May 27, 2011 at 6:28 pm #162682Jon QuackenbushParticipant
I must have overlooked that.
Jarrod, don’t use the title man.May 27, 2011 at 8:34 pm #162681allandParticipant
Most everyone in the industry knows that a license separates a designer and an architect. Engineering firms most certainly do. Design Build companies know more often than not, many of their bosses are either one. Help wanted ads usually specify Landscape/Architect or Designer or one of either. This is the way it is. Just because some individuals ‘perceive’ that no one gives a hey is not an excuse, at least for me.
I have given my sweat, blood and tears, and more tears (plus years) to pass the LARE and am two sections away from passing it. This makes me respect the title even more, and I dont care whether the ‘general public’ knows or cares.
PS any advice on Sec. D?May 27, 2011 at 10:03 pm #162680
“I think we can look at this discussion more narrowly as Jarrod has stated he would give himself the title of Landscape Architect in his job hunt.”
Not really sure where I stated that I ‘would’ use the title. I did address how I could answer a question from an RLA if asked why I used the title.May 27, 2011 at 10:46 pm #162679
I would like to thank Ryan McAlister for understanding the point of this post.
I must admit that I didn’t really think very much about it until I posted my resume. The firm that I used to work for often walked a very fine line between ethical/unethical, and I was often referred to as an LA in all sorts of documents. I pointed out that I was not an LA yet, but it fell on deaf ears.
I still practice Landscape Architecture. What that, by definition actually makes me, I’ll keep to my self.
I think I am going to title myself as, for the next couple of months, a Landscape Consultant/Designer/Planner.
I do hope that everyone remembers that you probably wouldn’t be in this field if you were not a Landscape Architect at heart. It’s an ART, it’s what your eyes see and how your mind interprets what you see. No test or college degree will teach you that.May 27, 2011 at 10:48 pm #162678
Section D…study up on erosion prevention, sediement control and BMPsMay 28, 2011 at 12:57 am #162677
In the conversation regarding your resume you do say that you will call yourself a landscape architect…as you did in your resume. Many people pointed out to you the issues you could have in doing so.May 28, 2011 at 1:08 am #162676Andrew Garulay, RLAParticipant
It just occurred to me that I have worked in civil engineering offices full time for a cummulative nine years or so. I am not there to do landscape architecture, but to do civil site plans. It has NEVER crossed my mind to call myself an engineer.
Does anyone understand how immature and insecure this whole notion is?May 28, 2011 at 1:26 am #162675David BarbarashParticipant
It is neither immature nor insecure. It’s a matter of semantics that as far as I can see, has no psychological reasoning at all regardless of how you’re trying to reduce the issue to a personal problem. Your example at the engineering office is not applicable as you were not trained nor schooled as an engineer ( I assume). Could it be the other way around? Could you be defending a superiority complex over those who have not yet earned licensure?
Here’s what confuses me about the issue: Every single licensed landscape architect I know and have read about uses the “RLA” acronym after their names. It’s the “R” that matters as they have taken the time, spent the money and effort and have earned Registration. The LA part after it is nothing more than the field in which they are registered. This means that there is a major distinction between a RLA and a plain LA.
To me the word “Architect” lends our profession and its practitioners a certain stature and respect that is EARNED through education. It is that term that should separate those who have earned their degree; no small feat in the greater scheme of things, from those who dabble in ornamental gardening. My mother is a landscape designer. My neighbor is a landscape designer. Anyone and everyone who has taken some time to think about where to place a plant, object, or structure is a landscape designer. But a landscape ARCHITECT considers ecology, sociology, materiality, time, and a whole host of other topics before making a decision.
How are we to separate the unlicensed from the uneducated, especially in a field that carries serious legal pitfalls as ours does?May 28, 2011 at 1:33 am #162674
I do know that what it takes to be a registered landscape architect is often not covered in the curriculum of universities. I know my husband had to study new material that was not covered to the extent necessary to be an RLA. I wonder if people understand this distinction. Much of what you need to know to pass the tests is not learned at school…I mean there are probably self taught people that consider all of the things mentioned above…does planning a healthy diet make me a dietitian? How about if I take a class on preparing vegetables? Can a horticulturist call themselves a landscape architect? How about people involved in permaculture…which does deal with ecology, sociology, etc? This argument can go round and round…but when it comes down to it…most people are smart enough to know not to call themselves a landscape architect in their resume…so obviously there is a recognition that there is a difference.May 28, 2011 at 1:42 am #162673David BarbarashParticipant
Agreed, which is why registration has an apprenticeship period as a requirement. My point is: why the need for the term “Registered” at all if we all ready have a distinction between the licensed and the unlicensed?
And while there will all ways be exceptions to the rule; people who are smart enough and interested enough to self-teach themselves into competence in a profession, but those people are few and far between when compared to LA’s who have gone the traditional route. (Since the institution of licensure at least). Your example with related disciplines still doesn’t work for me. I know that I don’t have the scientific knowledge to call myself a permaculturist and I doubt that one would have the regional planning or materials/structural experience that I have. We have overlaps with a number of professions (one of our main problems of relevancy in my opinion) but few without formal training would make a competent and well rounded landscape architect.
AS for this being a never ending argument, I couldn’t agree more… but it passes the time on a rainy night…May 28, 2011 at 2:02 am #162672
I should have said I will call, refer…hmmm…inflection is IMPOSSIBLE on the internet! Trying to say something to the effect of “in common, daily conversation.”
If my aunt asks me if I am still a landscape architect, I will say yes. If I told her I was a landscape designer now she would wonder why I changed careers at 40 after working so hard.
I hope this clarrifies.May 28, 2011 at 2:10 am #162671
That is an interesting angle Andrew. Although, civil site planning is in the pervue of the field of landscape architecture. So, you are still performing as a landscape architect, even if it is at an engineering firm. I was a site planner at an environmental engineering firm. I did not call myself an environmental engineer.May 28, 2011 at 2:21 am #162670Andrew Garulay, RLAParticipant
It is not an interesting angle. It is an analogy. In neither case does using the professional title apply.May 28, 2011 at 2:41 am #162669
Landscape Architect: One who performs or holds himself out as capable of performing any of the services or creative works within the definition of landscape architecture.
Once again, this in no way is meant to infer that I have the professional qualifications, nor is it a discussion of professional vs. non-professional. This thread was started as a discussion of what to call yourself since there is no LEGAL term for a person who is degreed in Landscape Architecture and practices Landscape Architecture.
It is, alas, a never ending argument at this point. Maybe one day we will have a national body so that we can lay down consistent standards.May 28, 2011 at 4:10 am #162668
Is there a degree for permaculture? I don’t think so…in fact, I would say they could not call themselves a landscape architect. Heck, they offer workshops around here…it is more geared towards food production but is that much different the researching soil type, solar aspect and proper plant selection?
Of course this is off topic…but more interesting in my book. 🙂
It appears you can get a permaculture degree at Gaia University. 🙂 Around here a lot of people are into that sort of thing…so I used it as an example of someone who would dabbles in topics LAs do…but is not nearly as qualified to perform the work an RLA is required to do.
To me, landscape architect becomes as useless as the term landscape designer…something anyone can call themselves. By doing that the door is open to Joe Blow down the street you really have no way to stop him from advertising landscape architecture services. I don’t understand the confusion. I mean after all, a graduate with a bachelors in psychology can’t call themselves a psychologist.
I will beat this horse to death! mwahhahahh
Edited to add: Not all states require apprenticeship to be licensed and with this economic climate it makes it even harder for new graduates to even work towards a license. Idaho does not require an apprenticeship and some states only require one year.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.