CPD is back!!!

Just read this announcement from the yahoogroup of UAP. I figured it's worthwhile sharing with those who might be interested...
----------------------------
The Architect's Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Program as required under R.A. No. 9266 was recently brought back by the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC), partly through the exercise of its quasi-legislative powers under R.A. No. 8981 (The PRC Modernization Act of 2000) and its derivative regulations.

All the forty four (44) state-regulated professions shall undergo the CPD program so that all PRC-registered and licensed professionals shall be afforded opportunities to improve their stock knowledge and skillsets pertaining to their chosen professions i.e. to keep abreast with worldwide practices and to help make the Filipino regulated professionals truly world class.

Among the key innovations/ differences with the previous continuing professional education (CPE) programs are:

1) that the new CPD program shall be strictly voluntary (and NOT mandatory); no CPD credit units shall be required by the PRC for the renewal of the PRC identification (ID) cards i.e. the 3-year PRC-issued licenses to practice architecture;

2) that testing and the passing of CD tests shall be mandatory to earn the full credit units.
The CPD requirement for professional self-improvement shall still be at twenty (20) credit units a year or sixty (60) credit units for the three (3) year period covered by a renewed PRC ID/ license to practice.
Cognizant of the fact that regulated professionals must constantly hone and improve their knowledge and skills, there is therefore clear need for individual professionals e.g. registered and licensed architects (RLAs) to use such CPD opportunities to allow them to move from general professional practice to specialized professional practice.

In line with the foregoing, the Architects' Continuing Professional Education (CPE) Council shall be formally reconstituted and sworn into office by the PRC on 03 September 2008 (9-11:30 am at the PRC Auditorium).

The CPE Council for Architects shall have three (3) members appointed by/ nominated from the: 1) Professional Regulatory Board of Architecture (PRBoA); 2) the integrated and accredited professional organization of architects (IAPOA) i.e. the United Archiutects of the Philippines (UAP); and 3) the Council of Deans and Heads of Architectural Schools in the Philippines (CODHASP).

The primary functions of the CPE Council include but are not limited to: 1) the accreditation of CPD Providers i.e. institutions, organizations, schools, firms and individuals; and 2) the approval of CPD courses.
The future of CPD may include the following:

1) the use of earned CPD units (in parallel consideration of verifiable professional practice duly certified by the IAPoA and/or the PRBoA) to lead to the granting by the PRBoA of a Certificate of Specialized Practice in Architecture; and

2) the possible use of the same CPD credits earned to lead to the possible granting by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) of a possible academic degree (to be possibly based on equivalencies to be officially established and approved by the CHED).

The pertinent PRC-issued documents relating to CPD shall be posted shortly at the Latest Publications section of the PRBoA website (www.architectureboa rd.ph).

This message is issued initially for announcement purposes. Thank You.

CDEP or JPT?

The idea of putting up an architecture review center in USC-CAFA had been there for some time now. Like most great ideas, it remained in the heads of those who thought about it. The greatest hurrdle is manpower, of course. This is what our Assistant Chair told us in our last faculty meeting. He is currently involved in a review school for the master plumber board exam and he knows the tasks needed to run such a facility. He does not think anyone in the faculty right now will be up to it considering each one's availability.

He proposed then that the department ties up with an existing review center. The fact that the PRC mandated all review centers to be "attached" to a school or university facilitates this move. In Cebu, there are only two review centers operating: CDEP and JPT.

Actually, CDEP is not operating for now. I'm not aware of the reasons but the people behind it are related to our dean and he expressed interest in the tie-up. The other review center, JPT, is based in Manila and already has a fixed faculty. While USC-CAFA can probably involve its faculty in a CDEP tie-up, it seems that JPT will only need CAFA's facilities.

It does seem like the choice is obvious. It would seem natural for CDEP to be associated with USC because of the affinity of the people behind both institutions. I just wonder, though, what other people think.

I hope this time we can give flesh to this idea.

Ladderized Arch Curriculum

The curriculum I followed during my college years had provisions for a certificate of building specialist upon finishing three years, and construction supervisor upon finishing fourth year. It looked cool, but I never got any certificate until I finished my undergrad.

When I came back to USC to teach, I noticed that they have removed those provisions. I even heard Arch't. Java mention that the ladderized curriculum is no longer applicable. Deep inside I thought that it sounded like a good idea because it offers a chance to those who are not able to finish the five years of bachelors degree in architecture to still earn something to show their possible employers.

In our faculty meeting yesterday, the issue of a ladderized curriculum surfaced again. It seems like there's a mandate from the university administration or the CHED to take this direction. This time, however, I looked at the proposal with a critical eye. Some faculty members said that the curriculum is already there, the problem lies in the implementation. Some said that we already have a standing approval from TESDA on the matter. Others question the need for it.

These are my thoughts about the matter:

First, I wonder if the curriculum right now is already designed to meet the requirements for a draftsman (after third year) and a supervisor (after fourth year). Majority of the graduates I know lack these skills and even the confidence to venture into these fields. If they want to pursue this ladderized curriculum, they'll have to revise the existing curriculum a little.

Second: I always thought that the Philippines is misguided in terms of education. We need more technicians who finish vocational courses than graduates in college. This is simply because most of the jobs here in the Philippines (and even abroad) require only this level of skills. Also, the cost of a vocational course is much, much cheaper than a full college degree. I don't think anyone will argue if I say that majority of the Filipinos are barely getting by in terms of income status.

Third: My second point is actually the reason why I would favor a ladderized curriculum. It would give a chance to those "misguided" students to earn the degree which is more suited for them. It is common knowledge that enrollment of a particular batch decreases as they reach the higher years. Not everyone is really cut out to become an architect. They just might do well as technicians. I know a lot of technicians who are actually earning a lot.

Fourth: What good will a certificate do if we finally give it away? Employers do not really look for it. Besides, someone armed with this certificate only will have to compete with another who is a college graduate even for a technician's position! The diploma or certificate handed out by CSCST is well respected though. CAFA's program should earn the same respect to make the ladderized curriculum worthwhile.

Fifth: A ladderized curriculum also calls for a two-track curriculum running parallel. On one side are the subjects needed for the "vocational degree", the other side for the "bachelor's degree". It would be better to have a different curriculum committee for each.

Finally: For this idea to take off the ground, the department needs a point man who will do the dirty work. One task, for example, is to define the vocational degree curriculum to follow, then review contents of existing curriculum...

Well, that's all I can download from my mind for now. I need to decide whether I should spend any more time on this task. Although this is a very easy thing to do for me, I'd rather spend my time relaxing =)

Coffee anyone?

PS
Someone suggested that certificates should be given only to those who requested for it. The person asking for it must satisfy the requirements for the certificate. Also. there should be an exam that they have to take to get the certificates... I think it's a good idea... Some details needed though but I think it's workable...

Mind the Mind

I just came from a three-day vacation in Bantayan Island. It was very relaxing. I went there with two friends, Fritz and Jehan. Chris and Jobelle followed the next day. We went to Ogtong cave but other than that we didn't do anything fancy. It was just what I wanted in a vacation... stress-free.

I realized I was getting the habit of going to weekend vacations. Two weekends ago I was in Bohol with my batchmates. Previous to that I went to San Remegio with a friend. To think that I should go into a vacation spree at a time when I am confronting very, very big problems.

I wish I could say that I only have one big problem to solve. Unfortunately it is multi-faceted. I am worried about my sister who is looking for work in Dubai. I am also worried about my parents and siblings in Davao. There are also things around me that is causing me a lot of stress, mostly not related to each other.

Lately, I was surprised to hear people tell me that I have become very serious. I hear this from people who see me everyday but I don't hang really hang out with. I have been trying to keep my composure but I guess the strain is showing.

I must admit that my situation has put my best talent to the test. My ability to solve problems is something I consider a gift which only I can fully understand. In fact, it has become a source of amusement for me. I am not referring to simple word problems in school but the real life problems.

Thinking through problems require a vast use of my mind's "resources." It almost has a will of its own, like it is already programmed. Many times I end up reflecting back on my actions to understand how I solved a problem. It seems that my "consciousness" can't cope with the thinking process. The process has become instinctive. All that my conscious mind needs to do is to define the problem, the rest comes naturally.

Looking back, I realized that my sudden decisions to take weekend breaks is my mind's sort of "defensive mechanism". I need it to have a clear mind so I can think through these problems. So I gues I wasn't trying to be hedonistic or care free or irresponsible.

I am not trying to say that I am such a genius to be talking about the workings of my mind. I don't think that this "mind-work" is something unique in me. I believe everyone has it. I just simply learned how to deal with it. It's quite troublesome to explain though...