This discussion is closed.
Badges: 2
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
What is the difference between an Architect and an Architectural Technologist?! apart from entry requirements and course length??
Badges: 2
Report 6 years ago
My mum is an Architect and my dad an Architectural Technologist so this thread definitely caught my eye! haha

You can only become a Registered Architect under RIBA with an Architect degree. An Architect degree encompasses a variety of modules including mathematics, physics, art, technology and history. An Architect degree will focus on the art of design; you will become a leader and expert in design technique, efficiency, function, planning and buildability. You will be working at the heart of most projects, interacting with a variety of people and clients, going out in the field and visiting many sites and using your skills to bring your designs and drawings to life. There is often more money involved with an Architect's salary.

Architectural technologists work closely with architects helping to assess the needs of clients and negotiating projects. An AT will often survey sites, analyse architectural plans/drawings, highlight any risks or problems and suggest the best materials. You will be specifying the appropriate technology and tools needed for the project and basically ensuring the safety and efficiency of construction.

You can become an architect technologist with an architect degree but you cant just become an architect with an architect technologist degree... if you get me?

Badges: 12
Report 5 years ago
Not true, you can get Riba part 1 by portfolio assessment direct at the Riba if you've got £800 and a passable portfolio, perhaps a bit arty/visual aspect of architecture. That said it may be more of a route for foreigners to gain recognition. Some architects may be recognised or associate members of Ciat but its not necessarily a straight forward situation since as Architects may be more arty they may lack the mindset to get to grips with the technological side if architectural technology. The impression I get is that Riba courses have become a lot more arty than they used to be in the past which means that many Riba architecture degree courses can be pretty light on in depth stuff on buildings.

The other thing to consider on both cases is that like the guy/girl above the architecture courses are fulll of kids of mummy and daddy's an architect/architectural technologist/owner if their own construction company, or their uncle/aunt close family friend/connection, dog, etc. So unless you have meaningful contacts in the construction industry already you're going to be up against it because basically they will do their little darlings work for them, or they will get all the answers from them or training, etc. So on many a module you can be on a real back foot even if your talented in certain areas. Harsh but unfortunately just the way it is but better you know the way it is now so you know what your venturing into.
Badges: 2
Report 6 months ago
What date is it now let me see.... oh yes, its 27th April 2020 the great age of Covid19!
The last reply was written over 5 years ago to this one.

Well there is a massive difference between Architects and Technologists... so much so you could sail through it.
Infact I think Elon could launch his next set of satellites through it and now one would notice.

The old school or what we shall call 'Classical Architects' truly earn the respect of being an Architect through ability not education nor title.

But today's Architects in the UK, are useless... and the fresh ones coming out of the production line called university are even more clueless.

Architects seriously.... yes I said seriously, lack the capability, the know how, the knowledge and the aptitude to take their pretty picture crayola "look mummy... look what I did" scribbles and turn them into a working set of construction documents that are accurate, they are functional, they are practical and they are buildable in an a realist, easy to construct process and are within budget and actually resemble their crappy scribbles.

Technologist are grossly underrated for the skills they possess. They are underpaid, overworked, given ridiculously short times scales because Architects cannot comprehend the **** ups they have made, let alone realise what will be involved for someone to solve their physics defying tardis sized scribbles.

Architects today should not be aloud to practice, designing buildings. That's correct, I just wrote that! They are not suitably skilled people for undertaking the perilous journey of designing a building that works, is within budget, can actually be built with common skilled labour and do not require the use of other peoples expertise to do their work for them and to remove them of all their responsibilities and risks. So they can have a nice life dreaming about their boats, and their cars, and their second or third house and the other fickle **** that floats through the empty cavernous vacuum between their ears!

You want my opinion, become an insurance broker or a hedge fund manager, stick it out for 10 years. Go it alone and invest your earnings, your never look back... and 10 years later your be able to afford all the Architects you want and then realise what a waste of time they are, and have a great time sueing them.

Yours faithfully, Technologost of 22 years, and Lemming.
Don't waist your life in this industry, it really is not worth it.
Last edited by ballsackbob; 6 months ago
new posts
to top
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.


Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

No, I think predicted grades should still be used to make offers (678)
Yes, I like the idea of applying to uni after I received my grades (PQA) (857)
Yes, I like the idea of receiving offers only after I receive my grades (PQO) (386)
I think there is a better option than the ones suggested (let us know in the thread!) (91)

Watched Threads

View All