The path to becoming a licensed architect in the U.S. has long been a demanding journey—costly, time-consuming and circumscribed by rigid educational and experience requirements. But now, signs are emerging that the pipeline into the profession is shifting. Between growing discussions of apprenticeship-style alternatives, new integrated degree models, and reforms from the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB), the architecture world is asking: is the “old way” finally giving way to more flexibility?
A system under strain
Historically, the route to licensure has followed a roughly three-part formula: an accredited architecture degree (often through the National Architectural Accrediting Board, NAAB), a documented experience period (usually via the Architectural Experience Program, AXP) and the national exam, the Architect Registration Examination (ARE).
But the model has drawn criticism on multiple fronts:
- Time and cost burdens: Data continue to show that candidates take more than a decade, on average, to traverse education, experience and examination.
- Attrition issues: Despite demand, many candidates drop off the ladder. The attrition rate remains high among those who begin the process and never finish.
- Equity and access: The traditional pathway may pose disproportionate barriers for individuals who cannot commit to long timelines or who take non-traditional routes into architecture.
- Workforce pressures: With many experienced architects nearing retirement and fewer young architects entering, the supply chain is under pressure.
In short, the architecture licensure pipeline has been criticized for being rigid, extended, and not fully aligned with diverse talent or today’s professional demands.
Emerging alternatives — education + apprenticeship
Fortunately, architects, regulators and educators are actively experimenting with alternatives.
Integrated degree pathways: NCARB’s Integrated Path to Architectural Licensure (IPAL) is a forward-looking model. With IPAL, students can complete their architecture degree while simultaneously earning credit toward experience and examination eligibility. The benefit here: shorter overall timelines and smoother integration of licensure components into the educational phase.
Apprenticeship-inspired models: Some in the field are explicitly re-evaluating the apprenticeship roots of architecture. As one commentary notes: “What if architect licensure returned to its apprenticeship roots?” — highlighting the potential of models where supervised on-the-job experience takes a greater share of the journey. These models are still nascent, but they reflect a broader shift: reducing reliance solely on the traditional academic-then-experience formula.
Regulatory reforms: NCARB’s “Pathways to Practice” initiative outlines a multi-year roadmap to rethink the competencies, experience and examination structures that underpin licensure. The goal: make the pathway more accessible and flexible without compromising public safety.
Evidence that things are changing
There are encouraging metrics to show that the pipeline may indeed be evolving.
- According to NCARB’s most recent data, nearly 40,000 individuals were actively pursuing licensure in 2024, indicating recovery and growth in the candidate pool post-pandemic.
- The average time to licensure dropped below the 13-year mark—the first time since 2016 that this threshold was breached.
- New entry pathways: NCARB reports that some jurisdictions now recognize alternatives to the NAAB-accredited degree for initial licensure, expanding access.
While these do not entirely dismantle the old system, they signal that reforms are gaining traction and are beginning to show impact.
The remaining hurdles & critical questions
Despite progress, significant questions remain before we can say the pipeline has been fully re-imagined.
- Scalability: How many architecture programs and jurisdictions will adopt the IPAL model or other apprenticeship-style pathways? Today, IPAL involves a relatively small number of schools.
- Quality assurance: With more flexible pathways comes the challenge of maintaining consistent standards of competency, especially given architecture’s impact on public safety, sustainability and built environment.
- Attrition and equity: While overall candidate numbers are up, attrition remains concerning — especially for historically under-represented groups. For example, the attrition differential between white and Black candidates after 10 years is notable.
- Cost remains high: Even with shortened timelines, the financial investment in schooling, licensure exam prep and the long years of experience remain significant. Many candidates still face burdens.
- Jurisdictional variation: Since each U.S. state or territory governs its own licensure requirements, pathways can differ drastically. This regional fragmentation creates complexity for candidates and firms alike.
What this means for aspiring architects (and firms)
For individuals and firms navigating the evolving licensure landscape, these shifts signal a need for more intentional planning and broader thinking about talent development. Aspiring architects should explore integrated licensure options such as IPAL early in their academic journey, as these programs can streamline the process and reduce unnecessary redundancy.
Firms, meanwhile, can play a pivotal role by structuring experience in ways that support nontraditional entrants—particularly those pursuing architecture without the conventional accredited degree—ensuring they gain meaningful, supervised exposure that aligns with emerging competency-based standards. Staying informed about regulatory changes is equally important: NCARB’s Pathways to Practice initiative outlines major updates to the AXP and ARE beginning in late 2025 and continuing into 2026, changes that will influence how candidates prepare and progress.
For companies committed to improving diversity and inclusion, expanding recruitment beyond the classic degree-to-intern-to-exam pipeline will be essential, especially as apprenticeship-style models gain traction. And for candidates weighing the financial reality of the profession, mapping the journey early—understanding the timelines, costs, and evolving alternative routes—can make the process more predictable and ultimately more manageable, even if not necessarily less expensive.
The pipeline into architecture licensure is shifting. With new integrated degree programs, budding apprenticeship-style models and regulatory reform led by NCARB, the journey from student to licensed architect is starting to become more flexible. That said, entrenched cost, time and equity challenges remain. For aspiring architects and firms alike, the next few years will be pivotal in seeing whether the profession’s “old way” is truly evolving.
FAQ
Q: What is the traditional time to licensure for architects in the U.S.?
A: On average, candidates take around 13 years from initial degree through experience and exam to licensure, according to recent NCARB data.
Q: What is the IPAL pathway?
A: The Integrated Path to Architectural Licensure (IPAL) lets students complete an accredited degree while concurrently earning some of the experience and exam requirements toward licensure.
Q: Are apprenticeship-only paths available for architects now?
A: While pure apprenticeship models are not yet widely established in architecture the way they are in some trades, there is growing conversation and pilot work around “apprenticeship roots” of architecture and alternative experience-based routes.
Q: What reforms are NCARB pursuing?
A: NCARB’s “Pathways to Practice” initiative includes a new Competency Standard released in October 2024 and planned updates to experience (AXP) and examination (ARE) programs beginning in late 2025 and April 2026.
Q: What can firms do to support change in the pipeline?
A: Firms can partner with schools offering integrated licensure paths, create structured supervised experience for non-traditional entrants, support exam prep and minimize barriers for candidates from diverse backgrounds.