Hi Kerrie,

When choosing a Part 3 course, don't just look at the examination criteria as a reference point for your decision. Look at the actual course itself. For example, I passed my Part 3 at Huddersfield University which had two 3 hour examinations on the same day under exam conditions with only JCT '98 (as it was then), Architects Job Book, Architects Handbook of Practice management and an RIBA appointment document.

The course however, was a week long full time intensive course with guest speakers on each subject criteria you are examined on. The course was an invaluable experience. I don't think there is a day that goes by where I don't use something I learned from that course in Practice.

At the time, I felt that the examinations seemed a tad 'unfair' compared with other open book and three day exams within the office. 45mins is not a lot of time to write a essay question about Contract Administration and cite all the relevant clauses etc; however having mentored someone in the past who had to undertake their Part 3 exam in the office, it was clear that they had not had the advice and guidance from their Part 3 tutors / university and had never even been to the University to gain knowledge on any particular subjects. It was expected that our principals had to disseminate that knowledge on their behalf. If you work in an office with many senior people then the advice you receive can often be conflicting and not in accordance with up to date legislation etc.

You need to see what University will give you the most help to achieve the qualification and take a view on which way is right for you. Personally, having known both sides, I would tend to agree with my peer above and take an exam based Part 3 course but one that will give you the tuition and support you need to be able to complete the exam with (realtive) ease.

i hope this helps. All the best. Ian

I agree that there is a problem with the variation between universities, some schools seem to have stopped failing students on experience alone whilst others continue to do so, which is surprising considering that these exams are externally assessed by the RIBA. I did an office based exam over 2 days and it was no joke, imagine 10 of the hardest situations you would have to resolve over a career as an architect, generally complex questions with no direct reference answer but back to back. I would however acknowledge that there is a problem with the amount of assistance some people get with these exams, there are rules but they rely on a standard of professionalism from the employment mentor and are easily ignored or broken.

It's a bit late to complain about the course and exam structure now - that's something you should have checked out before starting. However, you are correct - there is an absurd level inconsistency between not just Part 3 courses, but parts 1 and 2. I'd argue the differences are so great at part 1 and 2 as to make a mockery of the idea that there is any core syllabus at all. I mean, what is the purpose of part 2? I checked out a number of part 3 courses before opting for Westminster, which was (without wishing to cause offence) a walk in the park compared to some other places. The fact is that standards vary massively between different UK universities. This is why degrees from some places are rated more highly than others. I made the decision that when it came to Part 3 it was passing that mattered more than where you'd studied and so opted for the path of least resistance.

The exam is to test your competance- to make sure you don't bring the profession into disrepute or worse to get sued or endanger the public.

In a practice you have lots of info (too much) and the skill as an architect is more about the key conceptual knowledge, where to find more information (and when things are updated) and linking this info. This silo of retained knowledge cannot be endless (particularly in this day and age), therefore an open book exam is the best way of testing this competance in a day to day situation.

Any architect giving lots of advice from their memory without checking or referencing up to date info is putting themselves at risk - therefore a closed book exam is nothing more than a test of memory.

The part 3 should not be considered a test of how much you know, but knowing where the information you require is, linking that information and giving a considered response of both brevity and clarity.

Hi Kerrie,

The Part 3 exam is undertaken in a number of different ways, but the aim of the exam is to demonstrate a certain level of understanding of professional practice in order to practice as an architect. Without the right kind of preparation you won't be able to demonstrate this whether you do a three day or a three hour paper. An open book exam doesn't mean you will automatically have the answers available to you, you need to know your stuff either way. Most of part 3 can't be learnt only from a book, you need to have appropriate practical experience so you know how to apply this information.

The consistency within this examining process is through the level of knowledge you need to pass the exam. RIBA holds the register of examiners, they produce guidelines for the examiners to ensure this proces is examined appropriately and consistently. At least one of the examiners need to be RIBA registered with at least seven years experience of professional practice in the UK, and have undertaken Part 3 examinations previously. The examiners will also keep in mind whether you had three hours or three days to do the exam.

Good luck in your exam.

ps. There have been people in our office who have sweated through the three day exam, and quite frankly I think doing 2 x 3hr exams and getting it over and done with (out of view of your work colleagues) is the way to go.