Here is an update on my progress on ARE 5 exams and my experiences with the preparation materials on the market.
Ever since I passed my three managerial exams (PjM, PcM, CE), I've taken a long hiatus to focus on brushing up my coding and scripting skills, as I explored the option to pivot my career more towards digital design and geometric modeling.
But I finally got around to taking my fourth exam the PPD. Unfortunately my first attempt was a failed one. I had a pretty extensive study plan: going through the Brightwood book, the Ballast book and the Black Spectacle videos, which together would take me about three months. PPD is a large subject. I had started prepping before so the materials weren't terribly new to me. But due to some personal "turbulence" right in the midst of my exam prep, I was not able to finish my study plan. I blamed my failure largely to the botched plan. However, the quality of the study materials were very uneven.
First, Brightwood is a low end study material, because it is the least organized or updated for the ARE 5.0. Evidently large paragraphs of contents were copied and simply rearranged in the book from older ARE 4.0 exams. The knowledge described in the book is certainly valid but one can only casually skim through it to get a broad understanding. It should NOT be the primary study tool for ARE 5.0.
Second, Ballast or PPI ARE 5.0 review manual remains a solid options for exam prep. It is an upgrade from Brightwood for sure, as it follows the same strategy of blanket-covering nearly all concepts and knowledge points of the exam. The down side is that it's dense. If one were to understand everything the book touches on, the person could be spending months exercising in areas that might not even appear on the exam. Take PPD for example, Ballast portion of PPD speaks to some structural calculations that will very unlikely show up on the actual exam. My advise is to go through Ballast with care and perhaps only dive deep into any calculations in anticipation to PDD.
Third, Black Spectacle can be helpful in providing a few forms of practice exam but the videos are minimally effective. I've heard co-workers give the same feedback about the videos. They are broad and the lecturer speaks slowly. His presentation of the content isn't particularly engaging either. I would not count on Black Spectacle to shed too much light on exam contents. It's nice to have a decent size question bank from them but the subscription fee is dubiously high.
Thanks to the help of my employer, I recently got access to Amber books study materials. The videos on there are much better presented. They go straight to the point. While some may find that too "cut and dry", I think it helps me stay on task. Also in a way it itemizes the knowledge points to be tested so it gives a clearer idea of what an exam question will be or ask for.
In any regards, failing an exam is no fun. Over $200 goes down the drain and the time invested seems to have been lost. I am serving on the Think Tank group of NCARB this year and we have discussed the licensure process for long. ARE is a large portion of it and nearly everyone, including NCARB officials, agree that ARE needs some change. NCARB doesn't seem to have the resources to implement many of the improvements proposed over the years. But I do hope that ARE continues to evolve and develop. The current exams and the structure around it poses as more of an obstacle than a qualification. If NCARB doesn't change it, the crowd chasing after architect license will only dwindle and it will have even smaller pool of candidates and members from whom they collect fees, which eventually enables its functions as the administering body of the exams and licensure process.