Talk to me intelligently about modeling and documentation. Show me what you've done out of some of the training books. Talk to me about taking a certification course. The certification test isn't worth a damn. I want to know if they can look at a building plan and one elevation and be able to ask what do I need to do next to build this model? I want to know if someone knows how to put together furniture families that are truly parametric, scalable and utilize sub families efficiently. The questions that they are desk test asks are frequently arcane and unhelpful for regular every day proficiency. If the designer does not have that interest, I will spend it in the enormous amount time simply red lining drawings trying to get them to understand how a detail or plan is put together. ![]() Even then, the knowledge of Revit and the experience in working with it as a tool must be combined with a knowledge of how buildings are put together. Unless they are a novice coming right out of college I don’t find the certification to be useful as a measurement of their talent. Had a interviewee have on their resume their certification from 2010, the program has changed so much since then that it made me question his knowledge a bit more.Īrchitect here From the United States, (California). However, should note if you plan on using the certification on your resume, keep it updated to a recent year, I.e. But isn't a deal breaker if they don't have it. When I see someone have a Autodesk certification, It is a sign they at least know the program. In terms of usefulness, Im involved in the interview process at my company on new revit drafters. As you are rarely working without access to resources such as Google to search up issues. Which I found more difficult and almost useless. However, I've found each year the test became focused more on what you remember about the tool, as opposed to being inside and using it. For example, having you go into revit, and interrogate colour schemes or manipulate curtain walls. The test focused more on practical skills early on. I only took the exam as it was free at conferences I went to. I've taken the Professional Revit certification about 4 times, starting in 2016. Plus if you don't known how building construction works, Revit will make very little sense. ![]() It would much more benecifial to take a technician or technologist course because you will learn Revit and learn how to actuslly work with it. But I think the fundamental problem is that Autodesk doesn't really know (or care) how people use their software. YMMV depending on how valued that Autodesk cert is in your industry. Without an Architectural Technologist diploma on my resume, people don't even bother calling even though I have 7 years experience at a top arch firm in my industry. The certification also has not helped at all with trying to find a new job since being laid off in March. I spent a good chunk of my first couple years with Google open on one screen and Revit on the other, learning while I worked. Enter the real world and you quickly find out Revit is a fucking mess and it's all about work arounds if you are building anything other than a house. So of course everything worked the way they described it. All the practise projects I used to learn (from and Autodesk) were very controlled and simple. ![]() What I learned felt incredibly basic compared to how Revit was actuslly being used. Starting at the job, I felt completely unprepared with the knowledge I had. I only took the certification because I knew partners of a firm who were looking for a Revit tech and they basically said if I pass I get a job. It was pretty basic stuff for a" profrssional" level, IMO. The test itself I found pretty easy, but the questions were mostly useless things like "how many different ways can you open a Rvt file?“. The content from Autodesk was garbage, so I just watched all the vids and then took the test.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |