Podcast
Podcast – Architect Exam Prep – ARE Prep Courses
Hosted by David Doucette & Eric Corey Freed · EN
No description available
10episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
093. ARE Technical: Top 5 Tips for Project Development & Documentation (PDD)
Apr 800:41:30Tap to summarizeIn this episode, David and Eric focus on the ARE PDD (Project Development & Documentation) exam, framing it as the construction documents phase in contrast to PPD’s schematic design and PA’s programming. They emphasize that PDD is less about memorizing content and more about using judgment, coordination, and decision-making at a detailed scale, and while it’s often seen as the most technically demanding division, they argue it’s best understood as an exam about “details and decision making.” Listen to the Audio Show Notes Key Concept: Scale & Phase Differences PA: Programming phase – big-picture, site plan / 1⁄16″ scale. PPD: Project planning & design – floor plan scale (1⁄8″, 1⁄4″), schematic design. PDD: Project development & documentation – detail scale (1⁄2″, 1″, 3″), full detail level. Same topics (structure, ADA, waterproofing, cost, etc.) appear across PA/PPD/PDD, but: The phase and scale determine the right decision, not the topic itself. Tip 1: PDD Is a Coordination Exam Before a Detailing Exam Architects act as coordinators (“master conductors”) among disciplines: Making sure sprinklers, beams, and ducts don’t clash, and that it all looks good. On PDD, the emphasis is: Integration of building materials & systems (~1/3 of exam). Construction documentation (~1/3 of exam). These domains show that PDD is fundamentally about coordination, not just isolated details. Context is critical: Example: vapor barrier placement can’t be memorized as “always on the warm side” – climate, building type, and other conditions change the correct answer. The test is a judgment test, not a pure memorization or math test. Tip 2: Know What Level of Detail Is Appropriate Distinguish what is under the architect’s responsible control vs. contractor’s: Architects do not dictate means and methods. Architects review shop drawings only for design/esthetic intent, not for buildability. Shop drawings and submittals: Shop drawings = detailed drawings (e.g., custom cabinets) by subs. Submittals = cut sheets, product data, samples, mockups, etc., provided by contractor. Architect reviews/approves for design intent, but doesn’t create them. Avoid over‑detailing or chasing hyper‑specific local practices: The exam assumes a general North American standard of care, not one office’s or one region’s quirks. Use rules of thumb, but always understand the why: Foundations below frost line → top of footing must be at or below frost depth (to avoid freeze–thaw heave). Expansive clay → generally go deeper or adjust foundation type. Understanding the reason behind rules allows you to adapt in different scenarios. Tip 3: Systems Questions Are About Selection & Sizing, Not Heavy Calculations Modern ARE format: No calculus or full engineering design. Possible light calculations: CFM, board feet, simple area comparisons, etc. Focus on: Selecting appropriate systems for building type and use. Example: Big-volume church used weekly → CAV system is reasonable. Elementary school with many small zones → CAV would be inefficient. Relative sizing, not exact engineering numbers. Example: Duct sizing based on approximate areas: If 12″×12″ (144 in²) doesn’t fit, 10″×15″ (150 in²) is “good enough.” Use common sense and elimination, not perfectionism. Strategy: Know a handful of basic formulas as backup. Understand how to apply them and what the quantities represent. Adopt a “reasonable and works in practice” mindset rather than “exact to three decimals.” Tip 4: Construction Documents Communicate, They Don’t Explain CDs are meant to: Be bid, permitted, and built from. Communicate design intent, not act as step‑by‑step instructions. Good CDs: Use coordinated plans, sections, details, schedules, and keys to convey information clearly and consistently. Avoid long explanatory paragraphs; if a detail needs a paragraph to explain it, it’s probably a bad or overly complex detail. Varying levels of completeness: Permit sets: Only enough for code review and approval; minimal extras. Bid sets: More detail on scope and quantities so contractors can price. Construction sets: May go further for clarity, but still aren’t “assembly manuals.” CD standard: Clarity over cleverness; communicate efficiently and consistently. Tip 5: Codes and Costs Are Filters at the Detail Level Architects are not cost estimators: Costs fluctuate daily; the exam expects conceptual understanding, not dollar-accurate pricing. Example: Galvanized < Stainless < Copper in relative cost; exact numbers not needed. Code and ADA at the detail level: Aim for detailed‑level compliance (meeting intent within real‑world tolerances). Buildings are not built to 1/32″; materials move, contractors shim and adjust. In AIA B101: Architect provides an “estimate of the Cost of the Work” at the end of each phase (SD, DD, etc.), often by: SF costs, historical data, similar projects. This is not a guaranteed construction cost. Core idea: If a detail violates code or blows the budget, it’s wrong, no matter how elegant. On exams, think: “Does this choice reasonably satisfy code intent and cost constraints at the detail level?” How PDD Mindset Differs from PPD PPD: Schematic design, larger scale. Broader systems and layout questions. PDD: Project architect mindset, reviewing and redlining a CD set. Calm, methodical, systems-aware coordination across drawings and disciplines. Emphasis on: Coordination over isolated details. Judgment over perfection. Using the clues in the question (climate, use, code, cost) to choose the most reasonable option. You will not know everything on test day: That’s expected. Success comes from handling uncertainty well, using rules of thumb, understanding the “why,” and demonstrating standard of care. Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →092. ARE Technical: Top 5 Tips for Project Planning & Design
Mar 2700:33:51Tap to summarizeDavid and Eric discuss how PPD fits into the ARE sequence, how it differs from other divisions (especially PDD), and five key mindset/strategy tips for candidates. The main emphasis: PPD is about integration and judgment, not memorizing formulas or hyper‑detailed systems data. Listen to the Audio Show Notes Candidates often see PPD as “the big one” and psych themselves out. Compared to exams like PcM, PjM, CE, PA, PPD and PDD: Are longer and more technically demanding. Test how “architect‑like” a candidate thinks. Other divisions feel more siloed (e.g., contracts, firm types, corporate structures). PPD throws in multiple dimensions at once: cost, aesthetics, structure, codes, ADA, systems, site, climate, etc. → The challenge is the breadth and integration, not obscure content. Tip 1 – PPD is an Integration Exam, Not a Systems Exam PPD’s biggest module is Project Integration, and that’s where many struggle. The architect is the “conductor”: Coordinates structural, mechanical, electrical, code, and owner requirements. No one else on the team is integrating all of this. On questions: Don’t fixate on missing info (“that depends…”). Focus on the one or two key clues NCARB gives you. You’re not picking the perfect answer, you’re picking the best answer among several “good” ones. This requires adopting a realistic architect mindset (compromise, “good enough,” best fit). Tip 2 – Let Site and Climate Drive Design Decisions PPD is basically the schematic design phase: Programming is done; spaces and relationships are known. Now you must actually place and shape the building on its site. Candidates often underuse: Sun path, wind, micro vs. macro climate, orientation. Example: If the question says “Phoenix, Arizona,” that’s a huge clue: hot, dry climate → certain orientations and shading strategies are clearly better. Many candidates: Treat climate as secondary. Have never used a sun chart or don’t know they vary by latitude. Key message: If your design ignores the site and climate, it’s likely wrong – and NCARB is explicitly testing that. Tip 3 – Codes Shape Design; They Don’t Kill It Code thinking evolves across phases: Programming/PA: basic occupancy type, rough allowable height/area (e.g., table 503). PPD / schematic design: feasibility and layout: Allowable building height & area. Occupancy separations. Egress requirements and egress strategy. Codes aren’t “copy‑paste” details: Architects interpret the code and its intent. Egress, ADA, etc., are designed experiences, not just diagrams. Relationship to PDD: In PPD you decide: building type, heights, separations, general strategy. In PDD you detail and carry out those decisions. Bonus point: When codes conflict, it’s not either/or: You must comply with both; practically, you follow the more restrictive so both are satisfied. Tip 4 – Systems Questions Are Conceptual, Not Calculational PPD = still schematic design → things are fluid, nothing is sized to the last CFM. You might see very light “back‑of‑the‑envelope” math, but: Focus is on choosing appropriate systems conceptually, not crunching numbers. Example: Church used mainly on Sundays → large volume, infrequent use → CAV system makes sense. Music studio with small rooms: CAV could be noisy and inappropriate. Hydronic or quieter solutions may be more suitable. You use: Use type, occupancy pattern, acoustics, flexibility, climate as clues. Again: there is no “perfect” system, only the most appropriate given the clues. Don’t silo PPD vs. PDD: PPD‑style conceptual questions can show up on PDD, and vice versa. NCARB expects flexible knowledge application. Tip 5 – Budget Is a Design Constraint, Not a Math Problem In schematic design you do not: Produce detailed cost estimates or exact per‑unit pricing. You do: Understand relative costs: Brick vs. CMU: similar order of magnitude but different roles. Core‑ten vs. ACM panel vs. stucco. Marble countertop vs. plastic laminate. Recognize major cost drivers: Deep underground parking. High water tables and hydrostatic pressure. High‑performance envelopes for hurricane/tornado zones. As per B101 (Bonus Tip): Architect provides an estimate of the Cost of the Work at each phase (SD, DD, CD). Detailed cost estimates are typically done by a third‑party cost estimator or contractor, or as an additional service. Exam wise: If the owner wants a detailed cost estimate at SD, that’s unrealistic. PPD focuses on: “Given this budget constraint, which design move is more appropriate?” Closing Points from the Episode PPD vs. PDD distinction: PPD: concept, integration, “we’ll figure that out later.” PDD: “there is no later” – now you must detail and make it buildable. Candidates must: Stop chasing perfect answers and precision they don’t have at schematic phase. Work with clues, appropriateness, standard of care, and integrated thinking. You closed by recapping the five tips and heading to your Monday Round Table call for Platinum coaching members. Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →091. ARE Technical: Top 5 Tips for Programming & Analysis (PA)
Mar 2000:42:12Tap to summarizeDavid and Eric discuss five tips for passing the programming and analysis (PA) division of the Architect Registration Examination (ARE). They emphasize that PA is about evaluation, not design, and highlight the importance of using highlighting tools for long, wordy questions. They stress that programming focuses on constraints before opportunities, using codes and zoning as filters, and that economics matter at a high level. Programming is about relationships and feasibility, not just square footage. They also note that PA questions are longer, providing more clues for candidates to use. Listen to the Audio Show Notes A. Setup & Mindset Shift Why PA feels so different from PCM / PJM / CE and PPD / PDD PA = gray area, long wordy questions, more about judgment than memorization Bonus: practice using the exam highlighter—critical for PA’s long questions B. What PA Is Really About Programming phase = problem seeking, not problem solving No design yet: you’re evaluating constraints, feasibility, and relationships You’re analyzing inputs: site, climate, soils, codes, zoning, owner’s program C. Five Core Tips Stop Designing – Evaluate, Don’t Solve You haven’t designed anything yet Compare options, surface risks, and recommend feasibility Bubble diagrams and big‑picture fit, not plans and details Start With Constraints Before Opportunities Environment + context: sun, wind, soils, climate, topography, neighbors Look for what cannot be done first, then what could be done Treat this as due diligence at the very start of a project Codes & Zoning Are Filters, Not Afterthoughts Use setbacks, easements, FAR, occupancy, construction type as early filters Goal: define the buildable area / envelope and check viability You’re not doing deep PPD/PDD code work—just feasibility‑level analysis Programming = Relationships More Than Square Footage Quantitative: room sizes, totals Qualitative: adjacencies, privacy, sound, light, experience Residential example: public vs. private zones, don’t dump a powder room on the kitchen Good programs describe how spaces relate and feel, not just how big they are Economics Matter, But Only at a High Level Rough cost per SF or per unit to test viability, not detailed estimates Don’t blindly pick the cheapest option; PA is not a bid Think: “Is this project basically viable on this site with this program?” D. How PA Connects to PPD & PDD PA, PPD, PDD as three views of the same project at different scales Studying PPD can make a PA retake easier (you see the “other side” of programming) E. Big Takeaway You pass PA by thinking like an architect at the very beginning of a project: curious, constraint‑driven, feasibility‑focused, and comfortable in the gray area. Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →089. ARE Technical: Top 5 Tips for Construction & Evaluation (CE)
Mar 1300:30:18Tap to summarizeThis episode of the ARE podcast gives five key tips for passing the ARE Construction & Evaluation (CE) exam. The focus is on thinking like an architect under the AIA contracts, emphasizing standard of care, observation vs. construction, administrative procedures, question-reading strategy, and performance-focused closeout/post-occupancy work. Throughout, they stress judgment, restraint, documentation, and staying within professional/contractual boundaries. Listen to the Audio Show Notes Main Tips (1–5) 1. Answer from the Architect’s Contractual Role (Standard of Care) Always answer exam questions from the standpoint of the architect’s contractual role, not your personal or local practice. Think in terms of standard of care: What would any reasonably prudent architect do in this situation, based on the information given? Deep or specialized experience can hurt you on the exam if you override the “standard” approach with niche real-world habits. CE is a national, standardized test, not region-specific. Focus on: Roles, responsibilities, and authority during construction. Who has/produces/reviews which documents. Who can stop the work, what “observe” means vs. “inspect,” etc. 2. Construction Observation (Architect as Observer, Not Builder) In CE/Contract Administration, the contractor’s job: Build in conformance with the contract documents. The architect’s job: Observe whether work conforms to the contract documents and report findings to the owner. Key boundaries: Do not dictate means and methods—that’s the contractor’s domain. Shop drawings: Produced by the contractor, not by the architect. Architect reviews them only for design/esthetic intent, not for how to build. They are not part of the contract documents. Nonconforming work: The owner has the right to accept nonconforming work (A201). Architect must inform the owner of implications so they can make an informed decision. Field reports and site visits: Document date, time, weather, observed conditions. Not a guarantee or full inspection of all work. Architect only visits as frequently as the contract requires, often at agreed milestones (e.g., foundation completion, framing completion). 3. Administrative Procedures (The “AIA Way”) CE is less about technical minutiae (e.g., OSB vs. plywood) and more about admin processes and AIA contracts. Critical procedures and documents: Submittals & shop drawings RFIs Applications for payment Lien release forms Change Orders (COs) Construction Change Directives (CCDs) Project Manual Substantial Completion & Project Closeout Core contracts: A201 – General Conditions (owner/architect/contractor relationships and responsibilities). B101 – Owner–Architect Agreement A101 – Owner–Contractor Agreement Why the architect reviews applications for payment: Owner is not expected to understand construction. Since architect observes the work, they can verify claims like “50% framing complete.” Also logical for architect to review lien waivers in relation to paid work. “There’s the right way, the wrong way, and the AIA way”: For the exam, the AIA way is what matters, and it usually aligns with industry practice. Deviating from it in practice can increase liability. 4. Reading Questions for Timing & Keywords (First / Best / Most Appropriate) Many wrong answers come from misreading or reacting too quickly, not from ignorance. Pay close attention to timing/context words: “First” thing you should do “Best” action “Most appropriate” response Always ask: What phase are we in? (Construction admin? Multi-phase project? Pre-bid?) What logically happens next in the process? Exam traps: Fake urgency: e.g., owner is on vacation and unreachable, contractor “needs” a decision. Your roles and responsibilities do not change. If the owner hasn’t appointed a representative, you wait. Multiple answers may be true statements, but: You must pick the one that actually addresses the question asked and fits the given context and timing. In their coaching sessions, candidates rarely reach consensus on answers at first, showing how easily people: Justify multiple answers as “true,” but Miss what the question really asked. 5. Post-Occupancy Evaluation & Closeout – Focus on Performance, Not Blame Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE), substantial completion walk-throughs, punch lists, and final closeout are about performance: Does the building perform as intended? Are systems functioning properly? Are design goals (e.g., better test scores via daylight and ventilation) being met? It is not about blame or combative architect vs. contractor dynamics. POE is not part of the basic services in B101: Basic services end when the architect signs the final application and certificate for payment (changed from “60 days after substantial completion” in 2007). Contracts (B101 and A101) are the framework: They define what each party has promised to do. Failure to perform can become a contractual/legal issue. Key Mindset & Professional Boundaries Think like a licensed architect: Ground your decisions in contracts, standard of care, and professional boundaries. Respond, don’t react: Stay calm about changes, delays, or change orders—these are normal, not crises. Scope and additional services: Contract defines your scope. When clients request items outside scope, treat them as additional services: Explain calmly. Provide cost implications and seek approval. Observe how experienced project managers and principals handle construction meetings: They don’t blow up or panic; they manage, delegate, and document. Practical advice: If you’re studying for CE, ask to join job-site meetings at your office to see real construction administration in action. Ultra-Concise Exam Takeaways Answer as an architect under AIA contracts, not as a contractor or local expert. You observe and report; you do not build or dictate means and methods. Know A201, B101, A101 and how submittals, pay apps, RFIs, COs, CCDs, and closeout flow between parties. Read the whole question carefully, paying attention to phase, timing, and words like first/best/most appropriate. View CE as testing your judgment, restraint, documentation, and professional boundaries, with a focus on performance rather than blame. Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! <img decoding="async" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-15061" src="https://architectexamprep.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/spotify-e1627750196150.png" al...
Transcribe →088. ARE Mentor: Course Correcting After Failure
Mar 1000:16:27Tap to summarizeDavid discusses how to course correct after failing an ARE exam. He explains why one failed division shouldn’t create a negative narrative and reminds candidates that failure simply means retaking the exam. He also covers how to review the score report, keep momentum by scheduling the next exam about eight weeks out, and use practice exams to better understand the format. The focus is simple: adjust your strategy and keep moving forward. Listen to the Audio Show Notes Introduction & Purpose Addressing listeners who recently failed an ARE exam Brief on ARE Mentor vs. ARE Technical episodes Main goal: protect momentum and prevent derailing after a failure Mindset: Don’t Turn One Failure Into a Story How we create negative narratives after failing (imposter syndrome, “I’m bad at tests,” etc.) Core reframe: a failed exam only means you have to take it again Warning against letting a single result become your identity or long-term story Using the Score Report (But Not Overusing It) Look at the score report briefly to see: Where you were weakest Where you were strongest Reference to Episode 85 – ARE Technical: Analyzing the Score Report Emphasis that the score report: Doesn’t mean as much as people think Should be reviewed for a few minutes, then filed away Encouragement to rely on honest self-assessment of weak areas Staying in the Exam Cycle & Avoiding the “Same Division Loop” Personal story: failing Programming & Analysis (3.0) and waiting two years for the next exam Advice: Don’t take months off Don’t pause studying Don’t delay scheduling the next exam The “same division loop”: Example: fail PCM, wait 60 days, insist on retaking PCM before moving on Result: loss of momentum Strategy: Schedule the next division immediately after a fail Aim for about 7–8 weeks out Momentum Analogy: Flat Tire on a Road Trip Failure = flat tire, not the end of the journey You don’t turn around and go home; you: Change the tire Continue the cross-country trip Same idea with the exam process: fix, adjust, move forward Strategic Use of the 60-Day Retake Window General pattern: Schedule a new division ~8 weeks out Take that new-division exam Fit the retake shortly after: PCM, PJM, CE, PA: about 1 week PPD, PDD: about 2 weeks After the retake, jump into the next division Rationale: protect and extend momentum, avoid long study gaps Self-Analysis: Identifying What Actually Happened Go beyond the score report into self-awareness: Where did the exam start feeling hard? Case studies? Technical questions? Time pressure? Unfamiliar topics? Use these questions to pinpoint weak areas Common Patterns & What They Mean Questions felt unfamiliar (even though you studied) Often means you studied too narrowly Usually clustered in specific modules, not the whole exam Running out of time / feeling rushed Time management is a major hurdle, especially after long gaps You don’t fix time management in theory; it requires real exam reps Backpacking analogy: You become a better backpacker by going backpacking Day hikes and training help, but can’t replace multi-night trips Same for exams: practice actual NCARB exams to build timing skills Making the Most of NCARB Practice Exams NCARB practice exams as: A window into how NCARB thinks about questions Especially crucial in the final week before the exam How to use them: Don’t treat them just as a percentage score Reverse engineer: Handwrite notes and diagrams Mark why wrong answers are wrong Circle keywords and patterns Treat them as a guide to NCARB’s logic, not a mere score predictor Emotional Recovery & Course Correction Normal emotional reaction to failing: Imposter feelings “I’m never going to finish” “I’m not ready” Advice: Allow yourself to feel those emotions Then course correct rather than stay stuck Reframing the episode: It’s about course correcting after a failure Focus on protecting your momentum Core Process & Closing Message Core rhythm promoted in the coaching program: Study → Test → Analyze → Repeat Protecting momentum: Stay in a rhythm rather than stop-start cycles Closing encouragement: Think consciously about how to protect your momentum this week Keep moving through the cycle until you get your license Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →085. ARE Technical: Analyzing the Score Report
Feb 2700:24:28Tap to summarizeIn this episode, David and Eric discuss how to realistically interpret NCARB ARE score reports without overthinking them. They explain why content area percentages and “low” scores often look worse than they are, and how weighting and test design affect what the report really means. They also share healthier retake strategies, focusing on fuzzy topics, mindset, and holistic studying rather than obsessing over every data point. Listen to the Audio Show Notes The NCARB ARE score report is vague and often over‑interpreted by candidates. Its only real purpose: lightly point you toward weak content areas after a fail—not to precisely diagnose everything that went wrong. How Score Reports Work Tests are divided into content areas/modules, but: There is one overall cut score for the exam, not for each module. You do not need to “pass” every content area to pass the exam. Content areas are weighted very differently: Example (PDD): Content Area 1 ~ 37% of the test (~37 questions on a 100‑question exam) Content Area 5 ~ 2–8% (as few as 2 questions) So getting 100% in a tiny area doesn’t mean much; missing a lot in a big area matters more. Common Misinterpretations Candidates often: Lay out multiple reports like a detective wall, trying to decode patterns that aren’t really there. Think: “I got 40%, I need 80%, I’m only halfway there.” In reality, that might mean they were only ~10 questions away from passing. Believe online calculators that say, “You missed by 1 question,” which Eric says is mathematically almost never true—most are off by 5–15 questions, still very close, but not “one.” Two Main Score Report Scenarios Low in one content area This is actually good news: You were close to passing. You likely just need to tighten knowledge in that specific area. Use the report as a pointer: “Study more in this content area,” not as a judgment of your overall ability. Low across the board Usually not about content gaps in one topic. More about test behavior: Overthinking, second‑guessing, misreading questions Rushing or running out of time Not picking up clues in the scenarios Many candidates feel like they “bombed it,” but Eric often finds they’re still only around 10–15 questions away. Flip‑Flopping Scores (Multiple Attempts) After 3+ attempts, candidates often see: Content areas that were strong become weak, and vice versa. Over many attempts, they’ve “passed” every section at some point—just never all in the same sitting. This indicates: They’re capable of passing. But they’re now fighting their past attempts, changing answers based on what they did last time rather than calmly applying standard of care and good reasoning. Eric’s coaching focuses on: Mindset, test‑taking biases, and a “standard of care” mental model to get out of their own way. How (and How Not) to Use the Score Report Good uses: Spend a few minutes with it: Note if one or two areas are clearly weaker. Let that inform where to get a bit more clarity. Pair it with your own reflection: Ask: Was I rushing? Misreading? Did I run out of time? Was I confused by the question wording? Bad / unhelpful uses: Over‑analyzing multiple reports, building big collages and trying to decode hidden meanings. Letting the “% correct” vs “passing candidate %” convince you you’re farther from passing than you really are. Using it as an emotional verdict: “I bombed, I don’t know anything.” Better Strategy After a Fail Write down your “fuzzy topics” immediately after the exam: Any concept where you thought, “I’m not totally sure.” That list becomes your real study roadmap. Study holistically, not just one tiny module: Yes, give extra attention to weaker content areas. But keep reviewing all modules, because questions are integrated and pulled randomly from large banks. If you ran out of time and left many blanks: The score report is basically useless in that situation—it’s mostly reflecting unanswered questions, not your knowledge. Coaching / Tools Mentioned Eric has a score report tool in the Platinum coaching program: Takes the NCARB percentages from a score report. Estimates how many questions away from passing a candidate likely was. He also does five free coaching calls per day to: Interpret reports. Re‑frame how close people actually are. Build a realistic study and mindset plan. Their coaching provides a daily study plan, organized by content areas, to remove overthinking about “what to do next.” Big Takeaways The score report is not an oracle (and not the Grim Reaper either). It’s a blunt, limited tool: Use it quickly, unemotionally. Let it lightly guide you, then move on to studying and retaking. Practically, a failing score report mostly just means: You need to take the exam again, with slightly better content clarity and a much better test‑taking mindset. Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →084. ARE Mentor: Build Your Weekly Study System
Feb 2400:19:00Tap to summarizeIn this episode, David introduces the new ARE Mentor format — short, direct Tuesday episodes focused on mindset, structure, and execution — alongside the ongoing ARE Technical episodes released on Fridays. Listen to the Audio Show Notes The core message: most candidates don’t struggle because they lack knowledge. They struggle because they lack structure. Studying only when motivated, cramming on weekends, or starting and stopping repeatedly leads to inconsistency — and inconsistency kills momentum. The ARE does not reward intensity. It rewards consistency. David shares lessons from his own seven-year journey through the exams and emphasizes the need for a frictionless, repeatable weekly system. The recommendation: study six days per week, 60–90 minutes per day, at the same time each day, with one scheduled day off. Focus on one division at a time, build rhythm, and aim to test every six weeks. He also highlights the importance of: Avoiding marathon study sessions Committing to one primary study resource Incorporating a weekly review day Reducing decision fatigue Treating the process like a professional commitment The takeaway is simple: build a system you can repeat week after week. Show up consistently. Stop restarting. Create momentum — and keep moving forward toward your next exam. Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →Episode 80: Where’s Waldo? Looking for Answers in the ARE Journey
Apr 8, 202500:12:35Tap to summarizeIn this podcast, we discuss the idea of Where’s Waldo and how we can better look for answers during the process of the ARE. Listen to the Audio Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →Episode 79: The RFP Process Explained for Private and Public Projects
Dec 6, 202401:04:00Tap to summarizeIn this podcast, we discuss another frequently confusing and fuzzy topic, the RFP (Request For Proposal) process for both public and private projects. Listen to the Audio Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →Episode 78: Fire Separation – 4 Types
Nov 19, 202400:46:12Tap to summarizeIn this podcast, we discuss a frequently confusing and fuzzy topic, fire separation and the 4 types. Listen to the Audio Please Subscribe Receive automatic updates when you subscribe below! Please rate us on iTunes! If you enjoyed the show, please rate it on iTunes and write a review. It would really help us spread the word about the ARE Podcast. Thanks!
Transcribe →