4specs.com    4specs.com Home Page

LEED AP vs. CDT Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

4specs Discussion Forum » Institute Discussions » LEED AP vs. CDT « Previous Next »

Author Message
Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, MAI
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 298
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 07:24 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I just received my July copy of "Building Design & Construction" today, and on page S5 of the sustainability supplement the article is titled "25,000 LEED Professionals and Counting." 25,000!!!

So, now we have 25,000 people who have some idea about sustainability and how to achieve one credit versus another; but, how many of those LEED APs can tell you the difference between an addendum and a modification? ...what is a contract document and what is not?

Don't get me wrong, I think sustainability is important, and LEED AP is a desirable thing, but you're not going to achieve good, sustainable design with poor construction documents.

At last week's Southwest Region Conference, sustainability was the main focus. Also, there were discussions on certification and how we could better promote the CSI certification program.

Obviously, some firms value LEED accreditation (Perkins+Will has 450 LEED APs, alone). But, we need to show these and other firms that there is value in having employees with CDT certificates.

For you older, experienced members (like me): how long did it take you, on the job, to learn all of the information that is covered by the CDT program? 5, 6, 7, 10 years? Imagine a recent graduate with that knowledge already under his or her belt?

LEED AP is good to have, but CDT is just as good, if not better. Promote certification in your firms!
Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI
Senior Member
Username: rliebing

Post Number: 436
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 08:55 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

It's called a "fad", Ron.

It is typical when something new comes out, everybody wants to jump on it to appear to be both current, unique, revolutionary, visionary and "cutting edge". Of course, LEED is good and valid, it is just the specs and CDT have been around much longer, and have lost their glitz and appeal to perceptions of mundane, taken-for-granted, and "oh, yea, them too"!!!

Remember, and buck up-- LEED doesn;t get too far without specs, and CDT knowledge. The LEED fade-away is coming [its just beyond its zenith!]
Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, MAI
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 299
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 11:38 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Ralph, I agree it's a fad, but was the CDT a fad when it hit the public? Sustainable design will eventually reach a point were everyone is doing it, and to not do it may be considered below the "standard of care."

However, well-prepared construction construction documents will continue to be needed regardless of the type of project. We need to find some way of turning back on the "glitz and appeal" of the program.

(And, no, I don't sit on the Institute's, or the SW Region's, or even my own chapter's, certification committee--I'm just a big supporter of education and certification)
Wayne Yancey
Senior Member
Username: wyancey

Post Number: 159
Registered: 05-2005
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 12:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Having LEED AP after the name and promoting sustainablity has greater marketing power for the firm than CDT or CCS, etc.

Cities adminstrations like Seattle's require civic buildings over a certain area/size be LEED registered and certified (minimum silver I think). No such requirement that the specs be prepared by a CCS or the contract admin is performed only by a CCCA.

Fad, maybe. USGB has done marvelous marketing of an "in your face" hot topic. CSI needs to do a better job.

Wayne
David J. Wyatt
Senior Member
Username: david_j_wyatt_csi_ccs_ccca

Post Number: 31
Registered: 07-2005
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 01:07 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I agree with Wayne and Ron. LEED certification confers special status on projects that owners use in self-promotion.

Certainly there are benefits in having CDTs working on projects, but owners are not likely to amplify that fact as much as they tend to do with LEED certification.

Perhaps the Institute could implement a system of recognition similar to the USGBC's LEED program for projects in which CDTs, CCSs, and CCCAs were involved.

Certainly, the fervor to attain LEED AP status will wane a bit, but LEED appears to have the legs to last beyond the fad stage. No other sustainability model has gone as far in holding the public's attention. And, it is not static - it is under a constant state of development.
David J. Wyatt
Senior Member
Username: david_j_wyatt_csi_ccs_ccca

Post Number: 32
Registered: 07-2005
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 01:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I agree with Wayne and Ron. LEED certification confers special status on projects that owners use in self-promotion.

Certainly there are benefits in having CDTs working on projects, but owners are not likely to amplify that fact as much as they tend to do with LEED certification.

Perhaps the Institute could implement a system of recognition similar to the USGBC's LEED program for projects in which CDTs, CCSs, and CCCAs were involved.

Certainly, the fervor to attain LEED AP status will wane a bit, but LEED appears to have the legs to last beyond the fad stage. No other sustainability model has gone as far in holding the public's attention. And, it is not static - it is under a constant state of development.
Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: awhitacre

Post Number: 367
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 01:30 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

The easy answer is: our clients are asking how many LEED APs there are in the office, and using that as a hiring criteria. Our clients are not asking about CDT (or CCS) and don't see that as bringing any value to the table.

CSI needs
1) data to back up any claims about the value of the certification (for example: fewer claims on projects; saved time and money on documents, or whatever is measureable )
2) a marketing campaign to federal and state governments touting that information

I personally don't think that a LEED AP brings anything to the table except the ability to understand the LEED rating system. there is no assurance of any product/systems understanding and no assurance of actually producing good documents. However, if a client is using the LEED AP designation to select consultants, then of course we're going to encourage our staff to achieve that status.
Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, MAI
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 300
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 01:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Anne, thank you: to use the old cliche: "You hit the nail on the head."

Obviously, USGBC has cornered your item #2, but I doubt they could provide the similar data for #1 (except that having a LEED AP tipped X number of projects from one certification level to the next).

Data is great, but how do you obtain it? The problem with data is the false correlations it could generate--the data would have to be indisputably connected to certification in order for it to be accepted.

I think getting owners to recognize CSI certification and requiring it on projects (such as that for LEED AP) will be a stretch--even for the best marketing team. Personally, I think the focus should be internal, from within the company (A/E firms, contractors, manufacturers, consulting firms, etc.) by valuing the knowledge base their employess gain in such a short period of time--the CDT certificate, or any of the advance certifications, is just the prize at the end. Companies then could use the certifications to market their firms. Only then will owners see the value in certification.

Great discussion--any other ideas?
Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI
Senior Member
Username: rliebing

Post Number: 439
Registered: 02-2003
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 02:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Many of us cannot bring ourselves to say that "CAD is a tool" that produces drawings more rapidly and more reliably, but requires other input to establish the content of those drawings.

But it is!

So then LEED "is a tool" for selecting more approriate materials and methods, but needs the specifications to correctly convey its context and requirements.

So it is!But the "tools" are glitzy along wiht their value. Hence more appealing and prestigious to the users.


Overall this appears to be another item for the
CSI "TO DO" list
Anonymous
 
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 03:14 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I'm in agreement that CSI should be marketing its certifications similar to LEED and that being LEED-AP doesn't make the project more sustainable. Assuming that CSI did begin to market the CCS, CDT, CCCA, and CCPR, wouldn't it follow that staff needs to learn about the programs and understand their importance?

I'm still miffed that they ran out of CCS ribbons at the last convention and all the staffer said was that it wasn't important. As someone who earned a CCS, it meant something to me. Maybe the lack of understanding by staff has something to do with lack of promoting the certification programs.
Sheldon Wolfe
Senior Member
Username: sheldon_wolfe

Post Number: 209
Registered: 01-2003
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 05:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Firms value LEED accreditation because it's marketable. Everyone wants to be green now, so there is a lot of interest in the LEED AP.

Owners expect - as they should - that the architects and engineers they hire are qualified to do their jobs. Do owners care how many registered architects or engineers we have? No, and it doesn't matter. All that is required is to have one registered person in each profession. In that respect, LEED is the same. You get a point for having a LEED AP on the team. Doesn't matter if you have fifty, you still get one point.

The LEED AP is also appealing because it requires no education and no experience - it's an easy way to put some letters after your name. Certainly, those who take the LEED exam are interested in doing the right thing, and I don't doubt that motive, but I haven't heard of anyone who did not pass the exam on the first try. Does that mean it has no value? No, but given the pass rates for professional certifications - RA, PE, CCS, CCPR, CCCA, AHC, CID - for people who have devoted many hours of preparation, you have to have questions. The study material for the CDT exam is more extensive and complex than that required for the LEED exam.

Getting CSI certifications recognized at the same level as professional licensing is a tough battle because of the way we do our work. In the world of architecture, relatively few firms have dedicated specifiers. In the remainder of firms, the architects do their own specifications (or hire a SCIPPY!), and nearly all engineers do their own. In each case, the specifications are the responsibility of the architect or engineer who certifies the documents. That makes it hard to separate specifying or construction administration as separate, licensed specialties.
Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: awhitacre

Post Number: 368
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 05:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

the best example I know was that there was a period when the State of Alaska gave an extra point for having a CCS on the project team. (I don't honestly know if Alaska requires that any longer). When that occurred, the Cook Inlet (Anchorage) chapter was testing 50 CCS candidates a year.

As for requiring the LEED AP: when federal and state projects are requiring a project to meet LEED Silver designation, obviously the client values that designation. Part of the sales job for that designation is objective numbers: that a "sustainable" building will eventually save the owner money in long term operating costs. That isn't always true of course (the City of Seattle built a building that has several features that have 1000 year payback times, for example) but the long term value can be documented.
I would think that from the past 20 years of specifiers who have a CCS designation that there might be some data available on project cost savings, but this is something that CSI has to fund, not the individual chapters.
Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, MAI
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 301
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 06:26 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I believe, to a point, some owners, especially public ones, do care about registration. Standard Form SF255 requires that each key person, specialist, or consultant on the project provides their year first registered and the discipline. However, the form also asks for "Other Experience and Qualifications..."; a great location to list certifications.

Liability insurers may be another good group of people to approach with the value of certification; possibly getting reductions on liability insurance. However, being statistically-minded, they'll probably want the data to back it up. But, we won't know if we don't try.

Imagine being a principal of an architectural firm (a pipe dream for some of us in-house specifiers), and you have the mundane task of hiring a new intern architect. You have two equally qualified candidates, but one has a CDT: which would you hire?

Hopefully, you would hire the candidate with the CDT. On the other hand, if you're a principal that has no knowledge of what being a CDT means, you will likely overlook it; at best, the principal may be inquisitive enough to ask what it means.

My approach: shock the partners and principals in understanding the value by giving them a quiz consisting of 10 to 20 of the more difficult questions that could be found on a CDT exam. Afterword, explain that each employee who passes the CDT will know the answers to those questions.
Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: awhitacre

Post Number: 393
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Tuesday, September 26, 2006 - 04:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

about two weeks ago, the new managing partner of my office took me to lunch and said "assuming you're still with the firm in 5 or 10 years, what would you like to see handled differently than today?"
my answer: " I want to work for a firm that has at least twice as many specifiers as "sustainability coordinators". (at the moment, we have 3 of each).

this also ties back to a conversation that I had during my review two months ago. I was told that the sustainability people "didn't know anything about products" and I was asked to start teaching them about how buildings were put together. After four or five years of pushing green products (and we have some young staff who select products solely on the basis of how green they are), we are having some "problems" with these systems and products. My answer to that query was "You have promoted the sustainability director to the same staff level as me, which means to me that you place the same trust in her judgment as you do in mine. Unless I get promoted, I simply don't think its appropriate for me to oversee her work."

I'm getting the promotion.
Our partners seem to have a difficult time remembering that we get SUED if our specs are wrong, but we have no liability if we don't get the LEED rating on a project. I've simply decided to help them realize the consequences of that emphasis.
Russell W. Wood, CSI, CCS
Senior Member
Username: woodr5678

Post Number: 70
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Monday, October 16, 2006 - 03:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

OK, I give up. I'm tied of hearing my clients (mostly Architects) being so impressed by someone with a LEEP AP. So since we live in a world where perception is reality, I've decided to go for my LEED AP too. However, I'm not sure what my first steps should be. Could anyone offer some advice. Also, I have been selected to sit on a steering committee for a public agency that will determine how "green" we want to make schools in our area. Any suggestions how we should go about this or who we should be talking too?
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski

Post Number: 434
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Monday, October 16, 2006 - 03:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Start here: http://www.usgbc.org/
Nathan Woods, CCCA
Senior Member
Username: nwoods

Post Number: 126
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Monday, October 16, 2006 - 04:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

I think you need to hurry. I belive the test changes format significantly at the end of this month
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski

Post Number: 435
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Monday, October 16, 2006 - 04:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

It's my understanding that although the test is changing to reflect the new version, it will not be harder - just different. If you study the new, you will find it no more difficult than before.
Phil Kabza
Senior Member
Username: phil_kabza

Post Number: 216
Registered: 12-2002
Posted on Thursday, October 19, 2006 - 11:01 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Russell,
I suggest you catch a nearby USGBC-sponsored LEED Technical Review seminar. Plan to acquire a current LEED Reference Guide and read it well. It's a well-written reference document as well as the heart of the LEED Green Building Rating System.

You may also find the MASTERSPEC Specifying LEED Requirements book useful - especially if you don't subscribe to MASTERSPEC. And Ross Spiegel's CSI Audio seminar on Specifying LEED is a good 'un.

It's not rocket science. It's not as tough as the CDT, and certainly not as tough as the CCS. But it's a good topic to master, and seeing it is the marketing topic d'jour, go get it.

I'll follow my own advice pretty soon.

Please don't put the trademark symbol and the LEED version number in your credentials, though. That AP stuff is silly enough. Like MAIs. And EIEIOs.
Wayne Yancey
Senior Member
Username: wyancey

Post Number: 197
Registered: 05-2005
Posted on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 12:09 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

It is a sad day in Mudville.

My firm now has 24 happy LEED APs but only one CCS (me) and not one known CDT or CCCA.

Wayne
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski

Post Number: 439
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 12:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

My firm has 6-7 CCSs and a couple of CDTs; I'm not sure about CCCAs. But I do know that LEED AP is really being pushed and at least 2 more are added each week.
David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI
Senior Member
Username: david_axt

Post Number: 744
Registered: 03-2002
Posted on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 12:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

That is not sad at all Wayne. LEED is becoming so common that it is losing it's value. How many people at your firm have high school diplomas? How many have college degrees? Are you impressed by a HS diploma or BA/BS degree? I'm not even that impressed by someone with a Masters degree.

On the other hand, you are the only one with CSI credentials!

BTW, as certification chair for the Puget Sound Chapter, I will send you information on the upcoming study group.
Steven T. Lawrey, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA
Senior Member
Username: lawrey

Post Number: 54
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 02:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

This is a great thread! I too have been thinking about supplementing my credentials with LEED AP. I'm in full agreement with Ron, Ralph, Wayne and David.

I do however take issue with Anne's statement about an Architect not being liable for not achieving a given LEED rating. I've had this discussion with several local architects and specifiers and the prevailing thought is that the Architect is just as liable for the completed construction not achieving the client stated LEED rating as for not meeting any other stated performance requirement. At a minimum the firm may earn the reputation for not being capable of delivering a LEED certifid facility.
Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: awhitacre

Post Number: 405
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 11:56 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Steven: it depends on how your contract for services is written (and I am talking liability in the strict sense). Since the LEED rating is bestowed by an outside, non-governmental authority (the USGBC) the best we can do as consultants is endeavor to meet the required rating and plan to over-achieve the points so that a few can fall by the wayside. Our consultant contracts for services with the Owner specifically say that we have no control over the eventual LEED rating that a building achieves. So we are not liable in a "you can get sued" sense. if you want to take personal responsibility and write LEED compliance into your contract for services, be my guest.

and considering that the USGBC tends to be a moving target anyway: we had a large project in which the contractor set up a separate facility for a paint booth (with air cleaners, etc) for high performance coatings, but it was only a block away from the project site (to cut down on damage to those finishes when they were transported, I guess). USGBC ruled that the facility wasn't off-site enough so all the VOCs for those finishes were figured in with all of our Low VOC paints and coatings that were applied to the actual construction. I guess if we had the spray area two blocks away, it would have been okay.


the lawsuit I'm waiting for is probably just down the road: the City of Seattle recently changed its building code to allow additional square footage to developers who achieve a Silver rating on their building, and its a substantial amount of square footage. I'm just waiting for them to tell some developer to take the top 5 floors off their condo project when it doesn't get certified.
Steven T. Lawrey, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA
Senior Member
Username: lawrey

Post Number: 55
Registered: 08-2004
Posted on Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 02:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Anne, thanks for explaining that point. Your reasoning is right on. My discussions with fellow specifiers didn't include provisions of the Owner-Architect Agreement. That is the first place an atorney would look to determine a breach of contract.

I think specifiers by nature tend to keep up on new developments such as sustainability. Having LEED AP after CCS can only lend credibility to what we do.

If I hear of any demolition contractors looking for work, I'll be sure to mention Seattle!
Marty Sweeney, CSI, CDT, LEED-AP
Senior Member
Username: marty_sweeney

Post Number: 6
Registered: 07-2004
Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 12:48 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

All:

This is a great thread. I work for a manufacturer and have both my CDT and LEED-AP. I was having this discussion with an architect friend of mine Monday night. I explained that I had counceled two individuals in my company to first pursue the CDT and THEN, LEED-AP. After giving my reasons, he suggested I read this thread and maybe offer my comments.

First, my experience in preparing for the CDT exam (CSI Study Group) was rewarding both personally and professionally. It allowed me to network in the design community and make valuable contacts that allowed me to do my job better for my company. Additionally, I have found that the "CDT" behind my name tells the design professional that they will not spend the first 15 minutes of our meeting explaining what Division my product will be listed in and why. Often times, I have been able to help contractors and sub-contractors with avoiding pitfalls thus increasing my credibility with them as well. My overall understanding of the construction process (and more importantly, where my company brings value to this process)increased dramatically.

LEED-AP is more widely recognized. It, also, helps somewhat with the overall understanding of the construction process but with the added green/sustainable dimension. In my case, my preparation for this exam was a more isolated experience than the CDT. My local USGBC chapter did not offer a study group. This was disappointing in that lively discussions during CDT study groups brought the PRM to life! (I know, hard to believe!) Studying the LEED-NC Reference Guide felt a little like rote memorization.

I would agree with earlier comments that preparation for the LEED-AP exam does favor the LEED process specifically but I would add the caveat that a) the job of the LEED-AP is to guide the design team through the "LEED" process and b) LEED-AP training is, at the very least, an introduction to the idea of integrated design & sustainable construction.

Bottom line:

The aforementioned co-workers are both enrolled in CDT study groups and looking forward to sitting for the exam in March. After, I suspect they will both pursue the LEED-AP. It is up to each of the architects & spec writers on this thread to give value to the CDT behind their names when they come to see you!
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski

Post Number: 478
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 - 03:12 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Marty, Thanks for your insight. Your arguments for CDT and LEED value echo my own. You expressed it well and I will be able to use the information when the occasion arises. CDT and the levels of certification are for all projects, all time; LEED is, right now, for specialized projects and with time, may prove superfluous.
Marty Sweeney, CSI, CDT, LEED-AP
Senior Member
Username: marty_sweeney

Post Number: 8
Registered: 07-2004
Posted on Thursday, January 25, 2007 - 12:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Lynn, thank you for the kind words. I do, however, want to be clear. I value the LEED process very much. The momentum behind the green/sustainable movement is, in my humble opinion, not even at the proverbial "tipping point".

My point is better stated this way: I am a better LEED Accredited Professional BECAUSE I obtained my CDT first.

Maybe a CDT (excepting other applicable training) should be the prereq. for the LEED-AP?? Now that would be something!
Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA
Senior Member
Username: don_harris

Post Number: 108
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 11:18 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

"Maybe a CDT (excepting other applicable training) should be the prereq. for the LEED-AP??"

Right-on Marty!!!!!
Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: specman

Post Number: 391
Registered: 03-2003
Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 11:50 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Let's take it a step further...

How about working with NCARB to accept passing the CDT as a substitution for some of the IDT requirements, or as a means of reducing internship time for thoses states that don't require NCARB? Then it would have some appreciable value to architect candidates.
James M. Sandoz, RA, CSI, CDT, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: jsandoz

Post Number: 7
Registered: 06-2005
Posted on Friday, January 26, 2007 - 05:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

Ronald, that would be a wonderful thing if NCARB accepted passing the CDT as a substitution for some of its required credits. It would give every candidate for registration a solid baseline of knowledge as well. Once I studied for the CDT I really began to understand what it meant to be a good architect.

As for Lynn's comment that LEED may some day become superfluous, I take that to mean, in a very positive way, that one day we will all design and specify with the good of the environment foremost in our minds. "What a wonderful world." I'll stop singing now. Louis Armstrong, please forgive me.
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski

Post Number: 481
Registered: 07-2002
Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 09:45 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

James, that's exactly what I meant. And no matter what comes along, I think we'll still need CDTs, CCSs, CCCAs, and CCPRs!
Marty Sweeney, CSI, CDT, LEED-AP
Senior Member
Username: marty_sweeney

Post Number: 9
Registered: 07-2004
Posted on Monday, January 29, 2007 - 10:03 am:   Edit PostDelete PostPrint Post

This is a great discussion and, I might add, it has become a different discussion. The original title of this thread was LEED AP vs. CDT. Could it be that both could add value to the other?

It seems to me that there is a consensus, so far, that CDT and higher certifications could effectively serve as core education/prereq. for LEED-AP. It could also be utilized as some type of litmus for NCARB. Is there a business model here for CSI?

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Password:
E-mail:
Options: Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration