ARB Education Reforms: The End of Parts 1, 2 and 3 as We Know Them
The most significant changes to UK architectural education in 50 years are underway. ARB is replacing the traditional three-part structure with a flexible, outcomes-based framework. Here is what stays, what goes, and the timeline for transition.
The Architects Registration Board (ARB) is implementing fundamental reforms to architectural education and training in the UK — the most significant changes in 50 years. These reforms, driven by the ARB's five-year strategy to raise standards in safety, professional competence, and workplace culture by 2030, represent a major shift from the traditional Parts 1, 2, and 3 structure.
The New Framework: Outcomes-Based Accreditation
Under the new system, the focus shifts from prescribed qualifications to demonstrated competencies. Instead of completing Parts 1, 2, and 3, individuals will need to obtain two ARB-accredited qualifications:
Academic Outcomes Qualification: Equivalent to a Master's (Level 7/SCQF Level 11) qualification, focusing on the knowledge, skills, and behaviours developed at master's level.
Practice Outcomes Qualification: Gained through professional practical experience, demonstrating the competencies required for registration.
What Stays
The Core Pathway: Most students will still complete an undergraduate degree, followed by a master's qualification, followed by professional practice and a practice qualification. The journey remains broadly similar — the labels and regulatory framework are changing.
RIBA Validation: RIBA will continue to validate architectural programmes at all stages (Parts 1, 2, and 3) for global recognition. RIBA strongly believes in the value of undergraduate architectural education and will maintain its three-part validation framework.
Master's Level Requirement: The master's-level threshold for registration remains. An undergraduate degree in architecture will no longer be an ARB requirement, but it will remain a common entry point.
Two Years of Practical Experience: Students will still need to demonstrate at least two years of practice experience, though the "minimum duration" regulatory requirement is being removed in favour of competency-based assessment.
What Goes
ARB Part 1 Accreditation: ARB will no longer accredit undergraduate (Level 6 or below) qualifications. Part 1 accreditation will cease from December 2027.
Part 1 Prescribed Examination: The separate Part 1 prescribed exam for overseas candidates will be withdrawn, replaced by a single exam assessing Academic Outcomes.
Parts 2 and 3 in Current Form: Existing Part 2 and Part 3 accreditation will cease from December 2028. Providers must transition to the new Outcomes framework to retain accreditation.
Rigid Sequencing: The requirement to complete all Academic Outcomes before Practice Outcomes will be removed, allowing more flexible pathways.
"Double Counting" Rule: The restriction preventing experience from counting toward multiple outcomes is being removed.
Timeline
January 2024: New Competency Outcomes and Standards for Learning Providers came into effect for all ARB accreditation decisions.
Second half of 2026: New master's-level, practice, and combined qualifications expected to begin being offered.
December 2027: ARB Part 1 accreditation ceases. Part 1 Prescribed Examination withdrawn.
December 2028: ARB Part 2 and Part 3 accreditation ceases. Qualifications must be transitioned to new framework.
Implications for Current Students
Currently completing Part 1: You will complete your qualification under the current system. Your Part 1 will remain valid.
Currently completing Part 2: You will complete under the current system. Your Part 2 will remain valid.
Currently completing Part 3 or practical experience: You will complete under the current system. Minimal impact expected.
Starting architectural education in 2025-26: You may encounter a transitional landscape. Check with your institution about their transition timeline.
Why These Changes?
The reforms respond to several pressures: the Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommendations on professional competence, concerns about workplace culture and trainee welfare (highlighted by PASEO research), the need for greater flexibility in career pathways, and the desire to focus regulation on outcomes rather than inputs.