Last year the RIBA launched a stinging attack on the ARB, claiming the regulator had overstepped its current legal powers after tweaking its proposed education reforms.In October 2023, the ARB introduced a new set of accreditation procedures with the latest draft of the rules updating earlier wording from qualification-awarding powers to degree-awarding powers.The change means learning providers without degree-awarding powers or a formal agreement with a body that has such powers would immediately be disqualified from offering ARB-accredited courses.AdvertisementBut the RIBA claimed the amendment could have significant implications, with its RIBA Board of Trustees chair Jack Pringle saying the move was elitist and ill-judged. It warned that the ARB was in danger of overreaching its statutory remit.Its broadside, fired at the ARB last year during a consultation on the change provoked by a challenge against its introduction, warned the new phrasing would potentially close the door to innovative and diverse routes to the required professional qualifications.The institute also said it was concerned the move would tread on the toes of its own historic powers, granted to it by Royal Charter in 1837. The RIBA said these powers enshrine its ability to award our own qualifications, granting us the independence to award certificates and diplomas in our own right.The swipe, which was made in its official response to consultation on Accreditation Rule 4.2: Degree awarding powers, came even though the RIBA is currently partnered with Oxford Brookes University.Through this formal arrangement with Oxford Brookes, the RIBA will still be able to continue to provide architectural education under the new wording through the RIBA Part 3 and programme (equivalent level to a Part 1 bachelors and Part 2 masters degree). AdvertisementPapers put before the ARBs board at a meeting yesterday (11 February), claimed the rule would ensure any education provider would have the necessary additional regulatory assurance and oversight.The document goes on: The alternative option would be to remove the requirement for a learning provider to be regulated by a relevant academic regulator. This would have the benefit of opening the market to alternative providers but remove the additional assurances ARB could rely on as detailed above and would require significant risk mitigation.The papers added: This would require ARB to seek those assurances through its own accreditation procedures in respect of non-regulated organisations. Building such capability and capacity would significant additional resource and effort, the cost of which would need to be passed on to the learning providers or borne by the profession. Furthermore, it would represent a duplication of regulation already in place that would offend the principles of better regulation.The board said that there had been only two objectors to the rule, following the consultation, namely the RIBA and the Royal Society of Ulster Architects (RSUA).The papers continued: It has been suggested that there could be an exception in rules for bodies withRoyal Charter status, but while Royal Charter status is an important mark of expertise and learning in a particular sector, it does not provide the assurance around academic regulation as described above.It has also been suggested to us directly by RIBA and was raised in consultation responses, that the rule would limit access to the profession. We have considered this argument, but given there are no current providers impacted by this rule, we do not see this as a significant risk.The board voted to retain the clause as drafted.The ARBs proposed educational reform will see the scrapping of the existing Parts 1 to 3 and switch to a more flexible, outcomes-based system that, it says, recognises what you know, what you can do and how you must behave instead of how you got there.The ARB has been contacted for comment.Reaction - chair of RIBA Board of Trustees Jack PringleSince 1837, our Royal Charter has enshrined our ability to award our own qualifications, granting us the independence to award certificates and diplomas in our own right. Our current RIBA Studio diploma is already recognised as a masters level equivalent qualification and our external examiners recognise this in their reports. ARBs decision is a direct assault on the powers granted to us in our charter.ARBs decision fetters the RIBA's ability to seek further, different routes to qualificationWe are pleased to partner with Oxford Brookes University for the delivery of RIBA Studio, and the terms of our arrangement mean that we continue to satisfy Accreditation Rule 4.2. However, ARBs decision fetters our ability to seek further, different routes to qualification, that we may wish to devise in parallel. This is of great concern.In addition, this ill-advised move could disproportionately affect future alternative learning providers, preventing them from offering new qualifications that could particularly benefit students who face barriers to accessing education due to finances or caring responsibilities.We continue to advocate for an inclusive architecture education system that works for all.