Start here: identify the decision before collecting evidence
The Canadian Architectural Certification Board accredits professional degree programmes in architecture offered by Canadian universities. Its current programme page says every accredited Canadian programme is a Master of Architecture. The reliable check therefore matches the exact M.Arch programme and school, then opens the programme record, current term, Architecture Program Report and Visiting Team Report. A Bachelor of Architecture, post-professional master’s degree, online course or related design award is not covered merely because the same university has an accredited M.Arch.
Read the term literally. CACB distinguishes six-year terms, six-year terms with a focused evaluation, three-year terms, two-year probationary terms and revocation. A programme on probation remains accredited unless CACB publishes another decision; probation is not a licence and must not be hidden. Completing an accredited professional degree is the education step. CACB academic certification, internship, examination and registration with the relevant provincial or territorial regulator remain separate steps.
This guide was checked on 27 October 2026 against current primary guidance. CACB’s procedures page stated that revisions effective 26 June 2026 replace earlier revisions. Its current list showed twelve Canadian accredited M.Arch programmes and its visit page listed programme-specific reviews from 2027 onward. This guide preserves the current term wording and does not infer status from a future visit date.
This specialist sits under The Gold Standard of Education: Learning That Transfers into Life. The parent framework keeps the purpose visible: understand the system, act on the correct evidence and build independence for the next decision.
Contents and reading routes
Use the quick route for an immediate decision, the complete route for a live case, and the teaching route when helping a learner explain the mechanism.
- Quick route: chapters 1, 4, 7, 10 and 12.
- Complete route: chapters 1–12, authoritative sources, verification workbook and FAQs.
- Teaching route: chapters 2–3, worked case in chapter 7, and failure repair in chapter 10.
Open the chapter index
- Name the architecture decision
- Identify the accredited object
- Open the programme record
- Interpret accreditation terms
- Separate visit dates from status
- Work a post-professional case
- Read the evidence chain
- Apply the certification boundary
- Follow the licensure sequence
- Repair common errors
- Carry evidence overseas
- Complete the live check
1. Name the architecture decision
Identify the exact degree, programme, school, learner dates and intended regulator.
Architecture education and permission to practise are connected but separate.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: the receiving organisation changes. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
2. Identify the accredited object
Match the professional M.Arch, not the university or department.
A related design award does not inherit programme accreditation.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: the record is older than expected. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
3. Open the programme record
Read the current term, reports and decision evidence.
A map pin or school name is only the start.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: a deadline moves forward. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
4. Interpret accreditation terms
Preserve six-year, focused-evaluation, three-year and probationary wording.
Every term carries a different monitoring meaning.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: the programme changes after an offer. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
5. Separate visit dates from status
Treat an upcoming review as a scheduled process, not an automatic expiry.
Current published status remains the controlling record.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: one identifier is wrong. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
6. Work a post-professional case
Suppose a learner chooses an advanced architecture master’s beside the accredited M.Arch.
Match the actual professional purpose and award.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: a listing is current but the intake is not. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
7. Read the evidence chain
Connect self-study, APR, visiting-team review, VTR and Board decision.
No single document substitutes for the current decision.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: the learner changes jurisdiction. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
8. Apply the certification boundary
Use the correct CACB academic-certification mode after graduation.
Accreditation and individual certification answer different questions.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: evidence arrives after an internal deadline. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
9. Follow the licensure sequence
Map education, internship, examination and regulator registration.
Completion of one stage does not complete the others.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: a published route disappears. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
10. Repair common errors
Typical errors merge reputation, accreditation, certification and licensure.
Return each claim to its responsible owner.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: the decision-maker asks for the original document. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
11. Carry evidence overseas
Provide programme status, term, award and certification records.
A foreign receiver applies its own rules.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: the search result is correct but incomplete. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
12. Complete the live check
Reopen programme, term, reports and regulator guidance before commitment.
Save the dated current record.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route states the present decision in one sentence. CACB Board, university, exact M.Arch programme, visiting team, student or graduate, internship administrator, examination body, provincial or territorial architectural regulator, employer and overseas receiving body supplies only the evidence it owns. the live CACB programme page, programme-specific current term, Architecture Program Report, Visiting Team Report, decision wording, June 2026 procedures, learner transcript and award, academic-certification decision and regulator requirements records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.
Now change one condition: the learner changes goal. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.
Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.
Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.
Authoritative sources and evidence boundary
These primary sources were checked on 27 October 2026. Reopen the live record near any enrolment, recognition, immigration, transfer, funding or licensing decision because statuses, dates and operating guidance can change.
- CACB accredited Canadian professional architecture programmes
- CACB accreditation scope and review process
- CACB conditions and June 2026 procedures
- CACB term, probation and programme-scope explanations
- Maintaining accreditation and focused evaluation
- Current and upcoming programme visits
- CACB academic-certification pathways
A source can establish only the fact within its remit. Keep the current authority record beside learner-specific evidence and obtain the responsible organisation’s written decision where acceptance, credit, protection, immigration or eligibility is at stake.
Verification workbook
Complete every line with a dated official page, document, recorded state or named follow-up. A blank is useful because it shows where certainty has not yet been earned.
- Present decision
- Institution
- School
- Exact M.Arch
- Professional purpose
- Post-professional boundary
- Campus
- Delivery mode
- Initial accreditation
- Current term
- Six-year term
- Focused evaluation
- Three-year term
- Probation
- Revocation
- Visit year
- APR
- VTR
- Decision wording
- Procedures edition
- Enrolment date
- Graduation date
- Transcript
- Award
- Academic certification
- Internship
- Examination
- Regulator
- Protected title
- Overseas receiver
- Written decision
Build an auditable decision file
Open with the exact decision and its deadline. Attach the current current CACB record for the exact professional M.Arch programme and accreditation term, the learner-specific record and the receiver’s published requirements. A general webpage explains a rule; it does not replace a learner-specific decision from the responsible body.
Create one evidence row for each controlling fact: institution, school, exact M.Arch title, professional or post-professional purpose, campus, delivery mode, initial accreditation, current term, six-year term, focused evaluation, three-year term, probation, revocation, visit year, APR, VTR, decision letter, procedures edition, learner enrolment, graduation, transcript, award, academic certification, internship, examination, regulator, protected title and written receiving decision. Give every row a source, retrieval date, status and owner. Mark a fact confirmed only when the cited source proves it. Use reported, estimated or pending for everything else.
Separate inputs from outputs. Inputs are facts supplied by the learner, provider or authority. Outputs are comparisons, classifications and decisions made from them. If an output looks wrong, check the input, then the dated rule, then any recorded exception.
Keep a change log for programme name, professional purpose, campus, term, focused evaluation, probation, visit schedule, procedures, learner dates, certification route, regulator and receiving purpose. Record the old fact, new fact, date learned, source and every conclusion that must be reopened. Do not silently overwrite the earlier state; the history explains why a reasonable plan changed.
Add a deadline map with the formal deadline, an earlier internal deadline and the recovery route if evidence arrives late. Where no recovery route is published, record that absence rather than inventing one. Reopen the official page near the action date because archived guidance can look authoritative.
Use a responsibility matrix. CACB owns programme accreditation and academic certification; universities own programme delivery and learner records; internship, examination and provincial or territorial regulatory bodies own later stages; receivers own their decisions. If two people assume the other has acted, the file should expose the gap before the deadline.
Keep a contact note for each official enquiry: channel, date, question, answer and reference number. If verbal advice conflicts with a published rule or written decision, ask for clarification in writing before an irreversible action.
Run a source hierarchy check. Put the responsible authority first, current operational guidance second, the learner-specific notice third and informal explanation last. Where two official pages appear inconsistent, record both dates and ask which governs the present case.
Schedule a cold review two working days before any irreversible boundary. Recheck names, identifiers, dates, programme codes, study load and document version. Save the submission acknowledgement without treating receipt as approval.
After the decision, reconcile the notice with the plan line by line. Record what was accepted, refused, limited or deferred and the route for correction, review or appeal. Preserve the original decision when adding later correspondence.
Add a “not yet proved” page. List every conclusion that still depends on institution, school, exact M.Arch title, professional or post-professional purpose, campus, delivery mode, initial accreditation, current term, six-year term, focused evaluation, three-year term, probation, revocation, visit year, APR, VTR, decision letter, procedures edition, learner enrolment, graduation, transcript, award, academic certification, internship, examination, regulator, protected title and written receiving decision. Beside each item, name the smallest official record that would settle it and the person who can obtain that record. This stops a plausible estimate from drifting into the confirmed column merely because it has been repeated.
Rehearse a correction request before one is needed. Identify the learner, present decision, disputed input, supporting document and requested remedy without claiming an entitlement the evidence cannot establish. Address it to the organisation that owns the record or decision, keep a copy, and record the published response or escalation route.
Ask an independent reader to challenge the file. They should identify the weakest assumption, locate the official sentence that controls it and describe what changes if the assumption fails. Record that answer without deleting the earlier reasoning; the audit trail should show learning, not pretend uncertainty never existed.
Build a conservative time and cost plan beside the evidence file. Show what is already confirmed, what is estimated, which payment or enrolment step becomes irreversible and when. Then test a delayed decision and a less favourable outcome. The exercise does not predict the authority’s answer; it prevents an optimistic reading from becoming an unexamined commitment.
Ask the student, parent, graduate, adviser, employer or regulator checking a Canadian professional architecture degree, accreditation term, focused evaluation, probation, academic certification, internship, examination or registration route to narrate the case aloud in under two minutes: “This is my present state; this is the governing source; this is the learner-specific evidence; this is the unresolved boundary; this is my next permitted action.” A listener should be able to distinguish fact, comparison and choice without prompting.
Practise one counterfactual. Change only the university remains the same but the learner chooses a post-professional or fully online award, or the programme moves from a full term to probation and trace which conclusions stay valid. The exercise reveals whether the learner understands the dependency chain or has memorised an answer belonging to another case.
Finish with a retention plan. Keep source documents, decisions, receipts and later corrections for as long as they remain useful to explain the education record. Store identifiers securely and share only what the named recipient needs.
Frequently asked questions
Does CACB accredit whole universities?
No. It accredits professional architecture degree programmes.
Are all accredited Canadian programmes M.Arch degrees?
CACB’s current page says yes.
Is a post-professional master’s automatically accredited?
No. Match the exact professional M.Arch record.
Does probation mean accreditation has already ended?
No. CACB says a programme on probation remains accredited, but the status and next decision must be tracked.
Is an upcoming visit date an expiry date?
Not by itself. Read the current term and published decision.
Does graduation make someone an architect?
No. Academic certification, internship, examination and regulator registration remain.
Does CACB accredit fully online Canadian programmes?
CACB’s current FAQ says no solely online programme is accredited.
Can an overseas programme be called CACB-accredited?
CACB says its accreditation mandate is limited to programmes offered within Canada.
Close the workbook by explaining the process without notes. A dependable explanation names the authority, present state, evidence, deadline and consequence if one assumption fails.
Continue with this Education batch
These companion guides use the same evidence-first method for a different register, framework or recognition decision.
Continue through the Education branch
Return to The Gold Standard of Education. Continue with the Canada CACMS medical-programme specialist, the Canada CACEP counselling-programme specialist, the Canada CDAC dental-programme specialist, the Canada CICIC institution-directory specialist, the Canada CEAB engineering-programme specialist, the university-degree accreditation guide, the overseas-degree recognition guide. Each guide preserves the specialist owner while showing how records, qualifications and decisions connect.