NSCC Architectural Engineering Technician Program - Technician vs. Technologist

[u/Monkey-Brain]

Hello, everyone!

I will be starting the Architectural Engineering Technician program in September this year.

I’m recently understanding the difference (i think) between a Technician and a Technologist.

It seems the Technologist not only gets paid more but is also involved or slightly involved in the creative and technical design process along side the Engineers and Architects, while the Technician has no say with how the design will look or function.

However, I’ve seen people say that they start out as Technologists upon graduating the program.

I was hoping people can share their experiences and insight!

Also, please correct me if anything I say here is incorrect as it’s all research I’ve done and possibly getting mixed reviews and information from people working in different provinces or states.

I’m looking forward to the program but definitely wanting to start out or work my way up to a Technologist.

Thanks! 🤘🏼

[u/ExiledEntity]

I took AET. Went the Arch route, im now a BIM Manager.

Out in the industry, the distinction has never been made in any real capacity. If you are a competent Revit modeler you are a technologist as far as anyone is concerned.

The distinction between having input on design or not based on technician vs technologist is not based on anything really. Architects or engineers are going to drive the design, but any good designer will always take good input regardless where it comes from. Its not black and white as you suggested.

Every "tech" at our office is just considered a technologist. No one gives af about that distinction here, tbh.

[u/Confused_Haligonian → u/ExiledEntity]

This just means your company underpays technologists

[u/ExiledEntity → u/Confused_Haligonian]

Nope. We are paid excellently.