Elevating Standard of Care questions - B101 altering: question wording

[annarbrodersen]

Ok so These few real-world practice questions have been tripping me. Because the questions are asking what is the result of the architect changing the standard of care. The questions in no way explicitly indicate WHY or HOW the owner is proposing to modify the B101. And the questions do not indicate in anyway WHY or HOW the architect is considering modifying the B101. Upon the answer - it is IMPLIED that the architect is modifying to achieve “error-free” documents and design. But how am I supposed to frame my responses in that way when the question does not indicate modifying B101 to achieve “error-free” outcomes. Are we just supposed to know this is a standard example in the topic of being weary about contract mods to B101?

[kiaragalicinao]

Welcome to the Black Spectacles Community @annarbrodersen! Thanks for writing in. I replied to your question on the dedicated thread for this Real-World Practice exercise:

PcM | Understanding Standard of Care [Exercise A]

@annarbrodersen wrote in with this question: The requested contract modifications (error-free documents and satisfying all uses of the intended client) is noted in the overall scenario for this Real-World Practice exercise. Even though a question may not explicitly indicate this, all questions within the exercise will relate back to the overall scenario. This is also how ARE case studies are structured, in that all parts of the scenario should be considered when answering a question. If you …

Please note that we have dedicated threads for each exercise so that you can post your questions there, share insights with others, and engage in discussions related to the topics. You can access the thread by clicking on the “Discuss in the Community” button on your dashboard when taking the exercise.

Kiara Galicinao, AIA, NCARB
Product Coordinator
Black Spectacles