The ARE 5.0 is a computer-based exam with separate divisions. It uses selected-response items and case studies with exhibits such as drawings, specifications, contracts and code excerpts. Case studies reward careful use of the documents: the task is to apply the facts and constraints provided, not to guess what a familiar project might say.
These original ARE practice questions focus on that skill. Each gives you a scenario and asks for the best next decision. Read the exhibits in the question, choose an answer, then check the explanation for both the right choice and the most tempting distractor.
1. Check the egress dimension shown
This question tests whether you can find a controlling dimension in a code excerpt and compare it with the drawing. A case-study answer should point to the relevant exhibit fact rather than rely on an assumed code requirement.
A case-study question in the practice set looks like this:
The life-safety plan marks an exit access corridor as 44 inches clear. At a door swing, the enlarged plan shows only 34 inches clear. The provided code excerpt requires a minimum clear width of 36 inches at this location. What is the best next step?
The enlarged plan shows a 34-inch pinch point against the provided 36-inch minimum. Resolve the conflict in the documents and verify the route. The tempting choice is to rely on the wider corridor dimension, but it does not address the clear width at the door.
The useful habit is to compare the requirement with the narrowest relevant point, not the most favourable dimension on the sheet. If a case study gives a code excerpt, apply that excerpt to the specific condition shown.
2. Follow the accessibility criteria in the exhibit
This question tests whether you distinguish a walking surface from a ramp using criteria supplied in the case study, then identify the information needed to resolve the design.
The next question checks that distinction:
The accessibility exhibit says a walking surface may not be steeper than 1:20 in the direction of travel; a steeper route must be designed as a ramp under the referenced provisions. The site plan labels a 1:18 sloped approach to the entrance as a walking surface. Its cross slope is 1:48. What is the best response?
The running slope is steeper than the exhibit's 1:20 limit for a walking surface, so the route must be treated as a ramp and checked against the referenced ramp provisions. The tempting choice is to focus on the acceptable-looking cross slope, but it does not change the running-slope classification.
A label does not make a route compliant. In an exam case study, state the relevant measurement, identify which provision it triggers, and name the next design check rather than inventing unprovided ramp details.
3. Handle a proposed substitution through the stated workflow
This question tests specification review and the division of responsibilities. The contract excerpt in the question controls the answer; do not assume a different project’s substitution process.
A substitution scenario might appear as follows:
The project manual says substitution requests must include evidence of conformance, cost and schedule effects, and written owner acceptance before a change is made. The contractor submits a product sheet claiming equal performance but gives no cost or schedule information. What should the architect do?
The request lacks information required by the project manual and has not received the stated written owner acceptance. Ask for the missing information and continue through the specified workflow. The tempting choice is immediate approval based on a performance claim, which does not satisfy the other stated requirements.
A product sheet is evidence to review, not an approval by itself. Track the missing items and keep the decision, its basis and any required acceptance in the project record.
4. Respond to a field condition without taking over construction means
This question tests the difference between observing work and directing how the contractor performs it. The best response protects the project record and gets the discrepancy to the people responsible for resolving it.
Consider this site-observation question:
During a site visit, you observe that a concrete opening appears offset from the location on the structural drawings. The contractor says the opening can be corrected by cutting the slab after the pour. What is the best action?
The apparent discrepancy has structural implications and needs review by the responsible structural engineer before cutting. Document what was observed and communicate it through the project workflow. The tempting choice is to approve the contractor's proposed fix, which bypasses technical review and takes responsibility for a solution you have not verified.
Separate what you observed from what you infer. A clear note identifies the location, drawing reference, observed condition and requested follow-up; it does not prescribe an unreviewed repair.
5. Do not treat a price or schedule change as already authorised
This question tests whether you can follow the contract language given in a case study when a change is proposed. Look for the stated approval sequence and distinguish a recommendation from authorisation.
Try the contract-workflow question:
The contract excerpt says changed work requires a written directive from the owner before the contractor proceeds. The owner tells the architect by phone to add a finish upgrade, and the contractor asks to start tomorrow. What should the architect do?
The project excerpt requires a written owner directive before changed work proceeds. Clarify and record the proposal, then obtain the required written authorisation. The tempting choice is to treat the phone call as sufficient, but that conflicts with the stated process.
In practice questions, contract terms supplied in an exhibit are more useful than assumptions about a familiar standard form. Identify who has authority, what documentation is required and what must happen before the work starts.
6. Address an estimate that exceeds the project budget
This question tests how you connect scope, cost and design decisions without quietly removing a required function. A defensible response makes the trade-offs visible to the owner.
A cost-and-scope question looks like this:
The estimate for the current design is 12% above the owner's stated construction budget. The program and accessibility requirements remain unchanged. What is the best next step?
The team needs to understand the estimate and present viable options with their effects on scope, performance and cost, while retaining stated requirements. The tempting choice is an immediate cut, but deleting a required route or reducing quality without review avoids rather than resolves the decision.
When a question gives a budget constraint, show that you understand both sides of the decision: what cannot change, and what options can be evaluated. Do not imply that a contractor’s estimate or a design revision has been accepted until the responsible parties make that decision.
7. Resolve a drawing conflict before it reaches the field
This question tests coordination and the standard response to conflicting contract documents. The aim is to get a clear, documented direction before dependent work proceeds.
Try this coordination question:
The reflected ceiling plan shows a light fixture at the centre of a ceiling bay. The mechanical drawing shows a duct crossing that same location. The contractor requests direction before installing either item. What is the best response?
The drawings conflict, so coordinate with the relevant disciplines and clarify the intended arrangement before installation. The tempting choice is to privilege one drawing automatically, but the case gives no basis for doing so and the change may affect other systems or design intent.
A concise clarification should identify the conflict and the affected documents, then provide a coordinated direction through the project’s established process. Avoid making the contractor the designer of record for a design conflict.
8. Prioritise a life-safety concern over convenience
This question tests whether you recognise an immediate safety concern and respond in a documented, responsible sequence rather than treating it as a minor maintenance issue.
The next scenario focuses on risk:
On a site visit, you find a fire door on an egress route propped open. The contractor says it is only temporary and asks you not to report it because the work is nearly complete. What is the best action?
A fire door left open on an egress route raises a life-safety concern. Promptly document and communicate the observed condition and follow the project’s escalation process. The tempting choice is to defer it as a close-out item, but that delays action on a current risk.
Prioritise public health, safety and welfare when a scenario conflicts with schedule or convenience. Describe the observed condition and the follow-up needed; do not overstate what you know about the cause or direct work outside your role.
9. Check the scope before relying on a consultant’s work
This question tests whether you can identify a missing coordination step when a project change affects more than one discipline. The best answer names the information to confirm and the people who need to review it.
A consultant-coordination question might be:
The owner asks to move a rooftop unit after the mechanical engineer has issued drawings. The change may affect structure, roof drainage and screening. What should the architect do first?
The proposed location has potential structural, drainage and architectural effects. Confirm the change and coordinate with the relevant consultants before issuing revised documents. The tempting choice is to revise the architectural plan alone, which would leave the other affected documents unresolved.
The scenario is about process as much as technical knowledge. A strong response identifies the affected disciplines, confirms the owner’s decision and coordinates the documents before construction relies on them.
10. Do not accept an unverified structural change
This final question tests the ability to weigh schedule pressure against technical risk and to use the right review path when a proposed change affects structure.
Finish with this scenario:
To maintain the schedule, the contractor proposes enlarging an opening in a structural wall. The structural drawings do not show the larger opening, and no revised calculation or engineer's approval is included. What is the best response?
The proposed opening differs from the structural documents and has no supporting review. Refer it to the structural engineer, document the decision and do not treat the change as approved before review. The tempting choice is to proceed and submit information later, which puts schedule ahead of an unresolved structural risk.
Across these questions, the repeatable method is to identify the decision, locate the controlling exhibit, apply its stated facts, then choose a safe and properly documented next step. ARE case studies can combine technical, code and professional-practice issues; keep your answer tied to the specific scenario rather than reciting a general rule.
A practice review can help distinguish a knowledge gap from a missed document detail. For this set, the weaker areas might be tracked like this:
This summary ranks practice sections by the share of marks earned and records how often each was tested.
If the same decision keeps costing you marks, turn the correction into a short recall prompt. For example, after missing the structural-change question twice, the remediation card could be:
You lost this mark twice: the proposed structural opening differs from the drawings and has no engineer's review. What must happen before the affected work proceeds?
Answer with the action and the reason: refer the proposed change to the structural engineer, obtain the required review, and document the decision before the affected work proceeds.
How MySummaries helps
MySummaries lets you build a revision board from your own ARE study material, including PDFs, slides and photographed notes, then practise questions against that material. You can review missed points with spaced-repetition flashcards and use marked mock exams to identify which topics need more work. Start at portal.mysummaries.app.