How Many Questions Are on Each ExAC Section? Question Types and Exam Format Explained

The short answer: ExAC format at a glance

The Committee for the Examination for Architects in Canada does not publish a fixed public number of questions for each section, and that is by design. The exam committee builds each section to the published competency map, then sets a competency-based cut score that adjusts for the difficulty of the items used in any given sitting. Two candidates writing two different sittings of the same section may answer slightly different counts of items, and both pass standards are calibrated to be equivalent.

What is consistent is the time budget and the format mix. Each section runs roughly two to three hours of timed work, with the full four-section sitting filling a normal exam day. The format mix is what this post is about. Section by section, the kind of question you are answering changes, and that changes how you study. Here is the shape at a glance.

Understanding this mix is the difference between treating all four sections the same and studying each one for the format it actually uses. The rest of this post walks through the four sections in detail, then catalogues the seven distinct question formats that appear across them.

Section 1 question types and what they test

Section 1 is Design and Analysis. It covers programming, site and environmental analysis, engineering coordination, cost management, schematic design, and design development. It is closed book.

The dominant format is multiple choice, but Section 1 is not pure multiple choice. Short-answer (constructed-response) items show up here, often asking the candidate to explain a programming decision, justify a site analysis trade-off, or walk through a schematic design rationale in a few structured sentences. Both formats are scored against a rubric, so brevity with named-source content beats long meandering responses.

Cost questions are concentrated in Section 1, and the relevant data tables are supplied within the exam booklet itself. You are not bringing RSMeans or Yardsticks for Costing into the room. What is tested is the method: Class C estimating, the elemental cost approach, location factors, escalation, design contingency, and soft costs. Drill the workflow with practice questions, not the line items.

Diagram and scenario items can also appear in Section 1, particularly on site analysis and on the relationships between programming and engineering coordination. These are lighter-weight than Section 3 diagrams; they ask the candidate to label a site, sketch a bubble diagram, or annotate a programmatic relationship. The rubric still wants labelled components and correct relationships, not draftsmanship.

Section 2 question types and what they test

Section 2 is Codes, and it is generally all multiple choice. It is the only open-book section on the ExAC, with the NBC 2020 and the NECB 2020 permitted in the exam room. The emphasis is on code navigation and interpretation: locating the applicable Part, finding the relevant Section, and applying the article to the scenario in the question.

The topics covered include building code fundamentals, building classification, fire and life safety, accessibility, spatial separation, small buildings, envelope, integrated code application, and the NECB. Every one of these is fair game for a multiple-choice question that hands you a building, a scenario, or a small architectural condition and asks for the correct code response.

The trap is treating Section 2 like a memory test. The exam does not reward recall of clause 3.8.3.2 by number; it rewards the candidate who can find the clause in the NBC in under 30 seconds and apply it correctly. Tabbing strategy matters more here than the recall strategies that work for the closed-book sections. The NBC 2020 page and the NECB page cover the tabbing approach our team recommends.

The questions themselves are typically scenario-based: a small architectural problem, three or four answer options, only one of which is the code-compliant response. The wrong options are realistic distractors that a working intern might pick based on day-job intuition or partial reading of the article. Read the scenario carefully, find the article, eliminate the implausible options, and choose the one that fits.

Section 3 question types and what they test

Section 3 is Sustainability and Final Project, and it is the widest format mix on the entire ExAC. It is closed book. It pulls from CHING Building Construction Illustrated, CHOP, and a list of supplementary references covering sustainability literacy, integrated code application, document coordination, and the final-project scenario.

Six distinct question formats can appear in Section 3:

• Multiple choice. Scenario-based items on sustainability literacy, integrated code application, and document coordination.
• Short answer (constructed response). Three to four sentence or short-paragraph responses to a structured prompt; graded against a rubric of specific content elements.
• Details. Architectural detail items asking the candidate to identify, label, or sequence a small assembly (a flashing detail, a joint, a transition).
• Wall sections. A labelled or partially labelled wall assembly with prompts on component identification, layer sequencing, water management, vapour control, or thermal bridging. Drawn from CHING and the relevant CHOP chapters.
• Construction assemblies. Floor, roof, and exterior wall assemblies asking the candidate to apply assembly logic to a final-project condition.
• Drawing-based diagrams. Site diagrams, programmatic relationships, schematic sustainability strategies, or final-project sketches; the candidate produces a labelled diagram graded against a rubric.

This is the section where Intern Architects most often underestimate the format gap. A candidate who has done timed multiple-choice practice but never sketched a wall section under a clock will lose marks on the wall-section items not because they do not know the content, but because they have not rehearsed the format. Drill diagrams, wall sections, and assemblies the same way you drill multiple choice: with a clock, with a rubric, and with deliberate review.

The friendly read: once you see the six formats, the Section 3 study plan stops feeling impossible. You are not studying six different sciences; you are practising the same content through six different output shapes.

Section 4 question types and what they test

Section 4 is Construction and Practice, and it is all multiple choice. No short-answer prompts. No diagrams. No drawing-based items. The questions cover construction documents, specifications, bidding and contract negotiations, construction office and field functions, and project and business management.

The closed-book ruleset means the candidate cannot reach for CHOP or for CCDC 2 in the exam room. Both references, however, are tested. Section 4 scenarios apply CHOP chapters and CCDC 2 General Conditions to realistic architect-as-Consultant situations: handling a bid evaluation, responding to a Contractor request for substitution, certifying a progress payment, processing a change order, closing out a project. Each scenario is paired with three or four multiple-choice options, and the right answer is the one that aligns with CHOP guidance and the CCDC 2 General Conditions.

The candidates who underestimate Section 4 are usually working interns who have spent years on construction administration and expect day-job intuition to carry the section. Day-job intuition gets you most of the way, but the multiple-choice options are written to catch the cases where intuition diverges from the Canadian contractual standard. Practise Section 4 with timed multiple choice on bidding, contracts, and field functions before relying on experience.

The seven ExAC question formats explained

Across the four sections, the ExAC uses seven distinct question formats. Each one rewards a different study habit. Treat them as seven separate skills to rehearse, not as one block of "practice questions".

Read the table and act on the right-hand side: each format has a different rubric, so each one needs a different rehearsal habit. The candidates who pass on first attempt typically practise all seven, not just the multiple-choice block.

How to prepare for each question format

The Examitect approach, refined from post-exam debriefs we have run with Intern Architects across every sitting, is to build a weekly rotation that touches every format every week. Reading without practice builds recognition; practice builds the recall the exam rewards. The integration of practice questions starts on day one of the study cycle, not in the final week.

A working weekly rotation looks like this:

1. One day on Section 1 multiple choice and short answer. Programming, site, schematic design, design development. Include at least one cost-method practice item per week.
2. One day on Section 2 code navigation. Timed scenarios on Part 3 of the NBC 2020, fire and life safety, accessibility, spatial separation, NECB envelope and energy. Use the actual tabbed NBC; never substitute notes.
3. One day on Section 3 multiple choice and short answer. Sustainability literacy, integrated code application, document coordination. Mix in one detail or assembly prompt.
4. One day on Section 3 diagrams. Sketch a wall section, an assembly, or a site diagram under a clock. Grade against the rubric. Repeat until the labelling is clean and fast.
5. One day on Section 4 multiple choice. CHOP chapters paired with CCDC 2 General Conditions GC1 through GC12. Bidding, change orders, certifications, field functions, closeout.
6. One day on mixed practice. A small set of items pulled from all four sections to keep the format-switching reflex sharp.
7. Recovery day. Rest, recover, review only the items missed during the week.

Two to three weeks before the sitting, run a full timed mock exam in the real format mix. The mock is the only exercise that calibrates pace, fatigue, and format-switching at the same time. If the mock surfaces a weak format, the last weeks of study close that gap directly.

Common format mistakes that cost marks

Every ExAC cycle, the same format-side mistakes show up in the post-exam debriefs our team runs with candidates. Reading them now is cheaper than discovering them in the exam room.

• Treating every section as multiple choice. Section 1 has short answers. Section 3 has wall sections, assemblies, and diagrams. If your practice library is 90 percent multiple choice and 10 percent everything else, your format reflex will collapse on the Section 3 diagram items. Match your practice mix to the section's real mix.
• Writing essays in short-answer prompts. Section 1 and Section 3 short answers reward rubric-specific content, not eloquence. Answer the exact question, show the chain of reasoning, use Canadian terminology, and stop. A tight three-sentence response usually outscores a long one.
• Treating the open-book rule as broader than it is. Only Section 2 is open book, and only the NBC 2020 and NECB 2020 are permitted. CHOP, CCDC 2, CHING, RSMeans, Yardsticks, and your notes stay outside. Plan your closed-book sections around closed-book recall.
• Memorising NBC clause numbers. Section 2 is generally all multiple choice and the questions reward navigation, not recitation. Tab the NBC so any clause is under 30 seconds away, and spend zero study time drilling clause numbers by rote.
• Skipping diagram practice. Section 3 wall sections and assemblies are graded against a rubric of labelled components and correct sequencing. Candidates who never sketch a wall section under a clock cannot hit the rubric, even when they know the building science. Sketch deliberately during the study cycle.
• Letting cost questions absorb half the day. Section 1 cost items reward method, not perfection. Choose the right Class C estimate approach, apply location and escalation factors, finish, and move on. Spend the marginal hour on a Section 3 diagram, not on a second decimal place.

None of these mistakes are about content knowledge. They are about format fluency. Build format fluency the same way you build content knowledge: deliberately, with feedback, on a clock.