Cut Score...

[Photo Engineer]

I went to college with a guy who had to take Thermodynamics 3 or 4 times because he just didn't get it. He finally passed and graduated, and now has a BSMET degree on his wall.

I also went to college with many people who sailed through their freshman classes, got bored, and now work at the corner hardware store.

The point is - a passing grade is a passing grade, whether on the first or fifth try. And a passing grade on the fifth try is a whole lot better than never attempting it in the first place (even if the person is convinced they would pass with no problems.)

 

[IlPadrino]

The point is - a passing grade is a passing grade, whether on the first or fifth try. And a passing grade on the fifth try is a whole lot better than never attempting it in the first place (even if the person is convinced they would pass with no problems.)

What about this perspective: Who would you rather have defending you in a capital murder case (let's assume you're innocent!)... a lawyer who took the bar exam five times before he passed or a lawyer who passed it on the first try? For the sake of simplicity, let's also assume they both have the same education and experience.

 

[benbo]

The point is - a passing grade is a passing grade, whether on the first or fifth try. And a passing grade on the fifth try is a whole lot better than never attempting it in the first place (even if the person is convinced they would pass with no problems.)

What about this perspective: Who would you rather have defending you in a capital murder case (let's assume you're innocent!)... a lawyer who took the bar exam five times before he passed or a lawyer who passed it on the first try? For the sake of simplicity, let's also assume they both have the same education and experience.

Given everything exavtly equal, including the circumstances under which they took the exam, I'd take the first time passer.

The problem is that it is almost impossible for two engineers or lawyers to have exactly the same experience (and track record). If I was looking for a Supreme Court justice, I'd want somebody who passed the Bar the first time. If I was looking for a criminal defense attorney there are so many intangibles, involving knowing human nature, ability to address a jury, ability to read a judge or jury, etc., that are far more important than pure legal knowlege.

I guess the question is "how much does the success on this exam actually track ability to perform well as an engineer." I'm not sure about the answer to this question. In some cases you may be a super expert in a particular field, and the performance on the test doesn't reflect that. I passed the ECC electrical first time, but don't ask me to design a power grid.

But I think the point of Photo ENg's post was that you get the same credential regardless, and nobody is going to know anyway how many times you took the test.

 

[buick455]

What about this perspective: Who would you rather have defending you in a capital murder case (let's assume you're innocent!)... a lawyer who took the bar exam five times before he passed or a lawyer who passed it on the first try? For the sake of simplicity, let's also assume they both have the same education and experience.

 

[IlPadrino]

so which one is now more qualified?

Remember, the PE exam isn't constructed to determine levels of qualification. It only determines *MINIMAL* competence. In theory, a 70 is minimally competent and a 69 is not. Scores can't be used to compare competence. A 70 and a 90 are both minimally competent - and that's all you know. They both passed. All other things being equal (or at least, the difference being unknown), I'll take the guy that passed the bar on the first try. And I bet you would, too. Unless you had a chance to meet the lawyers...

Benbo: You wrote "how much does the success on this exam actually track ability to perform well as an engineer." I'd bet very little. I'd personally take experience and education over examination as being better correlated to ability to perform well. Unfortunately, we have no good way to compare experience or education objectively.

 

[Santiagj]

This arguement is exactly why we do not recieve our % grades anymore.

 

[Dexman1349]

Honestly, I really don't understand why knowing the cut score is so important. If you know it before-hand, you don't study any less or don't change how you take the exam. If you know it afterward, you can't change your results because you've already taken the exam.

Simply knowing your diagnostic percentages (if you fail), is all you really need to adjust your studying.

Anyways, IMO arguing the cut score is like :deadhorse:

 

[Mike in Gastonia]

Honestly, I really don't understand why knowing the cut score is so important. If you know it before-hand, you don't study any less or don't change how you take the exam. If you know it afterward, you can't change your results because you've already taken the exam.
Simply knowing your diagnostic percentages (if you fail), is all you really need to adjust your studying.

Anyways, IMO arguing the cut score is like :deadhorse:

You'd never guess that based on the number of times it comes up on this and the PPI board! :rotflmao:

 

[RIP - VTEnviro]

I'd look at it this way... the first time takers pool includes some people that will pass regardless of determination. Once these floaters are skimmed off when they pass, the percentage of sinkers increases. I think determination will certain help the sinkers float, but it's not going to raise the percentage enough to offset the lack of first time floaters.

If you're having issues with floaters and sinkers, you might want to brush up on your WW texts.

 

[Dexman1349]

I'd look at it this way... the first time takers pool includes some people that will pass regardless of determination. Once these floaters are skimmed off when they pass, the percentage of sinkers increases. I think determination will certain help the sinkers float, but it's not going to raise the percentage enough to offset the lack of first time floaters.

If you're having issues with floaters and sinkers, you might want to brush up on your WW texts.

I heard the iPhone has an app for that...

 

[Road Guy]

its 58!

 

[Photo Engineer]

What about this perspective: Who would you rather have defending you in a capital murder case (let's assume you're innocent!)... a lawyer who took the bar exam five times before he passed or a lawyer who passed it on the first try? For the sake of simplicity, let's also assume they both have the same education and experience.

But most lawyers don't defend people for capital murder cases. There area whole lot of non-trial attorneys (patent lawyers, contracts, union, etc) that a person who failed the bar exam a few times would do just fine.

Same thing with engineers. You may not want the engineer who failed five times doing the stress analysis on the Eiffel Tower. But you don't want the wiz kid being the on-site field representative talking with the construction crew because he'll just make everyone mad. The guy who tried thermo 3 times was great with people and I'd hire him in a minute to work with the construction crew because people respected him a lot.

 

[Dark Knight]

A source very close to the NCEES Gods at Mount Olympus told me that there is a push to include how many times you tried to pass in the PE Certificate. Some states are fighting this but NCEES is making a strong push.

It would look like John Doe PE(I) or John Doe P.E. (II), with the roman numeral indicating how many times you had to take the test.

Of course, this is nonsense, fiction, and untrue but you guys opened the door. :mf_bounce8:

 

[wilheldp_PE]

Of course, this is nonsense, fiction, and untrue but you guys opened the door. :mf_bounce8:

It's no fun if you reveal your ruse in the same post.

 

[Dark Knight]

Of course, this is nonsense, fiction, and untrue but you guys opened the door. :mf_bounce8:

It's no fun if you reveal your ruse in the same post.

I have a reputation to keep :Locolaugh: :Locolaugh: :Locolaugh: and do not want to be portraid as a liar.

By the way, I had to look what the heck was the meaning for ruse. Thanks for the lesson.

 

[Dexman1349]

A source very close to the NCEES Gods at Mount Olympus told me that there is a push to include how many times you tried to pass in the PE Certificate. Some states are fighting this but NCEES is making a strong push.
It would look like John Doe PE(I) or John Doe P.E. (II), with the roman numeral indicating how many times you had to take the test.

So THAT explains the Structural II exam...

 

[benbo]

A source very close to the NCEES Gods at Mount Olympus told me that there is a push to include how many times you tried to pass in the PE Certificate. Some states are fighting this but NCEES is making a strong push.
It would look like John Doe PE(I) or John Doe P.E. (II), with the roman numeral indicating how many times you had to take the test.

So THAT explains the Structural II exam...

Structural - the test so nice, I had to take it twice.

 

[wilheldp_PE]

By the way, I had to look what the heck was the meaning for ruse. Thanks for the lesson.

That would be another example of movies expanding my vocabulary. I still remember that word from when Randall used it in Clerks.

I also learned the word superfluous from the movie Father of the Bride when I was in middle school. I used it in class one day and my teacher almost fainted.

 

[RevMen]

One problem I have with the PE exam being a gage for engineering competency is the way it forces you to work so many problems in such a short time. Not once in my career have I had a supervisor looking over my shoulder with a stopwatch while I solved a problem. In a normal day it usually takes me 4 to 8 hours of work to answer a single question.

Being fast is not the same as being correct. People that can work more quickly will probably be more profitable but that doesn't mean they'll come up with better answers. The states don't care about how fast we answer questions, they care about how correctly we answer questions.

Test taking is a skill in and of itself. Some people are just better at it. I admit that I am a pretty good test taker; if my grades were based purely on my homework I probably wouldn't have graduated. I ended up getting an 86 on the FE last year, even though I graduated in 2002 and didn't study as much as some people. I'm certain there are better engineers out there who did not score that high. Certainly there are good engineers who just suck at taking tests and had to take the PE several times to pass it.

So yes, I agree that the exam should only be seen as a test of minimum competency and nothing else should be drawn from that. I don't think it's fair or even a good idea to make a determination of a person's competency as an engineer based on how many tries it took them to pass the **** thing.

I would argue that an employer who puts any consideration on a person's PE performance (beyond pass/fail) isn't doing a very good job of evaluating a job candidate's qualifications. I'm not aware of any firms that require their employees to sit down for 8 hours and solve 80 different 6-minute problems spanning multiple disciplines.