Master's Degree required for P.E.?

[IlPadrino]

My understanding is that it's 30 credits of graduate education in ANY discipline. Even an MBA would count.

I was wrong... I just looked for the latest NCEES information on the topic and found this link which discusses the change from "BS+30" to "master's or equivalent" in *engineering*. Seems an MBA won't count.

Read this (available from the previous link as well) for more information - I found it very interesting.

 

[EM_PS]

If nothing else, it will be real interesting to see if any state boards adobt the ncees model, esp so as not all states even require the EAC/ABET B.S. degree yet. i think there will always be a way to sit for PE, regardless of model law change or education level in general. . . it'll just take you longer.

This is priceless:

If the number of individuals pursuing licensure drops, it would result in a corresponding drop in thenumber of both Group I and Group II PE examinations administered. This would have a financial impact

on NCEES that would have to be addressed.

 

[Dleg]

Is the BS+30 intended to be a BS, followed by some experience, then followed by an MS (or maybe with some classes thrown in along the way with experience)?
Graduate education is supposed to be different from Undergraduate education - making the BS six years might ignore this.

I am not sure they are talking about graduate courses or not - the ASCE document mentions that some undergrad coursework would also be acceptable toward the 30.

Plus, the only substantive "reason" given for this so far is that the civil engineering field has expanded so much that a typical 4-year BS can no longer adequately prepare a civil engineer for the breadth of possibilities available in a career. Which, in my mind, would seem to argue more for a longer, broader BS program. OR: splitting civil engineering up - structural, transportation, construction, water/wastewater, etc.

Personally, I would prefer that the requirement remain a Bachelor's degree. Let ABET decide what the B.S. should consist of - with input from ASCE, NCEES, NSPE, etc. If academia, in consultation with the professional societies, agrees that 150 credits is required, then let a BS in civil engineering equal 150 credits.

A Masters degree is something that is potentially very useful to every engineer. But it is something, IMO, that should be decided on later in one's career, and not necessarily limited to an "engineering" MS. An MBA might be just what some engineers need in their career to be more effective engineer leaders, for example. Or an MS in environmental science , or a Masters in Public Health.... This BS+30 rule will force the decision upon the young, inexperienced student, and the Master's program will be chosen and completed before that student has even had a chance to get out and learn what he/she really wants to do. AND it will limit it to "engineering". This will simply reduce the value of the Master's degree - you'll still want another one later on, after you've figure out what you want to do with your life. (not to mention the student loans that will rack up)

 

[Ble_PE]

I am not sure they are talking about graduate courses or not - the ASCE document mentions that some undergrad coursework would also be acceptable toward the 30.
Plus, the only substantive "reason" given for this so far is that the civil engineering field has expanded so much that a typical 4-year BS can no longer adequately prepare a civil engineer for the breadth of possibilities available in a career. Which, in my mind, would seem to argue more for a longer, broader BS program. OR: splitting civil engineering up - structural, transportation, construction, water/wastewater, etc.

Personally, I would prefer that the requirement remain a Bachelor's degree. Let ABET decide what the B.S. should consist of - with input from ASCE, NCEES, NSPE, etc. If academia, in consultation with the professional societies, agrees that 150 credits is required, then let a BS in civil engineering equal 150 credits.

I agree completely with what you are saying. The problem would be that in some states, NC for example, the state has declared that all degree programs not go over a certain amount of required hours (120 I think). This is where you would run into a problem.

In order for an architect to become professionally licensed, they need to complete 150 hours I think and the way the school of architecture at the university I attended accomplished this was by having a 120 program that got you a Bachelor of Arts in Architecture. They then had a 5th year of architecture that got you the Bachelor of Architecture. I don't know that this would be feesible for engineering, but you could make the argument that you spend 120 hours for the general civil engineering degree and then the 5th year in the specialty of your choice, be it structural, environmental, or what have you.

It's a very complex problem without a clear cut solution.

 

[Kephart P.E.]

I think the ncees model is in the right direction. The main impetus has seemingly been to bolster the engineering curricula that have gotten weaned down from 150 credits (once upon a time) for a B.S. to around 120 credits(!) for some programs today. My alma mater has fallen victim to the same trend, it was 136 credits when i took program, now is down to 133 credits. Always a class that gets bumped for one reason or another (in this case it was business law). That said, i think if programs continue w/ seemingly watered-down degrees or leaner curricula, the BS+30 makes sense. since 30 credits past the undergrad level usually fulfills a master's course requirement, most folks trying to round out the increased credits will arguably pursue that in the form of an M.S. I wouldn't go so far as to say an M.S. is the requirement, just that one's academic curriculum had better at least fulfill the target of 150 credit hours (or more), in tangible, relevant courses in whatever field of engineering one is pursuing. If that includes business courses (and it should), so be it.
*edit*

Riparum usus publicus est jure gentium, sicut ipsius fluminis.

I posed the same question to a Professor of mine and he told me at least at OSU, they are covering the same material that they were 20 years ago. OSU like many institutions changed from Semesters to Trimesters and that drastically altered the amount of credits offered as I understand it. In 2 semesters you could have 2, 9 week courses each worth 3-4 credits. Now you probably just have 1 class worth 4-5. So in a way you "lose a few credits each term so to speak.

I am also sure when they remove some required courses (obsolete) the colleges really don't want to replace them if they don't have to.

 

[benbo]

I am for keeping the requirements the same, but I have noticed that for some disciplines education may be more important, while for many others it is experience.

In my office we recently had four people take the exam. Two were electrical, two were mechanical. THe only one who passed was the lady taking the electrical with electronics specialization.

I don't know anything about the mechanical exam so I'll limit my comments to the electrical.

Both the electrical examinees were good students, I think he graduated about five years ago. He took power. The lady is currently a PhD student at USC, working in electronics and controls.

I think the power is harder to pass if you don't have at least some practical

experience. You can do it, but it is harder if you aren't used to using the codes, etc. In our job there is very little use of the electrical codes, or any calculation, etc.

But for the electronics, I think for the PE exam at least, it is much more valuable to be in school, because when it comes to electronics, communications, and control, most working engineers rely extensively on software and seldom do the calculations that appear on the test. But to somebody in school, it is probably fairly elementary stuff.

 

[playboyman007]

An engineer intern with a bachelor’s degree in engineering, with an additional 30

credits of acceptable upper-level undergraduate and/or graduate-level coursework

from APPROVED COURSE PROVIDER, and with a specific record of 4 years or more of

progressive experience on engineering projects of a grade and a character which

indicate to the board that the applicant may be competent to practice engineering.

I can see the trouble it will cause with the master's degree requirement. One of the reason I chose Civil Engineering is due to the varies field opportunity (I.E. Structural, Geotechnical, Water Resources, Transportaion...and even within these subjects there are sub-depth involve with the subject....for transportation there is traffic, highway design and pavement engineering.) So upon entering the work force, potential engineers will have numerous choices to get a job. A master's program are usually focus on civil engineering emphasis. This will narrow down the work force demand of the specific civil engineering emphasis of choice. This is properly why ASCE and NCEES drifted to the 30 credits of acceptable coursework. This is where I see an issue. Who will dictate what is "acceptable" coursework. ABET determined that certain classes are require for a BS degree. I know the state will ultimately decide the rules to license an engineer, but opening up an questionable propose will just confuse the government agency further more.