Does anyone have any recommendations on review courses? I took the October 2016 exam, still do not know the results, but I do not feel very confident that I passed. I took School of PE for their review, and while the review was helpful for the morning, I had difficulty on the afternoon. I am looking for a review class that will better prepare me for the afternoon. The courses that I am looking at are Test Masters and EET. I have heard that EET prepares you well for the morning, but the Structural Depth portion is somewhat lacking. Does anyone have any insight on a course that was helpful for the Structural Depth portion as well as the morning?
Review Courses
- Thread starter cperr017
- Start date
Help Support Professional Engineer & PE Exam Forum:
Mangano
Well-known member
Since I know you've been checking this since you wrote it...
I took the Structural Depth only with EET and wished that I had taken the morning too! Not because I didn't do well on the exam, but because I felt that their approach was very fitting and their information was great. Their Seismic course is top-class, and I think that the structural review was extremely accurate. I think it may be more about finding a course with a similar mindset to your own. For example, I took an ASCE review course that I found to be useless.
I took the Structural Depth only with EET and wished that I had taken the morning too! Not because I didn't do well on the exam, but because I felt that their approach was very fitting and their information was great. Their Seismic course is top-class, and I think that the structural review was extremely accurate. I think it may be more about finding a course with a similar mindset to your own. For example, I took an ASCE review course that I found to be useless.
I would recommend the EET course, I found that both the breadth and depth portions were very helpful for the test. After taking the classes and doing extra problems from other practice test books I was able to pass the PE test on my first try. The classes were probably sufficient but I would highly recommend using extra practice tests just to have more experience with different problems you may encounter on the test. As a reference I took the classes for the October 2016 Civil-Structural Test.
Mangano
Well-known member
I'd like to add that the structural binder that EET provided for the review was very thorough and organized, and I will keep it in my office for reference in practice! I think that is a pretty solid indicator of their value.
WA_Civil_PE
Member
+1. That EET binder covered 85-90% of the structural depth portion of the civil exam for me. The rest of depth was code look ups and conceptual problems.
My company paid for an ASCE breadth review. Overall it was okay but the organization of the EET course was much better. Then again I am comparing breadth vs. depth. I would highly recommend EET.
I'd go with PPI. they at least give you a trial period to see if you like it.
I contacted SoPE for the SE and they seriously REFUSE to give me their syllabus. All i wanted to find out is what crossover there is between their lateral and vertical courses. They refused to answer that question too.
If it is so hard to simply give me basic info when they're trying to sell me their product, how shitty will their service be once they do have my money?
akvudaiyar
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2014
- Messages
- 18
- Reaction score
- 1
Do you see a need to read through the CERM on top of the EET binders for structural depth and breath ?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
For Sale CA Civil Seismic - AEI Review & Practice Exams Books - Newest Editions
- Latest: wellhellothere gen kenobi
-
-
-