# Master's Degree required for P.E.?



## Timewalker (Jul 13, 2009)

Anyone, in your opinion, Should a Master's Degree in an Engineering Field be required for taking the P.E. exam and licensing an engineer?

Would that requirement be valuable to already-licensed engineers or to their professions? How would this requirement affect the future P.E. and the related industry?

Thanks.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Jul 13, 2009)

There is a lengthy discussion on this subject in a thread called BS plus 30.


----------



## Timewalker (Jul 13, 2009)

Thanks Wilheldp_PE for the lead on BS plus 30. :lamo:

If you don't mind me asking, what do you think about the specific topics I mentioned above?

Thanks for your sincere reply.


----------



## wilheldp_PE (Jul 13, 2009)

I'm torn on the issue myself. I think requiring an advanced degree adds another layer of credibility to the title of Engineer (think JD required for Lawyers, or MD required for Doctors). On the other hand, very little of what you actually use in your career as an engineer is actually learned in school. But again, experience is just as important for doctors, and to a lesser extent, lawyers as it is for engineers.

I do have an M.Eng., so the requirement wouldn't really affect me. Plus, I'm already a PE, and I'm sure the requirement won't (can't?) be retroactive. There are several engineers on this board that don't even have bachelors that I would trust to design any structure/product that my life depended on, but they have far more experience than I do in engineering. I'm not sure I would trust a doctor that didn't have a medical degree no matter how much experience they have, so maybe that parallel doesn't hold.


----------



## goodal (Jul 14, 2009)

In my humble opinion, it would add no appreciable value to being a PE. Where i have learned the most was AT WORK. Not in a lecture. Im not cracking on those with Masters, i just dont see the benefit. However, it does sound like a great revenue producing scheme for universities (which is probably where the idea originated)!!!


----------



## Timewalker (Jul 14, 2009)

Thanks badal for your comment...how do you, or anyone reading this thread, think that extra requirement will affect the availability of PEs in the engineering market, since not every PE, even now, has a Master's degree in Engineering? Would that make existing PEs more valuable to PE-employing firms and new PEs more scarce to find? If this a good thing for PE-employing firms? Certainly, it seems beneficial for colleges...so, what's really the upside or downside of this issue for PEs and their potential employers?


----------



## CivE Bricky (Jul 15, 2009)

Here's 191 pages on the topic from ASCE

http://www.asce.org/files/pdf/professional...751247675903691

requirements will not be retroactive.

ASCE no longer advocates a formal Master's Degree, but instead a "Body of Knowlege"

I think this change will absolutely happen - only the timetable is in question.

I have not read this document, but have been exposed to summaries of it via involvement in ASCE. As written now, I largely agree with the concept.

Here's a two page summary of key points:

http://www.asce.org/files/pdf/professional...oints040708.pdf

I agree with the frequently stated concept that engineers need real-world experience, not book learning. I have high hopes that the market (and online study) will combine to increase the number of useful, applicable graduate level courses and also further educate professors on the real world (via their students) improving the profession overall.

ASCE was instrumental in shaping NCEES's new policy - I expressed my opinions early on and changes were made to this proposal in line with my comments....


----------



## T2D4 (Aug 4, 2009)

a master's degree is irrelevant. i learned more in my first year out of college than i ever wouldve taking any combination of classes for a master's.

i do, however, support a maximum number of PE exam attempts, be it 5 or 7 or so.

if you can't pass this exam in that number of tries, you shouldn't be doing things that involve human safety.


----------



## Dleg (Aug 5, 2009)

I think I said it in the other thread (BS + 30), but I'll say it again here: If ASCE and NCEES _and_ academia (ABET) all agree that a bachelor's degree is no longer adequate training for a civil engineer, then I don't see the purpose of simply adding a master's or extra coursework to a BS - just make an engineering BS become a 6-year degree. Call it something else to satisfy that (ridiculous) urge to "feel like lawyers." Call it an "ED" or something snooty based on latin. (anyone know any latin?)

But, seriously - if we are indeed being serious about this - what's the point of continuing the current B.S. engineering system if everyone agrees it does not make a person an engineer? We'll have to start calling a B.S. a "pre-engineering" degree.

But then again, what about the other disciplines? I am still fairly confident my M.E. degree prepared me adequately for entering the world of mechanical engineering and obtaining the professional experience I needed to get licensed. Did the other engineering professions have a say in this? Or is this something being pushed by the civil engineering "majority" only?

And I also have to echo the sentiment, which ASCE fortunately does also, that experience plays just as big a role as the degree for an engineer. I had to explain to my boss recently (he wanted to hire a recent graduate for a difficult eng. management job), that engineers don't leave college ready to perform a job. They leave ready to _learn_ a job. That's one of the big differences between a lawyer, for example, and an engineer. The lawyer spends a few years in school. We spend a few years on a job. _Only then_ can we work unsupervised on projects.


----------



## IlPadrino (Aug 5, 2009)

Dleg said:


> just make an engineering BS become a 6-year degree


What about the timeline of this qualification pipeline? Just about everyone agrees the education, experience, and examination wickets are appropriate and the are almost always linear: first education, then FE examination, then experience, and finally PE examination. 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.


----------



## EnvEngineer (Aug 5, 2009)

I have two questions, 1. what is current problem that this requirement will solve, and 2. are they going to align the MS course work with the work the PE is expected to perform. It makes no sence for a Engineer to get a MS in environmental if they are going to practice structural. This would be the same for Geotechnical, Transportation and Construction.


----------



## T2D4 (Aug 5, 2009)

EnvEngineer said:


> I have two questions, 1. what is current problem that this requirement will solve, and 2. are they going to align the MS course work with the work the PE is expected to perform. It makes no sence for a Engineer to get a MS in environmental if they are going to practice structural. This would be the same for Geotechnical, Transportation and Construction.


you touched on a very valid point. i don't know how many colleagues studied one field of CivilE in college, and now practice in another after working for a bit.

it's absurd to burden those students with more classwork (and debt) for a career path they may not even enjoy or stick with.

i will reiterate: experience gained during actual engineering work is much, much more valuable than class work. you simply don't learn real world scenarios in a classroom, no matter what is being taught.


----------



## chaocl (Aug 5, 2009)

I am not a great student in college because I graduated with GPA 2.80 only. A master degree ask student who have GPA above 3.00 and you need to take a GRE or GMAT for it......

If this is true that became a PE you need to be pass GRE or GMAT, FE and then finally PE?

I never heard that a license should be build ontop of another prefoession (Business, english)....Maybe that a english major can be PE later on... :210:


----------



## Kephart P.E. (Aug 5, 2009)

The only thing I think it will do is make passing rates for the FE and PE higher.

It is not a complete waste of time, but BS + 30 really will not help the average employer, so I don't see why they are suddenly going to start paying us all more than they already do for P.E.'s

Plus it seems to me that the further you go in your field the more specialized the training becomes, I think those extra 30 hours will end up being training you will never utilize. But as with most college classes there is always a review of the basics so that is why I think it will help with pass rates.


----------



## McEngr (Aug 5, 2009)

In my understanding, it was generated by the Structural Engineering Field. I'm not advocating or disapproving it because I know little about the big picture. However, I can say with certainty that my bachelors degree was NOT enough to know all there is about structural engineering. There are plenty of structural engineering topics like post-tensioned concrete, prestressed concrete, advanced mechanics of materials, finite element analysis, and plate/shell theory that a structural engineer may encounter in his career but never, ever be required to have a classical education for.

I think the point of it all is that many senior-level structural engineers (like some mentioned in "Structure" Magazine and "Structural Engineer" Magazine) have stated that the engineering schools are not the same as they use to be. The goal is to have more competency when entering the real world, not having more competency to have your license. I believe most of it is a result of being more and more frustrated with entry-level engineers.

Anyone agree/disagree?


----------



## McEngr (Aug 5, 2009)

Also, I think since most engineers will have a goal of acheiving their license - it is an eventual, predicted reaction by those pursueing engineering that they will be more prepared in their entry-level position regardless of whether they need a PE in the near future.


----------



## IlPadrino (Aug 5, 2009)

EnvEngineer said:


> 2. are they going to align the MS course work with the work the PE is expected to perform. It makes no sense for a Engineer to get a MS in environmental if they are going to practice structural. This would be the same for Geotechnical, Transportation and Construction.


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


----------



## EM_PS (Aug 5, 2009)

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*



Dleg said:


> Call it an "ED" or something snooty based on latin. (anyone know any latin?)


Riparum usus publicus est jure gentium, sicut ipsius fluminis.


----------



## pavell (Aug 6, 2009)

so would an MBA count to be licensed in 2015? Even though its not a "technical" civil degree?


----------



## EM_PS (Aug 6, 2009)

This from page 12, NCEES Model law August 2008:



> c. Licensure by Examination (Effective January 1, 2020)5 – The following individuals shall70 be admitted to an 8-hour written examination in the principles and practice of
> 
> 71 engineering and, upon passing such examination and providing proof of graduation, shall
> 
> ...


I'm not sure how many (if any) States have adopted this model. Ultimately, it is the state boards that will require (or not) implementing this, and what constitutes 'approved course providers or acceptable undergrad / grad coursework. '


----------



## IlPadrino (Aug 6, 2009)

IlPadrino said:


> 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 (Aug 6, 2009)

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 (Aug 6, 2009)

IlPadrino said:


> 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 (Aug 7, 2009)

Dleg said:


> 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. (Aug 7, 2009)

error_matrix said:


> 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 (Aug 7, 2009)

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 (Aug 19, 2009)

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.


----------

