# April 2019 SE Results Thread



## Civil Dawg

How's everyone feeling about the test?  This was my 3rd time taking Vertical Buildings after failing twice 2 years ago.  My first time I got 24/40, A, IR, U, U.  Last time I felt great leaving the test but must have fallen for every trick they threw at me and ended up with 19/40, A, A, A, IR.  I felt good about the morning but there were one part (out of the 5 parts) on the masonry, steel, and concrete that are keeping me up at night.  I think I did well on the other parts of those questions so I'm hopeful I can get a good morning score and at least 2 Acceptable's with no Unacceptable.  I also took Lateral Buildings for the first time.  I had to guess on 4 or 5 morning questions but feel pretty good about the other morning questions.  I think I did pretty good on the afternoon as well, but if there's one thing I've learned from taking the test before is there's no way of guessing how well you did!

As far as results, I was hopeful we would get results early this year since the exam was 2-3 weeks earlier than usual.  I would expect PE results around May 17-21.  The latest NCEES Licensure Exchange, however, doesn't show the SE Exam Grading Workshop during April, May, or the first weekend of June.  This would mean the earliest it would be is June 7-9, with results coming out June 14-17.  If that's the case, I find that completely unacceptable.  How can they justify not grading the exam for over 2 months?


----------



## SouthernEngineer

The vertical test did not seem difficult which scares me into thinking I fell for all their tricks. The lateral test seemed incredibly difficult. One of the afternoon problems I didn't even know what they were asking for. I Deffinanly anticipate having to take the lateral again.


----------



## Nathan55

Civil Dawg said:


> How's everyone feeling about the test?  This was my 3rd time taking Vertical Buildings after failing twice 2 years ago.  My first time I got 24/40, A, IR, U, U.  Last time I felt great leaving the test but must have fallen for every trick they threw at me and ended up with 19/40, A, A, A, IR.  I felt good about the morning but there were one part (out of the 5 parts) on the masonry, steel, and concrete that are keeping me up at night.  I think I did well on the other parts of those questions so I'm hopeful I can get a good morning score and at least 2 Acceptable's with no Unacceptable.  I also took Lateral Buildings for the first time.  I had to guess on 4 or 5 morning questions but feel pretty good about the other morning questions.  I think I did pretty good on the afternoon as well, but if there's one thing I've learned from taking the test before is there's no way of guessing how well you did!
> 
> As far as results, I was hopeful we would get results early this year since the exam was 2-3 weeks earlier than usual.  I would expect PE results around May 17-21.  The latest NCEES Licensure Exchange, however, doesn't show the SE Exam Grading Workshop during April, May, or the first weekend of June.  This would mean the earliest it would be is June 7-9, with results coming out June 14-17.  If that's the case, I find that completely unacceptable.  How can they justify not grading the exam for over 2 months?


To truly understand NCEES, you must watch the dark knight rises. Remember when Bane finally defeats batman, and he expects a quick demise? 

Batman/SE exam test takers: why didn't...you just....kill me?

Bane/NCEES: You don't fear death. You welcome it. Your punishment...must be more severe.

Batman/SE exam takers: Torture?

Bane/NCEES: Yes. But not of your body...of your soul. You will learn that there can be no despair without hope. I will give you hope...to poison your souls. To let you believe you can pass. And then, when it is done, and you receive your results...and everything you have worked for is ashes...THEN you have my permission to die.

And THAT is why results take so long, and why you can never know what you missed in the afternoon to determine what to improve upon for next time.


----------



## Civil Dawg

SouthernEngineer said:


> The vertical test did not seem difficult which scares me into thinking I fell for all their tricks. The lateral test seemed incredibly difficult. One of the afternoon problems I didn't even know what they were asking for. I Deffinanly anticipate having to take the lateral again.


Did you take Buildings or Bridge? I took Buildings and feel like I struggled my way through each question and ended up with a decent answer for each. The guy who was taking bridges said there was a Lateral PM question that he had no clue what they were asking.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

I felt like I rocked the SE lateral this time. Even with the sneaky tricks. I've taken the lateral exam a few times though, EET review this last time definitely filled in a lot of seismic unknowns for a poor old east coast engineer. I remember sitting there the first time thinking "What the heck is that?" So I feel for everyone. If I somehow by NCEES god knows what metric did not pass, I will definitely be talking to a lawyer to see my test as I will suspect either incompetent grading or malfunctioning equipment and I will not sit for this exam again. I still believe it is the ultimate disgrace in engineering that you are not allowed to see what you missed and receive a poor excuse for diagnostic that basically tells you "So sorry, better luck next time."

Good luck to all. I hate the wait, but at least this time I can prepare for a good time on release day!


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Took buildings both days. Lateral was on a whole different level of difficulty than Vertical, significantly harder than anything I expected.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Is there any insight on what the difference between Unacceptable/Needs Improvement/Acceptable is on a percentage basis or something like that?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

SE_Hopeful said:


> Is there any insight on what the difference between Unacceptable/Needs Improvement/Acceptable is on a percentage basis or something like that?


I wish I could give you better news, but I believe they grade fairly harshly. Basically, if you miss a section of a problem, it's improvement required. Miss much more than that and I think you get to see this lovely exam again.


----------



## cal91

Buildings both days. Vertical was pretty straight forward, easier than I thought it'd be! Felt really solid on both AM and PM. Feel like I nailed all the bridge questions too, and no guessing.

Lateral AM felt really solid. Got all the bridge problems, didn't have to guess on any.

 Lateral PM felt really solid on 2 of the 4 questions. I was a little surprised it seemed like the questions were...  1. General Analysis / Concrete, 2. Steel / Concrete Foundation, 3. Wood / Masonry, 4. Steel. I felt really solid on 3. and 4. On question 2, Felt really solid about the first half ( the steel part) but struggled to find the code provisions for the concrete foundation part. Question 1 felt really solid on the general analysis part (the majority of the question) but didn't feel like I answered the last part (the only concrete material specific part of the question).


----------



## Pur_SE_

I took Vertical this go around as I was able to pass lateral in October (yay!). I felt that Vertical was somewhat straightforward. It was kinda refreshing but then again I was doubting myself on a few of the items in the afternoon. I am not sure if I was able to pick up all the "tricks" that the exam presented. However, I felt much more confident after this exam than last session.


----------



## User1

I took Vertical only, buildings, first try. 

I felt like the morning killed me on time. I could have answered my remaining questions if I had more of it. But had to blindly guess on about 7 due to the 1 minute warning. 

The afternoon felt better, but not great. I suspect I will be seeing the vertical portion again. Haven't attempted Lateral yet.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

tj_PE said:


> I took Vertical only, buildings, first try.
> 
> I felt like the morning killed me on time. I could have answered my remaining questions if I had more of it. But had to blindly guess on about 7 due to the 1 minute warning.
> 
> The afternoon felt better, but not great. I suspect I will be seeing the vertical portion again. Haven't attempted Lateral yet.


TJ. This makes me sad. Wish you would've studied with me.


----------



## SouthernEngineer

Civil Dawg said:


> Did you take Buildings or Bridge? I took Buildings and feel like I struggled my way through each question and ended up with a decent answer for each. The guy who was taking bridges said there was a Lateral PM question that he had no clue what they were asking.


I took the buildings test. The second part of the second question confused me. find "x" when "X" was provided in the table.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

cal91 said:


> Buildings both days. Vertical was pretty straight forward, easier than I thought it'd be! Felt really solid on both AM and PM. Feel like I nailed all the bridge questions too, and no guessing.
> 
> Lateral AM felt really solid. Got all the bridge problems, didn't have to guess on any.
> 
> Lateral PM felt really solid on 2 of the 4 questions. I was a little surprised it seemed like the questions were...  1. General Analysis / Concrete, 2. Steel / Concrete Foundation, 3. Wood / Masonry, 4. Steel. I felt really solid on 3. and 4. On question 2, Felt really solid about the first half ( the steel part) but struggled to find the code provisions for the concrete foundation part. Question 1 felt really solid on the general analysis part (the majority of the question) but didn't feel like I answered the last part (the only concrete material specific part of the question).


I was not as confident on the Lateral AM - I had to guess on a few problems, however I expect to at least get a 'pass' for the AM. But my experience on the Lateral PM sounds very familiar to yours. I felt like I had a decent answer/approach for everything except for the Concrete/foundation stuff, which I don't think I interpreted the code correctly for / or made calc errors, because I got results that didn't make sense. Hopefully partial credit is enough to carry me through


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

SouthernEngineer said:


> I took the buildings test. The second part of the .....


Just a quick bit of concern, this site is really sensitive to sharing any exam information. Be careful what you say.


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> Just a quick bit of concern, this site is really sensitive to sharing any exam information. Be careful what you say.


I was thinking that what I shared was vague enough. If the Mod's think otherwise I won't be offended if it's removed.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Does anyone else feel like the SE Lateral exam makes them feel like the girl in Buffalo Bill's pit from the movie "Silence of the Lambs"


----------



## Nathan55

Every Lateral exam review session should begin with putting these Navy Seal motivational sayings to memory, with modifications:

1. The only easy day was yesterday (when you took the vertical exam) 
2. Get comfortable being uncomfortable
3. Don't run to your death (on essay problems especially)
4. Move (quickly through the exam), shoot (down tricks in easy problems), communicate (your knowledge of the code to NCEES graders)
5. No plan survives contact with (NCEES)
6. All in, all the time


----------



## User1

also, i need to bring a seat cushion next time. not because the chairs were uncomfortable, but the rough surface made the backs of my legs itchy in the afternoon!!!


----------



## SE_Hopeful

The biggest thing I felt after the test was rage. Rage that the NCEES can justify charging $50 for (or even offering at all for that matter) a 'practice exam' that is not even close to the same difficulty level as the actual exam. It was a total misrepresentation for lateral.


----------



## Nathan55

SE_Hopeful said:


> The biggest thing I felt after the test was rage. Rage that the NCEES can justify charging $50 for (or even offering at all for that matter) a 'practice exam' that is not even close to the same difficulty level as the actual exam. It was a total misrepresentation for lateral.


Copy that. The NCEES practice exam is one of the most eloquent "inception"-level sleights of hand I've seen.

"Wait so all this time....VADER was my father???Noooooooooooo!!!!"

NCEES: Well our practice test is an accurate representation of test content and difficulty......From a certain point of view.


----------



## kevo_55

The question seems general enough to me. I'll let this slide.

/steps off soapbox

Don't worry about the exam too much everyone. I have my fingers crossed!!


----------



## Civil Dawg

/ stands on stepbox kevo just got down from

I'm very frustrated with the timeline for results.  NCEES has always said 8-10 weeks for PE and 10-12 weeks for SE results but that's never been the actual timeline.  It's usually ~6 weeks for PE and ~7 for SE.  With the SE Grading Workshop not being scheduled (according to NCEES Licensure Exchange) until at least June 7-9, that means it will be 10-11 weeks at the earliest for SE results.  Does anyone know why the exam was so early this year?  I didn't decide to retake it until right before Christmas.  I could definitely have used those extra 2 or 3 weeks to study.  But if the exam got moved forward 2-3 weeks you would think they could at least move the grading workshop up 2-3 weeks to match.

/ stands off stepbox so someone else can get on


----------



## crammer

SouthernEngineer said:


> I took the buildings test. The second part of the second question confused me. find "x" when "X" was provided in the table.


I know. I swore I was going crazy in the test thinking of that... spent a good 15 minute trying to come up with something to fill the pages.

All I could think of was that I will be doing this again.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

crammer said:


> I know. I swore I was going crazy in the test thinking of that... spent a good 15 minute trying to come up with something to fill the pages.
> 
> All I could think of was that I will be doing this again.


I solved for the info with ELFP using their computed period. I'm pretty sure that is what they wanted but I agree the question was asked oddly. I also made a note that the information they were asking for was given in the table and the question did not make sense the way they were asking it.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Civil Dawg said:


> / stands on stepbox kevo just got down from
> 
> I'm very frustrated with the timeline for results.  NCEES has always said 8-10 weeks for PE and 10-12 weeks for SE results but that's never been the actual timeline.  It's usually ~6 weeks for PE and ~7 for SE.  With the SE Grading Workshop not being scheduled (according to NCEES Licensure Exchange) until at least June 7-9, that means it will be 10-11 weeks at the earliest for SE results.  Does anyone know why the exam was so early this year?  I didn't decide to retake it until right before Christmas.  I could definitely have used those extra 2 or 3 weeks to study.  But if the exam got moved forward 2-3 weeks you would think they could at least move the grading workshop up 2-3 weeks to match.
> 
> / stands off stepbox so someone else can get on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3




The more people that fail, the more $$$ for NCEES.

Why is there months between the exam and the grading workshop anyway?


----------



## Civil Dawg

SE_Hopeful said:


> Why is there months between the exam and the grading workshop anyway?


It boggles my mind why the grading workshop would be 8-9 weeks after the exam. I can get on the NCEES website and see the exam schedule through 2026 so it’s not like the exam sneaks up on them.


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> I solved for the info with ELFP using their computed period. I'm pretty sure that is what they wanted but I agree the question was asked oddly. I also made a note that the information they were asking for was given in the table and the question did not make sense the way they were asking it.


Ahhh, I know what you guys are talking about. Yes that was tricky. I got it, only after using probably 20 minutes of mulling it over.  Man it's hard to not talk freely about the exam!


----------



## Nathan55

Civil Dawg said:


> It boggles my mind why the grading workshop would be 8-9 weeks after the exam. I can get on the NCEES website and see the exam schedule through 2026 so it’s not like the exam sneaks up on them.


It will be nice when this becomes computer based. The test is great enough psychological torture as it is. But then the 10+ week wait...it rankles my soul. The great thing about the long wait is that you don't know whether to start studying again until they have lopped off 2.5 months of the 6 month window.


----------



## Duke

/ huh, who left this soap box here... looks stable enough, stands on it.

As someone who has yet to prove his competence I'm not going to complain about the difficulty of the SE. But to make a test this difficult and charge $400/$800 per try and only offer it once every 6 months is what bothers me. A couple swings and misses and some tough luck costs would be professional engineers years on their career. IMO this exam should cost half as much and be offered twice as often.

/ gets off soap box


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> / huh, who left this soap box here... looks stable enough, stands on it.
> 
> As someone who has yet to prove his competence I'm not going to complain about the difficulty of the SE. But to make a test this difficult and charge $400/$800 per try and only offer it once every 6 months is what bothers me. A couple swings and misses and some tough luck costs would be professional engineers years on their career. IMO this exam should cost half as much and be offered twice as often.
> 
> / gets off soap box


I don't disagree, but I would just settle for being able to see the exam after grading to know what  you did wrong. Even if they charged for it. I tried to take on the lateral without taking a course a couple times. It didn't work out for me but I had ZERO experience in special seismic detailing and bridges (which on their own make up about 70% of the morning portion and 75% of the afternoon). My honest to apples recommendation is to take a review course if your exposure to these topics is limited. I took two, both School of PE and EET. While both helped me and I now consider myself fairly competent in the BASICS of seismic detailing (read as: knows enough to be dangerous), I would definitely recommend EET as it was more in depth IMO. I would also state that you should go ahead and take the live version. Interacting with the instructor is so much easier than trying to get your questions answered through e-mail.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

I'm so glad that we are all super extra special best friends and support each other through these trying times.


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

I just want to thank everyone for reminding me why I'm so glad I'll never have to take that exam again. 

Good luck, guys and gals; lot of great advice here and I love seeing the comradery twice a year.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> I'm so glad that we are all super extra special best friends and support each other through these trying times.


Let's just say that there is a reason why the Special Activities Division of the CIA uses solitary confinement on detainees. Suffering alone is far worse than suffering in a group.

Also, NCEES would never allow us to see what was done wrong on the test. The multiple choice questions I'd even say I don't need to see those, since usually the key to answering it correctly is not making a dumb mistake or knowing the correct code reference. The essay questions though.......I'm relatively sure that NCEES graders are somewhere laughing hysterically at us. I've been haunted by problems of administrations past. I was SURE I did them right, but NCEES disagreed.

They are fantastically obtuse in descriptions of what differentiates the "acceptable", "improvement required", and "unacceptable" grades. I think they should simplify the grading system. If you don't pass, they just send you a bill to re-register. If you pass, they send you a free copy of the "practice" exam with "LOL" in permanent marker on the front.


----------



## User1

I wrote lots of little notes like "I messed this up, this should be X instead of Y but no time to fix so I'm just keeping with Y for consistency"


----------



## User1

and then a smiley face, as if that will help encourage them to be lenient LOL


----------



## User1

I also wrote "rude!   " in the MC morning booklet when they said I couldnt use a shortcut.


----------



## Nathan55

tj_PE said:


> and then a smiley face, as if that will help encourage them to be lenient LOL


Haha nice. My plan for next time will be to put "complete design per all relevant codes" on each essay problem. That will take 1 minute per problem, and is technically right. I'll finish in less than 5 minutes. Take that NCEES!


----------



## SouthernEngineer

crammer said:


> I know. I swore I was going crazy in the test thinking of that... spent a good 15 minute trying to come up with something to fill the pages.
> 
> All I could think of was that I will be doing this again.


The people I took the test with simply recalculated it and the SE at our office suggested that might be what they wanted but agreed it was very poorly worded.


----------



## SouthernEngineer

Duke said:


> / huh, who left this soap box here... looks stable enough, stands on it.
> 
> As someone who has yet to prove his competence I'm not going to complain about the difficulty of the SE. But to make a test this difficult and charge $400/$800 per try and only offer it once every 6 months is what bothers me. A couple swings and misses and some tough luck costs would be professional engineers years on their career. IMO this exam should cost half as much and be offered twice as often.
> 
> / gets off soap box


Lucky! Its $500/$1000 here


----------



## cal91

SouthernEngineer said:


> The people I took the test with simply recalculated it and the SE at our office suggested that might be what they wanted but agreed it was very poorly worded.


You did have to recalculate it, but there's a little more to it than that...  but yes it was poorly worded. Spent more time trying to interpret what they wanted than actually calculating what they wanted.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> Let's just say that there is a reason why the Special Activities Division of the CIA uses solitary confinement on detainees. Suffering alone is far worse than suffering in a group.
> 
> Also, NCEES would never allow us to see what was done wrong on the test. The multiple choice questions I'd even say I don't need to see those, since usually the key to answering it correctly is not making a dumb mistake or knowing the correct code reference. The essay questions though.......I'm relatively sure that NCEES graders are somewhere laughing hysterically at us. I've been haunted by problems of administrations past. I was SURE I did them right, but NCEES disagreed.
> 
> They are fantastically obtuse in descriptions of what differentiates the "acceptable", "improvement required", and "unacceptable" grades. I think they should simplify the grading system. If you don't pass, they just send you a bill to re-register. If you pass, they send you a free copy of the "practice" exam with "LOL" in permanent marker on the front.


You may be right. After studying seismic detailing and design for 1 and 1/2 years though, I honestly believe that I am far more competent to grade them than they are me. I would bet the grading is so inconsistent as to be laughable. I say this because I know for a FACT engineers that do NOT understand seismic detailing get invites to attend the grading shop. It has happened in my office.


----------



## cal91

Just noticed my vertical exam says results pending, but my lateral exam doesn't. Doubt this means anything, but really hope my exam wasn't misplaced!  What does yours say?


----------



## User1

mine is the same but i don't have lateral


----------



## bigirishman

tj_PE said:


> I wrote lots of little notes like "I messed this up, this should be X instead of Y but no time to fix so I'm just keeping with Y for consistency"


In one of my failed attempts I made a mistake very early on in a basic stiffness calculation.  I noticed it later on but since it was fundamental to the essay question I would have had to redo everything.  So I just added a star at that calc and a note saying I should have done this instead but due to time constraints will continue using what I had calculated.  I received an Acceptable on that problem, so they definitely are fairly lenient.  I always figured their grading was:

Acceptable:  You understand the problem and all the required steps to get each part of the answer (even if you messed up a calc but realized your error)

Improvement Required:  You mostly understood the problem, but may have struggled on a part of it (or really messed up the calcs)

Unacceptable:  Runs the gambit from you were completely lost to you just didn't understand enough of the parts.  Also if you made a really bad assumption or a really poor design choice.

Also, for folks complaining about the grading time.  A couple of tests ago the wait was ridiculously long due to a grading workshop, it happens.  Just keep in the back of your mind that about a week after you find out you passed, you'll have a really hard time remembering this waiting period.  All that frustration just washes away.  Also, you gotta give these graders some slack.  They're mostly folks just like yourselves.  They also have to deal with horrific handwriting (like mine), and have to really try and understand how much a person understands about a topic from a simple question, which is insanely difficult.

As far as a more detailed diagnostic, it's never going to happen.  These questions take a while to come up with and fine tune to make sure they're as clear as possible.  They reuse them a lot, so letting people know more about how they did on specific questions is going to make their lives incredibly difficult, as each test will require a full new round of questions.  Not sure why they don't break down categories by building or bridge though, maybe again to help reduce the chances of figuring out which questions you got right or wrong from the diagnostic.

MAKE SURE YOU LET NCEES KNOW ABOUT ANY QUESTIONS YOU FELT WERE POORLY WORDED, WRONG, AND/OR UNNECESSARILY CONFUSING!!!  They take it seriously, and it may affect your scores.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

cal91 said:


> Just noticed my vertical exam says results pending, but my lateral exam doesn't. Doubt this means anything, but really hope my exam wasn't misplaced!  What does yours say?
> 
> View attachment 12763


same here


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

To complain about the terribly worded question, you can send remarks to [email protected] Does anyone remember exactly which section that was? I think it was problem (3).


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

My lateral exam hasn't changed from exam authorization. They are probably just processing the gravity first due to mailing time. It was completed a day earlier.


----------



## cal91

bigirishman said:


> In one of my failed attempts I made a mistake very early on in a basic stiffness calculation.  I noticed it later on but since it was fundamental to the essay question I would have had to redo everything.  So I just added a star at that calc and a note saying I should have done this instead but due to time constraints will continue using what I had calculated.  I received an Acceptable on that problem, so they definitely are fairly lenient.  I always figured their grading was:
> 
> Acceptable:  You understand the problem and all the required steps to get each part of the answer (even if you messed up a calc but realized your error)
> 
> Improvement Required:  You mostly understood the problem, but may have struggled on a part of it (or really messed up the calcs)
> 
> Unacceptable:  Runs the gambit from you were completely lost to you just didn't understand enough of the parts.  Also if you made a really bad assumption or a really poor design choice.
> 
> Also, for folks complaining about the grading time.  A couple of tests ago the wait was ridiculously long due to a grading workshop, it happens.  Just keep in the back of your mind that about a week after you find out you passed, you'll have a really hard time remembering this waiting period.  All that frustration just washes away.  Also, you gotta give these graders some slack.  They're mostly folks just like yourselves.  They also have to deal with horrific handwriting (like mine), and have to really try and understand how much a person understands about a topic from a simple question, which is insanely difficult.
> 
> As far as a more detailed diagnostic, it's never going to happen.  These questions take a while to come up with and fine tune to make sure they're as clear as possible.  They reuse them a lot, so letting people know more about how they did on specific questions is going to make their lives incredibly difficult, as each test will require a full new round of questions.  Not sure why they don't break down categories by building or bridge though, maybe again to help reduce the chances of figuring out which questions you got right or wrong from the diagnostic.
> 
> MAKE SURE YOU LET NCEES KNOW ABOUT ANY QUESTIONS YOU FELT WERE POORLY WORDED, WRONG, AND/OR UNNECESSARILY CONFUSING!!!  They take it seriously, and it may affect your scores.


So here's what I don't get about NCEES not wanting their secret, reusable, problems to be known. Their reason for doing so (I assume) is so people won't cherry pick and study only problems that they see have been on exams. Okay, this works for new examinees, but then re-testers would have an unfair advantage, because they will likely see problems that they've already been tested on, right?  If you say that the re-testers don't have an unfair advantage, then what's the problem with having new testers see problems that retesters have seen? If you say the re-testers DO have an unfair advantage, then that's, well, unfair. I guess Momma always told me life isn't fair...


----------



## SE_Hopeful

FutureSE said:


> To complain about the terribly worded question, you can send remarks to [email protected] Does anyone remember exactly which section that was? I think it was problem (3).


It was problem 3 part 2. I believe that I understood what they wanted us to do but I agree that it could have been worded much better.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> So here's what I don't get about NCEES not wanting their secret, reusable, problems to be known. Their reason for doing so (I assume) is so people won't cherry pick and study only problems that they see have been on exams. Okay, this works for new examinees, but then re-testers would have an unfair advantage, because they will likely see problems that they've already been tested on, right?  If you say that the re-testers don't have an unfair advantage, then what's the problem with having new testers see problems that retesters have seen? If you say the re-testers DO have an unfair advantage, then that's, well, unfair. I guess Momma always told me life isn't fair...


Well the whole system is screwed. This exam was meant for high seismic practitioners and designers of large complex structures. Georgia won't allow anyone to be licensed without this exam now. It was never MEANT to be that way. Silly Georgia.


----------



## bigirishman

cal91 said:


> So here's what I don't get about NCEES not wanting their secret, reusable, problems to be known. Their reason for doing so (I assume) is so people won't cherry pick and study only problems that they see have been on exams. Okay, this works for new examinees, but then re-testers would have an unfair advantage, because they will likely see problems that they've already been tested on, right?  If you say that the re-testers don't have an unfair advantage, then what's the problem with having new testers see problems that retesters have seen? If you say the re-testers DO have an unfair advantage, then that's, well, unfair. I guess Momma always told me life isn't fair...


That may be oversimplifying it a bit.  You may have seen a problem before, but you:

A) Don't know how you did on it the first time, so you may get it wrong again (in this case recognizing a problem may be a downside)

B) Have likely seen many similar problems if you took practice tests and studied books specifically designed for this exam.  I actually had a question on my last test that I had seen the day before on a practice exam.  Almost word for word, with the the only difference being a single dimension.

Additionally, it's unlikely they're going to repeat the same question in back to back tests.  There's probably an algorithm that prevents that from happening.  So at best a question may appear two or three cycles later.  If you can remember specific questions from that far back, then good on you, you probably deserve the bonus point.

Think of it like this, they probably have a few hundred (maybe even a thousand) questions with lots of small variations.  If they started releasing diagnostics with specific questions, that number would whittle away pretty quickly.  They'd likely need to hire way more test makers to keep the pool of fresh questions up, which would increase the cost of the test even more.

Also, the lateral test seems rigged towards specific structures and areas because the ultimate goal was to eliminate the state exams in WA and CA.  So to appease the strictest you needed to screw over the the others requiring the test.  I can imagine a breaking point in the future, where Illinois, and Georgia, and anywhere else that decides to require this exam are forced with either allowing structural design with a PE (or just getting rid of that weird law in GA regarding which test you can take, which is dumb for many reasons), or they push back hard on NCEES and force them to soften the exam, which will likely force CA and WA back to state exams.  The goal to eliminate those exams was to allow easier license comity.  So it really appears like someone will need to make a hard decision, either NCEES, or the state boards.  CA specifically calls this exam a "mastery" exam, so it stands as bizarre that you need it for very simple structures in some non-seismic states, but I guess that's why I'm not an administrator.


----------



## Nathan55

Something else I find fascinating is the pass rate. If 70% of people will fail, even with your standard NCEES/PPI practice tests, that says a lot. That means when you look at a problem, you have to think (especially in the afternoon) "what will 70% of people who study for this material forget to do?" For the test to be that difficult for practicing engineers, you have to assume that every problem has a crucial trick (or three) in it. 

Sun Tzu seems applicable here: "All warfare (or test taking) is based on deception. When we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive. When we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near."


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

SE_Hopeful said:


> It was problem 3 part 2. I believe that I understood what they wanted us to do but I agree that it could have been worded much better.


But the thing is, you "believe" or you "think." You don't know, and if you don't know, it was a guess. I guessed as well. We should not have to guess in engineering. Guesses cause Regency Hyatt level collapses. If you don't KNOW what they are asking for but reasonably understand the topic, the problem is poorly worded.


----------



## Nathan55

bigirishman said:


> That may be oversimplifying it a bit.  You may have seen a problem before, but you:
> 
> A) Don't know how you did on it the first time, so you may get it wrong again (in this case recognizing a problem may be a downside)
> 
> B) Have likely seen many similar problems if you took practice tests and studied books specifically designed for this exam.  I actually had a question on my last test that I had seen the day before on a practice exam.  Almost word for word, with the the only difference being a single dimension.
> 
> Additionally, it's unlikely they're going to repeat the same question in back to back tests.  There's probably an algorithm that prevents that from happening.  So at best a question may appear two or three cycles later.  If you can remember specific questions from that far back, then good on you, you probably deserve the bonus point.
> 
> Think of it like this, they probably have a few hundred (maybe even a thousand) questions with lots of small variations.  If they started releasing diagnostics with specific questions, that number would whittle away pretty quickly.  They'd likely need to hire way more test makers to keep the pool of fresh questions up, which would increase the cost of the test even more.
> 
> Also, the lateral test seems rigged towards specific structures and areas because the ultimate goal was to eliminate the state exams in WA and CA.  So to appease the strictest you needed to screw over the the others requiring the test.  I can imagine a breaking point in the future, where Illinois, and Georgia, and anywhere else that decides to require this exam are forced with either allowing structural design with a PE (or just getting rid of that weird law in GA regarding which test you can take, which is dumb for many reasons), or they push back hard on NCEES and force them to soften the exam, which will likely force CA and WA back to state exams.  The goal to eliminate those exams was to allow easier license comity.  So it really appears like someone will need to make a hard decision, either NCEES, or the state boards.  CA specifically calls this exam a "mastery" exam, so it stands as bizarre that you need it for very simple structures in some non-seismic states, but I guess that's why I'm not an administrator.


I'd love to meet an NCEES grader some day. That is basically my life goal. But only after I pass.

"I've been waiting for you, NCEES grader. We meet at last. The circle is now complete. When you last graded my test I was but the learner. Now _I_ am the master."


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> But the thing is, you "believe" or you "think." You don't know, and if you don't know, it was a guess. I guessed as well. We should not have to guess in engineering. Guesses cause Regency Hyatt level collapses. If you don't KNOW what they are asking for but reasonably understand the topic, the problem is poorly worded.


I believe I got that one right as well.  95% sure. There is no question on that exam that I "know" I got right, but maybe I'm 99.9% sure on some of them. In fact, I don't even "know" that life is real. For all I know I'm just a dream in a coma or something. But I'm 99.9% sure that life is real   So is that guessing?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

cal91 said:


> I believe I got that one right as well.  95% sure. There is no question on that exam that I "know" I got right, but maybe I'm 99.9% sure on some of them. In fact, I don't even "know" that life is real. For all I know I'm just a dream in a coma or something. But I'm 99.9% sure that life is real   So is that guessing?


Same - yeah I am never fully 100% on anything. I am ~90-95% sure on that one as well. It wasn't a blind guess.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> I believe I got that one right as well.  95% sure. There is no question on that exam that I "know" I got right, but maybe I'm 99.9% sure on some of them. In fact, I don't even "know" that life is real. For all I know I'm just a dream in a coma or something. But I'm 99.9% sure that life is real   So is that guessing?


"I think, therefore, I am" ~ René Descartes. I am certain that I exist in some form or fashion due to the fact my senses and interaction with the world tell me to do so. When I feel pain, I am 100% sure that I felt it. I am 100% sure on over 90% of that exam. I know there are questions that I missed, and there may have been something that I misread, but that problem was worded incorrectly if they anticipated scaling. That is not what I got from it when first reading it and you yourself stated that you did not understand until pondering it for some significant amount of time on an exam where time is the enemy. You shouldn't have to solve riddles for this TRASH test. It should be about engineering knowledge. The problem was flawed, and if it took you more time than instant recognition, assuming you have knowledge of the subject (which I believe I do and it sounds like you do too), the problem needs to be rewritten.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

now shows results pending for me for both exams


----------



## cal91

Me too. Cool beans.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

bigirishman said:


> That may be oversimplifying it a bit.  You may have seen a problem before, but you:
> 
> A) Don't know how you did on it the first time, so you may get it wrong again (in this case recognizing a problem may be a downside)
> 
> B) Have likely seen many similar problems if you took practice tests and studied books specifically designed for this exam.  I actually had a question on my last test that I had seen the day before on a practice exam.  Almost word for word, with the the only difference being a single dimension.
> 
> Additionally, it's unlikely they're going to repeat the same question in back to back tests.  There's probably an algorithm that prevents that from happening.  So at best a question may appear two or three cycles later.  If you can remember specific questions from that far back, then good on you, you probably deserve the bonus point.
> 
> Think of it like this, they probably have a few hundred (maybe even a thousand) questions with lots of small variations.  If they started releasing diagnostics with specific questions, that number would whittle away pretty quickly.  They'd likely need to hire way more test makers to keep the pool of fresh questions up, which would increase the cost of the test even more.
> 
> Also, the lateral test seems rigged towards specific structures and areas because the ultimate goal was to eliminate the state exams in WA and CA.  So to appease the strictest you needed to screw over the the others requiring the test.  I can imagine a breaking point in the future, where Illinois, and Georgia, and anywhere else that decides to require this exam are forced with either allowing structural design with a PE (or just getting rid of that weird law in GA regarding which test you can take, which is dumb for many reasons), or they push back hard on NCEES and force them to soften the exam, which will likely force CA and WA back to state exams.  The goal to eliminate those exams was to allow easier license comity.  So it really appears like someone will need to make a hard decision, either NCEES, or the state boards.  CA specifically calls this exam a "mastery" exam, so it stands as bizarre that you need it for very simple structures in some non-seismic states, but I guess that's why I'm not an administrator.


So then they should allow you to see the physical copy of your grading if you are willing to pay shipping and for the proctor. After all, you’ve already seen the problems anyway. I know if I happened to fail this thing now I would gladly pay to see why but they won’t let you do that. It was something you could do in the past, I’m still putting it up to they don’t want people arguing about how inconsistent their “subject matter experts” are.


----------



## kevo_55

I am seeing stages 2-3 in this thread so far.


----------



## Nathan55

I think that to have that really reflect what's happening, change that "acceptance" to "acceptable".


----------



## Civil Dawg

Nathan55 said:


> I think that to have that really reflect what's happening, change that "acceptance" to "acceptable".


But then I may never reach the final stage of grief


----------



## Nathan55

Also, what if NCEES actually developed this forum as a way to obtain quantifiable data on the psychological trauma their exam and scoring process causes in aspiring engineers?


----------



## Nathan55

Civil Dawg said:


> But then I may never reach the final stage of grief


It is a daunting prospect, for sure. That being said, the thing to keep in mind is that the test is HARD. 70% fail. 85% of re-takers fail. It requires a preternatural ability to perform quickly, under pressure and with a high amount of accuracy. And you can't miss portions of crucial code/design checks. You have to react reflexively to unique situations. In my honest opinion, just being able to finish both components in the allotted time is an accomplishment in and of itself. I'm relatively confident that a high percentage of engineers, walking in off the street, as it were, would not be able to complete everything...let alone achieve an "acceptable". 

Regarding the wait, I avoid NCEES until PE results come out. I'd love to provide constructive criticism to NCEES to improve their process, but...in the end, it's extremely unlikely anything good will come of it. They must protect their business model; if they open the door to reviewing the exam and give us the red pill, the entire system breaks down and 85% of people will pass.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

kevo_55 said:


> I am seeing stages 2-3 in this thread so far.


I'm just consistently on step 3, sir.


----------



## NahzSema

I am currently going through stage 1 mentioned above. A little background of myself: I took both first time last October and passed only lateral. I felt that Friday was tough for me and it did not surprise me at all that I got only 23/40, A,A,IR,UA because I really didn’t understand some parts of the afternoon problems or what they were looking for. I also did not feel so confident about morning because there were a few questions I just blindly guessed due to time.

Retook vertical this past Friday and felt good walking out in the morning with more prep this time around. For PM, I finished all problems in time but rushed through last problem only to realize now that I may have missed an important check which could lead to domino effect from one part to the next. My question is, is this an automatic UA or in anyways can be spared as a IR? I really don’t know if missing that crucial check would put me under the category of “not understanding the concept”. I’d like to hear from you all because this is way too early for me to think about this for two months. Thanks in advance!


----------



## SouthernEngineer

I personally don't think a single check would automatically trigger an unacceptable. If you stated that you didn't have time to check it I think that demonstrates your knowledge of the subject.  Unfourtuanly it is up to the grader and his mood.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

NahzSema said:


> I am currently going through stage 1 mentioned above. A little background of myself: I took both first time last October and passed only lateral. I felt that Friday was tough for me and it did not surprise me at all that I got only 23/40, A,A,IR,UA because I really didn’t understand some parts of the afternoon problems or what they were looking for. I also did not feel so confident about morning because there were a few questions I just blindly guessed due to time.
> 
> Retook vertical this past Friday and felt good walking out in the morning with more prep this time around. For PM, I finished all problems in time but rushed through last problem only to realize now that I may have missed an important check which could lead to domino effect from one part to the next. My question is, is this an automatic UA or in anyways can be spared as a IR? I really don’t know if missing that crucial check would put me under the category of “not understanding the concept”. I’d like to hear from you all because this is way too early for me to think about this for two months. Thanks in advance!


I wish I could give you better news but I am convinced that I failed a wood problem last time over a check that I knew to do, got distracted and left out. I’ve also flip flopped on which parts I’ve passed in this exam. I really do think it is up to the leniency and the competency of the grader and from my experience, they are all over the place. I’ve seen people I wouldn’t trust to engineer a paper bag somehow get through this thing and some of the best PEs I know, can’t pass it. That is part of the problem with an exam that has essay questions, there is no way to insure 100% consistency. That is one reason I am advocating for being able to review your graded exam. As soon as I pass this lateral exam, I’m putting my name in the hat for my state board. It’s a long shot, but you have to start somewhere.


----------



## NahzSema

FutureSE said:


> I wish I could give you better news but I am convinced that I failed a wood problem last time over a check that I knew to do, got distracted and left out. I’ve also flip flopped on which parts I’ve passed in this exam. I really do think it is up to the leniency and the competency of the grader and from my experience, they are all over the place. I’ve seen people I wouldn’t trust to engineer a paper bag somehow get through this thing and some of the best PEs I know, can’t pass it. That is part of the problem with an exam that has essay questions, there is no way to insure 100% consistency. That is one reason I am advocating for being able to review your graded exam. As soon as I pass this lateral exam, I’m putting my name in the hat for my state board. It’s a long shot, but you have to start somewhere.


Yeah thank you for the input. I’m hopeful that I’ll get some partial credits from other parts of the problem but at the same time if I were the grader I could see that as a big no check which can reflect incompetency. I mean, it’s probably the reason for such low passing rate because the room for error is so small. And I feel that sometimes we can be at lower risk of messing up the problem if we provide procedure instead of numbers to walk the grader through the problem. That saves time and eliminates room for numerical error. Just a thought. Good luck everyone and just enjoy the time now.


----------



## AlexPE

SE_Hopeful said:


> It was problem 3 part 2. I believe that I understood what they wanted us to do but I agree that it could have been worded much better.


I literally have had nightmares every night since the exam about this problem. I wake up thinking I figured it out, but realize it was just dream logic.

Without being too specific, I clearly remember the question asking us to find the "minimum" x. Whats messed up is you go through ELF and get x, but find its higher than X given in the table... well at least I did. Which means I have to be wrong... right?

Maybe I screwed up R, or maybe I was supposed to combine directions? But after reading through asce after the test again and again and again, I feel like the answer just isnt in there.

If someone out there thinks they got it, please PM me. I miss being able to sleep.


----------



## AlexPE

As for the rest of the exam, definitely harder than I had anticipated. I passed vertical last year and felt like it was fairly straightforward. I told my wife I aced it after I finished. But not this time! Think I straight up guessed on about 10 in the AM (worst feeling in the world is to "know" how to do a problem, but fail to arrive at any of the answers, or arrive smack in the middle between two answers).

Like that question about the sign. Such a simple question, we all know how to do it. But depending how you interperet the question, its possible to arrive at 4 of the available answers (I checked it 4 different ways, 2 directions and with/without safety factor). Maybe I just need to brush up on my english.

Sorry if Im being too specific. This exam has consumed me...I need to vent to someone who understands.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

AlexPE said:


> I literally have had nightmares every night since the exam about this problem. I wake up thinking I figured it out, but realize it was just dream logic.
> 
> Without being too specific, I clearly remember the question asking us to find the "minimum" x. Whats messed up is you go through ELF and get x, but find its higher than X given in the table... well at least I did. Which means I have to be wrong... right?
> 
> Maybe I screwed up R, or maybe I was supposed to combine directions? But after reading through asce after the test again and again and again, I feel like the answer just isnt in there.
> 
> If someone out there thinks they got it, please PM me. I miss being able to sleep.


I was in your situtation, my ELFP "X" was higher that the dynamic "X". It's perfectly acceptable to be so, but that is NOT normal in practice. Just cross your fingers. I've already complained to NCEES about the wording of the problem. I don't know why they can't just directly ask what they are looking for rather than play the Bilbo Baggins game. "Guess what I have in my pocket!"


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

AlexPE said:


> As for the rest of the exam, definitely harder than I had anticipated. I passed vertical last year and felt like it was fairly straightforward. I told my wife I aced it after I finished. But not this time! Think I straight up guessed on about 10 in the AM (worst feeling in the world is to "know" how to do a problem, but fail to arrive at any of the answers, or arrive smack in the middle between two answers).
> 
> Like that question about the sign. Such a simple question, we all know how to do it. But depending how you interperet the question, its possible to arrive at 4 of the available answers (I checked it 4 different ways, 2 directions and with/without safety factor). Maybe I just need to brush up on my english.
> 
> Sorry if Im being too specific. This exam has consumed me...I need to vent to someone who understands.


Probably acceptable as worded but I wouldn't divulge anything else about the problem.

I feel the same way as a 4th time taker. What burns me the most is that I've flip flopped the sections I've passed. Also, (2) of the exams I certainly didn't feel like I had the time to finish (no time to check either). I took the PE years ago and thought it was the easiest test I've ever sat for (I've sat through harder interview exams). The PE took me (2) hours per section and the proctor told me good luck when I handed it to her on the way out. I knew I had the PE in the bag. I also took the Vertical, and though it was slightly harder than the PE, I thought it was very fair and still left knowing I passed. For the lateral, I've taken (2) review courses (EET and School of PE), bought and read (4) of the (5) Seaoc books. Read every line of AISC 341-10 and AISC 358-10. Read every line of ASCE 7-10 chapter 11 through 22 and 26 through 30 as well as the commentary as well as the TMS 402/602. I've certainly read the ACI 318-14 chapter 18 multiple times, but that book confuses the devil out of me since they reworked the chapters. You can go from chapter 18 to 10 to 22 to 25 and then 21 just to get an answer (&lt;- that's a wee bit much in my opinion, if anyone in the ACI is reading, please streamline this). Anyway, the point is the exam is hard so don't sweat it. I've beat myself up over this thing for (2) years and I'm well above MENSA membership in IQ (not that it necessarily means anything, but engineers are generally much more intellectually inclined than the average populace). I've also had problems that come up almost in the middle of (2) answers on these exams. I saw (2) on this past exam, one of which I felt I could reasonably guesstimate, the other was a shot in the dark. Unfortunately, it's probably something in the problem statement we missed but who knows. Just get through this thing and run for your state board or some position to get some authority over this and help me push to fix this exam. I don't mind it being hard. I think it should be hard, but it should be engineering hard and people should know exactly why they failed upon leaving. They should certainly not be leaving asking themselves, "What the HELL were they asking for." Otherwise, I believe a disservice is being perpetrated on the examinees and the profession in general. In my opinion, they should just give us a few pieces of a structure and literally ask us to design it from start to finish. Breaking it into cryptic pieces and using cryptic language has to stop. If they just gave you a frame and said, "Hey, Mr. Wannabe SE, design this concrete frame for x-criteria." It would be much more straightforward than the way the exam is currently written. Hell, turn it into a 24 hour exam, but make it reasonably understandable. These "Subject Matter Experts" grading the exam are mostly drunk clowns with big shoes (and no children's birthday party bookings) and people from bum fights with a few reasonably competent people scattered about IMO. Hell, from some of the things I've seen on my previous exams, I wouldn't be surprised if NCEES hired floor sweepers from Labor Ready for grammar checks.


----------



## AlexPE

"Maximum moment" could mean plastic moment or elastic moment, factored nominal moment, allowable service moment, since it was steel - expected moment. Plus in either direction - or square root sum if SDC D or 1+0.3 if part of a bridge. Definitely not reduntant, but turns out 70% of you missed the overstrength factor...

Just kidding. But yea I wish we all got a challenge flag to use during the exam.


----------



## TheBigGuy

Wait, we needed to multiply that moment by the overstrength factor?

I felt good during the lateral.  Unfortunately, I felt good during the vertical last time but ended up doing poorly.  This time I felt amazing during the vertical, which means I probably did good.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Probably acceptable as worded but I wouldn't divulge anything else about the problem.
> 
> I feel the same way as a 4th time taker. What burns me the most is that I've flip flopped the sections I've passed. Also, (2) of the exams I certainly didn't feel like I had the time to finish (no time to check either). I took the PE years ago and thought it was the easiest test I've ever sat for (I've sat through harder interview exams). The PE took me (2) hours per section and the proctor told me good luck when I handed it to her on the way out. I knew I had the PE in the bag. I also took the Vertical, and though it was slightly harder than the PE, I thought it was very fair and still left knowing I passed. For the lateral, I've taken (2) review courses (EET and School of PE), bought and read (4) of the (5) Seaoc books. Read every line of AISC 341-10 and AISC 358-10. Read every line of ASCE 7-10 chapter 11 through 22 and 26 through 30 as well as the commentary as well as the TMS 402/602. I've certainly read the ACI 318-14 chapter 18 multiple times, but that book confuses the devil out of me since they reworked the chapters. You can go from chapter 18 to 10 to 22 to 25 and then 21 just to get an answer (&lt;- that's a wee bit much in my opinion, if anyone in the ACI is reading, please streamline this). Anyway, the point is the exam is hard so don't sweat it. I've beat myself up over this thing for (2) years and I'm well above MENSA membership in IQ (not that it necessarily means anything, but engineers are generally much more intellectually inclined than the average populace). I've also had problems that come up almost in the middle of (2) answers on these exams. I saw (2) on this past exam, one of which I felt I could reasonably guesstimate, the other was a shot in the dark. Unfortunately, it's probably something in the problem statement we missed but who knows. Just get through this thing and run for your state board or some position to get some authority over this and help me push to fix this exam. I don't mind it being hard. I think it should be hard, but it should be engineering hard and people should know exactly why they failed upon leaving. They should certainly not be leaving asking themselves, "What the HELL were they asking for." Otherwise, I believe a disservice is being perpetrated on the examinees and the profession in general. In my opinion, they should just give us a few pieces of a structure and literally ask us to design it from start to finish. Breaking it into cryptic pieces and using cryptic language has to stop. If they just gave you a frame and said, "Hey, Mr. Wannabe SE, design this concrete frame for x-criteria." It would be much more straightforward than the way the exam is currently written. Hell, turn it into a 24 hour exam, but make it reasonably understandable. These "Subject Matter Experts" grading the exam are mostly drunk clowns with big shoes (and no children's birthday party bookings) and people from bum fights with a few reasonably competent people scattered about IMO. Hell, from some of the things I've seen on my previous exams, I wouldn't be surprised if NCEES hired floor sweepers from Labor Ready for grammar checks.


Just wanted to comment on ACI. That code is easily the most hilarious of the design codes. My theory is that it actually was developed in conjunction with NCEES to make our lives more difficult. I particularly am fond of the circular references that steal valuable time while you're doing the exam. Looking for how to detail a certain component of a deep foundation? Well surely ALL the requirements would be in the deep foundation section, right? Well no. Why do that when you can reference 3 _other_ sections that obfuscate design requirements? The steel code (AISC) is a breath of fresh air by comparison. 

Also, regarding the deception in the exam...that's of course to be expected. It's not fair. But then again, all's fair in love, war, and the Lateral SE exam.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

I think the biggest confusion from Problem 3 Part 2 is coming from what NCEES labeled in the table, though I could be remembering wrong at this point


----------



## SE_Hopeful

I just got a survey and it says 'You will have a chance to submit comments at the end of this survey. If you have technical comments concerning exam questions, please submit those via the message feature in your MyNCEES account.'

Is that how we complain about the questions? I can't seem to find the message feature


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

SE_Hopeful said:


> I just got a survey and it says 'You will have a chance to submit comments at the end of this survey. If you have technical comments concerning exam questions, please submit those via the message feature in your MyNCEES account.'
> 
> Is that how we complain about the questions? I can't seem to find the message feature


I've already complained about it. The message feature is the popup at the bottom right of the MyNCEES screen. They are going to tell you to send your test comments to [email protected] .


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> I've already complained about it. The message feature is the popup at the bottom right of the MyNCEES screen. They are going to tell you to send your test comments to [email protected] .


I plan on using reverse psychology. My only comment will be that I love NCEES, and really enjoy taking their tests, and great job on their practice exam, it was _so_ helpful. I want to be identified early on as a good person, and hopefully positively sway my results. I wonder if they like edible arrangements? Just brainstorming.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> I plan on using reverse psychology. My only comment will be that I love NCEES, and really enjoy taking their tests, and great job on their practice exam, it was _so_ helpful. I want to be identified early on as a good person, and hopefully positively sway my results. I wonder if they like edible arrangements? Just brainstorming.


Good luck with that. I have slowly grown to hate that organization as well as several state boards over the years. I do like dogs, though. Dogs are our friends.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Hey everyone! It's my birthmonth. I never thought I would make it this far (not many people did). I guess eating all those paint chips as a child really had people concerned about me. Anyway, you should all congratulate me on managing to become old and senile!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

You guys are boring today.


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> Hey everyone! It's my birthmonth. I never thought I would make it this far (not many people did). I guess eating all those paint chips as a child really had people concerned about me. Anyway, you should all congratulate me on managing to become old and senile!


Congrats old man


----------



## 23and1

FutureSE said:


> You guys are boring today.


I'm sure things will pick back up as people start slipping from the "Anger" phase to "Bargaining"


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

23and1 said:


> I'm sure things will pick back up as people start slipping from the "Anger" phase to "Bargaining"


I want to keep the red hot irons of rage firmly planted in the NCEES kiln.


----------



## 23and1

FutureSE said:


> Well the whole system is screwed. This exam was meant for high seismic practitioners and designers of large complex structures. Georgia won't allow anyone to be licensed without this exam now. It was never MEANT to be that way. Silly Georgia.


So, to keep the fire going, I am also located in GA. I took the Mechanical-MDM exam (due to my educational background) but I work with both mechanical and structural projects. I'm hoping that further in the future that I may take the SE exam, but it sounds more and more like a headache than beneficial - but that was BEFORE you said Georgia requires the SE for licensure now. Do you know in regards to what area/level of practice the SE is required (ie. for hospital/school design, or any other specific structure in occupancy category IV or something like that)? Did you have to get your Civil PE before you took the SE (like in CA)?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

23and1 said:


> So, to keep the fire going, I am also located in GA. I took the Mechanical-MDM exam (due to my educational background) but I work with both mechanical and structural projects. I'm hoping that further in the future that I may take the SE exam, but it sounds more and more like a headache than beneficial - but that was BEFORE you said Georgia requires the SE for licensure now. Do you know in regards to what area/level of practice the SE is required (ie. for hospital/school design, or any other specific structure in occupancy category IV or something like that)? Did you have to get your Civil PE before you took the SE (like in CA)?


I've had my PE for awhile but was licensed after January 1st, 2011. When I applied for reciprocity, I was denied. I received a letter for the reason of the denial stating that anyone licensed after January 1st, 2011 must take the new 16 hour SE exam if they design structures. To further confuse everything, I contacted the board to discuss this with them. From what I can tell, just about everyone there has no idea what the hell they are doing. The answer I was given was something along the lines of "The definition of structures is up to the board's discretion when reviewing your experience record." If you ever find out the the hell they define structures as, you're welcome to tell me. NSPE even filed a suit against the GA board over this. It's retarded. I moved over here a few years ago and I now absolutely hate almost everything to do with anything about licensure in this state. God, even getting my DL was a nightmare. Silly Georgia.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

And no, the PE is not required to take the SE. I thought the SE was meant to replace the state exams of the high seismic states. I was wrong apparently as I can piss with more force than Georgia earthquakes and it is now required here. Awesome.


----------



## 23and1

FutureSE said:


> I've had my PE for a while but was licensed after January 1st, 2011. When I applied for reciprocity, I was denied. I recieved a letter for the reason of the denial stating that anyone after January 1st, 2011 must take the new 16 hour SE exam if they design structures. To further confuse everything, I contacted the board to discuss this with them. From what I can tell, just about everyone there has no idea what the hell they are doing. The answer I was given was something along the lines of "The definition of structures is up to the boards discretion when reviewing your experience record." If you ever find out the the hell they define structures as, you're welcome to tell me. NSPE even filed a suit against the GA board over this. It's retarded. I moved over here a few years ago and I now absolutely hate almost everything to do with anything about licensure in this state. God, even getting my DL was a nightmare. Silly Georgia.




Yup, sounds like GA unfortunately. Guess I'll give them a call. Gonna have to bring some Georgia codes with me on this one. O.C.G.A. § 43-15-24 doesn't specify that an SE is required over a PE for any structure:

"(a)It shall be unlawful for this state or any of its political subdivisions such as a county, municipality, or school district, or agencies thereof, or for any private or commercial entity to engage in the construction of any work or structures involving professional engineering which by the nature of their function or existence could adversely affect or jeopardize the health, safety, or welfare of the public unless the plans and specifications have been prepared under the direct supervision or review of and bear the seal of, and the construction is executed under the direct supervision of or review by, a _*professional engineer*_ or architect."

Even earlier in their code, O.C.G.A. § 43-15-2 vaguely states that "(9) 'Professional engineer' means an individual who is qualified, by reason of knowledge of mathematics, the physical sciences, and the principles by which mechanical properties of matter are made useful to mankind in _*structures*_ and machines, acquired by professional education and practical experience, to engage in the practice of professional engineering and who possesses a current certificate of registration as a professional engineer issued by the board."

I know I've had a couple of issues with them clearing my experience because of my education. As you said, sounds like GA doesn't know what it wants. This will be an interesting phone call, to say the least...

I'll let you know how it goes.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> You guys are boring today.


sorry FutureSE. The new Star Wars trailer came out friday, so I was otherwise occupied. I'm hoping that disney buys NCEES, and the SE test is revised to just be about movie trivia. 

Regarding anger and NCEES, yoda said it best: "...anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering."


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> sorry FutureSE. The new Star Wars trailer came out friday, so I was otherwise occupied. I'm hoping that disney buys NCEES, and the SE test is revised to just be about movie trivia.
> 
> Regarding anger and NCEES, yoda said it best: "...anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering."


Suffering can be good as long as it is my enemies that do so.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

One week down, 11 to go


----------



## cal91

SE_Hopeful said:


> One week down, 11 to go


I was thinking results will be out by June 10... No?

Edit: Just asked Ashlei, she says the SE grading workshop is June 7-8.  So results should be out June 14 I would think.


----------



## Nathan55

cal91 said:


> I was thinking results will be out by June 10... No?
> 
> Edit: Just asked Ashlei, she says the SE grading workshop is June 7-8.  So results should be out June 14 I would think.


The good news is that if I save 40$ a week from now until results come out, I will have just enough to pay to re-register for the october exam!


----------



## Matt Skillet

FutureSE said:


> Hey everyone! It's my birthmonth. I never thought I would make it this far (not many people did). I guess eating all those paint chips as a child really had people concerned about me. Anyway, you should all congratulate me on managing to become old and senile!


There are pros and cons to eating paint chips, just like anything else in life.


----------



## David Connor SE

FutureSE said:


> I was in your situtation, my ELFP "X" was higher that the dynamic "X". It's perfectly acceptable to be so, but that is NOT normal in practice. Just cross your fingers. I've already complained to NCEES about the wording of the problem. I don't know why they can't just directly ask what they are looking for rather than play the Bilbo Baggins game. "Guess what I have in my pocket!"


I took the exam 5 years ago so I guess I can talk freely about it.  Based on what I can gather in this discussion, it might have had something to do with ASCE 7-10 Section 12.9.4.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

David Connor said:


> I took the exam 5 years ago so I guess I can talk freely about it.  Based on what I can gather in this discussion, it might have had something to do with ASCE 7-10 Section 12.9.4.


I believe that is the direction the question was heading. I also believe the wording was terrible. I've had issues with this exam in the past but I've also studied for the better part of 2 years and taken enough coursework to literally dream about seismic design. While I initially fell victim to the Dunning-Kruger effect, I've passed through the valley of ignorance and now I am certain that I understand the material explicitly as far as exam scope is concerned. If this problem were worded  as to give proper indication of the direction in which to proceed rather than being open ended and vague, the section you mentioned would likely have been my first choice. Based upon my comprehension and memory of the question, it picked up in the middle of an analysis and wasn't clear about methodology, starting point, previously taken steps, etc. Maybe my reading comprehension sucks, who knows. I'm a firm believer this exam should be reworked to more accurately represent engineering design. Popping into the middle of a problem with limited time and information while asking very pointed questions makes it more of a riddle than an engineering problem and makes the test unnecessarily difficult. Especially since EVERY engineer solves problems slightly differently, whether that be from systems used, methodology, or even the order of the solution.  When I am designing, I don't start in the middle of problems and try to solve backwards. I start the problem with specific design criteria in mind and have a clear workflow from beginning to end where every decision I make is calculated in order. I believe a major issue with the passing rate of this exam is not that people do not understand lateral, but the way the essay questions are presented is unlike ANYTHING a practicing engineer would see. I also HIGHLY doubt "Subject Matter Experts" are used to grade the exam. I personally know engineers, who've received invitations to grade past exams, who know next to nothing about seismic detailing. Maybe if NCEES were a bit more transparent, I would have more faith in their organization. A "Trust us, you didn't pass," does not sit well with me at all. I would not accept blindly believing something in any other facet of my life, but our licensing organization shoves it down our throats. While I have little authority to do so now, I intend to help right what I believe to be an injustice for future examinees.


----------



## AlexPE

FutureSE said:


> I believe that is the direction the question was heading. I also believe the wording was terrible. I've had issues with this exam in the past but I've also studied for the better part of 2 years and taken enough coursework to literally dream about seismic design. While I initially fell victim to the Dunning-Kruger effect, I've passed through the valley of ignorance and now I am certain that I understand the material explicitly as far as exam scope is concerned. If this problem were worded  as to give proper indication of the direction in which to proceed rather than being open ended and vague, the section you mentioned would likely have been my first choice. Based upon my comprehension and memory of the question, it picked up in the middle of an analysis and wasn't clear about methodology, starting point, previously taken steps, etc. Maybe my reading comprehension sucks, who knows. I'm a firm believer this exam should be reworked to more accurately represent engineering design. Popping into the middle of a problem with limited time and information while asking very pointed questions makes it more of a riddle than an engineering problem and makes the test unnecessarily difficult. Especially since EVERY engineer solves problems slightly differently, whether that be from systems used, methodology, or even the order of the solution.  When I am designing, I don't start in the middle of problems and try to solve backwards. I start the problem with specific design criteria in mind and have a clear workflow from beginning to end where every decision I make is calculated in order. I believe a major issue with the passing rate of this exam is not that people do not understand lateral, but the way the essay questions are presented is unlike ANYTHING a practicing engineer would see. I also HIGHLY doubt "Subject Matter Experts" are used to grade the exam. I personally know engineers, who've received invitations to grade past exams, who know next to nothing about seismic detailing. Maybe if NCEES were a bit more transparent, I would have more faith in their organization. A "Trust us, you didn't pass," does not sit well with me at all. I would not accept blindly believing something in any other facet of my life, but our licensing organization shoves it down our throats. While I have little authority to do so now, I intend to help right what I believe to be an injustice for future examinees.


FutureSE for president? Got my vote!

Part of me thinks some of their questions are truly thoughtful and open-ended, where they are attempting to gauge if there is a concensus on the interpretation of the codes (example: see the solution to the brace base plate punching shear question in the NCEES practice exam).

The other part of me thinks that structural engineers just suck at writing questions (and writing in general).

Speaking of the practice exam, anyone else notice the error they made in the errata for the wood shearwall question?

Like... wtf?? They need errata to fix the errata?!? Bro cant even errata properly, how the F he gonna grade our exams?


----------



## TheBigGuy

Yo dawg, I heard you like errata.  So i put some errata on your errata for your errata to the problem.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> I believe that is the direction the question was heading. I also believe the wording was terrible. I've had issues with this exam in the past but I've also studied for the better part of 2 years and taken enough coursework to literally dream about seismic design. While I initially fell victim to the Dunning-Kruger effect, I've passed through the valley of ignorance and now I am certain that I understand the material explicitly as far as exam scope is concerned. If this problem were worded  as to give proper indication of the direction in which to proceed rather than being open ended and vague, the section you mentioned would likely have been my first choice. Based upon my comprehension and memory of the question, it picked up in the middle of an analysis and wasn't clear about methodology, starting point, previously taken steps, etc. Maybe my reading comprehension sucks, who knows. I'm a firm believer this exam should be reworked to more accurately represent engineering design. Popping into the middle of a problem with limited time and information while asking very pointed questions makes it more of a riddle than an engineering problem and makes the test unnecessarily difficult. Especially since EVERY engineer solves problems slightly differently, whether that be from systems used, methodology, or even the order of the solution.  When I am designing, I don't start in the middle of problems and try to solve backwards. I start the problem with specific design criteria in mind and have a clear workflow from beginning to end where every decision I make is calculated in order. I believe a major issue with the passing rate of this exam is not that people do not understand lateral, but the way the essay questions are presented is unlike ANYTHING a practicing engineer would see. I also HIGHLY doubt "Subject Matter Experts" are used to grade the exam. I personally know engineers, who've received invitations to grade past exams, who know next to nothing about seismic detailing. Maybe if NCEES were a bit more transparent, I would have more faith in their organization. A "Trust us, you didn't pass," does not sit well with me at all. I would not accept blindly believing something in any other facet of my life, but our licensing organization shoves it down our throats. While I have little authority to do so now, I intend to help right what I believe to be an injustice for future examinees.


Can't agree with you more sir. The issue is actually simple: how do you write a test that SEVENTY percent of practicing engineers will fail? The only way to do that is by deception. It's an open book test. Most of us have passed the PE already. Most people have taken the test more than once. Everything is code based. So without deliberate obfuscation, the test would have a pass rate much higher, and NCEES would be out of business. The problem in question was particularly horrible. But I wasn't surprised because I don't expect questions to be fair, or well worded, or easily solvable.


----------



## bigirishman

Nathan55 said:


> Can't agree with you more sir. The issue is actually simple: how do you write a test that SEVENTY percent of practicing engineers will fail? The only way to do that is by deception. It's an open book test. Most of us have passed the PE already. Most people have taken the test more than once. Everything﻿ is code based. So without deliberate obfuscation, the test would have a pass rate much higher, and NCEES would be out of business. The problem ﻿in question﻿﻿ was particularly horrible. But I wasn't surprised because I don't expect questions to be fair, or well worded, or easily solvable.


The old WA state exam had many years with 0% pass rates.  That's one of the tests that this exam was designed to replace.  So 30% is quite an improvement for people in WA.


----------



## cal91

Does everyone agree that, with the grading workshop June 7-8, the expected day is the following Friday, June 14?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

cal91 said:


> Does everyone agree that, with the grading workshop June 7-8, the expected day is the following Friday, June 14?


that would be the best case scenario, so i'm not going to get my hopes up. what's the typical turnaround time from the grading workshop to posting of results?


----------



## cal91

SE_Hopeful said:


> that would be the best case scenario, so *i'm not going to get my hopes up*. what's the typical turnaround time from the grading workshop to posting of results?


But you're SE_*HOPE*ful!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

SE_Hopeful said:


> that would be the best case scenario, so i'm not going to get my hopes up. what's the typical turnaround time from the grading workshop to posting of results?


I’ve seen it take (2) weeks after the grading workshop. I would say they would push to get it out the week after though as it will be the 12th week.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> Can't agree with you more sir. The issue is actually simple: how do you write a test that SEVENTY percent of practicing engineers will fail? The only way to do that is by deception. It's an open book test. Most of us have passed the PE already. Most people have taken the test more than once. Everything is code based. So without deliberate obfuscation, the test would have a pass rate much higher, and NCEES would be out of business. The problem in question was particularly horrible. But I wasn't surprised because I don't expect questions to be fair, or well worded, or easily solvable.


I don’t expect easily solvable as I think the exam should stress your engineering skill and judgement, but from an engineering organization that prides itself on professionalism, I do expect reasonably well worded and fair. Also, I’d venture to guess the SE is one of their smaller professions. Not retaking this thing is not going to put them out of business.


----------



## Civil Dawg

cal91 said:


> Does everyone agree that, with the grading workshop June 7-8, the expected day is the following Friday, June 14?


Lately results have either been posted the Friday after the workshop or the following Monday. So either the 14th or 17th.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Good morning all of you beautiful people with your "purty" mouths! I hope you all have a Wonderful Wednesday. Just a tidbit of advice, don't go on a white water canoe/camping trip with Burt Reynolds in the backwoods. It doesn't end well. Also, stay positive about this thing whatever result you get! Many many many competent engineers struggle with this exam. If you have issues passing, take a course. I've had to take two. Both School of PE and EET. While there was a lot of overlap between the two prep courses, they definitely helped me flesh out my understanding of high seismic/special detailing. I would also like to recommend Mr. David Conner's bridge books. He frequents the site here and all of us are lucky to have him. His bridge problem books will definitely help you pick up the low hanging fruit if you've never been involved with bridge design. Considering the bridge problems make up 20% of the morning exam portion, do NOT attempt to write them off. I'm seriously thinking about putting together a publication as well. I've tabulated and organized all of the material that I've used on my journey from PE to the 16 hour SE and it's fairly comprehensive as I've been compiling it for years. I think it would also function fairly well as a design reference as I've put many of my real life examples into it. Just a thought, it would still require getting together with a publisher and editing. I suspect many of you already use, or have used, the SERM. If you would give me an opinion as to whether a comprehensive study guide/design manual covering all materials, common determinate and non-determinate analysis methods, and design methodologies would be useful in addition to the publications that already exist, I'd be grateful.


----------



## User1

FutureSE said:


> Good morning all of you beautiful people with your "purty" mouths! I hope you all have a Wonderful Wednesday. Just a tidbit of advice, don't go on a white water canoe/camping trip with Burt Reynolds in the backwoods. It doesn't end well. Also, stay positive about this thing whatever result you get! Many many many competent engineers struggle with this exam. If you have issues passing, take a course. I've had to take two. Both School of PE and EET. While there was a lot of overlap between the two prep courses, they definitely helped me flesh out my understanding of high seismic/special detailing. I would also like to recommend Mr. David Conner's bridge books. He frequents the site here and all of us are lucky to have him. His bridge problem books will definitely help you pick up the low hanging fruit if you've never been involved with bridge design. Considering the bridge problems make up 20% of the morning exam portion, do NOT attempt to write them off. I'm seriously thinking about putting together a publication as well. I've tabulated and organized all of the material that I've used on my journey from PE to the 16 hour SE and it's fairly comprehensive as I've been compiling it for years. I think it would also function fairly well as a design reference as I've put many of my real life examples into it. Just a thought, it would still require getting together with a publisher and editing. I suspect many of you already use, or have used, the SERM. If you would give me an opinion as t﻿o whether a comprehensive study guide/design manual covering all mat﻿erials, common determinate and non-determinate analysis methods, and design methodologies would be us﻿eful in﻿ addition to the publications ﻿that already exist, I'd be grateful.﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿﻿


I think many people would find great value in a publication that didn't come with a course signup requirement. I feel like the advice that I've heard from people is practice problems are most helpful, and having a resource to use on the exam and beyond would be good value...as the textbooks I've kept from college don't really apply much to real life directly, only in partial concepts.


----------



## Nathan55

bigirishman said:


> The old WA state exam had many years with 0% pass rates.  That's one of the tests that this exam was designed to replace.  So 30% is quite an improvement for people in WA.


Wow. That's a death star trench run if I ever heard of one.


----------



## Nathan55

tj_PE said:


> I think many people would find great value in a publication that didn't come with a course signup requirement. I feel like the advice that I've heard from people is practice problems are most helpful, and having a resource to use on the exam and beyond would be good value...as the textbooks I've kept from college don't really apply much to real life directly, only in partial concepts.


Amen to that. I've learned that PPI and NCEES are simply inadequate. I'd almost go so far as to say...don't buy the NCEES Practice exam. EET does an excellent job. Really delving into commonly misunderstood portions of the code. Just wish they'd sell the binder &amp; practice exams without needing to go to class. David Connor's bridge book is excellent. We need practice books for other subjects as well--concrete, steel...maybe even one dedicated to all the footnotes in the Seismic/Wind portions of ASCE 7. The PPI books are not up to the task.....and my guess is that since they are a large company, NCEES tells them there are things they can't publish. SERM attempts to do a good job, but I would rework that book entirely. It's merely a good starting point for lateral, and nothing more. I'd give it an "improvement required" for vertical.

Another thing to consider would be an "annotated" version of the code books. I find that it is time consuming to switch back and forth between the code, a code reference book, and a textbook. So my codes are jam-packed with notes, explanations, references, and things that are highlighted. Especially in the case of ACI, which is a labyrinth of clever misdirection.


----------



## User1

Nathan55 said:


> Amen to that. I've learned that PPI and NCEES are simply inadequate. I'd almost go so far as to say...don't buy the NCEES Practice exam. EET does an excellent job. Really delving into commonly misunderstood portions of the code. Just wish they'd sell the binder &amp; practice exams without needing to go to class. David Connor's bridge book is excellent. We need practice books for other subjects as well--concrete, steel...maybe even one dedicated to all the footnotes in the Seismic/Wind portions of ASCE 7. The PPI books are not up to the task.....and my guess is that since they are a large company, NCEES tells them there are things they can't publish. SERM attempts to do a good job, but I would rework that book entirely. It's merely a good starting point for lateral, and nothing more. I'd give it an "improvement required" for vertical.﻿﻿﻿
> 
> Another thing to consider would be an "annotated" version of the code books. I find that it is time consuming to switch back and forth between the code, a code reference book, and a textbook. So my codes are jam-packed with notes﻿, explanations, references, and things that are highlighted. Especially in the case of ACI, which is a labyrinth of clever misdirection.  ﻿


Yeah, I think I opened the SERM  mayyyyyybe twice during the exam. and never before. mostly because I didn't study properly but anywayyyyy

and 1000% would love someone to make tabs for references and annotations would be fantastic too! or like sticky notes on clear material to supplement the code, and you just slide a solid piece of paper under it, or just solid i guess and you flip it up, but the sticky part would have to be clear!!!


----------



## cal91

Nathan55 said:


> Amen to that. I've learned that PPI and NCEES are simply inadequate. I'd almost go so far as to say...don't buy the NCEES Practice exam. EET does an excellent job. Really delving into commonly misunderstood portions of the code. Just wish they'd sell the binder &amp; practice exams without needing to go to class. David Connor's bridge book is excellent. We need practice books for other subjects as well--concrete, steel...maybe even one dedicated to all the footnotes in the Seismic/Wind portions of ASCE 7. The PPI books are not up to the task.....and my guess is that since they are a large company, NCEES tells them there are things they can't publish. SERM attempts to do a good job, but I would rework that book entirely. It's merely a good starting point for lateral, and nothing more. I'd give it an "improvement required" for vertical.
> 
> Another thing to consider would be an "annotated" version of the code books. I find that it is time consuming to switch back and forth between the code, a code reference book, and a textbook. So my codes are jam-packed with notes, explanations, references, and things that are highlighted. Especially in the case of ACI, which is a labyrinth of clever misdirection.


All I used were the STERM, practice exams/problems and the codes themselves. For my studying I first went through the STERM cover to cover, only as a tool for me to learn the codes I wasn't experienced in (I'm only experienced in steel and seismic). After that all I did were practice exams/problems, (PPI Practice Exam, PPI SE Solved Problems, PPI 6-minute problems, NCEES practice exam, SEAOC Vol. 1and Connor's Bridge). For each practice book I'd do all of the problems, and then review the solutions, spending extra time on ones I missed. Then all I brought into the exam were the codes themselves, STERM and Connor's bridge. No textbooks / code refence books. I only used the STERM and Connor's Bridge book less than 5 times. For me, I felt that too much time would be wasted in the exam if I were to use a reference/text book to direct me to the code, rather than just going straight to the code itself. I know I am the outlier here, because the other 5 test takers with me had piles and piles of reference books and such, both on their table and on the floor. It looked daunting to me to have so much material, first thinking about what would be the book to grab on every problem and then finding the book among the library that was brought. I just had my several code books fanned out, none stacked top so I could immediately grab the correct one.


----------



## David Connor SE

cal91 said:


> All I used were the STERM, practice exams/problems and the codes themselves. For my studying I first went through the STERM cover to cover, only as a tool for me to learn the codes I wasn't experienced in (I'm only experienced in steel and seismic). After that all I did were practice exams/problems, (PPI Practice Exam, PPI SE Solved Problems, PPI 6-minute problems, NCEES practice exam, SEAOC Vol. 1and Connor's Bridge). For each practice book I'd do all of the problems, and then review the solutions, spending extra time on ones I missed. Then all I brought into the exam were the codes themselves, STERM and Connor's bridge. No textbooks / code refence books. I only used the STERM and Connor's Bridge book less than 5 times. For me, I felt that too much time would be wasted in the exam if I were to use a reference/text book to direct me to the code, rather than just going straight to the code itself. I know I am the outlier here, because the other 5 test takers with me had piles and piles of reference books and such, both on their table and on the floor. It looked daunting to me to have so much material, first thinking about what would be the book to grab on every problem and then finding the book among the library that was brought. I just had my several code books fanned out, none stacked top so I could immediately grab the correct one.


I agree with this assessment, and also mention it in the Tips sections of my book.  I think 2 "bins" worth of books and references is enough. 1 bin for codes, the other for study guides, references, my book , etc.  Also, I make book recommendations in my bridge book and I think if you use those you will be as good as you can get. Any additional may be too much. You can easily drown in reference materials if you bring too much.


----------



## David Connor SE

FutureSE said:


> Good morning all of you beautiful people with your "purty" mouths! I hope you all have a Wonderful Wednesday. Just a tidbit of advice, don't go on a white water canoe/camping trip with Burt Reynolds in the backwoods. It doesn't end well. Also, stay positive about this thing whatever result you get! Many many many competent engineers struggle with this exam. If you have issues passing, take a course. I've had to take two. Both School of PE and EET. While there was a lot of overlap between the two prep courses, they definitely helped me flesh out my understanding of high seismic/special detailing. I would also like to recommend Mr. David Conner's bridge books. He frequents the site here and all of us are lucky to have him. His bridge problem books will definitely help you pick up the low hanging fruit if you've never been involved with bridge design. Considering the bridge problems make up 20% of the morning exam portion, do NOT attempt to write them off. I'm seriously thinking about putting together a publication as well. I've tabulated and organized all of the material that I've used on my journey from PE to the 16 hour SE and it's fairly comprehensive as I've been compiling it for years. I think it would also function fairly well as a design reference as I've put many of my real life examples into it. Just a thought, it would still require getting together with a publisher and editing. I suspect many of you already use, or have used, the SERM. If you would give me an opinion as to whether a comprehensive study guide/design manual covering all materials, common determinate and non-determinate analysis methods, and design methodologies would be useful in addition to the publications that already exist, I'd be grateful.


I thought about doing something like this as well after writing my bridge book, but alas real life and work caught up with me. Just know that writing a book is very time consuming, and the time consumption continues after you are done if you plan to update it after NCEES updates their code references.  Also, there really is no need to go through a traditional publisher these days. Just use Kindle Direct Publishing (used to be known as Createspace before it was bought out by Amazon).  Fairly straightforward process to get your book on Amazon, and the royalties you get are much better than a traditional publisher.


----------



## TheBigGuy

David Connor said:


> I thought about doing something like this as well after writing my bridge book, but alas real life and work caught up with me. Just know that writing a book is very time consuming, and the time consumption continues after you are done if you plan to update it after NCEES updates their code references.  Also, there really is no need to go through a traditional publisher these days. Just use Kindle Direct Publishing (used to be known as Createspace before it was bought out by Amazon).  Fairly straightforward process to get your book on Amazon, and the royalties you get are much better than a traditional publisher.


hmmmm....  "Seismic Design for Midwesterners" by The Big Guy


----------



## Nathan55

TheBigGuy said:


> hmmmm....  "Seismic Design for Midwesterners" by The Big Guy


I'd buy your book. Or "how I passed the Vertical exam and came _oh so close_ to passing Lateral" by Nathan55


----------



## Nathan55

cal91 said:


> All I used were the STERM, practice exams/problems and the codes themselves. For my studying I first went through the STERM cover to cover, only as a tool for me to learn the codes I wasn't experienced in (I'm only experienced in steel and seismic). After that all I did were practice exams/problems, (PPI Practice Exam, PPI SE Solved Problems, PPI 6-minute problems, NCEES practice exam, SEAOC Vol. 1and Connor's Bridge). For each practice book I'd do all of the problems, and then review the solutions, spending extra time on ones I missed. Then all I brought into the exam were the codes themselves, STERM and Connor's bridge. No textbooks / code refence books. I only used the STERM and Connor's Bridge book less than 5 times. For me, I felt that too much time would be wasted in the exam if I were to use a reference/text book to direct me to the code, rather than just going straight to the code itself. I know I am the outlier here, because the other 5 test takers with me had piles and piles of reference books and such, both on their table and on the floor. It looked daunting to me to have so much material, first thinking about what would be the book to grab on every problem and then finding the book among the library that was brought. I just had my several code books fanned out, none stacked top so I could immediately grab the correct one.


Also agree 100%. The whole "open book" thing is clever misdirection. Essentially, if you need to look in textbooks and the like to solve a problem, you've lost already. Everything has to be muscle memory. As in, visualizing the code when you close your eyes. Knowing all the mistakes that people make. Forgetting the names of family members because all your cerebral lobes are ensconced in the nuances of irregularities and overstrength. I only bring a wood textbook and david's book and place in a "break in case of emergency" location. 

NCEES: Ah....textbooks, practice exams...powerful tools for the uninitiated. But...we are initiated....aren't we, Nathan?


----------



## Titleistguy

Two bins is alot of room if we didn't have a 2000+ page bridge code to deal with lol.  

On a side note, I'm glad the SE is hard to pass....it should be.  These are life and death engineering matters that reuqire a very high bar in my opinion.  I thought the PE was insulting how easy it was and frankly that the FE was harder.  I remember finishing the afternoon PE portion 90 minutes or so early.  It was a joke.

35% (ish) pass rates are scary to see and it's difficult prepararing but I'd much rather the NCEES keep it difficult to reflect the possible consequences of not knowing the subject matter.  Plus it'll mean that much more when I pass.


----------



## AlexPE

FutureSE said:


> Good morning all of you beautiful people with your "purty" mouths! I hope you all have a Wonderful Wednesday. Just a tidbit of advice, don't go on a white water canoe/camping trip with Burt Reynolds in the backwoods. It doesn't end well. Also, stay positive about this thing whatever result you get! Many many many competent engineers struggle with this exam. If you have issues passing, take a course. I've had to take two. Both School of PE and EET. While there was a lot of overlap between the two prep courses, they definitely helped me flesh out my understanding of high seismic/special detailing. I would also like to recommend Mr. David Conner's bridge books. He frequents the site here and all of us are lucky to have him. His bridge problem books will definitely help you pick up the low hanging fruit if you've never been involved with bridge design. Considering the bridge problems make up 20% of the morning exam portion, do NOT attempt to write them off. I'm seriously thinking about putting together a publication as well. I've tabulated and organized all of the material that I've used on my journey from PE to the 16 hour SE and it's fairly comprehensive as I've been compiling it for years. I think it would also function fairly well as a design reference as I've put many of my real life examples into it. Just a thought, it would still require getting together with a publisher and editing. I suspect many of you already use, or have used, the SERM. If you would give me an opinion as to whether a comprehensive study guide/design manual covering all materials, common determinate and non-determinate analysis methods, and design methodologies would be useful in addition to the publications that already exist, I'd be grateful.


That would be incredible. Id pay a handsome sum if you could get this thing published by the time next year's test rolls around.

For reals though - one thing that really hurts is not having a text book covering the lateral design and analysis situations. You people keep hating on SERM, but it was the ONLY reference I needed during the vertical exam's concrete and cmu questions (I passed that exam and wouldnt be surprised if I hit 100%). It does an excellent job of giving you the most important equations and steps to take, and always includes where to find the relevant section of code in case you need it (plus large margins for notes!)

However I recently found out (the hard way) that SERM sucks monkey balls when it comes to lateral design (vegas set my over-under at 24/40, 2A, 1NI, 1U and im taking the under). I think a large reason for this variance between vertical and lateral exam performance has to do with my lack of exposure to lateral questions and steps/checks during analysis. In other words I dont need theory... the lateral chapter of serm, seaoc vol 1, asce commentary all have plenty of theory - to the point where I feel like I could teach a class on lateral design theory. Instead, the most useful textbook would design/analyze a building frame, starting with load distribution, load cases and combos, and continue down to seismic detailing of the foundation - all the while describing what checks to make, and what code sections to review if some uncommon situation arises.

I look at it like this: there are 88 practice problems for the exam (44 ncees and 44 ppi - one could count solved, 6 min, and seaoc too, though the solutions too often feel more like college test questions than actual NCEES questions). Those practice problems cover alot of ground, but there are some glaring holes.

Someone like you, Mr FutureSE, is in a great position to write a book such as the one you propose. You have taken the exam, what... 4, 5 times now? You thus must have a good grasp on which topics they find important (i.e. load combinations!), which techniques have been covered to death (i.e. flexural stress in CMU, or seismic design category, anyone?), and which topics are important but barely discussed in the codes or practice exams.... like I am still amazed at how its possible to have NOT seen a structural irregularity problem (ncees style, not seaoc's) or a directional procedure problem (thats right - the most basic, enclosed condition) prior to the test! No amount of code reading, highlighting or note-taking is going to take the place of actually doing problems.

So in conclusion (sorry for the rant!), what the world needs are more questions and step-by-step solutions covering the basics in a comprehensive sense, with tips and code references for possible variations to given conditions. Like how serm does gravity... do THAT for lateral.

I said it before and ill say it again -FutureSE for president!


----------



## TheBigGuy

FutureSE, let me know if you decide to write the book.  I don't want to swoop in and steel your idea out from under you.  Otherwise, I'll spend every weekend writing "A Midwesterner's Guide to the SE Seismic Exam" this summer, full of example problems, tips for the test, and my unsolicited theories of life and this world.


----------



## Duke

Titleistguy said:


> On a side note, I'm glad the SE is hard to pass....it should be.  These are life and death engineering matters that reuqire a very high bar in my opinion.  I thought the PE was insulting how easy it was and frankly that the FE was harder.  I remember finishing the afternoon PE portion 90 minutes or so early.  It was a joke.
> 
> 35% (ish) pass rates are scary to see and it's difficult prepararing but I'd much rather the NCEES keep it difficult to reflect the possible consequences of not knowing the subject matter.  Plus it'll mean that much more when I pass.


This exam is unfair to those of us who are competent but have not been blessed with speed in the traditional test format. Otherwise competent engineers who perform well in the real world are held back from licensure if they aren't predisposed to performing material they saw once or twice in some form on a practice exam and then on the exam have to run design calcs on it at break neck speed. Then comparing the SE to other high stakes professions the pass rates don't even compare.

I believe the people passing the current SE are competent, and that is a good thing, but I also believe many competent engineers struggle with this exam which very negatively impacts would be SE's career paths, which is a bad thing.


----------



## Titleistguy

Duke, I appreciate your view point but I simply don't agree.  Competent doctors pass med school but can't pass boards...and I'm not sure if anyone would want that doctor practicing on them without the license.  I know it sounds harsh but that's the reality of it.  To me to call yourself an SE means you love this stuff, you are passionate and it makes you tick.  I truly believe if those things are all true then a person will eventually pass.  As opposed to the PE that I feel in some way is more token and just a thing you gotta take and pass.  

 I find it hard to believe that test taking skills / anxiety is the problem considering most if not all the people here have a PE, got through at least an undergraduate program and quite possibly a Masters.  So we've all taken tests before and know what it's about. 

I don't think watering down the test is the solution.  Especially if the claim is simply that it's not fair.  How is it fair to the people who have passed already if they were to make it easier?  

At any rate I'm sincerely hopeful that everyone involved in this conversation passes or will pass this test bc the fact we're all here talking about it means we care.


----------



## David Connor SE

AlexPE said:


> That would be incredible. Id pay a handsome sum if you could get this thing published by the time next year's test rolls around.
> 
> For reals though - one thing that really hurts is not having a text book covering the lateral design and analysis situations. You people keep hating on SERM, but it was the ONLY reference I needed during the vertical exam's concrete and cmu questions (I passed that exam and wouldnt be surprised if I hit 100%). It does an excellent job of giving you the most important equations and steps to take, and always includes where to find the relevant section of code in case you need it (plus large margins for notes!)
> 
> However I recently found out (the hard way) that SERM sucks monkey balls when it comes to lateral design (vegas set my over-under at 24/40, 2A, 1NI, 1U and im taking the under). I think a large reason for this variance between vertical and lateral exam performance has to do with my lack of exposure to lateral questions and steps/checks during analysis. In other words I dont need theory... the lateral chapter of serm, seaoc vol 1, asce commentary all have plenty of theory - to the point where I feel like I could teach a class on lateral design theory. Instead, the most useful textbook would design/analyze a building frame, starting with load distribution, load cases and combos, and continue down to seismic detailing of the foundation - all the while describing what checks to make, and what code sections to review if some uncommon situation arises.
> 
> I look at it like this: there are 88 practice problems for the exam (44 ncees and 44 ppi - one could count solved, 6 min, and seaoc too, though the solutions too often feel more like college test questions than actual NCEES questions). Those practice problems cover alot of ground, but there are some glaring holes.
> 
> Someone like you, Mr FutureSE, is in a great position to write a book such as the one you propose. You have taken the exam, what... 4, 5 times now? You thus must have a good grasp on which topics they find important (i.e. load combinations!), which techniques have been covered to death (i.e. flexural stress in CMU, or seismic design category, anyone?), and which topics are important but barely discussed in the codes or practice exams.... like I am still amazed at how its possible to have NOT seen a structural irregularity problem (ncees style, not seaoc's) or a directional procedure problem (thats right - the most basic, enclosed condition) prior to the test! No amount of code reading, highlighting or note-taking is going to take the place of actually doing problems.
> 
> So in conclusion (sorry for the rant!), what the world needs are more questions and step-by-step solutions covering the basics in a comprehensive sense, with tips and code references for possible variations to given conditions. Like how serm does gravity... do THAT for lateral.
> 
> I said it before and ill say it again -FutureSE for president!


For step by step seismic design examples/solutions, check out the SEAOC books, Vols. 2-5 if you haven't already.  They may be a little too comprehensive, like some of the SERM examples, but you can certainly learn a lot about seismic "design" if you study those books.

That being said, Seismic Design for Midwesterners is a great idea! Or maybe a book that covers the common "tricks" that can trip you up on the SE exam.  SE Exam: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them.


----------



## kevo_55

^^AISC has a webinar (and presentation) on this. It was offered at the NASCC this year. 

Still this exam is hard and very well should be for what they have replaced.

Now if a state board requires the SE exam for a PE then I would say that you may have a good argument for them.

Just my $0.02.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

TheBigGuy said:


> FutureSE, let me know if you decide to write the book.  I don't want to swoop in and steel your idea out from under you.  Otherwise, I'll spend every weekend writing "A Midwesterner's Guide to the SE Seismic Exam" this summer, full of example problems, tips for the test, and my unsolicited theories of life and this world.


Well, the thing is that it is practically written but it needs to be proofed and edited. I’ve compiled vast amounts of data across my years of experience as well as my studies for the SE. As it sits currently, I have (3) 2” binders so full of data, examples, references, and flowcharts that I can barely turn the pages. The whole intention of compiling this monster was so  my younger employees will not have to struggle as I did and I can just shove pages under their nose when they have questions rather than lose the billing time. It’s unfortunate that we are a smaller firm with zero high seismic experience, so I felt this compilation was essential. We came really close to designing a high seismic structure once, but a shear wave velocity test kicked us back into steel not specifically detailed. I also fully intended to cheat and just pay one of our young EIT’s to put this together during work hours. It’d be a good project for them during some slow time.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Titleistguy said:


> Two bins is alot of room if we didn't have a 2000+ page bridge code to deal with lol.
> 
> On a side note, I'm glad the SE is hard to pass....it should be.  These are life and death engineering matters that reuqire a very high bar in my opinion.  I thought the PE was insulting how easy it was and frankly that the FE was harder.  I remember finishing the afternoon PE portion 90 minutes or so early.  It was a joke.
> 
> 35% (ish) pass rates are scary to see and it's difficult prepararing but I'd much rather the NCEES keep it difficult to reflect the possible consequences of not knowing the subject matter.  Plus it'll mean that much more when I pass.


The P.E. was a joke as far as difficulty. It’s the areas of practice and problem styles that frustrate me. If you are a building engineer, how many times do you open the AASHTO? It’s 20% of the morning exam and I know I had to buy the thing specifically for this exam. I’ll probably burn it in ritual sacrifice to the ASCE gods soon. If you are on the east coast, how many special seismic systems have you designed? I’ll bet not many if any. I haven’t seen any in almost (2) decades. Those questions are at least 50% of the exam. Regardless of what you’ve designed and understand, I can always point out something that you don’t. An engineer can be competent in their area of practice without having to be competent across the country or various disciplines. Believe it or not, some of us still specialize in low to mid-height structures that do not require seismic design past a few ELFP checks and some subdiaphragm framing.

I wonder how long it will be before our friends at NCEES desire to incorporate airframe structures into the exam. Hell, why not space structures as bases for our new Space Force? It really feels like Space Force should have a trademark symbol to make it even “more awesomer.” I probably would have named it Solar System Soldiers or triple S for short, but no one asked for my opinion.  If we put a base on the moon, will we have to change the code and make all US based engineers learn lunar earthquake design? It’s a trick question, there are no “EARTHquakes” on the moon. It makes almost as much sense as a brain surgeon having to study buttholes with significant intensity (No offense to our proctologically inclined friends, you do you. Also, I’m not saying that bridges are buttholes so untuck any wadded panties, please). Imagine if buttholes made up 20% of the brain surgery medical licensure exam (Come to think of it, it would certainly make a lot of sense if our politicians had undergone surgery by these “qualified” doctors. I’m looking at you, Hank Johnson and your condition that rhymes with “pit stains”). Anyway, I’ll quit being intentionally crude and typing butthole.

Butthole. Fooled you, I just had to say it one more time!

 I’ll give you another dozen years, (4) to (5) revisions of code cycles, have all our foreign graduate students write crazy new  dissertations and theories for the ICC to slobber over (so they can sell more books). Then have NCEES change their exam format as well as your state board force you to take the new exam for licensure (to hell with grandfathering anything). Maybe we could even have engineers retest every (4) years. That should certainly set the bar high enough.

You’ll probably be as cynical and bitter as me by that point. This industry will do that to a person. It sucks little pieces of your soul right out one retarded contractor/building department plan reviewer question/comment and ICC code change at a time until you are a dried up husk of the proud engineering stallion that you once were.


----------



## Dean Agnostic

I feel like @FutureSE is contemplating on litigating the grading system issues. As a regular person, to the best of my belief, you have a good, clear and convincing argument with regards to "subject matter expert" competency grading your exam. 

@Dean Agnostic, Grand Jury #69


----------



## Dean Agnostic

It states on the NCEES examinee guide:

**********************************************************

*NCEES AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE (ALL EXAMS):*

1. In the event that any legal dispute arises between you and NCEES in connection with your participation in any NCEES examination where that dispute is not resolved by the appeals process, you agree that the exclusive means for resolving the dispute shall be binding arbitration as described by the terms of this agreement. This means that you waive the rights you may have to resolve the dispute in a court of law or by any other means that might otherwise be available to you.

.....

3. Arbitration proceedings initiated pursuant to this agreement to arbitrate shall be conducted in accordance with the then current rules of the American Arbitration Association. The arbitration and any proceedings relating to it shall be held in Charlotte, North Carolina. The arbitrator’s award shall be binding and may be entered as a judgment in any court of competent jurisdiction. Information about the American Arbitration Association, its rules, and its forms are available from the American Arbitration Association, 335 Madison Avenue, Floor 10, New York, New York, 10017-4605.

.....

4. In the event of arbitration, the parties shall bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees associated with the arbitration proceedings, unless the arbitrator directs one of the parties to pay the other’s costs, or attorneys’ fees, or both.

********************************************************

@FutureSE I'm curious to know what your legal counsel's thoughts on this and his legal fees .


----------



## Dean Agnostic

When I was kid, I was challenged by an organization, and I wound up in a judicial law library to save on legal fees for three years establishing probable cause documents and put them in 3 bankers box. It was probably the loveliest days of my life, LOL!

Whether you make an appeal or not, I hope you do well on the exam @FutureSE. GOOD LUCK! 

More BlessingS!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Dean Agnostic said:


> When I was kid, I was challenged by an organization, and I wound up in a judicial law library to save on legal fees for three years establishing probable cause documents and put them in 3 bankers box. It was probably the loveliest days of my life, LOL!
> 
> Whether you make an appeal or not, I hope you do well on the exam @FutureSE. GOOD LUCK!
> 
> More BlessingS!


I think you are reading too far into my idea of litigation. I'm not really concerned with them bearing the counsel fees either. Hardly any of this is legal, it's just a story (I like talking) but a brief synopsis of the situation is as follows:

I started this journey nearly (2) years ago after being rejected by the GA board for PE reciprocity as I only had the PE under my belt and I waited a long time to get it. It was probably a stupid idea and I should've taken it way earlier, but I never really needed the licensure so it was approximately 2013 or 2014 when I got it. Anyway, I bought the NCEES practice exam, studied, and took the vertical and lateral SE exams the same weekend. I left the vertical feeling like I crushed it and the NCEES practice exam was fairly representative of the content of that exam. Little did I know the next day would have a tremendous amount of material I had literally never been exposed to. I left the lateral with a long face, knowing I had clearly failed. I couldn't even feel good about the vertical anymore as this was the first exam in my life that I'd failed and it was a huge blow to my confidence. It was almost like a high school sweetheart breakup. I just knew life was over and I was never going to recover from this devastation. I was a decent undergrad with an upper 3's gpa and a straight A graduate student so I eventually attributed my failing to just not being exposed to the material, picked up my suck it up straw, and tried to move on with my life.

At this point, I contacted every SE that I knew. I was trying to get in touch with someone that had been exposed to the material so they could at least point me in the proper direction for my studies as I didn't even know which books to use for high seismic (my ignorance had been bliss to this point and I've never designed anything further west than Iowa). Even in South Carolina and Tennessee, I've never been lucky enough to see an SDC greater than C. I knew there was some funky stuff the west coast seismic voodoo engineers did but LITERALLY NOT ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL I SPOKE WITH KNEW WHAT THE HELL I WAS TALKING ABOUT (I not talking PE's, I'm talking licensed SE's, I guess pre 2011 it was dramatically different). A few of these individuals were graders for previous administrations! Other old SE's accused me of drinking when I proclaimed dynamic seismic analysis was on the exam in limited quantities. The resounding words from the industry were "You're wasting your time studying anything but ELFP." I searched for recent grads to try and learn this stuff. Turns out they aren't teaching it in most colleges (I did find out later that at least GA Tech has a seismic course now). I like self study, but if you have no idea where to start or what to study it's not so good. So I googled some books, bought them, and started reading this board and talking smack. I self studied hard. Dug into the seismic sections of the code like a tick buried in a dog's ear. Went to the exam feeling confident again. Then I didn't finish. Really didn't finish. To the point, I almost needed twice as much time to finish. At least when I got the grades back, most of the questions I did finish, I received decent marks for.

On a side note, after the second try, one of the exam proctors told me to apply for special accommodations. They said it was easy to get and they would allow time and a half or even double time. I thought I would try this out after finding out how badly I had failed for trial # (2). I applied and I don't know if I was randomly audited or if the proctor was just looking at me and thought I was retarded (I don't blame her, I blame genetics). Anyway, I received a letter requesting significant substantiating evidence for reasons of special accommodation to include: letters from doctors, letters from coworkers, and pictures of my work environment. At this point, I seriously considered buying and wearing a football helmet, sitting at my desk, and drooling profusely while my business partners took photo's of me pretending to eat my calculator. I decided against these actions and decided to take School of PE instead as I knew at this point I had a snowball's chance in hell of passing this thing without help.

School of PE cleared a lot of things up for me. I was regaining my confidence in my abilities, following their class schedule, reading the code books like a boss. I felt like I was finally taming this wild beast know as the Lateral SE Exam! I go in for trial #3, I do decent in the morning (passing level best I can tell from internet message boards). The afternoon was a little difficult and time consuming as I finished writing within the (1) minute warning period. Walking away from the exam, I was moderately sure I had passed. On the drive home I realized a few MINOR issues I had with the wood and general analysis problems concerning adjustment factors and the wonderful Omega value. "Surely the graders would see that I mostly knew what I was doing and would give me partial marks at the worst," I told myself. When I received the results, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that I passed the steel and concrete portions yet failed wood and general analysis (Oddly, this was a flip flop from the previous administration for me).

Receiving this result left me bitter as hell. I was furious. I still am. I should not have been required to take this thing again. I'm sure of that. I looked up challenging the grading of the afternoon, but NCEES doesn't allow that. I called and e-mailed NCEES offered to pay a proctor and their counsel, drive to South Carolina, donate to the charity of their choice, and perform mission work in the name of NCEES just to allow me to view the graded exam to see what I had done wrong. At this point, I would have donated a kidney, maybe even both of them to be able to see what I did that was so wrong to fail me. Everything I offered seemed more that reasonable and accommodating to me. After all, I'd seen the exam once and I was apparently assumed too stupid to reproduce it from memory. I was alos as considerate and accommodating as a butthurt individual can be, but I was told "Under no circumstances can you see your exam." I don't know who graded that exam, but they definitely went to the same brain surgeon that Hank Johnson did (see my previous post for an explaination). While, I knew I made some minor mistakes, there were absolutely no legitimate reasons to fail me on those two problems.

Eventually, I tried to get over my anger. I used engineer boards as my personal psychologist. I decided I was going to give this thing one more good shot at 1000% (Yes, 10X the capacity of a normal human being).  I signed up for EET as individuals on here stated they were exceptional (they really are). I went to the Dr. and got a prescription for adderall. I studied seismic like a teenage boy staring at a dirty magazine. I was absolutely like Rocky Balboa training in the Siberian wilderness to fight Drago.

During these intense studies, I realized that whomever graded the last exam either really did screw me over or NCEES grades so harshly that basically perfection is the only acceptable option. My standing theory is that NCEES hands over a key to the "subject matter experts" and they just compare it to your exam. If these so called "experts" don't know what they are doing and you don't match the key almost exactly, they mark it wrong and move on. If you are lucky enough to get two of these morons grading your exam (I think it's likely the second grader never really looks at it or just thumbs through it speedily), then congrats, you've likely failed. This gave me more fuel to punch NCEES right in the ding ding on the next exam. Finally, I sat for this last administration of the exam and left feeling like I smashed it like Hulk smashed Loki. I have (3) problems I likely missed in the morning and a small portion of one of the sections on (1) of the afternoon problems. Everything else, I'm fairly sure of. According to grading statistics online, I would have to miss 1 out of every (4) questions I thought I got right to fail this exam. Assuming that is the case, I have a HUGE buffer for passing.

So to sum it all up, Yes, if I get the grading back and I somehow didn't pass. I will absolutely go Hiroshima on that ass to see the exam. I will not take NO for an answer and the easiest option they will have is to just allow me to see the damn thing. I will pay for their time, the lawyer, the travel, the proctor, and an armed guard if need be, but I will see it. I am a practical and reasonable individual. If I legitimately failed, I'll learn from whatever I did wrong and move on, but I can't and absolutely won't sit here and just let them give me a "Sorry, try again" without me knowing EXACTLY why.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Dean Agnostic said:


> It states on the NCEES examinee guide:
> 
> **********************************************************
> 
> *NCEES AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE (ALL EXAMS):*
> 
> 1. In the event that any legal dispute arises between you and NCEES in connection with your participation in any NCEES examination where that dispute is not resolved by the appeals process, you agree that the exclusive means for resolving the dispute shall be binding arbitration as described by the terms of this agreement. This means that you waive the rights you may have to resolve the dispute in a court of law or by any other means that might otherwise be available to you.
> 
> .....
> 
> 3. Arbitration proceedings initiated pursuant to this agreement to arbitrate shall be conducted in accordance with the then current rules of the American Arbitration Association. The arbitration and any proceedings relating to it shall be held in Charlotte, North Carolina. The arbitrator’s award shall be binding and may be entered as a judgment in any court of competent jurisdiction. Information about the American Arbitration Association, its rules, and its forms are available from the American Arbitration Association, 335 Madison Avenue, Floor 10, New York, New York, 10017-4605.
> 
> .....
> 
> 4. In the event of arbitration, the parties shall bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees associated with the arbitration proceedings, unless the arbitrator directs one of the parties to pay the other’s costs, or attorneys’ fees, or both.
> 
> ********************************************************
> 
> @FutureSE I'm curious to know what your legal counsel's thoughts on this and his legal fees .


After reading my previous post, maybe you have a better idea of what I'm getting myself into. I'm not playing stupid games anymore. I've paid almost $10,000 for this exam and all of it's associated costs already. I'll pay that again or even more, if that is what it takes to get through. While arbitration is always called for in agreements, there are ways around it. I hate when smug people pretend to know everything. @Dean Agnostic, I should clarify that I'm not saying you are, but it certainly seemed to be what it looked like with this comment.


----------



## NikR_PE

FutureSE said:


> I think you are reading too far into my idea of litigation. I'm not really concerned with them bearing the counsel fees either. Hardly any of this is legal, it's just a story (I like talking) but a brief synopsis of the situation is as follows:
> 
> I started this journey nearly (2) years ago after being rejected by the GA board for PE reciprocity as I only had the PE under my belt and I waited a long time to get it. It was probably a stupid idea and I should've taken it way earlier, but I never really needed the licensure so it was approximately 2013 or 2014 when I got it. Anyway, I bought the NCEES practice exam, studied, and took the vertical and lateral SE exams the same weekend. I left the vertical feeling like I crushed it and the NCEES practice exam was fairly representative of the content of that exam. Little did I know the next day would have a tremendous amount of material I had literally never been exposed to. I left the lateral with a long face, knowing I had clearly failed. I couldn't even feel good about the vertical anymore as this was the first exam in my life that I'd failed and it was a huge blow to my confidence. It was almost like a high school sweetheart breakup. I just knew life was over and I was never going to recover from this devastation. I was a decent undergrad with an upper 3's gpa and a straight A graduate student so I eventually attributed my failing to just not being exposed to the material, picked up my suck it up straw, and tried to move on with my life.
> 
> At this point, I contacted every SE that I knew. I was trying to get in touch with someone that had been exposed to the material so they could at least point me in the proper direction for my studies as I didn't even know which books to use for high seismic (my ignorance had been bliss to this point and I've never designed anything further west than Iowa). Even in South Carolina and Tennessee, I've never been lucky enough to see an SDC greater than C. I knew there was some funky stuff the west coast seismic voodoo engineers did but LITERALLY NOT ONE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL I SPOKE WITH KNEW WHAT THE HELL I WAS TALKING ABOUT (I not talking PE's, I'm talking licensed SE's, I guess pre 2011 it was dramatically different). A few of these individuals were graders for previous administrations! Other old SE's accused me of drinking when I proclaimed dynamic seismic analysis was on the exam in limited quantities. The resounding words from the industry were "You're wasting your time studying anything but ELFP." I searched for recent grads to try and learn this stuff. Turns out they aren't teaching it in most colleges (I did find out later that at least GA Tech has a seismic course now). I like self study, but if you have no idea where to start or what to study it's not so good. So I googled some books, bought them, and started reading this board and talking smack. I self studied hard. Dug into the seismic sections of the code like a tick buried in a dog's ear. Went to the exam feeling confident again. Then I didn't finish. Really didn't finish. To the point, I almost needed twice as much time to finish. At least when I got the grades back, most of the questions I did finish, I received decent marks for.
> 
> On a side note, after the second try, one of the exam proctors told me to apply for special accommodations. They said it was easy to get and they would allow time and a half or even double time. I thought I would try this out after finding out how badly I had failed for trial # (2). I applied and I don't know if I was randomly audited or if the proctor was just looking at me and thought I was retarded (I don't blame her, I blame genetics). Anyway, I received a letter requesting significant substantiating evidence for reasons of special accommodation to include: letters from doctors, letters from coworkers, and pictures of my work environment. At this point, I seriously considered buying and wearing a football helmet, sitting at my desk, and drooling profusely while my business partners took photo's of me pretending to eat my calculator. I decided against these actions and decided to take School of PE instead as I knew at this point I had a snowball's chance in hell of passing this thing without help.
> 
> School of PE cleared a lot of things up for me. I was regaining my confidence in my abilities, following their class schedule, reading the code books like a boss. I felt like I was finally taming this wild beast know as the Lateral SE Exam! I go in for trial #3, I do decent in the morning (passing level best I can tell from internet message boards). The afternoon was a little difficult and time consuming as I finished writing within the (1) minute warning period. Walking away from the exam, I was moderately sure I had passed. On the drive home I realized a few MINOR issues I had with the wood and general analysis problems concerning adjustment factors and the wonderful Omega value. "Surely the graders would see that I mostly knew what I was doing and would give me partial marks at the worst," I told myself. When I received the results, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that I passed the steel and concrete portions yet failed wood and general analysis (Oddly, this was a flip flop from the previous administration for me).
> 
> Receiving this result left me bitter as hell. I was furious. I still am. I should not have been required to take this thing again. I'm sure of that. I looked up challenging the grading of the afternoon, but NCEES doesn't allow that. I called and e-mailed NCEES offered to pay a proctor and their counsel, drive to South Carolina, donate to the charity of their choice, and perform mission work in the name of NCEES just to allow me to view the graded exam to see what I had done wrong. At this point, I would have donated a kidney, maybe even both of them to be able to see what I did that was so wrong to fail me. Everything I offered seemed more that reasonable and accommodating to me. After all, I'd seen the exam once and I was apparently assumed too stupid to reproduce it from memory. I was alos as considerate and accommodating as a butthurt individual can be, but I was told "Under no circumstances can you see your exam." I don't know who graded that exam, but they definitely went to the same brain surgeon that Hank Johnson did (see my previous post for an explaination). While, I knew I made some minor mistakes, there were absolutely no legitimate reasons to fail me on those two problems.
> 
> Eventually, I tried to get over my anger. I used engineer boards as my personal psychologist. I decided I was going to give this thing one more good shot at 1000% (Yes, 10X the capacity of a normal human being).  I signed up for EET as individuals on here stated they were exceptional (they really are). I went to the Dr. and got a prescription for adderall. I studied seismic like a teenage boy staring at a dirty magazine. I was absolutely like Rocky Balboa training in the Siberian wilderness to fight Drago.
> 
> During these intense studies, I realized that whomever graded the last exam either really did screw me over or NCEES grades so harshly that basically perfection is the only acceptable option. My standing theory is that NCEES hands over a key to the "subject matter experts" and they just compare it to your exam. If these so called "experts" don't know what they are doing and you don't match the key almost exactly, they mark it wrong and move on. If you are lucky enough to get two of these morons grading your exam (I think it's likely the second grader never really looks at it or just thumbs through it speedily), then congrats, you've likely failed. This gave me more fuel to punch NCEES right in the ding ding on the next exam. Finally, I sat for this last administration of the exam and left feeling like I smashed it like Hulk smashed Loki. I have (3) problems I likely missed in the morning and a small portion of one of the sections on (1) of the afternoon problems. Everything else, I'm fairly sure of. According to grading statistics online, I would have to miss 1 out of every (4) questions I thought I got right to fail this exam. Assuming that is the case, I have a HUGE buffer for passing.
> 
> So to sum it all up, Yes, if I get the grading back and I somehow didn't pass. I will absolutely go Hiroshima on that ass to see the exam. I will not take NO for an answer and the easiest option they will have is to just allow me to see the damn thing. I will pay for their time, the lawyer, the travel, the proctor, and an armed guard if need be, but I will see it. I am a practical and reasonable individual. If I legitimately failed, I'll learn from whatever I did wrong and move on, but I can't and absolutely won't sit here and just let them give me a "Sorry, try again" without me knowing EXACTLY why.


I hope after this results cycle you close this chapter of your life and get inner peace. And I mean it in the sincerest way possible. 

And as for me, I didn't want to take the SE anyways  :mf_Flush:


----------



## cal91

Two weeks down. 8 more to go.


----------



## Nathan55

cal91 said:


> Two weeks down. 8 more to go.


Only one week till "avengers: endgame" comes out though. 3 hours of fun, that's almost an entire component of the exam! 

Also, FutureSE, I definitely hope you pass. I actually think the test will end up being much better when it is computer based. Hopefully that will shorten the turnaround time, allow more attempts as opposed to twice per year, and take some of the ridiculousness out of the afternoon grading procedures. I feel your pain on wanting to see your exam to figure out what was done incorrectly. I'd be willing to sign all sorts of NDAs to do it. Also, based on the exam problem variety, is it _really_ going to mess up NCEES' ability to write a difficult exam? If that were the case, they shouldn't be able to provide a practice exam. I'm not at all sure why being able to understand what makes something "unnacceptable" or "improvement required" is a Thanos-level extinction event. Surely there are worse evils in the world.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> Only one week till "avengers: endgame" comes out though. 3 hours of fun, that's almost an entire component of the exam!
> 
> Also, FutureSE, I definitely hope you pass. I actually think the test will end up being much better when it is computer based. Hopefully that will shorten the turnaround time, allow more attempts as opposed to twice per year, and take some of the ridiculousness out of the afternoon grading procedures. I feel your pain on wanting to see your exam to figure out what was done incorrectly. I'd be willing to sign all sorts of NDAs to do it. Also, based on the exam problem variety, is it _really_ going to mess up NCEES' ability to write a difficult exam? If that were the case, they shouldn't be able to provide a practice exam. I'm not at all sure why being able to understand what makes something "unnacceptable" or "improvement required" is a Thanos-level extinction event. Surely there are worse evils in the world.


I’m sure I did fine. I am very good at being ignorant but I’m not stupid (generally speaking). Unfortunately, a lot of people don’t know the difference between the two anymore. There is a small chance that I may end up eating crow, but honestly with the amount of effort and bad luck I’ve had with this thing, it’s made me much better at dealing with the stupidity I face on a daily basis. It’s nice to be able to stop contractors, architects, and plan reviewers mid-sentence with code provisions quoted like scripture when they are talking nonsense or telling me “I’ve been doing this for 30 years,” “I want to hang this dangly thing 72.45 feet out there at a 43.6259 degree angle,” or “I’m rejecting your permit for ...,” respective of the disciplines above. Architects and their dangly things at odd angles. Man, I swear this industry is going to kill me. Like I said, I just like to talk. Sometimes I get all bent out of shape when my donut level gets low. Nothing a trip to Krispy kreme can’t fix.

I can’t wait for the new Avengers movie either. It’s going to be better than sex. I know this because I’ll at least get to see Avengers!


----------



## AlexPE

FutureSE said:


> I’m sure I did fine. I am very good at being ignorant but I’m not stupid (generally speaking). Unfortunately, a lot of people don’t know the difference between the two anymore. There is a small chance that I may end up eating crow, but honestly with the amount of effort and bad luck I’ve had with this thing, it’s made me much better at dealing with the stupidity I face on a daily basis. It’s nice to be able to stop contractors, architects, and plan reviewers mid-sentence with code provisions quoted like scripture when they are talking nonsense or telling me “I’ve been doing this for 30 years,” “I want to hang this dangly thing 72.45 feet out there at a 43.6259 degree angle,” or “I’m rejecting your permit for ...,” respective of the disciplines above. Architects and their dangly things at odd angles. Man, I swear this industry is going to kill me. Like I said, I just like to talk. Sometimes I get all bent out of shape when my donut level gets low. Nothing a trip to Krispy kreme can’t fix.
> 
> I can’t wait for the new Avengers movie either. It’s going to be better than sex. I know this because I’ll at least get to see Avengers!


Maybe all that studying and exam failures are worth it in the end? 

Maybe, just maybe... by developing such a horribly written, poorly graded, asinine exam, it was the intention of NCEES all along to have each one of us delve deeper into our inner selves - to find meaning in our endeavors, and to persevere when grasped betwixt the jaws of defeat by a contractor who's done this for 30 years?

Naaahhh. Failures = mo $$.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Good morning, beautiful people. I hope you are all having a MARVELOUS Monday! Has anyone seen the new Hellboy movie? If so, is it worth watching? I didn't really care for the Ron Perlman version, but I guess I'm in the minority there.


----------



## Dean Agnostic

Dear @FutureSE ,

I can understand your point of view, and I'm not trying to denigrate you in any sense, It's clearly a complex issue. As a matter of fact, I would be pleased to hear that you passed the exam. With respect to your statements/post above, please see my response below as follows:



FutureSE said:


> Receiving this result left me bitter as hell. I was fur﻿ious.


Acceptable



FutureSE said:


> I think you are reading too far into my idea of litigation﻿﻿﻿﻿.﻿﻿


Acceptable



FutureSE said:


> I loo﻿ked up challenging the grading of the afternoon, b﻿ut *NCEES doesn't a﻿llow that﻿﻿.﻿*


Acceptable



FutureSE said:


> if I get the grading back and I somehow didn't pass. I will absolutely go Hiroshima on that ass *to see the exam. I will not take NO for an answer and the easiest option they will have *is to just allow me to *see* the damn thing.


Unacceptable



FutureSE said:


> I will pay for their time, the lawyer, the travel, the proctor, and an armed guard if need be, but* I will see it.*


Unacceptable



FutureSE said:


> *I used engineer boards* as my personal psychologist.


Uber Acceptable



FutureSE said:


> If I legitimately failed, I'll learn from whatever I did wrong and move on, but I can't and absolutely won't sit here and just let them give me a "Sorry, try again" *without me knowing* *EXACTLY why.*  ﻿


Unacceptable



FutureSE said:


> I am a practical and reasonable individual.﻿


Improvement required

Sincerely,

Dean Di-agnostic


----------



## kevo_55

In all seriousness, let's try to keep pending the conversation civilized.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

kevo_55 said:


> In all seriousness, let's try to keep pending the conversation civilized.


@kevo_55, we are being civilized. Just because @Dean Agnostic disagrees with what I find acceptable, doesn't mean we can't be friends. It just means he's wrong.


----------



## Duke

Titleistguy said:


> Duke, I appreciate your view point but I simply don't agree.  Competent doctors pass med school but can't pass boards...and I'm not sure if anyone would want that doctor practicing on them without the license.  I know it sounds harsh but that's the reality of it.  To me to call yourself an SE means you love this stuff, you are passionate and it makes you tick.  I truly believe if those things are all true then a person will eventually pass.  As opposed to the PE that I feel in some way is more token and just a thing you gotta take and pass.


I appreciate an opinion from the other side. I agree that the reality is not many people would want someone who can't say they have professional licensure to act as an EOR on their project. But to call yourself an SE all you have to do is "demonstrate competence" and pass the exam, there is no metric for passion.



> I find it hard to believe that test taking skills / anxiety is the problem considering most if not all the people here have a PE, got through at least an undergraduate program and quite possibly a Masters.  So we've all taken tests before and know what it's about.


I'm pretty confident that most SE's would agree, that the current SE exams are in a league of their own when it comes to testing. The difficulty is far beyond any college course I personally have taken.



> I don't think watering down the test is the solution.  Especially if the claim is simply that it's not fair.  How is it fair to the people who have passed already if they were to make it easier?


I don't think watering down the content is the solution either. IMO speed is just too much of a factor on the exam. And TBH it is a competence test, fairness to past test takers either way shouldn't play a role in what should be required for competence. I've been a part of peer reviewing some pretty scary calculation sets from SE's and I'm not going to complain that in the way back when it was easier to get the SE license.

I don't have a good answer on how to improve the exam, but I would happily settle for it being offered every 3 months and it costing half as much. The high price tag and NCEES's closed doors policy on this exam really has a bad faith feel to me.



> At any rate I'm sincerely hopeful that everyone involved in this conversation passes or will pass this test bc the fact we're all here talking about it means we care.


I agree, best of luck.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Dean Agnostic said:


> Dear @FutureSE ,
> 
> I can understand your point of view, and I'm not trying to denigrate you in any sense, It's clearly a complex issue. As a matter of fact, I would be pleased to hear that you passed the exam. With respect to your statements/post above, please see my response below as follows:
> 
> Acceptable
> 
> Acceptable
> 
> Acceptable
> 
> Unacceptable
> 
> Unacceptable
> 
> Uber Acceptable
> 
> Unacceptable
> 
> Improvement required
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Dean Di-agnostic


Kudos. That made me laugh. I can admire the wit and the fact there is at least one other agnostic trolling the boards. The fact still remains though, I KNOW I passed this time. There is no "Maybe." Basically, the entirety of my previous statements boil down to the following: There is no conceivable way for me to fail the exam with this administration short of grading incompetency. I've been frustrated in the past, but I have put forth the effort and the study to be where I needed to be. I slammed that exam around like the Rock laying the smack down. I do NOT suspect I will get any result except the Acceptable result I expect. Therefore, if I were to happen to see some result other than Acceptable, I would know shenanigans were afoot. I'm a veteran with this thing now. I want to make new fault lines in the Earth's crust just so I can use some special seismic stuff. Sadly, if I had contractors cut in dogbones in my current line of work and location, they would run me out of town.


----------



## AlexPE

FutureSE said:


> Kudos. That made me laugh. I can admire the wit and the fact there is at least one other agnostic trolling the boards. The fact still remains though, I KNOW I passed this time. There is no "Maybe." Basically, the entirety of my previous statements boil down to the following: There is no conceivable way for me to fail the exam with this administration short of grading incompetency. I've been frustrated in the past, but I have put forth the effort and the study to be where I needed to be. I slammed that exam around like the Rock laying the smack down. I do NOT suspect I will get any result except the Acceptable result I expect. Therefore, if I were to happen to see some result other than Acceptable, I would know shenanigans were afoot. I'm a veteran with this thing now.* I want to make new fault lines in the Earth's crust just so I can use some special seismic stuff.* Sadly, if I had contractors cut in dogbones in my current line of work and location, they would run me out of town.


Made me lol - im embarrased to say Ive thought the same...always good when we get paid to study!

By the way, those luxury condos are to serve as shelter from zombies during the next nuclear war. Thats auto SDC G (apocalypse exception - gotta see aashto for that one).


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Hello everyone! It is a Terrific Tuesday here in the southeast! I just wanted to wish a good morning to all of my very extra special super best friends (that's all of you guys, btw). One more day down, only forever and a day to go.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Hello everyone! It is a Terrific Tuesday here in the southeast! I just wanted to wish a good morning to all of my very extra special super best friends (that's all of you guys, btw). One more day down, only forever and a day to go.


Bonjour monsieur. To your point earlier about wanting fault lines made in your area so you can design special seismic stuff...I had a project with some accidental torsion recently and I was FAR more enthused than I should have been. I was looking for ways to use things I have ingrained in my head from this test. You've reached a new low when you're praying for overstrength.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> Bonjour monsieur. To your point earlier about wanting fault lines made in your area so you can design special seismic stuff...I had a project with some accidental torsion recently and I was FAR more enthused than I should have been. I was looking for ways to use things I have ingrained in my head from this test. You've reached a new low when you're praying for overstrength.


HAHA. That's funny. I had a square two story SDC B building recently where the seismic system was moment frames on one side and an ordinary reinforced CMU shear wall on the other. The wall was so much stiffer than the moment frames that the inclusion of accidental torsion (just the minimum 5%) caused the center of rigidity to be outside the building footprint. I thought it was an interesting situation and the first time I've seen it in my career. Wind still controlled as usual. All of my clients like 5' parapets, it makes me sad.

Quick question to all of you. Something interesting I find in the code is that seismic has a 0.7 ASD multiplier while wind has a 0.6 ASD multiplier. This creates a situation where, depending on design methodology and materials, wind can control LRFD design while seismic controls ASD design. I've never seen this personally, but have any of you experienced this? If so, how did you handle it? The conservative assumption is to check both, and detail accordingly, but it just seems odd to me since these two load cases don't "line up."


----------



## AlexPE

While we wait for our results, just wanted to let you all know, if you are trying to get your continuuing ed satisfied - I just had mine waived for studying and taking both parts of this exam. I didnt take a class.

I was told I am the first person to ask this question. So just goes to show that it never hurts to ask!


----------



## Duke

That's pretty neat and I think it was smart of you to ask. But..... probably one of the top ten life lessons I have learned is...... It most certainly can hurt to ask.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

AlexPE said:


> While we wait for our results, just wanted to let you all know, if you are trying to get your continuuing ed satisfied - I just had mine waived for studying and taking both parts of this exam. I didnt take a class.
> 
> I was told I am the first person to ask this question. So just goes to show that it never hurts to ask!


Oddly enough, I was told the exact opposite after asking this question by my state board. I was informed that the class would count towards the CEU's but passing the test would not. Probably depends on who you talk to and what mood they are in that day.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> That's pretty neat and I think it was smart of you to ask. But..... probably one of the top ten life lessons I have learned is...... It most certainly can hurt to ask.


Yes, Sir! Never, absolutely, never ask as woman if she is pregnant under any circumstances whatsoever. Also, never ask your wife why she is overreacting. It's another very bad idea. Last bit of sage advice, is never ask a police officer where to buy drugs. They don't find it funny. Maybe their uniform is too tight, who knows.


----------



## Titleistguy

FutureSE said:


> HAHA. That's funny. I had a square two story SDC B building recently where the seismic system was moment frames on one side and an ordinary reinforced CMU shear wall on the other. The wall was so much stiffer than the moment frames that the inclusion of accidental torsion (just the minimum 5%) caused the center of rigidity to be outside the building footprint. I thought it was an interesting situation and the first time I've seen it in my career. Wind still controlled as usual. All of my clients like 5' parapets, it makes me sad.
> 
> Quick question to all of you. Something interesting I find in the code is that seismic has a 0.7 ASD multiplier while wind has a 0.6 ASD multiplier. This creates a situation where, depending on design methodology and materials, wind can control LRFD design while seismic controls ASD design. I've never seen this personally, but have any of you experienced this? If so, how did you handle it? The conservative assumption is to check both, and detail accordingly, but it just seems odd to me since these two load cases don't "line up."


 I suspect the reasons they don't line up is bc of how the factors on the other load cases (on the demand side of the equation) in that combination either exacerbate or mitagate that lateral load effect, in that particular combination.  Combined with how the reductions on the strength side / allowable stress side limit the capacity in tandem with the demand side factors. 

I know there is a good discussion in Salmon and Johnson on when a particular method is more advantageous depending on your dead to live load ratios.  But personally Iwouldn't get too caught up in the apples vs oranges comparisons between the methodalogical procedures because at the end of the day everything is an approximation of a prediction based on a best guess return period, then formulated empirically, interpreted by an engineer and applied using engineering judgment.  There is so much fuzz built into the load formulation and design process that I wouldn't really worry if a controlling LRFD combination isn't congruent with it's ASD counterpart.

I have to believe that if there was a chance that a particular method would 'mis diagnose' the controlling lateral load effect such that there are detrimental design consequences then it would have been flushed out.  

Just my two cents.


----------



## Duke

> But personally Iwouldn't get too caught up in the apples vs oranges comparisons between the methodalogical procedures because at the end of the day everything is an approximation of a prediction based on a best guess return period﻿, then formulated empirically, interpreted by an engineer and applied using engineering judgment﻿.


Reminds me of the old quote -

"Structural Engineering is the Art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze, so as to withstand forces we cannot really assess, in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our ignorance."


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> Reminds me of the old quote -
> 
> "Structural Engineering is the Art of molding materials we do not wholly understand into shapes we cannot precisely analyze, so as to withstand forces we cannot really assess, in such a way that the community at large has no reason to suspect the extent of our ignorance."


While I understand the joke and agree that it's oddly funny and somewhat true, I feel this downplays the significant amount of intellect and mathematical genius that goes into engineering theory and practice. If we were to take a relationship of physical accuracy of our models and graph it against the preciseness of material testing, I suspect you would see an asymptotic relationship between how close the calculations get with reality. Dealing with all materials, we have to use statistical averages due to manufacturing defects and inherent fluctuations of material strengths and stiffness, however, the industry balances around a profitable equilibrium in which engineers expect and design to a reasonably small material property standard deviation that manufacturers can consistently reproduce. Of course this all depends on the rigor of your analysis, while Bernoulli will get you close, Timoshenko will get you closer, and finite element analysis would be the gold standard. Maybe there will be a paper published studying FEM elements with material properties varying over expected statistical deviations throughout a system. I would guess the smaller you made your elements, the more accurately you would reflect reality (again, an asymptotic relationship).  Unfortunately, my explanation won't fit on a t-shirt and even if it did, I suppose you could expect comments from the layperson along the lines of the movie "Idiocracy."

I'm reminded of when my wife was in college getting her MBA. We were having a conversation with someone about her career, with a blank stare the individual looked back at us and said "Is an MBA a nurse or something?"


----------



## cal91

No, she's playing for the Major league Bocciball Association


----------



## Titleistguy

Love me some Timoshenko, some of other heavy hitters I enjoy are Cross and Euler.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> No, she's playing for the Major league Bocciball Association


I actually had to look this up. I learned something new today. I wonder how long it will be before this is added to the olympics.


----------



## thedaywa1ker

AlexPE said:


> While we wait for our results, just wanted to let you all know, if you are trying to get your continuuing ed satisfied - I just had mine waived for studying and taking both parts of this exam. I didnt take a class.
> 
> I was told I am the first person to ask this question. So just goes to show that it never hurts to ask!


Just tried this myself after reading your comment...was told they would only accept an actual class (which I did not take) 

Glad you had better luck!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

thedaywa1ker said:


> Just tried this myself after reading your comment...was told they would only accept an actual class (which I did not take)
> 
> Glad you had better luck!


The good news is, if you don't already have a PE, passing will get your first licensing period without the CEU's...


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

AlexPE said:


> While we wait for our results, just wanted to let you all know, if you are trying to get your continuuing ed satisfied - I just had mine waived for studying and taking both parts of this exam. I didnt take a class.
> 
> I was told I am the first person to ask this question. So just goes to show that it never hurts to ask!


While I absolutely believe you amigo, as advice from someone who possibly has the worst luck in the universe, I would recommend getting this in writing in case of an audit.


----------



## Nathan55

cal91 said:


> No, she's playing for the Major league Bocciball Association


According to the website, this has origins in 5200BC. Who'd have thought. I'd like to throw this at the NCEES graders for an afternoon essay problem, just to show I'm a well-rounded engineer. "By inspection, the special concrete shear wall can also sustain the impulse imparted from 27 thrown bocci balls, a crucial component of a game invented by the egyptians, who were excellent structural engineers in their own right."


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> While I understand the joke and agree that it's oddly funny and somewhat true, I feel this downplays the significant amount of intellect and mathematical genius that goes into engineering theory and practice. If we were to take a relationship of physical accuracy of our models and graph it against the preciseness of material testing, I suspect you would see an asymptotic relationship between how close the calculations get with reality. Dealing with all materials, we have to use statistical averages due to manufacturing defects and inherent fluctuations of material strengths and stiffness, however, the industry balances around a profitable equilibrium in which engineers expect and design to a reasonably small material property standard deviation that manufacturers can consistently reproduce. Of course this all depends on the rigor of your analysis, while Bernoulli will get you close, Timoshenko will get you closer, and finite element analysis would be the gold standard. Maybe there will be a paper published studying FEM elements with material properties varying over expected statistical deviations throughout a system. I would guess the smaller you made your elements, the more accurately you would reflect reality (again, an asymptotic relationship).  Unfortunately, my explanation won't fit on a t-shirt and even if it did, I suppose you could expect comments from the layperson along the lines of the movie "Idiocracy."
> 
> I'm reminded of when my wife was in college getting her MBA. We were having a conversation with someone about her career, with a blank stare the individual looked back at us and said "Is an MBA a nurse or something?"


I do agree that structural engineering actually requires some cerebral acuity. It could be worse though, we could be dentists: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/the-trouble-with-dentistry/586039/


----------



## Duke

FutureSE said:


> While I understand the joke and agree that it's oddly funny and somewhat true,


You nailed it at that. It's reading to much into it to take it further ( ͡ᵔ ͜ʖ ͡ᵔ )


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> According to the website, this has origins in 5200BC. Who'd have thought. I'd like to throw this at the NCEES graders for an afternoon essay problem, just to show I'm a well-rounded engineer. "By inspection, the special concrete shear wall can also sustain the impulse imparted from 27 thrown bocci balls, a crucial component of a game invented by the egyptians, who were excellent structural engineers in their own right."


Under what organization are these projectile bocci balls regulated? Materials of a higher density would impart more force if thrown at equivalent velocity. Exactly how are these bocci balls thrown? Can we assume some sort of machinery that consistently throws bocci balls at a given force, or are these bocci balls being propelled by Guam level wind loads?

Granted, Egyptians did amazing things with what technology they had. Or maybe aliens. Either way, I wish my architect friends would let me space my columns as closely as the Egyptian engineers did.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> You nailed it at that. It's reading to much into it to take it further ( ͡ᵔ ͜ʖ ͡ᵔ )


Jesus put me here to suck all of the fun out of life. I'm just trying to make Jesus happy.


----------



## AlexPE

FutureSE said:


> While I absolutely believe you amigo, as advice from someone who possibly has the worst luck in the universe, I would recommend getting this in writing in case of an audit.


Agreed. The board legal council sent me this email to use:

I am approving you to use your 2 years of exam study, prep and taking both the components of the SE exam to meet your PDH requirement for the renewal cycle of 10/1/17 through 9/30/19. If necessary to submit proof for the 2017-2019 PDH, just submit this email.

Honestly I was hoping for (but not expecting) maybe 16 hours for the actual exam knocked off. But they waived the whole thing. Doesnt quite erase the sting of failing, but I'll take what I can get at this point.

Doubt I would be able to have it waived if I fail again... now THAT would be something - to never have to take another CEU class again, but be doomed to fail the SE exam every year for the rest of my career.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Jesus put me here to suck all of the fun out of life. I'm just trying to make Jesus happy.


Pretty sure that NCEES beat you to achieving acceptable results on that goal.


----------



## Nathan55

Something I've wondered is this: the SE exam, and the Lateral one in particular addresses a wide variety of subjects. However, at times one subject will be ignored entirely. For example, hypothetically you might have an exam that does not touch on wood diaphragm detailing, or collector design, or steel special moment frames. Someone could achieve acceptable results without knowing those subjects or others that happened to _not_ be covered on the exam they took. 

How is it then, that passing the exam shows a minimum level of competency if it eschews certain subjects entirely? You may know nothing about concrete shear walls, and by luck of the draw take a test that has nothing on detailing of shear walls. And you receive a license that purportedly certifies you as being competent in the design of structures to withstand high wind/seismic loads. But all with crucial, untested gaps in knowledge.

Wouldn't it be wiser--albeit more predictable--to have an exam that addresses a broader range of subjects (i.e. ordinary, intermediate AND special frames and walls)?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> Something I've wondered is this: the SE exam, and the Lateral one in particular addresses a wide variety of subjects. However, at times one subject will be ignored entirely. For example, hypothetically you might have an exam that does not touch on wood diaphragm detailing, or collector design, or steel special moment frames. Someone could achieve acceptable results without knowing those subjects or others that happened to _not_ be covered on the exam they took.
> 
> How is it then, that passing the exam shows a minimum level of competency if it eschews certain subjects entirely? You may know nothing about concrete shear walls, and by luck of the draw take a test that has nothing on detailing of shear walls. And you receive a license that purportedly certifies you as being competent in the design of structures to withstand high wind/seismic loads. But all with crucial, untested gaps in knowledge.
> 
> Wouldn't it be wiser--albeit more predictable--to have an exam that addresses a broader range of subjects (i.e. ordinary, intermediate AND special frames and walls)?


This exam certainly has a component of luck to it. I would argue that you are technically correct, however, the industry assumption would be that you cover all of the standard materials with this exam. If you show competence with those materials then you likely understand other methodologies. Again, while not always true, this is likely the norm. As far as claiming this test displays minimum competency. We've already determined that's incorrect. The SE is a mastery level exam and most PEs struggle with it. Especially the older ones. I find it interesting that civil engineering is basically the "2nd" oldest profession, has existed for thousands of years, and we are still finding silly ways to change the codebooks every 3 years. I should've just went into the oldest profession. Not much in the code books there.


----------



## cal91

Why not just do the oldest profession on the side? FutureSE seems like a good stage name.


----------



## User1

Coworker comes up to me today and is like so results tomorrow huh? 

and i was like uh WHAT 

then laughed. we've got another month and a half, kid.


----------



## cal91

tj_PE said:


> Coworker comes up to me today and is like so results tomorrow huh?
> 
> and i was like uh WHAT
> 
> then laughed. we've got another month and a half, kid.


Haha... No. Not even close. Nice try tho!


----------



## Nathan55

tj_PE said:


> Coworker comes up to me today and is like so results tomorrow huh?
> 
> and i was like uh WHAT
> 
> then laughed. we've got another month and a half, kid.


Haha yes I can relate. "So did you pass?" That's the question I get. I just reply that my opinion of the test and how I did has no actual bearing on what the NCEES graders think.

The good news is that seeing Avengers this past weekend gave me hope that I can defeat NCEES if I am persistent and make use of (spoiler) to (spoiler) and then finally (spoiler) the (spoiler). It may require me to (spoiler) but it would be worth it.


----------



## User1

yeah my general response is, I don't think I bombed it, but I ran out of time. So I'm not expecting to pass, but there's about a 3% chance I might have squeaked by.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> Haha yes I can relate. "So did you pass?" That's the question I get. I just reply that my opinion of the test and how I did has no actual bearing on what the NCEES graders think.
> 
> The good news is that seeing Avengers this past weekend gave me hope that I can defeat NCEES if I am persistent and make use of (spoiler) to (spoiler) and then finally (spoiler) the (spoiler). It may require me to (spoiler) but it would be worth it.


Who shall we sacrifice in this epic battle?


----------



## onemanwolfpack

Nathan55 said:


> The good news is that seeing Avengers this past weekend gave me hope that I can defeat NCEES if I am persistent and make use of (spoiler) to (spoiler) and then finally (spoiler) the (spoiler). It may require me to (spoiler) but it would be worth it.


I'm glad these boards are a spoiler-free area of the internet. You can never be too safe nowadays.


----------



## Nathan55

onemanwolfpack said:


> I'm glad these boards are a spoiler-free area of the internet. You can never be too safe nowadays.


Yeah I wanted to make sure I don't ruin the plot for someone. I pretty much went in to hibernation mode for the last week so I could go into it fresh. If you like superhero movies, you'll like it.

I also like to envision NCEES as a conglomeration of movie villains--a sort of Thanos/Bane/Joker hybrid. It provides a humorous outlet for the psyche-destroying angst.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Who shall we sacrifice in this epic battle?


My ASCE 7-10 code. NCEES will likely change to the ASCE 7-16 code soon, which will likely be far simpler and less ambiguous to use during the test. (insert evil villain laugh)


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> My ASCE 7-10 code. NCEES will likely change to the ASCE 7-16 code soon, which will likely be far simpler and less ambiguous to use during the test. (insert evil villain laugh)


Just wait until they release the ASCE 7-20 edition. I heard they just tore the pages from the ASCE 7-16, shuffled the pages like a deck of cards, then reassembled it.


----------



## SouthernEngineer

FutureSE said:


> Just wait until they release the ASCE 7-20 edition. I heard they just tore the pages from the ASCE 7-16, shuffled the pages like a deck of cards, then reassembled it.


So they pulled an ACI? Have to get money somehow


----------



## Dean Agnostic

FutureSE said:


> Just wait until they release the ASCE 7-20 edition. I heard they just tore the pages from the ASCE 7-16, shuffled the pages like a deck of cards, then reassembled it.


Oh Lawd! Why do you have to be so honest!


----------



## Dean Agnostic

Nathan55 said:


> The NCEES practice exam is one of the *most eloquent "inception"-level* sleights of h﻿and I've seen.


 Very True!


----------



## Dean Agnostic

FutureSE said:


> These "Subject Matter Experts" grading the exam are mostly drunk clowns with big shoes (and no children's birthday party bookings) and people from bum fights with a few reasonably competent people scattered about IMO. Hell, from some of the things I've seen on my previous exams, I wouldn't be surprised if NCEES hired floor sweepers from Labor Ready for grammar checks.﻿


ROFLMFAO! It's very useful for me to read your viewpoints, the other side of the equation. I never thought of it that way.


----------



## Dean Agnostic

FutureSE said:


> I would bet the grading is so inconsistent as to be laughable. I say this because I know for a FACT engineers that do NOT understand seismic detailing get invites to attend the grading shop. It has happened in my office.


Oh Lawd! This would be fatal for the Organization, especially if you have sufficient evidence to establish inconsistencies.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Dean Agnostic said:


> Oh Lawd! This would be fatal for the Organization, especially if you have sufficient evidence to establish inconsistencies.


Man. Fun stuff. I obviously don't think it would be fatal to the organization. A little transparency would go a long way. I get invites to write sample questions for study guides, is it too much to ask that NCEES do the same? The prized bank of test questions seems a little ridiculous from our perspective. In addition, older engineers were allowed to review their exams. Why did this change? Sounds to me like NCEES could use a little competition. Any insights would be greatly appreciated, as I am a firm believer that one of my afternoon questions on the previous exam was misgraded. As far as grammar and content checks, yes, I've seen those too, unfortunately. I *SPECIFICALLY *recall an afternoon question in wood that required a moment check for roughly 1600 k-ft moment for a roof rafter a couple cycles ago. In my humble opinion, someone could've just written, "No. This obviously doesn't work by inspection. A moment this large is ridiculous for wood framing!" and this individual would've been absolutely correct by all metrics. That wouldn't be accepted by NCEES though, despite it being an absolutely correct and viable answer.

Like I've said earlier, I like to talk, I like to get riled up, and I will continue to stoke the smoldering coals. That doesn't mean we can't be friends though, @Dean Agnostic. I'm on my medication today, so I feel amenable. If you truly have anything to do with NCEES, maybe you could write Georgia and tell them to use the SE exam as God intended (the very same God that we don't know and really can't know exists. Unfalsifiability is odd like that). It seems a bit more than ridiculous as a practicing PE that roughly 99% of my time is spent designing delegated items and low rise structures in SDC's at C and below, but I have to have the very extra special super seismic SE Lateral knowledge for licensure when the state doesn't even recognize SE's separately. I'll never use most of this again, but as an organization, NCEES has pushed this test down the throats of the next generation. Thanks, NCEES. We appreciate that.

I can appreciate the sarcasm, as I'm very sarcastic myself.


----------



## Nathan55

Dean Agnostic said:


> Very True!





Your mind is the scene of the crime. Also, in other news, the earth is flat and politicians are honest.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Man. Fun stuff. I obviously don't think it would be fatal to the organization. A little transparency would go a long way. I get invites to write sample questions for study guides, is it too much to ask that NCEES do the same? The prized bank of test questions seems a little ridiculous from our perspective. In addition, older engineers were allowed to review their exams. Why did this change? Sounds to me like NCEES could use a little competition. Any insights would be greatly appreciated, as I am a firm believer that one of my afternoon questions on the previous exam was misgraded. As far as grammar and content checks, yes, I've seen those too, unfortunately. I *SPECIFICALLY *recall an afternoon question in wood that required a moment check for roughly 1600 k-ft moment for a roof rafter a couple cycles ago. In my humble opinion, someone could've just written, "No. This obviously doesn't work by inspection. A moment this large is ridiculous for wood framing!" and this individual would've been absolutely correct by all metrics. That wouldn't be accepted by NCEES though, despite it being an absolutely correct and viable answer.
> 
> Like I've said earlier, I like to talk, I like to get riled up, and I will continue to stoke the smoldering coals. That doesn't mean we can't be friends though, @Dean Agnostic. I'm on my medication today, so I feel amenable. If you truly have anything to do with NCEES, maybe you could write Georgia and tell them to use the SE exam as God intended (the very same God that we don't know and really can't know exists. Unfalsifiability is odd like that). It seems a bit more than ridiculous as a practicing PE that roughly 99% of my time is spent designing delegated items and low rise structures in SDC's at C and below, but I have to have the very extra special super seismic SE Lateral knowledge for licensure when the state doesn't even recognize SE's separately. I'll never use most of this again, but as an organization, NCEES has pushed this test down the throats of the next generation. Thanks, NCEES. We appreciate that.
> 
> I can appreciate the sarcasm, as I'm very sarcastic myself.


I am pretty sure I've had afternoon questions graded incorrectly too. I'd of course love to prove this, but...a peek into NCEES' modus operandi would likely reveal inconsistencies. It's a classic Boeing 737 MAX 8 situation. "Rather than have us, the government, regulate you...how about if you just do it yourselves and we'll pinky swear that you're being super honest instead of checking your work and confirming it for ourselves. Everybody wins!"


----------



## Nathan55

tj_PE said:


> yeah my general response is, I don't think I bombed it, but I ran out of time. So I'm not expecting to pass, but there's about a 3% chance I might have squeaked by.


There is an irony to running out of time on the test. In certain situations, not having enough time can hide deficiencies in knowledge if you are general enough in your "this is how I'd do it" dialogue. Not getting into the weeds can mean you're not getting points taken off for doing things incorrectly.


----------



## User1

Nathan55 said:


> There is an irony to running out of time on the test. In certain situations, not having enough time can hide deficiencies in knowledge if you are general enough in your "this is how I'd do it" dialogue. Not getting into the weeds can mean you're not getting points ta﻿ken off for doing things incorrectly.﻿﻿﻿


oh totally. i was less prepared than I had planned to be. But it wasn't like I didn't know how to do/where to find stuff, it was just being efficient. About an hour into the morning, i realized I should just do problems of the same type at the same time so i'm not swapping codes around. And I forgot my clock so I didn't have constant time awareness. I don't think I passed the morning. But maybe I displayed enough knowledge in the afternoon problems. That's all. People who don't take the exam don't understand it though, and everyone asks how it went. So that's my "short" answer. lol.


----------



## Nathan55

tj_PE said:


> oh totally. i was less prepared than I had planned to be. But it wasn't like I didn't know how to do/where to find stuff, it was just being efficient. About an hour into the morning, i realized I should just do problems of the same type at the same time so i'm not swapping codes around. And I forgot my clock so I didn't have constant time awareness. I don't think I passed the morning. But maybe I displayed enough knowledge in the afternoon problems. That's all. People who don't take the exam don't understand it though, and everyone asks how it went. So that's my "short" answer. lol.


Ah I see. Running out of time on the morning is a bit more tricky. You may get fortunate with some guesses, but...it all depends. I'm generally more able to determine how well I do on the morning based on the timing. When I am able to finish 35ish problems, I can plan on 27-29 correct out of 40. I have forgotten my clock before as well, which is a HUGE pain. The oddity is that I convinced myself I'd fail and ended up being very calm and not being rushed for time. Not being able to check the time somehow made me less nervous.


----------



## onemanwolfpack

tj_PE said:


> About an hour into the morning, i realized I should just do problems of the same type at the same time so i'm not swapping codes around.


I did this for both tests, and found it to be very beneficial. Just jotted down which group of questions were going to be in the AISC, ACI, etc., and then went back and answered them all of each at once. This also gave me a chance to read through all 40 questions and make a mental note of which questions I knew I could solve quickly, which I could solve in under 6 min, and which I had no idea/would take a long time to work out. Any question I came across that I could solve in 1-2 min without cracking a code, I would just do on the spot. I cant remember entirely, but I feel like I was getting through ~15-18 questions in the first hour doing it this way. 

This of course creates an extra bit of bookkeeping you may or may not want to be doing during a rushed exam. And I was super nervous that I was going to accidentally bubble in answers for the wrong questions since I was jumping around so much, so that's definitely something you'd have to pay attention to. I believe the EET guys preach this method, and I'm all for it, it just takes a bit of practice to see what exactly works best for you.


----------



## User1

yeah. i also regret not marking lightly potential answers in my first round so if i didn't get a chance to come back to them, i could blindly fill it in later and at least count on having an educated guess.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Where my friends at?


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Where my friends at?


Just found out that a special shear wall I'm designing may need boundary elements. I'm pretty psyched about that. I _could_ make the wall longer or thicker, just to avoid the requirement. But this exam has given me perverse incentives to show that I can do random things that 95% of structural engineers at my firm have no interest in doing. I check shear friction between the wall/foundation interface just cuz I can.


----------



## Duke

FutureSE said:


> (the very same God that we don't know and really can't know exists. Unfalsifiability is odd like that)


More probable that not is enough for me.



> A little transparency would go a long way.


I agree, but if they become more transparent then they run the risk of more engineers learning and becoming more proficient and then proving competence... and they can't have that.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

@tj_PE, Why are you always giving me chocolate ice cream with googly eyes?


----------



## cal91

onemanwolfpack said:


> I did this for both tests, and found it to be very beneficial. Just jotted down which group of questions were going to be in the AISC, ACI, etc., and then went back and answered them all of each at once. This also gave me a ﻿chance to read through all 40 questions and make a mental note of which questions I knew I could solve quickly, which I could solve in under 6 min, and which I had no idea/would take a long time to work out. Any question I came across that I could solve in 1-2 min without cracking a code, I would just do on the spot. I cant remember entirely, but I feel like I was getting through ~15-18 questions in the first hour doing it this way.
> 
> This of course creates an extra bit of bookkeeping you may or may not want to be doing during a rushed exam. And I was super nervous that I was going to accidentally bubble in answers for the wrong questions since I was jumping around so much, so that's definitely something you'd have to pay attention to. I believe the EET guys preach this method, and I'm all for it, it just takes a bit of practice to see what exactly works best for you.


I thought about this method but did a simplified version for the very reasons you said - didn't want the extra bookkeeping, and didn't want to spend too much time looking through every problem before solving them.

My method was I just did all 32 non bridge problems in a row, skipping the roughly 2 to 4 questions where I didn't know where/how to get the answer and would have to do some code digging.  This meant I had to use AISC one question, then ACI , then NDS, then ASCE7, then TMS, etc rinse and repeat. But I didn't mind, I only had those 5 books plus AISI and IBC on my desk so it was pretty fast to grab another reference.  Those 32 problems took about 2 hours.

Then I did the 8 bridge questions in a row, again skipping maybe 1 or 2 if it looked like I'd spend a lot of time on it. This would take about 45 minutes.

 After that I'd have about 5 questions to go back and get, and about half of those I'd realize the trick.  Looking at it a tricky question for the second time, after an hour or two of delving in the code and solving the "easier" questions really does something for your mind. For me, if I stubbornly sit on the question until I solve it, I'll eventually get it but after a lot of time searching the cod.  The other half of those last questions I'd have to go digging in the code to find. This would take about 30 minutes. 

Then after that I'd have about 45 minutes to just go through and double check that I answered every question and marked the correct bubble.  I usually find one or two that I forgot to bubble or bubbled the wrong one. It is also good to glance over every question a second time through because you might think of something that you didn't before. I'll usually find a couple questions glancing through a second time where I'll realize there was a trick, or an exception, or a missed piece of given information or something. 

But I'd tell anyone to take the exam the same way they've been taking their practice exams... don't try something new. It should feel like clockwork. So this takes some planning ahead, in that you should take your practice exams the way that you plan on taking the real exam.


----------



## User1

FutureSE said:


> @tj_PE, Why are you always giving me chocolate ice cream with googly eyes?﻿


Well, now I feel self conscious about my poop reactions..


----------



## SE_Hopeful

I skipped all bridge problems by drawing a light 'X' through Answer 'B', so that I avoided the disaster of accidentally bubbling in answers for the wrong problems, then I went back and did them all at the end. Worked reasonably well I thought. Oh and I also skipped the IBC and AISI questions and did those at the end as well.


----------



## Nathan55

tj_PE said:


> Well, now I feel self conscious about my poop reactions..


No need to be self-conscious. Everybody does it.


----------



## Nathan55

cal91 said:


> I thought about this method but did a simplified version for the very reasons you said - didn't want the extra bookkeeping, and didn't want to spend too much time looking through every problem before solving them.
> 
> My method was I just did all 32 non bridge problems in a row, skipping the roughly 2 to 4 questions where I didn't know where/how to get the answer and would have to do some code digging.  This meant I had to use AISC one question, then ACI , then NDS, then ASCE7, then TMS, etc rinse and repeat. But I didn't mind, I only had those 5 books plus AISI and IBC on my desk so it was pretty fast to grab another reference.  Those 32 problems took about 2 hours.
> 
> Then I did the 8 bridge questions in a row, again skipping maybe 1 or 2 if it looked like I'd spend a lot of time on it. This would take about 45 minutes.
> 
> After that I'd have about 5 questions to go back and get, and about half of those I'd realize the trick.  Looking at it a tricky question for the second time, after an hour or two of delving in the code and solving the "easier" questions really does something for your mind. For me, if I stubbornly sit on the question until I solve it, I'll eventually get it but after a lot of time searching the cod.  The other half of those last questions I'd have to go digging in the code to find. This would take about 30 minutes.
> 
> Then after that I'd have about 45 minutes to just go through and double check that I answered every question and marked the correct bubble.  I usually find one or two that I forgot to bubble or bubbled the wrong one. It is also good to glance over every question a second time through because you might think of something that you didn't before. I'll usually find a couple questions glancing through a second time where I'll realize there was a trick, or an exception, or a missed piece of given information or something.
> 
> But I'd tell anyone to take the exam the same way they've been taking their practice exams... don't try something new. It should feel like clockwork. So this takes some planning ahead, in that you should take your practice exams the way that you plan on taking the real exam.


You hit on an important point. To do well, you really need to be at about 30 questions completed by the 2hr mark. That's key. I generally aim for that as well. 10 questions an hour is too slow, especially considering NCEES' shenanigans. I usually just work the easy problems I can solve first. I have tried the "let's use one code at a time method" but that didn't work for me since some problems I need to look at and file in my subconscious for a bit before I can actually solve them quickly. Sometimes, wind stuff will be easy, or even bridge problems. It just all depends.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

I hope everyone is having a Terrific Thursday!


----------



## User1

FutureSE said:


> I hope everyone is having a Terrific Thursday!


it's my friday!


----------



## Titleistguy

Golf league starts tonight, and playing 18 Sunday.  It's a nice break from strap footing design study.


----------



## Duke

What's a Thursday? Some rare pagan holiday? I only know this day as Friday Eve

@*Titleistguy*

Same here, softball league starts soon.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> What's a Thursday? Some rare pagan holiday? I only know this day as Friday Eve
> 
> @*Titleistguy*
> 
> Same here, softball league starts soon.


Thursday is a derivation of the day dedicated to the ancient nordic god of thunder, Tyr. Also known as Thor in the english tongue. If you're still confused, he's the fat one in Avengers.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Thursday is a derivation of the day dedicated to the ancient nordic god of thunder, Tyr. Also known as Thor in the english tongue. If you're still confused, he's the fat one in Avengers.


Thor's greco-roman equivalent is Jupiter (or Jove)  hence the romance language use of _dies joves _(latin), jueves (spanish), and jeudi (french) for Thursday.

Coincidentally, historiographers agree that NCEES' equivalent in Nordic Mythology is Loki, the god of manipulation, trickery and deceit. As to whether he's in avengers or not, _that_ would be a spoiler.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Well, only about six weeks to go, my friends. Anyone seen the newsletter with a grading workshop date yet?


----------



## cal91

Can't believe we're only at 40% of our wait time...


----------



## User1

FutureSE said:


> Well, only about six weeks to go, my friends. Anyone seen the newsletter with a grading workshop date yet?﻿


I didn't see a newsletter anywhere but I saw someone, somewhere on the great wide web mention that it wasn't until June 7-8 so we shouldn't expect results til prob the 14th


----------



## Stewie

tj_PE said:


> I didn't see a newsletter anywhere but I saw someone, somewhere on the great wide web mention that it wasn't until June 7-8 so we shouldn't expect results til prob the 14th


Where is this "somewhere on the great wide web"? reddit? twitter?


----------



## User1

Stewie said:


> Where is this "somewhere on the great wide web"? reddit? twitter?


I don't know lol.

I assume I saw it somewhere in EB land, because I don't really go anywhere else


----------



## User1

cal91 said:


> Does everyone agree that, with the grading workshop June 7-8, the expected day is the following Friday, June 14﻿?


here


----------



## cal91

I AM THE GREAT WIDE WEB


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> I AM THE GREAT WIDE WEB


I saw that post. I was just trying to confirm the June 7-8 date. I understood that as a "guess" from the original context, you were assuming that date because you haven't seen a date. So to confirm, have you seen that date as the grading workshop?


----------



## cal91

It wasn't a guess. I asked NCEES chat when the SE grading workshop was and they told me June 7 &amp; June 8.  We've got another 5.5 weeks :/


----------



## Nathan55

cal91 said:


> It wasn't a guess. I asked NCEES chat when the SE grading workshop was and they told me June 7 &amp; June 8.  We've got another 5.5 weeks


My favorite part, honestly, is that last week of waiting. It's truly a Schrödinger's cat situation, and I begin contemplating the intricacies of quantum physics and the wave-particle duality. I'm anxious for results to come, but only if I passed. In the meantime, I haven't passed or failed, so my psyche remains in tact. But I still wake up each morning curious about my fate. After failing there is a period of disbelief, then brief hope where I convince myself that an improvement on the last time's results is a "good" thing. In reality though, I'll be happy with nothing besides an "acceptable". As a pessimist, however, I plan for the worst. So I'm halfway to saving for the cost to take it in October. Just hoping the codes won't change, because ASCE 7-16 will be absolute loads of fun to design to. 

I'm also on the fence as to whether NCEES  enjoys this torture, or merely uses the data in the service of some greater, altruistic goal.


----------



## cal91

Nathan55 said:


> Just hoping the codes won't change, because ASCE 7-16 will be absolute loads of fun to design to.


I see what you did there...


----------



## SE_Hopeful

I wonder if there will be tsunami questions on the exam once ASCE 7-16 gets adopted


----------



## Titleistguy

cal91 said:


> I see what you did there...


I'm bracing myself for the worst if there is a code change....although it'll be a joy to shear all those new moments with you guys learning the new load standard.  All we have to do is just simply support each other and everything will be just fine.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Titleistguy said:


> I'm bracing myself for the worst if there is a code change....although it'll be a joy to shear all those new moments with you guys learning the new load standard.  All we have to do is just simply support each other and everything will be just fine.


Engineering humor. It's great. You had me fixed to the screen with the analysis of your prose.

I also wanted to correct a previous statement I made on the board. I said previously that Tyr was an archaic name for Thor. That is wrong, as Tyr was a separate deity and is the namesake of Tuesday somehow. Thor was apparently always some derivation of the word Thor, except they had some odd accent and another r in there. Anyway, just wanted to set the record straight from my ignorance. My takeaway from this is apparently archaic people didn't know how to spell or speak properly.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Engineering humor. It's great. You had me fixed to the screen with the analysis of your prose.
> 
> I also wanted to correct a previous statement I made on the board. I said previously that Tyr was an archaic name for Thor. That is wrong, as Tyr was a separate deity and is the namesake of Tuesday somehow. Thor was apparently always some derivation of the word Thor, except they had some odd accent and another r in there. Anyway, just wanted to set the record straight from my ignorance. My takeaway from this is apparently archaic people didn't know how to spell or speak properly.


It's rather apropos that you made this clarification on Tuesday.


----------



## Nathan55

SE_Hopeful said:


> I wonder if there will be tsunami questions on the exam once ASCE 7-16 gets adopted


NCEES will tell you no, but only so that they can throw a Tsunami/Earthquake/Infinity Gauntlet snap "general analysis" essay problem at you and put you in a panic.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Nathan55 said:


> NCEES will tell you no, but only so that they can throw a Tsunami/Earthquake/Infinity Gauntlet snap "general analysis" essay problem at you and put you in a panic.


i hate them 3000


----------



## cal91

SE_Hopeful said:


> i hate them 3000


Wow. If I recall even  FutureSE only hates them in the low 6 to 9 hundreds...


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> Wow. If I recall even  FutureSE only hates them in the low 6 to 9 hundreds...


That is correct, but that is given as a percent in decimal form. If you multiply that by the proper value of 100, you can begin to comprehend the amount of putrid darkness that dwells in my heart for that organization and the east coast states enforcing the new exam for licensure. I feel like we should all have visors to measure power/hatred levels for NCEES like the old school Dragonball. I'm pretty sure that merely looking at me would cause your device to short circuit. I'm currently somewhere around super saiyan 500 at this point. Even my nose hairs go super saiyan at the mention of NCEES.

Somehow, someway, I would almost guarantee that NCEES and HYDRA are in cahoots with the Decepticons, Skrulls, Dark Elves, and the remaining nefarious actors who intend to collect the anti-engineering-affinity stones and wipe out approximately three quarters of the structural engineering population with a finger flick. Maybe they even went back in time to interfere with our past timelines to prevent our future selves from passing. &lt;-Now that's cold, NCEES.

I think maybe NCEES stands for Nobody Can Ever Ever Succeed . Either that or Noobs Can't Even Evaluate Seismic. 100% sure it's one of those.


----------



## hindiana

I have a feeling that the results will come out in 10-12 days.

Exam was unusually early this past administration.


----------



## User1

hindiana said:


> I have a feeling that the results will come out in 10-12 days.
> 
> Exam was unusually early this past administration.


Maybe for PEs, but for SE, the grading workshop is June 7 weekend, so we will not have results until after that, we're thinking June 14.


----------



## Hindianapolis

tj_PE said:


> Maybe for PEs, but for SE, the grading workshop is June 7 weekend, so we will not have results until after that, we're thinking June 14.


where does it mention June 7?

maybe they are postponing it for this year. I dunno. June 14 is on the brink of their 10 week limit. I noticed that for the past administration, they released around the 1.5 month mark, approximately one week and some odd days after the PE's. we will see. 

Just a thought.


----------



## Nathan55

Hindianapolis said:


> where does it mention June 7?
> 
> maybe they are postponing it for this year. I dunno. June 14 is on the brink of their 10 week limit. I noticed that for the past administration, they released around the 1.5 month mark, approximately one week and some odd days after the PE's. we will see.
> 
> Just a thought.


You are correct sir, or madam. October results are always released around December 14th, plus or minus 5 days. April results are generally released after 8-10 weeks. PE results for the april exam might be around memorial day. So when the PE results are out, then you can "start the clock", as it were. Of course, theoretically, NCEES could release PE results this week for some reason, and SE results soon after...but I'd reckon it's improbable. They understand the key to any successful enhanced interrogation technique isn't necessarily the acuteness of the pain, but the unending nature of it.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> That is correct, but that is given as a percent in decimal form. If you multiply that by the proper value of 100, you can begin to comprehend the amount of putrid darkness that dwells in my heart for that organization and the east coast states enforcing the new exam for licensure. I feel like we should all have visors to measure power/hatred levels for NCEES like the old school Dragonball. I'm pretty sure that merely looking at me would cause your device to short circuit. I'm currently somewhere around super saiyan 500 at this point. Even my nose hairs go super saiyan at the mention of NCEES.
> 
> Somehow, someway, I would almost guarantee that NCEES and HYDRA are in cahoots with the Decepticons, Skrulls, Dark Elves, and the remaining nefarious actors who intend to collect the anti-engineering-affinity stones and wipe out approximately three quarters of the structural engineering population with a finger flick. Maybe they even went back in time to interfere with our past timelines to prevent our future selves from passing. &lt;-Now that's cold, NCEES.
> 
> I think maybe NCEES stands for Nobody Can Ever Ever Succeed . Either that or Noobs Can't Even Evaluate Seismic. 100% sure it's one of those.


I feel pretty confident that an alternate timeline version of me passed both days on the first try.


----------



## User1

cal91 said:


> It wasn't a guess. I asked NCEES chat when the SE grading workshop was and they told me June 7 &amp; June 8.  We've got another 5.5 weeks


@Hindianapolis


----------



## User1

I'm vowing not to quote @cal91 anymore if someone else asks LOL. sorry cal!


----------



## cal91

Haha no worries! And I will gladly eat my words if that means that for some reason the grading workshop is at an earlier date. Who knows, "Ashlei" at NCEES could be wrong and just appeasing me so that I won't ask anymore!


----------



## mdw

Does anyone know historically when NCEES changes code reference (specifically ASCE)? Would they change to ASCE 7-16 before most jurisdictions implement it (April 2020) or after?


----------



## cal91

My best Guess is April 2021 is when they will start to use the IBC 2018 and it's corresponding code versions, but I have no data to base that off of. Does anyone know when the test changed to IBC 2015? And to IBC 2012?


----------



## David Connor SE

cal91 said:


> My best Guess is April 2021 is when they will start to use the IBC 2018 and it's corresponding code versions, but I have no data to base that off of. Does anyone know when the test changed to IBC 2015? And to IBC 2012?


I think they make the switch to IBC 2012/ASCE 7-10 in 2015.  I know they were still on IBC 2009/ASCE 7-05 for the April 2014 exam.


----------



## cal91

Was 2018 the first year of IBC 2015?  Maybe it's as simple as that. Always using the 2nd latest edition.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> Was 2018 the first year of IBC 2015?  Maybe it's as simple as that. Always using the 2nd latest edition.


I believe they switched in October of 18 to the IBC 2015 if my memory serves me correctly.

Now what were we talking about?


----------



## TheBigGuy

FutureSE said:


> I belie﻿ve they switched in October of 18 to the IBC 2015 if my memory serves me correctly.


I think that's right.  I'm not worried about IBC switch at all.  I'm worried about AASHTO switch.  I have enormous amounts of notes in my AASHTO code and I hear the next edition is pretty different.  Hopefully I passed and it doesn't matter.

Actually, I'm not worried about AASHTO switch.  Everyday I grow more competent as an engineer and if I have to study one more code, than so be it.  Its an opportunity for me to learn more.  It would make it easier for me to help younger engineers in the office study for the exam when their time comes.


----------



## onemanwolfpack

TheBigGuy said:


> I think that's right.  I'm not worried about IBC switch at all.  I'm worried about AASHTO switch.  I have enormous amounts of notes in my AASHTO code and I hear the next edition is pretty different.  Hopefully I passed and it doesn't matter.
> 
> Actually, I'm not worried about AASHTO switch.  Everyday I grow more competent as an engineer and if I have to study one more code, than so be it.  Its an opportunity for me to learn more.  It would make it easier for me to help younger engineers in the office study for the exam when their time comes.


I did all of my studying on the 7th edition, and also have a bunch of notes scattered throughout my AASHTO. It wasn't too fun switching over to the 8th at work, and I still keep my marked up 7th around for reference...though I'll probably never get rid of it.


----------



## David Connor SE

TheBigGuy said:


> I think that's right.  I'm not worried about IBC switch at all.  I'm worried about AASHTO switch.  I have enormous amounts of notes in my AASHTO code and I hear the next edition is pretty different.  Hopefully I passed and it doesn't matter.
> 
> Actually, I'm not worried about AASHTO switch.  Everyday I grow more competent as an engineer and if I have to study one more code, than so be it.  Its an opportunity for me to learn more.  It would make it easier for me to help younger engineers in the office study for the exam when their time comes.


Yes, the 8th edition of AASHTO did undergo some fairly major changes.  A lot of it organizational, but some of it conceptual. One change is that wind loads are determined similar to buildings.  So, if you are a "buildings" person, then that change may actually be beneficial to you.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

onemanwolfpack said:


> I did all of my studying on the 7th edition, and also have a bunch of notes scattered throughout my AASHTO. It wasn't too fun switching over to the 8th at work, and I still keep my marked up 7th around for reference...though I'll probably never get rid of it.


Probably burning mine. My only regret is that it can't feel pain. I want it to suffer.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Probably burning mine. My only regret is that it can't feel pain. I want it to suffer.


HAHA. Can't say I disagree. I'd like to also add my NCEES practice test to that conflagration. My 6th edition aashto was full of notes, then NCEES switched to the 7th edition. I was less than enthused. 

The only good thing I have to say about AASHTO is at _least_ you're using one code for design. It's not like buildings, where you use ASCE 7, but then IBC since sometimes they contradict each other...then you switch to ACI, which was reorganized to make it simpler but in the end made it worse.......

All in favor of having the people who wrote the AISC Manual Thanos-snapping away all other codes and developing a single, overarching super code to replace them all, say "aye".


----------



## User1

aye


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Noticed this on the NCEES Website. Think that they will have the results out before the next test registration?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> Noticed this on the NCEES Website. Think that they will have the results out before the next test registration?
> 
> View attachment 13020


From my experience, I don't believe it has any bearing. Looking at past grading and reading Cal91's post though, I would expect to see the SE results by June 14. This is still merely a guesstimate as the NCEES operates in mysterious ways.


----------



## David Connor SE

Nathan55 said:


> HAHA. Can't say I disagree. I'd like to also add my NCEES practice test to that conflagration. My 6th edition aashto was full of notes, then NCEES switched to the 7th edition. I was less than enthused.
> 
> The only good thing I have to say about AASHTO is at _least_ you're using one code for design. It's not like buildings, where you use ASCE 7, but then IBC since sometimes they contradict each other...then you switch to ACI, which was reorganized to make it simpler but in the end made it worse.......
> 
> All in favor of having the people who wrote the AISC Manual Thanos-snapping away all other codes and developing a single, overarching super code to replace them all, say "aye".


We can only dream...


----------



## cal91

Well folks, we're officially halfway there. Woah. Living on a prayer.


----------



## Hindianapolis

how real is this?


----------



## Hindianapolis

also


----------



## BTF

Hindianapolis said:


> how real is this?
> 
> View attachment 13087


The PE results are starting to come out today so this is real.  However the SE results will not be coming out for a little while.  At least that is what I suspect.


----------



## Hindianapolis

maybe..

i have a feeling its gonna come out in a week or 10 days time.


----------



## David Connor SE

Hindianapolis said:


> maybe..
> 
> i have a feeling its gonna come out in a week or 10 days time.


Those are PE results that are coming out.  I think someone said the SE exam grading workshop is going to be sometime after Memorial Day, so I would say 2nd week of June.


----------



## cal91

Yeah unless I was lied too ( are chat bots capable of lying? If so they will probably become self aware soon) then the grading workshop is June 7 &amp; June 8, so results around June 14.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

For the October 2018, SE exam results were released 1 week after the PE results were. 

Edit: The April 2018 thread a bit later on has a list of all previous dates of release. Also, last Spring was a 24th of May for PE of and the 15th of June for SE  I am less hopeful now.


----------



## User1

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> For the October 2018, SE exam results were released 1 week after the PE results were.
> 
> Edit: The April 2018 thread a bit later on has a list of all previous dates of release. Also, last Spring was a 24th of May for PE of and the 15th of June for SE  I am less hopeful now.﻿﻿﻿


SE grading workshop confirmed by NCEES chat is not until june 7 weekend. Therefore we will not have SE results for another month


----------



## Civil Dawg

cal91 said:


> Yeah unless I was lied too ( are chat bots capable of lying? If so they will probably become self aware soon) then the grading workshop is June 7 &amp; June 8, so results around June 14.


I've tried periodically to get the SE Grading Workshop dates from the NCEES chat since the exam took place and "Keshia" has consistently told me it hasn't been scheduled yet.  Tried again this morning with the same result.  5 1/2 weeks after the exam and it's still not scheduled....hmmm.


----------



## SouthernEngineer

Civil Dawg said:


> I've tried periodically to get the SE Grading Workshop dates from the NCEES chat since the exam took place and "Keshia" has consistently told me it hasn't been scheduled yet.  Tried again this morning with the same result.  5 1/2 weeks after the exam and it's still not scheduled....hmmm.


NCEES Calendar: (https://outlook.office365.com/owa/calendar/[email protected]/bb5bc29c54fb4348b433f24b5c1030b68502884810685609233/calendar.html)


----------



## Stewie

SouthernEngineer said:


> NCEES Calendar: (https://outlook.office365.com/owa/calendar/[email protected]/bb5bc29c54fb4348b433f24b5c1030b68502884810685609233/calendar.html)
> 
> View attachment 13128


Wow, is this official?


----------



## SouthernEngineer

Stewie said:


> Wow, is this official?


It came from the NCEES website's calendar. They could have changed the dates and not updated the calendar but I would hope not.


----------



## Civil Dawg

SouthernEngineer said:


> It came from the NCEES website's calendar. They could have changed the dates and not updated the calendar but I would hope not.


That's great.  I've never seen that.


----------



## User1

NCEES: Most results from the April 2019 pencil-and-paper PE exams have been released to NCEES member licensing boards. PE Structural exam results will be released as soon as they are finalized. 

me: why are you delaying PE Structural results? What's the hold up?

also me: oh, maybe they mean the SE results? Who is updating these sites and do they even engineer, bro?


----------



## Stewie

tj_PE said:


> NCEES: Most results from the April 2019 pencil-and-paper PE exams have been released to NCEES member licensing boards. PE Structural exam results will be released as soon as they are finalized.
> 
> me: why are you delaying PE Structural results? What's the hold up?
> 
> also me: oh, maybe they mean the SE results? Who is updating these sites and do they even engineer, bro?


Do you think or you just know "PE Structural results" = "SE results"?


----------



## User1

well last cycle they said

All results from the October 2018 pencil-and-paper PE exams have been released to NCEES member licensing boards. SE exam results were released on December 10. PE exam results were released on December 5. How and when examinees receive their results varies by state.

So, why they being weirdos?


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

tj_PE said:


> well last cycle they said
> 
> All results from the October 2018 pencil-and-paper PE exams have been released to NCEES member licensing boards. SE exam results were released on December 10. PE exam results were released on December 5. How and when examinees receive their results varies by state.
> 
> So, why they being weirdos?


Because they had not realized that our training for the exam left us reading every sentence so closely to find the exact meaning and pick up any subtle differences.


----------



## LetsSE




----------



## User1

yeah. look back a page or two, someone got confirmed date for grading workshop which coincides with the ncees calendar that was also shared. we've got 4ish weeks left to wait.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

LetsSE asking the tough questions! Way to go!

I wonder if NCEES has to do some type of quality review of the exams before giving them over to the graders. 

I've also wondered what would happen if exams got damaged in an accident while in transit or if some type of fire occurred where the exams are held.... but it is best not to dwell on these thoughts for long.


----------



## Stewie

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> LetsSE asking the tough questions! Way to go!
> 
> I wonder if NCEES has to do some type of quality review of the exams before giving them over to the graders.
> 
> I've also wondered what would happen if exams got damaged in an accident while in transit or if some type of fire occurred where the exams are held.... but it is best not to dwell on these thoughts for long.


I heard the the question &amp; answer sheets are transferred with armored trucks.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Stewie said:


> I heard the the question &amp; answer sheets are transferred with armored trucks.


Hey- that $500 has to go towards something!


----------



## Civil Dawg

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> Hey- that $500 has to go towards something!


In case you thought he was kidding...he isn’t. Our proctor for the Lateral Exam on Saturday was talking about how she had to stay late the day before for the armored truck to come pick up the tests. We kind of smirked and she said no really, they come pick them up in armored trucks!


----------



## David Connor SE

I know it is borderline torture waiting for the SE results, but there isn't anything the person at the other end of the NCEES chat can do about it.  The SE exam just takes longer to grade because of the essay portion, and they probably don't even start grading the multiple choice portions until the PE exams are done.  But, you can pretty much take it to the bank that you will receive your results between June 10-14th. 

Until then, if you have another component to take next time or are pretty sure you didn't pass, I wouldn't waste the time waiting for the results and go ahead and get the study ball rolling for October.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

I do a good job with distracting myself from the wait - but then coworkers, friends, and family will ask "Hey how'd your test go?" because they are surprised to see me not studying and then are equally surprised that the results are not back!


----------



## cal91

David Connor said:


> But, you can pretty much take it to the bank that you will receive your results between June 10-14th.


I would've guessed June 14th as the earliest... Has NCEES ever released results just two days after the grading workshop closes?


----------



## David Connor SE

cal91 said:


> I would've guessed June 14th as the earliest... Has NCEES ever released results just two days after the grading workshop closes?


Ah, I thought the workshop was the week before.  But hopefully they can get the results out to you guys by the 14th.  That's where I would set the over/under date.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> I would've guessed June 14th as the earliest... Has NCEES ever released results just two days after the grading workshop closes?


I believe they did last December for the October exam. Though again, sometimes I dream stuff up and sometimes I'm just legitimately crazy.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

David Connor said:


> Ah, I thought the workshop was the week before.  But hopefully they can get the results out to you guys by the 14th.  That's where I would set the over/under date.


I'm with Mr. David "The Bridge Master" Conner. I believe It'll be out around that Friday.


----------



## David Connor SE

FutureSE said:


> I'm with Mr. David "The Bridge Master" Conner. I believe It'll be out around that Friday.


Ha, the dirty secret is, I haven't actually done a "real-life" bridge since the early 2000s.  But I can read the AASHTO code and come up with multiple choice bridge questions.


----------



## Nathan55

Civil Dawg said:


> In case you thought he was kidding...he isn’t. Our proctor for the Lateral Exam on Saturday was talking about how she had to stay late the day before for the armored truck to come pick up the tests. We kind of smirked and she said no really, they come pick them up in armored trucks!


I'm envisioning an "Ocean's 11" style heist where I assemble a crack team of operators who've passed the PE to get the armored trucks and replace them with duplicates. It would take nearly as much practice and preparation as studying for the SE exam, but it would be worth it. I think I'll change my screen name here to Danny.


----------



## Nathan55

David Connor said:


> Ha, the dirty secret is, I haven't actually done a "real-life" bridge since the early 2000s.  But I can read the AASHTO code and come up with multiple choice bridge questions.


Interesting. Also, my concern has always been escalation. As in...for every book that's written, NCEES becomes aware and then modifies the test to maintain a similar pass rate DESPITE new materials available. It's why the PPI practice test can only be a slightly harder version of the NCEES test. It's why the NCEES practice test has remained essentially unchanged for the past decade.


----------



## cal91

60% of the way there folks!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> Interesting. Also, my concern has always been escalation. As in...for every book that's written, NCEES becomes aware and then modifies the test to maintain a similar pass rate DESPITE new materials available. It's why the PPI practice test can only be a slightly harder version of the NCEES test. It's why the NCEES practice test has remained essentially unchanged for the past decade.


I received an invite to write Civil/Structural PE practice questions for School of PE this time. Any suggestions for items you would've wanted to see?


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

FutureSE said:


> I received an invite to write Civil/Structural PE practice questions for School of PE this time. Any suggestions for items you would've wanted to see?


A question on calculating when NCEES will issue exam results. I'd like to see your solved problem and supporting work!

Example question: When will NCEES release the exam results?

a) 6-7 weeks

b)7-10 weeks

c) 10-11 weeks

d) 11 + weeks


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Likely less than a month to go. Can't get here soon enough.


----------



## cal91

0.06849 years by my calculations


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> 0.06849 years by my calculations


That's like 0.00091 lifetimes for the average American Male or 1.522 X 10 ^-11 th of the time the Earth has been around.


----------



## cal91

0.00091 LIFETIMES TO GO EVERYBODY!

Unless you're not american. Or male. Then idk what to tell you...


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> 0.00091 LIFETIMES TO GO EVERYBODY!
> 
> Unless you're not american. Or male. Then idk what to tell you...


Murica, pew pew! That's all that needs to be said. Females live longer on average because they are a bit smarter than us. Then other country's population lifespans vary.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

You guys are being boring again. Stop it. Tell me something interesting. Lets make up stories about aliens and bigfoot conspiring with the NCEES. Apparently, all (3) of them are good at remaining out of sight for extended periods of time.


----------



## User1

I briefly thought the (3) you were referring to were all bigfoot and I was like wait where did that come from.

so, that's that.


----------



## cal91

Yeah Bigfoot's two friends, Smallbrain and Stinkybum


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

tj_PE said:


> I briefly thought the (3) you were referring to were all bigfoot and I was like wait where did that come from.
> 
> so, that's that.


@tj_PE, If I had been referring to them, would they have been bigfeet? I'm curious to the plurality there as I've never thought of the Sasquatch as more than a solitary blood thirsty undead demonic vampire ape with a hatred of mankind and a lust for world destruction by any means necessary (To include holding SE results until the very L A S T moment).


----------



## User1

I think it would be bigfoots, since they already have more than one foot per bigfoot ? IDK


----------



## BTF

I took the school of pe course and they sent me an email today saying the results were out in several states.  Did anyone here that results have started to come out or is the school of pe trolling me?  I assume they are thinking the pe exam results since they came out last week.


----------



## cal91

That's gotta be for the PE exam... sorry


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

You guys are being boring again. I need you to stop doing that (being boring). Make some noise. Talk about how bad you hated GoT or something. I can't take the silence. By the way, am I the only one who somewhat enjoyed GoT season 8. I'm not saying it was great, and it was definitely rushed, but at least the show closed most everyone's character arcs. I've seen plenty that didn't.

SPOILER WARNING!

The Hound and The Mountain descending into fire probably being my favorite. Of the closure's that disappointed me, Jorund was lost in the foray and I felt he deserved more. The Night King of course went down way too easy (in 1 episode, c'mon he was the MAIN baddie). I also expected more of Jon Snow and I was looking forward for a glorious death for Cersei (I was left severely wanting there).


----------



## User1

I really like reading people's posts about GoT because I don't watch it and it just reads as jibberish


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

tj_PE said:


> I really like reading people's posts about GoT because I don't watch it and it just reads as jibberish


Blasphemy!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

This is my SE passing dance, BTW.


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

I had no idea that was an older song. Heard a nice remix of it recently and loved it, so catchy.


----------



## Nathan55

Glad to know that my testing fees are being put to good use! Maybe this means I passed now.


----------



## Titleistguy

FutureSE said:


> I received an invite to write Civil/Structural PE practice questions for School of PE this time. Any suggestions for items you would've wanted to see?


I'd like to see questions regarding cellular / castellated beams.  In my line of work I see many perforated sections for MEP.  I usually go on to lecture the GC and EOR why we don't like to mutilate steel, and if it is a must then it should be engineered ... not torch cut in the field by pipe fitters, (I can't even get a millwright or iron worker to properly hack 'n' whack my steel)...lol....  If I'm lucky enough to actually get a PE stamped calc, sure enough, there is no mention in it of intended hole(s) and subsequent accommodations.  Its very aggravating. 

#EndRant


----------



## SE_Hopeful

This wait is so stupid, is there any reason whatsoever for it to be this long? I would love to hear someone from NCEES (fail to) justify the rationale behind needing 10 weeks to return results for a test.


----------



## TheBigGuy

Its usually been six weeks, right?


----------



## cal91

I have become comfortably numb...


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

I hate buttholes. Both the physical orifice and the metaphorical genderless, raceless,  creedless, and orientationless anthropomorphic sludge inducing embodiment of pure frustration that pours forth foulness onto the peaceful, serene, and preciously unblemished toilet paper that is my life.

That’s my motivational speech for the day. 

TLR - Don’t be a butthole.


----------



## Duke

FutureSE said:


> I hate buttholes. Both the *physical orifice*


                                                          


What..................


----------



## DoctorWho-PE

SE_Hopeful said:


> i hate them 3000


I see what you did there.


----------



## cal91

Can't believe we still have over 2 weeeeeeeeks


----------



## YAZRABADI

I know it is been a long time since we tested. It is a good time to pray and ask the Lord for passing (acceptable) results. 

Yaz


----------



## Stardust

YAZRABADI said:


> I know it is been a long time since we tested. It is a good time to pray and ask the Lord for passing (acceptable) results.
> 
> Yaz


What if you're an atheist?


----------



## ChebyshevII PE PMP

Stardust said:


> What if you're an atheist?


You’ll be bored while you wait for your results to come out.


----------



## SouthernEngineer

Nathan55 said:


> Glad to know that my testing fees are being put to good use! Maybe this means I passed now.


That's not their rationale. If they fail everyone then they get even more money when you have to re-register. Business 101: Create a monopoly and do whatever you want.


----------



## YAZRABADI

Stardust said:


> What if you're an atheist?


Then I don't know, would you rather have God bless you through life and through its challenges or rely on your own understanding of life.  As for me and my house, we humble ourselves to believe in a higher power that can do miracles that are not explainable. I pray for us all.....

Hope this helped.


----------



## LetsSE




----------



## cal91

So now we know EVEN BETTER that the SE grading workshop is next weekend.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Hey, we also got confirmation that the results have not been released!


----------



## cal91

And we know LetsSe's name is Jimmy.


----------



## Stewie

I think Jimmy is just his online alias. haha...


----------



## Stardust

YAZRABADI said:


> Then I don't know, would you rather have God bless you through life and through its challenges or rely on your own understanding of life.  As for me and my house, we humble ourselves to believe in a higher power that can do miracles that are not explainable. I pray for us all.....
> 
> Hope this helped.


Hard no/pass on the god/praying business.

To each their own, of course.


----------



## YAZRABADI

I am not to judge, but still pray for you Mr. Stardust.


----------



## cal91

80% of the way there!


----------



## YAZRABADI

Almost there guys........



cal91 said:


> 80% of the way there!


Almost there guys.....


----------



## Stewie

I hope I can pass at least one of them... Just hope...


----------



## cal91

I expect to pass both, but even if I pass just one I won't feel too bad, atleast all my time studying was worth something, and I will only have to focus on the other part of the test.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

cal91 said:


> I expect to pass both, but even if I pass just one I won't feel too bad, atleast all my time studying was worth something, and I will only have to focus on the other part of the test.


I took both in the fall and passed lateral. I found it to be a bit less stressful only studying for 1 test and for having the diagnostic to tell me what to focus on. Hope you pass both as well!


----------



## Nathan55

Stewie said:


> I hope I can pass at least one of them... Just hope...


But that's where they get you though. "There can be no true despair without hope."


----------



## YAZRABADI

I pray and hope all that whom is ready to be a structural engineer pass this exam. Have faith and fear not, the Lord is good. For me it is been a journey to say the least. I pray that I pass Lateral this time. Please pray for me and I will pray for you all.


----------



## YAZRABADI

It is confirmed now. News letter is out, God bless.....


----------



## cal91

Nice. Now it's official. We don't have to take Ashleighs word for it.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Good lord, I’m so tired of waiting. I think my patience started walking off, walked off some more, and then came to a gate that said “You can’t walk off past here.” Upon seeing this gate, my patience, wanting to live the impossible dream, climbed over it and walked off never to be seen again.


----------



## YAZRABADI

Hang in there guys, we are almost there. They will be grading our papers this Thursday through Saturday. Results should  be trickling in next week. God bless us all


----------



## cal91

11 MORE DAYS OF BONDAGE


----------



## Maya_206

I wish the scoring system were more transparent. The exam appears to favor younger folks who have the time and mental capacity to learn everything and regurgitate. Pass the exam and not know anything In 4 weeks.

Some suggestions for NCEES based on my 2nd time with the lateral exam:

- 16% passing rate for some states such as WA is crazy statistics and raises eyebrows!

- Less reliance on tabbing. This is a crazy exercise in itself. Just do a survey of how many hours are spent on tabbing by the examinees to find out. Triggered primarily by the am questions.

- Less reliance on being able to just looking up information. Focus the exam on what is more important on the engineering side.

- Make the exam harder but more focused. So that if you have the engineering knowledge you are able to solve it. Right now, you just need to do the basics of everything to get through the exam. It should be more of harder problems that take more time but is required of a good structural engineer.

- Really need to separate bridge and buildings. Why get everyone to go through IBC codes and AASHTO? For a building person who  passed the SE, he has no ability to design a proper bridge. So why bother?

 - Have questions that rely less on the codes and more on basic engineering. Why do examinees need to buy code every 2 years sit for the exam. Seems unfair.

- Test designed for knowledge and not speed. The speed portion favors the younger ones who are still in the university exam mindset.

- Have practice exams that are representative. In my opinion, the one they have is too easy and never changes. Yet, $50 is charged.

- What portions you study for your LFRS system has a big impact on whether you pass. I have known folks who skipped a few LFRS and passed simply because of luck. If the exams were harder, it would be fair. 

-  no sneaky questions that is related to code nuisances. In real life, we all have time to avoid these sneaky code issues.

- There is no reason why a specified date or week cannot be stated for the release of the exam results. This will help to alleviate anxiety for folks waiting for the exam results every day for two weeks. 

- In general, the release of the exam results is too late. If the April 2019 exam results come out by end of June, the re-takers are left with 3.5 months to prepare for the exam. Factor these with kids, vacations, conferences, buy new codes and tab again etc, and the window for study is too small for most folks. Ofcourse there is an option to give up on the rest of your life and study for this exam. But, it does not have to be this way (work/study/life balance). I hope NCEES does something to address this. I believe this is the primary reason why most retakers do not make it through. I am willing to bet that most retakers are older folks who have other responsibilities in life and cannot give up the other half of their life to retake the exam compared to younger folks. That is why I say that the exam is biased towards younger folks.

Just a few comments on the SE exam (more particularly the lateral exam). The above comments stand regardless of whether I pass or not.

Good luck everyone!


----------



## cal91

Believe it or not, I actually did no do any tabbing. I never have. My thoughts were I should study each book I bring into the test, to the point that I know it front and back and don't need tabs. Time spent tabbing for me is better spent doing practice problems.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

I probably spent over $50 on tabs alone


----------



## Maya_206

Cal 91 I would be curious to know how much effort was spent studying for the exam. There is always a different approach to solve a problem. 

No tabs has a steep cost to the time spent. Not sure if it is reasonable. Finding the right balance is what I was suggesting. Right now, there is too much expectation of this triggered primarily by the am questions. Pm questions, not so much.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

cal91 said:


> Believe it or not, I actually did no do any tabbing. I never have. My thoughts were I should study each book I bring into the test, to the point that I know it front and back and don't need tabs. Tim﻿e spent tabbing for me is better spent doing practice problems.


This has typically been my approach as well. There's an interesting feeling of know a book well enough to just go to the correct place. I did end up tabbing some basic items though, more to save time page turning!


----------



## Nathan55

Maya_206 said:


> Cal 91 I would be curious to know how much effort was spent studying for the exam. There is always a different approach to solve a problem.
> 
> No tabs has a steep cost to the time spent. Not sure if it is reasonable. Finding the right balance is what I was suggesting. Right now, there is too much expectation of this triggered primarily by the am questions. Pm questions, not so much.


I use tabs to an extent, especially on AASHTO. What I find even more useful than tabbing is actually annotating my codes themselves. Especially ACI, which has a sacrilegious level of circular references. Also, why don't they include more formulas?

Also, you have a lot of useful ideas on how to improve the test. I agree about making the test more about knowledge and less about speed. The test requires a preternatural ability to solve problems quickly. In the real world, knowledge will generally win because you have more time to design things. Also, almost nothing we do is a one-off design without a QA/QC procedure. I think that is a large part of consulting. It would be nice to see more problems about checking people's work...as in "determine if this calculation is adequate" sorts of exercises. Also, 100% accurate on the having "skipped an LRFS" and passed issue. Per the NCEES test spec, they can only test you on so many things. So you could feasibly gamble and say "I will not learn anything about system XYZ" and have a favorable mix of problems and do fine. 

And don't get me started on the practice exams. Anyone who asks me about the exam, I begin by explaining they should (almost) ignore the NCEES practice exam when they prepare. The practice exam hasn't really changed in the past decade. NCEES  relies on people assuming, erroneously, that the real exam will be like the practice exam and thus being unprepared.


----------



## cal91

Maya_206 said:


> Cal 91 I would be curious to know how much effort was spent studying for the exam. There is always a different approach to solve a problem.
> 
> No tabs has a steep cost to the time spent. Not sure if it is reasonable. Finding the right balance is what I was suggesting. Right now, there is too much expectation of this triggered primarily by the am questions. Pm questions, not so much.


I think that everyone needs to study differently. For example... in college, I had several classes where class attendance was not required, and the class was only a lecture. I skipped 80-90% of those classes. (3 classes a week * 14 weeks = 42 classes,  I'd have only gone maybe 5 to 10 times.) This is because I am a hands on learner. Not a sit down and watch/listen learner. Instead of going to class, I studied the texts example problems and studied the material on my own while I did the homework. My wife is opposite, she gains the most out of having someone explain to her rather than working it out on her own.  

I've also never tabbed my books. I always have thought that if books needed tabs to be easily navigable, then they would come with tabs. Instead they come with a table of contents and an index. For me I've always felt time tabbing books is not time well spent. I have all the navigation I need through the TOC and index, and my time is better spent learning the material. Obviously that is different for everyone.   I also don't like the chaotic, messy look of tabbed books. The tabs get crumpled, and a book with a bunch of tabs kind of stresses me out. It does something for me mentally to work with tidy looking books.

I did not take a class to study for the SE exam. All I did was learn the standards, and do example problems. I spent roughly 80 hours studying for the exam. But I do seismic structural engineering for a living, so take that into account as well. I'm in ASCE7 and the steel manual every day at work.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> I think that everyone needs to study differently. For example... in college, I had several classes where class attendance was not required, and the class was only a lecture. I skipped 80-90% of those classes. (3 classes a week * 14 weeks = 42 classes,  I'd have only gone maybe 5 to 10 times.) This is because I am a hands on learner. Not a sit down and watch/listen learner. Instead of going to class, I studied the texts example problems and studied the material on my own while I did the homework. My wife is opposite, she gains the most out of having someone explain to her rather than working it out on her own.
> 
> I've also never tabbed my books. I always have thought that if books needed tabs to be easily navigable, then they would come with tabs. Instead they come with a table of contents and an index. For me I've always felt time tabbing books is not time well spent. I have all the navigation I need through the TOC and index, and my time is better spent learning the material. Obviously that is different for everyone.   I also don't like the chaotic, messy look of tabbed books. The tabs get crumpled, and a book with a bunch of tabs kind of stresses me out. It does something for me mentally to work with tidy looking books.
> 
> I did not take a class to study for the SE exam. All I did was learn the standards, and do example problems. I spent roughly 80 hours studying for the exam. But I do seismic structural engineering for a living, so take that into account as well. I'm in ASCE7 and the steel manual every day at work.


Well, when I started this journey, I'd been out of college for about a dozen years. While I was at the top of my class in college, I never bothered to learn special seismic detailing and it wasn't even offered at alma mater. I sat down to the lateral exam after studying the NCEES practice exam and trying to master the concepts on it and I was severely under-prepared for what I saw. I've never seen an seismic design category over C though. I would estimate I've had well over 400 hours of study for the lateral exam and probably another 100 or so hours in the gravity. A large part of the intensive study came after I failed lateral the first time. I felt fairly well prepared for gravity and I am good at solving problems testing my logical capabilities as far as analysis and mathematics are concerned, but I have the memory of a goldfish and generally can't remember which codes state what. The vertical SE really falls along those lines, too. If you know analysis fairly well, all you really need are a few code provisions and material properties. On the other hand, I felt like the lateral exam dug into portions of the code the sun doesn't shine on. I can honestly say that I had never opened the AISC seismic design manual or seismic chapter of the  ACI 318 before the lateral exam.  The only good thing I can say from all of the study, is that I have been through every one of the major codes at least once and can generally call out provisions on the spot (even if I don't know where they came from). All that to say, for me at least, tabs are an essential part of the process and there is no way I would have possibly remembered where everything was without them. My mind just won't function well enough with that level of recall. Prime example as I'm speaking. The AISC 14th ed. has a section that shows the cold formed steel screw equations for fastening into thin walled HSS. I don't know whether this is under connections, bolts, or the shear sections though. My mind associates all three with likely places, but the section is only under one. I should probably tab that. Now I'm thinking about the song "Tap That," but with "Tab that," instead. I feel like someone with musical talent should write a parody song to the same beat about the SE exams and post to YouTube. I'd subscribe.


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> Prime example as I'm speaking. The AISC 14th ed. has a section that shows the cold formed steel screw equations for fastening into thin walled HSS. I don't know whether this is under connections, bolts, or the shear sections though. My mind associates all three with likely places, but the section is only under one. I should probably tab that.﻿ Now I'm thinking about the song "Tap That," but with "Tab that," instead. I feel like someone with musical talent should write a parody song to the same beat about the SE exams and post to YouTube. I'd subscribe.


Wow, I've actually never seen this. I wouldn't have thought the steel manual would have cold formed steel screw equations, since those are covered in AISI. I'm looking for it but can't find it. It's in the AISC 14th ed. steel construction manual? Or in the specification?


----------



## YAZRABADI

cal91 said:


> Wow, I've actually never seen this. I wouldn't have thought the steel manual would have cold formed steel screw equations, since those are covered in AISI. I'm looking for it but can't find it. It's in the AISC 14th ed. steel construction manual? Or in the specification?


I believe he is referring to chapter 7 of the AISC 360, equations 7-16,7-17, and 7-18 (page 7-15).


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> Wow, I've actually never seen this. I wouldn't have thought the steel manual would have cold formed steel screw equations, since those are covered in AISI. I'm looking for it but can't find it. It's in the AISC 14th ed. steel construction manual? Or in the specification?






YAZRABADI said:


> I believe he is referring to chapter 7 of the AISC 360, equations 7-16,7-17, and 7-18 (page 7-15).


@cal91, YAZRABADI is correct. It's listed under bolts. I'll forget it again and the bolts section will be the last place I check.


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> @cal91, YAZRABADI is correct. It's listed under bolts. I'll forget it again and the bolts section will be the last place I check.


Oh, cool. One less reason to pull out my AISI.


----------



## User1

FutureSE said:


> Now I'm thinking about the song "Tap That," but with "Tab that," instead. I feel like someone with musical talent should write a parody song to th﻿e same beat about the SE exams and post to Yo﻿uTube. I'd subscribe.﻿


I hope they start playing it when we walk out the exam and errbody gets turnt


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Ok everyone. First, you probably didn't even know you needed this. Second, you're welcome...

@tj_PE @cal91 this one is for you guys. Adderall is a helluva drug.

I see that beam, does it make L over one-eighty?
I see it creepin', oh yeah it’s deflecting real slow
We could probly’ fix it with some cabling and a King pos’ (post)
Yeah, I bet that would make it meet design co’ (code)
Oh no, here comes the proctor
Walking back to watch me

Tab that, NDS chapter four
Tab that, ACI and more
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
Tab that, live loads on the floor
Tab that, diaphragm chord
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh

Up real early, ready to go test now
Pull up in the parking lot shoving my biscuit down
Examinees got their suitcases packed now
Steel beam bearing on a grout pack now!
It’s temperature loaded and oh god I don’t know how!?! (ooh)
I see it expand and contract now
I can’t find tha’ chapter, I’ll just have to put my best guess down
Next one’s NDS, at least I’ve read that now!

I see beams creepin', oh they’re deflecting real slow
We could probly’ fix em with some cabling and a King pos’
Yeah, I bet that would make em meet design co’
Oh no, here comes the proctor
Walking back to watch me

Tab that, Lateral Force
Tab that, Omega and more
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
Tab that, Construction type 4
Tab that, Masonry anchor (long o)
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oooh

Ooh, another OCB frame there
They better hang on when I throw this seismic on
Superscript code exception and then increase it
Past its SDC limit

Euler, Bernoulli, and Newton’s laws
The way they interact determines bearing walls
Better check both orthogonals
Tryin' to hold my pee back through my drawers
Hands up, hope the proctor saw
Creeps up behind me, she's like "YOU'RE -"
I'm like, "Yeah, I know, let's cut to the chase"
I gotta hit the head then get back to my place
Plus from the restroom to the test room, it's like a mile away
Testing center’s like a palace, shall I say
Now I'm in the index trying to think of that equation’s name
Flipping through the words, but they all look the same!

I see beams creepin', oh they’re deflecting real slow
We could probly’ fix em with some cabling and a King pos’
Yeah, I bet that would make em meet design co’
Oh no, here comes the proctor
I hope my watch don't beep

Tab that, interaction, of course
Tab that, buckling and more
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oh-oh-oh-oh
Tab that, point load over a door
Tab that, connections to supports
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oooh

A big truck is rollin' right across the midspan
Bridge is checked for fatigue combinations
Girders just a bowin’, big truck a rollin'
Soon I'll be through after finishing this problem on masonry
Oh lord, I need a minimum of three!
NCEES please pass me
C’mon now, I wanna be an SE!

I see beams creepin', oh they’re deflecting real slow
We could probly’ fix em with some cabling and a King pos’
Yeah, I bet that would make em meet design co’
Oh no, here comes the proctor
Walking back to watch me

Tab that, confined concrete core
Tab that, Risk Category 4
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oooh
Tab that, even when you’re bored
Tab that, then tab some more
Tab that, 'till you get sore
Tab that, oh-oooh


----------



## User1

Oh


----------



## User1

My


----------



## User1

God


----------



## User1

I just proposed


----------



## Stardust

tj_PE said:


> I just proposed


to WHOM?


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Future SE is it safe to say that you're not spending your time studying for the fall exam? IE confident with the results of this round!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> Future SE is it safe to say that you're not spending your time studying for the fall exam? IE confident with the results of this round!


If I didn't pass, which I wholeheartedly believe I did after taking EET Lateral, I am taking a break anyway. I've got a few years before my vertical pass runs out. I just wanted to have some fun and iterations of that song stuck in my head throughout the day due to a previous comment.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

FutureSE said:


> If I didn't pass, which I wholeheartedly believe I did after taking EET Lateral, I am taking a break anyway. I've got a few years before my vertical pass runs out. I just wanted to have some fun and iterations of that song stuck in my head throughout the day due to a previous comment.


The effort was well appreciated   Makes waiting a little less painful.


----------



## cal91

Haha wow. Impressive in a way only engineers would appreciate. Haha love the part about the bathroom. Literally the most stressful part of the exam. Now I can relate to my 3 year old son that Dad gets stressed out about going on the potty too.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE, Well done sir. Even the acrimonious SE exam graders would give that soliloquy an "acceptable". Meets and exceeds all standards of competency, to be succinct.

As an added bonus, it seems that Akon also hails from ATL.


----------



## YAZRABADI

very impressive, one more day down. God bless us all.


----------



## Nathan55

It's surreal to think that at this very moment, people in south carolina are deciding whether I will need to pay NCEES 500$ to register in october.


----------



## YAZRABADI

Nathan55 said:


> It's surreal to think that at this very moment, people in south carolina are deciding whether I will need to pay NCEES 500$ to register in october.


It is very real and happening right now!! May the Lord soften their hearts and minds. I pray for us all, God bless.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Nathan55 said:


> It's surreal to think that at this very moment, people in south carolina are deciding whether I will need to pay NCEES 500$ to register in october.


I think it's surreal that the decision is behind based on some marks we made with rocks on dead trees over 2 months ago.

But maybe I am overthinking it. Send the positive thoughts to SC!


----------



## Nathan55

YAZRABADI said:


> It is very real and happening right now!! May the Lord soften their hearts and minds. I pray for us all, God bless.


Man...I gotta commend you on staying positive. 



QuinnTheEskimo said:


> I think it's surreal that the decision is behind based on some marks we made with rocks on dead trees over 2 months ago.
> 
> But maybe I am overthinking it. Send the positive thoughts to SC!


True that. NCEES, I take back I all I said about your practice exam being disingenuous. I'm ordering 10 of them now. Also, here is a something to show I'm sincere *virtual hug*


----------



## SE_Hopeful

What's the general turnaround time for the results after the SE is graded?


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

NCEES will open October SE exam on 06-17-2019. We should know the results by then.


----------



## YAZRABADI

Nathan55 said:


> Man...I gotta commend you on staying positive.
> 
> True that. NCEES, I take back I all I said about your practice exam being disingenuous. I'm ordering 10 of them now. Also, here is a something to show I'm sincere *virtual hug*


Nathan55, you have to my man. you have to have faith in the Lord in times of need and in all times. When you have put forth all your time and efforts into something and seek the Lord's help coupled with faith, no doubt it will come to be acceptable. I pray for all of us here, God bless us all. 

Yaz


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

My state board meets bi-monthly and met today. All the PE takers will be getting their License confirmed today while the SE takers will have to wait for August now  Thought this may be amusing to some!


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> My state board meets bi-monthly and met today. All the PE takers will be getting their License confirmed today while the SE takers will have to wait for August now  Thought this may be amusing to some!


The deadline for October SE exam registration is end of July. You would hear from them sooner than August!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Vancouver CA SE said:


> The deadline for October SE exam registration is end of July. You would hear from them sooner than August!


I think Quinn is saying that the SE’s won’t be able to be licensed until the board approves. Since they met now, it’ll be August before they meet again. Hence August before license app approval...


----------



## cal91

90% of the way there... One more week fellas!


----------



## YAZRABADI

Happy Friday to all. One day down. Day two grading. God bless all and have a blessed weekend.


----------



## Maya_206

Do we know when we are expecting the results? Is it next week (Week of 06/10)?


----------



## Maya_206

FutureSE - Can you share your experience with EET Lateral classes?

Freak-out mode where you start planning for what to do if I don't make it. I did two sample tests from PPI and NCCES and found the exam to be a lot harder.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

The EET Lateral practice exam was harder than the PPI and NCEES practice exams. I found it more in line with the difficulty of the actual exam. Overall the course is very good, you get a ton of practice problems


----------



## cal91

Friday 6/14.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

confirmed?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Maya_206 said:


> Do we know when we are expecting the results? Is it next week (Week of 06/10)?


Yes, we should all hear something next week. Hopefully as soon as Monday afternoon.


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

Scoring workshop should have been over by now, and, our exams are marked. Next couple of days are brutal!


----------



## Civil Dawg

Vancouver CA SE said:


> Scoring workshop should have been over by now, and, our exams are marked. Next couple of days are brutal!


Fingers crossed for “Improvement Required” on 1 or 2 PM problems. If I can get that then I like my odds...but not getting my hopes up. Would be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

So ready for this part of my life to be over. It has been a struggle for way too long. Good luck to all of you. Especially if you are in Georgia where there is no other option to licensure for anyone who designs any kind of building. If I ever manage to get on the state board, I will push for a bylaw that demands the current members must pass any new exams they intend to adopt. If there isn’t a PE there in that specialty, they shouldn’t be adopting new exams in that discipline anyway. I really don’t believe the current PEs practicing structural there could pass this thing but who knows, I’ve seen a terribly stupid engineer that somehow did (or claims he did and has a stamp). Yet another reason I believe the grading is extremely inconsistent.

“May the dice of life roll in our favor this administration and may the tears of joy flow forth from thine faces upon reception of Acceptable results.” ~

FutureSE

Upon passing, I will have to change my name.


----------



## Duke

Good luck everyone! I wish I was as confident as you FutureSE. Please stick around if you pass!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Maya_206 said:


> FutureSE - Can you share your experience with EET Lateral classes?
> 
> Freak-out mode where you start planning for what to do if I don't make it. I did two sample tests from PPI and NCCES and found the exam to be a lot harder.


@Maya_206The EET lateral course really helped me to understand the concepts behind special seismic detailing. In my opinion, it was an insurmountable hurdle to handle on my own due to my lack of exposure, and the lack of exposure of those around me, to high seismic design. If you have people around that are competent in seismic design that you can go to with questions, the course may not be needed. However, if you have no one competent in seismic and your shortcomings (like mine) fall within this category, then I can honestly say the EET lateral course will get you where you need to be on a conceptual and code level. If you are having difficulty in other sections, it could still help but the only reason I could see not to take it would be if you have weaknesses in structural analysis. The course is more so geared to code knowledge and most of the information presented is on seismic (which, at least to me, wind is fairly straightforward so this makes sense). If you have any other questions, please feel free to message me. Good luck!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> Good luck everyone! I wish I was as confident as you FutureSE. Please stick around if you pass!


I need suggestions for a new name. I was thinking something along the lines of Prince's name change. IE "TheSEformerlyknownasFutureSE"


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Of course, I'm going to feel like I went full retard if I fail, but I will definitely be around. I'm working on my publication by the way. I am about 30 questions in to writing what I plan to be a 100 question gravity review book. I'll do the same for lateral when I get there. @David Connor, SE is right though. This takes a significant time investment.

BTW David, I actually live near Lawrenceville, GA. If you want to collaborate on a publication outside of bridges, I'm very interested and you're welcome to message me. If not, that's fine too. I'll keep grinding along on my own as the sad music from the old "The Incredible Hulk" TV series plays in the background.


----------



## TheBigGuy

FutureSE said:


> Upon ﻿passing, I will have﻿ to change my name﻿﻿﻿.


CurrentSE.

Nah, if you are going to start publishing, throw your whole name down like David Connor, SE.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

TheBigGuy said:


> CurrentSE.
> 
> Nah, if you are going to start publishing, throw your whole name down like David Connor, SE.


Maybe a pseudonym.


----------



## LetsSE

I strongly feel that the results will be released either today or tomorrow.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

I think they will send the results to the boards by the end of today and release them to the examinees tomorrow. The PE results came out on a Tuesday too.


----------



## Civil Dawg

LetsSE said:


> I strongly feel that the results will be released either today or tomorrow.


History tells us it will either be this Friday (6/14) or next Monday (6/17).  On one hand, I don't want it to ruin my weekend. But on the other, if results are out Friday then that'll give me one extra weekend to study for October


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Civil Dawg said:


> History tells us it will either be this Friday (6/14) or next Monday (6/17).  On one hand, I don't want it to ruin my weekend. But on the other, if results are out Friday then that'll give me one extra weekend to study for October


I've seen it all over the place. Past performance doesn't always guarantee future results. I'm just ready to have the wait over!


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

What is a reasonable amount of time to wait between checking both this board and the NCEES website? Typically it's around 30 minutes for me. 

Also now that the HQ is in SC, the office should run on the eastern time zone! I hope the move doesn't cause any further delays.


----------



## Maya_206

My apple watch tells me its time to 'breathe'. Is it just me or is it just the Monday morning.

Good luck everyone!


----------



## Maya_206

"Past SE" would be too obvious of a name change.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

"NCEES_APPROVED_SE" To show your love for your favorite organization


----------



## Maya_206

Thank You "Future SE"..soon to be "Past SE". Good Luck.

I will seriously consider the EET if I don't make it this round. I am familiar with the seismic detailing but I am not practicing buildings lately (last few years). Will hopefully help me to stay focused. I passed PE CA Seismic without studying 10 years ago (when I was designing the same stuff at work every day). 

Keeping my fingers crossed. I put in a lot of effort but much has been towards the end (last 2 months before the exam). I took the lateral twice and every time, I remember walking out of the exam saying "If I had 30 minutes more, I would have aced it". That is the reason for my issue with the SE Exam structure. The afternoon portion was my issue. I have no problems getting 30/40 on the am.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Maya_206 said:


> Thank You "Future SE"..soon to be "Past SE". Good Luck.
> 
> I will seriously consider the EET if I don't make it this round. I am familiar with the seismic detailing but I am not practicing buildings lately (last few years). Will hopefully help me to stay focused. I passed PE CA Seismic without studying 10 years ago (when I was designing the same stuff at work every day).
> 
> Keeping my fingers crossed. I put in a lot of effort but much has been towards the end (last 2 months before the exam). I took the lateral twice and every time, I remember walking out of the exam saying "If I had 30 minutes more, I would have aced it". That is the reason for my issue with the SE Exam structure. The afternoon portion was my issue. I have no problems getting 30/40 on the am.


I hear you and I am certainly in agreement there is too much material on the exam for the time given. It's why I say the exam is not a "minimum competency" exam. With ample time, a suitably intelligent/competent engineer could find the code provisions, perform the calculations, and then leave with a reasonable expectation of passing. The current exam structure is formatted in such a way as to push the time frame to it's absolute limit. In other words, if you come across a problem that you don't immediately know the answer to or know almost exactly where the code provisions are, you'll likely run out of time. Happened to me twice as well. I still think not passing time before last was a fluke, but who knows. Maybe I suffer from the Dunning Kruger effect. I've never had ample time to check my answers in the afternoon for simple mistakes, though I was generally able to do so in the morning.

Worst case scenario if you take EET though, they'll provide you with a lot of additional study material and a schedule spanning about 4 months of study.


----------



## cal91

Man. Just read everyone's posts today and can already tell this week is going to be brutal - now my hopes are up that it'll come out today (or if not today, then tomorrow, rinse &amp; repeat) even though logically I know our chances aren't very high until Friday at the earliest. AHHHHHHH!!!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> Man. Just read everyone's posts today and can already tell this week is going to be brutal - now my hopes are up that it'll come out today (or if not today, then tomorrow, rinse &amp; repeat) even though logically I know our chances aren't very high until Friday at the earliest. AHHHHHHH!!!


I know. The suspense is killing me. Even though you are most likely almost certainly positively absolutely 100% right and the results are likely due out this Friday or next Monday, I cannot take it and must believe the NCEES exam fairies will visit us with good fortune and provide us with a much needed end to our current torment. I believe this Friday will mark the 10 week point unless my counting is screwed and it possibly is as my nerves are on edge.


----------



## cal91

Does anyone have historical data for determining the earliest results have ever been given out after a grading workshop? I didn't think it was ever released earlier than the Friday afterwards, but people on here seem to have higher hopes than that.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> Does anyone have historical data for determining the earliest results have ever been given out after a grading workshop? I didn't think it was ever released earlier than the Friday afterwards, but people on here seem to have higher hopes than that.


I've seen the results released the Thursday after. What gets me this time though, is that grading normally occurs over Saturday and Sunday. This administration, it started on a Thursday.


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> I've seen the results released the Thursday after. What gets me this time though, is that grading normally occurs over Saturday and Sunday. This administration, it started on a Thursday.


There's only one possible explanation as to why this would be...

We're in the end game now.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> There's only one possible explanation as to why this would be...
> 
> We're in the end game now.







There you have it. I am inevitable.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

I wonder which of us will be the first to see our own results!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> I wonder which of us will be the first to see our own results!


My magic 8 ball says "Not likely" for me.


----------



## YAZRABADI

This is the weeks Folks. God bless us all. I pray for good ending of this long wait. 

May the Lord Jesus show his mercy to all of us here. 

YAZ


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

YAZRABADI said:


> This is the weeks Folks. God bless us all. I pray for good ending of this long wait.
> 
> May the Lord Jesus show his mercy to all of us here.
> 
> YAZ


Maybe. My life experience has led me to believe Jesus has an odd sense of humor. He reminds me a lot of a kid with a magnifying glass, lots of spare time, and an unsuspecting anthill that doesn't even know doom is coming. Then he's all like "Accept me as your Lord and savior ants, or I shall burn you for all eternity!" Now that I say that out loud, it's almost mafia like. Jesus even demands money on Sundays for "Protection". This is why I have trust issues.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Productivity level seems to hovering around 55-60% today


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

TheLoneStarEngineer said:


> Productivity level seems to hovering around 55-60% today


Well, I'm thankful I'm my own boss. Although,  I might end up firing myself and that's going to make for a really awkward conversation.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

TheLoneStarEngineer said:


> Productivity level seems to hovering around 55-60% today


Combine normal Monday productivity with slim chance of getting SE results back... yeahhhhhhhh


----------



## SE_Hopeful

this thread already has more posts in it than any other thread on this SE board


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

SE_Hopeful said:


> this thread already has more posts in it than any other thread on this SE board


The previous results thread was about 3 pages before results came out. What made this one so special?


----------



## Maya_206

I got notification for the last exam on 12/10 (Monday). So I'm hoping it will be today or next Monday?? arghhh.


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> Of course, I'm going to feel like I went full retard if I fail, but I will definitely be around. I'm working on my publication by the way. I am about 30 questions in to writing what I plan to be a 100 question gravity review book. I'll do the same for lateral when I get there. @David Connor, SE is right though. This takes a significant time investment.
> 
> BTW David, I actually live near Lawrenceville, GA. If you want to collaborate on a publication outside of bridges, I'm very interested and you're welcome to message me. If not, that's fine too. I'll keep grinding along on my own as the sad music from the old "The Incredible Hulk" TV series plays in the background.


FutureSE, I think it goes without saying that any publications you write MUST include your "Tab That" remix in the foreword. It's reveals a type of genius we don't see often among structural engineers.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> FutureSE, I think it goes without saying that any publications you write MUST include your "Tab That" remix in the foreword. It's reveals a type of genius we don't see often among structural engineers.


I'll have to see if parodies are protected under fair use or ask Akon for reproduction rights.


----------



## Nathan55

Maya_206 said:


> I got notification for the last exam on 12/10 (Monday). So I'm hoping it will be today or next Monday?? arghhh.


Last spring, results came out on the Tuesday after the grading session. NCEES should be thankful I don't live in South Carolina. I'd be there right now. With a bouquet of flowers and chocolate. Maybe a hallmark card that says "thinking of you."


----------



## cal91

Nathan55 said:


> Last spring, results came out on the Tuesday after the grading session. NCEES should be thankful I don't live in South Carolina. I'd be there right now. With a bouquet of flowers and chocolate. Maybe a hallmark card that says "thinking of you."


AHHHHH I'm dying. And tomorrow I'm going to die even more. I'll be super dead.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> AHHHHH I'm dying. And tomorrow I'm going to die even more. I'll be super dead.


"It just so happens you're only mostly dead. There is a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead means slightly alive."


----------



## Duke

FutureSE said:


> Maybe. My life experience has led me to believe Jesus has an odd sense of humor. He reminds me a lot of a kid with a magnifying glass, lots of spare time, and an unsuspecting anthill that doesn't even know doom is coming. Then he's all like "Accept me as your Lord and savior ants, or I shall burn you for all eternity!" Now that I say that out loud, it's almost mafia like. Jesus even demands money on Sundays for "Protection". This is why I have trust issues.


Jesus was either a liar, lunatic, or lord. I don't see how this take is even rational lol.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> Jesus was either a liar, lunatic, or lord. I don't see how this take is even rational lol.


How do you know those terms are mutually exclusive?


----------



## Stewie

To me, most likely the release of results means the new round of study.


----------



## LetsSE

The results are OUT?

I really hope so.


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

Here reminds me of the undergrad. Group of students, lining up in front of Prof. office and waiting for him to put up the score list.


----------



## TheBigGuy

If I pass the exam When I pass the exam, I will probably make a lot of unnecessary high cost purchases.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

TheBigGuy said:


> If I pass the exam When I pass the exam, I will probably make a lot of unnecessary high cost purchases.


Hookers and cocaine.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

What I hope to see in a few days.


----------



## LetsSE

FutureSE said:


> What I hope to see in a few days.


Where did you get those pictures?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

LetsSE said:


> Where did you get those pictures?


I made it with my special picture making machine.


----------



## Duke

FutureSE said:


> How do you know those terms are mutually exclusive?


And are you suggesting you believe Jesus is divine and a combination of the other two? Talking like you have been about it I figured it was safe to assume atheist or agnostic.


----------



## LetsSE

FutureSE  is FakedPassed SE


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Man. I really need to have some patience, scroll all the way down the post and then check my NCEES account..


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> View attachment 13363
> 
> 
> What I hope to see in a few days.


 Damn you


----------



## LetsSE

I just called the Illinois exam board. They told me that they, NCEES, had hard experience grading the SE exam, the results could be out any time now and might until Friday. It is possible they had a delayed grading due to the difficulties they met. Take a big breath, everyone!!!!


----------



## Maya_206

I am wondering what 'hard' grading means.... not meeting all the statistical norms of a bell curving the results?


----------



## TheBigGuy

Maya_206 said:


> I am wondering what 'hard' grading means.... not meeting all the statistical norms of a bell curving the results?


I think they mean that they waited 10 weeks to grade the exam instead of the usual 6.


----------



## LetsSE

I would recommend everyone calling your state exam board to get more information. Please!!!!


----------



## YAZRABADI

FutureSE said:


> Maybe. My life experience has led me to believe Jesus has an odd sense of humor. He reminds me a lot of a kid with a magnifying glass, lots of spare time, and an unsuspecting anthill that doesn't even know doom is coming. Then he's all like "Accept me as your Lord and savior ants, or I shall burn you for all eternity!" Now that I say that out loud, it's almost mafia like. Jesus even demands money on Sundays for "Protection". This is why I have trust issues.


Don't be too hard on yourself. The Lord loves us all. Our Lord knows it all too, my friend, your ups and your downs (no surprises) . No need to think about burning for eternity for the Lord Jesus came  to save us all. You should not let thoughts tell you otherwise, the Lord is above it all and knows what is best for all of us. I hope this helps you. 

All I was trying to say is that I am pray for all of us that we may have a positive outcome......


----------



## Civil Dawg

Maya_206 said:


> I am wondering what 'hard' grading means.... not meeting all the statistical norms of a bell curving the results?


I just about guarantee it was due to the BS wording is some PM questions. Knowing how well I knew the material but got confused on wording on the one Lateral PM question discussed previously, and hearing how everyone else also seemed to feel the same way, I bet there was an unusual amount of UNACCEPTABLE results on that one question. If 60-70% of people failed that question then they failed the exam without even considering the rest of the exam. Hopefully they’re re-evaluating how that question was scored. That’s my hope at least.


----------



## TheBigGuy

Civil Dawg said:


> I just about guarantee it was due to the BS wording is some PM questions. Knowing how well I knew the material but got confused on wording on the one Lateral PM question discussed previously, and hearing how everyone else also seemed to feel the same way, I bet there was an unusual amount of UNACCEPTABLE results on that one question. If 60-70% of people failed that question then they failed the exam without even considering the rest of the exam. Hopefully they’re re-evaluating how that question was scored. That’s my hope at least.﻿﻿


Well I nailed that question, which I thought was fair.  If they are going to let people slide on that problem, I hope they cut me some slack on the lat pm foundation problem.


----------



## cal91

TheBigGuy said:


> Well I nailed that question, which I thought was fair.  If they are going to let people slide on that problem, I hope they cut me some slack on the lat pm foundation problem.


With you on that one too. It'll be interesting to see how it all goes down!


----------



## LetsSE

Civil Dawg said:


> I just about guarantee it was due to the BS wording is some PM questions. Knowing how well I knew the material but got confused on wording on the one Lateral PM question discussed previously, and hearing how everyone else also seemed to feel the same way, I bet there was an unusual amount of UNACCEPTABLE results on that one question. If 60-70% of people failed that question then they failed the exam without even considering the rest of the exam. Hopefully they’re re-evaluating how that question was scored. That’s my hope at least.


Are talking about bridges or buildings. For bridges, I feel that the second (foundation) and third (general) questions are both subtle and unclear.


----------



## cal91

If you pass, do you get to know your PM scores?


----------



## User1

cal91 said:


> If you pass, do you get to know your PM scores?


No


----------



## Civil Dawg

LetsSE said:


> Are talking about bridges or buildings. For bridges, I feel that the second (foundation) and third (general) questions are both subtle and unclear.


I took Buildings but was mostly kidding (but slightly hopeful). I did walk out of the exam in front of someone who took bridges and when I asked how it went he just shook his head and said he didn’t know what one question was even looking for.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Civil Dawg said:


> I took Buildings but was mostly kidding (but slightly hopeful). I did walk out of the exam in front of someone who took bridges and when I asked how it went he just shook his head and said he didn’t know what one question was even looking for.


This sums up my feelings on all multiple choice bridge questions ever.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

im holding my breath every time i get a new email notification, this could be a long week


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> Grats on passing, I don't know what to call you now. I'll likely have to wait days for my board to release the results
> 
> And are you suggesting you believe Jesus is divine and a combination of the other two? Talking like you have been about it I figured it was safe to assume atheist or agnostic.


The pictures were just a photoshop joke. I haven't received results, but I wanted to gig everyone.

I am what I refer to as an agnostic athiest. My main concern with Jesus (if he exists) is why he plays favorites. He appeared to a select few and shunned the rest of us. Supposing there truly is an omnipotent (take this to mean omnipresent and omniscient as well) all father type deity, it is fully within his realm of capability to at least remove all doubt of his existence from the minds of non-believers, yet he doesn't do so. I've heard others mention free will and such arguments, however, I have never seen this argument in the Bible. Matt Dillahunty actually has the best argument, IMO, for the free will defense in specifically pointing out that Satan and a third of the Angels had free will, were creations of God, were weaker beings than God, and yet were perfectly capable of rebelling against God while knowing he existed. 

I was raised in a fiercely religious family and it took me years to get out of my indoctrination of "belief without question." Once I moved out from my parents and started to critically question the Bible and the world around me, I started to realize the good book does not hold up to critical scrutiny. There are several barbaric practices the church partakes in that are hideous when looked at from another point of view. Take the practice of circumcision for example. When Muslims mutilate female genitals, everybody gets butthurt, but when Christians  happily have their sons genitalia mutilated because the good book says so, somehow that's fine because God said so. Why did he even put the foreskin on, one might ask? Is it that God made a mistake? Also consider the story of Eden. If God didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge, then why was the tree even in Eden. He's also supposed to be omniscient and omnipresent, he knew this was going to happen. It's like me leaving a steak in the living room for my dog and then beating him and banishing him and all future puppies outside when he ate it, despite the fact that I full well knew the poor pupper would. It's steak and I don't think I'd have that kind of control, much less expect my K-9 companion to. God also didn't mind guarding the tree with flaming swords that turned every way after the fall of man, he could've done so just as easily before one would think. For that matter, assuming the tree was a tangible temporal object, he could've placed the thing on Mars or he could've even made it inedible or even banished it to an alternate dimension (he's God after all). Just like I could avoid having my dog eat my steak by placing it in the oven. Another one of my favorites is Samson slaying 1000 Philistines with a donkey's jaw bone in the book of Judges. It is a complete impossibility for one man to accomplish such a feat. Even the Spartans with 300 in the pass at Thermopylae only managed to kill around 30 Persians each and this was only because their flanks were covered and their backs were inaccessible (for a time, anyway). Then there is the mention of Moses and the Israelites on the Exodus from Egypt.  There is literally no scientific backing or archeological evidence to prove this event ever happened not to mention that the trip was likely around 500KM or about 310 Miles. It's quite a haul, but most of the people in ancient times could handle 15 to 20 miles a day without too many problems. Even if they rested on the Sabbath, they should've made it to the promised land in less than a month. It took them 40 years to get there. God must've had his hand in programming apple maps I guess. No mention from Egyptians of hundreds of thousands if not millions of slaves leaving Egypt either. You'd think that would've kind of been a big deal. At least enough to get a few picture characters chiseled into some limestone.

Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely be a believer if there were any substantial evidence to support the case for Christ or any other deity for the thousands of religions. You'd think there would be gods everywhere doing their deeds as many as have existed throughout history.

If substantiating evidence were to be provided to me, I would change my mind if the evidence surpassed my burden of proof. Sadly, I've yet to see this happen. Seems like every time evidence is presented, it is done so in the way that Bigfoot is. By that I mean, it is a "look here are pictures of Bigfoot," however, no proof ever really materializes and if something (like hair) does get tested, it's proven to be a forgery. Just like the shroud of Turin now that I think about it. Maybe Jesus is Bigfoot. I have a feeling I would have a substantially equal probability of finding either. I'm truly sorry if I've upset you or anyone else from the post, as I've been fed the Christian doctrine almost my entire life and though I harbor no ill against those who believe, I also know sincerely how emotionally "naked and vulnerable" I felt after leaving the comfort of this belief system. The first step in opening one's eyes and freeing themselves from the bindings of religion is to view the absurdity from another point of view and then read the Bible. In my opinion, anyone that reads a religious text and then fact checks it or even thinks about it critically cannot remain religious.

What comes after this life, I do not know and can only wish that I did. The only thing I can say for certain is that I know nobody else does either.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

It's past 5pm EST, safe to say no results today?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

double post


----------



## SE_Hopeful

[running around in his underwear] Help me Jesus! Help me Jewish God! Help me Allah! AAAAAHHH! Help me Tom Cruise! Tom Cruise, use your witchcraft on me to [help me pass the SE]!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

SE_Hopeful said:


> [running around in his underwear] Help me Jesus! Help me Jewish God! Help me Allah! AAAAAHHH! Help me Tom Cruise! Tom Cruise, use your witchcraft on me to [help me pass the SE]!


Silly Ricky Bobby, he should've called for Poseidon. Everyone knows that the god of water can make it rain! Now I have ideas of a rapper named Poseidon at "da strip club" making it rain. Oh lord, I feel another song coming on.


----------



## YAZRABADI

FutureSE said:


> The pictures were just a photoshop joke. I haven't received results, but I wanted to gig everyone.
> 
> I am what I refer to as an agnostic athiest. My main concern with Jesus (if he exists) is why he plays favorites. He appeared to a select few and shunned the rest of us. Supposing there truly is an omnipotent (take this to mean omnipresent and omniscient as well) all father type deity, it is fully within his realm of capability to at least remove all doubt of his existence from the minds of non-believers, yet he doesn't do so. I've heard others mention free will and such arguments, however, I have never seen this argument in the Bible. Matt Dillahunty actually has the best argument, IMO, for the free will defense in specifically pointing out that Satan and a third of the Angels had free will, were creations of God, were weaker beings than God, and yet were perfectly capable of rebelling against God while knowing he existed.
> 
> I was raised in a fiercely religious family and it took me years to get out of my indoctrination of "belief without question." Once I moved out from my parents and started to critically question the Bible and the world around me, I started to realize the good book does not hold up to critical scrutiny. There are several barbaric practices the church partakes in that are hideous when looked at from another point of view. Take the practice of circumcision for example. When Muslims mutilate female genitals, everybody gets butthurt, but when Christians  happily have their sons genitalia mutilated because the good book says so, somehow that's fine because God said so. Why did he even put the foreskin on, one might ask? Is it that God made a mistake? Also consider the story of Eden. If God didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge, then why was the tree even in Eden. He's also supposed to be omniscient and omnipresent, he knew this was going to happen. It's like me leaving a steak in the living room for my dog and then beating him and banishing him and all future puppies outside when he ate it, despite the fact that I full well knew the poor pupper would. It's steak and I don't think I'd have that kind of control, much less expect my K-9 companion to. God also didn't mind guarding the tree with flaming swords that turned every way after the fall of man, he could've done so just as easily before one would think. For that matter, assuming the tree was a tangible temporal object, he could've placed the thing on Mars or he could've even made it inedible or even banished it to an alternate dimension (he's God after all). Just like I could avoid having my dog eat my steak by placing it in the oven. Another one of my favorites is Samson slaying 1000 Philistines with a donkey's jaw bone in the book of Judges. It is a complete impossibility for one man to accomplish such a feat. Even the Spartans with 300 in the pass at Thermopylae only managed to kill around 30 Persians each and this was only because their flanks were covered and their backs were inaccessible (for a time, anyway). Then there is the mention of Moses and the Israelites on the Exodus from Egypt.  There is literally no scientific backing or archeological evidence to prove this event ever happened not to mention that the trip was likely around 500KM or about 310 Miles. It's quite a haul, but most of the people in ancient times could handle 15 to 20 miles a day without too many problems. Even if they rested on the Sabbath, they should've made it to the promised land in less than a month. It took them 40 years to get there. God must've had his hand in programming apple maps I guess. No mention from Egyptians of hundreds of thousands if not millions of slaves leaving Egypt either. You'd think that would've kind of been a big deal. At least enough to get a few picture characters chiseled into some limestone.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely be a believer if there were any substantial evidence to support the case for Christ or any other deity for the thousands of religions. You'd think there would be gods everywhere doing their deeds as many as have existed throughout history.
> 
> If substantiating evidence were to be provided to me, I would change my mind if the evidence surpassed my burden of proof. Sadly, I've yet to see this happen. Seems like every time evidence is presented, it is done so in the way that Bigfoot is. By that I mean, it is a "look here are pictures of Bigfoot," however, no proof ever really materializes and if something (like hair) does get tested, it's proven to be a forgery. Just like the shroud of Turin now that I think about it. Maybe Jesus is Bigfoot. I have a feeling I would have a substantially equal probability of finding either. I'm truly sorry if I've upset you or anyone else from the post, as I've been fed the Christian doctrine almost my entire life and though I harbor no ill against those who believe, I also know sincerely how emotionally "naked and vulnerable" I felt after leaving the comfort of this belief system. The first step in opening one's eyes and freeing themselves from the bindings of religion is to view the absurdity from another point of view and then read the Bible. In my opinion, anyone that reads a religious text and then fact checks it or even thinks about it critically cannot remain religious.
> 
> What comes after this life, I do not know and can only wish that I did. The only thing I can say for certain is that I know nobody else does either.


Dude, you dont need to follow your parents foot steps. You just humble yourself and ask him if he is there? dont take no one else is word. I can grantee you, if you pay attention to the signs and open your heart and mind, it would be very clear to you my friend. 

Yaz


----------



## LetsSE

Morning Everyone, I really hope we know the results today.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Fingers crossed for Day 2 of the six paths of pain.


----------



## Civil Dawg

I was out of the office at a jobsite yesterday and will be tomorrow and Friday so those days go by quick.  My patience is tested on days like today and Thursday, though.


----------



## Maya_206

Fingers crossed! Good luck everyone. Could today be the day?

Wonder what everyone's plans are if they make it over to the other side? I am going to take the next day off to do nothing.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

every day the odds of receiving results increase


----------



## aman

this waiting game is keeping me on the edge......


----------



## Hindianapolis

my productivity is exponentially decreasing......


----------



## Nathan55

Maya_206 said:


> Fingers crossed! Good luck everyone. Could today be the day?
> 
> Wonder what everyone's plans are if they make it over to the other side? I am going to take the next day off to do nothing.


I honestly haven't thought that far in advance. I have my money saved for the October registration. If for some reason I pass, I may just retire like Jordan for a couple of years. Go out on top. Maybe try something easy like project management for awhile.


----------



## Nathan55

LetsSE said:


> I just called the Illinois exam board. They told me that they, NCEES, had hard experience grading the SE exam, the results could be out any time now and might until Friday. It is possible they had a delayed grading due to the difficulties they met. Take a big breath, everyone!!!!


I sincerely hope that any difficulties grading were due to that pure craziness they put on one of the (redacted) problems in the (redacted). It was purposefully obtuse. How can they give you a (redacted) and then ask for the (redacted)? My guess is that a lot of examinees complained about that problem. And maybe they figured that if they want to test knowledge of (redacted) they should word the problem better.


----------



## User1

maybe since it was so difficult, we'll all get the green pass


----------



## YAZRABADI

Another day another struggle. God bless may this day bring peace to all.


----------



## Annon

I believe the purpose of the question was to determine if you understand the accuracy of software output vs design code prescribed equations.  This is something that was discussed in an SE review course I took through SEAOI.  At least, that is how I approached the question.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

why do i keep checking NCEES every 15-30 minutes despite not receiving an email saying the results are out


----------



## LetsSE

SE_Hopeful said:


> why do i keep checking NCEES every 15-30 minutes despite not receiving an email saying the results are out


There is nothing else you can do due to the nervous you have.


----------



## cal91

10,000th post in the Structural forum!

Edit: LetsSE got it.... I'm 10,001st


----------



## Stewie

I got the 10,002nd post! cool~


----------



## Nathan55

Just some random thoughts...but according to NCEES, there are about 500 building people taking the vertical, and 500 taking the lateral. About 80ish bridge people for each day as well. So let's call it 1200 tests to grade. There are two graders on each test (for the afternoon). It makes me curious as to the logistics of this--how many graders are needed? Are they all in or traveling to South Carolina? Are the tests graded before or after the "SE exam meeting"? How much time does it take to grade a test?

And more importantly, are there uproarious eruptions of laughter when someone _just_ misses the cutoff score (i.e. 26/40, A, A, IR, IR)?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

i dont know that the graders even know if someone misses the cutoff score. I presume they are just given a stack of tests after they all come to a consensus on the rubric, and they go through them one by one. im not sure why theyd have the multiple choice results tied to a given afternoon pamphlet


----------



## cal91

Yeah, I'd imagine an individual only sees one part of the PM exams, and grades multiple exams for that one part.

So your exam would be graded by 4 individuals, none of them knowing what you got on the AM, and none of them knowing what you got on the other 3 PM portions.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Nathan55 said:


> Just some random thoughts...but according to NCEES, there are about 500 building people taking the vertical, and 500 taking the lateral. About 80ish bridge people for each day as well. So let's call it 1200 tests to grade. There are two graders on each test (for the afternoon). It makes me curious as to the logistics of this--how many graders are needed? Are they all in or traveling to South Carolina? Are the tests graded before or after the "SE exam meeting"? How much time does it take to grade a test?
> 
> And more importantly, are there uproarious eruptions of laughter when someone _just_ misses the cutoff score (i.e. 26/40, A, A, IR, IR)?


I really hope I am not one of these guys. Imagine the frustration...


----------



## Civil Dawg

Discussing the topic of "who are the graders", a guy I work with is Facebook friends with someone who was a grader.  He posted something on Facebook about headed to South Carolina for the weekend to grade SE Exams.  My co-worker went to college with this person.  He works in the Southwest so he was flown in to grade.  I did a google search and didn't see where he had his SE license but may have either a Masters of PhD?


----------



## aman

Grading workshop being done in June, so answer sheets are already in last two months? So it is automatically decided who cleared the exam when they did PM exam manual grading and computerized grading for AM exam. So what this meeting decides ???... They don't change the decision or something based on the outcome of this meeting???..... It would be more consistent if the same grader checks all the PM answer sheets atleast then you the he used the same yardstick for the whole batch doesn't matter where you are residing.....


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

One of my friend which is PE and has PhD was contacted by NCEES to attend the scoring workshop. I guess being a PE should suffice to mark the exams.


----------



## aman

Vancouver CA SE said:


> One of my friend which is PE and has PhD was contacted by NCEES to attend the scoring workshop. I guess being a PE should suffice to mark the exams. ﻿


that is strange...


----------



## Nathan55

Vancouver CA SE said:


> One of my friend which is PE and has PhD was contacted by NCEES to attend the scoring workshop. I guess being a PE should suffice to mark the exams.


If this is the case, I am slightly concerned that someone who isn't able to pass the test and be called an SE....is telling me I can't be an SE. 

As for the scoring workshop, my working theory is that they decide some of the cutscore info there. A final check on "this is how you should grade an essay problem...this is meeting the bar for IR, A, and so on." They also must have iron-clad NDAs. If a grader reveals the differences between those demarcations, they probably are sent to a CIA black site and forced to watch keeping up with the kardashians on loop.


----------



## Duke

@FutureSE

Thank you for being honest. One concerning thing I noticed with your objections is they are skeptical toward the ancillary elements of Christianity but don't touch on the lynchpin of it all, the resurrection of Jesus. If Jesus did rise from the dead then he is who he said he was and Christianity is true, if he did not then skepticism toward the rest isn't necessary because it would be false. I don't know what your personal "burden of proof" is but for me if it's more probable than not then I'd say it's perfectly rational to hold the belief.



FutureSE said:


> In my opinion, anyone that reads a religious text and then fact checks it or even thinks about it critically cannot remain religious.


TBH I think agnostic/atheists who say this are either uninformed of the strength of the case of the existence of God and the evidence for Christ's resurrection or they are bias against it. I won't bother listing any now unless you want to talk further on this but there are several strong philosophical and evidential reasons to believe in the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus. IMO it is pretty naive to think all Christians on the planet haven't fact checked and thought critically about their beliefs. Not trying to offend or argue, just my thoughts on this.

*Speaking on the grading of the exam*

*Also a coworker of mine took the SEOI course and said that two people grade the afternoon with a rubric and if the scores are different then a third gets involved. Once that is done they run a statistical analysis and correct for "bad questions".*


----------



## YAZRABADI

Duke said:


> @FutureSE
> 
> Thank you for being honest. One concerning thing I noticed with your objections is they are skeptical toward the ancillary elements of Christianity but don't touch on the lynchpin of it all, the resurrection of Jesus. If Jesus did rise from the dead then he is who he said he was and Christianity is true, if he did not then skepticism toward the rest isn't necessary because it would be false. I don't know what your personal "burden of proof" is but for me if it's more probable than not then I'd say it's perfectly rational to hold the belief.
> 
> TBH I think agnostic/atheists who say this are either uninformed of the strength of the case of the existence of God and the evidence for Christs resurrection or they are bias against it. I won't bother listing any now unless you want to talk further on this but there are several strong philosophical and evidential reasons to believe in the existence of God and the resurrection of Jesus. IMO it is pretty naive to think all Christians on the planet haven't fact checked and thought critically about their beliefs. Not trying to offend or argue, just my thoughts on this.
> 
> *Speaking on the grading of the exam*
> 
> *Also a coworker of mine took the SEOI course and said that two people grade the afternoon with a rubric and if the scores are different then a third gets involved. Once that is done they run a statistical analysis and correct for "bad questions".*


Duke, well said my man, I second everything said above. "Blessed are you  that believes without seeing". I questioned it too, trust me, once I humbled myself and accepted it that I will accept that it is true, then things started to change. Sure it is much easier to go through life being hard headed and ignoring the Love of the Lord and his blessing in your life, but believing and walking with Jesus is an amazing journey that I personally enjoy every single day. 

I rest my case!! back to the exam results, where are they? you guys think today?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

jesus fucking christ. i'd pray to whatever god y'all want me to if it meant i'd get the SE results today so i dont have to read any more religion talk in a thread about the SE Exam.

im guessing 5pm EST is the cutoff for results so if we dont get them within the next half hour today is probably not gonna happen


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer




----------



## cal91

^^ I've always wondered why it's socially acceptable in our predominantly Christian country to combine our foulest expletive with the Savior's name. It's especially surprising in the wake of otherwise very tactful posts on both sides of the argument dealing with the subject of Christianity.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> @FutureSE
> 
> Thank you for being honest. One concerning thing I noticed with your objections is they are skeptical toward the ancillary elements of Christianity but don't touch on the lynchpin of it...


Concerning any future arguments, just as the biblical God hardened the heart of the Pharaoh in Exodus, apparently he has hardened mine in confounded disbelief. The pharaoh is again a situation where the biblical God directly intervened in free will, but this time he killed innocent children because well, he's God and he can. &lt;-- This situation runs rampant in Genesis, it's almost like a perfect God couldn't get his creation right. Perhaps, if the absent father had spent positive time with his children, drowning them all for disobedience/blood mixing (spawning nephalim) wouldn't have been necessary. For a loving and all powerful, all present, and all knowing God, it seems strange that he would handle things in such a manner. Much less send someone to hell for eternity for simply not knowing he existed. This situation makes me feel really bad for the Sentinelese people off the coast of India as they're all going to hell and don't even know a hell exists. Plenty of other savages were never exposed to Jesus, despite his saying " I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Imagine waking up after you die and just thinking "Shit, now I'm on fire, FOREVER, and who's this Jesus guy who is so upset with me because I didn't know his name?" All this as pitchfork carrying demons stab you in the butt with said pitchfork and cackle with raucous laughter. This depiction of hell comes from Dante's Inferno by the way. There is actually precious little mention of hell in the Bible. The Jewish religion, from which modern Christianity sprang, doesn't possess a true hell like Christianity as Sheol was more just underworld where everyone went presumably to party and reminisce about the silly things they had done while alive). The other roots of Christianity, Zoroastrianism,  claimed hell was a temporary place meant to burn out the impurities acquired in life, similar to forging the impurities out of iron. I've also had the question about mentally handicapped people that sin and can't understand the concept of Jesus, seems like they get a free pass. Doesn't really seem fair to me.

I take the Bible to be a literal text as it only makes sense that it should be so. Otherwise, individuals of a lesser mental caliber wouldn't stand a chance at its comprehension and would be predestined to make the wrong choices. With that being the case, if there were a perfect God, I don't know why he would need a revision to his Holy book with the New Testament and the Blood Covenant. It's also even stranger to me that the Gospel's directly conflict in several accounts. Admittedly, this wasn't directly apparent to me but upon rereading them after this fact was pointed out, Jesus's burial and resurrection accounts are definitely contradictory and that's merely only the most glaringly obvious to me. I can appreciate the sentiment and I certainly know you mean well. As it is though, I will not respond to further public chat about religion on this board as there is certainly a time and a place (I enjoy the conversation) but where it is bothering others isn't it. If you wish to continue, please PM me but be aware that I love to argue, this isn't the first debate I've had on religion, and while I was impressionable at some point in the past, I am perfectly comfortable not having answers and it will take direct tangible evidence to change my mind. Merely stating personal experiences will not do it as I haven't experienced your life. If personal experience and coincidence works for you, great. The way I see it, if there was an all loving and all knowing God, he would know exactly how to reach me and, just like I would with my children, I would expect him to at least try through a method he knew I would find undeniable. There is my standard of proof, have God speak directly to me (or to the world) in a way that can't be written off as faith or coincidence. Then and only then, I'll believe.


----------



## cal91

So... How about them test results?


----------



## cal91

Maybe NCEES Chat knows if Christianity is true...


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

_And on the 70th day NCEES handeth the test results to the Boards of The State and then the Boards of The State handeth the results to examinees. And the examinees who achieved acceptable results were raised to blessed licensure while the examinees who did not were damned to reexamination and all burdens associated with such a fate. _


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

cal91 said:


> Maybe NCEES Chat knows if Christianity is true...


We need to send NCEES the chat history from this thread. Maybe they will have mercy on us and release the results sooner. As far as I know, NCEES is the one true lord of this thread right now and winter is coming for us all....


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> Maybe NCEES Chat knows if Christianity is true...


Should definitely ask this. I want to know what Ashlei thinks. I bet she tells you that "All I can say is that results will be released in 10 to 12 weeks."


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Happy workday Wednesday to all of you fine folks on the Engineer Boards. Someone mentioned on here earlier that every day the probability of results release increases. I can't find the exact post, but it got me thinking. I haven't heard a probability law state "As time approaches infinity the probability of all probabilistic events occurring equals 1." Take this statement to mean that "everything that can happen will happen," similar to Murphy's law of "Everything that can go wrong will go wrong." The difference is I am claiming both sides, what can go right will go right and what can go wrong will go wrong. The concept may have existed, but like the great thief, Sir Isaac Newton, who stole Hooke's inverse square law to produce the theory of gravitation and stole the credit for inventing calculus from Leibniz, I am going to take this insight, make it my own, and name it after myself. From now own, this shall be known as FutureSE's Law! By the way, for all that didn't know, Newton was a horse's ass. He stole a hell of a lot, it's why his name is on everything. He actually destroyed all paintings known of Robert Hooke over their rivalry too. In addition, one of his most famous quotes "If I've seen further than most, it was because I stood on the shoulder's of giants," was actually a jab at Robert Hooke after Hooke tried to expose Newton as a plagiarist over the inverse square law. Newton made that statement because Hooke was a short guy and Newton was a butthole.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

FutureSE said:


> Happy workday Wednesday to all of you fine folks on the Engineer Boards. Someone mentioned on here earlier that every day the probability of results release increases. I can't find the exact post, but it got me thinking. I haven't heard a probability law state "As time approaches infinity the probability of all probabilistic events occuring equals 1." Take this statement to mean that everything that can happen will happen, similar to Murphy's law of "Everything that can go wrong will go wrong." The difference is I am claiming both sides, what can go right will go right and what can go wrong will go wrong. The concept  may have existed, but like the great thief, Sir Isaac Newton who stole Hooke's inverse square law to produce the theory of gravitation and stole the credit for inventing calculus from Leibniz, I am going to take this insight, make it my own, and name it after myself. From now own, this shall be known as FutureSE's Law! By the way, for all that didn't know, Newton was a horse's ass. He stole a hell of a lot, it's why his name is on everything. He actually destroyed all paintings known of Robert Hooke over their rivalry too. In addition, one of his most famous quotes "If I've seen further than most, it was because I stood on the shoulder's of giants," was actually a jab at Robert Hooke after Hooke tried to expose Newton as a plagiarist over the inverse square law. Newton, made that statement because Hooke was a short guy and Newton was a butthole.


I'm going to put the probability just under 1. Maybe the test results will be destroyed by a solar flare


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> I'm going to but the probability just under 1. Maybe the test results will be destroyed by a solar flare


That's fine, you're allowed to disagree. I can't force everyone to be right.


----------



## LetsSE

Which state will announce the results first?


----------



## TheBigGuy

LetsSE said:


> Which state will announce the results first?


The one with the least bureaucracy.  Illinois will be last btw, sorry to break it to you.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Ashlei seems to getting trained well by Keisha!


----------



## TheBigGuy

TheLoneStarEngineer said:


> Ashlei seems to getting trained well by Keisha!
> 
> View attachment 13376


Typically we get results 6 weeks after the exam, but NCEES has instructed Ashlei to tell us we've actually gotten results typically 8-10 weeks after exam.

With that said, do we usually get results 2 weeks after exam or is that just Ashlei trying to manage our expectations?  I was expecting Illinois results late this week or early next.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

TheBigGuy said:


> Typically we get results 6 weeks after the exam, but NCEES has instructed Ashlei to tell us we've actually gotten results typically 8-10 weeks after exam.
> 
> With that said, do we usually get results 2 weeks after exam or is that just Ashlei trying to manage our expectations?  I was expecting Illinois results late this week or early next.


My bet is on this Friday. It's typically been the week after the exam and sometimes the following Monday after that week, however, the grading typically starts on Saturday and runs through Monday. This time the grading started on a Thursday and ended on a Saturday, which leads me to believe, we should almost certainly receive results Friday.


----------



## Nathan55

TheBigGuy said:


> Typically we get results 6 weeks after the exam, but NCEES has instructed Ashlei to tell us we've actually gotten results typically 8-10 weeks after exam.
> 
> With that said, do we usually get results 2 weeks after exam or is that just Ashlei trying to manage our expectations?  I was expecting Illinois results late this week or early next.


what if you sign in as Ashlei-Kesha and conduct a Turing test? Perhaps we can break the system and cause a cascading failure which will allow friendly white hat hackers to release the results early.


----------



## StruEng

A bit of a tangent here but are any of you that are confident you've passed this time or already have an SE license planning to be a part of SECB? I didn't even know what it was a few days ago and when I read about it I don't really know what the point is, it just seems like another membership fee for little value. I think having "SE" after you're name is already impressive, I'm not sure why SE, SECB would be any better. But I admit I know nothing about the board, so feel free to enlighten me.


----------



## cal91

StruEng said:


> A bit of a tangent here but are any of you that are confident you've passed this time or already have an SE license planning to be a part of SECB? I didn't even know what it was a few days ago and when I read about it I don't really know what the point is, it just seems like another membership fee for little value. I think having "SE" after you're name is already impressive, I'm not sure why SE, SECB would be any better. But I admit I know nothing about the board, so feel free to enlighten me.


No. Done after this.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

StruEng said:


> A bit of a tangent here but are any of you that are confident you've passed this time or already have an SE license planning to be a part of SECB? I didn't even know what it was a few days ago and when I read about it I don't really know what the point is, it just seems like another membership fee for little value. I think having "SE" after you're name is already impressive, I'm not sure why SE, SECB would be any better. But I admit I know nothing about the board, so feel free to enlighten me.


seems pointless if you have an SE.


----------



## Edub24

StruEng said:


> A bit of a tangent here but are any of you that are confident you've passed this time or already have an SE license planning to be a part of SECB? I didn't even know what it was a few days ago and when I read about it I don't really know what the point is, it just seems like another membership fee for little value. I think having "SE" after you're name is already impressive, I'm not sure why SE, SECB would be any better. But I admit I know nothing about the board, so feel free to enlighten me.


 A lot/majority of states don't recognize the SE license so technically anyone with a PE can practice structural engineering regardless of if it's in their field of practice. Basically anyone can put an 'SE' after their name but it doesn't mean anything to prospective clients. One of the main goals of the SECB is to provide a uniform certification process so anybody in any state regardless of whether or not they recognize the SE license will know that someone has an appropriate level of education/experience to practice structural engineering. There are other goals but I took that one as the main reason behind the creation of the SECB. Other disciplines have certification programs (like specialized doctors, architects etc) and I think this was modeled after those.

I think it's still pretty new compared to other licenses which is why a lot of people haven't heard about it. I only found out about it because my previous supervisor used to be on the SECB board. I agree I don't see much value if you're in a state that recognizes the SE license to some degree but I could see value if you either live or do work in states that don't recognize it.


----------



## StruEng

Edub24 said:


> A lot/majority of states don't recognize the SE license so technically anyone with a PE can practice structural engineering regardless of if it's in their field of practice. Basically anyone can put an 'SE' after their name but it doesn't mean anything to prospective clients. One of the main goals of the SECB is to provide a uniform certification process so anybody in any state regardless of whether or not they recognize the SE license will know that someone has an appropriate level of education/experience to practice structural engineering. There are other goals but I took that one as the main reason behind the creation of the SECB. Other disciplines have certification programs (like specialized doctors, architects etc) and I think this was modeled after those.
> 
> I think it's still pretty new compared to other licenses which is why a lot of people haven't heard about it. I only found out about it because my previous supervisor used to be on the SECB board. I agree I don't see much value if you're in a state that recognizes the SE license to some degree but I could see value if you either live or do work in states that don't recognize it.


I don't think anyone can put 'SE' after their name just because they're a PE practicing structural engineering. If you're a PE practicing structural engineering, like myself, you should put PE after your name. But if you pass the SE and are licensed in any state that recognizes SE licensure then you can put 'SE' after your name, regardless of where you practice, as long as you don't suggest you're a licensed SE in a state that you are not. So, if you've passed the SE exam, which is basically a prerequisite of applying to SECB unless you've taken the exams awhile ago or an odd combination of exams, you would likely put 'SE' after your name on your business card and email signature, regardless of the state you actually practice in. Why does 'John Smith PE, SE, SECB' mean anything more than 'John Smith, SE' to anyone who would be hiring John or his firm? Seems like more letters behind a name to make someone feel like they've achieved something more than others with only 'SE' after their name, when in reality it just means you're paying another fee to be a part of a board that doesn't clearly define what they're doing.

If I happen to pass this exam at some point I'll gladly pay to be a part of a board or group that provides some type of service or increases my value, but the website makes it seem like you should apply so you can have the prestige of putting 'SECB' after your name, which seems a little misleading.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

StruEng said:


> I don't think anyone can put 'SE' after their name just because they're a PE practicing structural engineering. If you're a PE practicing structural engineering, like myself, you should put PE after your name. But if you pass the SE and are licensed in any state that recognizes SE licensure then you can put 'SE' after your name, regardless of where you practice, as long as you don't suggest you're a licensed SE in a state that you are not. So, if you've passed the SE exam, which is basically a prerequisite of applying to SECB unless you've taken the exams awhile ago or an odd combination of exams, you would likely put 'SE' after your name on your business card and email signature, regardless of the state you actually practice in. Why does 'John Smith PE, SE, SECB' mean anything more than 'John Smith, SE' to anyone who would be hiring John or his firm? Seems like more letters behind a name to make someone feel like they've achieved something more than others with only 'SE' after their name, when in reality it just means you're paying another fee to be a part of a board that doesn't clearly define what they're doing.
> 
> If I happen to pass this exam at some point I'll gladly pay to be a part of a board or group that provides some type of service or increases my value, but the website makes it seem like you should apply so you can have the prestige of putting 'SECB' after your name, which seems a little misleading.


Yeah, no. I'm done after this too. I'm also putting SE after my name despite the fact GA does not recognize SE's because they deny PE licensure reciprocity to anyone practicing building design without having the new 16 hour exam (The old SE exams are grandfathered). I also may start my own organization and add SDESSE to my credentials (Super Duper Extra Special Structural Engineer) or maybe even ASS Provider (Accredited Structural Services). ASS Provider certification will definitely be an elite group of engineers held to the highest standard.

Edit: Now that I think of it, ASS Provider would go well with PMP certification (Project Management Professional). It's only a matter of time.


----------



## LetsSE

Go too farther away, guys! I just need to know the results for now.


----------



## Civil Dawg

I dreamed last night that I passed both Vertical and Lateral.  I was in shock but experienced such happiness.  That's unlikely to be the case when I get my actual results, but at least now I know how happy I could have been!


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Civil Dawg said:


> I dreamed last night that I passed both Vertical and Lateral.  I was in shock but experienced such happiness.  That's unlikely to be the case when I get my actual results, but at least now I know how happy I could have been!


You gotta be kidding me. I had a double dream last night. I just saw acceptable for the vertical portion on mine and didn't scroll down enough. Woke up and immediately logged in to NCEES on my phone to check my results and to my happiness saw that I had indeed passed it!

But then my alarm for 5:30 went off and I was back to wandering in this forum.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

TheLoneStarEngineer said:


> You gotta be kidding me. I had a double dream last night. I just saw acceptable for the vertical portion on mine and didn't scroll down enough. Woke up and immediately logged in to NCEES on my phone to check my results and to my happiness saw that I had indeed passed it!
> 
> But then my alarm for 5:30 went off and I was back to wandering in this forum.


You dreamed that you dreamed you had a passing result? And then in your first level dream, you woke up? Who gave NCEES the technology from Inception?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

TheLoneStarEngineer said:


> You gotta be kidding me. I had a double dream last night. I just saw acceptable for the vertical portion on mine and didn't scroll down enough. Woke up and immediately logged in to NCEES on my phone to check my results and to my happiness saw that I had indeed passed it!
> 
> But then my alarm for 5:30 went off and I was back to wandering in this forum.


But what if you're still sleeping


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

SE_Hopeful said:


> But what if you're still sleeping


If I am still sleeping and my dream was actually the reality, I would like to login and see if I passed Lateral too


----------



## cal91

SE_Hopeful said:


> But what if you're still sleeping


Then he's being as productive as the rest of us...

Ba -doo - KSSH


----------



## YAZRABADI

Any hope for today, guys???


----------



## aman

lets hope result comes out today


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

I'm calling negatory on today. I've generally seen them around lunch time best I recall.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

FutureSE said:


> I'm calling negatory on today. I've generally seen them around lunch time best I recall.


Seconded.


----------



## onemanwolfpack

FutureSE said:


> I'm calling negatory on today. I've generally seen them around lunch time best I recall.


My email notifications for both came on a Friday at 4pm for one, and Friday at 11:20am for the other (I am in NC).


----------



## LetsSE

Any updates, Guys?


----------



## Maya_206

Another day goes by.  Hoping it does not become 'Another Summer Goes by'. Life has been on hold because of this dang thing for the past two years.


----------



## YAZRABADI

God bless our souls. It is been tough hang in there ladies and gents. We should have them very soon (day or two). I have this beautiful feeling......


----------



## Nathan55

LetsSE said:


> Any updates, Guys?


The good news is that results aren't out...so technically, I haven't failed yet.

The bad news is results aren't out so the fun continues.


----------



## cal91

If our results don't come friday this weekend is going to suck


----------



## iDSE

I found this forum a few weeks ago. Just wanted to say thanks for keeping my sanity levels in check knowing I am not by myself.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

YAZRABADI said:


> God bless our souls. It is been tough hang in there ladies and gents. We should have them very soon (day or two). I have this beautiful feeling......


I am optimistic for tomorrow


----------



## Hindianapolis

iDSE said:


> I found this forum a few weeks ago. Just wanted to say thanks for keeping my sanity levels in check knowing I am not by myself.


good thing you have your's in check 

this is wrong i swear...i cannot comprehend how 10 weeks is required to mark any exam without obvious poor planning.


----------



## cal91

Well, we're about 97% of the way there


----------



## Stewie

Can someone react at my post please? I got 0 reaction point. T.T

If you do it, your pass chance is increased because you are being a good man/woman!


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

Is there any chance the delay to send out the results is because of NCEES is re-marking the exams? Have they ever done that before?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

seems very unlikely.


----------



## cal91

Stewie said:


> Can someone react at my post please? I got 0 reaction point. T.T
> 
> If you do it, your pass chance is increased because you are being a good man/woman!


Fudgied


----------



## ChebyshevII PE PMP

Stewie said:


> Can someone react at my post please? I got 0 reaction point. T.T
> 
> If you do it, your pass chance is increased because you are being a good man/woman!


I see you like fishing. Catch anything good lately? I do like a good bass.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Hopefully we wake up to the NCEES results release notification tomorrow morning.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

im imagine just a huge stack of them sitting on the desk of whoever job it is to input them all. maybe they spilled a big cup of coffee on them and now they're drying them out


----------



## Hindianapolis

They wouldn’t even bother....no one would ever see their paper and point a finger


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Stewie said:


> Can someone react at my post please? I got 0 reaction point. T.T
> 
> If you do it, your pass chance is increased because you are being a good man/woman!


If the results come out 6/13 I'll do it


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Vancouver CA SE said:


> Is there any chance the delay to send out the results is because of NCEES is re-marking the exams? Have they ever done that before?


My best guess is they are just doing their psychoanalysis (or whatever they call it). We’ll see the results next Monday at the latest but the possibility exists they will be out tomorrow. My money is on Friday around lunchtime though.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

I had my own dream last night of getting passing results! I take it as a good omen for today


----------



## LetsSE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> I had my own dream last night of getting passing results! I take it as a good omen for today


I can tell how much torture this exam has bring to everyone.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

I had a dream where I was talking with the head honcho of NCEES and he said the results will be out by end of business Friday.


----------



## Hindianapolis

its funny how everyone's having dreams about the exam all of a sudden


----------



## Stewie

Release the results already!!! I need to begin study for Oct exams!!! Though I know I failed at least one of them, I am just not feeling study and work now without seeing the red "FAIL".


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Stewie said:


> Release the results already!!! I need to begin study for Oct exams!!! Though I know I failed at least one of them, I am just not feeling study and work now without seeing the red "FAIL".


Likely tomorrow. Never seen a release on a Thursday, though there is a first time for everything.


----------



## Maya_206

Hopefully the results come in by Friday. At this day and age, I am surprised that NCEES does not have a set target date for exam release. You plan for it and make it happen - publish a date. 8 to 10 weeks ..really?  I probably checked my email / logged in to MyNCEES at least 30 times the last two weeks. I hope I am not alone in this.

On a side note, I have a love/hate relationship with this group forum. Love to hear from similar minded folks. Hate the number of times I find myself logging in to check what others have to say. But, all this comes to an end - On Friday?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Maya_206 said:


> Hopefully the results come in by Friday. At this day and age, I am surprised that NCEES does not have a set target date for exam release. You plan for it and make it happen - publish a date. 8 to 10 weeks ..really?  I probably checked my email / logged in to MyNCEES at least 30 times the last two weeks. I hope I am not alone in this.
> 
> On a side note, I have a love/hate relationship with this group forum. Love to hear from similar minded folks. Hate the number of times I find myself logging in to check what others have to say. But, all this comes to an end - On Friday?


Maybe for some of us. I hope I am not caught up in the turmoil of this awful exam ever again. Very sad it is to know that you have take another swing at this sucker.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Stewie said:


> Release the results already!!! I need to begin study for Oct exams!!! Though I know I failed at least one of them, I am just not feeling study and work now without seeing the red "FAIL".


I have the same feeling. And that is probably why I did not scroll down enough to check the Lateral exam results in my dream...


----------



## YAZRABADI

*Daily message: *Guys, Guys, Guys, stay positive and encourage one another. Results will be out sooner than you think. I think it could be Friday as it has not been released on Thursday before, but again, they could finish inputting the results in and release late today. 

Remember God loves you. Stay positive.. 

Yaz


----------



## Maya_206

Folks - If you are re-taker for the April 2019, what are your thoughts on this?

In general, the release of the exam result is too late. If the April 2019 exam results come out by mid to end of June, the re-takers are left with 3.5 to 4 months to prepare for the exam. Factor these with kids, vacations, conferences, buy new codes, tab again etc, and the window for study is too small for most folks. Of course there is an option to give up on the rest of your life and study for this exam. But, why does not have to be this way and for the older folks this is not an option (work/study/life balance). I hope NCEES does something to address this. I believe this is the primary reason why most retakers do not make it through. I am willing to bet that most retakers are older folks who have other responsibilities in life/work and cannot give up the other half of their life to retake the exam compared to younger folks. 

Just some thoughts that I am venting out and hopefully some of you can relate to this .... I struggled to find time to study for the last one due to project and family committment. Of course, one could start preparing early at a slow pace but who does that when there is hope. Fingers crossed -  I managed to complete all the afternoon problem on the last exam which gives me hope.


----------



## cal91

Maya_206 said:


> Folks - If you are re-taker for the April 2019, what are your thoughts on this?
> 
> In general, the release of the exam result is too late. If the April 2019 exam results come out by mid to end of June, the re-takers are left with 3.5 to 4 months to prepare for the exam. Factor these with kids, vacations, conferences, buy new codes, tab again etc, and the window for study is too small for most folks. Of course there is an option to give up on the rest of your life and study for this exam. But, why does not have to be this way and for the older folks this is not an option (work/study/life balance). I hope NCEES does something to address this. I believe this is the primary reason why most retakers do not make it through. I am willing to bet that most retakers are older folks who have other responsibilities in life/work and cannot give up the other half of their life to retake the exam compared to younger folks.
> 
> Just some thoughts that I am venting out and hopefully some of you can relate to this .... I struggled to find time to study for the last one due to project and family committment. Of course, one could start preparing early at a slow pace but who does that when there is hope. Fingers crossed -  I managed to complete all the afternoon problem on the last exam which gives me hope.


If I don't pass, I don't think I'd retake until April 2020 so it's a non-issue for me


----------



## YAZRABADI

Maya_206 said:


> Folks - If you are re-taker for the April 2019, what are your thoughts on this?
> 
> In general, the release of the exam result is too late. If the April 2019 exam results come out by mid to end of June, the re-takers are left with 3.5 to 4 months to prepare for the exam. Factor these with kids, vacations, conferences, buy new codes, tab again etc, and the window for study is too small for most folks. Of course there is an option to give up on the rest of your life and study for this exam. But, why does not have to be this way and for the older folks this is not an option (work/study/life balance). I hope NCEES does something to address this. I believe this is the primary reason why most retakers do not make it through. I am willing to bet that most retakers are older folks who have other responsibilities in life/work and cannot give up the other half of their life to retake the exam compared to younger folks.
> 
> Just some thoughts that I am venting out and hopefully some of you can relate to this .... I struggled to find time to study for the last one due to project and family committment. Of course, one could start preparing early at a slow pace but who does that when there is hope. Fingers crossed -  I managed to complete all the afternoon problem on the last exam which gives me hope.


I pray for you Maya-206


----------



## Maya_206

cal91 said:


> If I don't pass, I don't think I'd retake until April 2020 so it's a non-issue for me


My approach is 'strike while it is hot'. Good for you.

My whole point is - A lot of folks would pass if the preparation time was say 5 months for the re-takers instead of 3.5 months. I am already counting the weekends that I have available here till Oct.


----------



## aman

when i appeared in October last year, the gentlemen provided me with the advice that don't ruin your summer for the exams , enjoy the summers and appear for exam in April as during winter if you live up north you would basically have less outdoor activities.


----------



## Duke

@Maya_206

I'm with ya. The grading time is unreasonably long and a full review becomes very difficult in that time when you have kids, family, ect...


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

I truly believe NCEES prefers more people fails the exam so they have to pay the fees again. I realized by the time they would release the exam results, I wouldn't have enough time to cover what I read before. I started studying last month.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Of course they prefer we all fail. They have a monopoly on the licensure exam and they make money when people register for the exam and buy their practice tests, etc. We should be thankful they don't charge $5,000 to take the exam.

edit - ok so maybe not all of us, they need a certain amount to pass (probably around the 30% range where they have it), else more people would call them out for foul play. They also have to sell their practice exams so if no one ever passed then they wouldnt be able to claim their practice exams were worth anything.


----------



## Maya_206

Vancouver CA SE said:


> I truly believe NCEES prefers more people fails the exam so they have to pay the fees again. I realized by the time they would release the exam results, I wouldn't have enough time to cover what I read before. I started studying last month.


Good for you for starting early but I am so close or hoping to pass so I hesitate. Fishing vs. study for an exam that I have a good shot at passing. Go Figure... lol


----------



## Nathan55

Maya_206 said:


> Good for you for starting early but I am so close or hoping to pass so I hesitate. Fishing vs. study for an exam that I have a good shot at passing. Go Figure... lol


I've been studying, just cuz. I like to focus on things that tripped me up during the last exam so I don't have any holes in my knowledge base. I think that's the number one thing they count on...someone just not knowing how to solve a problem. I also have all of my EET class materials I can use again for October.


----------



## Nathan55

SE_Hopeful said:


> Of course they prefer we all fail. They have a monopoly on the licensure exam and they make money when people register for the exam and buy their practice tests, etc. We should be thankful they don't charge $5,000 to take the exam.
> 
> edit - ok so maybe not all of us, they need a certain amount to pass (probably around the 30% range where they have it), else more people would call them out for foul play. They also have to sell their practice exams so if no one ever passed then they wouldnt be able to claim their practice exams were worth anything.


As the Russians say "who benefits" when the pass rate is so low? So I think you hit the nail on the head. The other rather obvious tell is that NCEES provides no useful information on your failing score, and no way to improve on what was missed previously. This is a deliberate, Machiavellian decision that has obvious benefits from a business perspective. At least their new headquarters is nearing completion though. I like to feel like I played a part in financing that haha.


----------



## Duke

I'm not convinced yet........ that they are intentionally killing pass rates for $$$ but I does give them negative incentive to, grade speedily, provide a decent practice exam, ect. IMO we really ought to get the solutions to the exam we took so we can actually learn for mistakes, I feel like $500 earns at least that. Can't do that though, less we become "competent" engineers and pass the exam.


----------



## NahzSema

@Maya_206

For re-taker, if you calculate the date of results released to the actual date of exam, I am getting about 4 months plus/minus a week. Last December it was released on the 11th so for the April exam I had 4 months minus a week to study, whereas if we find out results tomorrow or Monday, there’s actually more time for October. 

And of course this would only seem fair if we are just talking about one component. I passed lateral last October and having 4 months to study for vertical seemed plenty of time for me. 

Study more doesn’t always mean it’s a positive thing. At least for me, I couldn’t remember the stuff I studied the first month and had to refresh almost everything when it comes to crunch time. It’s just my two cents.


----------



## TheCraic

FYI, for anyone who is interested, going back the last 8 SE exams 100% of the time the results are released to the respective State Boards on either a Thursday, Friday or Monday. For the April exam it’s been as follows:

April ‘18 - Thursday 06/14

April ‘17 - Friday 06/09

April ‘16 - Friday 06/10

April ‘15 - Thursday 06/11

Stands to reason that based on a pretty darn consistent performance history we should be getting results back today or tomorrow.


----------



## Maya_206

NahzSema said:


> @Maya_206
> 
> For re-taker, if you calculate the date of results released to the actual date of exam, I am getting about 4 months plus/minus a week. Last December it was released on the 11th so for the April exam I had 4 months minus a week to study, whereas if we find out results tomorrow or Monday, there’s actually more time for October.
> 
> And of course this would only seem fair if we are just talking about one component. I passed lateral last October and having 4 months to study for vertical seemed plenty of time for me.
> 
> Study more doesn’t always mean it’s a positive thing. At least for me, I couldn’t remember the stuff I studied the first month and had to refresh almost everything when it comes to crunch time. It’s just my two cents.


'Not Study More' but if you have a longer time frame, you can fit it better with your lifestyle. I think if I were to retake, 100 to 150 hours max is the range that I consider sufficient to sit for the lateral only.

I think the duration can be shorter if the exam comes earlier (e.g. April 2019 takers)


----------



## Maya_206

TheCraic said:


> FYI, for anyone who is interested, going back the last 8 SE exams 100% of the time the results are released to the respective State Boards on either a Thursday, Friday or Monday. For the April exam it’s been as follows:
> 
> April ‘18 - Thursday 06/14
> 
> April ‘17 - Friday 06/09
> 
> April ‘16 - Friday 06/10
> 
> April ‘15 - Thursday 06/11
> 
> Stands to reason that based on a pretty darn consistent performance history we should be getting results back today or tomorrow.


So if we do not hear by tomorrow, NCCES will set a record. lol


----------



## User1

TheCraic said:


> FYI, for anyone who is interested, going back the last 8 SE exams 100% of the time the results are released to the respective State Boards on either a Thursday, Friday or Monday. For the April exam it’s been as follows:
> 
> April ‘18 - Thursday 06/14﻿
> 
> April ‘17 - Friday 06/09
> 
> April ‘16 - Friday 06/10
> 
> April ‘15 - Thursday 06/11﻿﻿
> 
> Stands to reason that based on a pretty darn consistent performance history we should be getting results back today or tomorrow.


but we tested SO.DAMN.EARLY. this cycle. i still mad!


----------



## Maya_206

SE_Hopeful said:


> Of course they prefer we all fail. They have a monopoly on the licensure exam and they make money when people register for the exam and buy their practice tests, etc. We should be thankful they don't charge $5,000 to take the exam.
> 
> edit - ok so maybe not all of us, they need a certain amount to pass (probably around the 30% range where they have it), else more people would call them out for foul play. They also have to sell their practice exams so if no one ever passed then they wouldnt be able to claim their practice exams were worth anything.


Wonder if NCCES publishes the revenue by various exams.. would be interested to see heist from SEs. I am sure its big pot.


----------



## Hindianapolis

is there a formal venue where we can vent out our frustration of the process? like a formal complaint or anything of the sort?


----------



## NahzSema

I also forgot to mention that last December before I got the notification email from NCEES, say an hour or so, I was getting spam emails from review course vendors. Perhaps they find out before us when exactly NCEES pushes that release button ? Hmmmm


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

NahzSema said:


> I also forgot to mention that last December before I got the notification email from NCEES, say an hour or so, I was getting spam emails from review course vendors. Perhaps they find out before us when exactly NCEES pushes that release button ? Hmmmm


I think it's almost down to a science. It's the Friday after grading or the Monday after that. The only thing that threw me off with this administration is the fact grading was started on a Thursday rather than a Saturday. I'd be glad to eat crow, but I don't see it happening.


----------



## David Connor SE

I agree this is too long for everyone to wait for the results.  I think that's why NCEES has targeted 2024 for a computer based SE exam.  If you can wait that long then might be the best option.  Otherwise, just try to not think about it and before you know the NCEES email will be in your inbox.  Fingers crossed that you all passed!


----------



## LetsSE

I decided not to forgive NCEES unless they let me pass this time. LOL


----------



## Nathan55

Hindianapolis said:


> is there a formal venue where we can vent out our frustration of the process? like a formal complaint or anything of the sort?


I'm organizing a road trip to Seneca, South Carolina if you're game. We swing through ATL and pick up FutureSE so he can provide entertainment on the way there.


----------



## Nathan55

David Connor said:


> I agree this is too long for everyone to wait for the results.  I think that's why NCEES has targeted 2024 for a computer based SE exam.  If you can wait that long then might be the best option.  Otherwise, just try to not think about it and before you know the NCEES email will be in your inbox.  Fingers crossed that you all passed!


I'm actually waiting for the 2028 version where the "SE certification module" is implanted directly into my cerebellum by AI enhanced surgeons. My sources tell me the surgery should be less painful than what we're experiencing now.


----------



## TheBigGuy

Maya_206 said:


> Hopefully the results come in by Friday. At this day and age, I am surprised that NCEES does not have a set target date for exam release. You plan for it and make it happen - publish a date. 8 to 10 weeks ..really?  I probably checked my email / logged in to MyNCEES at least 30 times the last two weeks. I hope I am not alone in this.
> 
> On a side note, I have a love/hate relationship with this group forum. Love to hear from similar minded folks. Hate the number of times I find myself logging in to check what others have to say. But, all this comes to an end - On Friday?﻿


Alright.  I'm done.  This is no way to live my life.  I'll check website again in a month.  Results are generally released to the licensing boards 14-16 weeks after the exam.


----------



## User1

TheBigGuy said:


> Alright.  I'm done.  This is no way to live my life.  I'll check website again in a month.  Results are gen﻿erally released to the licens﻿ing boards 14-16 weeks after the exam.﻿


----------



## SE_Hopeful

After 5pm EST and no results, welp


----------



## cal91

cal91 said:


> I was thinking results will be out by June 10... No?
> 
> Edit: Just asked Ashlei, she says the SE grading workshop is June 7-8.  So results should be out June 14 I would think.


Just saying two months ago I called it being tomorrow. Time to double down and say it'll be between 3pm and 4pm eastern time that the first results are released.


----------



## YAZRABADI

cal91 said:


> Just saying two months ago I called it being tomorrow. Time to double down and say it'll be between 3pm and 4pm eastern time that the first results are released.


I really believe something should start happening tomorrow..... God bless


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

cal91 said:


> Just saying two months ago I called it being tomorrow. Time to double down and say it'll be between 3pm and 4pm eastern time that the first results are released.


Hmmmm....You sure you are not a secret agent from NCEES spying in this forum? Did NCEES pay you with passing grade in SE? I am contemplating you are the REAL Ashlei...


----------



## cal91

TheLoneStarEngineer said:


> Hmmmm....You sure you are not a secret agent from NCEES spying in this forum? Did NCEES pay you with passing grade in SE? I am contemplating you are the REAL Ashlei...


James Purcell may or may not be my uncle....


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Nathan55 said:


> I'm actually waiting for the 2028 version where the "SE certification module" is implanted directly into my cerebellum by AI enhanced surgeons. My sources tell me the surgery should be less painful than what we're experiencing now.


I hear you. I've met a lot of folks in Atlanta that would need a suppository "SE certification module" though. Practically the entire building department has their head firmly implanted in ass.


----------



## Civil Dawg

Let’s get this bread! First results will be out before 1 pm ET.


----------



## TheCraic

Civil Dawg said:


> Let’s get this bread! First results will be out before 1 pm ET.


Is that a guess or are you operating of something concrete?


----------



## Civil Dawg

TheCraic said:


> Is that a guess or are you operating of something concrete?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

do the results get posted at different times to NCEES depending on where you took the test?


----------



## Duke

SE_Hopeful said:


> do the results get posted at different times to NCEES depending on where you took the test?


Yes! Results will likely be posted today! But in states such as IL we won't see anything until days after release.


----------



## Pur_SE_

I tested in Illinois and they have a third party testing agency. If results come out today I am thinking I will find out on Monday or Tuesday through their third-party testing site and NCEES will post results on Wednesday.

All depending on how your state administered the exam. If your state does not recognize SE license then I believe that they just have NCEES release almost immediately. If your state does recognize the SE license then some administrator at the board will likely need to give NCEES the okay to post exam results. Some states are better/quicker at this than others. 

This is all conjecture, but we will see...


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Hey you guys! Do you remember when we were all friends, happy, and playing games on engineer boards? Those were the days. I'm going to drink to that since I can't take the pressure anymore. I've got my Bullit 95 Rye whiskey out right now.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Why can't they just let us know when results are coming? I bet they'll be out today, but NCEES Bots are still saying 10 to 12 weeks.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Wow.... 2 more weeks of this would be no bueno.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

LetsSE said:


> You never know. They might want to release the results next week. They do not care much how do we feel and only care how much more money that they can make for the next round of SE exam.


I don't think they make much money off of the SE. Not many people take it, roughly 300 per administration. It's probably why we are the red headed step child of the NCEES grading shenanigans. I apologize to all red headed step children for the figure of speech, it's not my fault you are what you are.


----------



## AMS6158

LetsSE said:


> You never know. They might want to release the results next week. They do not care much how do we feel and only care how much more money that they can make for the next round of SE exam, which is directly related to their salary raises.


The results last cycle were released a week and a half after the grading conference. Which would be next Tuesday/Wednesday for this cycle.  Hope they come out soon tho!  I know how hard waiting can be!  Good luck everyone


----------



## Stewie

So which week we are in? 11th? It tells 10- to 12-week waiting time.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo




----------



## LetsSE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> View attachment 13385


What is this?


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

LetsSE said:


> What is this?


I got the message from the board - But VT has made errors before. Let me look into it BUT it could mean results are out!!!


----------



## Stewie

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> View attachment 13385


Congratulations!


----------



## Duke

Results are probably out, you can see your active license in IL before the results on NCEES too.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Edit


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Im going to say that they're out! Good luck and trhanks everyone!!!


----------



## cal91

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> Im going to say that they're out! Good luck and trhanks everyone!!!
> 
> View attachment 13389


----------



## SE_Hopeful

for those that took the test in a state that doesnt require board approval to sit for the exam - we basically have to wait for NCEES right?


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

SE_Hopeful said:


> for those that took the test in a state that doesnt require board approval to sit for the exam - we basically have to wait for NCEES right?


Yes, NCEES will directly release the results. Nothing from Texas yet...


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

I'm going to chat Ncees


----------



## SE_Hopeful

im going to get literally 0 work done today


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

RESULTS ARE OUT!!!


----------



## Stewie

I guess I failed. Nothing is changed on my license lookup result (LAPELS). I am so disappointed by myself now. For four-five months, I stayed so late everyday for nothing. Stupid me...


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo




----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> View attachment 13392


Lonestar already contacted her and confirmed the results are released.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Yay!!


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> Yay!!


CONGRATULATIONS!!!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

QuinnTheEskimo said:


> Yay!!


Congrats on a job well done and never having to go through this again. My butt hurts from waiting.


----------



## Sheik

Results released. 

Failed in SE Vertical : Morning 23/40 , afternoon: Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable


----------



## User1

FutureSE said:


> Hey you guys! Do you remember when we were all friends, happy, and playing games on engineer boards? Those were the days. I'm going to drink to that since I can't take the pressure anymore. I've got my Bullit 95 Rye whiskey out right now.


You're my super extra extra really very special best friend. Let's drink


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

Man, Why does Texas have to wait before giving the go ahead. They do not even have dedicated SE licensure...


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

tj_PE said:


> You're my super extra extra really very special best friend. Let's drink


I'll take a shot to that! Good luck, SEERVSBFF!


----------



## Hindianapolis

Stewie said:


> I guess I failed. Nothing is changed on my license lookup result (LAPELS). I am so disappointed by myself now. For four-five months, I stayed so late everyday for nothing. Stupid me...


dont say that....you absolutely get better with every round. Better luck next time!


----------



## User1

It's not 8am here yet. Glad I'm not at work to struggle with my future bad news


----------



## User1

Fail for me. 18/40 and A A IR IR


----------



## Sheik

Stewie said:


> I guess I failed. Nothing is changed on my license lookup result (LAPELS). I am so disappointed by myself now. For four-five months, I stayed so late everyday for nothing. Stupid me...


Don't worry. Failure is the stepping stone for success. Lets prepare harder and clear it next time.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

tj_PE said:


> It's not 8am here yet. Glad I'm not at work to struggle with my future bad news








tj_PE said:


> Fail for me. 18/40 and A A IR IR


First you aren't going to fail, it was practice. I've practiced several times on this. I'd be willing to skype session if you need help. That goes for anyone else too. The more I learn from everyone the better my publication can be!


----------



## Sheik

tj_PE said:


> Fail for me. 18/40 and A A IR IR


I am Sorry and lets not give up and clear it in October! Good luck.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Still no word here. Waiting on results from BAMA!


----------



## Chuckimus

Sheik said:


> Results released.
> 
> Failed i﻿n SE Vertical : Morning 23/40 , afternoon: Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable


Holy crap. I haven't received my results yet, but I would think you would pass with that score. I only finished 3 problems in the afternoon - I'm screwed. 

When I passed the lateral, I only attempted 3 of the afternoon problems - but I made sure they were perfect.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Chuckimus said:


> Holy crap. I haven't received my results yet, but I would think you would pass with that score. I only finished 3 problems in the afternoon - I'm screwed.
> 
> When I passed the lateral, I only attempted 3 of the afternoon problems - but I made sure they were perfect.




how does that work? I thought if you got a single unacceptable in the afternoon it was game over. You passed lateral leaving one of 4 blank?


----------



## LetsSE

Anyone could call IDFPR in Illinois exam board and let them release the results at: https://www.continentaltesting.net/OnlineStatus/Status.aspx ?


----------



## Chuckimus

Yes, I only attempted the steel, concrete, and wind on C&amp;C. Damn the wood.


----------



## N_Mo

SE_Hopeful said:


> how does that work? I thought if you got a single unacceptable in the afternoon it was game over. You passed lateral leaving one of 4 blank?


That's exactly what I think. You can see the analysis here


----------



## Hindianapolis

Sheik said:


> Results released.
> 
> Failed in SE Vertical : Morning 23/40 , afternoon: Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable


You're literally there......better luck next time my friend.


----------



## Sheik

Hindianapolis said:


> You're literally there......better luck next time my friend.


Yeah Its kind of disappointing. I should have taken any prep course instead of self preparation.  Thank you though.


----------



## Sheik

Chuckimus said:


> Holy crap. I haven't received my results yet, but I would think you would pass with that score. I only finished 3 problems in the afternoon - I'm screwed.
> 
> When I passed the lateral, I only attempted 3 of the afternoon problems - but I made sure they were perfect.


Yeah I guess the min score to pass in the morning is 27 or 28/40, irrespective of your afternoon score.


----------



## Duke

Chuckimus said:


> Yes, I only attempted the steel, concrete, and wind on C&amp;C. Damn the wood.


I'm sorry to keep asking but you literally left it blank? Like you turned in a completely empty booklet and passed lateral?


----------



## LetsSE

Which states have released the results. I am still waiting for ILLINOIS.


----------



## AMS6158

Stewie said:


> I guess I failed. Nothing is changed on my license lookup result (LAPELS). I am so disappointed by myself now. For four-five months, I stayed so late everyday for nothing. Stupid me...


What state are you in?  Virginia didnt show my license in the lookup until like a week after I got my results.


----------



## Chuckimus

Duke said:


> I'm sorry to keep asking but you literally left it blank? Like you turned in a completely empty booklet and passed lateral?


Correct.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> I'm sorry to keep asking but you literally left it blank? Like you turned in a completely empty booklet and passed lateral?


This is exactly why I think the grading is inconsistent.


----------



## cal91

I'm dying.

FutureSE, when we getting our results, old friend?


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

cal91 said:


> I'm dying.
> 
> FutureSE, when we getting our results, old friend?


When the moon's in the sky like a big pizza pie.


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> When the moon's in the sky like a big pizza pie.


That's Amore!


----------



## Hindianapolis

Michigan out. Failed

 22/40

3A 1 IR


----------



## cal91

I'm literally refreshing this, my email, and ncees every thirty second. Please let this pass soon.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE




----------



## cal91

Hindianapolis said:


> Michigan out. Failed
> 
> 22/40
> 
> 3A 1 IR


I'm sorry. That sucks.

But close my friend! You got it next time!


----------



## Duke

If you are posting your score please also post bridges/building and/or vertical/lateral. Thanks


----------



## Structural bee

anyone in Nevada? Is Nevada usually late at releasing results?


----------



## Stewie

Duke said:


> If you are posting your score please also post bridges/building and/or vertical/lateral. Thanks


bridge has three problems in the afternoon while building has four, so you can tell from their result.


----------



## aman

Sheik said:


> Results released.
> 
> Failed in SE Vertical : Morning 23/40 , afternoon: Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable


You are almost there.... no one can stop you....


----------



## kcd58

First post but I've been following this thread for a long time.  I got my results an hour ago from NCEES.  I passed!  WhooHoo!  Took the vertical in 2018 and the lateral this year. Good luck to the rest of you!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Actual photo from my office.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Chuckimus said:


> Correct.


sorry if this might upset you, but that actually makes me a bit mad. i dont think you should be able to leave an afternoon problem COMPLETELY blank and still pass


----------



## cal91

Structural bee said:


> anyone in Nevada? Is Nevada usually late at releasing results?


I'm Nevada. Reno, actually. Were you one of the other 4 people in the room with me? Still waiting unfortunately.


----------



## Chuckimus

SE_Hopeful said:


> sorry if this might upset you, but that actually makes me mad. i dont think you should be able to leave an afternoon problem completely blank and still pass


Why not? Is 75% not enough? My biggest problem is that I cannot work through all four problems in 4 hours.


----------



## YAZRABADI

Structural bee said:


> anyone in Nevada? Is Nevada usually late at releasing results?


I am with you in NV. God bless you and I and May he shine his face upon us. I am still waiting buddy.


----------



## Structural bee

I am the only



YAZRABADI said:


> I am with you in NV. God bless you and I and May he shine his face upon us. I am still waiting buddy.


I am the only girl in the exam location on Reno site. Were you in Reno too?


----------



## YAZRABADI

Structural bee said:


> I am the only
> 
> I am the only girl in the exam location on Reno site. Were you in Reno too?


No I was in Las Vegas. God bless you and all of us.


----------



## cal91

Structural bee said:


> I am the only
> 
> I am the only girl in the exam location on Reno site. Were you in Reno too?


Yes! I sat to your left during Vertical. And you didn't take lateral, correct? Good luck!


----------



## Sheik

Hindianapolis said:


> Michigan out. Failed
> 
> 22/40
> 
> 3A 1 IR


Sorry and good luck


----------



## Sheik

aman said:


> You are almost there.... no one can stop you....


thanks Aman


----------



## Structural bee

cal91 said:


> Yes! I sat to your left during Vertical. And you didn't take lateral, correct? Good luck!


Yes! I said two at a time is too much for me. Good luck! Wish you get both done!


----------



## LetsSE

anyone from Illinois?


----------



## Duke

LetsSE said:


> anyone from Illinois?


I am


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Y'all got anymore of dem results, NCEES?


----------



## cal91

Structural bee said:


> Yes! I said two at a time is too much for me. Good luck! Wish you get both done!


And then I said, yeah you're the smart one in the group for doing that! We'll see shortly!


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> Y'all got anymore of dem results, NCEES?
> 
> View attachment 13397


FutureSE, I pictured you looking so different. Also, lay off the frosted donuts until after we get the results


----------



## Structural bee

cal91 said:


> And then I said, yeah you're the smart one in the group for doing that! We'll see shortly!


With such good memory, you should pass both!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Whelp NCEES, you got me. I fucking give the fuck up.


----------



## Duke

Goodness the morning is wrecking everyone.


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

FutureSE said:


> Whelp NCEES, you got me. I fucking give the fuck up.
> 
> View attachment 13403
> 
> 
> View attachment 13404


Sorry  I was really rooting for you. That really really sucks


----------



## cal91

FutureSE said:


> Whelp NCEES, you got me. I fucking give the fuck up.
> 
> View attachment 13403
> 
> 
> View attachment 13404


My heart goes out to you FutureSE.  I got a pit in my stomach when I saw your score. So sorry brother.

I've felt confident I passed this whole time... Now after seeing your score I'm pretty worried.


----------



## Maya_206

A re-do for me too. The am was brutal for me. I got 30/40 in the last two exam. This time, it was 24.


----------



## YAZRABADI

FutureSE said:


> Whelp NCEES, you got me. I fucking give the fuck up.
> 
> View attachment 13403
> 
> 
> View attachment 13404


Do NOT give up buddy, keep on pressing all you need help with is the Morning. Yes, I remember the morning being tough.... God bless you and give you peace.


----------



## Civil Dawg

Stewie said:


> I guess I failed. Nothing is changed on my license lookup result (LAPELS). I am so disappointed by myself now. For four-five months, I stayed so late everyday for nothing. Stupid me...


Stewie did you take the exam in BR or NO? I’m also waiting on results in Louisiana (took both in BR)


----------



## Structural bee

Feel so sorry for you guys. You are all very close. I might only be half there.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

YAZRABADI said:


> Do NOT give up buddy, keep on pressing all you need help with is the Morning. Yes, I remember the morning being tough.... God bless you and give you peace.


I appreciate the sentiment, but I really don't need help with anything. The test is what needs help. I am perfectly competent to practice this bullshit.


----------



## Stewie

Civil Dawg said:


> Stewie did you take the exam in BR or NO? I’m also waiting on results (took both in BR)﻿﻿


Bro, BR~ I really don't know what I am thinking now. I remember I told you "one afternoon problem I don't even know which part of code I should go for it". I am still hoping to pass. Maybe I am crazy already.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Not a lot of passing scores =\ this stinks


----------



## Nathan55

Stewie said:


> Bro, BR~ I really don't know what I am thinking now. I remember I told you "one afternoon problem I don't even know which part of code I should go for it". I am still hoping to pass. Maybe I am crazy already.


I'm numb emotionally right now lol. No results yet but I'm focusing on October. If I'm one of the NCEES moderators watching this forum, this angst is amusing. Interesting that the morning really kicked people's derriere this time around. And FutureSE...you did very well in the afternoon. Only 4 AM problems away from passing, in my estimation.


----------



## cal91

I think we're gotten 1 Pass and 6 fails so far? I'm about to fudgy my pants.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

I'm ordering a manual verification of the morning. I had several errant scratches from bouncing around problems.


----------



## SE_Hopeful

FutureSE said:


> Whelp NCEES, you got me. I fucking give the fuck up.
> 
> View attachment 13403
> 
> 
> View attachment 13404


So did I add that up right, you got 23/40 and A/A/A/IR and still didnt pass? WTF.


----------



## Civil Dawg

Stewie said:


> Bro, BR~ I really don't know what I am thinking now. I remember I told you "one afternoon problem I don't even know which part of code I should go for it". I am still hoping to pass. Maybe I am crazy already.


Bridges?  I quoted you on that statement earlier in this thread lol


----------



## Neeye

kcd58 said:


> First post but I've been following this thread for a long time.  I got my results an hour ago from NCEES.  I passed!  WhooHoo!  Took the vertical in 2018 and the lateral this year. Good luck to the rest of you!
> 
> View attachment 13394


Congrats on passing the exam. Please, could you share any info about your prep for the exam like the reference materials you used, self study, etc. Thank you


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

cal91 said:


> I think we're gotten 1 Pass and 6 fails so far? I'm about to fudgy my pants.


I have not received notification from NCEES but did from the automatic board. I only took vertical Buildings this round.


----------



## Hindianapolis

SE_Hopeful said:


> So did I add that up right, you got 23/40 and A/A/A/IR and still didnt pass? WTF.


Most of us did similar to this.

Shiek got 23/40 4A

yours truly 22/40 3A1IR

it really sucks!


----------



## Civil Dawg

FutureSE said:


> I'm ordering a manual verification of the morning. I had several errant scratches from bouncing around problems.


I did it last time I took the exam and it was a waste of $75 but I know the feeling of needing closure.  Honestly, all it did was make me more bitter with how the manual verification was handled.  I asked questions beforehand but couldn't get any answers at all so finally paid the $75 and a couple weeks later got an email saying nothing changed.


----------



## Chuckimus

Anyone from GA have results?


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Hindianapolis said:


> Most of us did similar to this.
> 
> Shiek got 23/40 4A
> 
> yours truly 22/40 3A1IR
> 
> it really sucks!


Those scores are better than the previously estimated cut lines posted here


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

I passed Both Vertical and Lateral on my first TRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Stewie

Civil Dawg said:


> Bridges?  I quoted you on that statement earlier in this thread lol


haha... I saw that but dare not to say a thing. I guess I just tried to deny my incompetence~ ;D


----------



## cal91

Vancouver CA SE said:


> I passed Both Vertical and Lateral on my first TRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> View attachment 13405


YES! Way to go! Hoping I can join you shortly in NV


----------



## Vancouver CA SE

Vancouver CA SE said:


> I passed Both Vertical and Lateral on my first TRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> View attachment 13405




I wrote the exam in Washington State BTW.


----------



## Hindianapolis

Vancouver CA SE said:


> I passed Both Vertical and Lateral on my first TRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> View attachment 13405


Congrats man

WTG!


----------



## jmm7200

I took the Lateral - Bridges in Milwaukee, and results were posted a few hours ago.  Failed Again!  23/40 in AM and all 3 Acceptables in PM.  Damn building concrete killed me 0/5.  I was above average in 6 of the 10 categories somehow.

Can someone provide any advice as to how a bridge engineer is supposed to pass the AM when its like 80% buildings?  You would think for over $500 a pop and 6 months between and over 2 months of wait time for results that NCEES would develop 2 separate exams; 1 focusing on building (like it is currently) and 1 focusing on bridges.  Or they could keep the current format grade on different scales for bridge and building candidates.....it seems to me that bridges pass rates are ALWAYS much lower than buildings.  Shouldn't that be a flag?  Especially when a "high" pass rate is in low 30%. 

Also, why they hell does the afternoon not average with morning...its almost like 2 separate exams...its bull shit.


----------



## Stewie

jmm7200 said:


> I took the Lateral - Bridges in Milwaukee, and results were posted a few hours ago.  Failed Again!  23/40 in AM and all 3 Acceptables in PM.  Damn building concrete killed me 0/5.  I was above average in 6 of the 10 categories somehow.
> 
> Can someone provide any advice as to how a bridge engineer is supposed to pass the AM when its like 80% buildings?  You would think for over $500 a pop and 6 months between and over 2 months of wait time for results that NCEES would develop 2 separate exams; 1 focusing on building (like it is currently) and 1 focusing on bridges.  Or they could keep the current format grade on different scales for bridge and building candidates.....it seems to me that bridges pass rates are ALWAYS much lower than buildings.  Shouldn't that be a flag?  Especially when a "high" pass rate is in low 30%.
> 
> Also, why they hell does the afternoon not average with morning...its almost like 2 separate exams...its bull shit.


I hope when you get time, please teach me how to prepare the afternoon problems. Not only I have difficulties in the morning, but also afternoon. I am bridge too.


----------



## Annon

I passed the Vertical.  Lateral AM results 20/40 are PM Results are:

Wood and/or Masonry Structure - Acceptable

 Concrete Structure - Acceptable 

General Analysis - Acceptable

Steel Structure - Unacceptable


----------



## cal91

Oh man what a wave of releif


----------



## SE_Hopeful

Passed both first try. This test sucks so bad, very sorry to those that failed.


----------



## LetsSE

11111111111


----------



## YAZRABADI

cal91 said:


> YES! Way to go! Hoping I can join you shortly in NV


Hey guys, It is finally over, The LORD is truelly on my side. I have passed this exam and it is finished. 

God bless you all. Please message me if you need any help...


----------



## ce-ei

I called LAPELS and they stated that they have received the results.


----------



## Structural bee

cal91 said:


> Oh man what a wave of releif
> 
> View attachment 13407


Big congrats man! I passed Vertical this time. We won't be seeing each other in Oct. But I am happy for you!


----------



## crammer

TX is out. Passed lateral second try. Done with the Tests!!


----------



## onemanwolfpack

jmm7200 said:


> I took the Lateral - Bridges in Milwaukee, and results were posted a few hours ago.  Failed Again!  23/40 in AM and all 3 Acceptables in PM.  Damn building concrete killed me 0/5.  I was above average in 6 of the 10 categories somehow.
> 
> Can someone provide any advice as to how a bridge engineer is supposed to pass the AM when its like 80% buildings?  You would think for over $500 a pop and 6 months between and over 2 months of wait time for results that NCEES would develop 2 separate exams; 1 focusing on building (like it is currently) and 1 focusing on bridges.  Or they could keep the current format grade on different scales for bridge and building candidates.....it seems to me that bridges pass rates are ALWAYS much lower than buildings.  Shouldn't that be a flag?  Especially when a "high" pass rate is in low 30%.
> 
> Also, why they hell does the afternoon not average with morning...its almost like 2 separate exams...its bull shit.


This is pretty much the reason why I decided to take a review course. As a practicing bridge engineer, there's so much that you're unfamiliar with in the IBC/ASCE/Seismic AISC, it is too much of a time suck to try to learn that all of that material with no direction. If you can have an instructor point at sections and say "pay attention to this, this is important", that's worth the money in my opinion. 

In your case, I think you're so close to passing, it would not be worth your money to take a review course just to get a few more morning questions correct. Buckle down on your concrete studying and you'll crush it next time.


----------



## Nathan55

YAZRABADI said:


> Hey guys, It is finally over, The LORD is truelly on my side. I have passed this exam and it is finished.
> 
> God bless you all. Please message me if you need any help...


I'm elated for you. Congrats!


----------



## cal91

Structural bee said:


> Big congrats man! I passed Vertical this time. We won't be seeing each other in Oct. But I am happy for you!


Great job! What a hard test. Glad we both got good news. Now you can focus on Lateral only.. I'm sure you'll get it when you take it!


----------



## Civil Dawg

ce-ei said:


> I called LAPELS and they stated that they have received the results.


Any indication as to when they would release them?!  Also, Baton Rouge or New Orleans.  We're already 2/4 (vert) or 2/3 (lat) represented in this thread!


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

First try. Failed both....

Vertical AM: 23/40

Vertical PM: A, A, A, IR

Lateral AM: 20/40

Lateral PM: A , A, IR, U

I will be breaking it up now and taking just the lateral next October. This sucks. I was really hoping I would pass the vertical! Dammit...


----------



## ce-ei

Civil Dawg said:


> Any indication as to when they would release them?!  Also, Baton Roug﻿e or New Orleans.  We're already 2/4 (vert) or 2/3 (lat) represented in this thread!


She said that NCEES controlled that.  BR both days.


----------



## Civil Dawg

ce-ei said:


> She said that NCEES controlled that.  BR both days.


Nice, looks like the whole crew is here.  I sat beside you for vert and in front for lateral.  Good luck man, hopefully not much longer to wait for results!


----------



## LetsSE

Just called CTS of Illinois. They said that they are not going to release the results until early next week. That is really bad news. I can not accept what she said. Can more people from ILLINOIS CALL HER and request to release the results. 

I call this number:

Continental Testing Services, Inc.

P.O. Box 100 LaGrange,
Illinois 60525

Contact: 800 359 1313
Fax: 708 354 9922


----------



## Sheik

Vancouver CA SE said:


> I passed Both Vertical and Lateral on my first TRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> View attachment 13405


congrats!


----------



## jmm7200

@LetsSE  Illinois always takes longer than other Board's.  They are also one of the few Boards that still use the middle-man like CTS.  I used to attempt this exam in that dump of test center in Hillside, this time I tried (and failed) to take it in Milwaukee, which is a wayyyyy nicer test center.  I will be heading back up there in October


----------



## Maya_206

Sheik said:


> congrats!


Congrats. You have to share some of your secrets.


----------



## aman

Appeared in New York state, Rochester area for vertical exam and I PASSED this time, I failed Vertical in my first attempt ..... thanks a lot guys..... now NEXT IS LATERAL .... and BEST OF LUCK TO THE PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T RECEIVED THE RESULTS YET


----------



## Mom-gineer

KY released...  for those waiting for IL to release... i'm with you...

I took the test in IL the first go around, but b/c I did not receive the results for a full three days after everyone else I took it the second time in KY. Great place and VERY reasonable proctors. You also get more desk space! Less noise! There were only 3 of us there for the vertical test (Oct 2018 - passed) and only 8 or 10 of us for the lateral (April 2019 - passed).

I took both days my first attempt and barely failed both (which is the typical result for so many of us). I have two young sons (2 &amp; 4) and it was extremely difficult and stressful to balance work, home, self, and exam prep. So I broke it up the next time and with a supportive work environment, awesomely helpful co-workers, and a wonderful husband I was able to conquer the material enough to get it done!

I'm so happy to be finished with this exam. It is certainly a challenge. I am thankful that our profession has this high standard, BUT I also think NCEES needs to acknowledge the high degree of difficulty of this test. Studying for this exam felt equivalent to gaining a second masters. It took just as many hours as my first masters. I do not think I now merely have a "Minimum level of competency in structural engineering." (THAT feels like a slap in the face. Especially, in reference to the time that I failed this exam. When I failed, this test did NOT prove that I did not have a "minimum level of competency in structural engineering.") I think at the very least it should state that we now have *"mastered the unique nuances of all facets of structural engineering." *

Best of luck to you who keep trudging forward. Especially those who are doing it while raising a family. Kudos to YOU!


----------



## Pur_SE_

LetsSE said:


> Just called CTS of Illinois. They said that they are not going to release the results until early next week. That is really bad news.


Go figure. This was the case last cycle too.... Results on a Thursday/Friday and IL results on Monday/Tuesday. 

I'm waiting for results from there too! Hang in there everyone still awaiting results!


----------



## aman

Vancouver CA SE said:


> I passed Both Vertical and Lateral on my first TRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> View attachment 13405


Congratulations to you..... Well done..... GUYS/GALS CHEERS ...... YOU ARE STILL BRAVE ENOUGH TO APPEAR IN THE EXAM.... MANY WON'T EVEN TRY IT.....


----------



## Civil Dawg

Civil Dawg said:


> Nice, looks like the whole crew is here.  I sat beside you for vert and in front for lateral.  Good luck man, hopefully not much longer to wait for results!


Louisiana is out...Failed Vertical for the 3rd time and Lateral for the first time.  This is brutal

Vertical: 24/40, IR, A, U, A

Lateral: 27/40, IR, U, A, U


----------



## NahzSema

I passed Vertical on my second try!!! I’m really glad this is over! I’m sorry to hear those who didn’t pass but don’t give up! I’m here to provide any advice (if it’s useful to you) let me know!

and congrats to those who passed this round


----------



## Mydude

Failed buildings lateral 2nd try,

27/40

Needs Improvement, Acceptable, Unacceptable, Acceptable.

If I had just done better on the general analysis PM question #803 looks like I would have passed!

This is killing me!! Going through this again will be torture!


----------



## ce-ei

First time taker for both building portions

Passed Vertical
Lateral 24/40; A,A,IR, UA


----------



## Sheik

kcd58 said:


> First post but I've been following this thread for a long time.  I got my results an hour ago from NCEES.  I passed!  WhooHoo!  Took the vertical in 2018 and the lateral this year. Good luck to the rest of you!
> 
> View attachment 13394


congrats!


----------



## Sheik

NahzSema said:


> I passed Vertical on my second try!!! I’m really glad this is over! I’m sorry to hear those who didn’t pass but don’t give up! I’m here to provide any advice (if it’s useful to you) let me know!
> 
> and congrats to those who passed this round
> 
> View attachment 13409


congrats! do you recommend any good prep course for vertical?


----------



## Stewie

I will study harder.

Passed Vertical.

Lateral 24/40; A A A. (very surprising afternoon result, but I guess nothing to complain.)


----------



## LetsSE

Stewie said:


> I will study harder.
> 
> Passed Vertical.
> 
> Lateral 24/40; A A A. (very surprising afternoon result, but I guess nothing to complain.)


It seems that you took lateral bridges. The afternoon questions are hard. It is a great achievement that you got three acceptable.


----------



## zas07001

I might be the only in CT, but I just called and the woman who can unlock scores at the dept. of licenses took today off - they said she might be in Monday.


----------



## Civil Dawg

Stewie said:


> I will study harder.
> 
> Passed Vertical.
> 
> Lateral 24/40; A A A. (very surprising afternoon result, but I guess nothing to complain.)


Wow you crushed that. Can’t believe that score didn’t pass. I’m super bummed out but I’ll likely be back and see you in October.


----------



## Civil Dawg

ce-ei said:


> First time taker for both building portions
> 
> Passed Vertical
> Lateral 24/40; A,A,IR, UA


Congrats on passing Vert. I would have given anything to knock one of them out and only have to focus on one. Time to regroup


----------



## YAZRABADI

cal91 said:


> Oh man what a wave of releif
> 
> View attachment 13407


congrats buddy time to celebrate. GOD IS GOOD


----------



## Stewie

Civil Dawg said:


> Wow you crushed that. Can’t believe that score didn’t pass. I’m super bummed out but I’ll likely be back and see you in October.


Man, let's do it again this Oct. WE WILL STUDY HARDER!


----------



## QuinnTheEskimo

Stewie said:


> Man, let's do it again this Oct. WE WILL STUDY HARDER!


I feel for you bridge fellas


----------



## Stewie

LetsSE said:


> It seems that you took lateral bridges. The afternoon questions are hard. It is a great achievement that you got three acceptable.


Yes sir, I am surprised. One of the afternoon problems, I just have no idea and do not even know which part of code I should look at... I guess I provided enough information for it somehow...


----------



## LetsSE

Stewie said:


> Yes sir, I am surprised. One of the afternoon problems, I just have no idea and do not even know which part of code I should look at... I guess I provided enough information for it somehow...


Are you talking about the footing problem? Concrete filled steel tubes?

I also feel it is hard to solve the third problem-general analysis.  They mentioned transverse direction all the time. Do we need to analyze the longitudinal direction at all and take 30% for transverse direction?


----------



## jmm7200

@Stewie  Its a damn shame that we did not pass the lateral with those scores.  You beat me by 1 in AM lol. 

But to answer your question from earlier about how to study for PM problems, I created a list of steps for each type of problem, i.e. column, footing, and analysis.  These steps have scenarios for various things with formulas, AASHTO code locations, different checks that are needed, etc..  For example, minimum area of steel required in the footing.  That is a check that is easy to skip.  The graders look for these checks.  This go around, with the exception of the provisions for the concrete filled tubes on the footing problem, I did not even open AASHTO, everything I needed was in my steps.

The afternoon and the whopping 7 AASHTO problems in the AM, I am good with.  Its all of that building stuff that kills me.  Unfortunately a lot of the morning AM is a scavenger hunt in these codes, and for me that never uses building codes at, work finding these little things is a killer. 

I'll never understand why ASCE7 makes wind so damn complicated or why NDS has so many very important footnotes.


----------



## NahzSema

@Sheik

I have heard good things about EET. A friend of mine took it and showed me his notes provided by the class and they seemed very thorough. Because I’m from California, I do seismic on a daily basis and so I did feel lateral was more straightforward for me. Vertical was tougher for me that it covered broader materials and also a lot of more “school” stuff that I just had to brush up on. I would recommend a course because it pretty much figures out the schedule for you and I think that is already a big factor in terms of wisely distributing your time on each area. What I found useful too was the specification from NCEES, try to stick to that and don’t over spend time studying material that has 1 or 2 questions on. From the previous diagnostic I knew what I needed to polish on and I made sure I could do those problems comfortably this time around. Hope it helps.


----------



## Stewie

@jmm7200, is there a way you share these steps (flowcharts) with Stewie?


----------



## Stewie

LetsSE said:


> Are you talking about the footing problem? Concrete filled steel tubes?
> 
> I also feel it is hard to solve the third problem-general analysis.  They mentioned transverse direction all the time. Do we need to analyze the longitudinal direction at all and take 30% for transverse direction?


Yep, the only thing in my mind now is the footing was killing me.

Man, I feel I am really getting old now. You still remember things. I will definitely begin study from tonight.


----------



## onemanwolfpack

@LetsSE Just a reminder that you signed an agreement with NCEES to not discuss problems/answers of the exam. Your comment above is walking a fine line I think.

@Stewie I've got a flowchart for bridge footing designs I created a few years ago if you'd like that.


----------



## Sheik

NahzSema said:


> @Sheik
> 
> I have heard good things about EET. A friend of mine took it and showed me his notes provided by the class and they seemed very thorough. Because I’m from California, I do seismic on a daily basis and so I did feel lateral was more straightforward for me. Vertical was tougher for me that it covered broader materials and also a lot of more “school” stuff that I just had to brush up on. I would recommend a course because it pretty much figures out the schedule for you and I think that is already a big factor in terms of wisely distributing your time on each area. What I found useful too was the specification from NCEES, try to stick to that and don’t over spend time studying material that has 1 or 2 questions on. From the previous diagnostic I knew what I needed to polish on and I made sure I could do those problems comfortably this time around. Hope it helps.


Thank you @NahzSema. From my diagnostic report I need to improve my knowledge on Analysis part and I did good in design though.


----------



## iDSE

Looks like Florida is sitting on it until next week.. Absolutely hate this.


----------



## NahzSema

@Sheik

That was exactly my issue in the first round. Study hard on loads, methods and analysis because they do contribute like 10+ problems in AM per spec. These 3 area are also crucial in the afternoon. You will nail this test next time!


----------



## Chuckimus

iDSE said:


> Looks like Florida is sitting on it until next week.. Absolutely hate this.


GA too.


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

Chuckimus said:


> Correct.


This is almost unbelievable. About the only way I can see this passing is if you nailed the multiple choice. I was unable to find someone who felt they had nailed a multiple choice  and got an unacceptable a afternoon problem. I've always wondered if this was considered a passing score by NCEES and, if you truly didn't write anything for an afternoon problem, then you may have done just that. Another consideration is they threw out a portion of the afternoon problem you didn't complete so you got partial credit even though you did no work. That seems unlikely though.

Either way, good info. How well do you think you did on the morning section?



Chuckimus said:


> Why not? Is 75% not enough? My biggest problem is that I cannot work through all four problems in 4 hours.


Our previous data (which is always going to be incomplete since we only see failing scores and not passing scores) was that an unacceptable fails an exam with even a really good morning score.



TehMightyEngineer said:


> 33/40 - Acceptable, Acceptable, Acceptable, Unacceptable ﻿
> 
> 35/40 - Acceptable, Acceptable, Unacceptable


The above are the highest morning scores that I've found mentioned here that still had a failure. Both appear to have been failed by that unacceptable. I've had confirmation that an acceptable on an afternoon can be obtained with partial work but never with no work done; that seems like it would always default to unacceptable. Thus, you passing would signal to me that you got better than 35/40 on the morning or they gave you credit due to a error on that question. Either way, huge congratulations.



kcd58 said:


> First post but I've been following this thread for a long time.  I got my results an hour ago from NCEES.  I passed!  WhooHoo!  Took the vertical in 2018 and the lateral this year. Good luck to the rest of you!
> 
> View attachment 13394


Congratulations! Nice to get those done one year apart. All the people on year 3+ are jealous of you.



FutureSE said:


> Whelp NCEES, you got me. I fucking give the fuck up.


Damn, sorry to see you throw in the towel but I can understand that. You're definitely close but I know you've been close for a while. I hope you still have some value in the experience working towards the exam.



SE_Hopeful said:


> So did I add that up right, you got 23/40 and A/A/A/IR and still didnt pass? WTF.


Yeah, you probably needed around 26-27 on the morning judging from the other scores that failed.



SE_Hopeful said:


> Those scores are better than the previously estimated cut lines posted here


Not really, 26-27 is likely the target for the morning on this exam based on my previous estimates of cut scores. Definitely a ton of people who are very close though.



Mydude said:


> Failed buildings lateral 2nd try,
> 
> 27/40
> 
> Needs Improvement, Acceptable, Unacceptable, Acceptable.
> 
> If I had just done better on the general analysis PM question #803 looks like I would have passed!
> 
> This is killing me!! Going through this again will be torture!


Dang, I agree that 803 probably killed you. Good luck next time around and stay motivated; you're so close.



ce-ei said:


> First time taker for both building portions
> 
> Passed Vertical
> Lateral 24/40; A,A,IR, UA


Some of those morning questions must have been brutal or tricky. Lots of people scoring in this range on the morning.



Stewie said:


> I will study harder.
> 
> Passed Vertical.
> 
> Lateral 24/40; A A A. (very surprising afternoon result, but I guess nothing to complain.)


Wow, you must have been very close. Definitely worth some praise getting 3 acceptables. Congrats on passing vertical.

Congratulations to all who passed; and good work to all regardless of your score. Everyone is clearly working really hard on these exams and I hope you're becoming a better engineer regardless of whether you pass on your first or sixth time.

It will be interesting to see what the change in passing rate are for April's exam period. For records, this is December's pass rate:


SE Lateral Forces Bridges


38


16%


45


36%


P&amp;P


Twice per year


Dec 2018


SE Lateral Forces Buildings


241


36%


264


38%


P&amp;P


Twice per year


Dec 2018


SE Vertical Forces Bridges


44


32%


20


45%


P&amp;P


Twice per year


Dec 2018


SE Vertical Forces Buildings


300


36%


206


21%


P&amp;P


Twice per year


Dec 2018


----------



## Engi-nerd

Continental Testing has Illinois results posted on their website


----------



## mstructural

Hindianapolis said:


> Michigan out. Failed
> 
> 22/40
> 
> 3A 1 IR


Didn’t know you can now take the SE exam in Michigan. Where in MI did you take? I took the SE last year in Illinois and passed. Had to drive 4 hours each way to take it. That made it even more special. Congrats to all those who passed!


----------



## Duke

Engi-nerd said:


> Continental Testing has Illinois results posted on their website


Thanks for sharing, can confirm CTS has posted.


----------



## Hindianapolis

mstructural said:


> Didn’t know you can now take the SE exam in Michigan. Where in MI did you take? I took the SE last year in Illinois and passed it. Had to drive 4 hours each way to take it. That made even more special. Congrats to all those who passed!


I took it in Macomb Community College


----------



## mstructural

Hindianapolis said:


> I took it in Macomb Community College


That’s cool @Hindianapolis That’s where I took my PE exam too many moons ago.

So would your license be issued by the State of Michigan if you’d passed? Did you register through LARA?


----------



## LetsSE

Stewie said:


> Yep, the only thing in my mind now is the footing was killing me.
> 
> Man, I feel I am really getting old now. You still remember things. I will definitely begin study from tonight.


I passed lateral bridges this April and with the vertical bridges passed last oct. I could be officially licensed as SE.

Good Luck Everyone.


----------



## Stewie

LetsSE said:


> I passed lateral bridges this April and with the vertical bridges passed last oct. I could be officially licensed as SE.
> 
> Good Luck Everyone.


nice job! congratulations!


----------



## EgineerBC

I took Vertical in Oregon, and passed. Good luck everyone.


----------



## Chuckimus

I spent the entire afternoon working on the three I attempted, and I would be surprised if I didn't get full credit for all of them. So, I think an acceptable has a range, and enough points lost on multiple problems along with an unacceptable will fail you on the afternoon.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

@TehMightyEngineer

The following items are what I've gained from study of this exam:

Gravity - absolutely nothing but I've been designing for around 14 years now. More if you count side work during graduate school.

Lateral - I learned a few things. First, I specifically learned special seismic detailing after paying out the ass for it as nobody in the southeast uses it. Second, I've learned that the older I get, the worse I am at these shitty licensure exams as I've never came close to failing an exam before in my life and I've now failed this one (4) fucking times. Third, I can't tell what most of the problems on that report are but I remember pulling everything from the cold formed framing directly out of the AISI and somehow that was still marked as incorrect (I missed 15 more problems than I anticipated on the morning section, something isn't right there. I'm concerned I may have screwed my bubbling up because of the bridge problems I skipped, I'll never know though, because fuck NCEES.), I don't trust my licensing organizations, the state board, or the NCEES themselves anymore and I will harbor a FUCKING hatred of all of these fucking fuckers for the rest of my fucking career. Fourth, GA is retarded for accepting this test as the only means of licensure for a glorified fucking house designer (myself). Fifth, this has made me ponder why it is easier and easier to become a contractor while code requirements on engineers are getting more stringent. Sixth, this has made me wonder why the fuck I became an engineer in the first place as I believe I've been caught in the middle of something I should've been grandfathered in on, FUCK NCEES again and the GA board. Seventh, why keep changing the damn codes? This is getting fucking ridiculous all of you fucking fuck code changing fuckers. We aren't having failures from the older codes. FUCK. Eighth, I now wonder why the boards keep adopting these new codes and why any state would make this test their only route to licensure when they aren't even a seismic state. Ninth, I hate NCEES 3000. Tenth, I hate the GA board ∞. Eleventh, I now know how to make infinity on the keyboard (ALT + 236). Twelfth, engineers don't make enough money to go through this horse shit so the fucking boards had better be careful, otherwise they aren't going to have any fucking engineers. Thirteenth,  how in the absolute fucking fucktardation can you fail someone on a God Damn competency exam when they absolutely fucking showed that they were competent with written problems? That's a rhetorical question. FUCK. Last, I think I'm going to become a God Damn contractor as they make twice as much as engineers and they can apparently eat fucking paint chips while doing so because those fuckers are stupid.


----------



## Nathan55

Not to add accelerant to the conflagration, FutureSE...but, some things I noticed, running some numbers...

About 1200 people take the SE exam (includes buildings and bridges) between the two days. In fall, maybe we assume 1000 people. At 500$ a pop, that gives NCEES an annual revenue of about 1.1 million dollars for the SE exam. With a pass rate hovering around 30%, accountants can rely on 70% of the people being repeat customers. That's a take rate that would make Steve Jobs envious. Even iPhone upgrades are done yearly; imagine if every 6 months they had a new one, and 70% of the buyers would replace their model? It's genius. 

Also, every 10% increase in the pass rate results in a loss of 120,000$ per year of NCEES. I'd be very curious, from a financial standpoint, whether NCEES could even sustain providing the test if the pass rate were 50 or 60%. The locked in revenue would be half of what they usually can count on. I'd posit the answer is no.


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

FutureSE said:


> @TehMightyEngineer
> 
> The following items are what I've gained from study of this exam:
> 
> Gravity - absolutely nothing but I've been designing for around 14 years now. More if you count side work during graduate school.
> 
> Lateral - I learned a few things. First, I specifically learned special seismic detailing after paying out the ass for it as nobody in the southeast uses it. Second, I've learned that the older I get, the worse I am at these shitty licensure exams as I've never came close to failing an exam before in my life and I've now failed this one (4) fucking times. Third, I can't tell what most of the problems on that report are but I remember pulling everything from the cold formed framing directly out of the AISI and somehow that was still marked as incorrect (I missed 15 more problems than I anticipated on the morning section, something isn't right there. I'm concerned I may have screwed my bubbling up because of the bridge problems I skipped, I'll never know though, because fuck NCEES.), I don't trust my licensing organizations, the state board, or the NCEES themselves anymore and I will harbor a FUCKING hatred of all of these fucking fuckers for the rest of my fucking career. Fourth, GA is retarded for accepting this test as the only means of licensure for a glorified fucking house designer (myself). Fifth, this has made me ponder why it is easier and easier to become a contractor while code requirements on engineers are getting more stringent. Sixth, this has made me wonder why the fuck I became an engineer in the first place as I believe I've been caught in the middle of something I should've been grandfathered in on, FUCK NCEES again and the GA board. Seventh, why keep changing the damn codes? This is getting fucking ridiculous all of you fucking fuck code changing fuckers. We aren't having failures from the older codes. FUCK. Eighth, I now wonder why the boards keep adopting these new codes and why any state would make this test their only route to licensure when they aren't even a seismic state. Ninth, I hate NCEES 3000. Tenth, I hate the GA board ∞. Eleventh, I now know how to make infinity on the keyboard (ALT + 236). Twelfth, engineers don't make enough money to go through this horse shit so the fucking boards had better be careful, otherwise they aren't going to have any fucking engineers. Thirteenth,  how in the absolute fucking fucktardation can you fail someone on a God Damn competency exam when they absolutely fucking showed that they were competent with written problems? That's a rhetorical question. FUCK. Last, I think I'm going to become a God Damn contractor as they make twice as much as engineers and they can apparently eat fucking paint chips while doing so because those fuckers are stupid.


I like your humor and agree with you more than generally I'd like to admit.

I 100% agree with fuck NCEES, but my anger stems from their records debacle. For me I passed the SE when I felt I deserved to pass so that's been my experience; however you're not the first person to feel unfairly treated by this exam so perhaps I'm just lucky?

Regardless, I agree with you on the state of engineering as an industry. Seems like you've really got the short end of the stick in a lot of things. Hopefully you can find a way out of the regional BS you're dealing with. Change of local maybe?


----------



## Chuckimus

Passed vertical. For the record, I passed both with A A A U in the afternoon.


----------



## crammer

Chuckimus said:


> Passed vertical. For the record, I passed both with A A A U in the afternoon.


Congrats!  Did you leave the 4th problem blank on both?


----------



## Saluki21

How do you know you passed with 3 acceptable and 1 unacceptable?


----------



## StandardPractice

GAengineer3 said:


> I passed the vertical 1st try. I failed the lateral four times in a row. The state of GA says that I have to re-submit my application AFTER taking 12 hours of graduate level coursework at an accredited university. This could cost thousands and take a long time. My vertical portion is good until 2022. What are my options here? Should I apply to take the exam in another state and try to get reciprocity with GA? If I did that, would the vertical part still be good or would I have to retake? Anyone been in this situation before? Any information or advice would be appreciated. Thanks!


I would think where you pass each part of the SE exam wouldn't matter as 'how the exam is administered' is not state dependent. In other words same exam taken in GA would be same one taken in NC. I've definitely heard of folks taking PE exam in other states if they hit the max retake number. They just had to physically drive to exam site that's out of state. Have you taken a review course? I'm pretty sure that may count instead of dropping a few thousand and years on courses and if this is try #4 it may help you get over that last hump.


----------



## Chuckimus

crammer said:


> Congrats!  Did you leave the 4th problem blank on both?






Saluki21 said:


> How do you know you passed with 3 acceptable and 1 unacceptable?


Only on the lateral. I started the fourth on the vertical, but didn't get far.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

GAengineer3 said:


> I passed the vertical 1st try. I failed the lateral four times in a row. The state of GA says that I have to re-submit my application AFTER taking 12 hours of graduate level coursework at an accredited university. This could cost thousands and take a long time. My vertical portion is good until 2022. What are my options here? Should I apply to take the exam in another state and try to get reciprocity with GA? If I did that, would the vertical part still be good or would I have to retake? Anyone been in this situation before? Any information or advice would be appreciated. Thanks!


Almost in the same situation as you. Passed vertical first try, can't get through lateral to save my life despite the fact I fully believe I am more than competent in the subject now. I originally applied in GA  but they deleted my original application after denying reciprocity (because they are GA I guess) and I didn't trust them to get me registered so I went to Alabama. Alabama has one of the best and most responsive boards I've dealt with. You can call them and the BOARD answers, not the crappy SOS as in GA. Alabama will let you test there. My suggestion is resister there. GA absolutely sucks in comparison. AL may not like abortion (I really don't either, but maybe it's because I was born in Bama), but they are at least engineering friendly.


----------



## Hindianapolis

Chuckimus said:


> Passed vertical. For the record, I passed both with A A A U in the afternoon.


@TehMightyEngineer

from what i understood from your famous cut score post, you cannot pass with a single Unacceptable PM problem. How is this possible?


----------



## Nathan55

Hindianapolis said:


> @TehMightyEngineer
> 
> from what i understood from your famous cut score post, you cannot pass with a single Unacceptable PM problem. How is this possible?


Something I stumbled upon, perusing the NCEES manual of practice:




So there IS a way to find out your score, even if you passed. The board needs to request it.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

@Nathan55@TehMightyEngineer

As far as passing when I felt I was capable, I should've passed last October. I was really close. As far as this last exam, after 2 review courses and 2 years of study, I know this shit like the back of my hand. I probably got the I/R on steel because I was running short on time and either made a math mistake or skipped something. It's funny because by far I consider steel, wood, and masonry far easier in seismic design than concrete. Doesn't matter, I know them all now. The fact of the matter is, something else screwed up. I either got off on the bubbling or the scantron read my tick marks for skipped questions. I've paid for and requested a manual verification but I highly suspect I screwed the bubbling up. Maybe by the grace of @YAZRABADI's God, it was just my tick marks on the bridge problems and a few of the harder problems as that would likely be about 12 of problems I ran into, wrote a tick mark, and came back to. There were a couple answer changes as well. I could handle missing a few I thought I got right, but at the level of understanding I have on this material now, 15 is simply not statistically probable. I was guessing 38/40. For reference, last October exam I missed 5 more than I thought I had and I was MUCH better prepared this time. It's taken me about 2 years but I have been through every material code book, the SEAOC books, the IBC and ASCE, taken both the School of PE and the EET Lateral courses, and read/studied/solved problems in a couple text books that I picked up online for dynamic analysis. Hell, I can calculate Finite Elements, vibrations, resonant frequencies, and (least of all) perform Modal Analysis in my sleep. I know all there is to know in the material codes about the yielding mechanisms for the steel seismic lateral systems (as well as when to use expected vs omega vs design strengths), concrete systems, masonry reinforcement requirements, and wood subscript (inappropriate butt touching) gotcha provisions. I may not necessarily have the equations memorized, but I know exactly what needs to be done to achieve a proper hysteric diagram and I've even learned linear dash-pot damping for shits and giggles. All this to say, shit yeah I should've passed this last time, but I have the worst luck in the universe. If probability gives me a 50/50 shot at something, I swear my odds are more like 90/10 against my favor. Maybe more. I honestly think one of my ex's has delved into Voodoo and is stabbing my effigy every night before she goes to bed and every morning when she wakes up. I can't think of any explanation other than that and my leg is hurting as I type this. I don't necessarily believe it is economic as I am perfectly satisfied with my afternoon score or I would've lawyered up as I certainly believe the grading is inconsistent. Not much I can do about the multiple choice. You either got it or you didn't. Just wish I knew if mine were in a wad at the end of the exam because of the whole bubbling issue. Who knows, maybe I'll win the lottery and it was just my errant tick marks that made the scantron scream in anguish. May be doubtful, but a man can dream.


----------



## Chuckimus

Hindianapolis said:


> @TehMightyEngineer
> 
> from what i understood from your famous cut score post, you cannot pass with a single Unacceptable PM problem. How is this possible?


It is possible, I think there is a threshold of acceptable, so maybe 70% correct of the problem is acceptable. So three of those with an unacceptable may not be passing, but three 100% acceptable and one unacceptable is passing. That's how I'm thinking of it at least.


----------



## Sheik

NahzSema said:


> @Sheik
> 
> That was exactly my issue in the f﻿irst round. Study hard on loads, methods and analysis because they do contribute like 10+ problems in AM per spec. These 3 area are also crucial in the afternoon. You will nail this test next time!


Thank you @NahzSema


----------



## iDSE

Florida released finally. Lateral Building - 23/40 A A IR U. Felt I did much better than 23..

3rd try, so have to figure out if I have to reapply from the start or if can try again in October. 

I COULD have taken the PE exam and likely had my license 2 years ago, but now I get to decide if I keep taking the SE lateral or PE since I have already passed the Vertical..


----------



## Nathan55

iDSE said:


> Florida released finally. Lateral Building - 23/40 A A IR U. Felt I did much better than 23..
> 
> 3rd try, so have to figure out if I have to reapply from the start or if can try again in October.
> 
> I COULD have taken the PE exam and likely had my license 2 years ago, but now I get to decide if I keep taking the SE lateral or PE since I have already passed the Vertical..


I'd suggest going the balla route and taking the PE on friday, then the SE lateral on Saturday. If you did that well on the SE lateral and already passed the vertical, the PE structural exam should be a walk in the park.


----------



## cal91

So when we finding out pass rates?


----------



## iDSE

@FutureSE 

Have you taken any courses beyond EET? State of Florida is requiring I take a review course to re-apply but EET is not on that list. 

(b) Submit evidence of completion of one of the following board approved engineering examination review courses; the selected course must cover content for the examination in the engineering discipline the applicant intends to take.

1. Schools with an ABET approved engineering program;  2. Kaplan Engineering Education;  3. School of PE;  4. Testmasters Educational Services, Inc.;  5. SmartPros, Ltd.;  6. Professional Publications, Inc.,

School of PE looks sketchy,

Kaplan is PPI now

Testmasters doesn't have SE 

PPI is combined vertical and lateral so half the course is a waste of time

What a pain in the ass this all is..


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

iDSE said:


> @FutureSE
> 
> Have you taken any courses beyond EET? State of Florida is requiring I take a review course to re-apply but EET is not on that list.
> 
> (b) Submit evidence of completion of one of the following board approved engineering examination review courses; the selected course must cover content for the examination in the engineering discipline the applicant intends to take.
> 
> 1. Schools with an ABET approved engineering program;  2. Kaplan Engineering Education;  3. School of PE;  4. Testmasters Educational Services, Inc.;  5. SmartPros, Ltd.;  6. Professional Publications, Inc.,
> 
> School of PE looks sketchy,
> 
> Kaplan is PPI now
> 
> Testmasters doesn't have SE
> 
> PPI is combined vertical and lateral so half the course is a waste of time
> 
> What a pain in the ass this all is..


I’ve taken School of PE and EET. Both were for the lateral portion of the exam. Both helped me in different ways and had their merits. I would have to say of the courses that EET was the most in depth and gave me the most benefit, though. In full disclosure , I did take EET live and School of PE was on demand. I would definitely recommend taking a live course too. The feedback from the instructors is instrumental to success in my opinion. Just be careful come test as apparently a review course can’t save you from yourself.


----------



## User1

iDSE said:


> @FutureSE
> 
> Have you taken any courses beyond EET? State of Florida is requiring I take a review course to re-apply but EET is not on that list.
> 
> (b) Submit evidence of completion of one of the following board approved engineering examination review courses; the selected course must cover content for the examination in the engineering discipline the applicant intends to take.
> 
> 1. Schools with an ABET approved engineering program;  2. Kaplan Engineering Education;  3. School of PE;  4. Testmasters Educational Services, Inc.;  5. SmartPros, Ltd.;  6. Professional Publications, Inc.,
> 
> School of PE looks sketchy,
> 
> Kaplan is PPI now
> 
> Testmasters doesn't have SE
> 
> PPI is combined vertical and lateral so half the course is a waste of time﻿
> 
> ﻿
> 
> What a pain in the ass this all is..﻿﻿﻿﻿


see if you have a school nearby that you can take a course at - those are usually 500 or less. probably both vert and lat but at least the price is better? I think Univ of Washington has one that they do a webinar version fo rthose far away


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

If anyone has trouble with dynamic analysis, this book kicks Uranus. It’s not a YUGE part of the exam (yuge courtesy of my favorite Mr. Cheeto Man), but it has been on every exam I’ve taken in some form or another.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Chuckimus said:


> It is possible, I think there is a threshold of acceptable, so maybe 70% correct of the problem is acceptable. So three of those with an unacceptable may not be passing, but three 100% acceptable and one unacceptable is passing. That's how I'm thinking of it at least.


I still wonder why in the hell the grading process is so secretive. Every class I’ve ever taken told us what would be weighted to which degree and roughly how the items were scored. I don’t know where the harm is in letting us know. Shame. Maybe I’m operating from ignorance, but I doubt other licensure boards are this secretive and arduous.


----------



## iDSE

tj_PE said:


> see if you have a school nearby that you can take a course at - those are usually 500 or less. probably both vert and lat but at least the price is better? I think Univ of Washington has one that they do a webinar version fo rthose far away


The school option actually requires 12 credit hours lol... Review course or literally 12 credit hours!

But closest school is 3 hours away that is ABET accredited regardless, so definitely couldn't go that route if I wanted to.


----------



## Chuckimus

FutureSE said:


> I still wonder why in the hell the grading process is so secretive. Every class I’ve ever taken told us what would be weighted to which degree and roughly how the items were scored. I don’t know where the harm is in letting us know. Shame. Maybe I’m operating from ignorance, but I doubt other licensure boards are this secretive and arduous.


I absolutely hate that about this exam. They don't tell us a damn thing about grading. And for us that aren't perfect at every test we take, being able to come up with a strategy is important. Mine turned into screw wood because it would be unethical for me to do anyway, as I have zero experience with it, and focus on what I know. I focused on concrete, steel, masonry, and analysis and did them completely. So I didn't fudge anything, I made sure it was correct and well explained. If you are struggling like me to pass (which I did, yay!), maybe try a different approach. I can't do four of those problems in four hours, and I don't think you should rush through something you haven't seen before


----------



## SEoregon

I passed the vertical portion in Oregon and I have 3 years of work experience. You guys can do it too!


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

Chuckimus said:


> It is possible, I think there is a threshold of acceptable, so maybe 70% correct of the problem is acceptable. So three of those with an unacceptable may not be passing, but three 100% acceptable and one unacceptable is passing. That's how I'm thinking of it at least.


I mentioned it earlier in this thread but we've never had good indications whether it was possible until now. You would have to be very confident you got AAAU on the afternoon to "confirm" it. We did theorize that a really high morning score would get you a passing score but we had failing scores well above 80% on the morning that were failed because of a U on the afternoon if I recall.

Either way, I'd say we can safely modify our understanding that an unacceptable on the afternoon will "generally" fail you.


----------



## NahzSema

I still find it hard to believe one Unacceptable can still pass, especially if left completely blank. A friend of mine took PPI and said someone failed with a score of 33 in AM and A/A/IR/IR in PM. That already sounds BS to me that you can’t pass with that score. 

In my engineer head, I’m thinking...Say each problem contributes 25 pt in the PM. Maybe range of being Acceptable is 19-25 pt (76% and above), and IR is 15-18pt (60%-76%), and anything below 14 pt (&lt;56%) is Unacceptable.

Based on that assumption, that PM score above gives a range of 68 to 86 pt. And even if you take 68 pt in PM and average it with 33/40 in AM, I’m still getting almost like 75% overall. And remember this is the low end of each range add up. If you take the high end, we get almost 85% overall. And with one Unacceptable, you can only match that if you score 95% in the morning. (95+75)/2=85...which is 38/40.

of course, this is all just assumptions and we will never find out how NCEES grade our exams. Hopefully @Chuckimus can enlighten me because I’m just SHOCKED.


----------



## David Connor SE

cal91 said:


> So when we finding out pass rates?


----------



## Nathan55

Chuckimus said:


> I absolutely hate that about this exam. They don't tell us a damn thing about grading. And for us that aren't perfect at every test we take, being able to come up with a strategy is important. Mine turned into screw wood because it would be unethical for me to do anyway, as I have zero experience with it, and focus on what I know. I focused on concrete, steel, masonry, and analysis and did them completely. So I didn't fudge anything, I made sure it was correct and well explained. If you are struggling like me to pass (which I did, yay!), maybe try a different approach. I can't do four of those problems in four hours, and I don't think you should rush through something you haven't seen before


To really answer why they won't tell us anything about grading, I'd posit we consider two principles. First, who does this procedure benefit? And second, Occam's razor. 

At some point, someone sat in a room and said "we need to grade essay problems subjectively, but maintain a believable--albeit superficial--patina of objectivity." We do know that in the past, all licensing exams were constructed response (essay). Additionally, we know that more information was provided on grading and errors as well. So what lead to the change? 

NCEES procedure manuals state that this was done for the purposes of exam security. This is their most important (stated) goal. However, if exam security were the only, or actual reason, you would see a marked _positive_ difference in the pass rate between first time takers and repeat takers. Seeing one administration of the exam would theoretically give you an unfair advantage when retaking, and, NCEES might limit examinees to a maximum number of attempts to maintain this illusion.  But based on the metrics and passing rate data provided by NCEES, we know this isn't the case--seeing exam content in and of itself does _not_ increase your chance of passing. Therefore the purposeful obfuscation on the essay grading must serve some higher purpose...otherwise it wouldn't be in place. The simplest explanation appears to be that the trick to the test _isn't_ necessarily the exam content, but rather the grading procedures themselves. So now the real question: whom does this procedure benefit?

The public as a whole clearly is benefited by competent engineers. However, if the public were intended to be the main beneficiary, NCEES would be in the business of promoting that examinees previously deemed "incompetent" could improve and become competent. The simplest way to achieve this would be to provide grading information to licensure candidates, likely bound by NDAs similar to those signed prior to taking the test. But NCEES does not and would not risk taking this step. Why? The grading data must thusly be considered sacrosanct in a way that goes above and beyond how the exam content is classified. There must be proprietary methods which are applied generally to all essay problems; NCEES is concerned that being aware of those methods--more than the types of problems themselves--would skew pass rates to a point that continued exam administration would be unsustainable.  The procedure in place clearly is not beneficial to the examinee in any way, and likely does more harm than good.

NCEES understands that providing a vague diagnostic doesn't raise your chances of passing the next time around. That, in my estimation, says volumes.


----------



## Hindianapolis

TehMightyEngineer said:


> I mentioned it earlier in this thread but we've never had good indications whether it was possible until now. You would have to be very confident you got AAAU on the afternoon to "confirm" it. We did theorize that a really high morning score would get you a passing score but we had failing scores well above 80% on the morning that were failed because of a U on the afternoon if I recall.
> 
> Either way, I'd say we can safely modify our understanding that an unacceptable on the afternoon will "generally" fail you.






NahzSema said:


> I still find it hard to believe one Unacceptable can still pass, especially if left completely blank. A friend of mine took PPI and said someone failed with a score of 33 in AM and A/A/IR/IR in PM. That already sounds BS to me that you can’t pass with that score.
> 
> In my engineer head, I’m thinking...Say each problem contributes 25 pt in the PM. Maybe range of being Acceptable is 19-25 pt (76% and above), and IR is 15-18pt (60%-76%), and anything below 14 pt (&lt;56%) is Unacceptable.
> 
> Based on that assumption, that PM score above gives a range of 68 to 86 pt. And even if you take 68 pt in PM and average it with 33/40 in AM, I’m still getting almost like 75% overall. And remember this is the low end of each range add up. If you take the high end, we get almost 85% overall. And with one Unacceptable, you can only match that if you score 95% in the morning. (95+75)/2=85...which is 38/40.
> 
> of course, this is all just assumptions and we will never find out how NCEES grade our exams. Hopefully @Chuckimus can enlighten me because I’m just SHOCKED.


I still find it hard to believe this.....

@Sheik had an impeccable afternoon with 4A and a 24/40 morning and still didn't cut it. I find this to be fundamentally wrong. How can someone who has proven competency across the entire afternoon session, covering all conventional construction materials, fail the exam with a 60% morning session (fairly shallow questions). I find this especially disturbing!!....This is also magnified when you contemplate that, with a little bit of luck, he could've bubbled a couple of correct questions and made it......


----------



## NahzSema

@Hindianapolis

All I can say is that those of who that got so close to passing just had gotten the low end of the Acceptable spectrum. 60% in AM and 76% in PM is 68% overall...

I’d agree the cut score is 72-75%.


----------



## Hindianapolis

so the PM is qualitative.....but also quantitative? Maybe....although i find it improbable in light of how subjective the responses of the PM can be. If the grading happens in a workshop, then there is likely going to be solution manual for the graders to follow. The requirement for the graders to have extensive industry experience is to allow them to identify deviations from the manual, but still follow the framework of the solution......I need not say that we are all shooting darts here.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Chuckimus said:


> I absolutely hate that about this exam. They don't tell us a damn thing about grading. And for us that aren't perfect at every test we take, being able to come up with a strategy is important. Mine turned into screw wood because it would be unethical for me to do anyway, as I have zero experience with it, and focus on what I know. I focused on concrete, steel, masonry, and analysis and did them completely. So I didn't fudge anything, I made sure it was correct and well explained. If you are struggling like me to pass (which I did, yay!), maybe try a different approach. I can't do four of those problems in four hours, and I don't think you should rush through something you haven't seen before


I appreciate the input. I didn't really have much trouble though, I finished the morning a few minutes early and estimated 38/40 correct but the scores came back 23/40 and figured I had acceptable on all 4 in the afternoon but came back with A A A I/R. I really don't understand it. I didn't struggle with hardly anything in the morning, just a couple of bridge problems. I still can't understand exactly how this happened, but I know the cold formed steel problem was marked wrong and I was 100% sure I got that one as I pulled the information directly out of the AISI. It was something about a steel deck. Either these problems were way trickier than I thought (I saw a few tricks but missing 15 additional problems seems unlikely), my tick marks beside skipped problems and/or some checked and changed answers screwed the scantron (I've applied for manual verification so at least I can eliminate this upon receipt), or I misbubbled somewhere after skipping problems prior to going back and picking them up. I suspect I likely misbubbled as I went through code by code. I had around 10 to 15 minutes of review as well. I don't know, man. I'm really frustrated by this. The knowledge I have concerning this stuff now certainly isn't reflected in an UNACCEPTABLE score.


----------



## N_Mo

FutureSE said:


> I appreciate the input. I didn't really have much trouble though, I finished the morning a few minutes early and estimated 38/40 correct but the scores came back 23/40 and figured I had acceptable on all 4 in the afternoon but came back with A A A I/R. I really don't understand it. I didn't struggle with hardly anything in the morning, just a couple of bridge problems. I still can't understand exactly how this happened, but I know the cold formed steel problem was marked wrong and I was 100% sure I got that one as I pulled the information directly out of the AISI. It was something about a steel deck. Either these problems were way trickier than I thought (I saw a few tricks but missing 15 additional problems seems unlikely), my tick marks beside skipped problems and/or some checked and changed answers screwed the scantron (I've applied for manual verification so at least I can eliminate this upon receipt), or I misbubbled somewhere after skipping problems prior to going back and picking them up. I suspect I likely misbubbled as I went through code by code. I had around 10 to 15 minutes of review as well. I don't know, man. I'm really frustrated by this. The knowledge I have concerning this stuff now certainly isn't reflected in an UNACCEPTABLE score.


Based on the data, that I have seen on different websites about the grading, I think they assign 10 points to each afternoon problem, so the whole exam will be 80 points and usually grades equal or above 56 ( &gt;= 70%) are passed. Acceptable, will be assigned a grade of 8,  9  or 10 (I guess getting 10 out 10 is almost impossible). I/R has a grade of 6 or 7. Most probably, for the grades below 6 (Unacceptable) they put 0, to force the applicant to fail !!!!!! (which is totally UNFAIR in my mind) . Let's say that you got, A(9), A(9), A(8), I/R(6), with 23 in the morning, your grade is 55. What I want to say is that, you were SO, SO CLOSE. Therefore don't give up, you will easily pass it next time.


----------



## DoctorWho-PE

Nathan55 said:


> I'd suggest going the balla route and taking the PE on friday, then the SE lateral on Saturday. If you did that well on the SE lateral and already passed the vertical, the PE structural exam should be a walk in the park.


Aside from the morning civil stuff, if you aren't a civil person... I had never seen the civil stuff before I started studying for the PE, my degree has more of a mechanical lean to it.  As in, up until me, they had all gone into Mechanical engineering.


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

In case someone missed it, here's the previous passing rates compared to David's post of this last exams passing rates. Looks like bridge lateral and vertical buildings were difficult this year.



TehMightyEngineer said:


> SE Lateral Forces Bridges
> 
> 
> 
> 38
> 
> 
> 16%
> 
> 
> 45
> 
> 
> 36%
> 
> 
> P&amp;P
> 
> 
> Twice per year
> 
> 
> Dec 2018
> 
> 
> SE Lateral Forces Buildings
> 
> 
> 241
> 
> 
> 36%
> 
> 
> 264
> 
> 
> 38%
> 
> 
> P&amp;P
> 
> 
> Twice per year
> 
> 
> Dec 2018
> 
> 
> SE Vertical Forces Bridges
> 
> 
> 44
> 
> 
> 32%
> 
> 
> 20
> 
> 
> 45%
> 
> 
> P&amp;P
> 
> 
> Twice per year
> 
> 
> Dec 2018
> 
> 
> SE Vertical Forces Buildings
> 
> 
> 300
> 
> 
> 36%
> 
> 
> 206
> 
> 
> 21%
> 
> 
> P&amp;P
> 
> 
> Twice per year
> 
> 
> Dec 2018 ﻿





David Connor said:


> View attachment 13418


----------



## Nathan55

N_Mo said:


> Based on the data, that I have seen on different websites about the grading, I think they assign 10 points to each afternoon problem, so the whole exam will be 80 points and usually grades equal or above 56 ( &gt;= 70%) are passed. Acceptable, will be assigned a grade of 8,  9  or 10 (I guess getting 10 out 10 is almost impossible). I/R has a grade of 6 or 7. Most probably, for the grades below 6 (Unacceptable) they put 0, to force the applicant to fail !!!!!! (which is totally UNFAIR in my mind) . Let's say that you got, A(9), A(9), A(8), I/R(6), with 23 in the morning, your grade is 55. What I want to say is that, you were SO, SO CLOSE. Therefore don't give up, you will easily pass it next time.


Therein lies the Machiavellian genius of NCEES. Leaving an essay question blank nets you an unacceptable. Doing the problem completely can _also_ get you an unacceptable. Explaining how to do a problem, and not really knowing what you're doing can get you an acceptable.


----------



## NahzSema

@N_Mo

hmmm, interesting.

if that’s the case, it sounds like you can pass with 3A and 1UA (say 9 points each and I doubt they give 10/10) and only 29 in the morning...

Based on @TehMightyEngineer‘s collection, it just doesn’t add up to me. 

28+ in AM and 3A/1IR in PM ...is where I think the line is.

@Nathan55 and yes I feel ya. Sounds like they like to read more than looking at numbers


----------



## N_Mo

Nathan55 said:


> Therein lies the Machiavellian genius of NCEES. Leaving an essay question blank nets you an unacceptable. Doing the problem completely can _also_ get you an unacceptable. Explaining how to do a problem, and not really knowing what you're doing can get you an acceptable.


That's why I called it totally UNFAIR.


----------



## N_Mo

NahzSema said:


> @N_Mo
> 
> hmmm, interesting.
> 
> if that’s the case, it sounds like you can pass with 3A and 1UA (say 9 points each and I doubt they give 10/10) and only 29 in the morning...
> 
> Based on @TehMightyEngineer‘s collection, it just doesn’t add up to me.
> 
> 28+ in AM and 3A/1IR in PM ...is where I think the line is.
> 
> @Nathan55 and yes I feel ya. Sounds like they like to read more than looking at numbers


I meant that, if you have one 0 (UA), you will fail, regardless of the total grade. If you don't have that 0, then the total grade will determine if you passed or not. Basically, there are 2 criterias to determine passing of the exam. 1- No ZERO score in the afternoon 2- Total grade &gt;=56


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

N_Mo said:


> Based on the data, that I have seen on different websites about the grading, I think they assign 10 points to each afternoon problem, so the whole exam will be 80 points and usually grades equal or above 56 ( &gt;= 70%) are passed. Acceptable, will be assigned a grade of 8,  9  or 10 (I guess getting 10 out 10 is almost impossible). I/R﻿ has a grade of 6 or 7. Most probably, for the grades below 6 (Unacceptable) they put 0, to force the applicant to fail !!!!!! (which is totally UNFAIR in my mind) . Let's say that you got, A(9), A(9), A(8), I/R(6), with 23 in the morning, your grade is 55. What I want to say is that, you were SO, SO CLOSE. Therefore don't give up, you will easily pass it next time.


I hear ya. It's just that I've got this stuff now. I had it when I took the test. My time was pretty decent too so there really isn't room for much improvement there. There really isn't anything much I could do for preparation other than go through the AASHTO a little better. I legitimately have (2) years of studying for this thing for (8) months out of the year approximately 16 hours a week. That's almost 1100 to 1200 hours of my life wasted on this. I realize seeing that number is almost unbelievable but just the coursework I've been through amounted to 195 hours and the test alone now is 32 hours. That's an awful lot of family time/sleep/movie watching/video game playing time to have lost. Almost (3) months of my life where every waking second would've been spent with my nose in a book or my head in a classroom for 16 hours a day! Like I said previously, I don't know what options I have because I DO NOT know why I failed. I did not feel tripped up 17 times in the morning. I felt tripped up twice and there was a third problem that was a little iffy (I thought I had it) but I thought that still gave me a huge buffer for passing (estimated as 9 to 10 problems I could've failed and still passed). I passed all of EET's coursework, problems, handouts, etc. no problem. Generally made 80% or higher on them and I felt a lot of their content was equal to or harder than the actual exam. I spent a little time trying to get the last three problems right after completion but I did notice the fact that the listed answers of the morning problems that I knew tripped me up were legitimate multiples of the actual answer. What this means (to me anyway) is, their problems are specifically set up to avoid elimination of easily identifiable incorrect answers. I couldn't find a way to backsolve the two that I knew got me because there were no outlying answers so to speak. At least 37 of the answers I calculated worked out almost exactly. Maybe it's like that Kung Fu parody movie where the master intentionally taught that one guy incorrect Kung Fu so he would constantly get beat down except I was the one learning Kung Fu except instead of Kung Fu it was Structural Engineering and instead of getting beat down it was failing the SE lateral. Oh fartsicles, Now I'm upset again.


----------



## TheBigGuy

FutureSE said:


> I hear ya. It's just that I've got this stuff now. I had it when I took the test. My time was pretty decent too so there really isn't room for much improvement there. There really isn't anything much I could do for preparation other than go through the AASHTO a little better. I legitimately have (2) years of studying for this thing for (8) months out of the year approximately 16 hours a week. That's almost 1100 to 1200 hours of my life wasted on this. I realize seeing that number is almost unbelievable but just the coursework I've been through amounted to 195 hours and the test alone now is 32 hours. That's an awful lot of family time/sleep/movie watching/video game playing time to have lost. Almost (3) months of my life where every waking second would've been spent with my nose in a book or my head in a classroom for 16 hours a day! Like I said previously, I don't know what options I have because I DO NOT know why I failed. I did not feel tripped up 17 times in the morning. I felt tripped up twice and there was a third problem that was a little iffy (I thought I had it) but I thought that still gave me a huge buffer for passing (estimated as 9 to 10 problems I could've failed and still passed). I passed all of EET's coursework, problems, handouts, etc. no problem. Generally made 80% or higher on them and I felt a lot of their content was equal to or harder than the actual exam. I spent a little time trying to get the last three problems right after completion but I did notice the fact that the listed answers of the morning problems that I knew tripped me up were legitimate multiples of the actual answer. What this means (to me anyway) is, their problems are specifically set up to avoid elimination of easily identifiable incorrect answers. I couldn't find a way to backsolve the two that I knew got me because there were no outlying answers so to speak. At least 37 of the answers I calculated worked out almost exactly. Maybe it's like that Kung Fu parody movie where the master intentionally taught that one guy incorrect Kung Fu so he would constantly get beat down except I was the one learning Kung Fu except instead of Kung Fu it was Structural Engineering and instead of getting beat down it was failing the SE lateral. Oh fartsicles, Now I'm upset again.


Let me share with you something @TehMightyEngineer shared with me a couple years back when I took the PPI course, just before he stopped teaching the course to build a aeroplane.  Just because you fail doesn't mean all the studying goes down the drain.  You are probably 95% of the way there, now you just need the extra 5%.

I bet your studying is actually done and you just need to work on speed and avoiding traps.  You took the EET course.  Every weekend, see how fast you can complete a homework set or the practice test, or even the PPI 6 min solutions or PPI building test.  That's just a four hour commitment each week, then you go back into that exam and CRUSH it.

I failed the vertical last fall after I thought I passed it.  Expected mid thirties on the morning, but got low twenties.  Did practice problems of vertical week before the exam, went in there, and CRUSHED it.

Also, i hear you on the bridge problems.  I thought they were very weird.


----------



## Duke

FutureSE said:


> Maybe it's like that Kung Fu parody movie where the master intentionally taught that one guy incorrect Kung Fu so he would constantly get beat down except I was the one learning Kung Fu except instead of Kung Fu it was Structural Engineering and instead of getting beat down it was failing the SE lateral. Oh fartsicles, Now I'm upset again.




WimpLoSE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d696t3yALAY

Please do let us know how the morning recheck goes.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

TheBigGuy said:


> Let me share with you something @TehMightyEngineer shared with me a couple years back when I took the PPI course, just before he stopped teaching the course to build a aeroplane.  Just because you fail doesn't mean all the studying goes down the drain.  You are probably 95% of the way there, now you just need the extra 5%.
> 
> I bet your studying is actually done and you just need to work on speed and avoiding traps.  You took the EET course.  Every weekend, see how fast you can complete a homework set or the practice test, or even the PPI 6 min solutions or PPI building test.  That's just a four hour commitment each week, then you go back into that exam and CRUSH it.
> 
> I failed the vertical last fall after I thought I passed it.  Expected mid thirties on the morning, but got low twenties.  Did practice problems of vertical week before the exam, went in there, and CRUSHED it.
> 
> Also, i hear you on the bridge problems.  I thought they were very weird.


I really do appreciate the cheerleading. The point is though, I have the speed, I finished the exam, and I explicitly know when to throw specific design principles. You're right about the studying. I'm done with that. I've read every single code section/book/whatever on anything they throw at you on the test for lateral and gravity. My only weak points in design are spiral reinforcement and the strut and tie method for concrete. Nothing weak in steel, I design connections all day long and I've been through those codes enough to wear the color off the tabs. Nothing in wood design. Nothing in masonry design. Fairly weak on AASHTO but I have absolutely not been able to motivate myself to learn it. I went through and tabbed all the major stuff, but dear sweet baby Jesus, I hate that book. It is yet another thing that I will NEVER use again. Regardless, what I was stating is that my competency in Lateral design is more than adequate. I didn't really "think" I got 37 right. I knew I did. Anyway, the point is, there really isn't much else I can do to increase my competency. I understand the stuff. It's like addition to me now. I don't really know how I could possibly get better at addition. I don't know how I could get better at this exam. I honest to apples do not know how I could not have passed... I swear, as shitty as my luck is, it's perfectly possible that I had the wrong scantron sheet and someone from Alabama is walking around with a damn unearned SE right now. I am THAT confident I understand what the fuck I'm doing.


----------



## Edub24

Chuckimus said:


> It is possible, I think there is a threshold of acceptable, so maybe 70% correct of the problem is acceptable. So three of those with an unacceptable may not be passing, but three 100% acceptable and one unacceptable is passing. That's how I'm thinking of it at least.


This may be true but this strategy is probably not something I'd do myself or recommend to others. I would imagine the probability of getting 100% on 3 problems is a lot lower than getting say 70% on all 4 problems.  This exam is so difficult that you're better off attempting all the problems and trying to capture as many points as you can. Kudos to you if it worked out though.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Duke said:


> WimpLoSE
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d696t3yALAY
> 
> Please do let us know how the morning recheck goes.


Will do. I don't even really have faith that they even look at it though. They could just take the money and go drinking. Another thing, I am so hung up on the incompetency of other engineers (I deal with a hell of a lot of delegated design) that I wouldn't doubt, if they even look at it, they check it upside down and actually lower my grade.

A couple examples of the shit I deal with on at least a weekly basis-&gt;&gt;&gt; I had a licensed engineer argue with me the other day about a damn handrail. The baseplate with (2) anchors placed 2" from the edge of a 5" by 5" post baseplate due to clearance issues. Think of it as rolling over the toe of a retaining wall footing. The engineer denied my calculations because I didn't check it in the other direction! Like rolling over the heel of a retaining wall if your heel is longer and larger than the toe. Last I checked the larger your "resisting" moment arm is, the lower your forces are.

I also had a city structural engineer argue with me about which direction you have to check deflection.This one is hard to explain, but basically I had a deflection of L/430 for a beam and this engineer was telling me it didn't meet L/360. I told him it was less that L/360 and tried to explain how larger denominators make smaller numbers all things being equal. He still argued with me. If I didn't live this stuff, I'd swear anyone telling me this was a liar but I can't make this shit up. Somehow these assholes are licensed and I'm over here with thumb firmly implanted in my rectum being teased about not being able to be licensed in GA. Good stuff.

Oh well, back to the luck thing. Nothing has ever been easy for me luck wise. I could walk outside and find $100 bill on the ground and somehow catch a flesh eating virus that costs my life savings to treat if I picked it up.

Oh well, this isn't the worst I've felt. I actually had a Secret Service investigation during Obama's presidency that made me feel much worse. Having federal agents declare you a domestic terrorist and telling you they can put you away without a trial for years thanks to the patriot act is much much worse. I survived that, I'll survive this.


----------



## iDSE

Turns out that Florida would not give me PE license even if I passed both SE exams. They stated that they don't acknowledge the SE exam, so I would still have to take the PE exam in order to become licensed. Wish someone had told me this 2 years ago before I started this mess. 

I am glad I have worked for the SE, because I feel I hardly knew anything before spending my time studying.

Taking the PE in October and will start trying for SE Lateral again next April and beyond!


----------



## Nathan55

FutureSE said:


> I hear ya. It's just that I've got this stuff now. I had it when I took the test. My time was pretty decent too so there really isn't room for much improvement there. There really isn't anything much I could do for preparation other than go through the AASHTO a little better. I legitimately have (2) years of studying for this thing for (8) months out of the year approximately 16 hours a week. That's almost 1100 to 1200 hours of my life wasted on this. I realize seeing that number is almost unbelievable but just the coursework I've been through amounted to 195 hours and the test alone now is 32 hours. That's an awful lot of family time/sleep/movie watching/video game playing time to have lost. Almost (3) months of my life where every waking second would've been spent with my nose in a book or my head in a classroom for 16 hours a day! Like I said previously, I don't know what options I have because I DO NOT know why I failed. I did not feel tripped up 17 times in the morning. I felt tripped up twice and there was a third problem that was a little iffy (I thought I had it) but I thought that still gave me a huge buffer for passing (estimated as 9 to 10 problems I could've failed and still passed). I passed all of EET's coursework, problems, handouts, etc. no problem. Generally made 80% or higher on them and I felt a lot of their content was equal to or harder than the actual exam. I spent a little time trying to get the last three problems right after completion but I did notice the fact that the listed answers of the morning problems that I knew tripped me up were legitimate multiples of the actual answer. What this means (to me anyway) is, their problems are specifically set up to avoid elimination of easily identifiable incorrect answers. I couldn't find a way to backsolve the two that I knew got me because there were no outlying answers so to speak. At least 37 of the answers I calculated worked out almost exactly. Maybe it's like that Kung Fu parody movie where the master intentionally taught that one guy incorrect Kung Fu so he would constantly get beat down except I was the one learning Kung Fu except instead of Kung Fu it was Structural Engineering and instead of getting beat down it was failing the SE lateral. Oh fartsicles, Now I'm upset again.


I do think it is worth mentioning that you really rocked the afternoon. It's harder to well in the afternoon simply due to NCEES' shenanigans and the purposefully enigmatic grading procedures. The multiple choice is far easier, in my estimation, to improve on and excel it. SE multiple choice problems are really about identifying the common mistake or trick. You can purposefully solve a problem incorrectly and eliminate answers that way. The wrong answers are well thought out and designed to catch you in a mistake while we rush through the problems. 

If you got A, A, A, IR on the afternoon, it's very unlikely that retaking it in october would make you forget your modus operandi which was already so successful. That's why I say that the grading criteria is the true secret to passing the test. That's why they won't tell us what it is or how it functions. The way you work problems in the afternoon is _absolutely_ in line with how the graders think you should solve problems. Perhaps modify that procedure for the morning and see how you do. It's far more difficult to do the reverse and figure out how to do afternoon problems in the way they approve.


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

iDSE said:


> Turns out that Florida would not give me PE license even if I passed both SE exams. They stated that they don't acknowledge the SE exam, so I would still have to take the PE exam in order to become licensed. Wish someone had told me this 2 years ago before I started this mess.
> 
> I am glad I have worked for the SE, because I feel I hardly knew anything before spending my time studying.
> 
> Taking the PE in October and will start trying for SE Lateral again next April and beyond!


What? I have a Florida PE license and I've never taken the PE. Granted, Florida wasn't my first state so maybe that's the hold up?

See if you can get licensed in another state first and then licensed by comity in Florida.


----------



## iDSE

TehMightyEngineer said:


> What? I have a Florida PE license and I've never taken the PE. Granted, Florida wasn't my first state so maybe that's the hold up?
> 
> See if you can get licensed in another state first and then licensed by comity in Florida.


That's what I would be doing if I had passed, but since I didn't pass lateral this go, I can't retake the SE lateral until I become licensed according to them now. (third fail) 

So I might as well take PE just to get the license and then go back to SE after they let me take it again.


----------



## CAEngr

Anybody knows how long it takes for them to release SE license numbers for everyone?


----------



## TehMightyEngineer

iDSE said:


> That's what I would be doing if I had passed, but since I didn't pass lateral this go, I can't retake the SE lateral until I become licensed according to them now. (third fail)
> 
> So I might as well take PE just to get the license and then go back to SE after they let me take it again.


Darn, yeah just take the PE and at least get the license stuff out of the way. Good to have it anyway since there are a few states that require you to have your PE to get licensed no matter what (NJ for example).


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

Well, got the manual verification result back. No change in results. I expected as much. I still don't understand how I could've done so poorly in the morning. I guess this means I am, in fact, just retarded.

Maybe mental retardation is just contagious and I caught it either here in GA or in NC one. Here is typical copied text from client correspondence today:

1 inche bolts  come in 1 and 1.5  inches most situations on site need a  little over a inche but not quite an inch so bolts at question dosen't come into the plate and 1.5 bottom out so we put 1/2 plate as a spacer and only 1/2 inche is been engage by elocone but. So the space will allow  full engagement without bottoming out and leave no play and don't have to use any other spacers

I've gotta get out of this shit. It's lowering my IQ.


----------



## TheLoneStarEngineer

FutureSE said:


> Well, got the manual verification result back. No change in results. I expected as much. I still don't understand how I could've done so poorly in the morning. I guess just means I am, in fact, just retarded.
> 
> Maybe mental retardation is just contagious and I caught it either here in GA or in NC one. Here is typical copied text from client correspondence today.
> 
> 1 inche bolts  come in 1 and 1.5  inches most situations on site need a  little over a inche but not quite an inch so bolts at question dosen't come into the plate and 1.5 bottom out so we put 1/2 plate as a spacer and only 1/2 inche is been engage by elocone but. So the space will allow  full engagement without bottoming out and leave no play and don't have to use any other spacers
> 
> I've gotta get out of this shit. It's lowering my IQ.


@FutureSE

You do seem to have the gift for attracting the best talent in the industry!


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

FutureSE said:


> 1 inche bolts  come in 1 and 1.5  inches most situations on site need a  little over a inche but not quite an inch so bolts at question dosen't come into the plate and 1.5 bottom out so we put 1/2 plate as a spacer and only 1/2 inche is been engage by elocone but. So the space will allow  full engagement without bottoming out and leave no play and don't have to use any other spacers


Hell, this is the kind of crap they should put on the SE exam:

You have a client send an email as shown above. Which of the following answers most closely resemble what this client is trying to tell you?

A) 1 inch diameter elocone nuts come with shoulder lengths of 1 and 1.5 inches. Most of the anchors placed on the site require a little over an inch shoulder length to achieve the required thread penetration but the nuts with a 1 1/2 inch shoulder bottom out against the leveling nuts. As an attempted fix, we would like to remove the leveling nuts we were having issues with, place 1/2 inch plate spacers beneath the column baseplate, and reinstall the 1 1/2" shoulder length elocone nuts so we can achieve the thread penetration into the elocone nut as required by the manufacturer.

B) I love to brush my teeth with lead paint

C) I've been doing this for 30 years and you engineers don't know nuthin'

D) I should've just welded on anchor bolt extensions like you directed me to do.

If you chose answer A, you require evaluation by both a trained and licensed physician and a psychiatric professional as you have demonstrated you know how to speak fluent retard. You have likely contracted the disease 'retardius maximus' in GA and, at this current moment, your DNA is tying itself into knots while eliminating any trace of paired nucleotides that contribute to intellectual ability. In addition, your body is mutating into a cross between the toxic avenger and the dueling banjo boy from the film Deliverance. There is no known cure, you will likely never pass SE Lateral, and may God have mercy on your soul.

On a side note, I'm pretty sure the person responsible for writing NCEES test questions wrote this e-mail to me.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE

TheLoneStarEngineer said:


> @FutureSE
> 
> You do seem to have the gift for attracting the best talent in the industry!


I am really starting to buy into the simulation theory argument. I am ALMOST certain that I'm an artificial intelligence character in a Sims-like video game and the player is just messing with me, seeing how much shit I will take before I lose it. Kind of like hitting the chickens in Zelda: Ocarina of time.


----------



## ChaosMuppetPE




----------



## Nathan55

@FutureSE I think true love....is paying NCEES time and time again to take their ridiculously unfair test.


----------



## AlexPE

Sorry for the late reply to this thread. I was down in the dumps and 100% sure I failed... so I didnt even check my results (then Id have to explain to everyone how I failed, better luck next time, blah blah blah).

But I just found out I passed!

Not sure how thats possible... I know for a fact I missed problem 3 (that question still haunts my dreams). Thanks to all who helped me understand it. I really wish I could see my score or at least the answer key.

FutureSE please dont give up. I feel unworthy - I really think 95% score within 5 pts of each other and pass/fail may come down to luck on the AM or partial credit on the PM. Coin flip will only come up heads so many times...


----------

