2016 results

[ductit]

The AM went smoothly. I found the PM Transportation Exam to be heavy on traffic and conceptual based. I can only hope. This was my first time taking the exam, but I can say it was NOTHING like the PE Practice Exams put out by NCEES or anyone else!

The NCEES practice tests for transportation were almost completely worthless.  I actually feel that me taking the NCEES practice test on Thursday (got 70 of 80 correct) did nothing more than waste 8 hours that could have gone to much better use just reviewing my notes or something.  

I don't think the test maker (NCEES) should be selling "practice"  tests at all now that I think about.  

If the material were too similar then it provides too much help and may not show your actual knowledge/ability.  But the complete lack of corresponding concepts,  except for the few  guaranteed geometry problems,  the practice tests are just misleading. 

The problem is,  Ncees knows what's on the test,  so they probably specifically do not include anything "similar" on the practice tests.  At least with other publishers,  they  are actually trying to make practice tests that will represent the real test.

 

[cpp11]

Yes, Structural PM taker as well. The main problem I saw was that the Exam Cafe looks like it was set up with questions from before the SE exam existed. I noticed the SE Exam questions (realistic with a touch of theoretical) were very different than the PE Civil-Structural Exam questions (conceptual and theoretical). I also noticed older versions of the NCEES practice exam were a waste of time. Not only due to the reference changes for updated code but also the lack of bridge questions on the PE Civil-STR. NCEES gives updated "Exam specifications" for a reason, and the PPI questions do not take that into account. I think PPI is a great resource, but you can't reply on it as your only one.

What's funny is that I feel like taking the NCEES Practice Exam a week before the real PE helped me the *most* out of all the reference materials that I used, in that it helped me get into the mindset the test preparers had when writing the test - though I purchased the practice exam when I signed up for the test, so that might've helped things.

Although, working through the PPI examples did help me a bit with some portions of the AISC code that I was unfamiliar with going into the exam, so perhaps it wasn't exactly a *total* waste of time in retrospect. I just wish that I had taken the NCEES practice exam much, much sooner into my studying, as I had (wrongly) assumed that the test wasn't quite representative of the actual PE exam.

 

[Guest]

The NCEES practice tests for transportation were almost completely worthless.  I actually feel that me taking the NCEES practice test on Thursday (got 70 of 80 correct) did nothing more than waste 8 hours that could have gone to much better use just reviewing my notes or something.  

I don't think the test maker (NCEES) should be selling "practice"  tests at all now that I think about.  

If the material were too similar then it provides too much help and may not show your actual knowledge/ability.  But the complete lack of corresponding concepts,  except for the few  guaranteed geometry problems,  the practice tests are just misleading. 

The problem is,  Ncees knows what's on the test,  so they probably specifically do not include anything "similar" on the practice tests.  At least with other publishers,  they  are actually trying to make practice tests that will represent the real test.

Basically! The NCEES practice exam for construction was also worthless... The AM and PM portions are so simplistic in comparison... I had a false sense of hope after getting a 94% on the practice exam... My experience with the lindenberg ones were they were significantly more difficult and essentially had no qualitative questions.

 

[snickerd3]

No offense, but people really put way too much stock in these practice tests, always have.  Labeling them as a practice test might be marketing ploy, but they are essentially retired test questions.  when they have enough to publish they put out a new practice test but really are just a bunch of practice problems.  they market it as a test to get you in the mindset of 8 hr testing.  To assume it will be representative of a test that changes from offering to offering has always perplexed me.  

 

[hjg7715]

I took Civil - Water Resources depth for the second time. I honestly thought the AM session was significantly easier than it was in October, though I thought October's AM session was relatively easy but still managed only to get 25/40 correct for whatever that's worth. However, I thought the PM session was just as difficult as October's exam and it seemed to me that some of the questions appeared to be less straightforward, almost as if they were making certain you paid more attention to the details of the questions and information given. I'm hoping I raised my AM score enough to push me over the cut score.

@snickerd3 I would agree with your point about the practice tests. I've now taken 3 different practice tests and while I think the practice tests and problems are good practice to help you prepare for the exam, your performance on them is not a direct correlation with preparedness or prediction of performance on the actual exam.

 

[Ken PE 3.1]

The practice tests are fine to help you identify different ways they pose the questions, but to think that 'I scored a 90 on the practice test, so I'm ready' is ridiculous. They switch it up every time and change the areas of focus. You have to have a baseline of all areas, else you will be hosed.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[ductit]

The practice tests are fine to help you identify different ways they pose the questions, but to think that 'I scored a 90 on the practice test, so I'm ready' is ridiculous. They switch it up every time and change the areas of focus. You have to have a baseline of all areas, else you will be hosed.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

I agree that you shouldn't assume you are ready based on a practice test for the most part.  

If the  testmaker is going to produce these practice exams,  they should absolutely include a consistent distribution of difficulty/content/subjects.   They do not have to include the same or similar questions at all.  But,  they should absolutely cover consistent depth of knowledge in the field as the real test.  

If I get an average of 90% on 5 Ncees practice exams,  without knowing any questions in advance,  that  should mean that I have 90% of the  overall knowledge base that could be tested on if the practice tests were as comprehensive and distributed as I would expect from the actual test maker (NCEES). Spread over 80 questions, there's no way that your 90% comprehension should only cover 70% or less of the actual exam.  If your practice exams are from a 3rd party,  none of this applies,  but NCEES should not be SELLING these practice exams at (ridiculous) markups if they aren't going to be as comprehensive as NCEES knows the real tests will be. It is a conflict of interest, and bait and switch more or less.  Over them at cost to distribute/deliver,  free,  or not at all. 

 

[cpp11]

No offense, but people really put way too much stock in these practice tests, always have.  Labeling them as a practice test might be marketing ploy, but they are essentially retired test questions.  when they have enough to publish they put out a new practice test but really are just a bunch of practice problems.  they market it as a test to get you in the mindset of 8 hr testing.  To assume it will be representative of a test that changes from offering to offering has always perplexed me.  

I definitely agree with the notion that the practice tests aren't the only material you should be studying with, nor should it be your main focus during study, but I definitely found it useful to prepare myself for the "pet problems" that NCEES loves throwing at test-takers in order to trip them up.

I know I would've changed how I studied had I taken the Structural PM practice test earlier, based on the actual Structural PM exam I just took last Saturday. I had problems with the concepts on a whole of 2 problems, and 1 of them (most likely) came down to something in the Code that I simply did not know existed. Heck, I probably used more structural formulae and theory on the practice exam than I did on the actual exam. Again, though, getting back to your point above - that was just for this cycle. It's probable that NCEES will come back with a moderately-to-radically revised test that focuses more on concepts than on Code requirements.

But then, I'm an engineer that's doing practice in Structural and I'm basically 2 years removed from getting my MS in Civil with an emphasis in Structural. The concepts presented on the test aren't really something I've struggled with, so YMMV and so on.

 

[hjg7715]

I agree that you shouldn't assume you are ready based on a practice test for the most part.  

If the  testmaker is going to produce these practice exams,  they should absolutely include a consistent distribution of difficulty/content/subjects.   They do not have to include the same or similar questions at all.  But,  they should absolutely cover consistent depth of knowledge in the field as the real test.  

If I get an average of 90% on 5 Ncees practice exams,  without knowing any questions in advance,  that  should mean that I have 90% of the  overall knowledge base that could be tested on if the practice tests were as comprehensive and distributed as I would expect from the actual test maker (NCEES). Spread over 80 questions, there's no way that your 90% comprehension should only cover 70% or less of the actual exam.  If your practice exams are from a 3rd party,  none of this applies,  but NCEES should not be SELLING these practice exams at (ridiculous) markups if they aren't going to be as comprehensive as NCEES knows the real tests will be. It is a conflict of interest, and bait and switch more or less.  Over them at cost to distribute/deliver,  free,  or not at all. 

I too took an NCEES practice exam in the past week and I would agree that there were a lot of problems that were not the same or similar content as ones on the actual exam. However, I thought the problems (on practice exam) were consistent with the types of questions and format found on the exam and included content that it's recommended you review. It's an 80 question exam, the odds that any single practice exam is going to cover a majority of the content is very small. Additionally, I don't think any of the practice exams I've come across are marketed or intended to be a comprehensive review, I think the intent is to simulate the types of questions that may appear on the exam.

 

[knight1fox3]

It's an 80 question exam, the odds that any single practice exam is going to cover a majority of the content is very small. Additionally, I don't think any of the practice exams I've come across are marketed or intended to be a comprehensive review, I think the intent is to simulate the types of questions that may appear on the exam.

Precisely. :thumbs:

 

[matt267 PE]

Practice exams are a great way to practice your timing.

 

[jmooney5115]

My timing was impeccable. I answered everything I knew just over 2 hours...it's too bad i didn't know more.

arty-smiley-048:

 

[ductit]

Precisely. :thumbs:

You dont use a practice exam to "study".  You study all materials that could be covered, and then you take a practice exam without looking at any of the questions beforehand.  You use a practice exam to test how much you are prepared.  If you consistently get 90% on practice exams, that means you know about 90% of the knowledge base that those practice exams covered.  When those practice exams were created, they should have included questions developed from the same overall knowledge base that the real exam draws from.  If there are 500 subjects total for example, and lets say the 80 questions include around 50 subjects on the actual exam with some subjects getting multiple questions, then the practice exams should not cover only 20 different subjects of the 500, and they definitely should not draw the questions from a different "pool" of potential areas than the real exam.  I am NOT saying the practice and real should cover the SAME 50 subjects.  The practice and real should both have similar distribution of "randomness" in what subjects are covered, and the depth/difficulty that make up the overall sample.

Yeah, the practice exams are consistent with literally how they word a problem, how the problems are physically presented on paper, but if that is all they are good for, then they are pretty much worthless, and the price you pay for the practice exam is ABSURD if it is only good for showing you how problems will look, but in no way tests how prepared you are.

Just my opinion I guess, but like I said, coming from the actual test maker, I think it is wrong.  This shouldn't be some big surprise or game, we know the overall content that can be included on the exam, why cant a practice test help us identify how much we have prepared?

 

[knight1fox3]

You use a practice exam to test how much you are prepared.

Perhaps by your own definition.  But there are no misconceptions with how NCEES markets their practice exam and it's intent.  Case & point.

Yeah, the practice exams are consistent with literally how they word a problem, how the problems are physically presented on paper, but if that is all they are good for, then they are pretty much worthless

Again, opinionated.  But the practice exams are exactly that.  This has been conveyed time and time again by NCEES with not only the PE exams, but the FE exams as well for as long as I can remember.  This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.  And furthermore, NCEES isn't just going to hand out to potential candidates actual representations of their exam problems.  Quite a bit of design and development time goes into creating them for the various exam cycles.  I assume you know this.

coming from the actual test maker, I think it is wrong.  This shouldn't be some big surprise or game, we know the overall content that can be included on the exam, why cant a practice test help us identify how much we have prepared?

And you are entitled to your opinion.  And you are also free to contact NCEES with what you feel is wrong.  Nothing should be a surprise or a game when it comes to a highly technical examination provided the examinee is properly prepared.  By your decree then, should practice exams also be given out for various engineering undergraduate and graduate courses so that students can be told that they are prepared versus reaching that conclusion on their own with hard work and dedication?

 

[hjg7715]

@ductit I think where I, and I guess others, disagree is that I don't think any practice exam (solely) should be or could be used to identify how much someone is prepared for the actual exam. I think individuals make their determination from their understanding of each subject area after studying by whatever means they choose. So practice exams have some benefit and can help you gauge your preparedness but a single practice exam isn't enough to identify how well you've prepared. I don't know if you expected to see some of the same problems with different values? Remember the purpose of the actual exam is to gauge your competency in a particular engineering discipline so I doubt NCEES would take the approach of some college professors who use practically the same final exam from one semester to the next and only changing some of the number values. 

 

[knight1fox3]

@hjg7715 said it more nicely than I did. :thumbs:

 

[ductit]

@ductit I think where I, and I guess others, disagree is that I don't think any practice exam (solely) should be or could be used to identify how much someone is prepared for the actual exam. I think individuals make their determination from their understanding of each subject area after studying by whatever means they choose. So practice exams have some benefit and can help you gauge your preparedness but a single practice exam isn't enough to identify how well you've prepared. I don't know if you expected to see some of the same problems with different values? Remember the purpose of the actual exam is to gauge your competency in a particular engineering discipline so I doubt NCEES would take the approach of some college professors who use practically the same final exam from one semester to the next and only changing some of the number values. 

Did you read what I wrote? It has nothing to do with having the same problems or lack there of.  The practice exams NCEES sells do not represent the level of engineering knowledge in your field that you need to have to  be ready to take and pass the real exam.  This has nothing to do with individual concepts or areas, having all the same types of questions or the same areas of your field covered.  It is about  both testing a similar amount of "depth" with similar difficulty. Every question could be a different area or concept as long  as the overall "depth"  tested is similar. Otherwise they serve no purpose,  this is such a simple concept that applies to many areas of engineering that I can't believe you guys think it doesn't matter.

 What would be the point of testing a concrete beam with a maximum of 100lb/ft  if the intention is to load it with 200lb/ft when put into service? To see if it can  handle half the load it needs to without failing? OK,  it passes the test,  now we know it's deflection and what it looks like under half load, let's go ahead and install it and hope for the best. I give up,  you guys are right,  100 bucks and 8 hours is a good investment to see if you understand how to read questions and use a pencil to do calculations. 

 

[DuckFlats]

I thought the practice exams helped me a lot, including the transportation depth. I am still waiting to see if I passed, but I studied based on the syllabus provided and did not rely on the practice test or even school of PE for my studying. I spent A LOT of time getting familiar with my manuals.

 

[hjg7715]

Did you read what I wrote? It has nothing to do with having the same problems or lack there of.  The practice exams NCEES sells do not represent the level of engineering knowledge in your field that you need to have to  be ready to take and pass the real exam.  This has nothing to do with individual concepts or areas, having all the same types of questions or the same areas of your field covered.  It is about  both testing a similar amount of "depth" with similar difficulty. Every question could be a different area or concept as long  as the overall "depth"  tested is similar. Otherwise they serve no purpose,  this is such a simple concept that applies to many areas of engineering that I can't believe you guys think it doesn't matter.

 What would be the point of testing a concrete beam with a maximum of 100lb/ft  if the intention is to load it with 200lb/ft when put into service? To see if it can  handle half the load it needs to without failing? OK,  it passes the test,  now we know it's deflection and what it looks like under half load, let's go ahead and install it and hope for the best. I give up,  you guys are right,  100 bucks and 8 hours is a good investment to see if you understand how to read questions and use a pencil to do calculations. 

I've read everything you've wrote but what it boils down to is that you weren't satisfied with the "exam preparation material" you purchased? And that's what it was, "exam preparation material", not an assessment. We can go back and forth about whether the practice exam was a good depiction of the actual exam or whether the sample problems represented the complexity of actual exam problems, but it sounds like the practice exam didn't help you any with your preparation. I guess if I paid $100 for prep material that I didn't find useful, I might be a little perturbed too. By the way, you should really consider contacting NCEES because they overcharged you for that practice exam, I only paid $39.95 for mine.

 

[ductit]

I've read everything you've wrote but what it boils down to is that you weren't satisfied with the "exam preparation material" you purchased? And that's what it was, "exam preparation material", not an assessment. We can go back and forth about whether the practice exam was a good depiction of the actual exam or whether the sample problems represented the complexity of actual exam problems, but it sounds like the practice exam didn't help you any with your preparation. I guess if I paid $100 for prep material that I didn't find useful, I might be a little perturbed too. By the way, you should really consider contacting NCEES because they overcharged you for that practice exam, I only paid $39.95 for mine.

Not perturbed at all, i was more that prepared for the actual exam and felt that I did great. You do not have to be personally impacted by something to observe and voice your opinion that something is wrong.  At its not about the money either for me.  I just really think NCEES should be held to a higher standard in the materials that they publish as they are the one and the ONLY "official" source, and just publishing something to make money, knowing that it is not what many will reasonably think it is, is unethical and predatory.  They may have some disclosure somewhere as to some of you saying they market these practice exams as for structure and time management only, but having some disclosure somewhere isn't even remotely meeting a reasonable standard of notification.  They look like exams, they say nothing on them or in descriptions of where they are sold that the content within is not relevant, only the test structure.  NCEES should just be more transparent. Tell people their scores when they pass the exam for crying out loud and which subjects they were weak in.  Why is that a "secret"?