Comity Question

[matchek]

Can you provide an example of questions that you think would be good do we can follow?

 

[hjg7715]

I guess I have a different take than many.  I agree that the idea of using a standardized exam as an evaluation tool is a good one.  However, I personally don't feel the PE in its current iteration is a useful evaluation tool at all for determining someones competency to be an engineer/design professional.  I'm not saying the exam was easy or hard, just that it doesn't evaluate someone's engineering competency at all.  While taking it, it felt like the entire goal of the exam was to create a standardized exam for the sole purpose of creating a standardized exam with no intent of actually assessing one's engineering competency, as opposed to taking an exam design to test someone's competency and mold it into a standardized exam if that makes sense.  
 
I have no problem with a state opting out of the FE or even the PE requirement at this point for someone who has received a PhD from an accredited university.  I might feel differently if I thought that the PE exam was a better evaluation tool.  But at the end of the day, my opinion means absolutely diddly on this subject...

Well I'm assuming you mean that you don't have a problem with waiving the testing requirement, IF applicants meet the professional experience requirement? Because I do think practical and professional experience is the most important element in determining competency. The problem, however, is that not everyone's professional experience is equal and there needs to be a way to at least test or gauge that beyond what someone lists on an application. And that's where the PE exam plays a role. Again, I understand the rationale with having the FE exam waived for people with PhD's because it's only testing the basic and core knowledge learned through formal education, but the PE exam tests your practical knowledge learned from engineering experience so I wouldn't agree or support any board waiving that requirement. 

 

[Audi Driver P.E.]

I think it's fairly reasonable to assume that anyone who's completed advanced curriculum in an engineering field would have obtained general understanding and basic knowledge of engineering?

I don't agree with that at all.  I may have until last weekend.  Any semblance of that dream was shattered, however when I listened to a PhD give the commencement "speech" at my nephew's HS graduation, all confidence I once had in science related PhDs was erased.   This woman was obviously fulfilling a quota.  That is the only explanation.  And from what I can tell, snow-jobed the Principal into believing she was a worthy speaker, merely because she had that degree and happened to be related to one of the graduates.

So, no, a PhD, IMO, is even less of a measure of of actual knowledge than the PE exam.  Make every last one of them take the FE.

 

[hjg7715]

I don't agree with that at all.  I may have until last weekend.  Any semblance of that dream was shattered, however when I listened to a PhD give the commencement "speech" at my nephew's HS graduation, all confidence I once had in science related PhDs was erased.   This woman was obviously fulfilling a quota.  That is the only explanation.  And from what I can tell, snow-jobed the Principal into believing she was a worthy speaker, merely because she had that degree and happened to be related to one of the graduates.

So, no, a PhD, IMO, is even less of a measure of of actual knowledge than the PE exam.  Make every last one of them take the FE.

So you're judging this speaker's knowledge in the field she earned her PhD based on a commencement speech??? I know plenty of people with advanced degrees in a science or engineering field and the truth of the matter is that probably half of them shouldn't be doing ANY public speakers, they belong in a laboratory doing research....but they know their stuff.  

But that's sooo BESIDES the point, we're talking about people who have earned an advanced engineering degree from an accredited institution and whether that advanced degree is evidence enough to conclude an individual has basic core engineering knowledge. If state boards can make distinctions and have different requirements for applicants based on graduation from abet accredited programs, then it's certainly reasonably for them to have different requirements for individuals based on the level of education earned. 

And again, the FE exam and EI/EIT designation isn't intended to measure competency in the practice of engineering, it's intended to assess competency in particular engineering curriculums...this comes from NCEES. So the truth of the matter is that the FE exam probably serves more purpose for potential employers than it does state boards. Employers can assess people's educational background using a national standard.

 

[Audi Driver P.E.]

So you're judging this speaker's knowledge in the field she earned her PhD based on a commencement speech??? I know plenty of people with advanced degrees in a science or engineering field and the truth of the matter is that probably half of them shouldn't be doing ANY public speakers, they belong in a laboratory doing research....but they know their stuff.  

But that's sooo BESIDES the point, we're talking about people who have earned an advanced engineering degree from an accredited institution and whether that advanced degree is evidence enough to conclude an individual has basic core engineering knowledge. If state boards can make distinctions and have different requirements for applicants based on graduation from abet accredited programs, then it's certainly reasonably for them to have different requirements for individuals based on the level of education earned. 

And again, the FE exam and EI/EIT designation isn't intended to measure competency in the practice of engineering, it's intended to assess competency in particular engineering curriculums...this comes from NCEES. So the truth of the matter is that the FE exam probably serves more purpose for potential employers than it does state boards. Employers can assess people's educational background using a national standard.

Yes.  Yes I am.  And anyone and everyone I talked to afterward agreed.  The woman was demonstrably incompetent at every level.  Fractal incompetence.  She is lucky breathing is an automatic function.  And it's NOT beside the point at all.  The entire point is whether passing the FE and PE exams should be universal to become a license engineer.

 

[hjg7715]

Yes.  Yes I am.  And anyone and everyone I talked to afterward agreed.  The woman was demonstrably incompetent at every level.  Fractal incompetence.  She is lucky breathing is an automatic function.  And it's NOT beside the point at all.  The entire point is whether passing the FE and PE exams should be universal to become a license engineer.

So is her incompetency an indictment on everyone that holds a PhD or just her? Surely you've come across individuals with PE's and you've questioned how did they get a PE? 

But to your point, I'm an advocate for consistency from one state to the next, I just don't believe (assuming everything else is equal) that someone who passes the FE exam is any more or any less qualified to be an engineer than someone who has completed at least twice as many years of formal education. I give a LOT more weight to professional experience. I think education and passage of the FE exam is a good assessment of someone's ability to grasp and understand engineering tasks and concepts, but not competency in making engineering judgment. And this is coming from someone who passed the FE exam.

 

[matt267 PE]

the truth of the matter is

There a thread for that.

 

[Ken PE 3.1]

Most PHD's are subject matter experts in THEIR area. They cannot possibly be capable of doing detailed design work based on teaching a class for x number of years.

PHD = piled high and deep.

I hate tapatalk

Besides all that, doesn't cutting corners negate all we had to do to get licensed?

Most, if not all states grant time served before sitting for the exam. That's good enough.

 

[hjg7715]

Most PHD's are subject matter experts in THEIR area. They cannot possibly be capable of doing detailed design work based on teaching a class for x number of years.

PHD = piled high and deep.

I hate tapatalk

Besides all that, doesn't cutting corners negate all we had to do to get licensed?

Most, if not all states grant time served before sitting for the exam. That's good enough.

Neither can someone who's completed 6 semesters of college coursework. We're not equating PhD's to PE's, we're talking about assessing the knowledge learned in an undergraduate program and cumulative knowledge learned by someone who's matriculated through a PhD program. I think the latter more than satisfies the educational requirement to sit for the PE. So I don't consider it cutting corners, I consider it going above and beyond. 

 

[Ken PE 3.1]

28 minutes ago, Ken PE 3.0 said:   Most PHD's are subject matter experts in THEIR area. They cannot possibly be capable of doing detailed design work based on teaching a class for x number of years.

PHD = piled high and deep.

I hate tapatalk

Besides all that, doesn't cutting corners negate all we had to do to get licensed?

Most, if not all states grant time served before sitting for the exam. That's good enough.

Neither can someone who's completed 6 semesters of college coursework. We're not equating PhD's to PE's, we're talking about assessing the knowledge learned in an undergraduate program and cumulative knowledge learned by someone who's matriculated through a PhD program. I think the latter more than satisfies the educational requirement to sit for the PE. So I don't consider it cutting corners, I consider it going above and beyond. 

I guess we can agree to disagree. Just let me know which skyscraper a PHD stamped so i can steer clear of it.

I hate tapatalk

 

[Audi Driver P.E.]

. We're not equating PhD's to PE's, we're talking about assessing the knowledge learned in an undergraduate program and cumulative knowledge learned by someone who's matriculated through a PhD program. I think the latter more than satisfies the educational requirement to sit for the FE. So I don't consider it cutting corners, I consider it going above and beyond. 

FIFY.

 

[hjg7715]

FIFY.

Take it up with the state boards, because a lot of them agree with me.  Actually, I believe there are a few states like Texas that waive the FE requirement for applicants with BS degrees if they've earned 8 years of professional experience. 

 

[Audi Driver P.E.]

Take it up with the state boards, because a lot of them agree with me.  Actually, I believe there are a few states like Texas that waive the FE requirement for applicants with BS degrees if they've earned 8 years of professional experience. 

Well, you and they are no less wrong just because of your agreement with each other, as has been demonstrated.

 

[hjg7715]

Well, you and they are no less wrong just because of your agreement with each other, as has been demonstrated.

Well it's not a matter of right or wrong, it's just a difference of opinions. I honestly respect both perspectives, but my own personal experiences with the process and first hand knowledge of other people's career paths influences my position.

 

[einatlanta PhD PE]

No worries everyone.....those dang Ph.D, PE's don't know nuthin anywho.....half of their brains are scrambled especially if they took the EIT from all the studying. They can't even keep a train of thought.......look a squirrel!!!.......wait....what was I talking about

 

[knight1fox3]

I've actually been told by PhD's themselves that after a master's degree, entering a PhD program one can actually begin to unlearn things and end up having no common sense and/or practical application logic.

I taped this to one of my colleague's office door:

 

[einatlanta PhD PE]

I now have that printed out and taped next to my PE certificate.......awesome!  Seems to fit for some odd reason..... 

 

[smahurin]

Ehh, I know I'm in the vast minority.  Having gone through a lesser process, I personally value my masters way more than my PE.  Conversely, the industry couldn't care less about my masters and only values my PE.  I definitely think of a PhD as a far far greater accomplishment than a PE, sorry for those who disagree, and not to demean or diminish those who have their PE's. That's just my opinion (obviously the minority opinion).  

Also for some reason my reply feature in this topic is pretty screwed up and automatically inserts (and won't let me delete quotes) anytime I try to reply.

 

[Karissa]

If I tried I'm sure I'll have issues. In MI there is a rule that states":

"Acceptable experience, as defined in sub rule (1) of this rule, shall be performed by the applicant under the direction of a licensed professional engineer or a person of equivalent professional standing."

I asked what that was and the response from the state was:

"A person of “equivalent professional standing” would apply only if you qualify for the “Industrial/Manufacturing” exemption; If you work for a company which produces a product where the company is 100% responsible for the quality of the product they produce, like an automobile manufacturer or one of the parts suppliers to an auto manufacturer, then Michigan’s statute exempts the designers of said product from the requirement of being a “licensed professional engineer”. "

Apparently since I work in a company that guarantees its parts (automotive engine part supplier)  the equivalent professional can be a boss, supervisor, or a PHD holder since I have no PEs in my company so I didn't work under a PE. I don't know of any other states that allow that. So I will probably only ever be licensed in MI as it was more of just a personal goal I had to just finish the process since I started it incase I would ever need it in the future.

 

[Audi Driver P.E.]

Ehh, I know I'm in the vast minority.  Having gone through a lesser process, I personally value my masters way more than my PE.  Conversely, the industry couldn't care less about my masters and only values my PE.  I definitely think of a PhD as a far far greater accomplishment than a PE, sorry for those who disagree, and not to demean or diminish those who have their PE's. That's just my opinion (obviously the minority opinion).  

Also for some reason my reply feature in this topic is pretty screwed up and automatically inserts (and won't let me delete quotes) anytime I try to reply.

Don't mistake the meaning of my posts.  I think that a Masters and/or PhD are just as valuable or more so than a PE.  My only, and I repeat, only point is that there is no functional equivalence.  PE is one thing.  PhD is another.  Neither prepares a person fully for the other.