Oct 2013 PE - Passing Percentages

[nateluke]

NCEES updated the PE passing percentages for the Oct 2013 PE exams...

http://ncees.org/exams/pe-exam/

 

[orangesalamander]

The civil scores are really low.

 

[NJmike PE]

that's shocking!

 

[corepe]

Very shocking to learn the percentage for repeat takers for Mech is very low for VA....will see what happen...

 

[jarrowsm]

From 70/37% to 64/29%...that's a significant change.

 

[jarrowsm]

From 70/37% to 64/29%...that's a significant change.

*For Civil

 

[nightshade]

The percentage for repeat takers for most disciplines is quite low. Any thoughts???

 

[dana]

OMG!

 

[Mike in Gastonia]

From 70/37% to 64/29%...that's a significant change.

but if they adjust the passing score for difficulty like they say, the passing percentages would change because of the testing group. So in theory this testing group's performance was lower than the spring exam's testing group.

 

[Sapper PE LS]

I'd be interested in knowing if the passing percentages have seen a downward trend over the years. Like maybe back 20 years ago, it was typical to see 80% pass on first try, now we're looking at 64%... and if that is the case (not saying it is, I don't know), but if it is the case, would it be any indication of a decline in college curriculum adequately preparing engineers or perhaps a decline in how much actual experience one obtains on the job.

I don't know, but I would be interested in seeing some analysis on that... if NCEES does any of that.

 

[NJmike PE]

I'd be interested in knowing if the passing percentages have seen a downward trend over the years. Like maybe back 20 years ago, it was typical to see 80% pass on first try, now we're looking at 64%... and if that is the case (not saying it is, I don't know), but if it is the case, would it be any indication of a decline in college curriculum adequately preparing engineers or perhaps a decline in how much actual experience one obtains on the job.

I don't know, but I would be interested in seeing some analysis on that... if NCEES does any of that.

They do, but they sub that work out to the PCS

 

[snickerd3]

The percentage for repeat takers for most disciplines is quite low. Any thoughts???

this is talked about a lot after each test cycle

 

[NJmike PE]

The percentage for repeat takers for most disciplines is quite low. Any thoughts???

this is talked about a lot after each test cycle

an email that I received from an NCEES inquiry:

With regard to the low repeat taker pass rate, the pool of "first-time" examinees is significantly different from the pool of "repeat-taker" examinees. The "first-time" pool includes a more or less even mixture of high-performing, medium-performing, and low-performing candidates.

They all take the exam. Most of the high performers pass, some of the medium performers pass, and only a few of the low performers pass. Those who pass leave the exam pool. Those who do not pass become repeat takers. So what does the repeat taker candidate pool look like? It has only a few high performers (because most of them already passed), plus some medium performers, and most of the low performers.

[SIZE=12pt]So the repeat taker candidate pool -- unlike the first-timer pool -- consists mostly of low performers. Assuming that the exams are of similar difficulty, there needs to be something significantly different about the repeat taker to pass the second time (more intense study and therefore increased knowledge, better health/mind set, etc.) because otherwise they will fail again. The repeat takers who had a bad day the first time or materially changed their approach will generally pass and be removed from the repeater pool. [/SIZE]

 

[ofareggie]

I'd be interested in knowing if the passing percentages have seen a downward trend over the years. Like maybe back 20 years ago, it was typical to see 80% pass on first try, now we're looking at 64%... and if that is the case (not saying it is, I don't know), but if it is the case, would it be any indication of a decline in college curriculum adequately preparing engineers or perhaps a decline in how much actual experience one obtains on the job.

I don't know, but I would be interested in seeing some analysis on that... if NCEES does any of that.

Looking over the past 20 years would add too a lot of variables, most notably the format of the test (used to be several hand written problems).

I know that, for example, IQ tests have gotten progressively more difficult over the years leading to the conclusion that people are in fact getting smarter... despite what older generations say about us, and what we say about those pesky kinds with their tweeters and their myspace and their aol chat rooms!

 

[Distant Thunder]

I'd be interested in knowing if the passing percentages have seen a downward trend over the years. Like maybe back 20 years ago, it was typical to see 80% pass on first try, now we're looking at 64%... and if that is the case (not saying it is, I don't know), but if it is the case, would it be any indication of a decline in college curriculum adequately preparing engineers or perhaps a decline in how much actual experience one obtains on the job.

I don't know, but I would be interested in seeing some analysis on that... if NCEES does any of that.

They do, but they sub that work out to the PCS

Nice!!!

 

[kchinger]

Well, I guess that materials guy I talked to who was taking it his third time didn't pass, seeing as that's 0%. If you don't pass Electrical the first time, you're screwed. The repeat this time was only 28%, the lowest of any exam. And the first time was 63%, which is almost the lowest.

 

[engncpa]

Well that is disappointing and also extremely annoying that they can post the passing percentage yet PA can't "approve" our scores.

 

[corepe]

The percentage for repeat takers for most disciplines is quite low. Any thoughts???

this is talked about a lot after each test cycle

an email that I received from an NCEES inquiry:

With regard to the low repeat taker pass rate, the pool of "first-time" examinees is significantly different from the pool of "repeat-taker" examinees. The "first-time" pool includes a more or less even mixture of high-performing, medium-performing, and low-performing candidates.

They all take the exam. Most of the high performers pass, some of the medium performers pass, and only a few of the low performers pass. Those who pass leave the exam pool. Those who do not pass become repeat takers. So what does the repeat taker candidate pool look like? It has only a few high performers (because most of them already passed), plus some medium performers, and most of the low performers.

[SIZE=12pt]So the repeat taker candidate pool -- unlike the first-timer pool -- consists mostly of low performers. Assuming that the exams are of similar difficulty, there needs to be something significantly different about the repeat taker to pass the second time (more intense study and therefore increased knowledge, better health/mind set, etc.) because otherwise they will fail again. The repeat takers who had a bad day the first time or materially changed their approach will generally pass and be removed from the repeater pool. [/SIZE]

Thanks for sharing and that is a very convincing statement. I understand I have not studied enough when I took the exam the first time but I have studied more and boost my confident twice when I sat for the 2nd round this past October, and cant wait to see how much improvement that I have done...still waiting on VA with Mech HVAC

 

[PSU09Vet]

From 70/37% to 64/29%...that's a significant change.

*For Civil

That's a little unsettling.

 

[PSU09Vet]

I'd be interested in knowing if the passing percentages have seen a downward trend over the years. Like maybe back 20 years ago, it was typical to see 80% pass on first try, now we're looking at 64%... and if that is the case (not saying it is, I don't know), but if it is the case, would it be any indication of a decline in college curriculum adequately preparing engineers or perhaps a decline in how much actual experience one obtains on the job.

I don't know, but I would be interested in seeing some analysis on that... if NCEES does any of that.

Looking over the past 20 years would add too a lot of variables, most notably the format of the test (used to be several hand written problems).

I know that, for example, IQ tests have gotten progressively more difficult over the years leading to the conclusion that people are in fact getting smarter... despite what older generations say about us, and what we say about those pesky kinds with their tweeters and their myspace and their aol chat rooms!

In my opinion, it's because we rely so heavily on computers and programs. At least in highway, we rarely do hand calcs for much of anything. Over the past three years, I've done drainage design for a couple jobs; by hand in spreadsheets at first, then the last 9 months in a drainage program. It's so much more valuable IMO to do at least say part of the design by hand to get a grasp of the calculations used. Take drainage, if you go by hand you're forced to measure the area and figure out the infiltration by hand, then use equations to calculate inlet capacity, bypass and gutter spread. Using the computer program, all you do is drop in the inlets and connect with pipes, pick surface types for infiltration rates, click the analysis and poof you get output without the equations. Or even for geometry, I always check things done in InRoads by hand to make sure they measure up. I don't know but IMHO, technology is a tool we need to be successful, but it's replacing our exposure to the basic calculations and mathematical concepts. And I'm not some old fuddy-dudd (no offense to any and all old fuddy-dudds), I'm 31 and am very active in social media. But I think there's a down side to making everything as easy as plugging two or three data points in and your whole analysis is done for you.

If any of that rambling rant was even written coherently enough to be understood.

BTW, Sapper, were you a 12B? (or w/e the new MOS is)