Oct 2021 Pass Rates

[steel]

I believe we saw a decrease in takers for Oct 2021 because it was the last paper & pencil admin. Many takers, especially those who would have been first-time test takers in Oct 2021, most likely opted to wait until the exam transitioned to a computer-based format. No use taking it once, risk failing, then have to study for an entirely new format. However, those who had already attempted it (like me) prior to October 2021 probably wanted to try one more time to pass the exam before it transitioned to computer-based testing.

With the exception of geotech (more first-time takers in Oct 2021 than in April 2021), all other civil disciplines saw a decrease in first-time takers and an increase in repeat-takers between the April and October 2021 admins.

 

[Hamilton]

I believe we saw a decrease in takers for Oct 2021 because it was the last paper & pencil admin. Many takers, especially those who would have been first-time test takers in Oct 2021, most likely opted to wait until the exam transitioned to a computer-based format. No use taking it once, risk failing, then have to study for an entirely new format. However, those who had already attempted it (like me) prior to October 2021 probably wanted to try one more time to pass the exam before it transitioned to computer-based testing.

With the exception of geotech (more first-time takers in Oct 2021 than in April 2021), all other civil disciplines saw a decrease in first-time takers and an increase in repeat-takers between the April and October 2021 admins.

I agree with your opinion on why the number of takers decreased. I also had my first attempt Spring 2021 and wanted to pass before making a change. I have several friends that decided to wait for their first time until it was offered via CBT because they liked the flexibility of the testing schedule and the idea of a searchable PDF.

 

[Acute Fungi]

Below are the last three paper and pencil Civil PE Exam overall results. I ran this in Excel. The bottom right hand corner shows the passing percentage regardless if this was the first time, second time, etc.. So for Fall 2021 overall passing rate was 53.2%, then Spring 2021 overall passing rate was 54.7% and then Fall 2020 was 58.8%. So, regardless of the number of times taking the Exam the highest Civil PE Exam passing rate was Fall 2020. Notice the number of overall test takers was shrinking slightly in number as we approached the final P & P Exam in the Fall 2021; Fall 2021 was 10,022, Spring 2021 was 10,324, Fall 2020 was 10,631 takers. This also confirms the comments made by steelnote15 above.

What are your thoughts or observations?

 

[Acute Fungi]

Pass Rates for first half of 2022 can be found at NCEES PE exam pass rates
For PE Civil, I tried to find overall total passing rate by combining first and repeat.
Why are the number of repeat takers down compared to those before CBT was implemented?
Any other thoughts?

 

[Pra4surf1]

Pass Rates for first half of 2022 can be found at NCEES PE exam pass rates
For PE Civil, I tried to find overall total passing rate by combining first and repeat.
Why are the number of repeat takers down compared to those before CBT was implemented?
Any other thoughts?

View attachment 28316

View attachment 28317

Big decrease across the board in repeat takers huh? Maybe people got tired of paying to retake exam or repeat takers getting pulled into first time count.

 

[Pra4surf1]

Big decrease across the board in repeat takers huh? Maybe people got tired of paying to retake exam or repeat takers getting pulled into first time count.

Seems like WR and Trans is consistent with a higher pass rate and construction averages at the bottom. The construction depth problems are so long. I wonder if it would be better to take WR or Trans after multiple fails. You would think if a discipline is continuously low they would try to level the difficulty out.

 

[rodr]

Pass Rates for first half of 2022 can be found at NCEES PE exam pass rates
For PE Civil, I tried to find overall total passing rate by combining first and repeat.
Why are the number of repeat takers down compared to those before CBT was implemented?
Any other thoughts?

View attachment 28316

View attachment 28317

This is absurd. I've said it before and I'll say it again, it makes absolutely no sense that a for-profit organization has this much control over the professional development of a career field. You look at these numbers and it's clear to anyone who actually cares about the general outcome that the test needs to be reformatted or scaled. How can NCEES look at these passing rates and not think that there is something wrong with the exam. When you are a for profit organization holding the livelihood of so many people in your hands you don't care about: how many times they have to pay a fee to pass the exam, providing refunds for an exam where the proctors closed the doors too early resulting in 20+ people being denied entry to the exam, providing a refund when parking information is not accurately communicated so examinees have to park on the third floor of a parking garage with no elevator (this was during P&P) and had to make trips up and down three flights of stairs with their heavy references, and you most certainly don't care about the number of complaints you get each year because you know you hold the key to the examinee's future.

I am sorry if you are trying to pass this exam. Please keep your head up and don't let NCEES win!

 

[Acute Fungi]

Pass rates for Jan 2023 can be found at NCEES PE exam pass rates
The overall passing rate, regardless of first time or repeat and whatever the Civil PE you take is 54.1%. This overall passing rate is down from June 2022 overall passing rate of 58.0%. See previous chart. Below is how I calculated the overall passing rate.


What are your thoughts?

 

[Pra4surf1]

Pass rates for Jan 2023 can be found at NCEES PE exam pass rates
The overall passing rate, regardless of first time or repeat and whatever the Civil PE you take is 54.1%. This overall passing rate is down from June 2022 overall passing rate of 58.0%. See previous chart. Below is how I calculated the overall passing rate.

View attachment 28483
What are your thoughts?

Construction continues to stay in bottom two as usual.

 

[WingNut]

Here is what I believe, having served on the exam development committee for the past 12 years. The exam is no harder than before-- what I believe the issue to be is that the candidates do not adequately prepare properly for the exam. You really have to KNOW the material in the syllabus-- really understand what is being tested and how it applies to a specific problem. I think that candidates that do that have no difficulty at all in passing the exam. Working a large number of problems with each topic area helps solidify those test taking skills.

The CBT exam allows multiple item types, i.e., matching, fill in the blank, heat maps, etc in order to determine if the candidate indeed possesses minimal competency to be licensed as a professional engineer. This is different than the old paper/pencil exam, where a candidate had a 25% change of marking the right answer just by inspection. If the candidate was able to eliminate at least 2 of the distractors, then his/her probability of success rose to 50%. Now, the CBT exam, where you have to work the problem, that advantage is not available-- either you know or don't know the question.

The reference handbook has all of the formulae that is needed to work the exam. What is different here is that the handbook does not explain the formulae, like a text book does. If you understand the question, you can identify the correct formula to use and then solve the problem. Being familiar with the handbook BEFORE taking the real exam is a bonus-- searching for a formula when in exam conditions burns up time that you don't get back.

I firmly believe that undergrad professors do the students a disservice by using scantrons and test problems that require memorization. When I teach, I use essay problems and calculation problems to identify if the student has learned the material. Say old fashoned-- ok-- it is a lot harder on me to have to grade all of those papers, however, I feel that I have done a better job for the student in ensuring that they learned the material.

 

[rodr]

Here is what I believe, having served on the exam development committee for the past 12 years. The exam is no harder than before-- what I believe the issue to be is that the candidates do not adequately prepare properly for the exam. You really have to KNOW the material in the syllabus-- really understand what is being tested and how it applies to a specific problem. I think that candidates that do that have no difficulty at all in passing the exam. Working a large number of problems with each topic area helps solidify those test taking skills.

The CBT exam allows multiple item types, i.e., matching, fill in the blank, heat maps, etc in order to determine if the candidate indeed possesses minimal competency to be licensed as a professional engineer. This is different than the old paper/pencil exam, where a candidate had a 25% change of marking the right answer just by inspection. If the candidate was able to eliminate at least 2 of the distractors, then his/her probability of success rose to 50%. Now, the CBT exam, where you have to work the problem, that advantage is not available-- either you know or don't know the question.

The reference handbook has all of the formulae that is needed to work the exam. What is different here is that the handbook does not explain the formulae, like a text book does. If you understand the question, you can identify the correct formula to use and then solve the problem. Being familiar with the handbook BEFORE taking the real exam is a bonus-- searching for a formula when in exam conditions burns up time that you don't get back.

I firmly believe that undergrad professors do the students a disservice by using scantrons and test problems that require memorization. When I teach, I use essay problems and calculation problems to identify if the student has learned the material. Say old fashoned-- ok-- it is a lot harder on me to have to grade all of those papers, however, I feel that I have done a better job for the student in ensuring that they learned the material.

Wow spoken just like someone with a power complex.

Why would you admit that the test is too difficult? Then you'd be admitting to the massive scam you so graciously financially benefit from. Like I've said before, when you put an organization in power as a professional gate keeper, they can do whatever they want and justify it how ever they want.

It's so easy just to say "people aren't studying enough". Do you have actual data on this? Because we have actual data, showing that passing rates are going down. ACTUAL DATA! Since when does "I firmly believe..." hold up against actual data?! Look in the mirror and realize you "beliefs" hold no water and the problem lies within you and your committee.

Why would people sign up for a $350 test if they didn't feel they were prepared? It wouldn't be because they just love showing up for the exam only to find the doors have closed earlier than the posted (web site and examinee verification sheet) time and being turned away. Just to have months of preparing thrown down the drain. It wouldn't be because they love using a mouse and keyboard from the 1980s in a small poorly ventilated room. NCESS knows what they are doing and they are laughing all the way to the bank, and so are you. Thank you for revealing what we already knew.

 

[bbringardner]

Here is what I believe, having served on the exam development committee for the past 12 years. The exam is no harder than before-- what I believe the issue to be is that the candidates do not adequately prepare properly for the exam. You really have to KNOW the material in the syllabus-- really understand what is being tested and how it applies to a specific problem. I think that candidates that do that have no difficulty at all in passing the exam. Working a large number of problems with each topic area helps solidify those test taking skills.

The CBT exam allows multiple item types, i.e., matching, fill in the blank, heat maps, etc in order to determine if the candidate indeed possesses minimal competency to be licensed as a professional engineer. This is different than the old paper/pencil exam, where a candidate had a 25% change of marking the right answer just by inspection. If the candidate was able to eliminate at least 2 of the distractors, then his/her probability of success rose to 50%. Now, the CBT exam, where you have to work the problem, that advantage is not available-- either you know or don't know the question.

The reference handbook has all of the formulae that is needed to work the exam. What is different here is that the handbook does not explain the formulae, like a text book does. If you understand the question, you can identify the correct formula to use and then solve the problem. Being familiar with the handbook BEFORE taking the real exam is a bonus-- searching for a formula when in exam conditions burns up time that you don't get back.

I firmly believe that undergrad professors do the students a disservice by using scantrons and test problems that require memorization. When I teach, I use essay problems and calculation problems to identify if the student has learned the material. Say old fashoned-- ok-- it is a lot harder on me to have to grade all of those papers, however, I feel that I have done a better job for the student in ensuring that they learned the material.

Thank you for posting.

I think you have an interesting perspective, which seems to be that test scores are going down as a result of the test no longer providing a guessing bonus and inadequate preparation by test takers. This test is not an easy one to prepare for. I see many test takers, especially in the construction depth, which have studied hard, taken prep courses, bought all the books, practice exams and attempted the test many times and failed many times.

Has the board considered the possibility that the testing subjects are too broad, especially for construction depth?

Engineering practice is rarely this broad (construction management is, but that's not what's being validated in the PE test). I work in an infrastructure engineering firm and we are pretty broad as a company, but the practice of individual engineers is no where near as broad as the test subjects. An anecdote, but I've got 20+ years experience and contact with 100s of engineers reinforcing this view. Construction prep materials also appear to have the tough time with this because don't do well at directly preparing students for the test because of the broad nature of the test subjects. Additionally, in most resources construction has the lease amount of material available (i.e. CERM... commits 22 pages out of what appears to be at least 1000 pages to the subject).

I will also say that it is pretty unfair to test takers to not make available a simulated version of the test environment version of resources ahead of the test, especially since interacting with "design standards" is such a critical part of the test. From a test takers perspective they walk into an intense timed test having had no practice using this tool which is plays a significant role in success or failure. I also think NCEES is missing an opportunity to sell more stuff... a subscription structure to access the references, in the format of the CBT could yield additional monthly revenue while providing test takers needed experience (it'd increase revenue for authors of design standards too because I am pretty sure 90% of students download bootlegged copies of these if they are unrelated to their current work).

 

[WingNut]

Thanks for your comment! I am a VOLUNTEER, a NON PAID professional engineer who wishes to help advance the engineering profession. I am NOT an NCEES employee, get paid by NCEES or am I a member of any state licensing board. So just to be clear, I VOLUNTEER, PRO BONO, i.e., FREE my time to help advance professional engineering licensure. I spend about 10-15 hours a month on professional engineering licensure matters-- all PRO BONO.

A logical question could be, "Why?" Well, the work is intellectually challenging -- you see and learn many things that you otherwise may not. Additionally, the mind exercise is fun-- however it is work.

Each PE test subject areas are derived from what is called a Professional Activities and Knowledge Survey (PAKS) survey. This survey, conducted every 6-7 years polls professional engineers in the specific discipline on what a 4 year minimally competent engineer should know at that stage in their career. The results of the PAKS study determine what the subjects are that are included in the PE test for the next iteration. A new cut score is determined after each PAKS study for those tests-- which are then administered for 6-7 years and then the process repeats.

If you are a licensed professional engineer in some jurisdiction which NCEES has purview, then volunteer to take the survey. They are always seeking more PE volunteers to complete the survey. If you are a professional engineer and like a good challenge, consider joining a licensure committee. Yes, there is a time commitment, like anything else in life, however, the work is stimulating and you meet some very interesting people-- college professors, Deans, CEO's consultants, professional engineers who work in areas that you don't. I always come away learning material that I either did not know or were tangentially familiar but had not worked in that area.

The PE test is a bachelor's level exam-- designed to be successfully completed by the engineering candidate at the 4 year point in his/her career. The exam is designed to ascertain the "minimally competent engineer", the C- student! Each exam question has been worked at least 6-8 times by committee members, independently, to ensure that the question has only one correct answer. Each question is designed to be completed in no more than 6 min-- thus, if you have burned 10 min on a question, either you fail to understand the question or your going down the wrong trail and need to regroup and rethink your approach.

I can assure you that each question is judiciously reviewed-- wording, answers, solutions, everything. There are many times that a committee will spend an hour on a question, with 6-8 PE's having a "healthy", read robust and vigorous discussion on a particular question. Sooner or later, consensus is achieved on the approach, the wording, the answers and the question is put in the pool for pre testing. If the question performs well, i.e., is able to effectively discriminate between right and wrong answers, the question is then placed in the active item bank for possible use. If the question is too hard, i.e., say only < 33% of the candidates get the question correct, then the question is rejected and either reworked, or rejected totally and we start again. Maybe the same concept, but a whole new question. The converse logic is also true-- if a question is proffered that 95% of the candidates get correct, then that is question is also rejected as being too easy. Again, the question may be rejected and reworked, or totally rejected and a new question developed that tests the same concept.

Everything is statistically based-- lots of statistics analyzed by psychometricians (test development professionals) to ensure that question is able to determine who is minimally competent to practice engineering.

Sure, it is very frustrating and demoralizing when you don't pass the test, not to mention how much time and money you spent, only to have to do again.

There are no "tricky" questions on the exam-- the exam is straight forward. I have rejected questions by a committee member who is an engineering professor at a major university who works primarily with graduate students. His questions are very good, but require some higher order mathematical skills that a bachelor's level 4 year candidate may not possess. No problem, either we rewrite the question or start over-- no hard feelings-- away we go!

I trust that this explanation is of benefit to board members who may not understand the whole PE exam development process. The NCEES website has a lot of this material on it as well.