PE license ... next to worthless --- NOT!

[MRDPE]

Check out this recent article in Electronic Design magazine http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/Artic...8642/18642.html

In particular note the statement by the author that "The exam and requirements for a PE license are so broad and general not to mention dated as to be next to worthless to most electronic engineers."

I have left my comments to the author on their web site; perhaps if a few others commented as well he may gain a greater appreciation for professional licensure.

 

[benbo]

Check out this recent article in Electronic Design magazine http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/Artic...8642/18642.html
In particular note the statement by the author that "The exam and requirements for a PE license are so broad and general not to mention dated as to be next to worthless to most electronic engineers."

I have left my comments to the author on their web site; perhaps if a few others commented as well he may gain a greater appreciation for professional licensure.

He recommends the GROL from the FCC. I have one of those and it's the stupidest and most useless thing I've ever done. When I took it they gave you a list of the question pool and it was pure memorization. At least for a PE exam you have to think a little.

I got that GROL the same time as I took the FE and the same reason - I was in a group of engineers at work and we used to challenge each other to take and pass exams. Little did I know I would eventually need a PE for my job, so the FE came in handy. Unfortuneately, I am now addicted to taking practice multiple choice exams (GRE, MCAT, GMAT, DAT) that I find online as a recreation.

 

[Guest]

Unfortuneately, I am now addicted to taking practice multiple choice exams (GRE, MCAT, GMAT, DAT) that I find online as a recreation.

:Locolaugh: :Locolaugh:

I feel your pain as I am in the same boat! :smileyballs:

JR

 

[benbo]

:Locolaugh: :Locolaugh:
I feel your pain as I am in the same boat! :smileyballs:

JR

You will think I am lying, but for some reason I thought you might be.

 

[snickerd3]

Check out this recent article in Electronic Design magazine http://electronicdesign.com/Articles/Artic...8642/18642.html
In particular note the statement by the author that "The exam and requirements for a PE license are so broad and general not to mention dated as to be next to worthless to most electronic engineers."

I have left my comments to the author on their web site; perhaps if a few others commented as well he may gain a greater appreciation for professional licensure.

Maybe it's out of bitterness of the author not being able to pass the PE himself that he puts it down so much.

 

[EM_PS]

Not yet holding professional license, i feel unmoved to comment on the guy's article. I do find it funny though, as he lambasts the PE exam as being so broad & general (& dated!) to be "worthless". Yet further along he states how the WCET exam is "relatively deep in each area, and very broad in coverage." Could this little cert exam be patterned after the breadth & depth structure used in the PE exam?

Apparently so. Further on he states: "I wonder just how many wireless engineers could come close to passing this exam. Most wireless engineers specialize in one or more of the above areas rather than being an expert in all. Anyone interested in this certification will have to have very broad experience, knowledge and skill, either that or do some serious studying in those areas where knowledge is lighter. Those passing this exam will be real super wireless engineers."

Hmmm, sort of like how engineers work to study, take, & pass the PE exam. . . . and yet they are evidently not "real super engineers." Mr. Frenzel, you & your article are garbage to me when you arrogantly attack PE licensure, while trying to sell us on a cert exam which by your own description completely models the PE exam structure & supposedly churns out "real super engineers". Unreal! Maybe i will comment. . . . :17: