Question about required experience for PE exam

[JHW 3d]

Audi I was referring to my own idiocy by stating "just wait til you have 11+ years -- pass rates are great then!"

I didn't look closely enough at the chart legend.

I have since edited my original post.

 

[RBHeadge PE]

Virginia, if that helps. I couldn't find anything precise looking at my VA's website.

Virginia's rules are little wonky. http://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title18/agency10/chapter20/section210/  implies that the professional experience requirement does not have to be after the EIT. Note that the type of undergrad degree and who awarded it will affect the amount of expereicned required to sit for the PE exam

The Virginia code found (http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+reg+18VAC10-20-160), doesn't define when the experience occurs. It defines:

"Qualifying engineering experience" means a record of progressive experience on engineering work during which the applicant has made a practical utilization of acquired knowledge and has demonstrated progressive improvement, growth, and development through the utilization of that knowledge as revealed in the complexity and technical detail of the applicant's work product or work record. The applicant must show progressive assumption of greater individual responsibility for the work product over the relevant period. The progressive experience on engineering work shall be of a grade and character that indicates to the board that the applicant is minimally competent to practice engineering. Qualifying engineering experience shall be progressive in complexity and based on a knowledge of engineering mathematics, physical and applied sciences, properties of materials, and fundamental principles of engineering design.

Also see the table at: http://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title18/agency10/chapter20/section240/ which outlines different types of qualifying and non-qualifying engineering experience. It too is silent on when the experience should be gained.

All this, plus in talking with Virginia colleagues who are currently pursuing a PE that the experience can happen prior to the EIT. You should check with the Commonwealth Board to be sure.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, yes Pennsylvania requires 4 years of experience after passing the EIT and prior to applying to sit for the PE exam. Which for many years, meant that one couldn't actually take the test until 4.5-5 years after graduation.

 

[Def]

View attachment 8180

Yikes, that's an even worse drop off than I imagined.

Not to say an engineer at 4 years isn't "experienced," but given that the pass rate halves between 4 years and 10 years of engineering experience, do you (in your own "not officially endorsed by NCEES" opinion) feel that the test is perhaps a poor reflection of mastery of engineering?

Or do you feel it's a symptom of the selection bias of the population of more experienced engineers taking it. As in, they're either more likely to not be doing technical engineering work, and/or they are attempting to get a PE as a "resume bullet point" and are maybe light on actually using it at the time? Just throwing out some possible cases as I see it as talking points, but I'd personally be a bit alarmed at that result if I were creating a test to show "sufficient mastery of practical engineering skillset and knowledge." 

 

[Audi Driver P.E.]

Yikes, that's an even worse drop off than I imagined.

Not to say an engineer at 4 years isn't "experienced," but given that the pass rate halves between 4 years and 10 years of engineering experience, do you (in your own "not officially endorsed by NCEES" opinion) feel that the test is perhaps a poor reflection of mastery of engineering?

Or do you feel it's a symptom of the selection bias of the population of more experienced engineers taking it. As in, they're either more likely to not be doing technical engineering work, and/or they are attempting to get a PE as a "resume bullet point" and are maybe light on actually using it at the time? Just throwing out some possible cases as I see it as talking points, but I'd personally be a bit alarmed at that result if I were creating a test to show "sufficient mastery of practical engineering skillset and knowledge." 

Like I said above, I think it's reflective of not being in the habit of, nor remembering how to study for an exam of this type.

 

[scatsob]

For anyone that cares, NC will allow pre EIT experience to count. I took the EIT in May 2015 and was approved for and took the April 2016 PE. 

 

[JHW 3d]

I would assume there is some selection bias in the data as Def says.

10 years out. You're not taking the test for the same reason as someone desperate to gain the qualification. I am in the former pool. I happen to have passed first time, but I do not use the PE license day to day at my job - and if I didn't pass first time it wouldn't have been a death blow to my career. My motivations were more for the future - consulting work and potentially owning my own firm.

 

[Ken PE 3.1]

I would assume there is some selection bias in the data as Def says. 10 years out. You're not taking the test for the same reason as someone desperate to gain the qualification. I am in the former pool. I happen to have passed first time, but I do not use the PE license day to day at my job - and if I didn't pass first time it wouldn't have been a death blow to my career. My motivations were more for the future - consulting work and potentially owning my own firm.

Wouldn't a first time taker 10 years out be solely for promotion purposes?

 

[JHW 3d]

I would assume there is some selection bias in the data as Def says. 10 years out. You're not taking the test for the same reason as someone desperate to gain the qualification. I am in the former pool. I happen to have passed first time, but I do not use the PE license day to day at my job - and if I didn't pass first time it wouldn't have been a death blow to my career. My motivations were more for the future - consulting work and potentially owning my own firm.

Wouldn't a first time taker 10 years out be solely for promotion purposes?

Yes, but when you pass and don't get a promotion it transitions to a resume padding purpose.

 

[Ken PE 3.1]

I would assume there is some selection bias in the data as Def says. 10 years out. You're not taking the test for the same reason as someone desperate to gain the qualification. I am in the former pool. I happen to have passed first time, but I do not use the PE license day to day at my job - and if I didn't pass first time it wouldn't have been a death blow to my career. My motivations were more for the future - consulting work and potentially owning my own firm.

Wouldn't a first time taker 10 years out be solely for promotion purposes?

Yes, but when you pass and don't get a promotion it transitions to a resume padding purpose.

True, I would think the potential for advancement would be the motivation behind taking the test. Awful lot of work for padding a resume. I'd rather sit through a seminar for that.

 

[RBHeadge PE]

Wouldn't a first time taker 10 years out be solely for promotion purposes?

Often, but not always. They measure test takers in time since undergraduate graduation, not post-graduate graduation. Someone could spend 3-5+ years in grad school then join the workforce, gain the relevant state-specific professional experience (*cough* antiquated Pennsylvania discipline specific rules *cough*) and then attempt to take the test. And some tests are only offered once a year. In that example its easy to see how a taker could take the exam as quickly as possible while still approaching the 10 year mark.

I didn't first sit for the PE until 8.5 years after undergrad graduation. And that was with taking it at the earliest opportunity given the state which I resided/worked.

 

[Audi Driver P.E.]

Wouldn't a first time taker 10 years out be solely for promotion purposes?

Seeing how I fit into the category... no.  I did it to make a viable side business.  There is/was no promotion potential at my place of employ.

 

[Ken PE 3.1]

20 hours ago, Ken PE 3.0 said: Wouldn't a first time taker 10 years out be solely for promotion purposes?

Seeing how I fit into the category... no.  I did it to make a viable side business.  There is/was no promotion potential at my place of employ.

I know every case is unique, but I would think most would fall in this category.

Hell, I work with 2 guys that have been out of school for a number of years and still haven't gotten around to taking the FE. Maybe they never will, but if they do, they will definitely be approaching the 10+ year mark and it will be strictly because of laziness.

 

[knight1fox3]

Unless one works in engineering consulting or something similar where a PE license is utilized, it shouldn't necessarily be expected that an employer automatically provide some sort of pay raise or promotion (not saying anyone here indicated this, just pointing it out).  However, I pursued becoming a PE to build my portfolio and to also have another proverbial "ace in the hole".  I had no qualms about jumping ship with my at the time present employer.  I knew having a PE license would provide a higher level of visibility and differentiation in a very competitive private industry market.  As such, once I did have my PE license, I did feel it was of value to my employer to a certain degree and negotiated for a raise but provided corresponding justifications for such.

On a side note, with some of the employer/salary research I conducted, on average it was suggested that after a person is with a particular employer for 6-7 years or more, their industry marketability tends to go down since they become very focused in a particular engineering role.  I also took this into consideration when I started looking around.  But all things considered, I'm glad I made the jumps I did because I am in what I consider to be a prestigious role at this stage of my career.