Why do we have to first get "approved" to take the PE?

[PE_2_Be]

I've been waiting 2 and a half months for my application to get approved to take the PE, and every time I call to check I get the same answer: "Your application is in line for review, it will take about 4-6 more weeks". They tell me this same time frame every time I call, every 4-6 weeks it will apparently take another 4-6 weeks. Bullspit! Waiting for approval just to take the PE is so freakin stupid!

Of all the standardized tests I have taken in my life, this is the ONLY test that I have to get "approved" by some board before I can take it. Any other test you just pay the money and sign up and take the test, and then it is up to whoever you send your scores to as to what they do with your test results. Why can't the PE be the same way, as the FE is? We should be able to just register, pay the fee, and take the PE. Then if we pass, THEN we can apply to the state boards for our PE license by sending in our stuff (EIT proof, degree verification, references, experience proof, etc.).

Does anyone else agree with me, or am I all alone on this one?

 

[nsgoldberg]

I'd much rather get pre-approved than go through all the trouble to studying and taking the PE, only to find out that my passing the test didn't count.

They just want to make sure you have sufficient real-world experience.

 

[snickerd3]

i'd rather wait ahead of time then when passing you get the license right away vs having to wait after passing

 

[ptatohed]

On a somewhat similar topic, have you guys seen the October '13 Licensure Exchange? Page 2. NCEES has voted to change their model law to allow a candidate to take the exam before they obtain their experience. Then, after they obtain their experience, they can get their license.

http://cdn1.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Licensure-Exchange-Oct-2013.pdf

 

[nsgoldberg]

I guess that gives you the best of both worlds? Plus, taking it right out of college may be beneficial, especially if you've been doing engineering work while in school.

 

[snickerd3]

even if ncess votes to do this the individual states have to adopt it. Some may not. Like pdh requirement not all states require it. and in IL you can already take the PE without having 4 yrs experience. personally i think it is a bad idea. The whole concept is principles and PRACTICE. The only way to get the practice part is the yrs of experience.

 

[ptatohed]

even if ncess votes to do this the individual states have to adopt it. Some may not. Like pdh requirement not all states require it. and in IL you can already take the PE without having 4 yrs experience. personally i think it is a bad idea. The whole concept is principles and PRACTICE. The only way to get the practice part is the yrs of experience.

Right, each state would have to decide to adopt it. In CA, you currently only need 2 years of experience (with a BS degree). I have to disagree with you about the 'practice' though. Ideally, part of the PE exam would be an exam that tested on topics answered solely from real experience. But that is not the case. Nearly all, if not all, of the PE exam questions can be answered from "book knowledge". I guess the idea behind the model law change is that, if adopted, a candidate can get his/her license right at the 4 year mark. Previously, one had to wait 4 years before even applying, then wait to get approved, sign up for the next exam, study, take the exam, wait for results, etc. It might be closer to 5 years before they get their license. Now a candidate can do all this 'PE stuff' within the 4 years while gaining experience and, in theory, get their license on the 4th year. Not sure if it is good or bad. Overall, I think I am neutral.

 

[nsgoldberg]

Honestly, the practice part is a bit overrated. The typical engineer finds a hole to dig somewhere in the field of engineering, and he digs himself a mighty fine hole that he or she cannot easily crawl out of. While they may have in depth experience in something like pressure vessels, or materials, or plastics, medical devices, etc., the knowledge of the other areas is very limited - about what you remember from school or can study to get. This is true even with the ME test split into three subareas.

While studying, there are many problems I can do without cracking a book, because I know the equations off the top of my head. However, many other questions I only know from studying them - I've never had the need to apply the concepts (i.e. pressure vessels, gears, dynamics, vibes, etc.).

I'm only 2 years out of school, but I've been doing engineering work for 5 now. However, my application only counted the 2 years since I claimed education credit. I don't think being able to take the PE earlier is necessarily a bad thing. I sincerely doubt I will have a greater grasp on the ME curriculum in another 2 or 5 years, at least in my current position (which isn't likely to change).

 

[JMT]

I have to disagree with your statement NS. The majority of civil engineers (or graduates with a BSCE) I know do not fit in only ONE of the Civil Depths. For myself, it was hard to decide a depth for the PE exam because my daily work is in water, surveying, transportation and construction, with a little geotechnical and structural.

I also feel I was more prepared for the Seismic and Survey (California) exams thanks to my post college employment. I wouldn't have been able to pass these exams with only my four year degree.

I agree with PT that part of the PE exam should be questions that tested on topics answered solely from real experience. I think California achieves this with their Seismic and Survey exams. I haven't taken the PE yet, so I can't say about NCEES's exam.

 

[nsgoldberg]

That's just my experience as an ME. I'm sure there are MEs out there who move around within the company, or among several companies, and they end up wearing all sorts of hats. I don't have any knowledge of how civils work, so I suppose that's more applicable to them, based on your statement.

It's been my experience that MEs tend to get stuck in a certain field. If you want to venture outside of that field, you're generally looking at a pay cut.

 

[PE_2_Be]

On a somewhat similar topic, have you guys seen the October '13 Licensure Exchange? Page 2. NCEES has voted to change their model law to allow a candidate to take the exam before they obtain their experience. Then, after they obtain their experience, they can get their license.

http://cdn1.ncees.co/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Licensure-Exchange-Oct-2013.pdf

This would be great! I hope NCEES and all of the states follow this action. We should be able to take the exam as soon as we want without board approval, then after we pass, then we apply for our PE license. I've been waiting now 3 months on my application and the board still won't give me any updates. What a bunch of slow incompetent ********.

 

[palvarez83]

I too disagree on this. Perhaps I have just been fortunate to not get stuck in a specialized hole. My work has allowed me to do things that are really across the board... I work for an EPC that does pretty much everything. I've sort of become a jack of all trades, master of none. When I did the mechanical test, I felt equally competent in all 3. I chose thermo-fluids since there isn't much code related items like there was for HVAC. When I took the electrical exam, I took Power since it is the only one subdisciple where you would actually need to stamp something. The other two are just so you call yourself a PE. I think NCEES has seen that as well since now they are 3 seperate exams entirely (no breadth morning section). Tomorrow I'm doing the Civil 8hr. I felt equally competent in all 5 sections. There is a lot of overlap equationwise between all 5 sections and a lot of overlap with mechanical. I ended up choosing construction. I kind of regret having to be tested on OSHA, since that book is not very user friendly. I think a more prudent choice for those of us in California is structural (since there is overlap with Seismic) or transportation (since there is an overlap with survey).

The equations used on most pe questions are very fundemental, simplified versions of what what is learned in school. I think if I were taking these exams right out of school, I would be like a deer in the headlights thinking there is information missing. A real world engineering problem is different than a school engineering homework problem. In the real work we make reasonable assumptions that only practice or code can justify. Speaking of which, there is also the issue of codes. Codes don't always have rationale and the procedure they dictate is really based on historical lessons learned. Code books are different than text books in that the index won't help you as much when looking something up. When you look something up the section it refers you to can, inturn, refer you to yet another section and so forth. It takes real world practice to be able to apply codes correctly... Code application is where I think a junior engineer fresh out of school would struggle on the PE.

 

[civilized_naah]

So, after you pass the Civil 8hr exam, your business card is going to read:

P. Alvarez, P.E., P.E., P.E. ?

Best of luck for tomorrow.

 

[palvarez83]

Well, sadly since I'm in California I'll still have to take the 2.5 hour Seismic and 2.5 hour Survey exams after I pass the 8 hour.... however, yes, my coworkers joke that my card should say "P.E.^3." Haha. Another said I need to get a 3-in-1 rubber stamp with dials on it to select the approriate stamp. Lol

 

[MWC PE]

Basically I assume the board wants to make sure they think you are qualified up front so as to either/or not delay results for people who will be licensed by having NCEES grade a bunch of extra exams and/or to make it easy to issue licenses (ie having you approved pending exam results that are mailed directly in to them at time of issuing the license instead of holding your exam results in a file for 4 years while you meet the experience).

And this might be the best reason: by using the test as the last step they only have to meet twice a year to approve new engineers. Most states probably have some full time admin staff but mostly the board is doing it as a second job. They aren't going to meet 12 times a year to decide if drawing traffic control plans for 4 years qualifies as progressive experience or not.