Was that thread on this bulletin board? Maybe it was on another site. Anyway, I went looking for it today and did not find it. When I come across a good thread I "save" it on my computer. I was going to come back and save that one once everyone had their say. I must have missed it. Any help is much appreciated. Thanks!
Generally helped. The quality of the practitioner is way better today.
The Conferences are much better behaved. The content is much better. The young surveyors are generally more professional in attitude and knowledge.
I think all this could have been done with a two year degree too though.
Experience is still going to be the driving force in practice quality.
The downside is some of the four year people can be a bit Prima donna.
Academia has the unfortunate ability to develop that attitude.
But generally, I've noticed a big improvement.
Well .....
if you want to start it again, let me be the first. (Well I see Marc beat me to it)
I absolutely believe that a 4 year degree should be a requirement for licensure. I do not believe the degree has to be in Surveying (or Geomatics).
I know that my degrees are in Economics & Business Administration and there should be more of them in the professional ranks.
I also think there should be math majors, physics majors, and history majors.
And all you need to do is look at some of the writing here and you know we should have some English majors.
That's my 0.04 worth!
Well .....
Too many engineers I've worked with can't write and can't spell. ABET Accredited education, and NCEES exam successes, they still can't write or spell.
There was 1 new PLS that passed the May 2013 Idaho Exam. If that's any indication of what a 4 year degree does to the profession it's not good.
That said, I think a 2 yr degree would be sufficient. Time will tell here in Idaho but the initial signs aren't well.
I like Indiana's requirements.
www.in.gov/legislative/iac/T08650/A00010.PDF?
And Indiana lets Land Surveyors do all the engineering (outside of structures) in the confines of a subdivision.
I have a 4 year ABET Surveying degree. It was a great education. Making it a requirement for registration is a bad idea.
Examination and experience (i.e., merit) should serve as the sole barriers to entry. The Chartered Financial Analysts and actuaries have it right. Their exams are hard as hell, and the required experience has to be the real deal.
Our exams should be much more difficult and cover more material to ensure a broad range of competency. The experience requirement could be modeled after physicians, with years spent in internship/residency, where it is very well documented what you do. Not every survey firm/organization is in a position to provide the necessary breadth and depth.
If the FS/PS exams were sufficiently difficult, the education issue would be moot.
Another issue is that many of the best and brightest will now be weeded out. Math degree from MIT with 10 years of surveying experience? Doesn't cut it under NCEES model law. Caltech geodesist with a law degree? Too bad, gotta go back to Fresno or you will have NO idea how to be a surveyor (under NCEES model law).
HELPED.
> Was that thread on this bulletin board? Maybe it was on another site. Anyway, I went looking for it today and did not find it. When I come across a good thread I "save" it on my computer. I was going to come back and save that one once everyone had their say. I must have missed it. Any help is much appreciated. Thanks!
Earl,
The topic has definitely been kicked around here many times.
Here is one old post I found that covers some opinions.
https://surveyorconnect.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=99042#p99223
As I've said many time, hopefully at the top of my lungs, in true TDD form: THERE IS NO WAY TO FAULT A SOLID EDUCATIONAL BASE FOR ANY PROFESSION.
Yes, there are 4 year grads that don't know squat with regards to common sense and or work experience coming out of school, but there are also seasoned licensed professionals working way beyond their area of expertise that scare me more. A two year program is great to create a qualified technician starting in our profession, but IMHO those upper level law, boundary, projections, geodesy, economics, speech, and writing classes taught only in a 4 year program are invaluable.
PS. Thanks again for all that you have contributed to the education of surveying professionals over the years.
Cheers
Does a degree weed out the bad apples?
This conversation is a perennial favorite but fails to address what I feel is the greatest threat to the profession. In my opinion it is not lack of education that needs to be addressed but lack of true professional integrity.
If, once licensed people followed basic principles such as working in their area of expertise and performing due diligence many problems would be solved. I am not convinced from my own anecdotal experience that a degree has much of a bearing on these key issues.
The degree route can get people in charge a little to fast sometimes as it serves as short cut to bypass field work. That said a education to put the field work in context does go a long way, at least for me learning all on the job has been a long journey.
> There was 1 new PLS that passed the May 2013 Idaho Exam. If that's any indication of what a 4 year degree does.......
It's not any indication other than the candidates were either unprepared for the exam or there was not a large pool of candidates interested in licensure in Idaho. IMHO;-)
> That said, I think a 2 yr degree would be sufficient.
With a good program and a good few years of mentorship at a quality firm, I would agree, two years can be enough to really get the ball rolling.
I love these discussions. The common answers are:
From those with a degree - ALL surveyors need a 4 year degree.
From those without a degree - Degree NOT needed.
I do not have a degree so those with one will stop reading here.
I learned to survey when you had to know the formulas to do the calcs - not just push a button. Every tool we use today is button pushing - a degree is needed for that?
The excuse is always - degrees raise the level of how the public sees us. The public LOL. You deal with Architects, Engineers and Contractors and whore yourselves out for lowest bid. Want to raise yourselves up - set fees like the real estate and title companies do - percent of value of property involved. Just like insurance companies fees based on level of exposure. Surveyor's fees are based on "how hungry am I".
A recent ad on Craigs List in Newport Beach CA. Owner wants, boundary, topo, corners set and RS or Corner record filed with the County for $2500. This is waterfront property on Lido Isle - Marion Morrison lived on that small sand bar. I told them to add a zero.
4 Year Degree Has Helped Surveying, Hurt Surveying Trade
The Profession is still sorting itself out.
Paul in PA
LINK to a recent Linkedin discussion ...
Here is link to the following Q that had a great going over
Are the state laws for four year degree to get a PLS licence hurting us or helping us?
Jason Stewart
RADU
LINK to a recent Linkedin discussion ...
Thank you - that is the link I was looking for. I follow threads on surveyorconnect more closely than I do LinkedIn and forgot where I saw it. Read it again, some good arguments on both sides of the question.
I used to think I knew but I'm not sure anymore.
The problems we face are many and largely related to the historic and continuing culture of the profession.
For some reason we have low enrollment rates, maybe we just don't need very many PLSs and people don't see the demand to justify the education when maybe a civil engineering degree opens up more doors.
Our ad hoc way of doing boundary is part of the problem.
+1. Until the average salary of a PLS dramatically increases, I will continue to disbelieve the notion that there is (or will be) a shortage of surveyors. +1 again that our professional culture is part of the problem.
Disclosure: I am a professional surveyor with a 4 year degree (B.S. in Geomatics from the University of Florida) and my father was as well.
I would say that it has helped improve the consistency of the professionals in the field of surveying. Whereas before you had some very bright surveyors and some that weren't so much. However, I do believe that it will decrease our numbers in the future. I know in my area there are a lot of surveyors that are over the age of 50, but not that many under that age. In 10-20 years, I may be a very busy surveyor.
.
The profession is missing the mentoring aspect. It is hard to teach the younger surveyors when the industry is built around the one man crew.
Can one pass the FS and PS? That is what should matter. The degree is not important.
LINK to a recent Linkedin discussion ...
I have said my bit on that page... LOL
RADU
