Beau_Immel, post: 352070, member: 8320 wrote: Posted before I was done writing. Starting to rant but I wanted one more thing in there.
I too am not happy with college tuition. Something is wrong with the system and i don't think anyone is working fast enough to fix it. It is possible to get through relatively unscathed though. And getting an engineering degree is well worth the money spent.
I looked at the Penn state fees. Those prices are for housing too? And a lot of times meals are included too (nothing special). Considering it is four years, that is 16 thousand a year, and summers are off. Not bad for what most consider the best time of their lives. London for some reason is expensive. If you use Germany as the example you could get a masters degree for nearly nothing, and a good one at that. They have pay colleges too if you can afford it.
OIT (Oregon) has from what I hear a great program and the tuition there is only 3500 a semester. Much more do-able. Not sure if it is coincidence or not but Penn does not have a degree requirement and if I am not mistaken, Oregon does?
The real trick is working the system, for better or worse, the schools are set up to suck in financial aid from students. Not sure how it is in Penn but in California they have a "state university grant", most students can get it and it covers 2000-3000 a semester. Then there are multiple other grants if you qualify and it is not just for broke kids or "immigrants".. I don't want to get into the politics of it, don't care much for it, I am only stating how it is set up right now. Add in any scholarships and the cost comes down quite a bit, if you are a good student you may even make money while in school. Most students don't know how to jump through those hoops and get terrible advice from "advisors". The system is set up to collect money. Don't get me started on textbooks, Pearson owns that racket. Those costs can sometimes be avoided too. Then there are the benefits to going too, colleges have rec classes that are free to students, tuitions max out at 12 units so any other rec classes can be taken. Gyms to play in, swimming pools, events...
Of course the advantage wears off as you get older but that is not a good reason to not require a degree. One thing you learn in college is that no one has time for anything. It is called time management. There are always excuses and people have priorities.
Last I looked PA had a associate degree requirement, and no experience counts until after you earn the degree and pass the FS exam.
Duane Frymire, post: 352084, member: 110 wrote: Last I looked PA had a associate degree requirement, and no experience counts until after you earn the degree and pass the FS exam.
Many licensing jurisdictions have laws that state that experience can't count until after graduation. Even in California for the professional engineer applicants, if the applicant requests a degree to count towards the overall work experience, all work claimed must be after the date of graduation to qualify. And California doesn't require a degree!
Personally, I believe these statutes are practically contradictory in nature and don't like it. The laws for the land surveyor don't state this same criteria. Both sets of laws however allow for some credit for non-qualifying engineering or surveying degrees, including associate.
I'm a firm believer that not everyone takes the "traditional" route of going straight to college right out of high school, graduating, and then working. Life gets in the way sometimes and for those that obtain a degree after starting a career or over a longer period of time (part time or evenings while working) should have the same opportunities. Its the education that is important, not when it is obtained.
Ric Moore, post: 352158, member: 731 wrote: Many licensing jurisdictions have laws that state that experience can't count until after graduation. Even in California for the professional engineer applicants, if the applicant requests a degree to count towards the overall work experience, all work claimed must be after the date of graduation to qualify. And California doesn't require a degree!
Personally, I believe these statutes are practically contradictory in nature and don't like it. The laws for the land surveyor don't state this same criteria. Both sets of laws however allow for some credit for non-qualifying engineering or surveying degrees, including associate.
I'm a firm believer that not everyone takes the "traditional" route of going straight to college right out of high school, graduating, and then working. Life gets in the way sometimes and for those that obtain a degree after starting a career or over a longer period of time (part time or evenings while working) should have the same opportunities. Its the education that is important, not when it is obtained.
I totally agree Ric.
I am a good example: I had 10 years of Party Chief and office experience before I went back to school and got a degree in surveying. I took and passed the LSIT in my sophomore year. Then applied to take the LS in Idaho upon graduating. I was turned down because my experience came prior to passing the LSIT. So I had a BS in surveying, 10 years of experience, LSIT, and I couldn't sit for the test because they were in the wrong order! Luckily, I appealed and was allowed to sit for the examination.
Non-traditional Ed
Exactly my point Ed. Didn't realize you encountered that. Based on the timing of when that occurred I can see how that would have happened though. Idaho had a very good Executive Director for a long time (and also has a good one now) but staff and board members are mandated to comply with the same laws that applicants are.
My background is similar to yours Ed. I got about half of my degree going to school off and on between working in MI, took off several years and then went back and completed my degree at OIT with about 10 years of experience behind me. I applied to take the LS exam in OR and was approved on experience and was licensed several months before graduation. Maybe it's a good thing that I didn't wait a year to apply based upon a degree with experience.
It makes no sense to me that if a state will approve an application based on experience alone, how they can rationalize that all of the experience that would have counted toward an application based only on experience would become useless once someone earns a degree.
eapls2708, post: 352338, member: 589 wrote: My background is similar to yours Ed. I got about half of my degree going to school off and on between working in MI, took off several years and then went back and completed my degree at OIT with about 10 years of experience behind me. I applied to take the LS exam in OR and was approved on experience and was licensed several months before graduation. Maybe it's a good thing that I didn't wait a year to apply based upon a degree with experience.
It makes no sense to me that if a state will approve an application based on experience alone, how they can rationalize that all of the experience that would have counted toward an application based only on experience would become useless once someone earns a degree.
Another excellent example for why the traditional route shouldn't always be the only route.
To help with your understanding of that rationale Evan, the "experience must be gained after graduation" criteria for engineer applicants in California only applies if the applicant requests credit for the degree towards the overall experience requirement. Sometimes the laws represent an outdated manner of thinking which is precisely why this discussion is pertinent.
From what I know about the Oregon requirements (at the time - recently revised) if you would have waited until after graduation and requested educational credit, you may had encountered the same situation as Ed did in Idaho. I know of several licensed land surveyors in California that cannot qualify in Oregon...yet...because of minimum age requirements and the increased work experience for those not claiming educational credit.
I luckily did not run into this. NH does not specify that experience must be post degree. I, like others who have posted here, went back to school after surveying for 6 years and having already obtained my SIT, took the licensing exam 2 months before I graduated, and was licensed a month out of school. I had 8 years experience, and NH does not require a degree.
That being said, I would not be opposed to the states I am licensed in requiring a two year degree at a minimum. I think that most would agree that the majority of folks surveying "found" the profession, and did not go to college at 18 with the desire to be a surveyor. It was daunting enough to go back to school working full time with two small kids for two years, let alone four.
Paul D, post: 352350, member: 323 wrote: I luckily did not run into this. NH does not specify that experience must be post degree. I, like others who have posted here, went back to school after surveying for 6 years and having already obtained my SIT, took the licensing exam 2 months before I graduated, and was licensed a month out of school. I had 8 years experience, and NH does not require a degree.
That being said, I would not be opposed to the states I am licensed in requiring a two year degree at a minimum. I think that most would agree that the majority of folks surveying "found" the profession, and did not go to college at 18 with the desire to be a surveyor. It was daunting enough to go back to school working full time with two small kids for two years, let alone four.
Yeah, I get that. I remember studying for my LSIT in the evenings and weekends while a one year old was running around he house and my wife was expecting the second one.
There are some states that have a "tiered" system which I think works very well. Ex. BS degree plus 4 years experience; AS degree plus 6 years experience; no education and 8 years experience.
Ric Moore, post: 352359, member: 731 wrote: .......There are some states that have a "tiered" system which I think works very well. Ex. BS degree plus 4 years experience; AS degree plus 6 years experience; no education and 8 years experience.
I really like this system Ric. It maintains a path to licensure for the applicant that doesn't hold a degree. I think that those experience requirements are about right too. A BS and four years seems reasonable.
I took the nationals in 2000 based on experience. While I see the changes in our model making that path narow, I'm not at all convinced it should close...
Hard to believe, but you can sit for the Bar exam based upon "reading the law" under the tutelage of an attorney, and the recommendation of others. Harder still to imagine passing the three day testing when JD candidates struggle ...
Warren Smith, post: 352364, member: 9900 wrote: Hard to believe, but you can sit for the Bar exam based upon "reading the law" under the tutelage of an attorney, and the recommendation of others. Harder still to imagine passing the three day testing when JD candidates struggle ...
Starting in the late 70s, I read everything I could find on surveying, cartography and navigation. Except for a few short breaks I've kept the habit of reading or writing an hour a day since then. I passed the nationals with one survey law class and no math after my sophomore year of high school.
This isn't a 'yeah look at me', it's just to illustrate that experience can equal or surpass education....
Warren Smith, post: 352364, member: 9900 wrote: Hard to believe, but you can sit for the Bar exam based upon "reading the law" under the tutelage of an attorney, and the recommendation of others. Harder still to imagine passing the three day testing when JD candidates struggle ...
Hard to believe because it's hardly true. Only theoretically true in 5 or 6 states anymore, and something like 0.07% of takers, of which less than 30% pass compared to about 75% of those who went to law school.
Many more without a surveying degree take the FS exam, but pass rates show something similar to above. And in fact, those with an Engineering degree instead of a surveying degree are not doing so well anymore either. This could be due to less surveying courses in engineering programs than there used to be or could just reflect the test is getting more surveying specific.
I went back to school after working a number of years, kids, bills, 100 plus hour weeks as well. But times are changing. I wouldn't tell anyone they could get into surveying today without a degree and expect to become licensed, although I think that path should probably remain for awhile. Unless you are involved in a family business, the chances of getting the learning you need out of the experience are getting slimmer. And the tests are becoming more difficult for those without a surveying specific formal education of some kind. Yes, in the law you could be one of 16 people out of 85,000 that read for the law and pass the bar in any given year; and in surveying you might be 1 of 30 out of 5,000 to pass the FS and be able to progress and have a 50% chance of passing the PS. But it's not really going to be the most common path that it used to be in surveying; and law and engineering and even medicine if you go back far enough.
Surveyors love the past and history, but clinging to it in the education debate is hurting the profession for those entering, which is one reason so few are entering.
I am very thankful and fortunate to work for the little survey company I work for. I get to have my hand in the "the works", field, office, client interaction, and it is great. I would love to take over our business as my two bosses would like to retire in a few years, however I do not have 4 years under my belt, I have 2. So many of you on this board have said that you can obtain a 4 year degree if that is what you really want. What I REALLY want is to be able to practice surveying on the professional level in the little town I work and grew up in taking care of our clientele in the future. Retrace section lines, cut line, stake multi-million dollar homes, do the small surveys on the cheap because the family really needs one. I don't really care about the degree, I care about the profession. Is getting a 4 year degree realistic for me personally in a few years, not really but it is definitely possible with a substantial amount of sacrifice and $$$. This business is a passion of mine and maybe it's the hopeless romantic in me that would like to see a path to becoming a licensed professional with an alternate course, such as a two-Year degree, field and office experience on top of it, and the knowledge to pass the exam. If you can pass the exam then obviously you know as much as the guy who just spent 75K on a Geomatics degree. There isn't enough money in this business to warrant the same requirements as becoming a doctor or lawyer, if there were we probably wouldn't be surveyors. It is most definitely without question, a profession, and in it's uniqueness those who have the drive, competency, and wherewithal that a great surveyor requires should not be completely denied a license due to life's circumstances. If going into heavy debt and sacrificing years of my life is going to be required then maybe I'll just stick to digging holes, and be happy with that. Having a cap with my own number on it sure would be cool though.
McCracker, post: 352932, member: 9299 wrote: I am very thankful and fortunate to work for the little survey company I work for. I get to have my hand in the "the works", field, office, client interaction, and it is great. I would love to take over our business as my two bosses would like to retire in a few years, however I do not have 4 years under my belt, I have 2. So many of you on this board have said that you can obtain a 4 year degree if that is what you really want. What I REALLY want is to be able to practice surveying on the professional level in the little town I work and grew up in taking care of our clientele in the future. Retrace section lines, cut line, stake multi-million dollar homes, do the small surveys on the cheap because the family really needs one. I don't really care about the degree, I care about the profession. Is getting a 4 year degree realistic for me personally in a few years, not really but it is definitely possible with a substantial amount of sacrifice and $$$. This business is a passion of mine and maybe it's the hopeless romantic in me that would like to see a path to becoming a licensed professional with an alternate course, such as a two-Year degree, field and office experience on top of it, and the knowledge to pass the exam. If you can pass the exam then obviously you know as much as the guy who just spent 75K on a Geomatics degree. There isn't enough money in this business to warrant the same requirements as becoming a doctor or lawyer, if there were we probably wouldn't be surveyors. It is most definitely without question, a profession, and in it's uniqueness those who have the drive, competency, and wherewithal that a great surveyor requires should not be completely denied a license due to life's circumstances. If going into heavy debt and sacrificing years of my life is going to be required then maybe I'll just stick to digging holes, and be happy with that. Having a cap with my own number on it sure would be cool though.
Your comments and passion for the profession are so cool. Thanks for sharing. Good luck to reaching your goal.
If you can pass the exam then obviously you know as much as the guy who just spent 75K on a Geomatics degree. There isn't enough money in this business to warrant the same requirements as becoming a doctor or lawyer, if there were we probably wouldn't be surveyors.
Ha ha, I don't know about you but if I could make the same money as a doctor or an attorney while doing surveying (especially a small business in a small town) I would definitely choose the life of a surveyor first!
It is amazing how passionate Land Surveyors are about their work. It is part of the reason I got into this profession, some of the respected professionals have been very influential on my career progression. Having a mentor to guide your experience is quite possibly the most important aspect of becoming a great land surveyor.
I do think there is a large gap between what most Land Surveyors think of a college land survey program and what the actual issues are. A 4 year program means a lot more that graduating "workers" that think they know everything upon graduation. From my experience I have never met a graduate that thinks they know everything about surveying.
No one thinks that education replaces experience, it does not take a college degree to figure that one out. It is not a part of my argument for degree requirements. Or anyone else's? A lot of people make it sound like experience is something that only applies to a few people. I am of the opinion that most people can learn how to do anything given some time to practice it. It has more to do with a desire to do it in the first place. Some just have an easier time at it than others.
There is no way to move to a mandatory degree without upsetting those that are right now working towards a license. There are those people that because of life or financial circumstances will not be able to get a degree, but that is always the case. That is true with many things in life. My argument is not about the people going for licensure right now , but for those 30... 50... 100+ years from now? How many people care about the future of the profession?
People argue that there are not enough boundary classes included in a 4 year degree? They are not available because there are not enough students in them! Many boundary techniques can be taught in college. It is a sorry state of the profession in my opinion. Meanwhile there are thousands and thousands of students getting GIS degrees. The same GIS profession that surveyor's begrudgingly talk about causing boundary problems? To quote land surveyors out there, "the Land survey profession missed that boat". And I don't know about you but I use google earth (a GIS) almost every day. Used correctly it is a tremendous tool.
Lets not compare a Land Survey degree to a medical doctor or law degree in terms of time and money. Doctors and lawyers typically stay in college for eight years, depending on their desired career path. Even a land survey engineering degree does not cost as much money or time as either of those. Don't doctors make a good living because of the regulation of the profession? Whether it is liked or not? There are many people in the medical profession that make a great living and never want to become a MD, or surgeon. The Land survey Profession should be much like that. There should be Boundary Surveying, Construction Surveying, GIS Surveying, Geodesy Surveying degrees. Those graduates should be going into everything from boundary to law and land planning. If Land Surveyor graduates moved into more positions than boundary surveying then there might be fewer times that a civil engineer or real estate agent tells you that your legal description should only cost 400 dollars. This all starts from 4 year land survey degrees.
I my opinion a "tiered" system should have been implemented a long time ago in California and should have led to more requirements already.
McCracker, post: 352932, member: 9299 wrote: [1] If you can pass the exam then obviously you know as much as the guy who just spent 75K on a Geomatics degree.
[2] There isn't enough money in this business to warrant the same requirements as becoming a doctor or lawyer, if there were we probably wouldn't be surveyors.
I would question item one quoted above. Do we not already have a large variety of capabilities represented in the profession from many people who have already passed the same exams. I do not mean in terms of ethical or professional conduct. It is very apparent in dealing with surveyors that each of them have different areas of strengths and weaknesses. Without data to look at, the most that could be said of passing the exam is that you knew at least minimally enough to pass the exam. It is entirely possible that you knew more or less than the person with the degree (in the aspects tested by the exam). That does raise a very interesting question to look into. Perhaps NCEES has already crunched the numbers comparing degreed/non-degreed test passers' scores.
Unfortunately, I have to mostly agree with you on item two above. In many areas, it is necessary for a new surveying graduate to relocate in order to make their degree financially worthwhile. That is more to do with many current surveyors lack of valuing their services provided (or devaluing their employees contribution to the company). That problem will certainly not be changed with no degree requirement.
If universities aren't out to just make money, maybe it would be a good system to have a surveyor or any other group to be able to test out of a certain number of courses for a minimal charge. The philosophy of getting a degree could be reexamined.
Same with a lot of survey curricula. Getting help and education where you need it, and being able to prove some of your lifetime education from the ole' school of hard knocks. "Testing out" of statistics might actually be a bigger deal than answering two questions on the LSI Exam.
Sorry, just some random thoughts on the topic.
@duane-frymire I just got my PA license this year with no degree of any type.
@mattyoclock Excellent, congratulations!