My path was similar to that of Zoidberg. I started on day one holding an umbrella over the equipment with no knowledge of surveying. The PLS I worked with couldn't grasp CAD so I handled that end while he told me what he wanted and answered what seemed like a million questions from as to why we were doing what we were. I took the FS about 8 years later and the PS and State five years later passing all on the first shot. It is more about the individual willingness and desire to learn that prepares them for the test.
SPMPLS, post: 409770, member: 11785 wrote: I was involved with grading the California State specific exam for several years, and worked on the development team that put together the last exam before computer based testing was implemented. The CA State specific has historically low passage rates (single digit in some years). However, based on my experiences, I believe a significant number of examinees were not actually qualified or ready to sit for the exam. That reflects a problem with other licensees who signed for them as references. Had the candidate pool only been composed of those who were ready and able, I believe the pass rate would have been much closer to 50%. Just my guess, but higher than what the record shows.
I was involved with the grading and development of CA exam at the same time and totally concur with this assessment. I believe that the bar should be much higher to sit for the exam. I also believe that after three failed attempts, you should have to show some major amount of effort before re-taking the exam.
