This morning I completed an NSPS CST Survey.
14. Do you think it is necessary to have a 2-year degree, 4-year degree or no degree to to become a Licensed
Surveyor? @ 4-Year
Comments to 14: We need licensed surveyors to have a solid background in math, computer science, physics, and the legal principles
of surveying. On-the-job training, by itself, is no longer sufficient.
I refer to "Big Data Is Reinventing Construction Surveying" posted by MNichols on October 19th, this website, as one of the reasons for my comment. Surveying is getting more and more technical everyday. I'm only a field dog, but I'm always willing to learn new things.
Or...
The critical function of boundary location requires those entering the profession to have enough education to detect the bullcrap being taught by many older surveyors.
At a minimum prosepective licensees need courses in boundary law, legal research, surveying systems, ethics, logic and communication. These should be part of or in addition to a bachelors program.
I think being licensed is complex enough to make it worthy of a 4-year degree but... a 4-year degree is no longer worth what schools are charging for it.
My dad would tell me back when he went to school your parents could cut a check for it and it didn't bankrupt anyone.?ÿ Now-a-days you're in debt for years and that's if your degree even pays.
So I guess my answer is yes but the education system ruins it.
I think that formal education is a very good thing for surveyors. But I do not think that the traditional 4 year degree thing is the right way to do it. And that is probably true for a lot of professions. I'd like to see a work-study arrangement where, after a couple weeks classroom/lab introduction to some basic survey skills like setting up an instrument, plumbing the rod, operating the Schonstedt, setting hubs, etc., the student goes to work for an actual, working surveyor on actual jobs, taking classes on nights and weekends, or maybe a day or two a week. This requires that the schooling be decentralized, which is very possible with web delivered classes. The surveyor who came out of 4 years of such a program would not be so deeply in debt and a much more useful surveyor than what might come out of 4 years of on-campus classroom learning.
What I'm suggesting is close to the Great-Basin model. It remains for the state boards to give up the ABET accreditation jag. Or for ABET to get on-board.
I suggest you go to youtube and watch some of the many videos of survey school teachers and students demonstrating how to set up an instrument?ÿ(I link this one example. There are many. Some are worse. Few are better.)?ÿ ?ÿ
Oh, my.?ÿ Why would anyone set the legs into the ground before getting the height close to what was desired??ÿ
I know a prof who would blow a gasket at that video. This prof makes his students take the instrument off the tripod for ANY change of the tripod, even lengthening one leg a bit, and especially for stomping the leg into the ground.?ÿ There is a lot of iteration for them to get it centered.?ÿ A separate optical plummet tribrach would help him, but it is built into their instrument.?ÿ
I think he is a bit overcautious, and usually make two-handed adjustments of my tripod legs, one hand on the clamp and the other wrapped around the leg with the thumb pushing on the top end of the lower part.?ÿ That permits the routine a) use the leveling screws to point the plummet at the ground point b) level using the legs c) fine level with the screws d) slide the instrument on the tripod head for final centering.
The video doesn't show the optical plummet centered.
Straddling the leg?
Why do they care about the HI for measuring a horizontal angle??ÿ With no rod level, they would get better results shooting the base of the rod.?ÿ
But especially, why point to the same height on the rod when other stations? Don't you usually keep the instrument pointed at 0 vertical angle for stadia, if the terrain permits??ÿ That avoids one of the corrections.
And what's a tribby-ark ? ?????ÿ
