question

So I assume you took the FS test and are trying to get ready for the retaking and better prepared. If that is the case. Take the test results and see what categories you did well in and which you did not. Put some time into staying fresh on what you did well in so you don’t lose that. Then put the majority of the time into where you struggled. When you are preparing for the computations. Don’t just work through them in that prep book. Take each type of problem and understand it. The test is not only can you be give say a horizontal curve to compute but can you be given very little information and have to solve something else before getting to the horizontal curve. Try and relate each type of problem to something you would do in the real world without a data collector. So what the data collector is doing. Here is an example. If you are at station 0+00 and sited station 1+50 that was 4 ft right and the bearing was N30E what is the azimuth and distance of the alignment. That is not a test question it’s a problem that you can use a right triangle to solve opposite over adjacent. Pythagorean theorem and then angles from bearing to azimuth. Take each problem and sketch it out get that visual in your head as you study and prepare. Take any horizontal curves draw it out and solve for every part. Assign that same curve a coordinate at some point and a bearing. Then compute the coordinates at all other main points PC PT Radius point PI. Solve all the angles. Delta delta/2 understanding the math itself in academic form is only a portion of the problem. Understand how to apply it and which to any problem is the other part. You got this. Get a scale a protractor and graph paper and sketch as close to scale as you can and angles as you can. Read the questions thoroughly. They may give you more information than is necessary to answer a question. Read twice work once lol. Just kidding. But pay attention to what they ask. If you are reading and the first thing jumps into your head and said they want me to solve a horizontal curve they are given me radius and length of curve. Pause keep reading. Make for sure that’s what they are asking.

About half way down the NCEES page is a section on exam specifications. The only suggestion I have is to compare the topics in the exam specifications with the topics in the review books and see if they seem to align.

A coworker just passed the FS on his third try (no college path to licensure) and attributed his success to an online FS prep course. I don't remember which one but I think it only cost around $200.

I've heard that they've scaled back on the math problems relating to curves and coordinate geometry and have include more GNSS questions pertaining to the relationship between state plane coordinates, the ellipsoid and geoid.

Good luck

There were several ground to grid. Also basic questions on the RTK language terminology.

The above NCEES has a cheap pdf practice exam. Now take each problem type they give you on that practice exam and go through the problems in the book you have. Like mentioned above. They are not exactly the same. You get a question on computing area that may have an arc. Work several different ones with different given information. Study your basic safety info. Basic GIS terminology. Basic business questions. Each section listed in the NCEES website gives a break down of the categories. That is your study outline. It would also be very good if you read that booklet that NCEES gives with all the what is allowed it has all the formulas in it. There is valuable information in that it’s also at least for my exam in digital form while taking the exam. You should read over it enough to have knowledge of where information is. Go and watch a few old videos that Dave Doyle did about Datum’s both the horizontal and the vertical datum’s. They can be found on NGS website under training past classes or something like that. There are some basic questions that those videos will help with. Don’t get into the weeds. Just watch them take some notes watch them again. Ask questions from your LS or here about that. There is way more questions than just math. If I missed one thing in being prepared it was matrix equations. I probably spent more time on those than any other problem. It had been years since I had actually worked one. You need to review definitions surveying terms. These are questions that you either know or do not. Remember you need to understand that you are given credit for what you answer correctly. Prepare. I say you should at minimum spend a hour or so working through problems until know matter what you can solve any problem like that in less than 2 minutes. When you can work through any basic problem like that given and know the other information then you are ready. 1 hr minimum every evening. Maybe more on weekends. Two weeks before you take the exam. Only brush up keep it fresh. No pounding away. Train yourself those last 2 weeks on what time you need to get up and such. Sleep rest. Last week I didn’t even crack a book. If I didn’t know it by then I was out of luck. You need to know what is acceptable and not at testing center. I could only bring in my calculator. No extra batteries no extra calculator not even the case for the calculator or for my eye glasses. No hat nothing in my pockets no wallet only my ID. Keys wallet hat all of that was placed in a locker. I was not prepared at the time to have to wear a mask. It almost cost me the exam day. My glasses kept fogging up lol. Preparing for the atmosphere of the test is just as important as the knowledge. That way you are mentally prepared and not in defense mode.

I’ve heard that they’ve scaled back on the math problems relating to curves and coordinate geometry...

See now this kind of thing irritates me. I finished a 4-year program in 2017 and everywhere I have worked since then I've had at least 1 unlicensed coworker with 15 or 20 or 25 years of experience who whined about not being able to get licensed because they failed to meet the education requirements.

I could almost see where these guys were coming from if I thought they had a snowball chance of hell of executing a simple trig function using a pair of coordinates, but the simple fact is 99.9% of them would be a deer in headlights if put in that situation. Even though we might not do that much math manually now a days I don't think it does the profession any good to move away from the fundamentals that the entire thing is based on.

"... it’s to many problems I’m planning to do half the book then take the test again. is that a good strategy or should I just do the whole book ? ....."

If it's that hard you aren't ready for the test. Take the hint. What do you hope to gain by setting yourself up for failure?

I am a non degreed PLS, you'll never see my saying that I agree with the degree requirement but I will agree with you that if you have been surveying for 10 or 15 years, you should have a strong grasp on the mathematics and be able to calculate manually with a non programmed calculator.

I qualified to sit for the exam with 10 years of progressive experience and passed the FS, PP and state specific exams and studied just about every book that our fellow professionals recommend to those taking the exam. I also had some great mentors who would hand me a calculator and plan sheet to see if I came up with the same results as they did and then taught me how to ally it in the real world. I honestly believe that coming up the way that I did made me more rounded in the long run.

I have hired degreed surveyors who were completely stuck on what their professors had to say in a generalized way, most of whom, when they were shown the hows and whys I made my decisions, they couldn't grasp it. I also have a survey tech that came to me about six years ago as a survey drafter. I worked him into simple calcs and progressively increased his exposure as his skill set grew. He is now to the point where he can solve some pretty complex boundary situations, is able to apply what he has learned with experience and is able to clearly communicate his thought process. The vast majority of time, I agree but occasionally have to point out logic that he missed and he learns from that. For the past two or three years he has been working full time while working part time on his degree and I can guarantee you that he will be ready for the exam before he earns his degree.

...if you have been surveying for 10 or 15 years, you should have a strong grasp on the mathematics and be able to calculate manually with a non programmed calculator.

There is not much in the normal course of work of the typical modern surveyor that would require being able to manually calculate anything. That said, it is something that should be done occasionally for checks of plans, etc.

I can count on my hand the number of times it was required for me to move forward on a process.

...it’s to many problems I’m planning to do half the book then take the test again. is that a good strategy?? or should I just do the whole book ? the book is for both LSIT and PS...

Yeah, please do only the easy problems...and take the test a lot of times.

Honestly, nothing in what you said in your post makes me want you as a fellow professional. If you don't want to learn the profession, then I would encourage you not to study at all before taking the test.

I see where you are coming from and call me old school if you will, but it is my belief that nobody should be running any software routine if they don't have a grasp of the number crunching going on behind the scene. If you put a data collector in my hand right now, could I run it? Not without training in the routines and which buttons to push. Not that it is generally employed these days, minus GPS data flow, if you put an old school RPN scientific calculator in my hand, I have the ability to calculate an independent check of a suspicious solution derived from the magic black box.

If you remove the logic of having to manually calculate, that means that you assert that advanced mathematics in the degree program are not necessary.

I one hundred percent agree. That it’s not the degree. The degree gets you a good basis. I know one thing that should be done is that every LS in my opinion should spend some time in the field. I don’t say that those who worked there way up from a cad background are not good surveyors. But let’s be honest. They don’t see the big picture often. When I am retracing a line on the ground I have a unique ability to quickly understand why when I am going up some nasty terrain and that survey was done in chains why that math or published distance may not match what I measured today. And I always walk the lines even when all corners are GPS able. I look at the oldest dates I can in which it was done. I look for that chopped line that has regrown thicker at the base of holly trees the blazed tree that old fence line that is barely visible. You just cannot get that only in front of the computer. Nor have an appreciation of how they did as good as they did. I am all about math and for sure. Applying it is an art form. Our technology today robs some of doing things like house topping to stay on a line to get around and abject or bucking or wiggling in. The art of applying sound math to a situation. I am thankful that you are one that mentors your folks to doing that stuff. We most definitely need more like you doing those things. The assembly line approach because of technology doesn’t help those who truly have a desire and the grit to move ahead. Now days the ones that get ahead mostly are ones that have a degree. They learn a process they learn how to pass a test. And until they set the wrong pin cushion with the wrong old crusty surveyor coming behind them so they get a call. It’s not good. Just helped a friend with some static issues. He is old school and found all the right corners evidence. Just was ha troubleshooting the baselines. He was not worried one bit about this one corner that was set for many years distance not matching by a foot or so. It has been accepted by many until some body decided to set another a foot away. Nasty swampy area. Yeah. That old cris oak post been there since original. But a new shiny rebar had to be set. By someone. Which changed more than one line obviously.

A little rough but very good point. I studied and then restudied every book I could get my hand on for hours a day for four years and used a highlighter on what I thought was important.

I don't know if things are different these days when it comes to test content, when I passed my exam back in the early 90's, no two people sitting in the room had the same exam. When I sat, a former PC of mine sat two or three seats down from me and when we had breaks, we left the room and compared questions, both of us had questions that the other did not.

I don't know that there is any state that would allow somebody to become licensed without field experience. My guy is out in the field working with the crews as often as possible to get the experience of jobs progressing from start to finish.

See now this kind of thing irritates me. I finished a 4-year program in 2017 and everywhere I have worked since then I’ve had at least 1 unlicensed coworker with 15 or 20 or 25 years of experience who whined about not being able to get licensed because they failed to meet the education requirements.
I could almost see where these guys were coming from if I thought they had a snowball chance of hell of executing a simple trig function using a pair of coordinates, but the simple fact is 99.9% of them would be a deer in headlights if put in that situation. Even though we might not do that much math manually now a days I don’t think it does the profession any good to move away from the fundamentals that the entire thing is based on.

@BStrand

Amen. There's a big big difference between pushing the buttons and understanding what happens when the buttons are pushed.

If someone really wants that stamp, there are plenty of avenues available in order to get there. It might not be easy, but professional licensure is supposed to be rigorous. And it should absolutely require knowledge of the fundamentals. "Putting your time in" is a terrible yardstick for professional practice.

In any case, licensure doesn't have to be the end-all, be-all, in the same way that not everyone should end up a CEO, or even in the C-suite, or even in middle management, and that's perfectly OK. I work with unlicensed folks who I wouldn't trade for all the licensees in my state.

These days they can get paid pretty well too; in recent years, the industry has made some serious strides in upping the salaries of skilled technicians and para-professionals. I'm hopeful that the trend continues.