I was recently given an interesting paper about the geodesy crisis in the US. I have traveled to quite a few FIG working weeks and FIG congresses around the world, and I am always impressed to see the level of geodesy education and also survey education in other countries, especially in Europe. I consider myself a geodesist, I was a CE but I majored in geodesy and took quite a few graduate level courses, but I only have a BS in CE. I guess that makes me a geodetic engineer. I also took a few geodesy courses after graduation but never completed a masters degree. When I graduated from Purdue, I applied to what was then DMA (now NGA). I actually wanted to go to work at the Inter-American Geodetic Survey (IAGS) but that was right about the time it was being dissolved. They first gave me a rating as a cartographer, and about a year later as a geodesist, but by then I was entrenched in the private sector.?ÿ
I think we also have a crisis in the education of surveyors as well. The beginning of the problem, as I see it, is when the civil engineers and surveyors separated. In many other countries, surveying is part of civil engineering. I realize that land surveying (i.e. cadastral or boundary) is something that is different than engineering surveying, and is often best learned on the job with a good mentor, but the undergraduate courses could still be part of a CE curriculum.?ÿ
As this paper points out, we are falling behind, especially the Chinese.?ÿ
John - good thoughts for discussion.?ÿ What happened - don't see engineers on rushmore or have many monuments named after them.?ÿ The Chinese picked up where the Japanese left off - they both copied US initialized innovation and went on the better us.?ÿ Kids in other countries want to learn and work hard to achieve skills to advance - many kids in the US strive to learn how to deviate funding to their pockets without creating value.?ÿ I still think we have the best institutions of higher learning that turn out the brightest students, many who go back home to other countries.
Just look at the names of professors and TA's at a university. When I was there I could pronounce the majority of the names. Now not so, at least in technical areas.?ÿ US kids are either not prepared for or not interested in that route, or both.
Excellent paper, well-written and to the point. The authors seem to have no illusions about what they're up against.
All U.S. academics understand that one of the biggest challenges of teaching the present generation is that it has a much shorter attention span than had students 25 years ago. This means that the video training courses must be of very high quality, unusually compelling, up-to-date and relevant.
Ouch. Not going to disagree with the assessment. I'm not sure it's solved by retrofitting highly technical subject matter into formats intended to capture short attention spans.
Then again, there were no advanced or graduate-level geodesy courses available when I finished my bachelor's, so I'd welcome any additional high-caliber geodesy training videos. Heck I just found out that my old geodesy textbook isn't even in print any more.
Kids in other countries want to learn and work hard to achieve skills to advance - many kids in the US strive to learn how to deviate funding to their pockets without creating value.
I'd say that this is only half the problem. The other half is a general disdain for learning/knowledge for its own sake, plus a general suspicion of formal education, public service and the public sector. It's all about the $$$.
Yes, looking in the wrong places makes finding the prize difficult. Surveyors have tended to be overlooked.
?ÿInstead of politicos or engineers, surveyors have been astronomers, mathematicians, philosophers, and imaginative types who conceived ways to divide the earth (geo-desy).
From Eratosthenes, and Euclid to Gausse, and Cassini, Newton, Brahe to Mason, Dixon and Ellicott and Banneker, and not to miss Hassler, outliers all.
The best qualities don't fit well in an on-line form.
Good luck! We all need it.
@bill93?ÿ
You mean like: Urho Uotila, Weikko Heiskanen, or Reino Hirvonen from the heyday of Geodesy at The Ohio State University. Or more currently, Dorothy Grejner-Brzezinska?
?ÿ
What would happen to survey licensing if some specific number of credits in basic geodesy and advanced geodesy were to be required in order to sit for the examination??ÿ Where would the wanna-be candidates find those courses in their home States??ÿ How many would have the calculus/physics levels required to even be allowed in the advanced classes?
While an argument can be made that we need ??fewer but better geodesists? the decline in geodetic capability in the US is serious. I am glad to see this paper. I hope it gets a wide audience.
On the specific issue of how agencies, like the US NGS, are small components of large entities like NOAA with priorities more oceanic and atmospheric, I recollect an Under Secretary giving what I assume was intended to be a ??pep talk.? She started with acknowledging the good work of the USGS.
I resist providing further anecdotes.?ÿ
?ÿ
You don't have to know calculus to see what geodesy means for the average surveyor. If every surveyor and equipment designer (software folks I'm looking at you) understood the concepts of geoids and map projections that would go 90% of the way to eliminating many confusions we see discussed here..?ÿ
2014 - Land Surveyor retraces much of Section 23. He obtained an OPUS position on the east quarter section corner. His survey is in grid bearings and distances so easy to compute coordinates.
Last week with an OPUS solution for my base near the center of Section 22 I go to stakeout the 2014 coordinate for the southwest of 23/southeast of 22. It tells me to move 1 tenth of a foot.
I find that amazing.
I will say that while Wolf & Ghilani is one of my favorite books, the section on gravity is crap.
As Einstein said, everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. They mix high school equations (constant gravity vs height) with something closer to true, and the derivation cannot be followed.
You don't go away with a good feel for it.
You don't have to know calculus to see what geodesy means for the average surveyor. If every surveyor and equipment designer (software folks I'm looking at you) understood the concepts of geoids and map projections that would go 90% of the way to eliminating many confusions we see discussed here..?ÿ
Fully agree with this. There are a ton of resources out there (the NGS science and education section is a treasure trove) that allow pretty much anyone to get a basic grasp of geodesy and map projections.
What would happen to survey licensing if some specific number of credits in basic geodesy and advanced geodesy were to be required in order to sit for the examination??ÿ Where would the wanna-be candidates find those courses in their home States??ÿ How many would have the calculus/physics levels required to even be allowed in the advanced classes?
?ÿIs it really asking too much for folks going into a technical, math-heavy profession like geomatics to pass Calculus I? I mean, it's a first-year college course. I took it in high school, probably a third of my graduating class did too. To understand EDMs and dual-frequency GNSS positioning, Physics I (plus some of that calculus) really helps. Linear Algebra and Statistics 101 is probably more critical in preparation for data analysis and adjustment.
All of those courses can be found in 95% of universities these days, since they serve a multitude of degree programs. All it takes to add geodesy (and geomatics) courses is for professional organizations and private- and public-sector firms to lobby for and support educational development.
As far as geodesy goes, I would think that the national defense angle would help the campaign to re-energize that sector.
I would absolutely jump back in and take some more geodesy courses, especially if there were some certifications to be gained from it.
What would happen to survey licensing if some specific number of credits in basic geodesy and advanced geodesy were to be required in order to sit for the examination??ÿ
Survey Licensing exists for boundary determination. If you can show me how a knowledge of geodesy affects boundary determination then we can talk about testing for it to become licensed. The geodesists at NGS, some of the smartest people in the world on this subject, are (mostly) not licensed to practice boundary surveying.?ÿ?ÿ
?ÿIs it really asking too much for folks going into a technical, math-heavy profession like geomatics to pass Calculus I? I mean, it's a first-year college course. I took it in high school, probably a third of my graduating class did too. To understand EDMs and dual-frequency GNSS positioning, Physics I (plus some of that calculus) really helps. Linear Algebra and Statistics 101 is probably more critical in preparation for data analysis and adjustment.
My surveying degree included papers both calculus and geodesy.
I never really had a handle on calculus until my final year. Then I discover it actually has some practical application, which for me makes it far easier to understand.
I really enjoyed Geodesy, my best subject by far.
I don't see how you could have a true degree level course without them.
What would happen to survey licensing if some specific number of credits in basic geodesy and advanced geodesy were to be required in order to sit for the examination??ÿ
Survey Licensing exists for boundary determination. If you can show me how a knowledge of geodesy affects boundary determination then we can talk about testing for it to become licensed. The geodesists at NGS, some of the smartest people in the world on this subject, are (mostly) not licensed to practice boundary surveying.?ÿ?ÿ
I'd say that an understanding of geodesy is required of licensed surveyors, since recording statutes typically cover control schemes, datum tags, epoch dates, etc., and define projected coordinate systems (whose underlying geodetic realizations change over time) as official horizontal control for states. If it's not necessary, why does the PS exam (inadequately, to be sure) cover it?
As professional and ethical standards forbid practicing outside our areas of expertise, I don't see how a surveyor without a solid grasp of geodesy and map projections can operate in a state plane coordinate system - or utilize GNSS - for a survey. At that point the surveyor is what we love to complain about most: a button-pusher.
