2008 was the perfect economic storm and is yet another reason that our profession lost a lot of people to unemployment and many companies did not survive the storm.
Yep, I had a surveying company and a web design company running side by side at that time. I miss surveying immensely, but the web design company took off like a rocket and I had no reason to go back to surveying.
Benefits and pay vary by area and state, I would think greatly. In Mississippi, it’s terrible and the best shot you have at decent pay is a supervisor position or self employment. Senior positions are very few and far between. I absolutely do not think the degree requirement helps long term moving forward. If someone just works for a company on a one man crew and is not mentored, I don’t think there is any way they pass national and state exams. Also, who is going to sign off on their experience? Most states require multiple licensees for references when they apply. In the engineering field, they can get a license via comity in many states and just pay a fee. In surveying, it’s not nearly that easy. I understand taking state specific examinations due to different requirements, procedures, and standards varying between states, but any experienced licensee in any state along with experience should be able to take a state specific exam and obtain a license in another state. For example, the state of Tennessee requires a licensed surveyor in another state to submit 2 plats that meet their standards and passing a state specific exam. The plats are required to be stamped, so you can submit plats from the state you are licensed in. They also want the plats modified to meet their standards and marked “for demonstration purposes”. Why does and experienced licensee need to submit plats when they obviously are able to produce them in their home state? In Mississippi, I had to submit plats to obtain a license already? After going through that process and having 14 years post licensure, should a profession not be able to bypass that step? I have a friend that got his TN license 5 years ago and didn’t have to submit plats, so that had been changed in recent years. It’s absolutely ridiculous that other states don’t respect licensees from other states, in many cases. Being an experienced licensee should mean a lot when seeking a license in another state. I will say kudos to TN for having a pathway without a 4 year degree, though. That’s better than other adjoining states.
Mr. Taylor,
I spent a few years reviewing applications. I can say with certainty there are people applying for comity here that should not practice anywhere. We asked for work samples, which I reviewed in light of the differences in Statutes. Most were decent work and demonstrated at least minimum competence. Some showed deficiencies warranting discussion or an interview. A small but significant minority revealed nothing short of gross incompetence. We were challenged to find a reasonable and legitimate way to help the applicant get where they needed to be or recommend denial.
It is absolutely reasonable to ask an applicant to provide samples of work if they are asking for a license based on that work. This is especially true as legislatures across the country are eliminating or reducing state exams. The Boards are tasked with protecting the public from us. They have to determine minimum competence using an ever shrinking tool box.
We have people practicing here as well that should not be anywhere. I guess it’s easy to see that step unnecessary when you practice in a manner to meet standards. I think a lot of my license and the work that I provide, but there are those who do not. I am glad they have a path for 2 year guys with experience and licensure. I can see where you would get a large fluctuation in quality of work. I have seen some work that was very questionable, at best.
What states are eliminating exams or requirements to become licensed? All of our adjoining states are becoming more stringent. I haven’t seen the opposite at all.
Nevada just dropped their test. Idaho universal licensure act prohibits a state law exam. Deregulation is gaining steam....
We are all in the business of training our replacement (whether we admit it or not). That training can come in many forms: self-guided, one-on-one, seminars, trade schools, apprenticeships, mentoring, online, dealer support, formal education and any combination of these. The purpose of training is employee development, sometimes called workforce development. When employees learn new things, our organizations can attempt new things with lower risk.
Training is also a risk management tool. Why do HR offices push sexual harassment training? To reduce the company's risk of sexual harassment actually occurring. Training, in all its forms, can help us prevent costly blunders.
At a fundamental level, states with higher education requirements have specified a distinct workforce development path toward licensure. The education is no guarantee of licensure; it is the first gate through which the future licensee must pass. Testing is the final gatekeeper for licensure. Since our states can make their own rules (and take differing paths), we have a patchwork of licensing laws.
In the 4-year degree states, it took one generation of surveyors to enact the education laws and at least another generation to begin implementing those laws. In my state, the planning process began in the late 1970s, and the law was enacted in 1998. Now in 2024, it appears (to me) that the educational opportunities have matured in my state - a generation later. Some states are farther ahead of mine, and others are behind mine in the transition. Major cultural changes like licensee education requirements take multiple decades to develop. During these transitions, it's common for many to feel left behind, excluded, or devalued.
I believe the intent of higher education requirements is to improve our profession and ultimately our service to the public. Just as physical strength training demands sacrifice, discipline, and clear vision of the goal, so too do our workforce development efforts demand change toward an improved future. We don't all agree on the method, or for that matter, what the desired goal looks like. However, we all know we must adapt to survive.
I offer all this not as a direct answer to the original poster’s questions but hopefully as helpful elements of a complex topic. It’s tempting to look at education requirements as either good or bad with no in-between positions. The sting of rejection by other states’ rules certainly doesn’t make this any easier. A longer range view toward the benefits to be reaped by our successors helps me creep back from the ledge and accept the difficulty of the transition.
Chris mentioned above about how most surveyors are going back to school part time after they've begun work and maybe even started a family. I wonder what the percentage is of actual traditional students coming out of high school and going straight to college for surveying. I considered myself semi-traditional since I went to college after high school, graduated with an AS in Sports Medicine but turned right around (long story) and went right back to the same school and graduated again with an AS in Surveying. I remember my class being made up of all traditional students except we had one State Trooper, another semi-traditional and one guy doing what Chris described above. This was 97-99. The game has changed a lot since then with the popularity of online schooling. When I moved to St. Louis upon graduation, I found out that I was a bit of a unicorn for the area. Almost all local surveyors looking to get licensed, were having to take 12 hours of night courses at a local community college. At that time, Missouri had 3 options: 4 year degree (12 survey hours), 2 year degree (12 survey hours) + experience, or 20 years experience with 12 survey hours. There wasn't a traditional pathway unless you went out of state. I knew of a few dual PELS that came out of SIU-Carbondale, which isn't too far, but it's now defunct. SIU-Edwardsville has just started up a fantastic survey program which is commutable for STL folks. Linn State Tech has emerged with a program but it's not a viable option for the non-traditional living in STL. I can't recall the last time I met a traditional college graduate fresh out of a land surveying school.
The degree 4-yr requirement was promoted heavily by those offering such degrees and made persuasive by a two-pronged campaign, 1) create the fear that without one, a person could not be recognized as a professional, and 2) the promise that having a 4-year degree will increase compensation.
The result is that frequently, a person licensed by degree and a little experience is ready to learn to learn about being a surveyor.
If the promotion had been thought out from the point of view of the future of surveying, the requirement would have been a master's degree plus a residency under a licensed mentor authorized to declare the novice ready to practice.
The degree trash talking has already become tiresome. What the profession really needs is for these fist-shaking dinosaurs to retire and go away.
What state are you in. I am very interested in the aspect of them accepting military experience. This is something that I have not seen in every state. As a matter of fact I heard from a friend recently that was given no credit period for his time surveying in the military. He was a CB. I told him that he should have taken his military experience and applied it towards a PE tract because he got some very good education and experience in design and such. I know personally my geodetic background has helped me tremendously in todays time of gps state plane etc. now I don’t believe for 1 second that alone qualifies me to be licensed. However I do believe it should count some towards credit. The big issue is the wording of qualifies as time under a LS. That means technically all the geodetic education and work was for nothing in regards to getting licensed in states that do not recognize it. Because it was not under the direct supervision of a licensed surveyor.
Here is an unpopular opinion or two.
First, I have a four year degree (Bachelor of Science) and I also attended graduate school. In my experience it was absolutely rewarding. If I had an opportunity I would gladly return to studies.
Second, I dislike being mentored. Obtaining knowledge from a mentor is hit or miss. The mentor may offer one opinion while an education gives you the skills to form your own.
Where I feel very fortunate is that I was able to get licensed based on my AAS degree and work experience because having gone back to school in my 30s, the prospect of another 2 years of school would have been a really tough pill to choke down. I'm not at all sure I could have pulled it off and I might be in a very different place today. As it was, going to school full time for 3+ years and having very little in the way of income during that time was really, really hard. If I'd had a family to support I'd probably be driving a forklift today. Having started out in the days of three man crews, that mentoring experience was immensely valuable and I truly believe that to produce a well rounded surveyor with some first hand knowledge of how surveys were performed in the past by the surveyors who actually did the work, the mentoring component is equally as important as the class room time. What really matters is the depth of one's knowledge and not necessarily how that knowledge was obtained.
I will stand by my IUOE Local 12 Apprenticeship experience for the rest of my days. I enjoyed 4 years of education, hands-on training, and experience in the field, all at the same time. It enabled me to learn while gaining experience without having to do both separately. At the time, it offered limited college credits, but I do think it has improved since then. It's a shame that a similar program isn't offered across the country.
The degree trash talking has already become tiresome. What the profession really needs is for these fist-shaking dinosaurs to retire and go away.
Amen.
Among the folks working with & for me, there's a wide range of experience and education.
I don't ever bring up education or degrees unless someone asks me about it directly, and then have a conversation about options and the pros/cons of formal schooling. While I support the four-year path, and have a degree myself, I'm in an experience-only state - no courses or degree needed for licensure in Washington State.
I hear a lot of comments from the other side of the fence, though, and it's rarely anything more than "these college kids don't know jack and college is worthless".
But...there's a rush to snap up graduates from our two-year schools for brand-new crew hires. But finding top quality office folks is extremely tough. So clearly there's some inconsistency between words and actions...
Reading through this thread, the "I think..." and "I feel..." statements are great as individual thoughts and feelings for general discussion and should have been voiced to your licensing boards when degree requirements were enacted. But if a degree requirement was enacted anyway, then there were either more (or at least more vocal) supporters of the degree requirement or evidence based data that supported a degree requirement. At this point, arguing over it without any supporting data showing a degree requirement is either causing harm (actual harm, not just the inconvenience of having to follow the current rules) or not accomplishing stated intentions when enacted accomplishes nothing. "I think" or "I feel" the number of new licensees has been adversely affected by a degree requirement would be taken more seriously if it were then backed up with hard numbers showing that it was the degree requirement causing the problem of fewer licensees. It may be the case that the degree requirement is a problem in some areas. If so, gather the data, crunch the numbers, and prove to your board and legislators that there is a problem.
I have posted on this several times in the past: current applicant and passing candidate numbers in Kentucky do not support the argument that a degree requirement has negatively affected the number of licensees. While longer term data is needed to substantiate, since the degree requirement has matriculated, there seems to be a slight increase in new licensees. Attributing the increase in new licensees specifically to the degree requirement is not 100% possible due to the potential effect from multiple other actions such as increased outreach by university programs and outreach by the state surveying society. However, the predicted outcomes based on a year long study by the board of licensure, the state surveying society, and an outside consultant before enacting the degree requirement are exactly the outcomes that have happened.
Potential option for folks with an associates in surveying already and who would be willing to put in the effort to complete a 4-year degree in order to get a license in states that accept a variety of four year degrees. Some universities might have a bachelor of independent/integrated studies program (usually offered online). These are somewhat self guided, but supervised studies that allow for earning a four year degree by completing the additional hours above your existing associates degree needed to reach the 120 hours required for a bachelors degree. In some instances, there are programs of study already set up for such things as business (would be a useful one for surveyors). These programs are designed for adults wanting to go back and complete their 4-year degree. In addition, you could talk with an advisor about the potential for 'prior learning assessment' which could gain you several hours based on your experience you already have. This can be accomplished through testing out of some content, submitting a portfolio of information, or prior military experience.
CAUTION: This is not advising you to jump in and start such a program UNLESS you have verified if the state you are looking into would accept the degree. Some states just require a four year degree from "a college or university of recognized standing" plus some number of hours in surveying specific course work.
