ABET Accredited Surveying Programs

Michigan Technological University also does a 4 year Surveying Engineering degree. That is were I received my degree from.

Mohawk Valley Community College, NY AAS is accredited (no ?).

We also have a new program in southern NY at Ulster County Community College that will be pursuing ABET accreditation I am told.

TAC has been done away with fairly recently; the TAC's are all EAC now I believe.

Forgot to add, another recent change is that ABET will now accredit graduate programs. I'm told there is only one engineering graduate degree that has opted to go that route so far, not sure which one.

Good List. Thanks for the update!!

> TAC has been done away with fairly recently; the TAC's are all EAC now I believe.

TAC was changed to ETAC (Engineering Technology Accreditation Commission)

There is a new program in southern WV. Southern West Virginia Community and Technical College offers a AAS Survey Technology and a Certificate in Survey Technology. I am not sure if they will pursue ABET accreditation.

Oops, missed the T, thanks for the correction. One can lose their accreditation over something like that:)

ABET Accredited Surveying Programs, Yes To Mohawk

It is on my list, but I should have removed the comment?

Paul in PA

Mr. Tompkins-

I love your signature line.:good: :good: :good:

I Added Michigan Technological University To My List

Because they call the program "Surveying Engineering" it does not pop up on ABET's three "Surveying and Geomatics" lists.

There are other surveying programs tucked away in the corners of other Civil Engineering programs. Because the CE program is ABET accredited the surveying also is by default. If an accredited college has an online program, that to is accredited.

Paul in PA

I Added Southern West Virginia Community & Technical College

to my regular surveying program list.

I have never done a thorough search for certificate programs.

Paul in PA

ABET Accredited Surveying Programs, Yes To Mohawk

Yes, the comment should be removed. We are fully accredited. I posted a lengthy reply that got lost and was not going to redo it. But, I suppose I should.

Accreditation is an ongoing process that requires many changing regulatory compliances. We have had excellent feedback from employers and transfer institutions to the effect that our graduates are the ones they want. But this is anecdotal evidence to an inspector. Our program status may have been listed as something temporarily in limbo (for accreditation I would need to use specific language here and I'm too lazy to look it up). We are accredited by both ABET and the regional accreditation that every legitimate college needs and they both have their own language. Accreditation is a huge industry that (at the college level) seeks to regulate performance of graduates. The accreditors want to retain control so that this regulation is not imposed by the federal government and so then allows the federal government to control the message (dependent on which party is in control).

In my view we had an excellent inspector, who pointed out things that I had myself tried to stress (go figure, a surveyor who is good at measurement). But colleges, as with any organizations, have people in charge that don't necessarily get it. The good old boy inspection is many times the norm. In our case the inspector agreed with me and made a report to help rectify things. That is what accreditation is supposed to be for. Of course I was demonized for three years because the program "had problems". Not so; we just needed to provide evidence that the students were learning. It shouldn't be a big deal, but it is. For what it's worth, I (all reports are collaboration, not just me) also provided the Civil Engineering program with the same report but their inspector did not find a problem. Who are the measurement experts?

The big thing now is assessment. Grading in the classroom is not enough. Colleges need to produce evidence that the students are learning what the program claims, and it can't be only the word of employers and transfer institutions. There must be direct measures such as exams that show graduates have actually learned. We supplied this evidence and insisted it be included, but it was not. The second go around it was supplied and surprise, accreditation extended.

The accreditors also continually change things. When we produced the report the stated policy was that the ABET contributing societies determined the outcomes (program objectives) of the program so that we did not have to. But they sanctioned us for not determining them. Then they wanted assessment of graduates out in the workforce 3-10 years after graduation. This is very difficult, but we did it. Now the policy has been rescinded. We are a community college and don't have a lot of money for continual in depth studies. This is now a big problem for our small program because it has cost a bunch of money to track down information.

I contacted NCEES for data on success rates of our graduates taking the licensing exams. NCEES refused to provide that data (they don't have it) and refused to even discuss changing their policy to collect that data for the surveying exams. NCEES routinely collects that data for the engineering exams (which college did you graduate from?). Another instance of institutional bias against surveyors actually being educated in a surveying program.

I could go on, but suffice to say that a college program in surveying should be striving for ABET accreditation so that their graduates get credit in other states and countries. But make no mistake, it is a regulatory morass. It is costly, and your success will depend on the management and support structures in place, or the quality of the inspector, rather than on the quality of the graduates. Sad to say this because it's not the way it should and could work.

OK, now my promotion has already been denied and I've got myself fired:) But if it helps someone else, it was worth it.

Duane, What Are You Doing Now ?

email me.

From the PA Law:

"Section 4. General Powers of Board.
The board shall have power
(a) Approval of Engineering, Surveying and Geology Curricula.
To investigate and to approve or disapprove engineering,
surveying and geology curricula of this State, and other states,
territories and countries for the education of students desiring
to be licensed to engage in the practice of engineering, land
surveying or geology, and to revoke or suspend approvals where
they are no longer deemed proper."

This language should be similar in every jurisdiction. Therefore the State Boards should be correlating data from the applicants applications i.e. the educational institutions cited in those applications, with exam success.

I note that NCEES tauts using the FE exam to measure college success but is silent regarding the FS. It is not just the fundamentals that should be used, but the PE and PS also.

Paul in PA

Duane, What Are You Doing Now ?

Sorry, still teaching, just figured my post might get me fired:) Still surveying too.

Yes, NCEES touts it for engineering, but apparantly surveyors are considered uneducated, so why bother collecting information on the occasional test taker who has a degree of some kind. My anectodal evidence suggests that any licensing exam can be passed by an intelligent individual given enough tries at it. This is true with law, engineering, surveying. But my students pass the first time or second on one particular part. Others retake all parts, many times over. This is not something that NCEES wants to come to light. It would indicate that degreed surveyors are intelligent, educated people who can figure things out. This would overlap the engineer qualifications and take away work from an already over stressed economic sector. This is also why engineering is moving to a masters degree for entrance to the exams. It's all about the money. Meanwhile, the public gets screwed. And yes, it all adds to the academic industry as well (for engineering but not for surveying).

Nothing against those with engineering licenses or education (most of my udergrad education is in engineering). I'm looking at the larger picture. Engineers are numerous, they have a large lobbying presence, and they look out for each others economic best interest. Too many engineers and not enough work for them. But it becomes an environment where consumers can not get anything done without one expert after another to determine relatively simplistic things.

In my view, surveyors need to either break away entirely from NCEES and the engineering community or they need to become another branch of it and be licensed as PE's like all the other branches of engineering.

ABET Accredited Surveying Programs, Yes To Mohawk

Well spoken, Duane.
:good: :good:

Duane, What Are You Doing Now ?

Glad to see you're still employed.
:good: :good:

Regarding NCEES

One would think that they would gain an advantage for education by showing the high fail rate for non-degreed test takers.

However, the pass rate might be a double whammy for NCEES or just too much work. For the FE, 99%+ of the test takers are college seniors or grads. The few that are not can be ignored without altering the statistics.

However, FS test takers come from various backgrounds, Experience only, Surveying Certificate Holders, Engineers with as few as 10 surveying credits, AAS graduates with an average of 30+ credits, BT/BS grads or candidates with 40+ credits.

The experience only rate is much lower, some give it up after 3 failures, some make a life of taking the test. The whammy is that there is most likely a rather high success rate among AAS grads. I have no info and will not speculate on the Certificate only test takers.

Here is the NCEES promoting an MS minimum for PEs and at the same time giving good account to the success of the AAS programs in surveying.

Now you know the "Rest of the story".

BTW Duane, it is all your fault for being so successful.

Paul in PA