So what you are saying that mentors, with years of experience, knowledge in mathematics, survey history, boundary law and how to apply it are inferior to a professor who teaches theory out of a textbook, and not licensed as an LS and don't necessarily have a degree in land surveying are more credible for the mere fact that they have a degree in education? What kind of sense does that make? Ask one of them who never surveyed to resolve a complex survey in the real world and see what you get.
"So what you are saying that mentors, with years of experience, knowledge in mathematics, survey history, boundary law and how to apply it are inferior to a professor who teaches theory out of a textbook, and not licensed as an LS and don’t necessarily have a degree in land surveying are more credible for the mere fact that they have a degree in education? What kind of sense does that make? Ask one of them who never surveyed to resolve a complex survey in the real world and see what you get."
That appears to be it. Also, that appears to be the stance of multiple states, including Alabama and Florida, and I'm sure a number of others.
So what you are saying that mentors, with years of experience, knowledge in mathematics, survey history, boundary law and how to apply it are inferior to a professor who teaches theory out of a textbook, and not licensed as an LS and don’t necessarily have a degree in land surveying are more credible for the mere fact that they have a degree in education? What kind of sense does that make?
What kind of universities are you talking about? My boundary law profs were licensed. One of them doubled as my geodesy and spatial data adjustments instructor. My cadastral surveying prof was a (30-year) BLM supervisor. The core (non-adjunct) professors didn't always work during the summer, but most of them did, or at the very least consulted. The adjuncts for subjects like hydro, scanning, image analysis, etc. were all working in their current field while teaching, or recently retired and still active in professional societies.
The professors could explain the fundamentals far more easily than my real-world mentors; no judgment against them, they were always busy and had work to do. More importantly, the profs could spend dedicated time with the students they were teaching, to explain and go into depth on subjects without worrying about having to get that deliverable out the door or the next proposal over to the client. (They also didn't have a problem with students asking questions or requesting explanations, which quite a few "mentors" do.)
Ask one of them who never surveyed to resolve a complex survey in the real world and see what you get.
I wouldn't ask them to solve a complex survey, because they aren't paid to do that, they are paid to instruct students in the theoretical and academic concepts that they will end up using as professionals...because before those kids can solve a complex boundary they have to learn what a "boundary" is in the first place.
Where do you live that you think engineering & geomatics departments only hire folks with degrees in the field of education?
"I’m still not convinced that cutting the degree requirement will improve the profession. That doesn’t change the fact that (a) it’s tough to start out in surveying at current entry-level pay grades, (b) opportunities for supported growth and development are slim pickings, unlike many other industries, and (c) there are several other adjacent industries that have embraced the technology revolution and are more appealing to younger prospects."
I agree. Solve the problem of the shortage of people at the entry level and the licensee problem fixes itself. I began my career in British Columbia, where getting licensed is very difficult and the number of licensees has always been low. A typical office has several career technicians for every licensee -BCLSs doing field work on a daily basis is uncommon - and its not a problem for them.
I do agree that entry level pay grades are terrible and in some areas, good paying jobs are few and far between. Idk how to fix that issue as you can only pay so much for a rodman, not that a good rodman isn’t valuable, but you have to pay a crew chief or PS more and need to have competitive rates to stay in business. All my argument has been, is that there is a real disregard of a 2 year education in combination with experience. I don’t see any reason why those 2 items shouldn’t afford a surveyor to earn a license in any state. Differences from state to state can be addressed in the state specific exams. Outside of that, it’s similar to an engineer doing work in another state or taking on a project that they haven’t had as much experience with. They research and study to provide a good service and gain a sufficient understanding of the work they’re doing in that situation. Their experience and license qualifies them to grow in the practice while they practice.
A few random thoughts...
Around the mid to late 90's we started seeing two man crews as the norm. Some places sooner, some later. That quickly morphed into one-man crews. The elimination of the experience only track followed soon after. The cutoff dates weren't random at all. They were founded in the reality that mentoring was disappearing.
After the transition to the four-year degree requirement, our Board set about adjusting policy to make the change workable. The agency also worked to help with recruitment and funding for our in-State degree program. I was lucky enough to be a Board employee, working on some of these changes myself.
While we sit and argue from our limited perspectives, the Profession of Surveying is being deregulated into oblivion. There are a number of States that will be all too happy (proud in fact) to be the lowest common denominator for licensing and regulation. Don't think for a minute they will stop with the degree requirement.
THRAC mode off...
That stance by Alabama is pretty consistent with several other states. They allow for licensure if you received your first license in another jurisdiction AND met the requirements in place in the state you are seeking a new license in AT the time you actually received your first license. If there is no hard cut-off date, then any change to the requirements would serve no purpose within that state as anyone could go to one of the states with less stringent requirements and then transfer into the other state. Keep an eye out and see if Alabama starts to go down the Universal License Recognition path. If they do, then how it is implemented could affect your situation.
There is a bunch of anecdotal "I know this surveyor with/without a degree who was very good/horrible at surveying" that could be thrown around as "proof" that a degree requirement is or isn't worthwhile. But that is not a serious analysis of the situation.
I used to be on the fence a bit about the degree requirement because I had several great mentors w/o a degree (also one not so good one w/o a degree). However, those mentors grew through the ranks when there were several people on a crew and they worked their way through the ranks learning from the person next higher in rank over the course of a 10+ year career. In their (and my early career) time, it was not unusual to have 3 or 4 people, with one being a licensee, out in the field.
How many 4-person crews, with each member being at different levels of experience and learning from each other, are out there now days? How many crews are out there where the 'party chief' is just a reasonably experienced instrument person, but they are the key source of all mentoring for the newer hire (if they aren't working alone as a 1-person 'crew')?
The old days of learning the details of the profession on the job, while not impossible, are much less realistic now IMO.
More anecdotal discussion with no analysis of what it actually might mean. In my home state, even while a degree requirement was not in place, the number of licensees was dwindling. With no degree requirement, the fundamentals exam pass rate was in the low to mid 30% range. With the current degree requirement, it is up to well over 70% - with the same number of applicants in the most recent years. So we are now getting twice as many new candidates passing as we were pre-degree requirement.
Given the average age and retirement matter, that increase in passes does not necessarily translate to increased numbers yet, but it certainly doesn't indicate the degree requirement is the cause of the shortage of licensees. It actually may show the opposite because when there was an experience route, new license numbers were going down but now numbers are finally going up with a degree requirement in place. Although it could also be because the state surveying society was more active in getting the profession out to young people, some college surveying program recruitment, or other things. Only time and further numbers will tell.
Could the degree requirement exacerbate the problem of dwindling licensees? I don't know about every state, but it does not seem to be the case in my home.
As more anecdotal evidence to throw on the fire - having just last year looked at a few 4-year programs and a few 2-year programs (not all 2-year and not all 4-year programs and certainly not with any type of serious number crunching) in order to provide commentary to some legislators, I found that there were several one semester courses in 4-year programs that required 2 semesters in the 2-year programs (course descriptions indicated covering the same/similar content). It was clear that some of that stretching of the course work was because of fewer prerequisite math courses; which, in turn, required the faculty member to teach not only the surveying concepts of the course, but also the math needed to work with the surveying concepts.
On the teaching of surveying courses discussion:
rover, I know of several universities that have/had faculty who are not licensed and/or have never even worked in surveying but they are teaching surveying courses. There are only a very few states that even define the teaching of surveying courses as the practice of surveying. And those courses being taught by unlicensed individuals range from the technical to professional practice.
Also on teaching surveying courses - there is no requirement that university faculty have ANY qualifications in pedagogy. At times, it can be VERY disheartening to see what lengths some faculty can go to in order to 'cookie cutter' their courses to minimize their workload year to year. Just like learning from other crew members on the job - there are some faculty who are good at teaching concepts and there are some that have no interest in if anyone learns a thing, they're just showing up for the paycheck.
Degree/No Degree is a great topic that gets hit a few times a year, but unfortunately, there seems to be minimal investigation into real numbers. It always devolves to the biased I approve or I don't approve argument. It would be a good topic for some young surveying scholars working on an advanced degree to try to work with the licensing boards, NSPS, and NCEES to get serious data to look into the matter. It could be that the degree requirement works in some regions but not others, if so what contributing factors may be at play (professional support, university support, government support, length of time enacted, state median wages, high school guidance counselor awareness of the profession)?
