Engineering Degree To Surveying License, How Much Education?

Texas Has A Problem (?)

There are 5 current paths to an SIT, per subsection 253 of Chapter 1071, summary.
(1) BS Surveying, 0 experience
(2) BS combination Engineering/surveying/etc, 1 year experience.
(3) AS Surveying, 2 years experience
(4) 32 credits in Surveying, 2 years experience
(5) High school diploma, 4 years exoerience, proof of self education

"Amended by:
Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 53, Sec. 1, eff. May 10, 2007."

Because the law specifically says Surveyor In Training, there is legal implication that the path to licensure has been started.

"Sec. 1071.254. QUALIFICATIONS FOR REGISTRATION AS
REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR.A (a)An applicant for
registration as a registered professional land surveyor must:
(1)hold a certificate as a surveyor-in-training;
(2)have at least two years of experience satisfactory
to the board as a surveyor-in-training in performing surveying in
delegated responsible charge as a subordinate to a surveyor
registered or licensed to engage in the practice of surveying in
this state or in another state having registration or licensing
requirements equivalent to the requirements of this state; and
(3)if the application is filed after January 1, 2003,
have earned a bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution of
higher education that included at least 32 semester hours in a
combination of courses acceptable to the board in:
(A)civil engineering;
(B)land surveying;
(C)mathematics;
(D)photogrammetry;
(E)forestry;
(F)land law; or
(G)the physical sciences.
(b)An applicant is entitled to registration as a registered
professional land surveyor if the applicant meets the
qualifications prescribed by Subsection (a) and is approved to take
and passes the required sections of the examination prescribed
under Section 1071.256.
Added by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1421, Sec. 1, eff. June 1, 2003."

One could argue that having received the SIT via (3) or (4) above with 32 credit hours being acceptable for part 1, that those same 32 credits may not be acceptable for part 2 because they were not included in the required course of study, thus requiring retaking said 32 credits, an incongruity.

One could argue that if one meets the requirements for the SIT per law adopted in 2007, it is an impossibility to meet the requirement for RPLS adopted in 2003 to apply prior to Jan 2003.

One could further argue that a law (Sec. 1071.254) adopted in June 2003 requiring application prior to Jan 2003 is "ex-post-facto" and unconstitutional.

Now the requirements for an AS to apply for RPLS can be different and greater than for a BS, but since the AS was granted step 1, he cannot be denied access to step 2 by any absence of specific requirements. 4 years instead of 2, or 3 years plus additional education seem reasonable, but since there are certified AS programs with 32 Survey Credits, what could that additional education include?

I'm glad I do not want to apply in Texas.

Paul in PA

Texas Has A Problem (?)

(5) High school diploma, 4 years exoerience, proof of self education
exoerience - you can only get that in Texas - That's why it's different.

Sorry - couldn't resist. The best to you!

No civil engineer has any business taking a Land Surveyor exam unless he is and has intentions of practicing land surveying in the future. A person can't do both jobs, in fact if you are surveying the project that you are designing IMHO it's a conflict of interest.

Missouri is only 12 credit hours plus...
1. A BS degree
2. An AA degree with some survey experience
3. Enough survey experience for the Board to allow you to sit for exam

These conditions only let you take the LSIT exam. There is another 4 years of experience inbetween the LSIT and the LS exam in Missouri.

Always a topic of discussion with surveyors on experience/college classes but I think this is getting better than it was in the past. Having the 4 years experience required for anyone passing LSIT fulfills some of both experience/college classes debate.

Sorry, TC

How on Earth could you possibly view that as a conflict of interest? Being able to provide both parts of the project is far, far better than the reverse.

Identifying all of the possible concerns as early as possible in the planning process makes sense. The designer is the only one who rapidly recognizes the relative importance of each detail and how it may impact the design.

Well how about

a surveyor taking the PE exam? I went to school, got 10+ years experience, and then took the LS exam. Then I went to work for an enginering firm researcing, locating and computing rights of way for road projects (I'm sure you'd rather have a surveyor do that), then decided to take the PE exam too. I see no reason I can't do both, no conflict of interest, and sometimes I can even avoid problems by seeing both sides of an issue.

Andy

Well how about

I am in favor of allowing people to take the test. They then find out what it is that they do not know. Then they can choose whether or not to pursue obtaining enough training (field or classroom) to be able to pass the test.

The current system of having one acquire a long list of experiences (field and classroom) before being allowed to find out what the experts have deemed to be critical knowledge is ridiculous. I say, let the student seek out the specifics of what is required rather than have them stumble around in half-darkness for years thinking they are doing precisely the correct things.

Some tests are designed to be exceptionally difficult so as to limit the number of members of the group. Some are made so simple, many could pass the test without any significant training so as to enlarge the group.

Please read my post about the trespass of my property as to what ENGINEERs think of their ability to survey...

HEY we don't need a survey because we got this ral neat COUNTY GIS...

Holy Cow!

"I am in favor of allowing people to take the test. They then find out what it is that they do not know. Then they can choose whether or not to pursue obtaining enough training (field or classroom) to be able to pass the test.
The current system of having one acquire a long list of experiences (field and classroom) before being allowed to find out what the experts have deemed to be critical knowledge is ridiculous. I say, let the student seek out the specifics of what is required rather than have them stumble around in half-darkness for years thinking they are doing precisely the correct things.
Some tests are designed to be exceptionally difficult so as to limit the number of members of the group. Some are made so simple, many could pass the test without any significant training so as to enlarge the group."

The whole point of education and experience is to learn what is critical, as you say, to the task of surveying. However what is really critical is the minor applications that may only occur once in a few years.

Having taken all the tests, FE, PE, FS and PS I can assure you they are not designed to be exceptionally difficult to limit the numbers that pass. But they are designed to weed out those who fail to learn what is neccessary.

As to tests that are made so simple that one can pass without significant training, the driver's license test comes to mind. When you consider the number of new drivers involved in fatalities you can see how well that works.

Paul in PA

>What is your opinion on how many surveying credits a Civil Engineer should have to be allowed to sit for the PLS?

The description of the degree requirements above might seem to infer that attending college for four years is being treated as more important than the actual subject matter being studied.

In any degree program, what percent of your classes are specific to the major, and what percent are "elective"?

Well how about

I wish you were on the PA State Board. I am a PE in PA and a PLS is WV. I have been exposed to boundary surveying pretty much my entire life. Until I am able to finally sit for my PA exam, I will not expand any further. I have told Paul my story, however there is now another chapter added to it since I spoke with him last. I am very frustrated with the "system" to say the least.

Angelo ?

My question is in reference to a Civil Engineering graduate from the typical college who may have had 0, 3 or at best 6 Survey credits as an undergrad. Many states allow a CE to later add on Surveying credits solely to allow them to sit for the PLS.

"The description of the degree requirements above might seem to infer that attending college for four years is being treated as more important than the actual subject matter being studied."