Ok?
My point being that if your Board is allowing a secretary to make the determination of a LS applicant's qualifications, then there's something wrong with its process.
I'm peeved I can't find Geritol.
I'm peeved, and have been for years, that realtors can make $6k on a $100K sale and expect the surveyor to furnish a survey for $250. It takes a potential real estate salesperson with a GED a few weeks to obtain a license in FL while it takes surveyors 4 years or more with a formal education. Although monetary success is not a big deal for some, it is for those who like to eat and feed their family.
Until we can form an organization such as the national association of realtors or something similar with teeth, we will just "carry on" as the working labor class.?ÿ
I'd be willing to bet that there are some pretty poor ABET schooled surveyors out there.?ÿ It truly comes down to the amount of "give a damns" a surveyor puts into their profession.?ÿ Which is also why everyone's path to licensure isn't the same.?ÿ
?ÿ
How many kids with a surveying degree get their SIT/LSI immediately, then ACTUALLY get field experience??ÿ Very few I'm guessing.?ÿ I'm assuming most get thrown straight into an office because they instantly become more valuable there.?ÿ Here in Colorado, a student with a 4-year degree (which doesn't exist in CO) only need 2 years(!) experience before sitting for the license test.?ÿ How is it possible to learn what you need to learn in the field in those 2 years??ÿ Maybe if that person gets lucky and finds a small company with a PLS, who does everything cradle to grave, who's willing to show the newbie everything.
@aliquot?ÿ
I've been asking for the evidence that a formal education is needed.?ÿ Anecdotes aside, there's nothing that's indicating a need.
We spurned the opportunity to match other professions in bare-bones requirements for candidacy, refused to acknowledge the increasing complexity of our field, and generally acted like we were a trade but demanded the respect of a profession.
Then we threw up our hands in confusion, wondering why there was inconsistency in practice, why there were so many different ideas about what a "surveyor" is, and why our profession seemed to be dying. (I'm not saying that it is, but that's a common sentiment.)
The USA medical field went through this exact same scenario in the mid-19th century. They got together and recognized that aspiring medical professionals needed a combination of rigorous schooling that delivered a common base of fundamental knowledge, and a rigorous mentorship under qualified professionals.
It wasn't an either/or proposition for the medical field, and it shouldn't be for us.
I for one am glad that the medical field chose education and mentorship over bloodletting and leeches. Let's not make that mistake ourselves.
@rover83?ÿ
I'm sorry, but we're not doctors.?ÿ
If there're crappy surveyors putting out crappy work in your area, then you need to do something about them, not do something else to prevent a supposed influx of new crappy surveyors.
@jph?ÿ
What I said was not an anecdote.?ÿ I used a specific example, that doesn't make it an anecdote.?ÿ What I said is a lexicon.?ÿ Everyone knows that the model of surveying has changed.?ÿ Licensed surveyors are not out in the field as much as they were, and working with their employees as directly as before.?ÿ So how are they learning??ÿ How can they replace that one-on-one mentorship??ÿ That's what I was saying.?ÿ But there is an issue, and I think most people can see it even if they don't want to admit it.
@rover83?ÿ
Good point.?ÿ The fact we aren't doctors is irrelevant.?ÿ You aren't comparing our expertise, you are comparing the issues in our profession.
@joe-b?ÿ
I think you're replying to the wrong person.?ÿ I didn't bring up anecdotes, someone else did - I never commented on what you said.
@joe-b?ÿ
I don't think there's an issue.?ÿ Maybe in your area and in other areas.?ÿ
I think you're all after a solution to a problem that doesn't exist in my area, at least.
There are different types of learners and different types of thinkers.?ÿ Many of those choosing law school had their B.A. in fluff course work (psychology, communications, sociology, art, English, history, etc.).?ÿ Very few are math majors, accountants, geologists, physicists, chemists, engineers, medical science, etc.?ÿ But, those who major in boundary surveying need to be taking the same law classes that relate to property law.?ÿ They also need to have coursework in both types of education listed above.?ÿ Starting out as a grunt cutting line is not a likely course of action to eventually taking all of those courses that make a surveyor a Professional Surveyor.?ÿ Understanding WHY is more critical than knowing HOW.?ÿ This is becoming even more important as changing forms of data reporting are required by the end user of the information found and created by the licensed land surveyor.
@flga-2-2?ÿ
Aren't you also a realtor? Or is that hC?
Not asking in a perjorative fashion, just curious.
And I always tell people their is no 6% commission, that's just an assignment by the Industry that is actually under an Investigation by the DOJ for illegal trade practice and collusion. I'll find the article. Really good stuff actually.
Commission is negotiable.?ÿ
?ÿ
I do have a license as a real estate salesperson.?ÿ I rarely perform in that arena, however, by choice.?ÿ When I get old I will have something to fall back on as a source of income.
That was by far the easiest multiple-choice, computer test I have ever taken.?ÿ I believe I had every question correctly answered.
A deed is...............
a) A male parent
b) A bomb that does not explode
c) The past tense of do
d) The means to transfer the bundle of rights
e) All of the above
F) None of the above
@flga-2-2 There is a national organization, the NSPS! If more surveyors bothered to support it perhaps the results you are looking for might be obtained. As it is they have had some remarkable successes that benefit all surveyors.
?ÿ
If more surveyors bothered to support it
But they won't. I've been a member of NSPS longer than I can remember and nothing has changed.
Aren't you also a realtor? Or is that hC?
Yes and have Condo Assoc.Mgmt. license, both still active. ?????ÿ
@flga-2-2 There is a national organization, the NSPS! If more surveyors bothered to support it perhaps the results you are looking for might be obtained. As it is they have had some remarkable successes that benefit all surveyors.
I think this is rather debatable.?ÿ They trumpet their recent success of gutting the Davis-Bacon Act (with regard to surveyors), thereby reducing the wage of field surveyors on federal construction sites by sometimes 50%.?ÿ The mind boggles.?ÿ I can't think of another profession where the national organization would reduce the potential earning power of the rank-and-file and people would still pay dues.
@jph?ÿ
I thought you were speaking generally, not specifically about your state.?ÿ Maybe your state is different.?ÿ I'm only defending the merit of a surveying education, and why some states are requiring education instead of just experience.?ÿ Surveying is changing, and so they are changing the laws with it.?ÿ A year of education in surveying is rigorous and accounts for thousands of hours of learning.?ÿ You can get a year of experience just by showing up to work for a year.?ÿ you can't just show up to class and get a degree after 4 years (err.. maybe some degrees, but not surveying) but you can show up to work for 4 years and gain 4 years of experience.?ÿ?ÿ I think that's a flaw and needs to be corrected.?ÿ But how??ÿ Education is how they are doing it in many states, and it ensures that a foundation of knowledge is being taught to the new surveyor.?ÿ Maybe Vermont will never face the same problems as my area.?ÿ
Do you think the licensed surveyors in your state are going out in the field less, or are they spending the same amount of time as they always did with their technicians??ÿ Or are you saying that there isn't a problem caused by the new technology (such as robotics, RTK, etc. that requires less people to operate, and is much simpler to operate.)
But they won't. I've been a member of NSPS longer than I can remember and nothing has changed.
I was a member of ACSM from the early seventies to the late eighties.?ÿ
Originally named the National Congress on Surveying and Mapping when it was founded in June 1941, later the name was changed to the American Congress on Surveying and Mapping to encompass members from Canada and South America.?ÿ It was dissolved in the early 2000s(?) due to internecine issues, but the national member organizations survive to this day, notably NSPS.
It was expensive for a nascent surveyor but I pored over every journal and attended 5 or so national conventions at my expense.?ÿ They were always eye openers concerning technical stuff and I attended presentations and hobnobbed with some of the top players.?ÿ For a country boy, 4 days in San Francisco wearing a suit was quite the experience.?ÿ I cherish those times.
Once licensed I joined my State association(s) and was active, becoming secretary once which was a gopher style job and quite tedious. But after a decade of that the meetings where becoming irrelevant and poorly attended so I bailed. Never considered joining NSPS, it seemed more like a lobbying outfit than a common ground for State licensed surveyors; better bang for the buck was State organizations back then.
ACSM at its prime was a powerful entity, essentially refereed the Title Company's proposed ALTA survey scope, was the gold standard concerning emerging technologies research (notably GPS & EDMs), defined the boundaries between Federal and State licensed surveyors and accomplished many other good works.?ÿ Sad to witness ACSM fade, but with only 7,000 members max our voice became irrelevant.
Just want to point out as a Licensed surveyor you are *not* required to join any professional association.?ÿ I've seen web posts to the contrary which are wrong.
?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿ
@rover83?ÿ
I'm sorry, but we're not doctors.?ÿ
I'm not sorry at all. We're also not carpenters. If you want to be a tradesman, then at least be honest about it and advocate for deregulation and elimination of professional surveying licensure.
@rover83?ÿ
If there're crappy surveyors putting out crappy work in your area, then you need to do something about them, not do something else to prevent a supposed influx of new crappy surveyors.
We're not talking about specific instances of crappy surveyors. We're talking about optimizing and standardizing the pathway(s) to licensure while ensuring that prospective licensees have the necessary fundamental knowledge at the time they begin the mentorship process.
Just because you personally don't see problems in your corner of the world (see my comment on anecdotes upthread) doesn't mean that we can't strive to improve both ourselves and our profession. Even if we weren't concerned about the future of our profession, we still have a duty to assess the efficacy of our licensure process and make improvements.
Hashing out the details is always tough and will never satisfy everyone, but "change nothing ever because we decided something a long time ago and therefore it will forever be correct" is not a valid position.