Graduate Degree Options 3

[Lion06]

I am closing the loop on a thread I started some time back about a master's program.
The masters program that I would like to enroll in will require me to take 7 undergrad classes (to fulfill their undergrad CE requirements in 3 of the other 4 disciplines - they will only count 2 of my 8 undergrad stuctural classes, because that is all they require). There are 4 other master's programs within approx. 50 miles and every one has told me that they wouldn't require me to take any additional classes (in fact, 2 of the 4 made a point to tell me that I've really taken a lot of structural classes).
The program I would like to enroll in is the most convenient for me - it is 10 minutes from my work and 35 minutes from my house. Also, I would rank the course offerings from this program near the top of the 5.
I have already taken 1 class there and got an A. I am taking another this spring.
That being said, I don't know if it is worth killing myself for 7 additional undergrad classes in fluids, transportation, and environmental engineering when I have no intention of EVER working in those disciplines and will not take any grad course in those disciplines.
Before you say 7 undergrad classes won't kill you.... I obviously work full time and have a wife and 2 kids at home. I did that for several years to get the undergrad degree, and it wasn't fun.
I am considering one other option. The university will let me take all the classes I want, but will not award me a degree until I complete their undergrad requirements. I am considering just taking the classes and saying "To hel* with the actual degree".
Would you think less of the 10 grad level classes on a resume if there weren't a degree attached to them?
I would like to get some opinions on which is the right way to head.
1. Take the classes and don't get the degree
2. Take the undergrad requirements and get the degree
3. Go to a different college

 

[jistre]

Hmm, whyun makes a good point. Take the requirements of licensure in whatever jurisdictions you plan to work in into account when making your decision.

For instance, in this state, a technology degree alone will most likely never qualify you to sit for the FE exam. There are three conditions under which you are eligible for the FE.

1)You have a degree in Engineering from an ABET-EAC accredited engineering program.

2)You have a degree in Technology from an non ABET-EAC accredited program (technology programs are usually accredited by ABET-TAC, not ABET-EAC) AND a graduate degree from an school whose undergraduate program is ABET-EAC accredited.

3)You have a degree in Engineering from a non ABET-EAC accredited program and four years of experience.

To receive a license, you either have to have be an intern (able to sit for and pass the FE) or have the qualifications of an intern and pass the PE exam OR be a licensed engineer in another state who honors reciprocity AND whose qualifications at the time the license was issued were not in conflict with this state's.

So, as far as I can tell there is no way to become licensed in this state with a technology degree by itself, even if you try to go the reciprocity route. I don't know what other states do, but if you're going into structural engineering and may be crossing state borders, it is something you're probably going to want to consider carefully.

 

[AlmostPE]

StructuralEIT, it sounds like you already got your feet wet in the structural engineering world. I wouldnt go if I were you. There are plenty of seminars and free classes for you to sharpen your knowledge.

Not almost anymore!

 

[Lion06]

AlmostPE-
I know I want to take classes, I am just trying to decide which of the 3 routes I mentioned earlier to choose. I wouldn't be as concerned about the degree except for some comments by some respected people on this forum about how BS candidates only are really unsuited for structural work and would only consider MS candidates.
That being said, I work with people (who all started within 6 months before or after me) who have MS from Virginia Tech, Cornell, and USC, to name a few of the schools, who have no deeper understanding of steel or concrete design or structural analysis than I have.

 

[Lion06]

Also, my work is encouraging me to get a master's.
While researching all of these schools I have spent some time actually looking into their undergraduate programs. It is no wonder some people feel that a master's is necessary for structural engineering - most undergrad CE degrees limit you to 3-4 structural classes. People should really recognize that not all programs have the same limitations. For example, the school where I am currently taking grad classes has a very good selection of graduate structural classes, but only 3 (yes, you read that right... THREE) structural undergraduate classes in their course catalog and steel/concrete are offered TOGETHER, not even as seperate classes.
I took 8 undergraduate structural classes. I just finished a graduate concrete class and I wondered why 60%-70% of what was taught in this grad level course was covered in my undergrad concrete classes. It makes more sense now that concrete is only half of a semester here.

 

[NS4U]

I would do it to get the degree

undergrad fluids and transpo is a joke compared to structures classes.

hopefully someday you will be a principal, and when you hand out your professional resume, you will want it to say you have an MS. Especially since in 20+ years almost all entry levels SEs will have a MSCE minimum

Also, at my firm you can't become a principal without having an MSCE

just remember, it's all about that little piece of paper, not that classes you took