Increasing Education Requirements 22

[3doorsdwn]

http://www.ncees.org/news/index.php?release_id=37

Above is a URL to an NCEES release where they discuss a proposal to raise the requirement for licensure to M.S. level. I have to admit I was surprised: I've heard this idea kicked around for Structural Engineers; but this makes it sound like they want to make it mandatory for ALL disciplines. I think that is a bit of a stretch. I have a hard time seeing why this should be required for a HVAC engineer or an electrical engineer.

I also think it isn't a good idea for structural engineers either (and I say that as someone who holds both a Masters and a PE). I don’t understand why any educational reforms cannot be made at the undergraduate level. If not by increasing the hours required, than why not reallocate the hours? If memory serves, as an undergraduate I had dozens of hours of English, Economics, and other non-engineering courses. Why not reallocate these hours into the engineering curriculum if the B.S. is now deemed inadequate?

It really disappoints me that ASCE and NCEES have proposed this idea. I think they (ASCE especially) have fallen for the idea that if you raise the educational requirements you will improve the perception of the engineering business (and thus) gets everyone’s salary higher (it’s not going to happen). Also, they think it’s going to reduce outsourcing by making licensure more difficult. That ignores one of the most critical aspects of outsourcing: many engineers registered here are stamping things designed overseas and (falsely) claiming they “oversaw” its design. If you raise the bar, you will still have the same thing happening (except you will have engineers with a masters degree making the same false claims). Overall, it’s just a bad idea. But that is typical for ASCE.

I can certainly see a company making this a requirement for employment there (based on the work they do); but a (legal) requirement for licensure? No way.

 

[B16A2]

No way, no how, can the general structural engineering community correctly self teach themselves the majority of material in a grad degree within the 4 year internship. Maybe you can because of your personal circumstances, but to expect everyone to get there is unrealistic and a step backward for our profession.


I'd choose to have my ACI member professor teach me advanced concrete rather than me wallowing through the text any day.

 

[3doorsdwn]

I tell you what: you sure are obsessed with the fact I didn’t have an advanced R/C class aren’t you? Riddle me this Grad School Man: if an advanced degree is all it takes to be a competent engineer why aren’t holders of such degrees allowed to waive the PE or SE exams? Why do some states still allow people who have accumulated enough experience to sit for the exam (in spite of the fact they may not hold a B.S.; Georgia is still one such state (the last time I looked))?

The answer is because class room knowledge may not translate into practical/useful knowledge. One of the main reasons I went back to Grad School was to take a course in Structural Dynamics. (Because I kept running into dynamic loading problems on the job.) How good was it? Want to know who pointed out to the class acceptable frequency ratios (forcing frequency/natural frequency) for acceptable dynamic magnification factors? ME. Want to know who pointed out to the class the maximum dynamic load factor (from a suddenly applied load)? ME. Want to know how many practical examples my ASCE member professor (with a PHD) did? Pretty much zilch. My presentation to the class (on my semester project: a fan foundation subjected to out of balance forces) was the closest thing they ever saw to something useful. What kind of homework did this guy assign? All kinds of useless stuff with numerical methods to solve Duhamel’s Integral (never mind most texts are filled with charts and solutions for most loading situations where it is not necessary to evaluate Duhamel’s Integral), equations of motion, and methods for solving Fourier series problems. Real useful.

Not to brag but: At some points in the class it was almost like that scene in ‘Back To School’ where the students turn around and start taking notes off of Rodney Dangerfield [with me playing Rodney] because he is the only person in the class with any useful knowledge. I had people ask me questions all the time (before and after class). I wound up bringing in [copied] material for those who asked. And answered questions on everything from blast loading to what type of out of balance forces are expected for different types of equipment.

As I said earlier in this thread: I’d be the last person to run down the importance of an education. But the idea of making an MS mandatory for registration is going too far. Any profession can be enhanced by more education. But for ours, this could become a permanent obstacle in ones career path. To me, that is unacceptable.

 

[kchan711]

Well put...

Kyle Chandler

http://www.chiefengineering.net

"To the Pessimist, the glass is half-empty. To the Optimist, the glass is half-full. To the Engineer, the glass is twice as large as it needs to be!"

 

[GregLocock]

Bingo

Cheers

Greg Locock

SIGlease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[B16A2]

I don't see anyone in this thread implying a grad degree be a direct ticket to an SE, nor is that the intent of ASCE 465.

Sorry to hear you feel your classes were a waste. I'd be angry too if I had to teach my classes. There's junk programs out there, but to discredit the entire education system and publicly dissuade structural engineers from more education is not right. I'm in advanced dynamics right now and we've had a majority of practical assignments. I have a much better understanding about earthquake spectral response curves, how to experimentally determine building periods, how damping can hurt or help, forced vibrations on soil and on elevated structures, I can design tune mass dampers, have a MUCH better understanding about modeshapes, scaling, modal decomposition....list goes on Yea, we spent a lecture and a question on Duhamel's integral, but it wasn't anything to get chapped about. Rayleigh's quotient has proved to be very useful. Earthquake engineering is next semester, and that goes even further into real world code applications, resisting systems, etc.

A lot of things are clicking in grad school. Not just dynamics but in design courses too. Prestress next semester...man, I've yet to find a decent seminar on prestress while out working the past few years. Grad school is definitely providing more confidence and useful knowledge that goes toward making myself as a structural engineer more professional, and improving the perception of the engineering business.

 

[apsix]

To state that a BS only is not enough if you want to be a 'real' structural engineer is not right.
Many are saying that the education system is sufficient to produce good engineers with 'only' a BS as a basis for their career.

 

[3doorsdwn]

"I don't see anyone in this thread implying a grad degree be a direct ticket to an SE, nor is that the intent of ASCE 465."
---------------------------
Didn't say it was. The point was: years of PRACTICE and passing exams with real world type problems are necessary for licensure. I think that speaks volumes right there.

"Sorry to hear you feel your classes were a waste. I'd be angry too if I had to teach my classes. There's junk programs out there, but to discredit the entire education system and publicly dissuade structural engineers from more education is not right."
--------------------------------
First off, if you will recall, I said "I'd be the last person to run down the importance of an education" and I mean ANY level. Regardless of how theoretical anyone's education is it can have a use somewhere (maybe research). But what you can't seem to get through your head is: we are talking about a legal requirement for licensure. Not someone wanting more background as to where code equations come from, not someone who may want to teach or do research, someone who actually wants to seal drawings. Would the background of these folks be better with a higher level degree? Of course. Whose would not be? But we are talking a minimum level of competency here. As I have said previously: it is understood that you should "punt" [or seek guidance] in an area you do not feel comfortable in. Do you seriously think a course in something will prepare them [completely] to seal drawings? Of course not. You know how many structural engineers out there are self-taught wood and masonry? Quite a few.

As far as the “junk program” comment goes: where I got my MS (same place I got my BS) is actually highly regarded in the Civil Engineering community. (In fact, you probably have a few text books written by some former professors of mine.) But as I said before: there is a wide gap between the classroom and practicality. How much you want to bet if I sat in on your Structural Dynamics class I’d wind up having to give input there too? Does your professor even hold a license? How long did he practice? How many designs does he have sitting in the field today? Furthermore, at many Civil Engineering programs (across the country) a push has started for instructors to hold licenses (in fact, it was part of one of ASCE’s policy statements that I saw quoted in Structural Engineer magazine sometime back). Why do you think that is?

 

[3doorsdwn]

The above post is the last one I think I’m going to make on this thread because I think this discussion has gone as far as it can (and it has been suggested to me to move on). We are starting to go in circles here (as I am beginning to repeat myself). Suffice it to say: I have no problem with higher education, only making it a legal requirement for licensure. Thanks to the participants.

 

[Burg97]

Saw this thread and feel compelled to say something, so here's a vote for the MS requirement in Structural Engineering.

My background is BS, work 3 years, went back for MS, and have worked for 8 years. Architectural firm doing low to mid rise buildings.

The MS made me a much more professional engineer. If that's the goal of ASCE for our profession then I'm all for it. I think it's a needed goal.

I've been around the country and have experienced a disproportionate number of BS engineers who simply don't know what they don't know....and they'll fight to the end to not have to take another class.