PE Exam (passing scores)??? 6

[bpsmith]

Hey Everyone,

This will make the 2nd time I have took the pe exam (civil) in NC. I currently have around 7.5 yrs experience behind me (rdwy design and traffic eng). Unfortunately, I am starting to feel as if I am pretty 'dumb'!

I took the exam the first time to just get a feel for how the exam was and the type of questions that would be thrown at me. The 2nd time I signed up for a review class and threw lots of $$$ into many reference books outside of Lindenburg based of the first exam. I studied my --- off based off the first exam and even learned my weakest module 'water resources'. After taking the review class and working numerous problems in 'transportation' out of the Lindenburg problem book, I felt as if I was ready to conquer this test. During the am portion of the exam felt as if I did great, the pm portion I ran out of time and ended up guessing alot at the end (there is no way those afternoon problems are 6 mins each).

After the exam I felt as if the least I could have made was a 48 out of 80 HMMM...not so says my NCEES and NCBELS even though my score went up by 10pts from the previous test. This time I scored a 41.56pts.

I have read sites and they have said that the grey area for the exam is between 48 to 56 or 45 to 50 (out of 80 questions).

Regardless of what the passing number is, I'm not getting something obviously...(lol...the right answers)

Could you guys please take a look at my breakdown and give me some good advice on whether I should retake this test again in Apr or wait until Oct to retake it.

am environmental 25%
structures 50%
geotech 50%
transp 63%
water resources 38%

pm traffic analysis 73%
transp plan/const 43%
geometric design 63%
geotech 60%
water resources 56%

Thanks

 

[HgTX]

Not that this is helpful for getting you to pass the exam, but not passing it doesn't necessarily mean you're dumb. We had a coupla guys who took forever to pass and no one was surprised, but one of our better engineers also took three tries to pass. Some people are not good test takers.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[henri2]

The passing rate for individuals who take PE exams within 4 years after graduation is higher than those who take it later on. Test taking is like many other skills; if you don't use it often, you lose it.

My advice is to take a review course that offers timed practise/mock exams; they'll be much more expensive than others that do not offer this feature but well worth it. If there are none available, spend your time preparing by solving questions under simulated exam conditions with set time limits. This will help sharpen your test taking skills and develop strategies. Having a strategy and keeping calm during the exam is very important. If you panic you can easily unravel.

Have you considered challenging the exam results? Some states permit that. This could give you the opportunity to review what you did...and you may be suprised that you probably made some mistakes you thought you would never make.

 

[bpsmith]

Thanks Henri2,

I will impliment your recommendations. Do you have any suggestions on who I should use??? I dont want to forget all that I have learned. As of today I am hearing that some individuals even scored as high as 48 and didn't pass. It looks as if I have much more learning to do.

I do plan to appeal the score this week to the board and have my test hand graded. I wish I knew really how close I was to passing it might make me feel a little bit better rather than feeling so 'dumb'.

 

[jdonville]

bpsmith,

How did you get your score - let alone a breakdown?! All I ever got was an indication of overall "PASS" or "FAIL".

I hate to pour salt on the wound, but I note from your breakdown that your results in your area of practice (transportation) weren't exactly stellar. If you had been more consistently in the 70's or 80's in this area, you might not be scheduling your next exam...

Jeff

 

[dicksewerrat]

I think you have to get 70% or higher to pass. By my calcs., that is 54 out of 80. Try to work a group of problems out with out using a calculator. This will give you a better feel of what to expext. You may have only misplaced a decimal or two.

Richard A. Cornelius, P.E.

http://WWW.amlinereast.com

 

[zcp]

Looking at your breakdown, you only hit 70% in one area....and that is your area of EXPERTISE. It is time to look yourself in the mirror and ask what the problem is, "Am I not fast enough with my references or do I not have enough technical knowledge?" I think a combination of the two is your path to your stamp.

Now the hard part. Not being fast enough or "not being a good test taker" is the cop out many use in your situation. You CAN train yourself to take tests and work quickly with your references. The tough one will be admitting you don't have enough technical knowledge and then doing something about it. One of the keys to being a PE is knowing what you don't know and then doing something about it. Good luck!

ZCP

http://www.phoenix-engineer.com

 

[LHA]

Remember, you are just playing a numbers game, trying to get enough total points. This is much more important that "learning" disciplines.

There is nothing requiring you to take your depth exam in your area of expertise. I note your a.m. geo and structural grades are not markedly worse than your trans; also, you would improve greatly by ditching planning/construction and water on your depth exam.

Have you considered taking geo or struct? It's been a couple of years, but I believe struct has no water in p.m., and neither has planning/construction.

Also, if you could get environ. up to just 50%, you would pick up .5*.2= 10% on your overall, enough to pass. Even if not in your field, it might be worth considering; there are some relatively easy conceptual things in env, and the calcs in waste water are very straight-forward, even if you don't know what the answers mean.

Good luck, and I agree with bp and Hg. Some really great eng (and surveyors) can't pass the exam. But a lot of doors open when you do, or they did for me. Keep trying.

Remember: The Chinese ideogram for “crisis” is comprised of the characters for “danger” and “opportunity.”
-Steve

 

[HgTX]

Structural is MUCH harder than any of the other four PM exams. When I looked at the sample afternoon tests, I could do geotech, environmental, transportation, and hydraulics all pretty well, with only a couple of undergrad courses under my belt in each. On the other hand, even with a master's degree in structural engineering, I had a LOT of trouble with the structural sample afternoon test. Granted, I don't do a whole lot of design in my job, but still. I don't do any geotech at all and I had no problem with that sample test.

For some reason the people writing the structural afternoon test use a completly different standard of knowledge than the people writing the other four tests. I don't see why; if they feel that so much more knowledge is required for structural engineering, that's what the Structures I and II tests are for! I wound up taking geotech instead. In my state, it's all the same license. Some year I'll go back and do the structural one, in case I need to work someplace that requires it.

It's not just me either; I took the exam along with a working designer who was also not taking the structural PM portion, because he'd been warned by a structural PhD to stay away from the structural PM test. Something ain't quite right there.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[RDK]

I have to go along with what zcp says.

If you are not a “good test taker” then how did you ever manage to get an undergraduate degree in the first place?

If you cannot even pass your own area of practice then you better take a good look at yourself and your skills. You are obviously lacking in some area. I don’t mean that as an insult but you need some skill upgrading to become an engineer.

I’ve never written the US exams but have scored better than that on sample problems in ALL disciplines, not just the civil ones, taking them cold with no reference material available. The tests do not appear to be all that difficult if you are truly capable of doing professional engineering work.


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[henri2]

In the US there is a huge difference between taking exams in engineering school (college) and taking the Principles and Practice (PE). The scope and duration in the former is much smaller than in the case of the latter; so I can easily see where a student might have little problem obtaining an engineering degree but faces a more formidable challenge in a PE exam.

The PE exam questions are not very challenging for an individual who is prepared and has the mental stamina to endure 8 hours. Unfortunately for a variety of reasons, some people cannot cope after a few hours. Under pressure they start "short-circuiting", lose confidence, forget what they know...the center can no longer hold and things start quickly falling apart.

The pass rate for folks who repeat the exam is significantly lower than those who pass the exam on the first attempt (who are typically people who take the exam within first 4 years). As pointed out by others, in the group of repeat examiners are some very knowlegeable and technically competent individuals who cannot pass; but I am sure there chances would increase if the exam was split in two parts and held a few days apart. However, one cannot dwell on such wishful thinking and unless one is provided extra time per ADA provisions, one has to deal with the hand one is dealt. This is where STRATEGY comes into play for the repeat examiner and I have evidence where use of a well thought out strategy has helped repeat examinees pass.

When taking multiple choice open book exams, in addition to doing a lot of practice exam questions, some helpful tips include:

1. Making sure references are tabbed in a user friendly manner to access info quickly. Developing an index also helps.

2. Answering easy questions first, such as questions you know of the top of your head without looking up a formula. Skip questions that cause you to start employing a lot of critical thinking skills....you can always come back to them.

3. Keep an eye on time...set benchmarks..otherwise you will run out of time. So keep you foot on the pedal and do not back off.


bpsmith, consider attempting the NCEE practice online exam soon so you can see where you are at. If you feel good with the results, apply for the April exam and go for broke..but have a plan for both studying and when you are actually in the exam. Good luck to you.

http://www.ncees.org/exams/study_materials/#civil

 

[RDK]

If you fall apart after 8 hours of having to do the basics of your profession how do you ever make it through a day with a couple of overtime hours?

In my undergraduate days I had several courses in design areas where we had 4 tests each 8 hours long. (all the same professor) We were issued a design problem in the morning and had to complete a design assignment in the 8 hour period. (Always on Saturdays so that there was no interference with other classes.) What is the difference with that and an 8 hour professional exam except that in my case an initial error could really screw you up and in the FE/PE exam an initial error only costs you one mark.

If you take a Masters or a PhD you will have a comprehensive exam or a thesis oral defense that will last several hours.

From what I can see of the exams if you cannot pass them then you do not deserve to be an engineer. (That does not change my opinion that they are not a good method of determining entry to the profession.)


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[henri2]

RDK:

As expected, you have raised some very thought provoking points.

You ask "If you fall apart after 8 hours of having to do the basics of your profession how do you ever make it through a day with a couple of overtime hours?"

Actually the exam does not mirror the basics of what a lot of engineers do at work..a lot of it is academic and based on subjects an engineer may never be required to utilize at work...with the passage of time, some can forget what was learned in college. Also the stress and anxiety involved in taking professional license exams is different from what obtains at work.

In college, a student knows the Prof and can easily anticipate the questions that will be asked in an exam....which is not the case for the PE exam.

Graduate students specialize in subject areas they have an interest in so they should not have much of a problem coping with comprehensive exams and thesis/dissertaion defense. It's interesting to note that some graduate students and Profs have gone south with California PE exams..especially the Special Civil Seismic Principles and Engineering Surveying. Guess these subjects(sesimic/surveying) were outside their comfort zone.

All the same, I do endorse FE/PE exams, mainly because of the lack of uniformity in undegraduate engineering education. Even though the subject areas covered appear vast, the questions posed are not that challenging for an individual who is prepared. The key focus for any potential examination candidate who has been out of college for a a long while is a great REVIEW COURSE, PREPARATION and STRATEGY. Once that is taken care of, the examinee should be prepared to hit home runs/knock em for six.

bpsmith: Have you heard about Michael R. Lindberg's passing zone?

http://ppi2pass.com/ppi/PPI

Their next session starts on Jan 9th which is just around the corner. Do a search in the forum and read about what others have said about the program.

 

[bpsmith]

Thanks Guys for this wealth of information. I definately plan to put it to use.

Just to give you guys some insite on me. I am a CE grad student studying the design side of transportation. This covers the following topics: rdwy, airport, pvmnt, ITS, transp planning, and a few other areas ...and then there is the optional thesis. Unfortunately I have only been exposed to soils and foundations, and hydraulics during my undergrad years in college. Plus I do see some of it working on rdwy projects.

In my line of work all I have to do is the rdwy design (hor/vert, ect) and some traffic analysis. That's what I do for 8 hrs every single day (it doesn't bore me and I find it very exciting work). I'm not responsible for the ENTIRE rdwy project ["RDK"- fyi- a rdwy project encompasses the following disciplines struct, geotech, transp, planning/environ, traffic, and hydro]. In my opinion this is a good thing, because I feel that no one person is an expert in EVERY disciple. Its impossible...There is a difference between knowing of something as opposed to being able to design something in detail. I "know of" the other disciplines...I can design in my areas of transp/traffic.

Just because you "know of " a particular disciple doesn't mean one should seal/sign ones name to that portion of the plans? correct? I am very weary of someone that seals/signs off on an ENTIRE set of rdwy plans that encompasses everything I just listed above.

However, for this exam it appears that one must not just "know of" but one must be able to know "everything in detail" regarding to a majority of the modules on the exam.

I will continue to try at passing this exam and and again thanks for the advice and the constructive critism [henri2,lha,zcp dicksewerrat,hgtx and RDK]...You guys have been a big help.

bpsmith

 

[RDK]

When I finished grad school we had a comprehensive examination. If we failed the exam there was a second attempt allowed. A second failure meant no degree and mandatory withdrawal from the program. (Yes there were some people with two or more years of work that did not get a degree because of this.)

It consisted of questions submitted from each professor who taught a course that any of the potential graduates had taken. Thus there was a question from each of the courses in a major area from each professor who taught that course to any person writing that exam.

The result was that we had to answer 5 out of about 30 questions. All long answer. All very comprehensive of that course and all representative of the required knowledge for the degree. Many of them were ones that involved the ability to use material from other courses and disciplines to come up with the correct answer.

The exams were marked on a pass fail basis only. You had to get a pass on four of the five questions to get a pass on the exam.

At the start of the exam we were told that the university senate had just voted to abolish the comprehensive exam as a passing requirement, and welcome to the last comprehensive exam. One student asked what would happen if we failed and we were told that since it was a graduation requirement for us and this was the last opportunity to pass then we better not fail.

You want pressure, try betting you graduate degree and the last two or more years of your life on the next 4 hours no appeals and no second chances.

In most of your undergraduate coursework a failure on an exam means a failure of the course and an additional year to complete the degree. For a lot of people that is one additional year too many and in my class we had a lot of people drop out of the program after one failure because they did not want to or could not afford the additional year.

If you want to be an engineer then you have better be able to take the pressure. Ours is a profession with many conflicting pressures. The pressure to get it right. The pressure to do it quickly, the pressure to save money, the pressure to satisfy many competing and conflicting requirements.

Ours is a profession where we are betting many people’s lives on our ability to do the calculations and designs. If a simple exam that you can take over and over and over until you pass is too much pressure then I would suggest a different occupation.

And before anyone starts in with the claim that there are so many checks on any design that serious errors cannot actually be built, consider Willow Island, Kansas City Hyatt Regency, Chernobyl, Challenger, and many other fatal engineering mistakes.


We can kill people with our calculators. To me that is more pressure than a simple multiple guess exam.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[francesca]

Chernobyl was human error, not engineering failure. There has not been a significant nuclear failure that was a result of engineering error, only human error.

 

[LHA]

Further to francesca's post:

Likewise, from what I understand, neither space shuttle accident was conclusively proven to be due to faulty design. I might be wrong, I know nothing about either shuttle design or operation. The o-rings, and whatever allowed the piece of foam to break off, COULD have been designed improperly, at which point, the designers are at fault. Or something could have been not to spec(manufacturing), installed wrong or not inspected/maintained properly (O&M).

There are lots of "professionals" involved with the implimentation of every engineered-design. To blanketly blame any system failure on the designer is probably not fair.

Remember: The Chinese ideogram for “crisis” is comprised of the characters for “danger” and “opportunity.”
-Steve

 

[RDK]

If a human error can occur then I submit that the system was not designed to eliminate the human factor. This is however not the issue of the discussion.

My point was that we as engineers can and often do make errors that kill people.

If this fact does not put as much pressure on you in making your day to day designs as would a simple multiple guess exam that has no significant consequence of failure then I submit that there is something wrong with your moral compass.

I don’t support the exam. If the real problem is inadequate undergraduate education then fix that problem. We are engineers, supposed to be able to identify and solve the real problem.

Don’t continue to let young people waste 4 years of their lives thinking that they are going to become well trained engineers and then tell them that they should have gone to a different university.

With that is standard practice it is no wonder that some of the best and brightest people in the US are staying away from engineering education and some people who could have become engineers are turning away from the profession after discovering that the collective “we” has allowed them to spend 4 years of hard work in a futile effort because “we” did not adequately police the educational system. Instead ‘we’ relied on exams administered after the fact to determine if they had wasted their time, effort and money. This does not sound like a wise use of our resources to me.

Four years at an accredited educational institution with tests, projects and exams should be sufficient to determine who has the adequate educational background to be an engineer. Four more years experience with references and sign offs by other professionals should be enough to determine who has adequate experience to be a professional.

Spending a total of 16 hours writing two multiple guess exams that are by necessity limited in scope and do not represent real world professional practice is not a good substitute for a total of 8 years adequately monitored and examined training and experience supplemented by letters of reference by those who actually know the person, their character and their work.

Exams persist be cause they are easy. They should be abolished because they do not work.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[jdonville]

bpsmith,

You don't need to know everything in detail. Many of the questions on my PE exam seemed based on core principles from my undergrad.

Not that I remembered everything. But I had about 6 or 8 references with me and knew where to look most of it up.

I suggest that you get your undergrad soil mechanics, fluids, transportation, structural analysis, wastewater/enviro and surveying texts along with the Lindburg(?) tome together and study using timed practice exams. When studying, don't just read the texts, hand write your notes out (improves your ability to recall the written material). Review your answers and make a note of what you get wrong and make special study sessions for those problem topics.

As henri2 suggests, do the easy questions first and scan all the exam questions before diving in (helps to get your subconscious working on 'triage' early).

Jeff

 

[chicopee]

My suggestion on passing your PE exam is to do as many problems as you can in all the disciplines that you will be tested for! I did not take my exams until about 10 years after I graduated but I committed myself to roughly five months of continuous problem solving at nights, weekends, holidays and vaction time eventho I was married and had a baby son. Commitment is the key!!