SI Certs 3

[durtaholic]

Hey All ,

Was wondering if anyone has taken the SI Certs on-line class for ICC Reinforced Concrete . They are offering a summer price of 299.00 which includes plan reading. It has a 90 day limit to finish class. Seems reasonable ?

http://sicerts.com/

Thanks

 

[boffintech]

Being of charitable mood today I'll give you the 2 step plan that guarantees success!

FREE!!!!!!!!

1) turn off TV
2) read book

 

[Ron]

boffintech....exactly...nice post!!!

 

[BigH]

Ah, but you don't get PDHs for reading the book - only when you pay money to someone who tells you what's in the book!

 

[vollEngineer]

I did one online through vccampus, I think, that was about $100 and it was awful. (I got the reinforced concrete.)
An online course cannot help you with the plan reading, in my opinion. If you can read plans well, tab your books, and take that skinny general special inspections reference, that should do it. I don't know about pdh. I always seem to have enough somehow...

 

[sicerts]

Looks like I am a few months late in the discussion. I am the developer of SI Certs and the Reinforced Concrete course. boffintech made a great point, turn off TV and read book! This made me laugh, but its true, there definitely takes commitment and dedication on the part of the one seeking the certification. I developed the course for a number of reasons...one, I couldn't find any real quality online courses available. There are traditional brick-and-mortar classes offered in California and a couple other western states, but they are typically around a grand. Just not practical. Also, I wanted to make it 100 percent online, so the user can take it anywhere, anytime, without having plans or tests mailed back and forth.

We launched the course last year late April and users tried it out. We sought feedback and continued to improve where we could to make it the most relevant and beneficial. We've been getting good, constructive feedback. I'm in the process of uploading testimonials from several of our users that were open to submitting them.

Briefly, the course has already sifted through the reference materials to present the relevant portions that the user will encounter on the test. Portions of the code/ASTMs and concrete manual are not even addressed on the test, so unless the user is familiar with where to look, the studying can be time consuming. I hired an artist to create hand-drawn illustrations that expound on areas that need visuals. Unless a person is a veteran so to speak, some of the code concepts are difficult to understand without visuals. Now everyone has different learning styles, from visual, auditory, to hands-on, and combinations thereof. I've really tried to address all of the learning styles (kinesthetic, which is hands-on is obviously the most difficult online, save the general interactivity itself inherent in the course). A user will encounter audio links throughout the course, where narration expounds on concepts with further explanations. The key here is for the user to familiarize themselves with the references in front of them as they go through the course. Highlight them, study the areas presented and explained, so that when going into the test, these references are familiar and quickly navigable. It really does no good to attempt the SI Certs course without all of the references in hand.

I can agree with vollEngineer to a degree with plan reading, in that no one can master plan reading via online. It's just not possible. I will disagree though, with the stated premise. Plan reading concepts can be taught online, in a classroom, or anywhere with the right approach. I recall when I first got into the industry and started looking at plans. I was under the tutelage of a seasoned inspector with multiple ICC certifications. Even with his help in print reading, I still progressed fairly slowly understanding how to navigate, how prints were organized, and how to find randomly queried information. Looking back on it, I wish I was taught the foundational concepts that I have since worked into the course. It would have moved me along much quicker. The course's approach is not theoretical either. There's a real set of plans to navigate and learn from, study questions to answer and gauge your understanding. It's a foundational and conceptual approach. From there, the user should practice what was learned with a few "real" sets from their office or job site to "solidify" their understanding and have confidence in approaching any set in the future.

When the course sales page claims that models were adapted from graduate level courses, this is not just a marketing pitch. I drew from concepts, learning approaches and online formats that I learned when completing my master's degree in secondary education from a well-known online university and incorporated it into the course. Before entering the special inspection industry, I taught both high school and adult education. I've drawn from all of my experiences both in teaching and field work to come up with something that's extremely convenient and really worthwhile in preparing someone to advance their career.

All of this said, it's always better to hear from actual users. They are what help me gauge where improvements need to be made, what is beneficial and what isn't. In a couple weeks there should be some testimonials on the site, but hopefully other users will chime in about their experiences too. So far I can say this with confidence: those who have taken their time with the course and used it along with their references have generally been successful. Those who have not and "breezed" through the course thinking it was a magic pill or that just by possessing access to the course alone was the answer, so to speak, have generally not been successful. It's definitely not a cheater course. I hope this helps some.

 

[msucog]

took it...passed it...read ACI, read IBC and read the other noted reference materials. then, go work in the field for a couple of years and you'll do fine. practical experience is the only way to learn how to read plans. and i must say that the plans provided to me for the test looked like copies of old blueprint copies of faxed copies...in other words, the quality was poor and unreasonable. either way, it tested that i truly knew how to read plans so maybe that was the point or maybe it was a coincidence. by the way, having the certifications is useless when enforcement of IBC is spotty or non-existent and irregular from city to city, county to county, state to state, etc to etc. and having come from several years with a very large contractor prior to my geotechnical/materials testing career, enforcement needs to be ramped WAAAY up. that's my two cents...

 

[henri2]

An individual of average intelligence with a high school diploma and no construction experience can go through a 1 month exam preparation course and pass an ICC special inspection exam on the first attempt. In the field, the lack of experience will quickly show up. This is why, many jurisdictions on the west coast evaluate special inspectors who desire to work in their jurisdiction. With the iCC exam as a pre-requisite, a review of relevant work experience (3-5 years), a written and oral exam is not uncommon.

 

[BigH]

Good to see you back henri2!!

 

[henri2]

What's up BigH? I peep from time to time. Been very busy in the Big Apple.

 

[durtaholic]

Thanks for the replies.

 

[sicerts]

Congrats, msucog! It's a great accomplishment. ICC needs to continue its influence in United States. This will happen as Building Officials are "encouraged" to enforce the code. This is happening where people like you and I are making it happen. The geotechnical engineering company I currently work for is doing just this out of their Boise, Idaho office. Over a year ago they began having informational seminars (which they have been approved to issue professional development hours for attendance). They intentionally targeted municipalities as the audience. By educating, bringing awareness to current issues and the lack of quality that's pervasive without enforced oversight, and teaching just what the code requires regarding special inspection, changes are already being made. Prior to about two weeks ago, the building department would allow uncertified individuals to look at structural elements in the field and write observations, so long as a certified individual signed off their report at the end of the day. Just now, they have said that they now require all on-site field personnel observing on-site conditions must be certified in the respective discipline. Looking at masonry, must have ICC structural masonry. This is big progress, and needs to keep happening.