National PLS Exam.

[wlday]

I'm still waiting on my results from last October's PLS exam.
Apparently, there was some sort of computer glitch delaying the exam results.

The 34% pass rate was quite low for the NPLS. Did anyone who sat for this exam and previous ones think it was much more difficult this time?

[rodgers]

to Chester Dowling for passing the National

[E_Page]

Some states have 3-strikes type rules. An examinee fails 3 times and then may not take the test again for some period of time like 2, 3, or 5 years, and then submitting a complete new application showing a new set of experience beyond that shown in one's original application.

California has no such rule, and therefore may have a higher percentage of 2nd, 3rd, 4th .... time test takers.

Brokenchain1 cited the national pass rate of 2nd timers. I think that if you could look beyond that, to those taking it for the 3rd, 4th time or more, you will see that average continue to decline rapidly.


Questions for debate:

Is there a point at which the state should say "no more"? Either the failing examinee needs to go away for 2 or 3 years and then reapply, or perhaps after the 6th (to pull a # out of the air) failure, that examinee may no longer qualify, at any time, to sit for the CA LS?

Or does it serve the public that licensing is designed to protect to allow an examinee to take the exam an unlimited amount of times as long as their check to BPELS clears?

[CalifCarl]

I got my results on Monday, having already seen the 34% pass rate and feeling that the Oct. test seemed harder than the April test I was worried to some extent. I knew I was more prepared , but you never know. I got the skinny envelope!

So this was my second time around for the National test and I passed, I hope I did hurt their statistics.

I'm not sure a limit on test taking is the way to go. We all know a few competent surveyors out there that have not yet been able to pass the test.

If you asked the BOPELS I've only taken the LS test one time. Well one and a half if you count the October test. But in reality I had taken the test twice before back around 89-90-91. Failing both time by less than the points given for one problem. Just a note on one of the tests, one of the problems out of the eight or so given was thrown out because of an incorrect bearing given. I recognized the error fixed it and continued the problem. But being it was thrown out I didn't get a score for it and lost the time I spent giving what was most likely a correct answer. I was too young , inexperienced and too broke to challenge what might have been as passing test. My how that would have changed these last fifteen years.

But back to my point the first two times I took the test I had two jobs and was going back to school, a mortgage and three kids to support. I came very close but no cigar. Now I'm older with more time and money to spend to make this happen, but if you threw in a three test limit I would technically be done. Ask an engineer how many times he or she had taken their examine. Don't laugh if they say three, four, five or six times before they passed. It's a hard process. I personal feel that the CA LS test is even harder than the PE examine. Mostly because of how the test is graded and the problem results not being shared. The most pro-active thing to happen for future LS examines is the Study guide that the CLSA produced. Kudo's you folks that put that together.

Anyway if an examinee just isn't qualified to be a surveyor, it's not going to happen by luck, no matter how many times he or she takes the test. The current number of people taking the test certainly doesn't warrant cutting people off from taking the test either. Bottom line no limits are needed!

[wlday]

BROKENCHAIN1,

Are you saying that all 93 who did not pass were second time test takers?
I agree with your 21st century remark, I'm on day 8 since letters were supposedly sent out and still have no results in hand.

[wlday]

BROKENCHAIN1,

I sat for the PLS last October for the first time. How would one know whether or not first time test takers were admitted?

[E_Page]

Carl,

First, congratulations on passing the exam.

Second, go back and read my previous post. I did not propose a 3-strikes and your out of the game (I believe I grabbed a number of 6 for discussion purposes). I proposed a 3-strikes and go away for some period of time before making your next attempt (I proposed 2 or 3 years).

Doesn't your experience support the idea of preventing a person who has repeatedly failing the test (after say, 3 attempts) from continually retaking it without getting additional qualifying experience?

My recollection of the NCEES exam is that it was not particularly difficult. Anyone with the requisite education and experience should be able to pass it with little difficulty.

Anyone who fails it more than twice really needs to take a step back and examine their base of knowledge and/or their exam taking methodology.

This is a professional level exam. It is testing not only your technical knowledge, but also your time management and (in the case of the state specific) communications skills.

For repeat takers, you are also being tested on your ability to question your current base of knowledge and methods. Are they adequate to the task? Does the repeat examinee have the ability to adjust methods and strategy, as well as receive additional education (through training and/or experience) to achieve success?

These too are crucial skills that the professional needs to possess.

Of those who I have known and had thought minimally competent and yet failed the exam, all but one passed on the second attempt.

Those who seem or are highly competent but cannot seem to pass the exam probably can't do so because thay have never learned effective short term time management and how that applies to an exam situation.

Again, they need to examine their methods and make the necessary adjustments.

I have known licensed surveyors whom about I've wondered how they were able to pass. Mostly, they are those who looked upon the exam as a hurdle to get over (and then coast for the reaminder of their career) rather than a milestone to be passed.

If you think that the grading process is unfair, I submit that you know very little to nothing about that process. I have attended a CLSA chapter meeting at which the process was described in some detail. Perhaps you can bring this up as a matter of discussion at your chapter and someone can explain it to you in a manner that does not give up the specifics of particular problems.

I have also attended a grading session and can assure you that the system is set up to be as fair as possible and the professionals, who either donate their time or get the chainman level wage the state pays for participating put in long hours and work very hard and spend long hours to ensure that your exam is graded as fairly as possible.

The study guide is not a counter to the grading process. It came about partly because of the unwillingness of BPELS to release past exams and solutions.

There is valid reasoning as to why BPELS has been unwilling to release exams or solutions related largely to costs. They, like everyone else must work within a budget and decide upon priorities for available funds. They also need to consider whether or not releasing exams/solutions would compromise their ability to prepare a fair and consistent exam in future years.

A person doesn't necessarily need to aspire to the professional level to be considered succesful in surveying. Look at the level of pay for highly talented PCs and office techs who may never go any farther than LSIT, if even that.

Highly skilled technicians are very important to our line of work, and putting pressure on someone who performs well there to become licensed may not be fair to them.

For those who do go on to be licensed, be professional also...


Attaining the license is a milestone in your training, not a hurdle.

[CalifCarl]

Evan sorry if I pushed your wrong button. I wasn't picking your statements out as a challenge. My comments are in general and of my personal experience. And I still think there is no reason to have test limits. When a passing score is less than 50% and only about 10% of the examinees can reach that, there just no way someone is going to get luck and pass the examine. If they want to continue to plunk down the $275 to take it again so be it. I don't plan on doing that more than this one more time! ;)

I never said that the grading of the examine is unfair. (OK it wasn't my intent to say the grading was unfair.) I'm sure it is fair and equal for all examinees. I have heard the stories of how these test are graded. The hard part of the process is how it is hidden to the examinees where they failed on the examine. The National examine results gives you a straight up % of where you failed which matches the test sections. The state specific doesn't do that. I know if were in aposition to appeal my test all the questions that I have would most likely be answered or at least point to the direct areas of my mistakes.

To let you know on the NCEES test in April I took it to lightly, 70% no big deal, test seemed easy. Heck I found most of the answers in my references. No way I didn't pass that test. ;) again This time I found very little of the answers in my references. It was a lot different test than in April. But I worked harder and apparently made the grade. Just a note if an examinee took the last two National test and failed, it's may not because they didn't improve themeselves from the first test. These two test were different.

"The study guide is not a counter to the grading process. It came about partly because of the unwillingness of BPELS to release past exams and solutions." See Evan we are talking about the same thing.

"Carl,

First, congratulations on passing the exam."

Evan Thank you

[E_Page]

No harm, no foul, Carl.

The low pass rate has been used as the main squawking point as to problems with the exam, particularly the CA state specific.

It has been statistically proven, time and again, that repeat test takers have much lower success rates than 1st time takers. The more tries, the lower the success rate.

If the majority of these examinees were taking the opportunity between tries to improve their knowledge, the trend would be just the opposite.

So if we are going to let people take the exam an indefinite number of times, we need to let go of the argument that there must be something wrong with the process because of the low pass rate.

Take a look at regional and national averages for the NCEES exams. California is quite a way behind in both comparisons. CA lags about 10 percentage points.

The argument has been made that CA has a much larger population of people taking the test compared to other states and so a direct comparison to another state isn't necessarily valid.

That may be true, when comparing one state for one sitting of the exam. But, if you increase the population, the satistics should be more accurate.

Look at the results from many states over many years vs CA results. You will find that CA still lags behind.

Same exam, same exam rules. What is the most logical conclusion that can be drawn from that.

CA applicants are not as well prepared as those of other states.

Is it because the applicants in other states have more or better access to past exams, solutions (speaking of the NCEES exam here), or study materials?

Is it because there are more and better review courses in other states?

The answer to the first question is an obvious no.

Having lived in quite a few states, I can tell you that I have seen many more training and review courses related to the LS exam in CA than anywhere else I've been.

Many chapters of CLSA offer them, Caltrans has them, most of the colleges and universities in CA that have survey curricula offer them, and there are private companies that offer them.

Anyone who is truly serious about passing the exam has the opportunity to attend one or more review course in any given exam season.

So what is it? Are the entrance qualifications too lax? Are there too many who feel that by virtue of having taken the test x number of times or having worked in surveying for many years that it is their right to be licensed? Are californians just stupider and lazier than people in other states?

I don't know the reason for certain, but I suspect that other states have a higher standard for entrance to the exam, either through educational or experience requirements.

I have met very few who have taken and failed the exam who felt that their own qualifications were lacking, therefore it must be the exam development and grading.

But these people are comparing their qualifications to the state's basic entrance requirements and the qualifications of other applicants. They should be comparing themselves to licensed surveyors, asking themselves "how was that person prepared and what am I lacking in comparison?" and then targeting their own areas of weakness.

Unfortunately, many have egos that won't let them admit, even to themselves, any weakness, so they continue to spend $275 year after year.

And having met some folks that don't seem to know much about surveying yet managed to get licensed, I'm not so sure that once in a while, some pass more on luck than on knowledge.

Question: I was under the impression that a failing examinee had the opportunity to review their exam to see where they were weak. Not to find out what the correct answers are, but to see what they got right and what they got wrong. Am I mistaken in that impression?


Once your practicing, on your own, with no other licensee responsible for your work and therefore not checking it, there will be nobody to tell you that you are doing something wrong before you get sued for it.

In review of a failing exam attempt, it should be sufficient to be told what your area of weakness is. It is then up to the examinee to figure out why he was wrong and to figure out how to arrive at the correct answer.

Once you pass, nobody will be there to hold your hand.

The license is not a promotion given for long and loyal service to the profession. It is given to those who have demonstrated the requisite knowledge, communication, time management, and organizational skills to be considered minimally competent.

And it's not as much of a mystery as many believe that it is.


Simple formula for the repeat examinee to use to pass:

1. Find out in what area(s) you failed or were weak.

2. Begin study shortly after your exam, but no later than getting your failing results.

3. Study all of the areas that are likely to be seen on the exam, giving extra emphasis to those areas in which you were weak.

4. Go to your CLSA chapter meetings and get to know some of the more knowledgeable LSs and ask them if it's OK to bounce questions off them from time to time.

5. Get into or form a study group with others studying for the exam.

6. take a review course presented by a reputable organization.

7. Pass the exam.

8. Continue your education until retirement.

Good luck to those taking the exam this April.