april 2004 stuct. i pe takers

huangyhg

april 2004 stuct. i pe takers
i was curious as to why the pass rates for the structural i test was so low?
it is even lower then the structure ii pass rates.
i do not know except i was in the struct. 1 exam trying to be one of the passees. it was a very difficult exam.
as a test taker, it felt as if the test was very geared towards seismic and bridge design and not in accordance with their percentages. beyond the percentages, i was very disappointed with the test since it doesn't test my knowledge. i felt it was testing my ability to have and bring a reference to the test. then, look up values from a table. as an engineer it is should be a foregone conclusion that i would be able to find a reference and lookup a value.
for one thing, the exam administration is different now that the second and third parts are combined into one so as to produce a higher pass rate.
another consideration is that the s1 is so general and encompasses so many topics whereas the second day is a bit more concise.
regards,
qshake
eng-tips forums:real solutions for real problems really quick.
cenaen,
do you think a long hand test of calculations and written theories with less questions would be more appropriate?
just curious, what is your area of expertise?
mjohan,
i peronally think essay questions would be much more beneficial then the current multiple guess version. some of the questions have answers that are essentially the same #.(for example diaphram loads of ( 770, 775, 780, lb per ft) the current test does not require you to show a train of thought and design logic it only tests if you can extract the exact capacity they have for a given situation. it does not allow you to show any engineering judgement.
i took (and passed) the struct 1 test back in 1997, and i found it to be a reasonable test of my knowledge since only one question was about bridges, and i do all of my work in buildings.  if i re  
all,
recall when the exam was all building (up until about 1989) and bridge engineers had to suffer through the building problems - not so fun anymore is it.
i think the exam is finally where it should be with respect to fairness.  with the exception of teh first day, which is general in nature and more favorable to building types, you get the option of building or bridges.  as i can re  
ideally, the test should be an attempt measure your ability as an engineer, not your ability to buy review books and regurgitate so you can get a passing grade.  since there is already a plethora of pe exams, maybe there should be a separate test for bridge engineers.