I think that taking a university course is what most licensing agencies rate the highest. The problems with that, however, are that they are time consuming, cover topics that might not be on focus to what the practicing engineer wants, and for the engineer who has been out of school for a while and not engaged in very specialized work or research, the math emphasis can be a problem.
What is not given the proper value by licensing agencies is day to day work experience. Most of us in the very competitive consulting business have to keep ahead of the field to get and successfully complete projects and to get additional projects from our very knowledgeable and up-to-date clients. So why is this not formally given its due? AAEES does give credit for work experience.
I am all for lots of continuing education; I am not for mandatory and monitored continuing ed.
------------------------------
Lewis Ewing P.E., M.ASCE
Engineer
Carollo Engineers PC
Irvine CA
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 04-07-2023 02:08 PM
From: Christopher Seigel
Subject: Value of Various Forms of Continuing Education in Industry
How does the Civil Engineering industry prioritize and value different forms of continuing education, such as certifications, professional development hours, and other types of ongoing learning opportunities? Are certain types of continuing education considered more valuable than others?
For example, if someone told you that they had a received a certification in GIS, would your initial feeling be that they were a competent user of the software? In contrast, would you feel differently if they told you they had gone to a week-long GIS training worth a certain number of professional development hours?
How much value do we place on different forms of ongoing learning?
------------------------------
Christopher Seigel P.E., M.ASCE
Civil Engineer
------------------------------