Some observant readers may have noticed that since April, the "L.S." designation has not appeared after my name in this column. Prior to then, "P.E., L.S." after my name signified that I was both a Professional Engineer and a Professional Land Surveyor. But, as I begin to contemplate retirement, I decided not to spend the time and money required to continue practicing land surveying legally in New Jersey, where I have practiced civil engineering (primarily) and surveying for decades.

To keep my professional land surveyor licensure, it would have been necessary to acquire at least 24 hours of continuing education credits (Professional Development Units—PDUs) as required by New Jersey state law. Both the cost of such an educational requirement and the time necessary to amass sufficient PDUs have significantly influenced my decision. I intend to continue practicing professional engineering since, at least in New Jersey, it is not yet necessary to acquire continuing education credits to continue doing what I have been doing for more than 50 years.

Until the end of September 2008, the "P.E." after my name referred to licensure in both New Jersey and the state of New York. However, because continuing education for licensure is now required in New York, the letters P.E. will be applicable only in New Jersey. Advancing age has not disqualified me from practicing in New Jersey, but I won’t do anything "professional" in New York because I haven’t acquired sufficient PDUs to be "legal" in that state.
Some readers may consider this column simply a rant by a disgruntled former (at least in one state) professional practitioner. Nevertheless, I am compelled to share my long-held thoughts that many of the engineering and surveying courses used to meet continuing education requirements had little value. Many courses I have taken have been almost useless in affecting the quality of my ability to serve society as a professional engineer. I was required to spend time sitting through courses in which I had no interest and which would be of no use whatsoever in my professional practice of land surveying or engineering. Attending these courses to maintain licensure in New Jersey (surveying) and New York (engineering) cost both significant time and money.

I must admit that at one point, earlier in my career, I also taught continuing education courses under college and professional association auspices. But, the best training I received during my career occurred at Stanford University while working on my Masters degree in hydraulic engineering. Among the many required classes, I took four courses on hydraulic engineering taught by John King Vennard—the greatest "pure teacher" I ever met, even though he did not have an advanced degree. Of course, the classes included testing on the content in a supervised environment. There was no way to cheat (which I was not inclined to do). Early in my career I also took courses and tests that were monitored and graded by accomplished teachers.

However, without sufficient oversight, some engineers allegedly have used dishonest methods to acquire continuing education credits by having subordinates, friends, or coworkers sign the necessary document(s) indicating attendance at a course they paid for but did not attend, thus fulfilling the legal requirements for continuing education without actually being in the classroom (or learning anything). Alternatively, a registered attendee might sign in for a course, then leave after a few minutes and not return, or return only as necessary to sign whatever documents were necessary as proof of attendance.

Other professions—law, medicine, dentistry—probably face similar problems when it relates to keeping up with the profession and maintaining competency over time. Unless their continuing education sessions relate to the specific area of their practice, such PDUs are probably worthless for those professions, as well.

Ensuring the ability to perform at an adequate level within any profession is primarily the responsibility of the license holder.

Editor’s note: What’s your opinion? What are the important elements of effective continuing education? What has been the most useful and effective training you’ve received during your career? How could (should) licensure and continuing education requirements be restructured to ensure that knowledge and skills of practicing engineers and surveyors keep pace with advancements in the fields—or with lessons learned from failures and disasters? Submit your ideas and opinions to Bob Drake, editor, at bdrake@zweigwhite.com.

Alfred R. Pagan, P.E., is a consulting engineer in Hackensack, N.J. He can be reached at 201-441-9719; or e-mail him at pagan@cenews.com.