Review for and Assessment of the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam

Transcription

1 Review for and Assessment of the Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Enno Ed Koehn, Rajesh D. Malani Lamar University Abstract One of the most important phases of the registration process involves satisfactory completion of the Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination. This paper describes a FE review course which has been operating since The course has been successful in that 94.5% of the students completing the sequence have passed the Fundamentals Examination. The review emphasizes, over a seven-week period, the various engineering sciences. It is assumed that the students are motivated to study on their own the remaining material on the exam that includes, in part, questions on chemistry, computers and mathematics. A pretest, final practice exam, and independent student evaluation are also conducted. An assessment of the review course indicates that students believe that they are well prepared for the FE exam in subjects that they have taken for their program of study. Here, the review course enhances their knowledge of specific subject areas. However, in subjects students have not taken, the review appears to be less than satisfactory. Obviously it is difficult to review a subject that one is not familiar with. Overall, however, the findings indicate that well-motivated students, who complete a comprehensive review course, experience a high pass rate on the fundamentals of engineering examination. For a university with an engineering program, performance by students on the FE exam can be important and may be utilized as one measure that outcomes are being satisfied. This can assist in satisfying ABET accreditation requirements. A state may also utilize the FE pass rate as an output measure of the effectiveness of an institution s undergraduate program. I. Introduction In order to protect the public, health, safety and welfare, the practice of engineering has been entrusted in the United States, by various governmental entities, only to those persons duly licensed and registered. Engineering has also been declared by government statute to be a learned profession, the practitioners of which shall be held accountable to the public for high professional standards in keeping with the ethics and practices of other professions 2. Approved education, appropriate experience, and examination, commonly called the Three E s, are required in order to become a licensed professional engineer 11. This paper describes experiences related to the operation of a Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) review course Page

2 designed to assist individuals to become Engineers-in-Training (EIT). Successful completion of the Fundamentals of Engineering examination may be considered one of the initial steps in becoming an EIT and subsequently a licensed professional engineer 5. II. Fundamentals of Engineering Exam The Fundamentals of Engineering examination is composed by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES) and administered in a uniform manner by the various boards of registration. It consists of required four-hour morning and afternoon sessions. The morning examination consisting of 120 questions and the afternoon general exam consisting of 60 questions is composed of multiple-choice questions covering the subjects listed below. Chemistry Computers Dynamics Engineering economics Electrical circuits Ethics Fluid mechanics Materials science/structure of matter Mathematics Mechanics of materials Statics Thermodynamics The afternoon portion of the test consists of 60 multiple-choice questions in a specific area one of which a student must choose to complete. These include general, chemical, civil, electrical, industrial and mechanical engineering. In both parts of the examination all questions should be answered since no subtraction is made for incorrect answers 9. It is usually recommended that a strategy be developed to prepare for the examination 12. For example, some recommend that the general examination in the afternoon should be chosen since it covers the identical subjects as those on the morning test. It is also strongly advised to review subject areas with which an individual may be familiar but not to spend an exceedingly large amount of time on unfamiliar subjects. A knowledge and location of various formulas in the Fundamentals of Engineering Supplied Reference Hand book is also recommended 4. Copies of this book are available to students studying for the test. A new handbook is distributed during the exam since the examinees are prohibited from bringing their own copy for use during the examination. An ASCE task committee has reviewed the FE exam in order to ascertain its applicability to B.S.C.E. programs 3. This was undertaken because results indicated that civil engineering (CE) examinees ranked 12 th out of the 16 disciplines tested. In addition, only 60.6% of civil Page

3 engineering students passed the examination compared with an overall 71.8% pass rate. After investigating the subject matter tested by the exam, the ASCE committee concluded that the FE examination measures those fundamentals appropriate for entry into the civil engineering profession and does not discriminate against civil engineers. It was noted, however that the poor CE performance was most likely related to the lack of student motivation to review for the exam. This suggests that, nationally, civil engineering students apparently do not place a high priority on the FE examination. This may indicate that educators are not emphasizing to their classes the importance of the exam as well as the associated benefits and prestige of professional registration. III. Fundamentals of Engineering Review In order to assist students in reviewing for the fundamentals of engineering exam, Lamar University has operated a comprehensive review course since The course has been successful in that over the years 94.5% of the students completing the sequence have passed the FE examination. Since 1986, a format which consists, of an introduction and pretest, seven fourhour review sessions, final practice exam, evaluation and independently directed study has been utilized. Before 1986 the syllabus did not include a pretest, evaluation, or independently directed study. However, in certain semesters due to university schedule requirements and various other factors the pretest is not offered. The data presented in this paper are based on the 1986 format which includes the performance of 364 students sitting for the FE Exam. It shows, specifically, that since 1986, the pass rate has been 94.0 %. This value is approximately equal to the overall pass rate since 1980, 94.5 %., which is based on the performance of 524 examinees. Specifically, these values measure the percentage of students who take the exam the same semester the review course is offered. It may include, at times, a small number of students who have taken the exam previously and did not pass the minimum requirements. The FE review is open to undergraduate and graduate students as well as engineers working in the community. It is composed, therefore of a large variety of students. The subjects covered in the review, consists of the following engineering sciences: statics, dynamics, solid mechanics, circuits, thermodynamics, engineering economy, and fluids. They are presented two nights a week (Tuesday and Thursday) for a seven-week interval. Faculty from five engineering departments; chemical, civil, electrical, industrial and mechanical, teach the course. Students who have confidence in their knowledge of a certain subject often elect not to participate in the evening that particular material is presented. In addition, it is assumed that it is the student s responsibility to review subjects such as chemistry, computers, materials, and mathematics. These subjects account for a large section of the required portion of the FE examination. Numerous universities operate FE review courses with good results. The classes are usually 4 5 weeks in length which is shorter than the 7 8 weeks scheduled for the program at Lamar University. At some institutions the students from various departments teach the different sections covered on the examination. This approach tends to involve students in the teaching as well as learning experience and has been found to yield satisfactory results. In any case, it is generally believed that individuals who are motivated to study and review the material on the Page

4 examination, experience a high pass rate on the FE exam. It has been found that the most important aspect of the endeavor is that students must be prepared to review some of the subject areas on their own. IV. Pretest As the syllabus states, all students enrolled in the course take a pretest (if it is offered) during the first week of class. The pretest is designed to familiarize individuals with the FE examination and to indicate that a review session may be helpful in preparing for the exam. It consists of a collection of problems in the engineering science subject areas. The average grade on the pre-test for the academic years since has been calculated and shown in Table 1. The results indicate that the pretest scores of students who passed the FE exam are roughly the same as those who did not satisfy all the course requirements including those who failed the FE examination. The average scores are a disappointing versus out of a maximum of 70 points. It appears therefore, that all students tend to start the review course at a relatively low level of basic knowledge in the engineering sciences. These results suggest that it would be beneficial for the students to be involved in a review course. V. Final Practice Examination After completion of the review sequence, a final practice exam is given. The final practice exam consists of a collection of problems similar to those utilized on the morning portion of the FE examination. It is believed that a score on this test should be a good indication of whether a student is adequately prepared to take the FE Exam. The grade distribution on the final practice exam shown in Table 2 indicate that the scores of students who passed the FE exam are higher than the students who did not satisfy all the course requirements including failing the FE test. The average grade on the final practice exam of those who passed the FE exam is 71.2 in contrast to 52.2 for students not satisfying all the requirements of the review course including those who failed the FE exam. These scores suggest that numerous students have not taken the time to study and review for the final practice exam and/or the FE examination. The average low score on the final practice exam is for those students who passed the FE examination. The average grade for those who failed the FE test is It appears that at this level a student s knowledge is such that he/she could possibly either pass or fail the FE Examination. A previous study found that electrical engineering students performed at a relatively high level on the final practice exam compared to the other disciplines tested 7. Their average score was 76. In contrast, those in mechanical engineering performed at the lowest level with an average grade of 62. Civil engineering students were between the two extremes with an average score of 70 correct answers. This would suggest that, as a group, the majority of civil engineering students are capable, after a review, to perform well on the FE examination. Page

5 In this regard, the data relating pretest scores and the final practice exam is extremely variable. The findings suggest that the score on the pretest does not predetermine the performance on the final practice exam. Numerous students who do well on the pretest perform poorly on the final practice exam and vice versa. This is to be expected since most students study for the final practice examination but do not have the opportunity to review for the pretest. Table 1: Pretest Grades (Maximum Score 70 Points) Academic year Students passing FE Examination Students not satisfying course requirements including those who failed the FE exam Mean score Standard deviation Mean score Standard deviation Average Page

6 Table 2: Final Practice Exam Grades Academic year Students passing FE Exam Students not satisfying requirements including those who failed the FE Exam Mean Standard Low Mean Standard Deviation Deviation Average Page

7 VI. FE Examination Results After completion of the final practice exam, a personal evaluation of a student s performance is conducted. Those subject areas which exhibit weakness are noted and independent study is recommended to correct deficiencies. This process has been found to be of great assistance in passing the FE examination. Overall, 77% of the students successfully finish the review course and sit for the FE examination. Since 1986, the passing rate for those students has been 94%. The overall student grade-point average (GPA) distribution discussed in a previous paper may be noteworthy 7. The data indicate that there is a direct relationship between grade-point average (GPA) and performance on the exam. As an example, all students with a GPA greater than or equal to 3.05 have passed the FE test. As has been mentioned, 23% of the enrollees do not successfully complete the review course. Time constraints from required course work, interview trips, weddings, job assignments, work relocation, and other miscellaneous activities are given as reasons for not finishing the sequence. A number of these excuses may not be valid since the review is usually completed shortly after the midterm date and before pressure from required course work and finals tends to develop. It would probably be difficult, however, due to the aforementioned external and personal reasons, to substantially increase the completion rate above 85%. Nevertheless, the 94% pass rate on the FE exam suggests that the review course is meeting its desired objective. For informational purposes, the passing rate by discipline since 1986 is listed below: Chemical 97.2% Civil 94.8% Electrical 93.2% Industrial 100.0% Mechanical 92.4% Total 94.0% As shown, since 1986, 94.8% of the civil engineering students have passed the fundamentals of engineering examination. This is significantly higher than the national average of roughly 60-70%. The data indicate, therefore, that engineering students, who are motivated to enroll in and complete a review course, are well prepared to satisfy the requirements of the FE Examination. This is also true for the other engineering disciplines VII. Engineering Accreditation There are various criteria that must be satisfied for an engineering program to be accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). These are tabulated in the publication, Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs 1. One requirement that must be satisfied is that each program should have an assessment process including documentation that the results are being applied to further develop and improve the course of study. In addition, the outcomes that are important to the objectives of the program must be measured. Evidence that Page

8 may be used includes performance on nationally-normed subject content examinations 1. The FE test is one such examination that may be utilized. Furthermore, an approach has been developed which may be utilized to measure a program s performance on various sections in the FE exam 8. The performance of Lamar University students on the FE examination is one indication that the program outcomes are being, to some degree, satisfied. VIII. Assessment of Review Courses Recently a questionnaire was completed by students involved with the FE review course. The survey instrument is specifically designed to determine a student s preparedness for the topic areas on the FE examination 8. The comprehensive findings are shown in Table 3 6. Specifically, Table 3 shows that over 38% of the students perceive they were unprepared for three subject areas on the A.M. exam. These include Fluid Mechanics, Material Science/Structure of Matter, and Mechanics of Materials. This value increases to 62.5% for the afternoon general engineering exam as shown in Table 4. Table 5 indicates that the average student completing the survey has completed, overall 1.2 credit hours in Fluids,.3 credit hours in Material Science/Structure of Matter, and.3 hours in Mechanics of Materials. Civil and mechanical engineering students are required to take 2 6 credits in these areas. However, chemical, electrical, and industrial students often take no courses in these subjects. It is difficult for a student to review an area in which he or she has not taken a formal course. Therefore, it is reasonable that the perceived level of preparedness would be less for these three subject areas. The composite score of the level of preparedness was also calculated. As illustrated in Table 6 the level of preparedness for mathematics is 3.39 for the morning and 3.25 for the afternoon general FE exam. In fact, Tables 3 and 4 show that no student believed they were unprepared in mathematics. These results are interesting, in that the review did not cover mathematics. The class was asked to review utilizing the self study approach in this subject. Apparently this was the correct approach in the mathematics area. In addition, engineering ethics received a 3.0 composite score for the morning exam. Also, no student believed they were unprepared for this section as shown in Table 3. As in mathematics, the review did not cover ethics. It appears that the data indicates that self study is adequate for the engineering ethics subject area. The review course covered the subjects of statics and thermodynamics. According to the information in Tables 3 and 4 no student believed they were unprepared in these areas. In addition, these subjects are taken by all engineering students as part of the core curriculum. Overall, the assessment data in Tables 3 6 indicate that the FE review course is meeting its objective to prepare students for the FE exam. However, difficulty exists in reviewing subjects such as mechanics of materials and fluids which numerous students have not taken in their undergraduate program. Perhaps another approach should be taken for these subjects in the review sequence. Page

9 Table 3. Level of Preparedness for Morning FE Exam, as a percentage SUBJECT AREA VERY ADEQUATELY MINIMALLY UNPREPARED PREPARED PREPARED PREPARED Chemistry Computers Dynamics Electric Circuits Engineering Economics Ethics Fluid Mechanics Material Science/ Structure of Matter Mathematics Mechanics of Materials Statics Thermodynamics Table 4. Level of Preparedness for Afternoon General FE Exam, as a percentage SUBJECT AREA VERY ADEQUATELY MINIMALLY UNPREPARED PREPARED PREPARED PREPARED Chemistry Computers Dynamics Electric Circuits Engineering Economics Ethics Fluid Mechanics Material Science/ Structure of Matter Mathematics Mechanics of Materials Statics Thermodynamics Page

10 Table 5. Average Credit Hours for FE Exam Students SUBJECT AREA CREDIT HOURS Chemistry 8.9 Computers 5.1 Dynamics 3.0 Electric Circuits 6.2 Engineering Economics 2.3 Ethics.9 Fluid Mechanics 1.2 Material Science/ Structure of Matter.3 Mathematics 16.0 Mechanics of Materials.3 Statics 3.0 Thermodynamics 3.2 Table 6. Composite Scores for Subject areas * SUBJECT AREA MORNING FE EXAM AFTERNOON GENERAL FE EXAM Chemistry Computers Dynamics Electric Circuits Engineering Economics Ethics Fluid Mechanics Material Science/ Structure of Matter Mathematics Mechanics of Materials Statics Thermodynamics *Composite score based upon 4.00 for very prepared, 3.00 for adequately prepared, 2.00 for minimally prepared and 1.00 for unprepared. IX. State Requirements Page

11 The state of Texas has developed a testing mechanism at the elementary and high school level to measure and increase the performance of students in the public school system. At the university level, tests given by independent professional organization such as the FE examination are utilized as a critical measure of performance. By law, each state school with an engineering program must yearly report their pass rate on the FE exam to the Texas State Legislative Budget Board 6. If the results do not meet a specific target, the reasons must be explained and plans must be developed involving the various steps that will be taken to achieve the target in future years. It is recognized that the results on the FE examination only measure those graduates who attempt the test. Nevertheless, it is utilized by the state as an indicator of the effectiveness of the institution s undergraduate engineering program. X. Conclusion There are numerous reasons for an individual to become a licensed professional engineer, including 10 : 1. Legal requirements (if appropriate) 2. Recognition by the public and peers. 3. Possibility of full membership and affiliation with various professional and technical societies 4. Recognition by industrial firms and government agencies The aforementioned indicates that becoming a licensed engineer may be considered, by many individuals, a measure of professional development. This is a recognition for which numerous engineers strive. For a university with engineering programs, performance by the students on the FE exam can be important and may be utilized as one measure that outcomes are being satisfied. This can assist in satisfying ABET accreditation requirement. A state may also utilize the FE pass rate as an output measure of the effectiveness of an institution s undergraduate program. One of the initial and most important phases of the registration process involves satisfactory completion of the Fundamentals of Engineering examination. This paper describes a FE review course which has been operating since The course has been successful in that 94.5% of the students (and 94.0% since 1986) completing the sequence have passed the Fundamentals examination. The review emphasizes the engineering sciences covered on the exam. It is assumed that the students are motivated to study on their own the remaining subjects which consist of questions on chemistry, computers and mathematics. The engineering program at Lamar University requires the completion of a broad spectrum of courses in various subject areas. Since a large percentage of the enrollees in the review are Lamar students, this comprehensive background may also be a factor in the high FE pass rate. Page

12 The ASCE Task Committee on the FE examination has suggested that poor performance on the FE exam is related to lack of student interest to review for the test. This paper agrees with these findings and presents data that indicate that well motivated students, who complete a comprehensive review course, experience a high pass rate on the Fundamentals of Engineering examination. Acknowledgment The authors wish to recognize Ms. Linda Dousay for her assistance with the production activities involved with the preparation of this paper. Bibliography 1) Criteria for accreditating engineering programs Accreditation board for engineering and technology (ABET). Baltimore, Maryland. 2) Engineering practice act and law and rules concerning the practice of engineering and professional engineering licensing Texas Board of Prof. Engrs,. Austin, Texas. 3) Fundamentals of engineering (FE) Exam review Task committee report to the ASCE Board of Direction, ASCE, New York, N. Y. 4) Fundamentals of engineering supplied-reference handbook, 6 edition National council of examiners for engineering and surveying Clemson, S.C. 5) Guidance for engineering students in Texas on the licensed practice of engineering Murdough center for engineering professionalism, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas. 6) House bill one Texas House of Representatives, State Capital, Austin, Texas. 7) Koehn, E "Fundamentals of engineering exam: motivation/review enhances pass rate". Journal of professional issues in engineering. ASCE 115(3) ) Le Fevre, K.R Using the fundamentals of engineering (FE) examination to assess academic programs. National council of examiners for engineering and surveying Clemson S.C. 9) NCEES fundamentals of engineering examinations Nat. council of engrg. Examiners for engineering and surveying, Clemson S.C. 10) Nedderman, W.H Registration as a professional engineer" Review notes for the EIT exam. The Texas Engrg. Foundation, Austin, Tex. 11) P.E Licensure National council of examiners for engineering and surveying, Clemson, S.C. 12) Potter, M.C Fundamentals of Engineering Review. Great lakes press, Inc., Okemos, Mich. ENNO ED KOEHN Enno Ed Koehn is a Professor of Civil Engineering at Lamar University, Beaumont, TX. Professor Koehn has served as the principal investigator for several research and development projects dealing with various aspects of construction and has experience in the design, scheduling, and estimating of facilities. In addition, he has authored/co-authored over 200 papers and presentations in engineering education and the general areas of civil and construction engineering. Dr. Koehn is a member of ASEE, AACE International, ASCE, NSPE, Chi Epsilon, Tau Beta Pi, and Sigma Xi and is a licensed Professional Engineer and Surveyor. RAJESH D. MALANI Rajesh D. Malani was awarded the M. Engr. Degree from the Department of Civil Engineering at Lamar University, Beaumont, TX. He has served as a Technical Assistant at the reputed Indian Institute of Technology (I.I.T.) Mumbai. Page