ca projection tables

[shaunb]

sorry to post again about something.... but ran across something that made my head itch.

was watching the CLSA dvd covering state plane coordinates.

i was understanding it for the most part of how to convert a lat and long to a xy coordinate.

however, I've got this projection table: http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/cgs_spe ... 531951.pdf

and when i was looking up the R value for zone 5 at 34*17' my table has 30364356.82 where the value he had (I presume from maybe the CLSA book?) was 30363669.15. Also, the tabular difference for 1 second of lat was differnt too, however, in the opposite direction...

Its not important for tomorrows test, but, if i've got the wrong one or an old one, I need to see if i can download or find correct version.

anyone know why there is a difference?? it doesn't seem to be a US foot vs International foot difference, but I can't tell for sure.

[Steve Martin]

I did not see Jeremy's presentation so I cannot comment on the reason for the difference, however for exam preparation, I would recommend studying the polynomial coefficient method that NGS has recommended since the original NAD83 was released. Vince Sincek did a really nice job of presenting the material in his seminar handout which you can get from Paul Cuomo Press or there is a shortened version available in the CALTRANS video exam study guide. The old projection table method used for NAD27 calculations is no longer widely used.

[cals6406]

The projection tables attached are dated 1961 - NAD 27

The projection tables from CLSA are NAD83

You will probably be furnished any needed tables?

[Stuart Hagerman]

From what I've seen on previous tests that have been released is that they will provide you with the sheet in the tables that you need.

[Raymond Mathe]

For those that have taken recent or past state and national licensing exams please remember that any type of exam subversion can lead to discipline of licensed and unlicensed individuals. Exam security benefits all in that we can equally measure a candidate’s readiness to be a Professional Land Surveyor. While forums like this are an excellent medium to share important information and strategies it is important to refrain from discussing specifics about any exam when you or others may have direct knowledge of those exams.

Ray Mathe, Exam Manager BPELSG

[Gary Schenk]

Mr Mathe,

Not even general comments on the exam are permitted? I would never discuss specific questions, of course.

[land butcher]

For those that have taken recent or past state and national licensing exams please remember that any type of exam subversion can lead to discipline of licensed and unlicensed individuals. Exam security benefits all in that we can equally measure a candidate’s readiness to be a Professional Land Surveyor. While forums like this are an excellent medium to share important information and strategies it is important to refrain from discussing specifics about any exam when you or others may have direct knowledge of those exams.

Ray Mathe, Exam Manager BPELSG

Sounds like the definition of a material discrepancy. Big brother will decide after the fact if you crossed their invisible line.

[shaunb]

he was right in saying it... I spoke to specifically the test in my last response.

everything was/is good up to that point though.

sorry for the heartburn guys :)

[Raymond Mathe]

General comments about your exam experience or the test center are ok provided you don’t communicate information related to the exam content or test requirements. While we do post the test plan for the exam and will test each of the five content areas on each exam, as published, there may be times where we cannot cover each possible Job Task and Knowledge Area; as a result, you should not communicate which of these were actually covered on your exam.

I know that we generally want to discuss one of the more memorable moments of our lives with those that can understand our pain. However, I would err on the side of caution because the price is too high in getting your license to jeopardize the privilege you earned with a few careless words.

[land butcher]

What Ray is saying is if you discuss survey issues on this board you do so at your own risk. Step over the invisible line and you step on a land mine.

Amazing how this professional test has degraded itself.

I remember when it was a test of knowledge and when finished it was possible to see your actual deficiencies and study those specifics instead of the useless letters sent out after recent tests. It was also possible to bring erroneous questions to the attention of the committee, no more.

I am sure the board can come up with a myriad of reasons for having keeping test specifics secret, mostly because writing and grading real tests costs money and it's much cheaper to have a handful of tests, like the DMV, and give them over and over and over.

I am glad I am at the age where I won't have to follow any of these surveyors in the field. I'm not blaming them I'm blaming the degraded system.

[shaunb]

in all honesty LB.... I think that after taking the test, I really don't need someone to tell me where I did and didn't struggle. Albit, I could have bombed the questions I thought I got right, but, if i didn't pass and they tell me the score, I'll know that.

I know the questions I probably missed and even if i pass, I've written down what areas that was so I can start reading those sections in books.

I don't know how anyone could walk away from the state or national exam and if they were honest with themselves, not know or have a good idea of their weak points.

[land butcher]

Lack of experience rears it's head again.

[E_Page]

I don't know how anyone could walk away from the state or national exam and if they were honest with themselves, not know or have a good idea of their weak points.

Believe it or not, there are lots of people who don't know what they don't know. That is, they come out of the exam feeling as if they did well in a certain portion of the exam because they are comfortable with what they know in that aspect of practice. But unfortunately, what they know is based upon what they've learned through the misguidance of poor mentorship, and is far enough off track that they perform very poorly in that portion they felt they did well in.

It is especially unfortunate when such a person manages to pass the exam (a consequence of a low cut score applied to the whole exam) and is granted a license. Then they get to go practice on their own without ever becoming aware of their weak area unless and until they get cited by the board or get sued for negligence and lose.

At the conference, BPELSG staff (Ric & Ray) made a presentation of the test plan. I didn't sit in on that session, but among the handout materials included on the conference CD were example "Diagnostic Letters" that are sent to those who do not pass the State-specific exam.

They are not detailed, but do give the candidate an idea of their performance relative to the broad categories identified in the Test Plan. It's unfortunate that examinees who are close can't review to see specifically what they missed (as they could under the previous appeals process), but between the Diagnostic Letter, the Test Plan, and one's memory of the questions, an examinee should be able to narrow it down some from the broad categories.

[7702]

"I know the questions I probably missed and even if i pass, I've written down what areas that was so I can start reading those sections in books."

That's probably not allowed either. : )