Read.Watch.Listen. Career Roadblock: Computer-based test (CBT) format of SE Exam
- SE3 Committee
- Jul 26
- 6 min read
Updated: Jul 26
July 2025 Issue
A monthly forum to share diversity, equity, and inclusion resources.
Welcome to the next installment of Read.Watch.Listen. This month, we continue discussing challenges for engineers pursuing structural engineering (SE) Licensure, especially due to the recent shift from a pen-and-paper examination to a computer-based test (CBT). Licensure is critical to ensure the safety and integrity of the built environment, and the future of our profession depends on finding a robust and equitable path to licensure for all structural engineers.
Image from Pearson VUE
Licensure has been a cornerstone of the structural engineering profession since 1915, and safeguarding the public has always been the primary motivator. There have been many versions of the evaluation process through the years, and each time a change has been made, there have been growing pains for one reason or another. However, the most recent shift to CBT for the PE Structural exam in April 2024 has raised more concerns than seen in the past. Engineers who participated in the inaugural CBT exam reported that while the breadth portions were manageable, the depth sections presented significant challenges that hindered candidates' ability to effectively demonstrate their structural engineering competencies. The primary issues include exam preparation resources, exam structure and timing, complexity and quality of provided scenarios, writing tools and surfaces, window management and navigation, ambiguity and length of questions, and quality assurance and scoring. There is potential that the current licensure process could lead to a decline in the number of people that become licensed SEs if changes to the exam and improvement of probability of passing are too slow. Our profession is already struggling with the recruitment and retention of structural engineers, so we need to work together to ensure that we are not adding unnecessary roadblocks in the SE career path.
Given these concerns, multiple state SEAs -- beginning with SEAOI -- have shared feedback with NCEES and state licensing boards. Additionally, the state licensing boards of Washington and Illinois issued a joint memo to NCEES to request that NCEES form a task force to address the feedback. These groups have urged NCEES to resolve the concerns to ensure a fair and reasonable assessment of candidates' knowledge and skills, emphasizing the importance of not disincentivizing SE licensure for current and future structural engineers. This advocacy has already led to some changes by NCEES, and the exam length for the depth portions will be increased starting in 2026. But there is still more work to be done, and all stakeholders -- including exam candidates, educators, and industry professionals -- need to actively participate in the ongoing dialogue to improve the licensure examination process.
HOW SHOULD YOU GET INVOLVED?
Everyone should talk to the state licensing boards where you are licensed or pursuing SE licensure. Share your concerns and support them as they advocate for our profession. The licensing boards are NCEES’s direct clients and the best positioned to push for change. Broad industry voices and support will help to reinforce the need to make changes to the new computer-based PE Structural exam. Additionally, feedback can also be provided directly to NCEES at help@ncees.org.
Leadership of local SEAs should consider advocating on behalf of your state and community. By collecting feedback from individuals that have recently taken the exam and from firm leaders who are seeing a disruption in the SE licensure process of their engineers, you can provide a united message to state licensing board(s) and NCEES. Even if your state does not require or recognize the SE license, many engineers in your state are likely doing work all around the country and facing this licensure roadblock.
Current candidates, who have recently taken the exam, are in the unique position of experiencing the exam firsthand. Please submit thorough exam comments and concerns directly to NCEES through your MyNCEES account. If you discuss your experience with others, please ensure that you do not violate the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) that you signed with NCEES. Do not share any specific information about any test questions or answers, as NCEES will revoke one’s exam results if it believes the NDA has been violated.
Future candidates should stay informed regarding upcoming changes that are being made to the exam format. Currently, a positive change is planned for the 2026 exam offerings, but there are no planned changes for the October 2025 exam.
Firm leaders and decision makers should review any policies on promotion or compensation that are tied to licensure. The current test structure will likely cause a decrease in SE licensure, so this should be considered when setting career and promotion goals. Firms should also reach out to the licensing boards in every state that you do work in to share concerns and advocate for change. Additionally, you should stay informed regarding upcoming changes that are being made to the exam format and support your engineers who decide to postpone the examinations.
By collaborating and providing constructive feedback, we can work towards a more equitable and effective assessment system that upholds the integrity and standards of the structural engineering profession. The resources below aim to help further educate on the current state of licensure and provide resources to promote this continued and widespread advocacy.
Providing Feedback on the Current CBT Format – SELC
The SE exam’s challenging digital format creates an unnecessary barrier to licensure by testing navigation skills in limiting conditions rather than engineering competency, potentially discouraging qualified candidates. Limited flexibility in viewing references and an unintuitive interface increase cognitive load, making problem-solving artificially difficult and misaligned with real-world practice. These issues create equity concerns and may ultimately impact the future of the structural engineering profession. The Structural Engineering Licensure Coalition (SELC) serves as a united voice advocating for structural engineering licensure, and they have provided information on providing feedback on the current CBT format, as well as other helpful resources.
Published 2025; Estimated Read Time - 3 minutes
From Paper to CBT: My SE Exam Story (and What’s Coming) – Quick Question Engineering
Rômulo de Carvalho Silva shares his story of his licensure path to date. He has spent hundreds of hours and hundreds of dollars pursuing structural engineering licensure and has not completed this journey. In his experience, the April 2024 exam “was honestly a disaster with a shocking passing rate of 16% for the lateral depth. It was clear that NCEES still had a lot of work to do on the new format and this is with most engineers studying hundreds and hundreds of hours.” Due to the challenges of the exam combined with his growing family, he has decided to pause his pursuit of licensure. While this is just one story, many engineers are likely going to postpone licensure, which would have a significant impact on an industry that is already facing a labor shortage. Also check out this bonus video, where another engineer discusses why he feels that the CBT format falls short, even though he was part of the minority who passed the CBT exam.
Originally aired November 25, 2024; 00:03:47
Different pathways to licensure offered by NCARB – Archispeak
On this episode of the podcast Archispeak, hosts Evan Troxel and Cormac Phelan interview Jon Baker. Jon Baker, in addition to being a licensed architect and firm leader, served 13 years on the California Architects Board and has been actively involved in NCARB since 2006. Their conversation is centered around Jon’s work with NCARB to promote multiple pathways to getting licensed as an architect. NCARB released a statement, Pathways to Practice: NCARB Statement Endorsing Multiple Paths to Licensure, laying out a framework to become a licensed architect without earning a degree from an accredited university. Jon speaks of his own experience becoming licensed without an architecture degree. They also touch on the importance of licensing and integrating practical experience with education. If you don’t have enough time to listen to the entire episode, we recommend listening from 22:26 to 39:21 for the main conversation around multiple pathways and the response to the NCARB statement. The SE industry could learn from our architectural peers and consider adopting a more accessible approach to licensure that could include multiple pathways.
Originally published April 29, 2024; 00:57:54
This article was originally published in the NCSEA's Structural Connection newsletter.
Read.Watch.Listen is a monthly forum hosted by the NCSEA SE3 Committee to share and promote conversations on diversity, equity and inclusion within the structural engineering profession. Each month, we will curate a series of articles, audio-visual and digital media to facilitate self-education in matters that affect our professional practice as structural engineers. Whether you choose to read, watch, or listen (or all three!), we hope you will join us in this important conversation. Missed the previous issue? Check out the NCSEA SE3 Committee News and Publication page.
Share your thoughts and/or recommended resources for the next issue at ncsea@ncsea.com.