Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Photogrammetry, LiDAR & UAS › Requirements for Being A Drone Instructor at a College or other School
Requirements for Being A Drone Instructor at a College or other School
Posted by transitman on January 16, 2020 at 4:11 amI am curious what the requirements are for teaching students to use drones as part of a college curriculum. I had thought that some sort of special certificate would be needed by the teacher, but as far as I can see from the FAA website it only seems to be necessary that the teacher possess a UAS Certificate (Part 107). Is this correct?
spmpls replied 4 years, 2 months ago 10 Members · 21 Replies- 21 Replies
There’s a difference between “fly” and “use”. Direct regulation will only be interested in “fly”. It’s the “use” teaching we should be concerned about. A little knowledge can be a not-good thing.
Having a teaching certificate and being a Licensed Surveyor or Engineer as well as holding a UAS Certificate (Part 107) would be a contributing factor.
The FAA will want you to be a pilot. The Board will want you to be a PLS. The State will have varying requirements, but adjunct track teachers usually don’t need an education credential or cerificate.
Being a pilot qualifies you for most any drone use and will get you out of most drone “situations” you might get yourself into. If you are going to make a living with drones, get a pilot license.
- Posted by: @thebionicman
The FAA will want you to be a pilot. The Board will want you to be a PLS. The State will have varying requirements, but adjunct track teachers usually don’t need an education credential or cerificate.
Huge rant to follow. Sorry, but this is one that really bugs me.
I don’t think you will find that the “Board” will necessarily care one way or another if you are a PLS. May depend on the state.
I spent 4 years teaching as a full time non-tenure track faculty member at a regional university before choosing to not renew my contract. The next year, a PE/PhD, who was already on the faculty, was teaching the introductory surveying course (while also teaching a course that overlapped in time – guess which class got shorted their time). Students from three different sections of the course informed me that he couldn’t work a traverse reduction problem correctly so just told them “read the book” instead of pointing out the many check-points in the process and showing them how to find mistakes. Only one of many failures to transfer knowledge I heard about from the students. Since that time, a different unlicensed person has been teaching the course; at least with fewer complaints from students. Although I had finally arranged purchase of data collectors for the program just before I left (3 years ago), they have still not been used to expose students to semi-modern technology.
I have looked at course offerings from universities around my state and have found intro courses being taught by unlicensed individuals at pretty much all of them. In addition, at least two universities in my state have had unlicensed individuals teaching boundary surveying course work. It may be so in both of those instance, but in one boundary course, the individual teaching has never even worked within the surveying profession (or even the legal profession applied to real estate).
I see this as a big legislative failure when we now require a degree (especially given the reasoning behind most degree requirements) yet do not seem concerned with the qualifications of who is teaching the subject area. I’ve been pushing for changes in my state that would include the teaching of land surveying as part of the practice of land surveying – so far to no avail. When I started looking into it several years ago, I found only 4 states (Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, and Montana) that specifically include the teaching of land surveying within the definition of the practice of land surveying. I have no idea how well it is enforced in those states.
At the university and state level, requirements are driven by government agency (for my state the Council on Post-Secondary Education), national accrediting agencies and politics. For the universities I am familiar with, university-wide accreditation would be the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). Fairly open requirements for teaching – meaning that even in some instances someone with a bachelors could be teaching the courses with proven qualifications. Proven qualifications are similar to any other industry – documentation does not always indicate what is claimed, but a license is a pretty good claim to qualification. At least one university had a licensed surveyor adjunct the intro course and then had a PhD (non-surveyor) faculty teach the boundary course because they either did not understand the simplicity of proving qualifications for teaching a higher level course or preferred to avoid a couple of sheets of paperwork and simply have someone with PhD after their name “teach” the subject. Another possible accreditation would be program specific accreditation through ABET. I am actually mildly surprised that they do not have a licensure requirement for faculty in accredited programs.
Now, I’m sure there are some people who are great professors who have never gotten licensed, but it just seems that if we (the profession) are making formalized education requirements to become licensed (to the exclusion of those survey techs who practice for decades), it should be of interest to us (the profession) that the people teaching up and coming surveyors would have enough interest in the profession to have become licensed and actively maintain their license.
When I got my pilot license I took three courses at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. The program is part of a professional program in sUAS. The entire program was taught by professional pilots who were FAA licensed, many of them holding multiple certifications. Two of the professors were also PhD.
My thoughts, along with Jon’s above…if the course involved sUAS for Survey application – then the instructor needs to be a licensed surveyor.
But back to OP…how can you teach sUAS class and not be certified pilot?
@jon-payne
Eh, it’s not surprising that there is such variation in requirements, or in quality of instructor.
We decided as a society – many decades ago – that education is not a priority, that instructors should be paid about what a chainman is, and that higher education is for suckers.
But then we decided that a college degree was something everyone should have. (At a cost of nearly three times what it was 35 years ago, as wages stagnated and housing costs skyrocketed over the same time period.)
At the same time, we decided that advanced degrees were for “academics” and “intellectuals” (both being pejorative terms) and anyone who holds one must by definition be incompetent in the real world. All you can do with those is teach, right?
And those professors must be terrible at instruction too, because just look at all of these people coming out of universities with bachelor’s degrees who obviously learned nothing! Therefore all degrees must be worthless…rinse and repeat.
Among professional surveyors, there is a great deal of ambivalence about the value of education, despite demanding a level of knowledge from practitioners that can only realistically be obtained from a rigorous formal education combined with years of practical application and mentorship.
It’s almost as if we value the license but not the underlying knowledge it (should) signify.
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil Postman@jon-payne
Oh, the problem with higher education goes way beyond survey programs. Their entire strategy is to hire knowledgable people first and foremost, and teachers somewhere down below. After having spent more time in college than I would have liked I can easily say it doesn’t matter if the instructor is licensed, or a PHD holder, or anything else if they can’t even teach a dog to eat a steak. Yes, it would be nice if the instructors had these credentials but personally I’ve encountered enough junk teachers in my time to not even really care about their qualifications anymore. And, like I suspected while I was in school, I’ve learned about as much (maybe more) in 1.5 years of real world work as I did in 4 years of college.
That was always strange to me. In Kentucky, K-12 teachers have to earn and maintain teaching credentials beyond their degree major. This includes coursework where they learn about pedagogy. However, higher ed does not require anything resembling actual teaching qualifications.
The first year I started teaching, a faculty resource center on campus began hosting seminars to help faculty learn more about teaching methods. I made a point of going to all of them that I could fit in my schedule. Not surprisingly, they were not as well attended as one might expect. One long term faculty member in the program I taught in actually told me he did not need to go to those because of all his experience.
As to learning more in your real world career, I’m not surprised at that. In college, I was fortunate enough as to have a survey instructor who was, in my very biased opinion, the best possible professor to have. Despite the great job that he did, I still learned a great deal in professional practice simply because of the immersion of spending at least 40 hours every week surveying. That daily practice supported things I learned in college in such a way that I couldn’t just forget them after the exam (LOL).
@jon-payne
PM sent.
Thanks Scott. That was an interesting opinion article. As you point out, this subject could use some deeper research to see what the result are. Hope you don’t mind me linking the article in case others want to read it.
https://www.xyht.com/surveying/degree-requirement-how-is-that-working-out/
@jon-payne
I was hoping to read something informative but unfortunately it’s mostly just some old fart taking subtle digs at 4-year degree programs. There are the usual doom and gloom threats of a surveyor shortage sprinkled in there too. Look, if this guy thinks the 4-year program is a waste then just say so. Speaking for myself I can say I certainly wouldn’t be offended. However, what I do find funny is how there is regular talk of raising the profile of the profession. But when it comes to actual ideas there is a whole lot of silence. And when the 4-year programs get brought up a few seemingly butthurt “OTJ guys” typically come out of the woodwork to make snippy comments.
Is this normal across all professions in society? Is the most effective way to make yourself seem better to make others seem worse?
- Posted by: @bstrand
Is this normal across all professions in society? Is the most effective way to make yourself seem better to make others seem worse?
Only if you are insecure.
I read that article when it was posted. Probably shouldn’t have re-read it…but here we go.
It’s the usual anti-intellectual snobbery, coupled with a complete failure to understand the purpose of formal education. Like so:
“One of the most respected surveyors I have had the privilege of knowing went back to get his four-year degree several years after he earned his license. Clearly, for him, he saw value there. I haven??t asked him, but I suspect that he would tell me that it made him a better surveyor, and that is likely true. But I surmise that is because he was already a seasoned professional, and studying theory from that perspective was much different than being fresh out of high school. He already knew what nuggets to mine to augment his knowledge base. His fellow classmates had no perspective to evaluate what was simply an academic exercise and what would be of value as a practicing land surveyor. He is the exception, for sure.”
Great. How about we let medical techs have the title of MD and take a whack at some patients with a scalpel before they go to med school and “mine some nuggets”? God forbid doctors do a few “academic exercises” before practicing medicine.
Suggesting that education is not worthwhile because the students don’t know what they need to know is just…actually, it’s pretty American.
“Haha, look at all those stupid people, wanting to gain knowledge – in a classroom!”
Land surveyors are not special. We certainly not all savants.
If a civil CADD designer wants to get their PE, they go back to school.
If a legal secretary wants to practice law in a courtroom, they will apply to law school.
If a medical tech wants that MD after their name, guess what?I don’t see doctors, lawyers, or engineers pissing on new graduates for having a degree. I don’t hear them complaining about having to get a degree in the first place, or choking off funding for their local university because they think a basic standard of fundamental knowledge is detrimental to their profession.
The degreed professional surveyors aren’t making less money because degrees are worthless. They are making less money because we have decided as a profession that we are not worth as much as other professionals, in part because we reject what those professionals consider a bare minimum qualification to even start the road to licensure. When firms are run by surveyors without degrees, they sure as hell aren’t going to pay a degreed surveyor any extra.
I spend a lot more time than I should explaining fundamental concepts to licensed professionals precisely because they never learned it on the job. Despite what some will claim, your average mentoring LS (including myself) is not able to teach full-blown courses of statistics, geodesy/projections, error theory, GNSS best practices, spatial data adjustments, etc. during coffee breaks. Not to mention boundary law.
And on that note, we have to put a stop to the ridiculous notion that the evolution of the United States land tenure system, fundamental rules of practical boundary/easement construction, basic legal description writing, and land title examination principles are impossible to learn in a classroom setting. Necessity of practical application on the job does not invalidate learning fundamental concepts in a classroom setting.
If you don’t like the quality of education available, or a particular professor at your local school, speak up. If you don’t like the curricula, make some suggestions to the advisory board. Lack of a surveying program in your state or region doesn’t mean surveying programs are worthless. If the programs are not supported or taken seriously by the very people who stand to benefit from them, it’s a given that they will fail to provide benefit.
The sweeping claim that formal education is of no benefit whatsoever to a profession that demands extensive technical and theoretical knowledge, and in-depth understanding of legal and historical precedents, is just stupid. Making that claim under the guise of “I’m just asking questions here!” is not only stupid, but dishonest as well.
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil Postman No “subtle digs” at 4-year degree programs. I never said they are a waste, nor do I think that. I am certainly not convinced they should be a requirement for licensure, however.
Mr. Payne already shared his not so subtle experiences with non-licensed instructors in these programs earlier in this thread. Exam statistics (people taking the exam) are down in the states where this requirement has been implemented. I didn’t make that stuff up.
I simply asked a few questions about what positive results, if any, have resulted from the implementation of the degree requirement? To date, not one person has answered any of them with a single fact. So sir, I shall ask them here again:
So, what have been the realized benefits? Are enforcement actions down? Are examination passage rates up? Are the degree-holding licensees smarter than their OJT predecessors? Are they more prepared to successfully operate a business? Is enrollment up at the limited academic institutions offering an ABET-accredited degree in surveying (often called something else)? Have charge-out rates increased directly because staff have degrees in addition to licenses? Do degreed, licensed surveyors earn more than their non-degreed counterparts?
In my 33 years as a licensed professional, I have never been in a single professional situation where someone asked me if I had a 4-year degree or not. So if I did, how would that “raise the profile” unless I carried my sheepskin into the meeting and showed it off during introductions? What I have done is represent the profession as an integral part of the team, bringing unique skills and qualifications that contribute to the success of the team. I have managed all aspects of surveying on many projects with total budgets exceeding $50M, from the initial mapping/control, land rights acquisitions, construction, and as-builts. At all times I did so with the similar knowledge and confidence of every professional on those teams. They didn’t care if I had a degree.
Believe me, I am never “butthurt” when the subject of 4-year degrees comes up. Heck, I am the one who wrote the article. I honestly would like to know: What have been the positive results?
Care to educate me, Mr. bstrand?
OK, so you opened the article saying you did no research, gathered no facts, but you want me to go find all of this stuff? No thanks. What I have the time and energy to offer are a few anecdotal items from my own experience.
I was able to operate as a 1-man crew (field and office) basically straight out of school, and occasionally I’m able to teach the “old guys” something they would have learned had they participated in a 4-year program. I passed all of the exams on my first attempt, and most of the questions on them looked familiar from lectures or exercises I experienced in school. I’m not one of the people that goes around waving a degree in anyone’s face but when I meet new people they will often ask me what I do for a living. When I tell them they will usually follow it up with “Did you go to school for that?”, and when I tell them yes, I can almost see a look of approval wash over their face– like they know they’re talking to someone who takes their work seriously enough to invest that level of time and money into it. Along those lines, when I did get out of school I had more interest from various employers than ever before in my life (late graduate, 39 years old). In fact, I ended up going to work for a company that I had no idea existed, but had contacted my school specifically looking for degree holders.
Anyway, Rover said it all far better than I could but at the end of the day is it really necessary to explain to you the benefit of establishing a broad, fundamental knowledge base prior to sticking a foot in it?
- Posted by: @bstrand
@jon-payne
Is this normal across all professions in society? Is the most effective way to make yourself seem better to make others seem worse?
I believe there is value in the opinion piece linked. It was clearly stated in my post that it was an opinion article; which would infer it was not a scientific study. However, as noted in the article, there needs to be some real research into what the degree requirements have accomplished. That is a very serious undertaking that can not be simplified into just how many test takers there are or the pass rate because there are so many other variables that could be considered.
As to is that normal across professions, I would say yes, it is. There is an interesting book from the 1970s that addressed what is called credential creep in the teaching profession. The same ideas have played out in various professions throughout time. Some of us probably remember when there was no such thing as a nurse practitioner. Addressing the higher education situations I discussed earlier, there have been increasing credential requirements in several faculty positions as more and more people attain an advanced degree in the subject area. Medical doctors were brought into the discussion, so – there was even some interesting instances concerning doctors (MD) versus doctors (PhD) in university programs that have medical facilities (and onsite residency programs) associated with them over job classifications and titles.
As each increase in credential requirement occurs, you can often find research articles being published to either support or slam differing ideology on the increased requirement. I would almost guarantee you could also find opinion articles doing the same. Eventually, it all settles out and the new “norm” is in place.
I managed to forget probably the biggest thing… I can’t even count how many people I’ve met over the years who have a degree they don’t use. I, on the other hand, tell people (assuming they asked) I use my degree every single day and it’s not even an exaggeration.
Log in to reply.