IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Degree Holder: which route to choose, IEng of CEng
Topic Summary: Are IEng and CEng same for graduate engineer and non-graduate with experience
Created On: 19 August 2008 05:46 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
1 2 Next Last unread
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 19 August 2008 05:46 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Siddiqui75

Posts: 2
Joined: 25 July 2008

Hi,

i am a graduate electrical engineer with three years of experience.

i was about to start my application for ieng, then someone warned me that ieng is aroute for non-graduates, i should apply for ceng.

i am bit suspicious about this. can someone help me finding the right route. or both routes are same for graduates and non-graduates and have different criteria.

thanks
siddiqui
 19 August 2008 06:18 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



N0LONGERALOSER

Posts: 71
Joined: 05 July 2008

Please take a look at the threads in here, many people here believe IEng to be a waste of time. I advise you to try for CEng, good luck.
 19 August 2008 06:42 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for hamishbell.
hamishbell

Posts: 288
Joined: 11 September 2001

You should seek proper advice from a PRA (Professional Registration Adviser). They will be able to give you authoritative advice based upon your personal details, something which is not appropriate on an open Forum such as this. Check the website to see if there is one near you. In any case, you should check the membership pages of the website here to decide if you meet the required Competences as well as the level of your academic qualifications. The decision between IEng and CEng is not straightforward and so a single line answer is not possible, I'm afraid. It may help you to also look at Career Manager, also accessible from the web page noted above. This enables you to record your experience against the Competences and so determine where you need to expand your knowledge or experience.
Regards
Hamish

-------------------------
Hamish V Bell, BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI, CQP
2013 - 2016 Elected Council Member
2007 - 2010, Vice President and Trustee
 24 August 2008 11:42 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



amillar

Posts: 1918
Joined: 28 May 2002

And in answer to the specific question, IEng is a route for graduates. For the simplest applications you need a first degree for IEng, a second degree for CEng. But there are many other routes to either (you can get CEng with a first degree + additional stuff).

You may like to look at recruitment websites and see how many ask for IEng and how many ask for CEng.

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET CMgr MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress." Joseph Joubert
 27 August 2008 01:26 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Brian Robertson

Posts: 106
Joined: 01 April 2006

It is funny to see the Vice President and Trustee BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI

Today if you applied with a Bsc you would be I.Eng
 27 August 2008 08:57 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



amillar

Posts: 1918
Joined: 28 May 2002

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson
Today if you applied with a Bsc you would be I.Eng


Not necessarily. It depends on your total experience/training/education mix.

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET CMgr MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress." Joseph Joubert
 27 August 2008 10:09 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for hamishbell.
hamishbell

Posts: 288
Joined: 11 September 2001

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson

It is funny to see the Vice President and Trustee BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI



Today if you applied with a Bsc you would be I.Eng


In fact, I wouldn't be unhappy with that as my personal opinion is that the various categories of registration are more indicative of the roles undertaken by engineers than a state based,in my case, on a qualification gained 50 years ago. At the time, the educational qualification for "Chartered Member", the predecessor of CEng was an HNC, so I was "over-qualified". It is also a reflection of the way in which both standards have changed and the increased access to education nowadays. Only around 5% went to university at the time I did compared with the 40+% now.

Any award reflects achievement at a point in time. Continuing Professional Development is the essential to maintaining competence. IEng, EngTech and CEng seek to quantify those competences at a point in time, but one should continually be seeking to maintain and improve one's competences.
Regards
Hamish

-------------------------
Hamish V Bell, BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI, CQP
2013 - 2016 Elected Council Member
2007 - 2010, Vice President and Trustee
 27 August 2008 11:00 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for gkenyon.
gkenyon

Posts: 4488
Joined: 06 May 2002

Just to re-emphasise.

I'm sure there is no requirement to actually have a degree, to get either CEng or IEng. But if you don't have a degree, or the RIGHT degree (e.g. even someone with an MSc that's not accredited for CEng or IEng), you need to prove to the IET that you have built up an equivalent level of knowledge and understanding to an "accredited devree", typcally gaied "on the job".

Obviously, this requires a little work to put together (but don't forget that you didn't need to do the degree in the fist place ). However, if you really are working at the CEng or IEng level, this should NOT be an insurmountable problem.

It's time for those without accredited degrees, who believe they are working at the right level, to contact the IET, and put in a little work and apply for IEng or CEng (as appropriate), instead of using "not got the right qualifications" as an excuse, or trying to deride professional registration as useless because they feel they've been left out in the cold.

Do it now!

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
 27 August 2008 12:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



danielscott

Posts: 461
Joined: 18 April 2003

Originally posted by: hamishbell

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson



It is funny to see the Vice President and Trustee BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI







Today if you applied with a Bsc you would be I.Eng




In fact, I wouldn't be unhappy with that as my personal opinion is that the various categories of registration are more indicative of the roles undertaken by engineers than a state based,in my case, on a qualification gained 50 years ago. At the time, the educational qualification for "Chartered Member", the predecessor of CEng was an HNC, so I was "over-qualified". It is also a reflection of the way in which both standards have changed and the increased access to education nowadays. Only around 5% went to university at the time I did compared with the 40+% now.



Any award reflects achievement at a point in time. Continuing Professional Development is the essential to maintaining competence. IEng, EngTech and CEng seek to quantify those competences at a point in time, but one should continually be seeking to maintain and improve one's competences.

Regards

Hamish


Hamish,

In 1965(or earlier), those with an HNC, could no longer become a Graduate Member of any Institution, as they raised the standard to and ordinary BSc, I know because, I was one of them. Now the institutions are falling all over each other to attract members from ONC upwards. So in my opinion, academic standards do and have played a big part in the present and the past. Several of my apprenticeship colleagues went on to Strathclyde, London and Queens Universities to gain their BSc's and on return to work where automatically given junior management positions, whereas the rest of us with HNC, remained in the drawing offices.

Things do change, as you have noted above, but not always for the better, and yes, we all should strive for CPD.

Daniel
 27 August 2008 02:06 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson
It is funny to see the Vice President and Trustee BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI

Today if you applied with a Bsc you would be I.Eng

To be fair to Hamish, the standard of degrees awarded in Hamish's days were of much higher standard than today. The same argument goes for HNC/HNDs.

It is precisely because of this that the standards had to be raised to MEng. So in reality the caliber of MEng graduates are about the same as BSc graduates back then.

I know this because the lectures who taught me in my CEI Part 2 course all had CEng BSc(Eng) qualifications. They were not only top flight lecturers but also top flight Engineers judging by their stories.

As a result I passed all my technical exams at my first attempt, a result only achieved by 5% of UK and overseas students. Unfortunately the two lecturers who taught me the Engineer in Society subject were bubble headed boobies as they were not up to standard. This cost me a pass and a future CEng qualification.

Edited: 27 August 2008 at 03:54 PM by mbirdi
 27 August 2008 11:09 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Brian Robertson

Posts: 106
Joined: 01 April 2006

mbirdi

I am just stating the facts as they are now, I do not see how a Bsc done then and now are diffrent, have standards dropped?.

It is the same qualification and means the same.

You may argue it was harder but the facts are it is still the same qualification and same words describing it.

An apple is an apple, a orange is an orange and a Bsc is a Bsc.
 27 August 2008 11:26 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for gkenyon.
gkenyon

Posts: 4488
Joined: 06 May 2002

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson
... and a Bsc is a Bsc.
This is an assumption.

If it's a valid assumption, then no-one would ask you when you got it and where.

But they do, for three reasons.

1. To make sure you got it (i.e. ability to check up);

2. Because, whatever people think, where your degree came from actually does matter; and

3. Because when you got your degree makes a difference also.



I wish we lived in a world where 2. and 3. (especially 3.) were not true, but they are.

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH
 28 August 2008 12:27 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Brian Robertson

Posts: 106
Joined: 01 April 2006

1. From a UK university.
2. From a UK university.
3. I do not see why, are you saying a Bsc now is not the same?

I do not believe that to be true, where is the evidence the standards have dropped?
 28 August 2008 02:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson
I am just stating the facts as they are now, I do not see how a Bsc done then and now are diffrent, have standards dropped?.

It depends on what is meant by standards?

Let me give you an analogy. English football players in the premiership league today, train harder for longer periods than they ever did back in the 1960s. The pace of the game is much faster than it was in the 60s and faster than anywhere else in the world. Therefore the standard of football has gone up compared to the 1960s.

Yet England still can't win the world cup or the European cup because they are simply not talented enough when compared to foreign players of today and yesteryears and English players of the 60s. England won the world cup in 1966 despite lesser training and slower pace of the game compared to today. Their standard of playing football was higher, hence the world cup.

Exams today are much easier to pass then they were in the past because they have become a reflection of course work done. I.e students know what's coming in the exams, so it's easier to memorise stuff already done and regurgitate them in the exams and get the distinctions or first class.

The only exceptions to this are the London University external degrees and the Engineer Council Examinations, where students don't know what questions they will face in the exams. Hence the very low pass rate.

I do know that some top Universities rely on continuous assessment only in the first year and then limited assessment in the second year and then just on end of year exams in the final year. Lesser Universities rely just on continuous assessment in all 3 years, which is not a good thing in terms of maintaining academic standards.

Edited: 28 August 2008 at 03:53 PM by mbirdi
 28 August 2008 04:30 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



danielscott

Posts: 461
Joined: 18 April 2003

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson

1. From a UK university.

2. From a UK university.

3. I do not see why, are you saying a Bsc now is not the same?



I do not believe that to be true, where is the evidence the standards have dropped?


How can you say that Brian.

First of all, not everyone gains a 1st Class standing. So BSc's do have different levels, whether it is nowdays or 30/40 years ago.

Secondly, why do you think Universities in the U.K and the rest of the world are ranked. Just check out the U.K rankings.

Daniel
 28 August 2008 04:57 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for gkenyon.
gkenyon

Posts: 4488
Joined: 06 May 2002

Originally posted by: Brian Robertson

1. From a UK university.

2. From a UK university.
Red-brick, or Modern? Specialist place like Loughborough, Brunel, etc., or one of the "oldest" or "top 10"? Oxbridge?

3. I do not see why, are you saying a Bsc now is not the same?
Seems that way. I don't make the decisons, so can't comment.

-------------------------
Eur Ing Graham Kenyon CEng MIET TechIOSH

Edited: 28 August 2008 at 04:58 PM by gkenyon
 28 August 2008 05:00 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



amillar

Posts: 1918
Joined: 28 May 2002

Originally posted by: mbirdi
Exams today are much easier to pass then they were in the past because they have become a reflection of course work done. I.e students know what's coming in the exams, so it's easier to memorise stuff already done and regurgitate them in the exams and get the distinctions or first class.

Sounds pretty similar to my degree course of nearly thirty years ago...

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET CMgr MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress." Joseph Joubert
 29 August 2008 10:01 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



amillar

Posts: 1918
Joined: 28 May 2002

I certainly agree that the increase in the number of firsts, and even 2.1s, over the last 10-20 years is interesting (on my cohort of about 90 students I think we had 2 firsts and just a handful of 2.1s). And I personally have not seen a huge increase in the actual competence of graduates. My point was that from what I have seen of University examination processes it does not seem to be that it is changes in these processes which have caused the increase in grades awarded - in other words, I don't subscribe to the "exams are getting easier" theory. However I have had a number of lecturers in recent years privately express deep concern that they have been asked to award grades considerably higher than they wished for a given exam answer. Now, this is only anecdotal and should not be taken as evidence that standards are falling, but if I was involved in academia it would make me want to ask some serious questions: basically, would the same exam answer that would rate a 2.2 in 1982 rate a 1st today?

So coming back to the year/grade discussion: for a graduate in the 80's I would expect them to have a 2.2 or better (as 2.2 was the mode (most common) result), for a graduate since 2000 I might expect them to have a 2.1. But I wouldn't expect any difference in competence.

My experience of recruiters is that they don't consider this (which is good or bad depending upon your point of view!). In the 1990s recruiters were not normally interested in you if you had less than a 2.2, now it seems to be less than a 2.1 irrespective of when you got it.


Personally I think the whole question of whether degrees today are worth the same as they used to be is slightly moot since for anyone with more than about 5 years experience their degree grade is (or should be) completely irrelevent - you should have plenty of real performance information by then to judge their competence on. Hence the various routes to registered engineer status. Recruiters, of course, are not necessarily so wise...

-------------------------
Andy Millar CEng MIET CMgr MCMI

http://www.linkedin.com/in/millarandy

"The aim of argument, or of discussion, should not be victory, but progress." Joseph Joubert
 29 August 2008 01:59 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: amillar
And I personally have not seen a huge increase in the actual competence of graduates.

Agreed. Practically all of the trainees I mentioned earlier are or were doing the same jobs they did (5 years down the line) before they began their studies.

The other thing is, and this is only my perception, the younger graduates (from part-time and distance learning courses) seem to behave like adolescence, whilst the older graduates (from full-time courses) behave with maturity and take their jobs very seriously.

I am of the opinion that (taking into account A level and graduate performances) the standard of education has gone up because of better teaching, better course material and unlimited access to information on the internet. Hence the high standards of regurgitation of course work in the exam. However, the standard of academic achievement (or talent) hasn't gone up as I demonstrated in my football analogy.

I have seen graduate projects of around 300 pages. The first 30 pages are entirely on the corporate aspects of the company they work for. A lot of the material comes from the internet with a little bit of their own work thrown in. And that delivers a 1st class degree. I wonder how the examiners ever find the time to read 300 pages of material from every student?

In contrast, my Higher Diploma project contained only around 25 pages of mainly graphs and formulas with a little bit of introduction and conclusion thrown in. This was before the days of the internet, the Personal Computer and of course the laser printer.

If you look at the Engineering Council examinations, it is independent of the internet, the PC and the laser printer (except for the project of course). The examination result depend on the students' knowledge of the subject matter, and not on what they copied from the internet or been asked to regurgitate from pre-prepared course material.

There was a very interesting article about lowering standards of degree courses, on the BBC site, with comments form anonymous lecturers. It seems to have gone, but If I find the archive I will provide the link to this thread.

Edited: 29 August 2008 at 02:16 PM by mbirdi
 09 April 2009 03:54 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



sassonajeet

Posts: 7
Joined: 01 October 2008

Hi Siddiqui
Just need to know were u able to proceed with ur CEng registration with the same experience or what did u do for that caz i am also sailing in same boat with bit more experience.Please reply asap at Ajeet.Sasson@eon-uk.com
Many Thanks
Regards
Ajeet
Statistics

See Also:



FuseTalk Standard Edition v3.2 - © 1999-2014 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.