IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Why was the QRPD scrapped as part of the PRI? It remains for the IMechE application!
Topic Summary:
Created On: 30 January 2012 07:27 PM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Search Topic Search Topic
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View similar topics View similar topics
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 30 January 2012 07:27 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



atw

Posts: 12
Joined: 18 January 2003

I have just had my PRI a couple of weeks ago and was very surprised that the QRPD that I had completed (nugatory effort unfortunately) was not considered or had even been seen by the interviewers. This meant I was unable to draw on the examples that I had used in the QRPD as evidence. I completed the QRPD as I had started it before I realised it was not a requirement and a colleague of mine who was applying for PR with the IMechE at the same time had done so. The QRPD was a really good exercise for me to reflect on my experience and achievements and I am confused as to why the IET no longer utilises it and soley relies on a job history on the application form. So, why has it been scrapped, especially considering other institutes such as the IMechE still use it? Surely the more evidence that we as prospective IEng/CEng candidates can provide can only assist the Professional Registration process. I feel that had my QRPD been reviewed for the interview, I would have performed much better and been able to better present examples of when I have fulfilled the competences in the UK Spec. It just seems eveything is based on a 5 page application form and what you can spurt out in a hour interview.

Edited: 07 February 2012 at 02:04 PM by atw
 31 January 2012 02:21 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



atw

Posts: 12
Joined: 18 January 2003

I need to make an additional comment to my post above. Searching thorugh older posts, I have come across one by Roy Bowdler dated 14 March 2011. He states:

"If you have already prepared a competency statement (QRPD on the old form) this is still quite acceptable."

This suggests to me that the fact I had completed a QRPD (and submitted with my application in June 2011, only 3 months after the post above), then surely this should have been presented in the interview? I am still concerned that I have put in a huge amount of work in a report that I believed would support my apllication and that has not been considered.

Whilst I have got what I applied for (IEng, but only thanks to my primary sponsor being reluctant to support CEng), I was hoping to have the best chance of proving myself as a CEng. Afterall I am educationally quallified on pre SARTOR 97 rules and have been working as a professional engineer for nearly 12 years.
 09 February 2012 06:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



roybowdler

Posts: 276
Joined: 25 July 2008

Partly covered in another thread

All the evidence submitted is normally made available to interviewers to assist with their preparation, including any competence statements (previously called QRPD). Having reviewed this information they may choose to focus elsewhere, especially as the interview format now allows for the candidate to "have the floor" for the first part of the interview to establish their own agenda. Interview is only one stage of the process although probably the most influential one, particularly so in the context of some services personnel within a particular rank where IEng is considered "the norm" but CEng may sometimes be recommended for exceptional applicants.

For all applications a final panel reviews all the evidence including the interviewers recommendations before making a decision. A reference to the registration committee can be made if a consensus is not reached.

My hypothesis would be that a face-to-face interview slightly favours a persuasive candidate compared to video-link technology. We don't have enough data to prove this yet, but face-to-face is always preferred where possible.

Unfortunately without the use of such technology the delays and potential cost to candidates may be considerable. If both interviewers and the candidate have to travel to London (for example), then transport disruption for any of the three parties could scupper the interview and waste a lot of money.

-------------------------
Roy Bowdler IEng FIET FCIPD
IET Registration & Standards
 10 February 2012 04:02 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



thewaverider

Posts: 14
Joined: 03 June 2011

Had my PRI this week via skype but felt it did not go well at all

The presentation went ok however when it came to discussing the career history it seemed that the first 15 years of my career were of no interest at all. I had spent hours gathering evidence of technical reports I had written but these were never looked at. I had run one particular department in an R&D division whilst sitting on the BFPA committee for Product Testing and this was never mentioned. The whole interview seemed to get hung up on one point (HAZOP) which I had done about 3 years ago and could not remember the key words.
All in all a big disapointment, felt like the interview was to put me into a "bracket" and not look at the broader spectrum of the engineering involvement I have had.
When you have a career that has spanned over a broad base of engineering skills it is dispointing to be hemmed into one distinct area for the interview.
 10 February 2012 06:03 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: thewaverider
When you have a career that has spanned over a broad base of engineering skills it is dispointing to be hemmed into one distinct area for the interview.

The method(s) of assessment used for registration are similar to those being used by companies recruiting staff. They determine from the detailed job description (either written by you or supplied by the company as part of the job offer), as well as undertaking a test or presentation during your interview, your competency to do the job at the required level and pay award.

In effect achieving the CEng award is like being appointed the head of a division, group or team. In that sense the panel is only interested in what you have done recently that's relevant to the post. They are not interested in your past achievements especially if it doesn't have direct relevance. For example, you may have been a rocket scientist for NASA 10 years ago, and now you're designing websites.

With a job position, you have to keep up with advancement in your field to maintain your status, otherwise you cannot carry on holding that job. Unfortunately with CEng, once you get it, you can immediately leave the profession and do something completely different and still maintain you CEng status. In that sense CEng becomes only relevant to the person having it, but not much useful for others looking to employ you.

Good luck in your application. If you're not successful, you can at least take comfort in the knowledge the panel are made of CEngs (or IEngs) who are probably well past their best doing completely different jobs (or retired) to what they used to do.
 14 March 2012 06:18 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



thewaverider

Posts: 14
Joined: 03 June 2011

Well I failed my Ieng assessment because I had a lack of knowledge.(If this is the case how did it get past the application process?) Maybe I do when the interview evolves around an Exd rating and HAZOP which is something I cover once in a blue moon, my knowledge is not great of an area that I do not specialise in.

All in all a truly wasted effort and £117 if I want to appeal and a reduced rate if I want to apply again..hmm no thanks think I have paid enough for a 42minute interview
 14 March 2012 06:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for hamishbell.
hamishbell

Posts: 287
Joined: 11 September 2001

Ask to talk to a PRA. They will be able to give you advice on what aspects of the interview were considered not to prove that you met the competence requirements. Then take it from there rather than make a hasty decision. It may be good career advice anyway.
Regards
Hamish

-------------------------
Hamish V Bell, BSc, CEng, FIET, FCQI, CQP
2007 - 2010, Vice President and Trustee
 14 March 2012 07:53 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for DavidParr.
DavidParr

Posts: 242
Joined: 19 April 2002

Hamish is quite right, and it wont cost you any money to start down this path as this does not constitute a formal appeal.

It must be disappointing for you, however by getting to the interview I can infer you were expected to achieve your registration goal. Nothing to be lost by asking for some help!

-------------------------
David Parr BSc.CEng MIET
PRA
 14 March 2012 08:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



thewaverider

Posts: 14
Joined: 03 June 2011

Hamish and David

You are both right I will speak with a PRA but from the letter I received it implied I needed to develop knowledge and understanding and more responsibility for technical design and development.

Again this is what I was saying in an earlier post had the interview gone down the path of exploring my career history we could have discussed a position I held for 6 years in a Research and Development centre were I was involved in the design, procurement, manufacturing, testing and commissioning and ran the dept for 4 years.

I guess I'll see what the PRA says but it is frustrating to be told the interview is just an informal chat and that you have basically got the recognition by getting to the interview stage as many people post on this forum.

Onwards and upwards as they say!
 15 March 2012 11:17 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



DonaldFisher

Posts: 44
Joined: 21 December 2010

I have my PRI next week and that is the one thing that concerns me; if they decide to focus in on one part of my career rather than exploring my career history. I moved from civil engineering into the renewable energy sector around 2/3 years ago and I don't want to get hung discussing what I worked on a good while back.

Did they not work their way through your application in the way it was written (chronological order)?

JBB

-------------------------
JBB IEng MIET
 15 March 2012 07:10 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



thewaverider

Posts: 14
Joined: 03 June 2011

They worked through it very briefly and there were roles they never even mentioned and I must add I did mine via Skype but the whole process lasted 42 minutes with 10 of them spent trying to get the Skype connection to work and restarting my presentation 6 times. When it did come to finally doing the presentation I think there was a general feeling of lets get this over and done with ASAP

But that was my PRI, in hindsight if I did it again I would wait until they finish talking and then say I want to explain something I did in that role in more detail

Problem is they are selected for your current role and because I have a very broad base of engineering they really could not discuss my other roles as maybe their knowledge was limited?

Hope it goes well for you
Statistics

See Also:



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