SOE News

http://www.engc.org.uk/media/9...Eng%20eBook.pdf


J Moore I Eng MIET MIIE

Edited: 21 February 2012 at 08:35 AM by jcm256

Good to see this continuation of the Engineering Council campaign which the IET has supported through both staff and volunteer member involvement. The guide was posted on Engineering Council's website a couple of weeks ago.

The IET continues to support existing IEng members and encourage new registrations from high quality professional engineers. In 2011 this meant nearly as many as all other professional institutions combined and the highest total for a decade. I would be delighted if we can maintain this progress as the best advert for the title IEng MIET (or FIET) is the people themselves.

The link is to IET partner news which goes to a wide cross-section of industrial and academic organisations with a specific IEng article on page 22. A number of other IEng related articles have been published in various journals. The IET has also been prominent recently including several appearances on BBC news supporting the importance of Technicians and apprenticeships.

Partner News

-------------------------
Roy Bowdler IEng FIET FCIPD
IET Registration & Standards

It is good that EC continues to promote IEng registration and it value. It will be good if EC can promote IEng in other country as well via other country engineering institution so that it can be recognize globally especially commonwealth country.

YungYaw Lai
BEng(Hons) LCGI IEng MIET MIEEE

The Engineering Council's "IENG promotion" is doomed and sure to fail. This is already apparent from falling number of registrations.

If EC-UK really wants to promote IEng title , EC should withdraw IEng from Sydney Accord and refrain from describing "IEng" as "Technologist" internationally.
This only means one thing ;
ALL BRITISH FIRST CYCLE DEGREES = TECHNOLOGIST = NOT ENGINEER
This is how British first cycle degrees are perceived in other countries.(Thanks to EC-UK).
***** After all it is perception that prevails not advertisement quotations. ********

Edited: 24 June 2012 at 03:25 PM by olcay

I am currently working in Australia where a technologist is just a glorified drafter and in general is not allowed to carry out complex engineering work. So you can't really compare a UK Ieng with an Australian technologist as a technologist in Australia has been held back. What is really sad about this is that Engineers Australia are guilty in this sorry affair and have backed a campaign in Queensland to make it illegal for a technologist to carry out the work that they themselves state as a technologists typical job description. The IET should work around the world to promote the the value of Ieng and technologists because it is a real shame that someone with a 3 year degree is not allowed to practice engineering.
This is one reason why there are very few technologists in Australia and its damaging the economy here.

The answer isn't for the IET to distance itself from the Sydney accord but to work to support its Ieng and technologists members worldwide. I believe that if the IET launched a good Ieng campaign here in Australia and started to shake the politicians it would get a huge membership and rightly so.

What is similar in Australia and the UK is the lack of understanding of what incorporated engineers and chartered engineering technologists are or do. The confusion on whether IEng or CEngT is a professional engineer or associate professional role results in young engineers not pursuing the qualification in both countries. The statistical overviews published by both the Engineering Council and Engineers Australia show the very low levels of registration at this grade and indicate the process is unfit for purpose as the vast majority of individuals undertaking these engineering jobs choose not to be registered.

This is true however in the UK the IET and EC seek to promote the value of Ieng and technologists. The same can't be said in Australia where Engineers Australia backed a law to restrict the rights of technologists in Queensland. Its illegal for anyone other than a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland to carry out engineering work and that includes Ieng and Technologists as they do not have the required Beng to achieve RPEQ status. Now in reality this means that an Ieng here could not carry out a simple bit of ohms law! So why would anyone want to register as a technologist here if its illegal to carry out their normal duties? The UK has work to do but its way ahead of the retarded system here in Queensland!

At a web site IMMInfo.com it says ;
"For USCIS purposes, a three year bachelor's degree cannot ever qualify as a "bachelor's degree" for U.S. immigration purposes - at least on
the basis of educational credentials alone. ..........
a four year foreign degree, standing alone, is the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor's
degree."
So much for International recognition. USA does not accept B.Sc.

It is a HUGE PARADOX to declare "Incorporated Engineer" as "professional engineer" in UNITED KINGDOM and as "Technologist" INTERNATIONALLY.
This is where the sincerety of the EC-UK is damaged. PARADOX.

Just accepting Technology degree graduates for "IEng" and charging fees is not enough.
The EC-UK has to make IEng accepted as "engineers" internationally .
If the EC-UK cannot do it, at least should stop decsribing "IEng" as "Technologist" internationally.
How can a person be "Engineer" locally and "Technologist " internationally???
Do not deceive "IEng" registrants that you are promoting our status..

WHAT ABOUT "EU" ? Does EU accept first cycle degrees ????
MAYBE they too will not accept British first cycle degrees ????
We non-degree engineers do not exist at all for the EC-UK .
Does EU Dir. 5005/36EC hold True ????
I wonder?