IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Is the IENG qualification an associate professional award?
Topic Summary: Is the IENG qualification an associate professional award?
Created On: 30 July 2012 07:47 AM
Status: Read Only
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
<< 1 2 3 4 Previous 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.
 17 March 2013 04:32 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rcapol

Posts: 17
Joined: 23 December 2002

Sorry all, I seem to have dragged the post off topic a little.

The 'associate' terminology for IEng may have sounded a little condesending took the wrong way, but having just re-read the UKSPSEC from the ECUK I'm sure the good intent was there.

It is a very valid level of competence accreditation and in my experience it is very well thought of by fellow professionals. Its a shame a few seem to have belittled it as it hurts the profession as a whole. I would certainly encourage registration at all 3 levels.

Link to the ECUK registration overview document for those wanting to know more:
http://www.engc.org.uk/ecukdoc...%20library/UK-SPEC.pdf

Edited: 17 March 2013 at 04:42 PM by rcapol
 18 March 2013 04:21 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Brian Robertson

Posts: 106
Joined: 01 April 2006

rcapol

I agree, I would also encourage registration at all 3 levels.

A lot of companies these days ask for registration or someone who is working towards registration, my friends company is an example of this.
Good for company CV.



Just came across this article
'Engineering is foundation of economy'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fin...dation-of-economy.html
 22 March 2013 05:31 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: amillar

Originally posted by: westonpa

I am happy with that approach as you have an accredited degree + appropriate experience but professional status can be gained without an accredited degree and that is the inconsistency I am not in favour of.

I strongly disagree with this. Yes, applicants applying without a degree must expect to give a more robust account of their academic expertise than those with one

How can they give a robust account, without taking a test to see how much they actually know? There are people in senior positions who are very good at absorbing other people's (colleague's) hard earned knowledge, simply by listening to what opinions others have; then take this knowledge and apply it as if they were experts who discovered or derived from first principles things they never bothered to find for themselves.

You can see this in action from Cabinet ministers. They have absolutely no understanding of how to run the country, but have talent to absorb knowledge from civil servants and advisors and then proclaim them as their own work.

Put these ministers in an exam hall and give them a set of questions on how they would run the county, with proof of how it is achievable and don't be surprised to catch them texting advisor for answers.

Top academic qualifications are the only way to ensure the country gets top engineers.
 23 March 2013 12:47 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: mbirdi
Top academic qualifications are the only way to ensure the country gets top engineers.

I agree that this should be part of the requirement.

Regards.
 23 March 2013 11:59 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AndyTaylor

Posts: 164
Joined: 24 November 2002

Originally posted by: mbirdi
Top academic qualifications are the only way to ensure the country gets top engineers.


I should resign then because I'm too thick to be doing my job, though I think I deserve some credit for the way I have managed to con thousands of people over the last 30 years into believing that I know what I am doing.

-------------------------
Andy Taylor CEng MIET
 24 March 2013 12:16 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: AndyTaylor
I should resign then because I'm too thick to be doing my job, though I think I deserve some credit for the way I have managed to con thousands of people over the last 30 years into believing that I know what I am doing.

Sounds like ideal experience for a job in the cabinet.
Regards.
 24 March 2013 12:12 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



AndyTaylor

Posts: 164
Joined: 24 November 2002

Nothing short of PM I reckon

-------------------------
Andy Taylor CEng MIET
 24 March 2013 12:54 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



amillar

Posts: 1918
Joined: 28 May 2002

Originally posted by: AndyTaylor
Originally posted by: mbirdi
Top academic qualifications are the only way to ensure the country gets top engineers.

I should resign then because I'm too thick to be doing my job, though I think I deserve some credit for the way I have managed to con thousands of people over the last 30 years into believing that I know what I am doing.


I'll join you There I was thinking that because I designed products that delivered what customers wanted and were extremely reliable, and (latterly) got safety approval for them through the toughest authorities that I must know what I was doing. But no, my c**p degree from 30 years ago (when I was a typically idiotic 20 year old, more interested in engineering geekery than pieces of paper) is far more important

-------------------------
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
 28 March 2013 06:35 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

I am currently unavailable to answer any of your questions, but my esteemed colleague, westonpa, will be more than happy to answer them.
 01 May 2013 01:00 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for MosheW.
MosheW

Posts: 192
Joined: 14 April 2013

In USA we have RN - Registered Nurse qualificaation.

The minimum requirement to be a RN is two year Associate Degree in Nursing and successfully passing the RN Examinations.

But if RN really wants a job in today market they better have BSN degree.
Bachelor of Nursing.
And even better for select positions MSN degree.

Now lets see ASN RN, BSN RN, MSN RN all are RN but not equal.

The same with IEng. The Employer looks on underlying education as well.

HNC or HND IEng, BEng IEng and I seen MA IEng..

I think it is a mistake that EngC is not allowing BEng IEng to register as EurEng.

But IEngs can do something about it.
A. work with IET and EngC to change this situation.
B. Start their own Society that has one purpose to promote the interests of IEngs.

BTW CEngs should do the same.

In USA there is NSPE - it is run by professional engineers to promote interests of professional engineers.

But it depends on underlying degree just like with the examples of RN.
 06 May 2013 11:06 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

That would initially fragment IEng because parts of it would sit in one association and other parts of it would sit in other associations. The seperate association would not have the funding or clout as do the existing associations and EC and I do not see that changing in the future because IEng does not offer anything of such a value that it sets it apart, which it would need to bring in funding. If I am an employer 'Chartered' x, y or z carries a high value and recognised status, however I say that about those employers that understand professional status, because the majority do not. The solution is to either improve its brand recognition within the EC/IET etc., or else consign it to the scrap heap. However, I conclude that instead of just pointing out issues that existing IEng's who want to see something better should instead get themselves engaged and be part of the solutions. I think that starts with them deciding amongst themselves what they want from the status and thus what they want it to represent. If they cannot decide this then I really do not see who else can. If however they decide they want it to be the same as CEng then I think they would be better to meet the requirements of CEng and then apply for it. Maybe the IEng community on the whole are happy with the current situation!

Regards.
 08 May 2013 08:29 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: pmiller2006
One of the problems with the industry is that it is very CEng centric and the various committees are all dominated by chartered engineers. They have a vested interested in insuring that CEng interests take precedent. There is currently a review of UKSpec being undertaken, you can bet that no incorporated engineers will be on the committee or be involved in the decision making process!

If CEng are only interested in themselves then it calls into question the whole area of professional engineering status. However, I do not believe the CEng professionals are the issue. Chartered has a brand name which has been embedded into our culture over history, IEng does not have anywhere near the same recognition. It would take a lot of finance and time to change that, and for what? What exactly do you want from the status? Increased earnings, more respect, nice calling card, better standards of engineering, more influence with the government? I conclude there are easier and lower cost methodologies for achieving those things. I think it is easier to improve from within and all it takes is a determination and an ability to focus on the goal to be achieved and to make a good case for it.

Regards.
 09 May 2013 03:44 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for MosheW.
MosheW

Posts: 192
Joined: 14 April 2013

I would applaud EngC and the PEI's for promoting the IEng in last couple of years.
I think the effort did good to promotion of IEngs. Yes more can be done.
I'm IEng and in final PRI stage for CEng.

In UK EngC left the IEng title, in Ireland its called AEng, Associate Engineer and in Australia, Canada its a Technologist.
I think Chartered Technologist at one point was getting a momentum but many opposed loosing the word Engineer.

I'm for 4 level system.

Chartered Engineering Technician (Lev 4)
Chartered Engineering Technologist (Lev 5) HND
Chartered Engineer (Lev 6) BEng Hon
Chartered Graduate Engineer (Lev 7) MEng

Edited: 09 May 2013 at 03:55 PM by MosheW
 12 May 2013 04:30 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: pmiller2006
I'm most probably being a bit thick or is the above contradictory?
'It's not worth seeking improved recognition for IEng, so the best way is to do this is within the existing institutions'?

It's challenging you to set out what you want from 'IEng' and then suggesting that if you then have a clear vision of what that is then it will be easier to make that vision a reality within the existing institutions.

If you have the drive and determination to want to start another association then why not use some of it to change the one you are a member of? Get yourself elected to a decision making board and then mix it up and start getting your views across. I will vote for you and I am sure we can get mbirdi to vote for you as well....now that is two votes already!

Regards.
Statistics

See Also:



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