IET
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Unaccredited Bachelors - Accredited MSc
Topic Summary: Will IET accept an unaccredited bachelors (by 1 year time frame) and accredited masters without a technical report
Created On: 30 January 2014 03:55 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 2014 03:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rrr605

Posts: 3
Joined: 16 September 2009

I request some guidance with regards to CEng registration with regards to my educational accreditation.

I did a BEng (Hons) Electrical and Electronic Engineering (Sandwich) from University of Greenwich 2006-2010. However I have just been informed that the degree was only accredited from 2007 hence my degree is not classed as accredited by the IET. At the time I was told my degree was accredited by the IET and mentioned in the university prospectus.

I am currently doing an MSc in Building Services Engineering (LSBU) which is accredited by CIBSE. I believe in my 4 years of work experience I have amassed the required competencies however am hesitant from the accreditation degree point of view.

What would be the best route for CEng? Will the IET expect me to produce a technical report since my Bachelors is a non-accredited degree inspite of my Masters being accredited by a different body? In the event I have to do a technical report I would prefer to it via CIBSE. This is because it will be in a field I am currently working in (electrical Building Services) however I would prefer Chartership with the IET since it has got a much wider global spread in comparison to CIBSE.

I currently have 1.5 year's experience in Electronics R&D and 3 year's experience in Building Services - Electrical.

Regards

Ryan
 30 January 2014 10:37 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



dlane

Posts: 690
Joined: 28 September 2007

Hello Ryan,

You need to approach a Professional Registration Advisor with the IET as they will be able to review your whole application and give you specific guidance.

The only advantage to having an accredited degree is that the course has already been assessed as having the appropriate content for IEng or CEng and that will speed up the initial stages of the application.

Without accreditation the assessors will need to do some more research on the course. Since the level of learning for CEng is at a masters level, I very much doubt there will be that much emphasis on your bachelors degree, so I wouldn't be worried about it.

A technical report is requested after you have been requested to present further information with regard to your application that still doesn't give the assessors the full confidence that you are ready for a peer review. It would not be requested just because you have a non-accredited degree.

Remember that very few registration applications will meet all of the requirements, there will always be areas that an applicant is good at and areas where there are weaknesses.

Good luck with your application

Kind regards

Donald Lane
 30 January 2014 11:20 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: rrr605
I have just been informed that the degree was only accredited from 2007 hence my degree is not classed as accredited by the IET.

Just commenting from an outside prospective.

Your degree is recognised by every university in the UK, as well as the teaching profession and industry, as a first degree level qualification (worth 360 credit points) for postgraduate study and work respectively

However, the IET works in a different way to everybody else. What makes them different is down to the question of money. If a University pays the fee, the IET will accredit the degree.

Think of an accredited degree as the bride getting married, and the reason for achieving accreditation, as the dowry given by the bride's parents to the bridegroom, in return for taking her off their hands.

If your degree is not accredited (married), it means you remain unaccredited (bridesmaid). And since your university (parents) decided not to pay the fees (dowry) to the IET (bridegroom); you have to find another way to get accredited (married). The only way to get this is for you to gain more qualifications (look more beautiful) to satisfy the IET (attract the bridegroom). Perhaps your postgraduate degree (luscious good looks thanks to cosmetic surgery) will do the job and you will gain accreditation (hitched) after all and achieve CEng status (1 carat diamond ring with house, presents and honeymoon).

Edited: 31 January 2014 at 12:09 AM by mbirdi
 31 January 2014 09:39 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Avatar for anupmahajan.
anupmahajan

Posts: 3
Joined: 24 July 2012

Hi,

As an Indian Engineer, I am MIET.

Now for processing my C Eng ,is it mandatory to validate my qualification with IET?

During getting MIET, I already sent my degree to IET office. Please guide.

Anup B Tech, MIET
 31 January 2014 02:30 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



rrr605

Posts: 3
Joined: 16 September 2009

Thank you very much Donald for the information. Gave me some reassurance which is exactly what I required.

Also thanks mbirdi, the analogy was very useful and painted a good picture. I have contacted a PRA and will hope to hear back soon.
 31 January 2014 03:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Thanks for that mbirdi, maybe the Vicar needs to be GEng to conduct the wedding!

Regards.

PS: GEng = God's Engineer.
 31 January 2014 07:25 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

The vicar should be the 'head of the CEng review panel, and the marriage register the EC register.

As for GEng, I'd give that title to the CEO of the EC. His disciples (pmiller2006 et al) are always praying for a miracle but never get a response.
 31 January 2014 09:08 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



kasese

Posts: 183
Joined: 31 March 2006

Be careful my panel looked at my MSc & MBA as CPD - NOT additional learning & also how much senior level (Site) HSE responsibility do you have?
Tim Guy
MSc, MBA, HND I Eng MIET
 01 February 2014 12:22 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Mmmmm but do we not then come back to the same old position: You have to jump through hoops and meet some really high standard and be reviewed and ok'd by peers etc., in order to get CEng but then the requirements to maintain that level of competency, and the subsequent checks on it, are poor. Therefore I ask if either the IET or EC are actually as competent as they think they are. And the real reason why they will not implement proper checks, and why IOSH do not really do thorough checks on theirs even though they say it is mandatory, is because they know it's an administration nightmare and many professionally registered people would not maintain their competencies to the right level and would therefore be removed. That in turn would lead to less income and less registered professionals etc., etc., etc. So what is the point of asking people to jump through these hoops at that level in the first place? If you have a decent engineering honours degree and with a decent grade and you can show 10 years good quality engineering experience, then CEng should be awarded, and if you have something less than that then maybe the MSc and/or else other requirements should be added in to fill the gap. You could have, for example, HND + 20 years of experience, BSc + MSc + 5 years of experience etc. My car is built to a standard and undergoes testing and assessment before it can be sold as a product; thereafter after a designated period it is then subject to an annual test/check to ensure it is still to the standard. The IET and other institutions inflated the requirements to achieve these status's but they did not then go back to all the 'older' holders of the relevant status's and either remove their status or else ask them to show CPD or else some other learning to prove they were at the same level as the 'new' requirements. The systems are full of gaps which need to be filled in.....continual improvement!

Regards.
 02 February 2014 12:50 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

That's why I regard CEng as a qualification only up to the first 5 years from registration; then it should be regarded as a professional title - not a professional qualification.

It would be impossible to have a regular peer review, say every 3 to 5 years because you can't expect engineers to stay in the same job doing the same level of work they did 5 years ago.

As the EC survey indicates the median salary for CEng is around £65k; which is the salary managers receive. If you look elsewhere, starting salaries for a school head is around £60k. So how would a CEng working mainly at management level demonstrate engineering competence when they are no longer working on the shop floor, to coin a phrase?

The IEE tried introducing compulsory CPD, but some CEng members responded by saying they would resign if that were to occur; so the IEE abandoned the idea.

The biggest problem with the IET and EC jointly is they are not responding to engineers who remain, over their entire career, who do actual engineering on a day to day basis. If they're not managing teams, or budgets, then they're not regarded as suitable candidates for professional registration. thousands of suitable engineers become detached from registration - not good for the IET's reputation. Which is why I tend to harp on about the IET no longer being the home of engineering and technology, but rather that statement belongs to the World Wide Web.

I'm puzzled why you have been so supportive of registration over the years? given that you cite the flaws above. It's the precise reason why I mock it.

At the end of the day, the IET is a club and the rules of registration are set by those running the club. If you want registration with proper validation, then perhaps the government should set up OFSET (office of science, engineering and technology) to regulate the profession; with the IET left to look after the professional needs of its members.

Edited: 02 February 2014 at 01:00 AM by mbirdi
 02 February 2014 02:13 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

Originally posted by: mbirdi
The IEE tried introducing compulsory CPD, but some CEng members responded by saying they would resign if that were to occur; so the IEE abandoned the idea.

And there we have it, in a nutshell!
I'm puzzled why you have been so supportive of registration over the years? given that you cite the flaws above. It's the precise reason why I mock it.

Critical analysis/thinking is about looking for flaws but also seeing the positives and then seeking to find solutions which improve things. You choose to mock things which is fair enough because those types of opinions/challenges are required in the debate, whereas I have my approach. I doubt either of us will bring about any significant changes because there is no major crisis with things as they currently stand. If for example a CEng made some catastrophic error and it caused several deaths or major injuries and the media got hold of it and they showed the CEng had not maintained CPD, and this was clearly the cause of the issue, then changes would likely be made. However, I see none of these things taking place and for the most part engineering standards are good in the UK and so there is no big issue to resolve. I personally do not believe standards are good because of the EC either and instead think it is for a variety of reasons of which the EC/IET are just a part; however it seems to work pretty well and so I seek only to make continual improvements rather than make major structural changes. We could if we wanted change it all and then end up with a system/methodology which on paper looks fine and dandy in principle but then ends up delivering a complete mess.

IEng and CEng are far from perfect but the system does deliver benefits and no one is forced to take them up; I seek to improve the benefits whereas I think you are more dissapointed because you did not achieve CEng and feel this was not as it should have been, and from what I have read of your postings I do think you have a good point.

I also remember very well how Mr Parr used to really lay into the IET with his postings and he was another engineer who felt aggrieved at not achieving CEng but then changed his tune when he finally achieved CEng. Again maybe he was correct to be aggrieved.

I am not aggrieved and have no beef with the IET/EC and I support professional registration but think there are improvements which could be made to deliver a better product; however it does not mean I am correct of course and hence we need the variety of opinions and including those from yourself and who argues his point very well.

At the end of the day, the IET is a club and the rules of registration are set by those running the club. If you want registration with proper validation, then perhaps the government should set up OFSET (office of science, engineering and technology) to regulate the profession; with the IET left to look after the professional needs of its members.


Forget the government they would just appoint the usual sirs, lords, vice chancellors, deans, professors, etc., and stick it under some completely unqualified minister and so I think we are better as we are. We joined a club the day we were born mbirdi, our parents made that decision for us and so if there is an issue with coming into a world of clubs then we best raise it with our parents, and if we want to be in a club or clubs then there are rules and requirements, that's life really. I think the rules and requirements can be improved upon but overall I am happy there is a club and I prefer that it improves its product and expands its influence.

Regards.
 16 February 2014 03:18 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: rrr605
I would prefer Chartership with the IET since it has got a much wider global spread in comparison to CIBSE.

First of all, there is no difference, in terms of academic quality, between an accredited and non-accredited degree. You were accepted onto the accredited MSc course because the university saw nothing lacking in your academic achievement - an important information for those wondering what the difference is.

An accredited degree is nothing more than a private arrangement made between the university concerned and the IET; where the university agrees to have their degree syllabus inspected by the IET followed by accreditation fees being paid.

You degree accreditation lapsed because the university didn't start the arrangement with the IET, and so fees were only paid after you started your course.

However, if you then complete an accredited MSc degree then, in principle, you are deemed to have been fully accredited. The analogy being a sinner (non-accredited graduate) entering a place of worship (accredited degree course) then confessing all (finishing the course) and walking out a saint (graduated with accredited degree).

If you cannot get into the IET as CEng, then you should get it with CIBSE, and then transfer your CEng over to the IET. No need to do a technical report or confess your sins all over again.

Edited: 16 February 2014 at 03:25 PM by mbirdi
 17 February 2014 01:07 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

I do so like your comments and opinions mbirdi.

I am of the opinion that the leaders of some of these top institutions and the EC do not really think some of their decisions through, or else they do but they do not really explain themselves too well and so do not carry people with them. The problem with the University and Institution connection and with regards to professional membership is that it generally relies on one or more people at the University to drive it and maintain it. For example I undertook an IET accredited engineering degree and it was quite clear that my(our) course leader was the driving force behind the connection. Shortly after the end of the course he died, which was rather unfortunate because he was a good man and a good tutor, not a career tutor but a man who became a tutor as part of his career, and very shortly after that the accreditation lapsed. That was in 2009/2010 just to make the point it was not like 20 years ago and so is not relevant today. So the student completing that same degree today would not have an IET accredited degree.....that in particular is not the fault of the IET. I tend to think there needs to be some better joined up thinking between employers, universities and institutions.

Regards.
 17 February 2014 06:01 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



mbirdi

Posts: 1907
Joined: 13 June 2005

Originally posted by: westonpa
I do so like your comments and opinions mbirdi.

A praise, in which ever form, is always welcomed.

Sorry to hear about your tutor passing away; you provide a very good example of how delicately balanced the status of a degree can be form being accredited one year to non-accredited the next; and it can be all down to the enthusiasm of one tutor trying their best for their students.

Perhaps those with influence in the IET will take note of your comment and look at ways to improve the situation for the students' sake. It could help secure the future of the IET, given the rising cost of fees and disillusionment from some of the members contemplating whether to stay or not.
 20 February 2014 12:48 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zuiko

Posts: 521
Joined: 14 September 2010

You make some excellent points mbirdi.

I feel there is too much pressure on *some* universities to have their degrees accredited by the institutions; to the effect that some modules are no more than a mechanism for the student to begin the registration process with a particular institution.

This oftens backfires. The student, fed up with wasting precious time writing thousands upon thousands of words of *waffle* about key skills is turned off entirely by the registration process.

If the institutes want students to engage with them, then they should provide their own - free - modules that the student can study in parallel with their degree, or afterwards if they want to register. As it stands, the student spends several thousand quid in fees to satisfy the institutions' vanity.

What should happen, is that the institutions assess the academic content of the degree impartially - rather than insist on non-academic/membership driven content that ensures the university is doing their (tedious) work for them; which is having the effect of discouraging students from continuing the process.

Or - even better - stay out of it. As you say - A British degree from a British university meets the requirements of the engineering council and the government. Leave it at that.
 20 February 2014 02:28 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



roybowdler

Posts: 276
Joined: 25 July 2008

The clue is in the i.e. critical/witty comment, not official advice.

A non-accredited degree might be equal to, or even arguably better than an accredited one, but it hasn't been audited during a specific time period by a professional institution, under Engineering Council supervision. Therefore, for someone choosing a degree (most commonly as a teenager) accreditation represents a safe choice, which offers some advantages later in terms of professional registration and employment potential.

I would expect an experienced professional seeking an academic experience, to choose the best match with their own development needs, perhaps in conjunction with their employer and/or advice from their professional body.

Higher degrees are offered in a huge range of specialist areas, and on an individually bespoke basis so it is impractical to accredit all of these. I'm not involved in academic accreditation but IMHO, awareness and engagement with relevant professional institutions should be encouraged, especially in an extra-curricular sense. However if what Zuiko suggests has taken place, i.e. substitution of "easy" material for more challenging, then this seems inappropriate. In a similar vein, IET accreditation might be withheld for example, from an institution that didn't offer suitable laboratory and workshop facilities, or otherwise didn't provide a strong curriculum or sufficient quality of support. Things would have to be much more extreme than this, for a government body to stop a course being offered.

Many MSc programmes are accredited as "Further Learning" under Engineering Council regulations. In this context for CEng "further" means on top of a CEng Accredited ( "subject to further learning") Bachelors Degree. There are also IEng accredited Bachelors Degrees, with a different balance of study.

An accredited MEng is usually a 4 year full-time programme (similar to a CEng BEng + an additional year) and an accredited Engineering Doctorate is also about to be added to the list.

Any other qualifications are not "standard route" for CEng, unless it is from overseas and covered by EU or Washington Accord treaties.

Non-accredited qualifications are therefore described as "individual route" under Engineering Council rules.

Under current IET practice, a person aspiring to registration, who has professional achievements that offer good evidence to illustrate the UK-SPEC competence requirements, is not at a significant disadvantage as an "individual route" candidate.

Very few people apply without some recognised academic qualifications, but it is also common for experienced engineers to use evidence of work-based learning in demonstrating their knowledge. In a minority of cases, additional questions arise and some lead to a Technical Interview, based on a sample of work.

Requests to transfer registration from another institution are assessed and the request may be rejected. In general, the IET will only accept a transfer if we can see good reason, consider ourselves competent to judge the field of expertise and consider that the person concerned is currently demonstrating competence to UK-SPEC standards.

Arguably one of the main purposes of the IET is to collaborate with academic institutions, employers and others to the benefit of our members (both now and in the future), the engineering community and society in general. Professional Registration and Accreditation are activities carried out on a "not for profit" basis, with a very substantial voluntary contribution of time and effort from IET members.

-------------------------
Roy Bowdler IEng FIET FCIPD
IET Registration & Standards
 20 February 2014 03:51 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



Zuiko

Posts: 521
Joined: 14 September 2010

Originally posted by: roybowdler

However if what Zuiko suggests has taken place, i.e. substitution of "easy" material for more challenging, then this seems inappropriate.


The irony is that is exactly what the institutes are causing. Instead of studying extra mathematics or physics, a fair percentage of the 360 points required for an Honours Degree (often as much as a tenth) is spent on tedious exercises about institute requirements!

It does more harm than good to the institutes, it turns people off, and it is something that they need to look at when accrediting degrees.
 21 February 2014 10:30 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



roybowdler

Posts: 276
Joined: 25 July 2008

Zuiko, for as long as I have had a knowledge of this area , a proportion of engineering students have complained that "general studies" is "a waste of time" or "tedious".

If substitution is taking place which sacrifices fundamental technical content, then I agree with you. However, there is merit in examining broader issues such as the business and regulatory environment (of which professional registration is a small part). If this is being covered in a tedious way, then the teaching structure & methods might be at fault?

I'm not sure about cause and effect here, as I don't think the IET would seek to encourage any more than an awareness of professional registration until it is "on the radar". Students with the right work experience, might be ready for registration whilst still studying, especially those on part-time/ sandwich/distance learning courses, who may already have some business understanding, plus technical and sometimes management experience from the workplace.

-------------------------
Roy Bowdler IEng FIET FCIPD
IET Registration & Standards
 21 February 2014 11:25 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message



westonpa

Posts: 1771
Joined: 10 October 2007

When I did my accredited degree the content with regards to the institution was one day of one module; as I recall a total of 2 hours. This part was along the lines of this is the IET, this is what it does, this is what professional registration is and why we think it has value, this is the code of ethics etc. Here is the website and here are the links to all the relevant items and which you can read in your own time in order to understand the detail. The next thing was that the university paid for student membership for each student on the course and so provided that first step. So maybe some universities are going over the top! Regards.
Statistics

See Also:



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