Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 153 replies
  • Subscribers 10 subscribers
  • Views 3837 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

A new model of high-value engineering education

Mark Curtiz
Following on from the UK Engineering Report 2016 (and the discussion of same in this forum) and the adequacy or not of current efforts to educate and train, and to encourage the registration of our future engineers, I am intrigued about a “new model in technology and engineering” (NMiTE http://www.nmite.org.uk). It is a new University that is to focus on the teaching of engineering.

In a recent press release, it says:  

“At NMiTE we believe that engineering education can be different.
We’re here to unlock the creativity and drive of Britain’s next generation – the Passioneers – the designers and builders, problem solvers and innovators who will shape our future.


We’re establishing a new model of high-value engineering education:


  • Creating a beacon institution to help address the engineering skills shortage that threatens to hobble the UK’s ability to compete globally.

  • With a new approach to learning – based on real-world problem solving and the blending of high quality engineering, design, liberal arts and humanities with communication and employability skills targeted at the growth sectors of the future.

  • Located on a new and different type of campus – designed for inspiration, collaboration and a deep connection to the global community.

  • And reinforced by an innovation ecosystem of global corporations & SME entrepreneurs, coupled with global universities, not just to invest, but to contribute knowledge and expertise – with New Model students at its centre.

We’re shaping an institution to create and deliver 21st century engineers – catalysts for innovation and change – a new model generation of emotionally intelligent entrepreneurs, innovators, employees and leaders for the future."


Two things strike me as very different about this proposition:

  1. Its motto is “no lectures, no exams, no text books” (!). It plans to be very practically-based, largely conducted within real industry.

Apparently, it will also have no departments, no faculties, no tenure, no Council.  Instead, it’ll have “teaching teams designed around the delivery of our unique engineering and Human Interaction curriculum” (developed by an impressive, international, and overwhelmingly academic array of advisors and partners).


  1. It’s located in the city of Hereford (admittedly partly a personal one as a resident of Herefordshire for over 30 years). 

It is a city by virtue of its cathedral but it is one of the smaller cities in the UK with a population of just over 50k, and is in England's first or second most rural county (depending on how you rank it). Hereford’s engineering heritage is largely unremarkable as it is known more for its agricultural and food output (beef, potatoes, strawberries, apples, cider(!), beer, etc.) and of being home to the UK's elite special forces regiments. It has engineering history in munitions production from during WWII and it's current engineering association is with food production, double-glazing, Morgan chassis and JCB cab manufacture, insulation material forming, and that’s largely it. So, not the most obvious choice to base a new Advanced Engineering University then!


The NMiTE project has been described (The Times 6th Sep 2016) as “at worst an intriguing experiment and at best an innovative template that traditional universities might learn from”.

What do you think?


As an aside, I have seen nothing of NMiTE in these forums or indeed on the IET website – yet, apparently (and quite rightly) the IET has been an advisor/contributor/supporter.


As a footnote, I would very much like to reach out and connect with any IET members/fellows that are/have been involved in NMiTE with a view of my getting involved too.
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Ref Cheong
    Tsoi



    “Cheong
    Tsoi

    I read your
    posts.

    Would it be more relevant
    if you apply for CEng thru Nuclear Institute with your past
    experience in Nuclear engineering instead of IEE/IET where more
    suitable for traditional electrical/electronic
    engineers?    ”




    Thank you Cheong, you have
    made an honest reply. 

    However you will not have
    the knowledge of the history of these UK PEIs and IET in
    particular.




    Briefly I joined ITEME from
    a European R&D reactor where I was transfered to from MoD
    UK.

    I returned to the UK where
    I became a lead engineer in another R&D nuclear project, I was
    invited to help run, ITEME as a committee member. I pushed for amalgamation
    of all UK PEIs     to try and make an umbrella organisation
    which would cover all schools of
    engineering.


    On this project my name was
    plagiarised and illegal work was carried out in my name. I reported
    the incident, but the project was so politically and financialy
    tied to the EU, that I was dismissed, denigrated and had to leave
    the country. The UK administration was just scarred to defend
    me    .

    ITEME went on to create IIE
    which created the idea of engineering & technology, we
    amalgamated with the IEE to form IET    .


    IET is meant to be an
    Institute for all
    branches of PEIs    .


    I agree with your opinion
    IET:     IEE/IET where more suitable
    for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    In fact the UK has no PEI suitable for
    only traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    I applied to this same
    R&D project to return to nuclear engineering and to return to
    my home land.

    I was told that I had to be
    Chartered Engineer, and that they did not respect IET as a
    mechanical - nuclear PEI.     They would only recruit
    CEng I Mech E.

     

    I applied to the then
    Nuclear Institute, they were in a poor shape and had no active nuclear engineers
    (they broke up and went scientific just after my complaints to
    their CEO).     The GM of Nuc Inst was a teacher who had cleaned up
    a 5KW R&D
    nuclear teaching reactor. This work is called DAD. On the reactor I
    have just analysed and programmed for DAD, the teaching reactor was
    not even studied as it was not considered as a nuclear DAD problem,
    it could be put into a simple nuclear container ( this applies to
    all small R&D reactors).This person found all the excuses
    possible to not accept my CEng candidature. I had been a member of
    Nuc I before he arrived there.

    I applied to I Mech E and
    had the same treatment – 5 applications for CEng , Two Master
    thesis written and approved – no CEng because I do not have
    sponsors.

    Sponsors are illegal in
    France     and all the people I contacted for sponsorship refused
    because they do not agree with the UK CEng system – it is simply
    corrupt.

     

    I have sent my complaint to
    the CEO, President and head of membership IET . I was rebuffed.
    They are turning a blind eye as they are on campaign which does not
    concern UK PEs.

    They are as scared of the
    truth as the UK Administration. Reply below.

     

    I am now retired, but on
    call to consult on the next big UK Nuc Reactor, it will not be a
    UK project!

     

    I agree with certain people
    on this blog,

    It is time for an audit and
    change in IET and ECUK.

     

    What we need is
    Professional Registration of all trained Professional
    Engineers     – one UK system for UK attached PEs

    Secondly one PEI covering
    all branches of Engineering and Technology    , which was our aim
    in ITEME and many progressive minor PEIs in the 80s.

     

    As for IEng CEng  just
    call them PE and add the suffixes they wish : Consultant, Expert,
    BA, BSc, Hons, MA, MSc, MEng but not MBA this is
    management.

     

    With all respect, you have
    a name that sounds Chinese, no offence, I trained the head of the
    Chinese EPR project now building a UK EPR, he told me that they
    qualified more engineers in china each year than there were people
    in France!

    Imagine if they all joined
    IET.

     

    We need a membership of IET
    for non UK professionals; the UK has one great big problem BREXIT and it needs a
    new sort of engineer to engineer BREXIT future.

    Engineers need to
    communicate and work together worldwide but not under todays
    archaic systems, it is your generation that has to guide and
    lead.

     

    John Gowman -
    MIET

    PJ

    IET Management reply to my
    signaling of corruption at executive level, (this
    week).

    I am sorry to hear that
    you are disappointed with the IET’s present day attitude to
    Professional Engineers who are apprentice trained, or have
    HNC’s/BSc’s. 

     

    When assessing engineers
    for professional registration at IEng or CEng level, the IET adhere
    strictly to the Engineering Councils guidance, and specifically the
    UK-SPEC competency framework. 

    This assessment method
    requires the Institution to assess members competence based on a
    combination of their educational qualifications and work based
    learning to determine which category of professional registration
    best suits their experience. 

     

    With regard to your
    comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that
    the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not
    discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered
    members. 

     

    The number of IEng
    registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5
    years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage
    its growth. 

     

    As a professional PEI, we
    are not in a position to comment about your thoughts on Fusion
    lobbying. 

    E&T magazine is
    editorially independent within the IET and E&T’s editorial
    policy allows a variety of views to be expressed in its pages but
    it is not endorsing Fusion
    lobbying.     

     

    The IET is a
    multi-disciplinary Institution    , with over 165,000 members
    operating in all areas of Engineering and Technology.

     

    I hope this has addressed
    your concerns, and thank you for your continued support of the
    Institution and the engineering
    profession. 

     


    Head of
    Membership      The IET

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Ref Cheong
    Tsoi



    “Cheong
    Tsoi

    I read your
    posts.

    Would it be more relevant
    if you apply for CEng thru Nuclear Institute with your past
    experience in Nuclear engineering instead of IEE/IET where more
    suitable for traditional electrical/electronic
    engineers?    ”




    Thank you Cheong, you have
    made an honest reply. 

    However you will not have
    the knowledge of the history of these UK PEIs and IET in
    particular.




    Briefly I joined ITEME from
    a European R&D reactor where I was transfered to from MoD
    UK.

    I returned to the UK where
    I became a lead engineer in another R&D nuclear project, I was
    invited to help run, ITEME as a committee member. I pushed for amalgamation
    of all UK PEIs     to try and make an umbrella organisation
    which would cover all schools of
    engineering.


    On this project my name was
    plagiarised and illegal work was carried out in my name. I reported
    the incident, but the project was so politically and financialy
    tied to the EU, that I was dismissed, denigrated and had to leave
    the country. The UK administration was just scarred to defend
    me    .

    ITEME went on to create IIE
    which created the idea of engineering & technology, we
    amalgamated with the IEE to form IET    .


    IET is meant to be an
    Institute for all
    branches of PEIs    .


    I agree with your opinion
    IET:     IEE/IET where more suitable
    for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    In fact the UK has no PEI suitable for
    only traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    I applied to this same
    R&D project to return to nuclear engineering and to return to
    my home land.

    I was told that I had to be
    Chartered Engineer, and that they did not respect IET as a
    mechanical - nuclear PEI.     They would only recruit
    CEng I Mech E.

     

    I applied to the then
    Nuclear Institute, they were in a poor shape and had no active nuclear engineers
    (they broke up and went scientific just after my complaints to
    their CEO).     The GM of Nuc Inst was a teacher who had cleaned up
    a 5KW R&D
    nuclear teaching reactor. This work is called DAD. On the reactor I
    have just analysed and programmed for DAD, the teaching reactor was
    not even studied as it was not considered as a nuclear DAD problem,
    it could be put into a simple nuclear container ( this applies to
    all small R&D reactors).This person found all the excuses
    possible to not accept my CEng candidature. I had been a member of
    Nuc I before he arrived there.

    I applied to I Mech E and
    had the same treatment – 5 applications for CEng , Two Master
    thesis written and approved – no CEng because I do not have
    sponsors.

    Sponsors are illegal in
    France     and all the people I contacted for sponsorship refused
    because they do not agree with the UK CEng system – it is simply
    corrupt.

     

    I have sent my complaint to
    the CEO, President and head of membership IET . I was rebuffed.
    They are turning a blind eye as they are on campaign which does not
    concern UK PEs.

    They are as scared of the
    truth as the UK Administration. Reply below.

     

    I am now retired, but on
    call to consult on the next big UK Nuc Reactor, it will not be a
    UK project!

     

    I agree with certain people
    on this blog,

    It is time for an audit and
    change in IET and ECUK.

     

    What we need is
    Professional Registration of all trained Professional
    Engineers     – one UK system for UK attached PEs

    Secondly one PEI covering
    all branches of Engineering and Technology    , which was our aim
    in ITEME and many progressive minor PEIs in the 80s.

     

    As for IEng CEng  just
    call them PE and add the suffixes they wish : Consultant, Expert,
    BA, BSc, Hons, MA, MSc, MEng but not MBA this is
    management.

     

    With all respect, you have
    a name that sounds Chinese, no offence, I trained the head of the
    Chinese EPR project now building a UK EPR, he told me that they
    qualified more engineers in china each year than there were people
    in France!

    Imagine if they all joined
    IET.

     

    We need a membership of IET
    for non UK professionals; the UK has one great big problem BREXIT and it needs a
    new sort of engineer to engineer BREXIT future.

    Engineers need to
    communicate and work together worldwide but not under todays
    archaic systems, it is your generation that has to guide and
    lead.

     

    John Gowman -
    MIET

    PJ

    IET Management reply to my
    signaling of corruption at executive level, (this
    week).

    I am sorry to hear that
    you are disappointed with the IET’s present day attitude to
    Professional Engineers who are apprentice trained, or have
    HNC’s/BSc’s. 

     

    When assessing engineers
    for professional registration at IEng or CEng level, the IET adhere
    strictly to the Engineering Councils guidance, and specifically the
    UK-SPEC competency framework. 

    This assessment method
    requires the Institution to assess members competence based on a
    combination of their educational qualifications and work based
    learning to determine which category of professional registration
    best suits their experience. 

     

    With regard to your
    comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that
    the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not
    discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered
    members. 

     

    The number of IEng
    registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5
    years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage
    its growth. 

     

    As a professional PEI, we
    are not in a position to comment about your thoughts on Fusion
    lobbying. 

    E&T magazine is
    editorially independent within the IET and E&T’s editorial
    policy allows a variety of views to be expressed in its pages but
    it is not endorsing Fusion
    lobbying.     

     

    The IET is a
    multi-disciplinary Institution    , with over 165,000 members
    operating in all areas of Engineering and Technology.

     

    I hope this has addressed
    your concerns, and thank you for your continued support of the
    Institution and the engineering
    profession. 

     


    Head of
    Membership      The IET

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Ref Cheong
    Tsoi



    “Cheong
    Tsoi

    I read your
    posts.

    Would it be more relevant
    if you apply for CEng thru Nuclear Institute with your past
    experience in Nuclear engineering instead of IEE/IET where more
    suitable for traditional electrical/electronic
    engineers?    ”




    Thank you Cheong, you have
    made an honest reply. 

    However you will not have
    the knowledge of the history of these UK PEIs and IET in
    particular.




    Briefly I joined ITEME from
    a European R&D reactor where I was transfered to from MoD
    UK.

    I returned to the UK where
    I became a lead engineer in another R&D nuclear project, I was
    invited to help run, ITEME as a committee member. I pushed for amalgamation
    of all UK PEIs     to try and make an umbrella organisation
    which would cover all schools of
    engineering.


    On this project my name was
    plagiarised and illegal work was carried out in my name. I reported
    the incident, but the project was so politically and financialy
    tied to the EU, that I was dismissed, denigrated and had to leave
    the country. The UK administration was just scarred to defend
    me    .

    ITEME went on to create IIE
    which created the idea of engineering & technology, we
    amalgamated with the IEE to form IET    .


    IET is meant to be an
    Institute for all
    branches of PEIs    .


    I agree with your opinion
    IET:     IEE/IET where more suitable
    for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    In fact the UK has no PEI suitable for
    only traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    I applied to this same
    R&D project to return to nuclear engineering and to return to
    my home land.

    I was told that I had to be
    Chartered Engineer, and that they did not respect IET as a
    mechanical - nuclear PEI.     They would only recruit
    CEng I Mech E.

     

    I applied to the then
    Nuclear Institute, they were in a poor shape and had no active nuclear engineers
    (they broke up and went scientific just after my complaints to
    their CEO).     The GM of Nuc Inst was a teacher who had cleaned up
    a 5KW R&D
    nuclear teaching reactor. This work is called DAD. On the reactor I
    have just analysed and programmed for DAD, the teaching reactor was
    not even studied as it was not considered as a nuclear DAD problem,
    it could be put into a simple nuclear container ( this applies to
    all small R&D reactors).This person found all the excuses
    possible to not accept my CEng candidature. I had been a member of
    Nuc I before he arrived there.

    I applied to I Mech E and
    had the same treatment – 5 applications for CEng , Two Master
    thesis written and approved – no CEng because I do not have
    sponsors.

    Sponsors are illegal in
    France     and all the people I contacted for sponsorship refused
    because they do not agree with the UK CEng system – it is simply
    corrupt.

     

    I have sent my complaint to
    the CEO, President and head of membership IET . I was rebuffed.
    They are turning a blind eye as they are on campaign which does not
    concern UK PEs.

    They are as scared of the
    truth as the UK Administration. Reply below.

     

    I am now retired, but on
    call to consult on the next big UK Nuc Reactor, it will not be a
    UK project!

     

    I agree with certain people
    on this blog,

    It is time for an audit and
    change in IET and ECUK.

     

    What we need is
    Professional Registration of all trained Professional
    Engineers     – one UK system for UK attached PEs

    Secondly one PEI covering
    all branches of Engineering and Technology    , which was our aim
    in ITEME and many progressive minor PEIs in the 80s.

     

    As for IEng CEng  just
    call them PE and add the suffixes they wish : Consultant, Expert,
    BA, BSc, Hons, MA, MSc, MEng but not MBA this is
    management.

     

    With all respect, you have
    a name that sounds Chinese, no offence, I trained the head of the
    Chinese EPR project now building a UK EPR, he told me that they
    qualified more engineers in china each year than there were people
    in France!

    Imagine if they all joined
    IET.

     

    We need a membership of IET
    for non UK professionals; the UK has one great big problem BREXIT and it needs a
    new sort of engineer to engineer BREXIT future.

    Engineers need to
    communicate and work together worldwide but not under todays
    archaic systems, it is your generation that has to guide and
    lead.

     

    John Gowman -
    MIET

    PJ

    IET Management reply to my
    signaling of corruption at executive level, (this
    week).

    I am sorry to hear that
    you are disappointed with the IET’s present day attitude to
    Professional Engineers who are apprentice trained, or have
    HNC’s/BSc’s. 

     

    When assessing engineers
    for professional registration at IEng or CEng level, the IET adhere
    strictly to the Engineering Councils guidance, and specifically the
    UK-SPEC competency framework. 

    This assessment method
    requires the Institution to assess members competence based on a
    combination of their educational qualifications and work based
    learning to determine which category of professional registration
    best suits their experience. 

     

    With regard to your
    comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that
    the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not
    discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered
    members. 

     

    The number of IEng
    registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5
    years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage
    its growth. 

     

    As a professional PEI, we
    are not in a position to comment about your thoughts on Fusion
    lobbying. 

    E&T magazine is
    editorially independent within the IET and E&T’s editorial
    policy allows a variety of views to be expressed in its pages but
    it is not endorsing Fusion
    lobbying.     

     

    The IET is a
    multi-disciplinary Institution    , with over 165,000 members
    operating in all areas of Engineering and Technology.

     

    I hope this has addressed
    your concerns, and thank you for your continued support of the
    Institution and the engineering
    profession. 

     


    Head of
    Membership      The IET

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson

    Ref Cheong
    Tsoi



    “Cheong
    Tsoi

    I read your
    posts.

    Would it be more relevant
    if you apply for CEng thru Nuclear Institute with your past
    experience in Nuclear engineering instead of IEE/IET where more
    suitable for traditional electrical/electronic
    engineers?    ”




    Thank you Cheong, you have
    made an honest reply. 

    However you will not have
    the knowledge of the history of these UK PEIs and IET in
    particular.




    Briefly I joined ITEME from
    a European R&D reactor where I was transfered to from MoD
    UK.

    I returned to the UK where
    I became a lead engineer in another R&D nuclear project, I was
    invited to help run, ITEME as a committee member. I pushed for amalgamation
    of all UK PEIs     to try and make an umbrella organisation
    which would cover all schools of
    engineering.


    On this project my name was
    plagiarised and illegal work was carried out in my name. I reported
    the incident, but the project was so politically and financialy
    tied to the EU, that I was dismissed, denigrated and had to leave
    the country. The UK administration was just scarred to defend
    me    .

    ITEME went on to create IIE
    which created the idea of engineering & technology, we
    amalgamated with the IEE to form IET    .


    IET is meant to be an
    Institute for all
    branches of PEIs    .


    I agree with your opinion
    IET:     IEE/IET where more suitable
    for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    In fact the UK has no PEI suitable for
    only traditional electrical/electronic engineers?

     

    I applied to this same
    R&D project to return to nuclear engineering and to return to
    my home land.

    I was told that I had to be
    Chartered Engineer, and that they did not respect IET as a
    mechanical - nuclear PEI.     They would only recruit
    CEng I Mech E.

     

    I applied to the then
    Nuclear Institute, they were in a poor shape and had no active nuclear engineers
    (they broke up and went scientific just after my complaints to
    their CEO).     The GM of Nuc Inst was a teacher who had cleaned up
    a 5KW R&D
    nuclear teaching reactor. This work is called DAD. On the reactor I
    have just analysed and programmed for DAD, the teaching reactor was
    not even studied as it was not considered as a nuclear DAD problem,
    it could be put into a simple nuclear container ( this applies to
    all small R&D reactors).This person found all the excuses
    possible to not accept my CEng candidature. I had been a member of
    Nuc I before he arrived there.

    I applied to I Mech E and
    had the same treatment – 5 applications for CEng , Two Master
    thesis written and approved – no CEng because I do not have
    sponsors.

    Sponsors are illegal in
    France     and all the people I contacted for sponsorship refused
    because they do not agree with the UK CEng system – it is simply
    corrupt.

     

    I have sent my complaint to
    the CEO, President and head of membership IET . I was rebuffed.
    They are turning a blind eye as they are on campaign which does not
    concern UK PEs.

    They are as scared of the
    truth as the UK Administration. Reply below.

     

    I am now retired, but on
    call to consult on the next big UK Nuc Reactor, it will not be a
    UK project!

     

    I agree with certain people
    on this blog,

    It is time for an audit and
    change in IET and ECUK.

     

    What we need is
    Professional Registration of all trained Professional
    Engineers     – one UK system for UK attached PEs

    Secondly one PEI covering
    all branches of Engineering and Technology    , which was our aim
    in ITEME and many progressive minor PEIs in the 80s.

     

    As for IEng CEng  just
    call them PE and add the suffixes they wish : Consultant, Expert,
    BA, BSc, Hons, MA, MSc, MEng but not MBA this is
    management.

     

    With all respect, you have
    a name that sounds Chinese, no offence, I trained the head of the
    Chinese EPR project now building a UK EPR, he told me that they
    qualified more engineers in china each year than there were people
    in France!

    Imagine if they all joined
    IET.

     

    We need a membership of IET
    for non UK professionals; the UK has one great big problem BREXIT and it needs a
    new sort of engineer to engineer BREXIT future.

    Engineers need to
    communicate and work together worldwide but not under todays
    archaic systems, it is your generation that has to guide and
    lead.

     

    John Gowman -
    MIET

    PJ

    IET Management reply to my
    signaling of corruption at executive level, (this
    week).

    I am sorry to hear that
    you are disappointed with the IET’s present day attitude to
    Professional Engineers who are apprentice trained, or have
    HNC’s/BSc’s. 

     

    When assessing engineers
    for professional registration at IEng or CEng level, the IET adhere
    strictly to the Engineering Councils guidance, and specifically the
    UK-SPEC competency framework. 

    This assessment method
    requires the Institution to assess members competence based on a
    combination of their educational qualifications and work based
    learning to determine which category of professional registration
    best suits their experience. 

     

    With regard to your
    comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that
    the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not
    discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered
    members. 

     

    The number of IEng
    registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5
    years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage
    its growth. 

     

    As a professional PEI, we
    are not in a position to comment about your thoughts on Fusion
    lobbying. 

    E&T magazine is
    editorially independent within the IET and E&T’s editorial
    policy allows a variety of views to be expressed in its pages but
    it is not endorsing Fusion
    lobbying.     

     

    The IET is a
    multi-disciplinary Institution    , with over 165,000 members
    operating in all areas of Engineering and Technology.

     

    I hope this has addressed
    your concerns, and thank you for your continued support of the
    Institution and the engineering
    profession. 

     


    Head of
    Membership      The IET

  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson
    (2) Cheong,


    Cheong,
    The IET claims to be :-

    • the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineering membership organization

    • the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovator

    • grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers


    Not just IEE CEng

     
    IET is meant to be for people and professionals concerned about the future of science and technology.

     
    You are right IET has lost its way it is as you say
     “IEE/IET where more suitable for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?”

     
    As for the IET membership managers remarks:
    “With regard to your comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered members. 

                        
    The number of IEng registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5 years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage its growth.” – this is a pure text book marketing reply, a pure mockery of an MIET demand for professional action concerning fraud and corruption.

     
    CEng no thank you.
    I am a professional engineer my career and salary are my credentials.

     
    Thanks to my full engineering training from apprenticeship to taught masters, I have had the pleasure to work with the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineers with the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovators, grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers. It was not my suffix that counted it was my competences.

     
    I have worked for two CEng in all my career, I would never work for a CEng again.

     
    Today the CEng hegemony has cornered the market in the UK, No CEng = No job.

     
    A simple registration of Professional Engineers with their work certificates and CVs is all that is needed to be employed. Market forces will always win.

     
    Sorry, this is the hard reality in the UK.

     
    John Gowman,  MIET


  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson
    (2) Cheong,


    Cheong,
    The IET claims to be :-

    • the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineering membership organization

    • the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovator

    • grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers


    Not just IEE CEng

     
    IET is meant to be for people and professionals concerned about the future of science and technology.

     
    You are right IET has lost its way it is as you say
     “IEE/IET where more suitable for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?”

     
    As for the IET membership managers remarks:
    “With regard to your comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered members. 

                        
    The number of IEng registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5 years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage its growth.” – this is a pure text book marketing reply, a pure mockery of an MIET demand for professional action concerning fraud and corruption.

     
    CEng no thank you.
    I am a professional engineer my career and salary are my credentials.

     
    Thanks to my full engineering training from apprenticeship to taught masters, I have had the pleasure to work with the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineers with the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovators, grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers. It was not my suffix that counted it was my competences.

     
    I have worked for two CEng in all my career, I would never work for a CEng again.

     
    Today the CEng hegemony has cornered the market in the UK, No CEng = No job.

     
    A simple registration of Professional Engineers with their work certificates and CVs is all that is needed to be employed. Market forces will always win.

     
    Sorry, this is the hard reality in the UK.

     
    John Gowman,  MIET


  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson
    (2) Cheong,


    Cheong,
    The IET claims to be :-

    • the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineering membership organization

    • the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovator

    • grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers


    Not just IEE CEng

     
    IET is meant to be for people and professionals concerned about the future of science and technology.

     
    You are right IET has lost its way it is as you say
     “IEE/IET where more suitable for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?”

     
    As for the IET membership managers remarks:
    “With regard to your comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered members. 

                        
    The number of IEng registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5 years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage its growth.” – this is a pure text book marketing reply, a pure mockery of an MIET demand for professional action concerning fraud and corruption.

     
    CEng no thank you.
    I am a professional engineer my career and salary are my credentials.

     
    Thanks to my full engineering training from apprenticeship to taught masters, I have had the pleasure to work with the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineers with the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovators, grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers. It was not my suffix that counted it was my competences.

     
    I have worked for two CEng in all my career, I would never work for a CEng again.

     
    Today the CEng hegemony has cornered the market in the UK, No CEng = No job.

     
    A simple registration of Professional Engineers with their work certificates and CVs is all that is needed to be employed. Market forces will always win.

     
    Sorry, this is the hard reality in the UK.

     
    John Gowman,  MIET


  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member in reply to Chris Pearson
    (2) Cheong,


    Cheong,
    The IET claims to be :-

    • the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineering membership organization

    • the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovator

    • grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers


    Not just IEE CEng

     
    IET is meant to be for people and professionals concerned about the future of science and technology.

     
    You are right IET has lost its way it is as you say
     “IEE/IET where more suitable for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?”

     
    As for the IET membership managers remarks:
    “With regard to your comments on the IETs denigration of IEng members, I assure you that the IET hold all our members in the same regard, and do not discriminate between our IEng and CEng registered members. 

                        
    The number of IEng registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5 years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage its growth.” – this is a pure text book marketing reply, a pure mockery of an MIET demand for professional action concerning fraud and corruption.

     
    CEng no thank you.
    I am a professional engineer my career and salary are my credentials.

     
    Thanks to my full engineering training from apprenticeship to taught masters, I have had the pleasure to work with the world’s most multi-disciplinary professional engineers with the world’s very best science, engineering and technology innovators, grouping the cutting-edge, thinkers and doers. It was not my suffix that counted it was my competences.

     
    I have worked for two CEng in all my career, I would never work for a CEng again.

     
    Today the CEng hegemony has cornered the market in the UK, No CEng = No job.

     
    A simple registration of Professional Engineers with their work certificates and CVs is all that is needed to be employed. Market forces will always win.

     
    Sorry, this is the hard reality in the UK.

     
    John Gowman,  MIET


  • 0

    Cheong Tsoi:

    Dear John,


    I read your posts.


    Would it be more relevant if you apply for CEng thru Nuclear Institute with your past experience in Nuclear engineering instead of IEE/IET where more suitable for traditional electrical/electronic engineers?


    Just my thought for sharing!




    Hi,


    Apologies, but I'd have to slightly disagree with this, I've found the IET CEng process to be pretty much non-discipline specific. In practice the process is looking for professionalism in engineering approach, irrespective of the specialism of the applicant. Probably a more relevant issue to consider is whether the member will find, after joining and registering, that the institution discusses issues relevant to their discipline - e.g. I have no doubt a mechanical engineer could obtain CEng through the IET but may not find it offers services as relevant as the IMechE would. (And I note your comment about "electronics and electrical engineering": when my interest was specifically electronics I, like many others, joined the IET for the CEng and the IEEE for the technical content!)


    It's actually a very difficult question. Many of us work across disciplines, and the aim when the IET was set up was that it would also work across all disciplines. Nice idea, but can one institute actually manage that without spreading itself too thinly? Whilst going in the other direction, there are those who want the chartered status to explain what they are, e.g "Chartered Electrical Engineer". Not keen on that myself, seems a very narrow and (to me) rather outdated view of engineering.


    So no easy answers, except that if a non-electrical engineer wanted to use the IET to obtain CEng I certainly wouldn't put them off by saying they wouldn't get it. Apologies for the triple negative in that sentence!


    Cheers, Andy

  • 0
    "The number of IEng registered Members has been steadily increasing over the last 5 years, and we continuing to do all we can to support and encourage its growth.

    Could the IET provide more detailed numbers. It was my understanding that IEng numbers were decreasing.

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines