However, the reasonable statement “if you can show that you have an equivalent level of training and experience” requires some explanation. A similar question often put is, “do you accept my qualification”? The answer would be; The IET accepts all legitimate qualifications, but only those accredited through a formal process (including via international treaty) have their value clearly defined. Under Engineering Council Regulations we call these qualifications “standard route”.
All other qualifications are evaluated as part of each member’s professional registration assessment. At an early stage of the process we assess the “gap” between the qualifications offered and standard route qualifications. The next stage of the process uses the expert judgement of several trained assessors, often termed “peer review”. Assessors consider the evidence of career achievement against the UK-SPEC standard. If in the assessors collective opinion competence seems to be being illustrated, they are required to state how the identified “gap” has been closed. Typically an assessor would state something like “ in my opinion (specific achievements) demonstrate sufficient underpinning knowledge and understanding”.
If doubt remains at the point, then additional evidence may be requested in the form of a “Technical Report” which is separately assessed. Sufficient underpinning knowledge and understanding must be demonstrated before a Professional Review Interview is conducted, which is designed to validate competence.
“Equivalent” should be taken to mean demonstrating an acceptable minimum threshold standard of competence in accordance with UK-SPEC”. An experienced professional will typically be working well beyond the minimum thresholds in some of the competences and/or hold formal qualifications beyond the benchmark threshold.
Standard route qualifications assure the IET or other interested party that competence is underpinned by knowledge and understanding gained in a formal academic environment. The IET “individual route” assessment process offers “equivalence” relative to a practising competent engineer, this is an IET professional opinion based on UK-SPEC, it is not an assessment or examination based on an academic or vocational training syllabus.
Anyone seeking registration with international mobility in mind should understand that, although the equivalence of “standard” and “individual” routes is generally accepted in the UK. Some other country’s regulators will only accept accredited degrees, such as those specified under the Washington Accord for example.
To return to your question Rajarshi, it seems highly likely that you are demonstrating professional competence, aligned to either IEng or CEng through your achievements. You do not seem to have a “standard route” CEng accredited degree so you are “individual route” under the rules, although the application process is exactly the same for every member.
Compare the examples given in UK-SPEC for the A&B competences of IEng & CEng. Can you demonstrate achievements aligned to the CEng examples? If you cannot do so then you should consider IEng and/or seek further development. Your development could include formal study at Masters Level , which for an experienced practitioner, should involve further research and critical evaluation. This requires a different type of thinking to most learning at bachelors level. You will greatly enhance your prospects of a successful CEng assessment if you can demonstrate some “post-graduate attributes” (like research skills) used as part of your work, becasue the benchmark is "masters level".
However, the reasonable statement “if you can show that you have an equivalent level of training and experience” requires some explanation. A similar question often put is, “do you accept my qualification”? The answer would be; The IET accepts all legitimate qualifications, but only those accredited through a formal process (including via international treaty) have their value clearly defined. Under Engineering Council Regulations we call these qualifications “standard route”.
All other qualifications are evaluated as part of each member’s professional registration assessment. At an early stage of the process we assess the “gap” between the qualifications offered and standard route qualifications. The next stage of the process uses the expert judgement of several trained assessors, often termed “peer review”. Assessors consider the evidence of career achievement against the UK-SPEC standard. If in the assessors collective opinion competence seems to be being illustrated, they are required to state how the identified “gap” has been closed. Typically an assessor would state something like “ in my opinion (specific achievements) demonstrate sufficient underpinning knowledge and understanding”.
If doubt remains at the point, then additional evidence may be requested in the form of a “Technical Report” which is separately assessed. Sufficient underpinning knowledge and understanding must be demonstrated before a Professional Review Interview is conducted, which is designed to validate competence.
“Equivalent” should be taken to mean demonstrating an acceptable minimum threshold standard of competence in accordance with UK-SPEC”. An experienced professional will typically be working well beyond the minimum thresholds in some of the competences and/or hold formal qualifications beyond the benchmark threshold.
Standard route qualifications assure the IET or other interested party that competence is underpinned by knowledge and understanding gained in a formal academic environment. The IET “individual route” assessment process offers “equivalence” relative to a practising competent engineer, this is an IET professional opinion based on UK-SPEC, it is not an assessment or examination based on an academic or vocational training syllabus.
Anyone seeking registration with international mobility in mind should understand that, although the equivalence of “standard” and “individual” routes is generally accepted in the UK. Some other country’s regulators will only accept accredited degrees, such as those specified under the Washington Accord for example.
To return to your question Rajarshi, it seems highly likely that you are demonstrating professional competence, aligned to either IEng or CEng through your achievements. You do not seem to have a “standard route” CEng accredited degree so you are “individual route” under the rules, although the application process is exactly the same for every member.
Compare the examples given in UK-SPEC for the A&B competences of IEng & CEng. Can you demonstrate achievements aligned to the CEng examples? If you cannot do so then you should consider IEng and/or seek further development. Your development could include formal study at Masters Level , which for an experienced practitioner, should involve further research and critical evaluation. This requires a different type of thinking to most learning at bachelors level. You will greatly enhance your prospects of a successful CEng assessment if you can demonstrate some “post-graduate attributes” (like research skills) used as part of your work, becasue the benchmark is "masters level".
