The definition, that the IEng (Engineering Technologist) has lower level of knowledge i.e. Bachelors Degree (either in Engineering or Technology) as compare to the CEng (Professional Engineer) who has higher level of knowledge i.e. Masters Degree (either in Engineering or Technology), is a legacy, i think.  Because both titles i.e. IEng and CEng are being awarded to both kind of Graduates i.e. Engineering and Technology.  It is conflicting the International Accords i.e. Washington Accord and Sydney Accord.


ECUK takes its CEng into Washington Accord, means, both M.Eng and M.Tech as CEng falls under Washington Accord and gets the international standard Title i.e. Professional Engineer.  Whilst it is quite clear that Washington Accord is about Engineering only.


Likewise, ECUK takes its IEng into Sydney Accord, means, both B.Eng and B.Tech as IEng falls under Sydney Accord and gets the international standard Title i.e. Engineering Technologist.  Whilst it is quite clear that Sydney Accord is about Engineering Technology only.  


 That is why, i am saying that the Titles of ECUK i.e. CEng and IEng under UK-SPEC are conflicting with the the Titles of IEA i.e. Professional Engineer and Engineering Technologist under Washington Accord and Sydney Accord, respectively.



As far as, Titles for Engineers and Technologists used in UK and rest of the world (other countries) are concerned, these are standardized by various International Accords.  The most famous is IEA (Washington Accord and Sydney Accord).  The Washington Accord deals with Engineering Profession by awarding the title Professional Engineer whilst the Sydney Accord deals with Engineering Technology Profession by awarding the title Engineering Technologist.  Now the Question that whether the Professional Engineer and Engineering Tecnologist are equal in status.  In my opinion, yes both should be treated at par or at equal status being a distinct disciplines of knowledge or professions, otherwise, there would not be any need of Sydney Accord, The Washington Accord would be enough for both Engineers and Technologists.


I hope that now i would be succeeded to get all of you well understand the subject point.  Please give your feedback.  Thank you.

The definition, that the IEng (Engineering Technologist) has lower level of knowledge i.e. Bachelors Degree (either in Engineering or Technology) as compare to the CEng (Professional Engineer) who has higher level of knowledge i.e. Masters Degree (either in Engineering or Technology), is a legacy, i think.  Because both titles i.e. IEng and CEng are being awarded to both kind of Graduates i.e. Engineering and Technology.  It is conflicting the International Accords i.e. Washington Accord and Sydney Accord.


ECUK takes its CEng into Washington Accord, means, both M.Eng and M.Tech as CEng falls under Washington Accord and gets the international standard Title i.e. Professional Engineer.  Whilst it is quite clear that Washington Accord is about Engineering only.


Likewise, ECUK takes its IEng into Sydney Accord, means, both B.Eng and B.Tech as IEng falls under Sydney Accord and gets the international standard Title i.e. Engineering Technologist.  Whilst it is quite clear that Sydney Accord is about Engineering Technology only.  


 That is why, i am saying that the Titles of ECUK i.e. CEng and IEng under UK-SPEC are conflicting with the the Titles of IEA i.e. Professional Engineer and Engineering Technologist under Washington Accord and Sydney Accord, respectively.



As far as, Titles for Engineers and Technologists used in UK and rest of the world (other countries) are concerned, these are standardized by various International Accords.  The most famous is IEA (Washington Accord and Sydney Accord).  The Washington Accord deals with Engineering Profession by awarding the title Professional Engineer whilst the Sydney Accord deals with Engineering Technology Profession by awarding the title Engineering Technologist.  Now the Question that whether the Professional Engineer and Engineering Tecnologist are equal in status.  In my opinion, yes both should be treated at par or at equal status being a distinct disciplines of knowledge or professions, otherwise, there would not be any need of Sydney Accord, The Washington Accord would be enough for both Engineers and Technologists.


I hope that now i would be succeeded to get all of you well understand the subject point.  Please give your feedback.  Thank you.