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: 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). 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 6 th 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.

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

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:

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).

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 6^th 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.

Parents

0 Andy Millar over 6 years ago

Yes, that is an interesting article, it resonates with things I've been thinking about looking at my children's degrees: my daughter's coming to the end of an integrated Master's in biology, my son's finishing his first year of a joint honours philosophy and music. Sad to say I think they both seem to be getting a much better education for life than I did with my engineering degree. In particular, a point we were discussing over Easter was an oddity of engineering degrees: they "teach" you (and this still seems to be true) that all problems have solutions, and not just that but defined solutions*. Between the three of us we could not think of another class of degrees that does this - and, for example, it does explain why so many engineers struggle with moving into management where you're often just trying to make the least worst decision you can based on not nearly enough information! I also see this in my own field of safety engineering, it's an odd concept to many graduate engineers that the systems they are working on will end up with a probability of killing people, and that often the argument that it is acceptable safe (and what does that mean?) relies on some best guess assumptions - not least as to how likely it is that people will do stupid (or just thoughtless) things. You can't calculate everything, and if you think you can you're probably doing Garbage In Garbage Out.

To my mind a degree should be the polar opposite of a vocational course here, it should support you in learning that the world is an uncertain, unknown, and changeable place, help you discover how to find the best knowledge that is available, and then use that to solve new problems - in some sort of structured responsible way that lets you make best guesses when you need to. Trying to give the students that available knowledge is absolutely a waste of time. Knowing how to manage evidence and arguments is far more important.

(Micro rant here: Every so often, on these forums and elsewhere, an engineer will write "all politicians should be engineers, because engineers are taught how to think logically". Sorry, not true, philosophers and scientists (and some lawyers) are supported to learn methodologies for thinking logically - I think that's what attracted my children to those subjects - engineers are, largely, taught to do things by the book. And in the real world there ain't no book! Micro rant over )

So whilst I don't agree with every word Professor Plummer is quoted as saying here, I very strongly agree with the thrust of his argument. The engineers of the future need to understand that there are no easy answers, but there are lots of fascinating opportunities to try to find the difficult answers - and we do know an awful lot about good ways to carry out that search.

All this, I suppose, is why the concept of NMiTE just slightly bothers me - there's no reason why an engineering focused institute shouldn't provide an education which encourages deep thinking about a range of issues beyond the obviously technical, I just have this nasty feeling it won't!

Cheers, Andy

(*This came out of a discussion about end of year exams: we were thinking how odd it is that only engineering degrees have largely "right" and "wrong" answers, every other degree (apparently even maths, although we may be wrong) is looking at how you approach an issue, and accepts there may be several different but perfectly valid approaches.)
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Andy Millar over 6 years ago

Yes, that is an interesting article, it resonates with things I've been thinking about looking at my children's degrees: my daughter's coming to the end of an integrated Master's in biology, my son's finishing his first year of a joint honours philosophy and music. Sad to say I think they both seem to be getting a much better education for life than I did with my engineering degree. In particular, a point we were discussing over Easter was an oddity of engineering degrees: they "teach" you (and this still seems to be true) that all problems have solutions, and not just that but defined solutions*. Between the three of us we could not think of another class of degrees that does this - and, for example, it does explain why so many engineers struggle with moving into management where you're often just trying to make the least worst decision you can based on not nearly enough information! I also see this in my own field of safety engineering, it's an odd concept to many graduate engineers that the systems they are working on will end up with a probability of killing people, and that often the argument that it is acceptable safe (and what does that mean?) relies on some best guess assumptions - not least as to how likely it is that people will do stupid (or just thoughtless) things. You can't calculate everything, and if you think you can you're probably doing Garbage In Garbage Out.

To my mind a degree should be the polar opposite of a vocational course here, it should support you in learning that the world is an uncertain, unknown, and changeable place, help you discover how to find the best knowledge that is available, and then use that to solve new problems - in some sort of structured responsible way that lets you make best guesses when you need to. Trying to give the students that available knowledge is absolutely a waste of time. Knowing how to manage evidence and arguments is far more important.

(Micro rant here: Every so often, on these forums and elsewhere, an engineer will write "all politicians should be engineers, because engineers are taught how to think logically". Sorry, not true, philosophers and scientists (and some lawyers) are supported to learn methodologies for thinking logically - I think that's what attracted my children to those subjects - engineers are, largely, taught to do things by the book. And in the real world there ain't no book! Micro rant over )

So whilst I don't agree with every word Professor Plummer is quoted as saying here, I very strongly agree with the thrust of his argument. The engineers of the future need to understand that there are no easy answers, but there are lots of fascinating opportunities to try to find the difficult answers - and we do know an awful lot about good ways to carry out that search.

All this, I suppose, is why the concept of NMiTE just slightly bothers me - there's no reason why an engineering focused institute shouldn't provide an education which encourages deep thinking about a range of issues beyond the obviously technical, I just have this nasty feeling it won't!

Cheers, Andy

(*This came out of a discussion about end of year exams: we were thinking how odd it is that only engineering degrees have largely "right" and "wrong" answers, every other degree (apparently even maths, although we may be wrong) is looking at how you approach an issue, and accepts there may be several different but perfectly valid approaches.)
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

A new model of high-value engineering education

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Community Rules & Guidelines