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 7 years ago

Hi Moshe,

I understand that a similar situation exists in Italy (I work for an Italian company), I believe the situation there is that typically an engineering graduate will be professionally registered about two years after graduation?

I can see the benefit, it aligns with most other professions, and it gives a clear mark between a 'graduate in engineering' and an 'engineer'. I think perhaps where we all (including myself) may have got mislead on these forums is seeing this process as an either/or with CEng. Actually it is - or at least could be - complementary. So a post graduate certification when an engineer has gained sufficient experience to practice, but keeping CEng (as it is now) as a level for those more senior engineers taking final sign-off responsibility. Potentially the post-grad certification could be IEng, but it will rattle a few cages saying that so a different designation may be appropriate!

But in the UK I can't see this happening, as there is little enough interest already in the industry in any certifications other than degrees. Some organisations may like to have a few CEngs dotted amongst their staff, but in my experience primarily employers base their recruitment and promotion processes on academic qualification plus perceived track record plus perceived value to the company. Fair enough, although personally I strongly believe that if employers started taking CEng / IEng more seriously it would greatly help them support this process, but I feel like a bit of a voice in the wilderness there! And since the UK is considered to have a good track record in safety aspects of engineering - at least perhaps until we get fall out from the Grenfell tower fire - and (as I'm not going to go on about again for the moment) we are a determinedly free market for engineering employers I can't see this changing. If it ain't broke - or not seen to be broke - it ain't going to get fixed.

In particular, given this debate in various forms has been going on for the 40 years I've been in the industry, I've never seen anyone present evidence that generic licensing (not specific licensing for specialist tasks) decreases engineering mistakes or - for those who argue for this - pushes up engineering employment and pay. But that's not to say such evidence (positive or negative) doesn't exist, it would be very interesting and useful to know. But of course it's got to be evidence, not bar room opinion.

Many thanks as ever for giving a wider perspective on this debate! Highly appreciated.

Cheers, Andy
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Andy Millar over 7 years ago

Hi Moshe,

I understand that a similar situation exists in Italy (I work for an Italian company), I believe the situation there is that typically an engineering graduate will be professionally registered about two years after graduation?

I can see the benefit, it aligns with most other professions, and it gives a clear mark between a 'graduate in engineering' and an 'engineer'. I think perhaps where we all (including myself) may have got mislead on these forums is seeing this process as an either/or with CEng. Actually it is - or at least could be - complementary. So a post graduate certification when an engineer has gained sufficient experience to practice, but keeping CEng (as it is now) as a level for those more senior engineers taking final sign-off responsibility. Potentially the post-grad certification could be IEng, but it will rattle a few cages saying that so a different designation may be appropriate!

But in the UK I can't see this happening, as there is little enough interest already in the industry in any certifications other than degrees. Some organisations may like to have a few CEngs dotted amongst their staff, but in my experience primarily employers base their recruitment and promotion processes on academic qualification plus perceived track record plus perceived value to the company. Fair enough, although personally I strongly believe that if employers started taking CEng / IEng more seriously it would greatly help them support this process, but I feel like a bit of a voice in the wilderness there! And since the UK is considered to have a good track record in safety aspects of engineering - at least perhaps until we get fall out from the Grenfell tower fire - and (as I'm not going to go on about again for the moment) we are a determinedly free market for engineering employers I can't see this changing. If it ain't broke - or not seen to be broke - it ain't going to get fixed.

In particular, given this debate in various forms has been going on for the 40 years I've been in the industry, I've never seen anyone present evidence that generic licensing (not specific licensing for specialist tasks) decreases engineering mistakes or - for those who argue for this - pushes up engineering employment and pay. But that's not to say such evidence (positive or negative) doesn't exist, it would be very interesting and useful to know. But of course it's got to be evidence, not bar room opinion.

Many thanks as ever for giving a wider perspective on this debate! Highly appreciated.

Cheers, Andy
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

A new model of high-value engineering education

Community Rules & Guidelines