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

Brilliant post Roy as ever. Interesting that I've just been involved with a discussion on Graduate Apprenticeships on another thread, which does seem to be a valiant effort to address this - I just hope there are enough companies around to support these.

I wonder how much of a bias there really is (rather than perceived) against apprentice trained engineers? EXCEPT, and it's a really big except, by HR and recruitment 'gatekeepers'. Thinking about it, in the industries I've been in actually there have been as many apprentice trained senior (often very senior) engineering staff as school-to-university educated. Now, many of those have achieved degrees later in life, but there is a bit of motivational difference there. I'm sure it is true that an apprentice trained (or indeed degree educated!) engineer whose approach is "we'll do it this way because it's the way we've always done it before and it's the way I was taught" may struggle to rise to the top. But you don't need a degree to be aware that there may be a new and better - and still properly thought out - way of approaching an issue. But input from other industries on how general this acceptance of apprentice trained engineers is would be interesting - I do remember (I've probably mentioned this before) sitting on an industrial liaison panel where another industry representatives said his company only recruited PhD graduates. Jolly nice if that's what they want to do. But I'm relieved (since for some reason I do care about the future of engineering in the UK) that this is a minority view.

On the train this afternoon I finally got a chance to read the "New Approaches" conference proceedings Roy gave a path to a few posts back (I'm about half way through). Fascinating for two reasons. Firstly because a couple of the approaches I think are really very interesting: Vertically integrated projects: transforming higher education, Stephen Marshall and An engineering renaissance, Janusz A. Kozinski and Eddy F. Evans. Both were genuinely a breath of fresh air, and the latter in particular is a very thorough approach. But sadly, the second reason I found this so interesting was because throughout these studies it was emphasised that all the problems that existed with my engineering degree nearly 40 years ago are still there. I'm not going to write much more on this, because Kozinski and Evans for example have expressed the problems and potential solutions much better and much more authoritatively than I would. Except to say that it amuses me and frustrates me by turn how bad academia is in innovating in its organisations - but I have an impression that in STEM there is a new species of academics coming through who will be prepared to shake things up, I just hope they survive the frustration and bureaucracy to get to a position where they can!

P.S. What I find works well in the "bar room banter" / "evidence" balance is that when someone moves from having a chat to getting angry (or in my case a bit tetchy or slightly miffed) and demanding change, that's when shifting to needing real evidence becomes essential - and often in fact shows there wasn't really a problem there in the first place (or at least not what the person thought it was). As I've often found myself.

Cheers, Andy
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Andy Millar over 7 years ago

Brilliant post Roy as ever. Interesting that I've just been involved with a discussion on Graduate Apprenticeships on another thread, which does seem to be a valiant effort to address this - I just hope there are enough companies around to support these.

I wonder how much of a bias there really is (rather than perceived) against apprentice trained engineers? EXCEPT, and it's a really big except, by HR and recruitment 'gatekeepers'. Thinking about it, in the industries I've been in actually there have been as many apprentice trained senior (often very senior) engineering staff as school-to-university educated. Now, many of those have achieved degrees later in life, but there is a bit of motivational difference there. I'm sure it is true that an apprentice trained (or indeed degree educated!) engineer whose approach is "we'll do it this way because it's the way we've always done it before and it's the way I was taught" may struggle to rise to the top. But you don't need a degree to be aware that there may be a new and better - and still properly thought out - way of approaching an issue. But input from other industries on how general this acceptance of apprentice trained engineers is would be interesting - I do remember (I've probably mentioned this before) sitting on an industrial liaison panel where another industry representatives said his company only recruited PhD graduates. Jolly nice if that's what they want to do. But I'm relieved (since for some reason I do care about the future of engineering in the UK) that this is a minority view.

On the train this afternoon I finally got a chance to read the "New Approaches" conference proceedings Roy gave a path to a few posts back (I'm about half way through). Fascinating for two reasons. Firstly because a couple of the approaches I think are really very interesting: Vertically integrated projects: transforming higher education, Stephen Marshall and An engineering renaissance, Janusz A. Kozinski and Eddy F. Evans. Both were genuinely a breath of fresh air, and the latter in particular is a very thorough approach. But sadly, the second reason I found this so interesting was because throughout these studies it was emphasised that all the problems that existed with my engineering degree nearly 40 years ago are still there. I'm not going to write much more on this, because Kozinski and Evans for example have expressed the problems and potential solutions much better and much more authoritatively than I would. Except to say that it amuses me and frustrates me by turn how bad academia is in innovating in its organisations - but I have an impression that in STEM there is a new species of academics coming through who will be prepared to shake things up, I just hope they survive the frustration and bureaucracy to get to a position where they can!

P.S. What I find works well in the "bar room banter" / "evidence" balance is that when someone moves from having a chat to getting angry (or in my case a bit tetchy or slightly miffed) and demanding change, that's when shifting to needing real evidence becomes essential - and often in fact shows there wasn't really a problem there in the first place (or at least not what the person thought it was). As I've often found myself.

Cheers, Andy
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

A new model of high-value engineering education

Community Rules & Guidelines