A new model of high-value engineering education

I'd add another factor for the UK, which is the collapse of large engineering companies. I was offered an undergraduate apprenticeship in the late '70s by Thorn and Marconi (although I actually took up a third offer). Both could churn through large numbers of apprentices, Marconi in particular were renowned for starting a huge number of my generation on their career - even if they did leave the moment their apprenticeship was over to earn more money! Similarly my post grad training was at the BBC, who again in the early 80s had enough staff that they could train large numbers of engineers, sadly I was in the last cohort before they halved the number of in-house engineers they had. 


An unintended outcome of the joint effects of outsourcing manufacturing and the break up of conglomerates is that there seems to be far fewer locations in the UK which can both provide a meaningful experience for school leavers and provide staff to supervise them in an engineering environment.


It's a challenge, and I very fully agree that we need to accept that it's a challenge. We can't ressurect what we used to do because the world's changed. Personally, I rather like the idea (I can't remember where I came across this) that apprentices are attached to FE/HE colleges rather than companies. They can then be circulated around different companies, small as well as large(ish), and hence obtain different skills, without placing an impossible burden on employers. But this does need colleges to genuinly engage with employers (and vice versa) for this to work.


As an aside, I would put a slight caveat on this, just to mention that there are engineering activities where a very high level of mathematical and conceptual (and state-of-the-art) knowledge is required, and hence where a pure school/university/PhD/post-doc path is invaluable. I would suggest that if you want a really strong innovation team then a mix of engineers of practical and theoretical backgrounds - who all respect each others capabilities - is the best of all possible worlds. (Just as a team needs a mixture of innovators and finishers, indeed mixtures of a whole range of skills.) The underlined words are the key! I very strongly believe that a successful engineering community needs a wide range of different routes in and up, so we can build the multi talented teams we need. Luckily we've got it in principle in the UK, but in practice getting on the apprentice route is far too challenging for the people we need and who want to do it.


Cheers, Andy

Each country has its own approach. I like to read about US, UK, France, Canada, Germany , Israel, Australia etc. I think we can learn from each other and each country can adopt or export if they choose so the Engineering and Technology of things.

Israel is highly innovative and a leader in many ways when it comes to Engineering and Technology etc.

Israeli engineers are highly sought-after in Israel and abroad. The hi-tech capabilities within the country are renowned globally, and major corporations are opening research and development operations throughout Israel. Engineers of every type are succeeding in almost every part of the globe

In Israel registration is a must and membership in Histadrut Mehandesim ( Union) while voluntary also a must. But in the professional life of the Engineer is something they do early in their career, once the registration is achieved it's an important check in order to be employed in government, military industry and many civil enterprises, companies as well.

So registration first step in the career upon graduation from the university such as University of Tel Aviv or Beer Sheva or Institute such as Technion or Waitsman etc.

Once registered then what is important are training and experience, apprenticeship exists in some places its informal in many cases because entry-level positions for new graduates are basically equal to paid apprenticeship. Many companies groom their Engineers and as members of the Histadrut of Engineers, there are protections of the union and privileges as well. The benefits that Histadrut Engineers negotiates for the Engineers protect their job security, training and allow education, pension plans among other benefits. The labour law of 1956 and in 2002 for example, Histadrut (nation union) influenced a law that Civil Service cant hire non-academically qualified employees for Engineering and Technology programs.

Titles/Designation of:

Technai  - Technician ( Engineering Technician) 

Handasai  - Engineer Technician - also Engineering Technology BSc can register as one.

Mehandes - Engineer

Are protected by law, and only qualified registered person can be called such and hired for many jobs. and join associations such as Association of Engineers, Architects and Graduates in Technological Sciences in Israel.

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