Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Subscribers 9 subscribers
  • Views 360 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Appeals Process

Andrew Naftel
I have been asked to support an IEng candidate who has been unsuccessful for the second occasion at his PRI. I was his PRA for the second attempt at IEng and was surprised at the outcome. The decision reached by the interviewers did appear to be contentious and was questioned by at least one of the reviewers on the panel post-PRI.

He is thinking of appealing against the recent decision on the basis that he was led to believe that he could only present evidence of competencies in the time since his first PRI. The wording in the letter he received post his first PRI would appear to confirm this. My understanding is that a candidate can present evidence at the interview from his/her entire career history. Can anyone offer clarification on the above or provide general advice on the guidance I should provide to the candidate.


Thanks in advance


Andrew
Parents
  • 0
    Andrew,

    I can't provide definitive clarification but my understanding is that at the second the expectation is that the candidate will show that he/she has filled the gaps that were found at the first Application/PRI. This is expected to be through further experience/examples that were not available for the first PRI, but (and it is a major BUT) if there are examples that for one reason or another were not previously presented which do show the competences are achieved (or were presented but incompletely and were thought by the interviewers not to show them) then these are perfectly legitimate.

    For old evidence the question in the back of the assessors'/interviewers' minds is always going to be "why was this not presented at the previous PRI" so there should be a legitimate reason.

    Alasdair
Reply
  • 0
    Andrew,

    I can't provide definitive clarification but my understanding is that at the second the expectation is that the candidate will show that he/she has filled the gaps that were found at the first Application/PRI. This is expected to be through further experience/examples that were not available for the first PRI, but (and it is a major BUT) if there are examples that for one reason or another were not previously presented which do show the competences are achieved (or were presented but incompletely and were thought by the interviewers not to show them) then these are perfectly legitimate.

    For old evidence the question in the back of the assessors'/interviewers' minds is always going to be "why was this not presented at the previous PRI" so there should be a legitimate reason.

    Alasdair
Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines