Gentlemen


I was not really intending to go off topic, but making a serious point which I think you appreciate. However I am going to make another, in in my view a complete demonstration, of why this paperwork system does not work, and I am not making a political point but an objection on real grounds.


You are probably familiar with this system of "proof" and "total reporting" in the lower part of our education system, in the entire school system. Teachers have to provide continuous documentation of the "progress" of pupils through their courses. This takes a great deal of time and effort, and is mostly useless as the only outcome is some league table position. I have many friends who teach, and this system is seen as nothing but a bureaucratic nonsense. It has caused a severe decline in educational standards, and a great many excellent teachers to leave the profession. Examination standards are at an all time low, whatever those in charge claim, and whatever meaningless grade candidates achieve. 25-30%  first class honours degrees, you have to be joking!


You have said that this recording takes little time and is easy to show sufficient CPD time, but my question is "what is the CPD result?". Unless you can prove a positive improvement in your performance (which with most of the CPD cited is unlikely) it would be much better if you did something else. The reporting standards are likely to get more onerous as time passes, again with severely negative results. Engineering is hard enough without this extra load, and the CEng registration is of very little real value to the holder. The first step must be to show that registered engineers are better, cleverer, and more valuable to a business. This has been said for at least 30 years, but our leaders have made exactly zero progress, perhaps making it even less valuable.


Engineers expect to be judged by results, because we directly make things happen. CPD needs to show direct results, which it does not in any way that I can see. Real study of problems does show direct results, in that they end up solved. That is the real purpose of engineering. My team did not win the McRobert prize because we had neat notebooks, we won it because we worked every hour the was for years to achieve results. None of us at that time was a CEng, only a few are now. So make it worth something, and not by paperwork which proves nothing!

Gentlemen


I was not really intending to go off topic, but making a serious point which I think you appreciate. However I am going to make another, in in my view a complete demonstration, of why this paperwork system does not work, and I am not making a political point but an objection on real grounds.


You are probably familiar with this system of "proof" and "total reporting" in the lower part of our education system, in the entire school system. Teachers have to provide continuous documentation of the "progress" of pupils through their courses. This takes a great deal of time and effort, and is mostly useless as the only outcome is some league table position. I have many friends who teach, and this system is seen as nothing but a bureaucratic nonsense. It has caused a severe decline in educational standards, and a great many excellent teachers to leave the profession. Examination standards are at an all time low, whatever those in charge claim, and whatever meaningless grade candidates achieve. 25-30%  first class honours degrees, you have to be joking!


You have said that this recording takes little time and is easy to show sufficient CPD time, but my question is "what is the CPD result?". Unless you can prove a positive improvement in your performance (which with most of the CPD cited is unlikely) it would be much better if you did something else. The reporting standards are likely to get more onerous as time passes, again with severely negative results. Engineering is hard enough without this extra load, and the CEng registration is of very little real value to the holder. The first step must be to show that registered engineers are better, cleverer, and more valuable to a business. This has been said for at least 30 years, but our leaders have made exactly zero progress, perhaps making it even less valuable.


Engineers expect to be judged by results, because we directly make things happen. CPD needs to show direct results, which it does not in any way that I can see. Real study of problems does show direct results, in that they end up solved. That is the real purpose of engineering. My team did not win the McRobert prize because we had neat notebooks, we won it because we worked every hour the was for years to achieve results. None of us at that time was a CEng, only a few are now. So make it worth something, and not by paperwork which proves nothing!