This discussion is locked.

You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Youngest Chartered Engineers

Having received the latest copy of Member News, I noted that there was an article about the new youngest CEng. Now, obviously it isn’t a race to get CEng and it doesn’t really matter at what age you achieve it.

But it did tweak my interest to wonder what the ages (not names, let’s keep some privacy) of the, say, 16 youngest people to achieve CEng was. Assuming the IET kept that type of information. I don’t suppose that this information is available?

I’d imagine it would be a challenge to get the youngest age that much more under 26. If a 3 year BEng can be compressed to 2 years, then possibly a MEng can be compressed down to 3. Assuming a compressed degree could achieve accreditation then that might lower it another year. However, the competences take as long as they take and it’s about being in the right place and grabbing the right opportunities.

Parents

0 Roy Bowdler over 5 years ago

Lee I see that others , have answered your question.

To keep it simple many Chartered Engineer recognitions are awarded by completion of academic qualifications, followed by some training, followed by some responsibility, with a final check that all the UK-SPEC competences have been addressed. Professional Institutions may accredit each of these steps and conduct the final assessment. If you are fortunate enough to be admitted to an accredited degree programme and then gain employment with an employer who has accredited their training with a professional institution, then you can reasonably expect with average diligence to be CEng by 25 to 27.

To borrow a golfing metaphor, this is the fairway. Minor mishits may result in having to hack out of a bunker, but if you deviate from the fairway the grass gets longer and eventually becomes a jungle. For many years “out of bounds” was close to the edge of the fairway and there was a 10 year penalty for being out of bounds, after which you could be allowed back if the captain passed your stroke as suitable on the practice ground. Things have become a little more forgiving in recent years. So if you are coached to successfully stay on the fairway for a round, then you are deemed OK for life. If you didn’t get into the club, or get the right coaching, then you risk a very long round or possibly being excluded altogether. First impressions are important! In the context of this analogy, competence is the score, so completing the course is a starting measure, but how many over par is allowed, is a handicap system in operation, is there a dress code, equipment restrictions, local rules and unofficial concessions agreed between players? Everyone can stand back and admire the very top pros, but many of the average players may feel that they haven’t had a fair rub of the green when the prizes are given out.

My suggestion was simply to ensure that every member gets some instruction and coaching then works on improving their game. Once they can play to a reasonable standard we recognise them as proper players and encourage them to improve some more. We can set the score required to be considered a “master” wherever we choose, but if we make it too difficult and belittle those who haven’t made that mark, then they will stop playing and the club will no longer be credible or viable.

When I first learned about competence, an example used was the driving test, where you were expected to demonstrate a specified standard of performance under reasonably controlled conditions, but how you reached that that standard wasn’t prescribed. What we have is a hybrid form, with different examiners placing the emphasis in different areas, or allowed to introduce some extras of their own. What Chartered Engineers do is complex and enormously varied, so a system has been evolved to measure it in a simplified way. It seems to work reasonably well on the whole for people who clearly deserve to be recognised through following an ideal pathway, but there are many uncertainties otherwise.

We wouldn’t have debated all of this for generations if the answer was a simple one , but wherever a perception of winners and losers is introduced , ill feeling won’t be far away. Also if something doesn’t seem to have “face validity” then people won’t trust it. So for example, if an employer is told that someone that they consider to be their best engineer is actually in PEI eyes their worst, because different attributes are given different value, then an obvious gap exists. In earlier more deferential times, most people just accepted qualifications at face value, or if even they didn’t, they had no means of arguing.

I don't think the intent of this thread was to generate this type of debate, so I will just reiterate my earlier comment "if you're good enough then you'r old enough". So to any 25 year old aspiring to Chartered Engineer - Good luck! As was said earlier this isn't a race, but its good to set challenging goals. We just don't all have to get round Amen Corner without dropping a shot ?.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Roy Bowdler over 5 years ago

Lee I see that others , have answered your question.

To keep it simple many Chartered Engineer recognitions are awarded by completion of academic qualifications, followed by some training, followed by some responsibility, with a final check that all the UK-SPEC competences have been addressed. Professional Institutions may accredit each of these steps and conduct the final assessment. If you are fortunate enough to be admitted to an accredited degree programme and then gain employment with an employer who has accredited their training with a professional institution, then you can reasonably expect with average diligence to be CEng by 25 to 27.

To borrow a golfing metaphor, this is the fairway. Minor mishits may result in having to hack out of a bunker, but if you deviate from the fairway the grass gets longer and eventually becomes a jungle. For many years “out of bounds” was close to the edge of the fairway and there was a 10 year penalty for being out of bounds, after which you could be allowed back if the captain passed your stroke as suitable on the practice ground. Things have become a little more forgiving in recent years. So if you are coached to successfully stay on the fairway for a round, then you are deemed OK for life. If you didn’t get into the club, or get the right coaching, then you risk a very long round or possibly being excluded altogether. First impressions are important! In the context of this analogy, competence is the score, so completing the course is a starting measure, but how many over par is allowed, is a handicap system in operation, is there a dress code, equipment restrictions, local rules and unofficial concessions agreed between players? Everyone can stand back and admire the very top pros, but many of the average players may feel that they haven’t had a fair rub of the green when the prizes are given out.

My suggestion was simply to ensure that every member gets some instruction and coaching then works on improving their game. Once they can play to a reasonable standard we recognise them as proper players and encourage them to improve some more. We can set the score required to be considered a “master” wherever we choose, but if we make it too difficult and belittle those who haven’t made that mark, then they will stop playing and the club will no longer be credible or viable.

When I first learned about competence, an example used was the driving test, where you were expected to demonstrate a specified standard of performance under reasonably controlled conditions, but how you reached that that standard wasn’t prescribed. What we have is a hybrid form, with different examiners placing the emphasis in different areas, or allowed to introduce some extras of their own. What Chartered Engineers do is complex and enormously varied, so a system has been evolved to measure it in a simplified way. It seems to work reasonably well on the whole for people who clearly deserve to be recognised through following an ideal pathway, but there are many uncertainties otherwise.

We wouldn’t have debated all of this for generations if the answer was a simple one , but wherever a perception of winners and losers is introduced , ill feeling won’t be far away. Also if something doesn’t seem to have “face validity” then people won’t trust it. So for example, if an employer is told that someone that they consider to be their best engineer is actually in PEI eyes their worst, because different attributes are given different value, then an obvious gap exists. In earlier more deferential times, most people just accepted qualifications at face value, or if even they didn’t, they had no means of arguing.

I don't think the intent of this thread was to generate this type of debate, so I will just reiterate my earlier comment "if you're good enough then you'r old enough". So to any 25 year old aspiring to Chartered Engineer - Good luck! As was said earlier this isn't a race, but its good to set challenging goals. We just don't all have to get round Amen Corner without dropping a shot ?.
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

Youngest Chartered Engineers

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Community Rules & Guidelines