Does the humble C&G-2391 syllabus need to be updated?

What do EAS and EAL & AM2 stand for? Never heard of em, and why is 2391 split into 3? Sounds like a money maker to me - all surplus and needless fluff

whjohnson said:

Sounds like a money maker to me

Personally can’t dispute that. The imperatives for this and similar qualifications stem from several quarters and has allowed me to shop for groceries in MandS for many years!

Sergio Fernandez said:

Does the humble C&G-2391 syllabus need to be updated?

Good question. However, before we consider an update, it might be reasonable to assess what currently exists. The 2391 is said to be level 3. I would dispute that. It may have been intended to equate to the complexity of an A-level but I would contend it is well below O-level status. And that is where it needs to be! 

I have no wish to be patronising, but it has been my experience over the 30 years I have been in part-time tutoring that the vast majority of installation electricians have little understanding of the fundamental principles and regulatory requirements that underpin the electrical systems they are working on, let alone the basic maths and electrical theory that would be needed to deal with them.

The reason for that is simple, most operatives install wiring systems and equipment. After all, that is what they are required to do. Those operatives are a precious commodity, they are the ones who we need to work steel conduit, trunking, galvanized tray and the like on a winters day, they are the ones who wrestle SWA cables into main panels, they are the ones who use infinite patience to install hundreds of ceiling roses and sockets  in a housing development.
They are also the ones who are far more important to society than those who seek to dig into their pockets for their hard earned cash to fund high-cost training that results in qualifications of dubious worth.

I throughly understand the need to upskill and the importance of keeping abreast of technical developments in one’s area of work. I also understand the reasonable argument for mandatory technical competence (MTC). However, no one could persuade me that the candidates that pass through my 2391 course, even when it is pitched one day per week over seven weeks with homework in between are suddenly competent to undertake inspection and testing, particularly of the periodic type. It would be equally difficult to persuade me that two days on a PV or battery course would be of any durable worth.

So, yes, maybe it is time for a complete review of the 2391, maybe it could be extended to cover other topical elements, but  as far as the new MTCs are concerned, the die has already been cast!. 

lyledunn said:

Those operatives are a precious commodity, they are the ones who we need to work steel conduit, trunking, galvanized tray and the like on a winters day, they are the ones who wrestle SWA cables into main panels, they are the ones who use infinite patience to install hundreds of ceiling roses and sockets  in a housing development.

[and in a competent consistent manner maintaining the basic standards we expect] 

Yes. These are the 'giants' upon who's shoulders we stand. Rock paper scissors all the way [or scissors paper stone if you associate that way] CEng/IEng is useless without the hands on capabilities here. The bootstrap hierarchy.

lyledunn said:

Those operatives are a precious commodity, they are the ones who we need to work steel conduit, trunking, galvanized tray and the like on a winters day, they are the ones who wrestle SWA cables into main panels, they are the ones who use infinite patience to install hundreds of ceiling roses and sockets  in a housing development.

[and in a competent consistent manner maintaining the basic standards we expect] 

Yes. These are the 'giants' upon who's shoulders we stand. Rock paper scissors all the way [or scissors paper stone if you associate that way] CEng/IEng is useless without the hands on capabilities here. The bootstrap hierarchy.