The 8th Edge Debate: 20th April 1999

Action Points from the 8th Debate

1. Equating report to accelerators. Latham and Egan same accelerator. Part of constant acceleration. Everyone (high and low) needs to be part of the same team
2. The 26% figure -- 41% if you look at UK figures. Situation worse. What is causing decline to Civil engineering?
3. General issue relating to science. Too many engineering courses. Complicated by training needs. Have a set of general engineering courses, scrap the specific ones. Why can't engineering be fun? Problem for employer is to find engineers who are creative. Have abstract and less abstract modules.
4. Reduce the number of professional bodies in the field. Does the built environment require 36 bodies?
5. Should be reducing the number of 'label' engineers. Should organisations be set up to reflect general nature of business it is operating in. Should be getting better about multi-skilling/university for industry?
6. Failures of general education – basic informing role/process of design & product. Close the gap between knowing and doing.
7. How many good engineers do we want/what will technology do the professions (esp the average professionals). Need small number of specialists/suspect that we have more than enough.
8. Image in construction industry: global issues – construction (can) damages the environment, lack of respect for people in the industry, not seen as dynamic enough. Were invitations sent to young professionals?
9. Think about integration of institutions. Problem to do with SARTOR
10. Shortage might be a good thing. Need 'creative engineering'.
11. Questions have been asked before. More endorsement for moving to the generalist position/an assault on the institutions. Look at how government departments have turned through 180 degrees.
12. Need specialist interests. Specialisations difficult to swallow up. Need federal structure. If institutions gave up accredited course, would need to pay attention to training. Not a university issue. Need to marginalise institutions but not scrap them.
13. What does drop in applications actually mean? Essential to know. A role for government to get together with institutions and monitor situation year by year. Issue of training the teachers. Industry is managing to do more with fewer people. Maybe a halving of the workforce in last 10 years with bigger salaries being paid?
14. University take-up increased. Engineering not getting a good press, achievements not charter marked.
15. Client view: issue is about global competitiveness. UK is not a closed system. Have can the UK systems be expanded to take advantage of global opportunities, and this might, in turn, grow the system. Clients would like more concentrated support from the professions. We are not making enough of the good projects that are occurring/ transmit this sense of excitement to a wider public.
16. Why shouldn't the specialisms be in one profession? Government would pay more attention
17. Need to start educating the current workforce/there is the Europe/world question about education. Inspiration to be taken from other systems – esp French system of generalist engineer.
18. Ignoring the fact that European engineers can work here/Work is being done in field of emotional intelligence. Where it is happening, we do need to disseminate the work and telling of best practice.
19. Entry requirements same subject different institutions – different story. What is happening with drift in UK A levels? Creative technology courses are the ones that hold up.
20. Deterrent effect of different professions/institutions. Thorough RD into what is going to be the future of construction. Institutions need to come together to produce the funds for this research. The right way to chop things up changes over time/eg nation state. Institutions are bad divisions. Need to have a broad base and overlaid on this all sorts of specialisms.
21. Where are our groupings in international rankings and how do these reflect back into our industries. Look at best practice initiatives within educational systems and build on these.
22. Who is 'we'? We are going to have more diversity and this will require more and more specialists. Real skill is then how you draw them all together.
23. Cohort argument. IEng are being educated together with MEng.
24. UK has an anti-industrial culture. UK excels in the arts. How many head teachers with engineering degree. The better the school the better the classics degree. Not the image that is wrong, but the reality. Problem is with A levels/Scottish system better because it is broader.
25. Levels of engineering/facets of engineering. Misunderstaning of various facets of engineering is barrier (eg, you can only be an engineer if you have CEng).
26. Increase in study of industry in GCSE and A level. If you want engineering PR, there is an opportunity. Problem in schools in getting industry to come into the schools and tell the story.
27. Endorsement for the global view. Impact on the schools the RIBA addresses (70,000) could be remarkable in a short time.
28. Little support for CFE/ more needed
29. Throw point about how institutions should work together to CIC. One area institutions could work together is on the impact of IT
30. Look again at Andrew Ramsay's 5 questions/ esp what is being done on the recruitment of teachers. Universities and institutions are now in the retail trade. No one has to join an institution. Likely to happen and something you have to work around. General engineering courses are not as popular as specialist ones at universities.
31. Integration has to be to the needs of the clients/not playing around with labels that are producer-driven.
32. Problem with recruiting products of general degree courses and then fitting them into an institution. Marketing for product of specialist courses is good. No one is marketing for the generalists. Registration issue. Should you register as an engineer and then look for specialist support
33. We should know more about whether standard of education is about to go up or down. Universities appointing staff on basis of their research not their teaching ability.