How do we get kids to be engineers

[Phil Pascoe]

50% of kids go to university. 50% of kids are above average IQ, 50% of kids are below. Not all intelligent kids wish to go to university, therefore there are kids with below average IQ at university. :? Worrying, really.

 

[RossJarvis]

I'm surprised how restrained I've been on this subject so far bearing in mind how much I've ranted on about it before.

1, what do we mean by engineer? Is that a chair polishing eejit who's been through a degree course, or someone who can think through a problem and come up with a practical solution. I'm aware of the issues with calling "techies" engineers, but it's also an insult to some people who get their hands dirty and make things, just to consider them as "technicians" or something. These labels can often mean nothing. I know some "engineers" and studied engineering at university, some of my peers didn't even know which way to turn a screwdriver. (admittedly I retired early). Engineering at degree level leads to being the person who designs the securing nut on the left hand door-mirror of a Ford Cortina.

2, Training in practical hand skills has virtually vanished from the British Educational system. Before I retired early (for the second time) I also studied Design and Technology at degree level, one of the people on the course had a degree in food technology and two came from a fashion background another was qualified in glass-blowing. However several of us came from sound industrial backgrounds and a few of us were very able at making things. The concurrent PGCE course (post grads) were almost universally inept at practical tasks. About 40% of us would not move on into education as it is a most unattractive profession (all it's got going for it is the holidays and even those don't make up for the awfulness of the work days any more). D&T focusses on design and being the person who makes the best presentation of an idea. It does not look foremost at the practical ability of the individual.

3, Eventually, after retiring too often, I started teaching fitting and turning at a further education college. Occasionally I would have a student who wanted to learn the basics of making things and who was very bright. Occasionally I'd find a student who was often poor within academia but excellent at making things. A minimum of 60% of the students only got on the course because they weren't able to get on any other course. Practically no-one from school wants to do a practical engineering course because they either don't know what it is, or it is not perceived as attractive.

4, about 7 years ago the government tried to introduce an engineering diploma, for yr9 and above which had a lot going for it, after a couple of years it was dropped due to very poor implementation. The main reason being that schools and teachers had no idea at all what engineering was. The other reason being that "diplomas" did not have the cachet of GCSE's.

5, Training engineers costs money in a way that teaching history, maths, etc doesn't. Additionally to do it properly you have to select out the best and fail those who can't do it. As all state education establishments are now businesses who are not allowed to fail anyone it is impossible to teach anything where there is the risk of failing anyone or the risk of spending too much money.

Not that I'm bitter or anything.

One Solace we can have is that we had an exchange with some "practical" engineering teachers from South Korea. They had similar problems. Their main concern was that everyone there wanted to go to university and have a nice, well-paid clean job and didn't want to make anything either. At least when Britain collapses with no-one able to do a proper job, we'll be going down with everyone else in the World. We can sink into oblivion knowing the World has an overabundant supply of hairdressers, telephone sanitisers and PR personnel. Apart from the Germans maybe!!

 

[Keith 66]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is the truth of it, add on that the academy system has made the buisness side of it far worse, the costs of feeding the service provider cuckoo gobbling all the money mean less & less to be spent on pupils.
It was suggested earlierthat private firms might provide after school clubs. Its difficult to see how this can be done when budgets for such are non existent, we ran a sucessful one but we had to drop it as there was no money to buy materials at all. It was implied that i as the technician should buy them out of the goodness of my heart.
A recent article in the telegraph stated that half of all schools in England have dropped d&t as a subject completely this year already.

 

[woodenstx]

50% of kids go to university. 50% of kids are above average IQ, 50% of kids are below. Not all intelligent kids wish to go to university, therefore there are kids with below average IQ at university. :? Worrying, really.

but IQ is by no means a measure of how clever or useful someone is....
Also, why should "below average" mean you cant carry on learning if capable of it?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Of course it doesn't mean anyone isn't going to carry on learning - it just means there are people there who are awaiting failure at that level costing us (not them, they probably will never earn enough to pay it back) a lot of money. Would you be happy knowing your doctor, solicitor etc. had below average IQ? That of course is a redundant question - the ones with below average IQ have degrees tailored to their needs and expectations ... which ultimately are worthless.

Incidentally because it is relevant to engineering, here are some questions I saw on a GCSE maths paper a few years ago -
1/ How many 50p pieces are there in £200?
2/ Write six thousand and eight in figures.
3/ What is 17 +14?
4/ What is 4 x 28?

This was admittedly a Foundation level paper (but still targetting sixteen year olds), but to any over a certain age a GCSE is a GCSE. I gave ten of the questions to my boy (at the time he was eight) - he got nine, I suspect he'd have got the ten if he was remotely interested, and asked why I was asking him stupid questions. It doesn't bode well for the future, does it? Why should England tremble?

 

[novocaine]

1/ How many 50p pieces are there in £200? none, they only had notes in the bank
2/ Write six thousand and eight in figures.

3/ What is 17 +14? a sum
4/ What is 4 x 28? also a sum

 

[AJB Temple]

^^^couple of posts above
It depends on what you think the university system if for. I'm concerned that we are pushing teenagers into university on a false premise that they will have a better career later. We have a lot of young people coming out of second rate universities, with second rate degrees but first rate expectations. And significant debt. Those that accept that they will stay at the bottom of the income pile will not have to repay the debt unless government moves the goalposts again, but many are starting their working life with a large debt burden and fewer career prospects than they may realise (due to the bulge of graduates coming out of universities).

The debate is interesting though. Before going to a highly academic school, I was at a school that did woodwork and metalwork. I loved my time in the workshop and I got exposure to making and fixing things at home. Financially it would have been foolish for me to follow a craft path, but I never lost that enthusiasm instilled in childhood. I also never forgot the kid who leant his arm against the spinning grinding wheel in metalwork class. That was my first sight of human bone!

 

[Phil Pascoe]

My nephew is a Kiwi with a First in geography from Auckland and shortly a Master's from LSE - he needs the Master's because he can't get a decent job in NZ with a first class batchelor's degree.

 

[Rhyolith]

I am very skeptical of IQ's and the idea of people being more or less intelligent than one another. Its an oversimplification of reality to the point of being an outright falsehood! People are good at different things, not simply superior or inferior to each other.

On the subject of 'easy' GCSE papers. Why does this matter? I suck at maths and to be honest would have struggled with even an easy paper like that (& did). Yet now I have lived in the 'real world' for a while I have not found my lack of maths skill to be a problem in the slightest... indeed the only thing related to this that was a problem was the limitations imposed by my mediocre grades in maths.

I think we have all become obessed with this prodigy culture and think every child needs to become a genius. Not just does this idea completly ingore reality, but its activity unhelpful for mainstream education.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

On the subject of 'easy' GCSE papers. Why does this matter? I suck at maths and to be honest would have struggled with even an easy paper like that (& did). Yet now I have lived in the 'real world' for a while I have not found my lack of maths skill to be a problem in the slightest... indeed the only thing related to this that was a problem was the limitations imposed by my mediocre grades in maths.

Certainly - but you are not doing a STEM degree, are you?

 

[Rhyolith]

I don't know what a "STEM" degree is, so no!

 

[RossJarvis]

To get back to the original question, I'm a bit stumped as to how we'd get more engineers. There are many great flaws in the education system, which is not isolated from a lot of other things going on in society.

As I mentioned, a fair amount of time, money and effort was put into introducing engineering at an earlier stage in education than has been done so far. Unfortunately this flopped. I think that we need a real change in education, particularly taking all the "financial-market target-reaching" nonsense out that's been pushed for far too long. Unfortunately the whole behemoth of "education" is like a supertanker at full chat and it would take a really great effort to change it's direction. Looking at yesterdays news it seems we are only just getting the standard of GCSEs to O'Level standard, how long ago was that change?

There are quite a lot of things as well as engineering, that require addressing, but the primary thing is the large amount of young people who aren't benefitting greatly from what's provided. At a wild guess I'd say roughly 25% do well through their school years and onward, maybe up to 50% are so-so and 25% are generally failed by a combination of the system, upbringing, society and everything else. Like many of my colleagues before I left teaching I felt tremendously sorry for all the kids who were being shafted by the system and treated as "Individual Income Units" rather than human beings. Particularly those who were very smart and good at practical things but not good at "getting the bits of paper".

 

[finneyb]

I don't know what a "STEM" degree is, so no!

STEM - Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths - Medics feel left out and have added extra M in some case which spoils the view.

Brian

 

[Sawdust=manglitter]

This thread has been an interesting read seeing everyone's opinions.

In my industry the Institute of Civil Engineers do try hard to get school kids interested in engineering with things like an 'engineering taster day' which they will be holding at Swansea university for year 9 pupils which aims to introduce them to engineering and the variety of opportunities that engineering brings. The day involves building a paddle boat and testing it in paddling pool and building a bridge and testing it to failure. It also includes a session informing the pupils about different routes into Engineering and a tour of the Swansea University Engineering Department.

It was an event similar to this that got me interested, they came to our D+T department when i was in yr 9 where we had to build a bridge out of different pvc pipe fittings to hold as many bricks as possible over a span of 600mm. Apart from that, i personally ended up getting a summer job at a precision engineering factory when i was 16, and i learnt a lot! From there i originally applied to do mechanical engineering in uni, but ended up converting to do civil engineering during the foundation year. And talk about a massive difference in degrees, my degree was extremely difficult/intense with 25hrs of lectures a week and expected 30ish hrs a week of coursework, compared to some friends who did things like History with 4hrs a week of lectures and around 10hrs of coursework/reading!

In terms of the real world, when i was at uni what helped me massively was to get summer placements with engineering companies which taught me loads and developed my practical knowledge within the industry! Because of the practical work experience I had I was a much better engineer once I graduated compared to the geeky academic types who had never even had part time jobs. I was even told in one job interview that they would prefer to employ someone with a 3rd and life/work experience than some academic boffin with a 1st with no social skills or life experience.

My company at the moment do a kind of apprenticeship scheme where we have a couple of CAD technicians who do a part time day release degree over twice as many years as full time, but they will be infinitely better engineers (and earn more) than fresh graduates because of the practical experience they've had.

Apart from the lack of decent engineers in my industry, the other problem we have is persuading girls to pursue a career in engineering!

 

[Phil Pascoe]

... Because of the practical work experience I had I was a much better engineer once I graduated compared to the geeky academic types who had never even had part time jobs.

My friend's husband had a very successful career as a solicitor after going to to work for a solicitor as an office boy - it took him ten years to qualify, but cost him little. One of the very best bank managers my wife worked with started on a youth training scheme.

 

[Tasky]

Yes, I was being serious. Do you think the country would be better off without sewage collection, treatment an disposal?

Given the level of customer complaints and newspaper reports, it looks like it's already getting by!!

With respect, I'd appreciate it if you read the whole comment again, instead of selectively editing it and making snarky remarks.

With equal respect - I work in Civil Engineering for a water utilities company.
Our department comprising Engineers, Technicians, Asset Planners and such are the people responsible (ultimately, anyway) for the very design, construction, installation, (sometimes) operation, and in particular the inspection, maintenance and periodic replacement of sewers, pumping stations, rising mains, penstocks, flap valves, manholes, chambers, screens, dewatering plant, odour control systems and even the entire sewage treatment works of which you speak.
That is the reason for the specifically selective editing and also the reason for the sarcastic and cynical response you interpreted as "snarky remarks".

Yes, I'm laughing (or making "snarky remarks", if you prefer) at the idea you think we do our jobs so well, especially given our reputations and that of our regulator, let alone the layers of red tape management that prevent us from doing anything in the first place.
Yes, I am entitled to make fun of something you seem to take so seriously, especially as I'm the one doing it.
Yes, you should piddle off and get a sense of humour, especially since one seems to be an essential part of being an Engineer.

Questions?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Questions?

Yes.

You hate your job. OK - but why take it out on me? Maybe you were just letting off steam, but it came across as you having a right go at me and my comment, which I feel is somewhat unwarranted.

I was trying to make the point that the country needs people with engineering skills, both 'theoretical' and 'practical' just to keep normal life as we now take for granted ticking over, and that our education system doesn't seem to appreciate the need to keep a supply of suitably qualified and motivated people coming through (though some people at the sharp end of education most certainly do).

Serious point - if you're that cynical about what you do for a living, it may well be time to change jobs. Trust me; I speak from bitter experience. It's also the case that the country is short of engineers, so it shouldn't be impossible to find another opportunity somewhere different. A change is often as good as a rest.

 

[HappyHacker]

I feel very lucky to have failed my 11+ and attended a good secondary modern school. The woodwork teacher canned you if you pushed your luck or if he was in a bad mood, but I learnt a good deal about woodworking. The metal work teacher came from industry and tried his best to get the better students into engineering, arranging visits to local engineering companies so that we could see what the different jobs entailed. He even got us into a steel works where we saw the blast furnace tapped, no H&S worries then so we stood next to the flow of molten steel running along a channel in the sand floor. Our blazers looked sparkley when we were under street lights later that night from the tiny globules of steel that had settled on them.

At a school reunion 50 years on the majority of us have done reasonably well despite attending a secondary modern which according to modern thinking were a dumping ground for the thick.

While I did not follow an engineering career, I got into computers in the 60's, I have built on the skills taught at school and can turn my hand to most practical skills. In my most recent job as an electrician I see many young people who have difficulty changing a light bulb and who have a complete lack of practical skills but lots of A* A levels. I do know some youngsters who do have excellent practical skills but I think that is related to their parents interests and guidance.

On the IET forum the members are currently discussing the lack of Electrical Engineers with the practical knowledge to design installations that can be installed or even work.

I think we need a rethink of our education system but I do not believe that will happen as all the people who would drive a change see engineering as a manual dirty job which they do not want their children to get involved in.

We'er doomed I say we'er all doooomed. (With a Scottish accent).

 

[RossJarvis]

I feel very lucky to have failed my 11+ and attended a good secondary modern school. The woodwork teacher canned you if you pushed your luck or if he was in a bad mood, but I learnt a good deal about woodworking. The metal work teacher came from industry and tried his best to get the better students into engineering, arranging visits to local engineering companies so that we could see what the different jobs entailed. He even got us into a steel works where we saw the blast furnace tapped, no H&S worries then so we stood next to the flow of molten steel running along a channel in the sand floor. Our blazers looked sparkley when we were under street lights later that night from the tiny globules of steel that had settled on them.

At a school reunion 50 years on the majority of us have done reasonably well despite attending a secondary modern which according to modern thinking were a dumping ground for the thick.

Great point and good post. My understanding is that a lot of the ideas behind the Secondary Modern/Grammar etc system were very sound but a number of issues and British snobbishness made much of it go wrong, possibly under-investment/effort on the Secondary moderns. I've heard it compared to the still current German system where technical streaming happens earlier and technical types are appreciated. A bit like Blitzkreig, invented by the British but made to work by the Germans. Or as my German friend would say "see my nice and useful VW, here is my wife's nice and useful VW.......Oh, you have a Rover!!".

 

[Tasky]

You hate your job. OK - but why take it out on me? Maybe you were just letting off steam, but it came across as you having a right go at me and my comment, which I feel is somewhat unwarranted.

Yeah, I'm finding a lot of people on this board who really don't get it.... from jibes and jests, to basic, obvious wordplay and even puns, they somehow get all serious and start bleating about personal attacks, snide remarks and so on.... IT'S A FYKIN' JOKE, man... Worse still, even after I explain how it's a simple, non-personal joke directed purely at the humour in a word, they carry on thinking up ways to be all offended.... It's a pun - How does anyone expect me to believe they are personally offended and morally attacked by a pun???!!!!!
Moreover, how on EARTH was this, a disparaging and sarcastic *** at a specific area of an industry, in any way directed at YOU? Unless you are my regulator, or my manager, it has absolutely nothing to do with you....

OK, let me explain the joke, to those of you in the cheap seats... and those who are so cheap, you seem to have brought your own.
I do this for a living. I'm making fun of myself and playing on the bad reputations I and my entire industry have. No different to a postman joking about how bad the Post Office is, or a train driver complaining about how Network Rail are always late.
Get it, now?
Do you see why this is just a joke, yet?

Now, if you still want to take my own self-deprecation as somehow being some kind of insult against you and start playing the victim over it, do it on your own time in the privacy of your own home, yeh? I have no time for special little snowflakes who sieze any opportunity to turn the spotlight onto them.
Or you can just have a little giggle and carry on, as was the intent in the first place...

I was trying to make the point that the country needs people with engineering skills, both 'theoretical' and 'practical' just to keep normal life as we now take for granted ticking over, and that our education system doesn't seem to appreciate the need to keep a supply of suitably qualified and motivated people coming through (though some people at the sharp end of education most certainly do).

Yes it does, and no they don't, but since much of that is now an imported skillset (similar to nursing) it probably won't be worth focussing on until the roles they'd eventually (hope to) occupy actually pay a salary sufficient to make it a worthwhile career.
Already they're trying to teach AI to do a lot of the inspection and assessment work. Once that's actually achieved, no Engineer will ever again need to make a decision based on Engineering Judgement.

Serious point - if you're that cynical about what you do for a living, it may well be time to change jobs. Trust me; I speak from bitter experience. It's also the case that the country is short of engineers, so it shouldn't be impossible to find another opportunity somewhere different. A change is often as good as a rest.

Serious reply - I'm not an Engineer, I'm a Technician and a very specific one within a very narrow field of high specialisation. If I want to change jobs, either someone in the new position has to die, or I move to another country. As is, I'm one of less than a hundred who have ever held my specific set of qualifications, which took almost 10 years to attain, and there are only three such people in our company of about 8,500... one of whom has to be hired in.
We are the Engineering equivalent of senior Nurse Specialists and we continue to do our jobs for the same reasons they do theirs, but just like them the mis-management and red tape is getting in the way.

But if you really cannot stand my humour and want me to stop doing what I do for a living, just say so...
I'd attempt another joke about how cynicism is another mandatory quality in Engineering, but I'd probably get a flippin' lynch mob chasing me for such an insult!!!!!