The majority of readers think that teachers need help to improve their understanding of engineering so they can introduce the discipline to their pupils.
Our poll about this report from the IMechE conmcerning engineering in schools attracted 448 responses, of which a clear majority, 56 per cent, thought that teachers needed more help to improve their engineering knowledge. The next largest group, 34 per cent, thought that a greater emphasis on engineering at primary level would reaper dividends later in students’ lives. Only 3 per cent thought that broader requirements for engineering degrees would be useful, and only 7 per cent declined to pick one of the suggested options.
As ever, we encourage readers to continue to send us their thoughts on this subject.
No need for any additional ‘poles’ (should that be polls or Poles) simply a sensible amalgamation of the many excellent ideas to enhance our profession everywhere by the meja, society, Parliament, the G&G offered by bloggers over the past few years: but I will offer a single new approach. As well as suggesting the positive benefits of our manipulation of Nature’s Laws to the benefit and value of all mankind, a direct ‘discrimination’ against the selfish self-centred, self-perpetuating self-advancing efforts of the ‘shams’ -who (notwithstanding Cameron’s suggestion that he is proud of his father’s tax avoidance skills-ie his long term participating as a stock-broker is a horse-race in which only the jockeys move, and they only side-to-side) simply manipulate man’s laws to the benefit of whoever can and will pay the most. Respectfully, I invite those who believe otherwise to match, meet and counter that argument.
Mike, it cannot be countered as politicians are merely the puppets of the large corporations and do their bidding for them, this reaches down into policies which bring the largest returns for the smallest outlay and in the shortest time as only the shareholders matter to them.
Government (puppets) never appear to do anything other than react to a situation instead of pre-empting a situation and dealing with it before it becomes problematic and very costly because this means private corporations can charge the highest price to sort out the largest mess.
There are two things that the sector as a whole could do to change the perception of what a career in engineering can offer school children;
1. Engineering bodies such as the CBI and EEF must desist from publically lobbying government via the press on subjects related to interest rates and exchange rates. Such activities may have an effect on government decisions however the process involves creating doom and gloom headlines in the press about the state of UK Engineering. Any teachers reading these articles are inclined to dissuade pupils from Engineering careers thinking they are giving their pupils good advice. Macro Economic lobbying must be done behind closed doors. The sector is relentlessly shooting itself in the foot from a recruitment perspective by doing otherwise.
2. Engineering companies need to hold more open days and host school parties. This sort of practise is widespread in Germany and the links between schools and Engineering businesses need to be developed much more in the UK. If one more person in every class room could be persuaded to become an engineer it would make a huge difference to the whole sector.
Where I went to school it was common that classes had partner teams in local factories and businesses. Often these were teams were parents of the children worked. There was some interaction between those teams and classes. The adults would help out in school, for example at sports competitions, or help with excursions. A teacher alone can’t handle a whole class of 30 pupils when travelling by public transport or in museums.
The classes were also visiting the team at their workplace. In our case a steel foundry. We got the helmets and escorts, and went into the factory to watch what is going on there. After all, this was the place were we most likely would end up working.
There is the noise, and the sight, and the smell, the mud and dust. Can’t have that by Internet or books or in a museum. I still remember that laboratory where they pulled that steel bolt apart to test the quality. You see how it gets thinner in the middle and then with a loud bang it is gone. And then we got to touch both parts, and someone explained what happened.
Not only should engineering awareness be greater amongst teachers, but it should feature more widely on the curriculum. I’m not sure engineering even appears on the curriculum currently except perhaps in Design Technology type subjects. Really it should be relevant to many subjects and the way to raise its profile is for it to be made relevant to these, including maths and science subjects but also economics, geography, history (why do we always focus on wars in history – what about the marvels of the Industrial Revolution?), art and design, and even English (e.g. technical wiring skills). The fact that engineering is so important to the way society functions, its absence from education is a strangely gaping hole that has persisted for the longest time.
Jason
I don’t disagree with what you have said, but schools and parents like me have great difficulty bringing up teenage boys, unfortunately wars have always appealed to boys, but how do you firstly get around many adolescent boys baulk against their fathers discipline as they do with authority figures at schools. I have little idea or I’d be on better speaking terms with my 19 year old. Somehow you need to find something that excites them. Like Ralf mentioned in his blog visiting a steel foundry might give them some sense of awe, and have some desirable effects. So maybe the educational establishment should look at the German system that he describes or are most Guardian readers who would not be able to appreciate the benefits.
Maybe we should focus on:
1) Why engineering is not a career choice (most people think of Kevin from coronation street as an engineer when asked)
2) Bring engineers (men and women) into schools to talk to students about what we do and the types of projects we work on (A380 etc.)
3) Teach projects that combine engineer skills and fun
4) Teach engineering skill that can be applied in the world
5) Make problem solving part of the curriculum, use real world problems (solar stove, pumps for water, low cost simple ideas that may be put into production and build a prototype) this could involve budgets, project planning working as a team design review, FMEA the list is endless
6) Make it fun take students on visits to factory and research companies to understand what choices they have and that their are many types of engineer.
Sorry for the long email but this subject is a passion for me, and we do not do enough to show what engineers do
Jim, never apologise for being passionate about something close to all our hearts.
At the moment, there is a push for STEM at school to create the “Foundations” of an engineering career. There is also an push to enhance the perception of engineering across the country…both of these are to be lauded!
What seems to be missing is the link between these foundations and the careers. We all know we need a good foundation, particularly in STEM subjects…and with the emphasis on the end results, we can theoretically achieve very well at the back end…the structures that result. What seems to be missing is the inbetween!
You ask most primary kids these days what they want to be when they grow up, and the top answer is often “an Inventor”…but they are not linking Engineering into the pathway to success.
We are building fantastic Aspiration, but without bridging the knowledge gap, there will remain the chasm that few will successfull cross…”castles in the sky” need to be linked to these strong foundations or they just drift away in the breeze!
I spent period of years very successfuly in the Corporate Environment, only to have my career destroyed by one simple question (well the reaction to the answer)…”What Univeristy did you go to..?” My answer was I attended one of the last “real” Mechanical Engineering apprentiships before they were “relaunched”, studying to HNC alongside…my relationship with my line manager changed catestrophically at that point. Where I had been a trusted adviser and an “idea bounce” I immediately became a pariah and was….well…”Engineered” out. A non-degree holder – didn’t suit his departmental vision! His 2-year degree he deemed “superior” to my 5 years of intense learning…that would never happen in Germany! Still, their loss!
Bruce, your story is sadly typical of the modern world (or the UK, anyway) – that a degree is of much greater worth than anything ‘manual’ or vocational. Thanks to Mr Blair and his pals, school leavers think that half their number should be going to university, only to study some nonsense, accrue massive debts and end up working in a burger place for minimum wage. Our whole education system is skewed to funnel people into pursuing worthless ‘qualifications’ rather than actually get them working and helping the country prosper. History tells us that some of the most notable figures never went to university but made a great impact in spite of it – Richard Trevithick, Thomas Telford, Clive Sinclair, Alan Sugar, Richard Branson… University should be for those with true ability, not be an extension of college for people who either don’t want to work, or think their abilities are greater than they truly are. We need trade schools like Germany’s Berufsschule and for degrees like Klingon or golf course management to be discarded like the rubbish that they are
Why not teach them how to think (rather than just pass a test)? I suspect once that had been understood the inquiring minds would do (some of) the rest. Then we can present the roles/careers that are available.
This needs to come from the Institutions (and engineering companies) too. The IMechE seems to me to be largely made up of self serving old boys peddling overpriced courses to its members. Maybe they are worried their market is going to dry up.
There isn’t a shortage of engineers. Want to make it more attractive to the people that have the ability to study Medicine, Accountancy, Banking etc instead of Engineering? It’s not difficult to work out. Meanwhile the Engineering companies want to offer no training, expect there to be ready available experts in specialist areas often for little more than a very basic salary.
The ‘shortage’ has nothing to do with schools or teachers.
I totally agree with Christian. Follow the money when you want to see why something is happening.
I remember many “engineering” (in a broad sense) tasks at primary school, but absolutely no accountancy or banking ones. So how do banks ever get any recruits? I don’t hear about a shortage of bankers or accountants. Don’t pass the buck to teachers, just pay more and provide some training to get the skills you need, and the recruits will be there.
And just to repeat Christian: The ‘shortage’ has nothing to do with schools or teachers.
Torn between improving teacher knowledge and primary level emphasis. I think both are equally important. Teacher’s need to be better informed about what the modern role of an engineer actually entails and the addition of more problem solving/creative solution finding at a younger age could help develop a sense of enjoyment in such activities that become core parts of an engineering career. I’d argue a combination of the two would be an important step forwards; then we just need to look at the retention of young engineering talent/potential between the ages of 13-18 so that an engineering degree becomes an attractive proposition!
First we need to get rid of all these bodies alleging to promote engineering as they are money sucking leeches and jobs for the boys and little else. As a nation we need to bring engineering into the public domain and get people understanding that every part of life is a form of engineering, including the human body; and from my experience remove this apathy.
When you take such an approach it generates interest in children and being children they ask questions and the answers fire their imagination; basically make them connect with all forms of engineering as a matter of course.
We need them to understand that engineering degrees are not the be all, and end all of engineering and engineering can be entered into by all people irrespective of ability and back it up by additional support and learning as we used to allow them to learn at their own pace to better themselves. We need to take the focus (in all areas) away from universities and bring back the polytechnics and local colleges and fund them, if someone working at ground level wants a promotion they can attend a course to improve their skills.
We can do more with our own families, having two girls was no obstacle as I have always instilled into them one simple rule “its what’s between your ears that matters and not what’s between your legs” and they have always followed this rule to this day. They would always be with me doing something with me and for many years it was building fast road cars and these skills remain to this day, they never send their own vehicles into a garage, they repair and service their own. Eldest grandson was a proficient MIG welder at 3 years old and by 10 he passed a weld test at my then current employer, but its not all about achievement and him being chuffed at achieving something, its about making them think about problems and find resolutions. Yet another life skill which stays with them and the amount of people who don’t/can’t think for themselves today and resolve a problem is alarming so they demand an instant answer.
As we can see its not just about engineering its about life skills and teaching them real life skills which transfer into all areas of life and stay with them all their lives and can be passed to future generations.
V sorry to read of Bruce Reid’s treatment. Sadly, he had an immediate senior who allowed his peronal interests, advancement, and views to interfere with his wider professional responsibilities. So it is unlikely that he was actually such -(professional)- and consequently not worth working for . So nothing new there.
It could even be more basic than that – as a governor of a local school we really struggle with the teachers grasping Maths applications which I don’t think is an uncommon thing (and if they don’t get it the kids stand much less of a chance). Just thinking about how many adults “proudly” say that they were “no good at Maths” suggests this is possibly even cultural. Teaching the teachers the practical use of numbers and what you can then do with that is, I think, more important than focusing solely on engineering. Build up the basics first!
I feel that engineering in all its broad spectrum should start in primary school and be a core subject as is science, maths and English. I currently run a year 6 end of year science project titled ‘Gravity Car Race’ . The project is simple in material and design. The project aims to demonstrate energy from gravity, low friction and the problems encountered from not thinking about the problem. All the class get a day out at MOSI in Manchester. Many of the children state without asking ” they would like to do engineering”. So why is the subject not promoted? The mantra for the project is ‘Nothing moves unless a mechanical engineer has touched it and nothing is made to day unless an electrical engineer has provided the power’. I have seen staff try to find a way round the mantra but to no avail. Engineering is the KEY to this countries future so it should be made a core subject in schools. Sadly few teachers have the skill to promote engineering.
The onset of the National Curriculum in 1988/9 dissolved the woodwork, metalwork, technical drawing and science lessons that occupied most of two school days. The onset of Design and Technology replaced all this with all state schools offering 1-2 hours per week of the new subject. Sadly, my own experience demonstrated that most Design and Technology teachers were book taught and very few had any practical / industrial experience with which to promote the subject. To save costs many schools reduced the subject to designing and colouring food packaging (usually pizza boxes), and certainly in one school of my experience all but craft knives and colouring pencils and crayons were removed from the workshop which was transformed into a classroom – all machines were consigned to the scrap bin. As overall costs of running schools have escalated many senior management of schools have further reduced Design and Technology to Art and Design because it is even cheaper to support. My own enjoyment of engineering started at primary school using Mechano to construct working models. All the experience, I gained at school as a student in a Technical High School has stood me in good stead throughout my working life. Sadly having worked with many people over the years, it became obvious that many people under forty years of age appear to have very little skill and lack vital knowledge and understanding in the field they work in; this I believe is the legacy of the National Curriculum, designed by academics with no practical experience. A possible solution to meet the need for engineers is to have a 13 plus exam, where those with an academic bent could be schooled in, shall I say, a grammar type school and those with a vocational bent be schooled where the emphasis is on vocational subjects such as engineering : bring back Technical High Schools? . It is vitally important to see prestigious degrees not only in academic subjects, but in vocational subjects also to promote excellence. Finally, a comment made to me some years ago, I believe sums up the attitude of some towards engineering in any field; a head teacher once accused me of being ‘trade’ rather than an academic capable of teaching because I had spent most of my successful career in the engineering industry.
Why do we always focus on wars in history – what about the marvels of the Industrial Revolution? Jason C-W’s question.
We don’t do this, but ‘they’ do: because those trained in the arts and history see such simply in terms of more of the same. Self-perpetuating stupidity and irrelevance. Sadly, as my own and other bloggers, views confirm: ‘we’ Engineers and technologists have for centuries given the aggressive conflict groups increasingly effective, nastier ways to wage way: the very R-evolution jason describes sadly the primarp vehicle for this. Nobel (dynamite) sought to make warfare so terrible that it would stop. He failed to register that the sent are junior to the senders in the pecking order and will unfortunately do what they are told. Fucks was the real ‘leveller’ because he ensured that both ‘sets’ of generals would vanish together. I believe that we are close to a tipping point: that now that the real effective ‘control’ is in the hands of those who deal in ‘bits and bytes’ and we Engineers and technologists alone control that knowledge, we can do as we please. And that is for good, not evil.
Stories of engineers, who have had a huge impact on the world should be celebrated in schools, factory visits, links with industry and engineers to explore problems together, talks by engineers, and informing secondary school teachers of career possibilities would help. Schools also need to be more supportive of people trying to help-my daughter tried to have links with a school via the STEM project, but she would turn up to schools only to find that the staff had forgotten she was coming/had not got students there/did not follow up ideas–hopeless! Also it is difficult for students to work out which type of degree they want to go for-there are very few general engineering degrees and how at the age of 18 do you know enough to work out the difference between all the types when your school has no idea either? And don’t get me started again on girls not being encouraged!
Actually re-reading some of the comments above set me thinking. For good or ill, about ten years ago the senior military and others recognised that ‘military matters’ (perhaps losing the peace after several recent mini-‘wars!’ played a part) were not high in the perception of the public: and military personnel were not being accorded the status and respect they deserve. There has clearly been a substantial PR initiative to counter this. So, let us Engineers, perhaps starting with REME and the other Engineering based and biased sections of the military, develop a similar approach. Let us have TV programmes of our training and education, let us have ‘economic’ programmes, demonstrating ‘our’ actual and potential contribution to UK plc (surely even more important than any military effort, because out of such the military expenditure must be paid for), let us have social programmes, “Downton Design” “Britain’s got real Talent, not froth…” anyone. I am sure amongst our Professional Institutions and illustrious Trade Press organ(s) there are senior persons with links to the popular/mass meja.
Indeed a good start might be a series of programmed to educate ‘journalists’ as to what and who is/are actually behind their screens, cars, things in everyday use, food, clothes, sports…need I say more?
“she would turn up to schools only to find that the staff had forgotten she was coming/had not got students there/did not follow up ideas–hopeless!”
I too have had this experience (surprisingly at what purported to be a university) but several/mostly outstanding school visits as well. Hitting the popular meja cultures in the area(s) Sally Dyer suggests: surely positive. How about getting a Royal on-side (we now have two very young ‘examples’ one of each type!) so lets get them Meccano and Lego (unisex!) and have our Professional bodies offer junior membership immediately. I am quite serious. If a dress worn is ‘splashed’ across the world’s meja in a nano-second….. baby (royal or otherwise) playing with construction, or lit toys, or a screen…will surely have a related effect.
I suspect that there are more than one route into engineering (but both the main ones are becoming harder and difficult to access).
The academic route benefits most from having maths & physics tied together (mutual support) and assist in developing thinking/reasoning skills. More practical approaches including fabrication & drawing. However, from my experience, students who have come through the more vocational route are good students; and appreciate, all the better, the maths & science they study.
I support moving to (back?) a more cohesive approach to science study and of engineering too; emphasising the holistic approaches to knowledge, beauty and creativity.
The history of science & engineering is both interesting & educational; but the lessons of success as well as of failure need to be learnt.
All Engineering undergraduates at St. Andrews were required to attend a lecture by the Dean on the first day of their first term. Professor Dick, an unfortunate name for 18-year-old students to ponder, started with a short history of the subject and our new profession, gave warnings about the need to work hard, and then invited the entire class to accompany him down to the River Tay, which conveniently ran close to the University. There, in the water was the final part of his lecture: the rusting remains of the original Tay railway bridge.
“Gentlemen,” he said, even though there was one girl in our class, “Gentlemen, never throughout your careers, nor your practice of the great profession that you are soon to commence, forget that any attempt to defy any of the Laws of Nature will result in both immediate detection and punishment. And if not for you personally, certainly for those who will have had the misfortune to use your skills. Which will have been shown to be wanting.” Splendid words, worthy of the Institution that he served, and the ideals that should unite all Engineers. Indeed should unite all professionals in whatever sphere of science and technology they engage. Their role in life is solely to direct “the great forces of Nature to the benefit of mankind.”
In addition to the much needed increase in awareness of engineering, there is still the need to create a “pull”. Surely supply-and-demand says that a shortage of engineers should mean significant salary increases. See this report in The Engineer.
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/study-suggests-low-wages-to-blame-for-skills-gap/
And then the kind of report that promotes medicine and economics over engineering to school children and undergraduates could become a thing of the past. And don’t even get me started on how normalised the IFS data is…
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36028368