Which type of Engineering would you recommend?

fluffyduffy wrote: »

Why?? How would you define "engineer"??

Are you suggesting that phonewatch etc. dont use engineers to put in their alarms?? These alarms even have to be programed, not just anyone can do that sort of thing.

Educationally speaking, someone who has completed a certified engineering course (preferably Level 8 or above on the National Framework of Qualifications). Depending on their position/responsibilities, they should also have appropriate work experience.

Phonewatch etc. use technicians to install their alarms. I'm sure they're very good, but installing equipment to instructions is a world away from solving engineering problems - could a technician design the alarm, for example?

The main problem is that Engineers Ireland have been useless at protecting 'engineer' as a professional title - anyone can call themselves one, regardless of qualifications. If I set myself up as 'Turbulent Bill, Medical Doctor and Solicitor', I'm sure the Medical Council and Law Society would come down on me like a ton of bricks.

Darren1o1 wrote: »

EI sent out a survey to members recently and allot of it focused on did the members want the title "Engineer" protect similar to other professions. The framework is already in place (AMIEI, MIEI, CENG etc) and there are several models from other countries which could be implemented. To protect the profession and to maintain quality it makes sense. Problem is in certaon professions (mechanical, electrical etc) there is no emphasis to get chartered unlike in Canada where most job require it when you reach a level.

Thanks Darren1o1, but the fact that they had to ask whether the title should be protected is ridiculous - why else would someone belong to a professional organisation if not to support the members' interests?! Did it take the 'washingmachine engineer' small ads for them to realise that 'engineer' might need to be protected? EI controls engineering titles in Ireland, acredits suitable courses etc. but does little to protect them once they've been granted or even stress their value to the general public.

I think the main driver in Ireland for becoming chartered is legal - as far as I know, chartered civils are required to sign off on certain works. The chartering process requires mentors / leaders who are chartered (as far as I remember). It's much more difficult for engineers in other fields to become chartered simply because there are few chartered colleagues around - it's chicken-and-egg. Until the title is properly protected, I don't think this is likely to change.

Dundhoone wrote: »

That wasnt a technician bashing post, I just think that this whole national framework for qualifications setup was in order to "inflate" diplomas into degrees (pass).

Can someone enlighten me? If you complete your pass degree in 3 years and go on to do two more on an honours degree course, what do you graduate with? I presume so that if you scrape a pass after the five years that you get a pass level 8 degree (and same for a uni four year course)???

Trad engineering courses always allowed transfer from distinction in a diploma to third year of a degree course. And those students were behind on the maths, and way ahead on practical subjects in my experience.

I don't think the NFQ is inflating diplomas - it's fairly clear that a pass degree isn't equivalent to an honours one, and I'm sure employers are aware of the difference (if they have any interest). In most cases having a degree is a box-ticking exercise for engineering recruiters if you went to a big university, whereas they mightn't be as familiar with IT degrees and would check them out.

As far as I know, if you transfer into an honours degree course you're treated the same as the other incoming 3rd years - exactly as it should be. You can then go on to pass/fail/honour the Level 8 course.

As an example, a friend of mine who was weak at maths but otherwise an exceptional engineer did a diploma and followed on with an honours degree in a big Dublin uni (5 years total). He finished with a 1st, so it's entirely possible to do well by going this route.

casey jones wrote: »

I think this demonstrates how the status of engineers in Ireland is compromised by the loose manner in which it is used. This in turn makes it unattractive to people, especially girls, as a career. The "engineer" is the guy who programmes the alarm or fixes the phone, not the person who develops new technology or applications. The media are really poor on this also, they report on how "engineers" are climbing poles to fix phone or ESB lines after a storm. Engineers Ireland need to tackle this as a priority or engineering will never attract good people in sufficient numbers.

+1,
It is very easy to be classed as an engineer these days, and easier than ever to become one with the array of degrees out there. Quite simply many of these courses don't handle any level of difficult maths, I have seen some basic papers for 3rd and 4th year students, but is difficult maths required in all engineering fields? no it's not IMO.
Colleges that once held high standards still do, but they offer other qualifications that are easier to obtain and will still provide a student with a degree in engineering. Fair play to anyone who completes these courses.

The standard, entry level requirements and work load are all lower/less then the traditional courses, but both people end up with a degree in engineering, One student may have studied hard to get honors maths in the leaving, the other got a C or B in pass maths he/she may have opted for a diploma in Engineering with an option to spend an extra year to get a degree, there was a time when this was 2-3 years extra (or five part time).

At the end of the day both can become an IEI member one just knows a hell of a lot more then the other about the subject. The other guys seldom recognise this and consider themselves on par. Most industries agree with them.
I use to recommend that people study with the IEI (a difficult studying environment). However recently I have advised people to get a handy qualification in as fast a time as possible, if you kill yourself for the harder course and end up in the same interview what's the point? I know the odd place will be fussy, but most will not, of course this is not a good attitude to have but I try to tell people that there is an easy road and a hard one and in many cases they lead to the same place.

Students in college IMHO seem to over estimate how their particular course is valued. I remember all the crap that went on when in was in college about which course was better, it was in the most part complete rubbish.
The real world is different, at an interview having degree may be required to get the interview but the interviewer will look at different aspects of an application once the existence of a degree has been established.

Take for example the amount of times someone from HR give the green light for an engineer to be taken on. In the past I saw some of the pay scales for Intel and HP staff, a cert, diploma, degree and post grad were all grades, where you received these qualifications was not an issue.

Real work experience is what determines an engineer IMO. Most positions require a lot of training, many times it is required to almost start again when the work place is entered. Since they say we only use about 10% of our training in the work place, maybe knowing all that extra material is not as important as some might think.
For example if someone joined HP with a cert they will be provided with some fantastic training opportunities for years, someone with a degree might work somewhere with little or know professional development, who is to say that after 5 or 6 years that the HP guy is not better trained then the guy with a degree? or is less entitled to be called an engineer, not me anyway.

I don't know about the IEI TBH, I have written to them at length in the past about some issues I have with them. They can make it difficult for some things and too easy for others IMO, at an elementary level I have an issue with big boys clubs, but the doors are wide open now.
I have noticed in the last 3-4 years a huge improvement in their communications methods, their regular updates and CPD info is well documented and very appropriate IMO. I think they are doing some excellent work. Once the polly techs in the UK started to offer degrees in the UK it was only a matter of time before we followed here, their hands were tied IMO, the country needs stats to show how qualified we are as a nation. The UK and Ireland work too closely together to have such a discrepancy IMO, colleges here followed the UK lead.

doolox wrote: »

The downturn the the car industry will also cripple mechanical eng.

What about chemical/process engineering? I feel that there aren't too many of us! As far as jobs go, it's not the worst, you don't have to specifically work in any one area, it's quite varied, I have worked in lots or areas, mech, elec (not so much though), environmental, quality, etc.

muboop1 wrote: »

btu more then on that, most pharmecutical companies in ireland cannot properly be hit by recession, as in people will still buy drugs if sick, they arent a luxury, and when a pharmecutical plant is built, it has to be kept for a set number of years before they make a profit, most plants in ireland havent hit that limit yet. so they cannot for the most part pack up and leave without losing millions which they wont do. so most jobs for chemical engineers in these areas are secure.

Keep dreaming. EVERY pharma company will be hit by recession to a greater or lesser degree, the same as any other industry. It's common knowledge that many of the major pharma's drug patents will run out in the next few years, hence we'll see generic replacements on the shelf at a lower cost. This will reduce demand for branded drugs currently in production in Ireland. Some companies might cut their losses on infrastructure and close/ reduce their production facilities.

Chem eng is an interesting and valuable field, but like any of the other fields it doesn't guarantee a job. Those involved in R&D, process development, quality improvement etc. are probably in the best position.