The Recruitment and Admissions Toolkit has not been updated as yet but has been left here for archive purposes.

 

Developments in Pre-University Education Classification of Vocational Qualifications and the Tech Bacc.

There have been some developments as far as the Government’s classification of qualifications into ‘Technical Level’ (which was originally called ‘Occupational’), ‘Applied General’ and ‘Academic’.  It is understood that ‘Occupational’ was meant to mean specialist craft/technician qualifications and the Government envisioned them not to be a “normal” route to higher education.

The scene changed considerably during 2014.  The larger BTEC engineering qualifications have moved from being classified as ‘Applied General’ to ‘Technical Level’.  Only the smaller BTEC Engineering Certificate (equivalent to one AS qualification) is left in the ‘Applied General’ category.

There may be two reasons for this:

  1. Following the consultation (in 2013) the Government agreed that ‘Technical Level’ qualifications could be used for entrance to university.
  2. The new Technical Baccalaureate (Tech Bacc) performance measure only recognises ‘Technical Level’ qualifications, not ‘Applied General’.

Relevant documents can be found at:

The City and Guilds Technical Baccalaureate

City and Guilds officially launched their ‘TechBac’ qualification in, among other subjects, Engineering, Construction and IT. (This should not be confused with the Government’s Tech Bacc which, like the EBacc, is not a qualification, merely a performance measure.)  The TechBac claims to be a blend of technical qualifications, a project qualification and a work placement.  There appear to be two Level 2 TechBac qualifications (presumably of different sizes).  Both involve a free-standing ‘Level 2 Higher Project’ and either a Technical Award or Technical Certificate in Engineering.  A Level 3 TechBac is termed an ‘Advanced TechBac’ and it comes in three sizes: Certificate, Extended Certificate and Diploma.  All have the free-standing ‘Level 3 Extended Project’ as a mandatory component.

The Pearson Edexcel BTEC Nationals

Most of the Level 3 BTEC National qualifications are now in the Tech Level category and therefore qualify to be included in the Government’s Tech Bacc.  The BTEC Nationals are being revised and teaching to the new specification will start in 2016.  This means that university admission tutors are unlikely to see the new qualifications before the 2018 entry.  There is very little detail at the time of writing this paper as to the content of the new qualifications.

Edexcel are changing the names of their national qualifications and the following table is an interpretation of the changes:

GLH* A Level Equivalent 2010 National 2016 National
180 0.5 Certificate —
360 1.0 Subsidiary Diploma Award
540 1.5 90-Credit Diploma Subsidiary Certificate
720 2.0 Diploma Certificate
1080 3.0 Extended Diploma Diploma

* GLH = Guided Learning Hours

One thing to note is that the various sizes of BTEC qualifications do allow the mixture of BTEC and A Level qualifications.

Currently, the best information on the 2016 Nationals can be found at:

Developments at Level 2

Awareness of the new school performance measures, Progress 8 and Attainment 8, is increasing and they will certainly be a great improvement on the best-5 GCSEs, which they replace from 2016.  The English Baccalaureate stays but its importance may decline.

There is a range of GCSE-sized engineering qualifications that have been approved by the Government to be counted in Progress-8 and Attainment-8 metrics.  In the areas of engineering and construction, these include:

University Technical Colleges (UTCs) are now able to blend GCSEs with these Level 2 vocational qualifications without their league table position being compromised.  Up to 3 vocational qualifications can be included.  Further information can be found at:

Teaching of the new versions of GCSE Science qualifications are due start in 2016.  The new much tighter Key Stage 4 specifications for science mean that the old modular structure for science will no longer be practical.  Schools will not be able to mix the teaching of combined and single science subjects as the additional material covered in the single sciences is spread throughout the topics.  The Combined Science GCSE will be double-weighted.  No single Combined Science will be available.  The new specifications can be found at:

The tighter specifications mean that there will be less variation between awarding bodies and that would have made the design of A level sciences easier – had their revision been delayed until 2018.

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

The Recruitment and Admissions Toolkit has not been updated as yet but has been left here for archive purposes.

 

UCAS provides a useful set of links to information about student finance in each of the devolved administrations:

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

The Recruitment and Admissions Toolkit has not been updated as yet but has been left here for archive purposes.

 

There is considerable anecdotal evidence that students who have studied Further Mathematics find the transition to the mathematics taught and used in an undergraduate engineering programme much easier. A report published by the Institute of Physics in 20111  found:

“Those students who had studied further mathematics to A- or AS-level standard reported coping better with the mathematical content of the degree, and as such perceived that they required less additional support throughout their studies. Many students and academics felt that studying further mathematics should therefore be made a requirement of studying physics or engineering at university.”

It seems then, that is in the interests of engineering departments that more students study Further Mathematics, at least to AS level, which introduces them to complex numbers and matrices and extends their algebraic abilities.

But one of the main obstacles to future growth in the number of students taking Further Mathematics is the cost to many schools and colleges of running courses for relatively few students. Universities can play a key role in further increasing the number of students taking Further Mathematics by providing clear encouragement to students to do so through their admissions policies and in course planning.

Admissions statements and entry requirements which emphasise the importance of Further Mathematics have a strong influence on students’ subject choices and have helped to create the demand from students for Further Mathematics. The Russell Group report “Informed Choices”, which lists Further Mathematics as a facilitating subject has helped many school and college mathematics departments make the case for more Further Mathematics provision.

Engineering departments can help to promote the study of Further Mathematics and improve the prior knowledge of their students. Some examples which have been used successfully by HE mathematics departments are:

Working to promote engineering applications

The Advanced Mathematics Support Programme (AMSP) is a government-funded initiative, supported by the Department for Education and is managed by Mathematics in Education and Industry (MEI).  The MEI website contains a range of resources for both teachers and students of Maths and Advanced Maths.

The Advanced Mathematics Support Programme is able to provide information for teachers and students about STEM degree courses, including the Advanced Mathematics requirements, via its network of Area Coordinators, through newsletters and at AMSP events.

These information sheets are of particular interest:

Further Maths [now Advanced Maths] Briefing for Higher Education (2013)

The current content of AS and A2 Further Mathematics (2013)

..and a network of regional university-based representatives is available for local support.

See also details and resources available from the Sigma organisation which has received HEFCE funding to enable any higher education institution in England to tap into a wealth of expertise and resources which it has developed.  Sigma, established in 2005, has been a driving force in the creation of university-wide centres dedicated to helping students to develop and improve mathematical and statistical skills. It is led by Professors Tony Croft from Loughborough University and Duncan Lawson from Newman University.

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

The Recruitment and Admissions Toolkit has not been updated as yet but has been left here for archive purposes.

 

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

The Recruitment and Admissions Toolkit has not been updated as yet but has been left here for archive purposes.

 

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

The Recruitment and Admissions Toolkit has not been updated as yet but has been left here for archive purposes.

An engineering degree that is accredited by the UK Engineering Council offers a marketable advantage for a university and will be more attractive to potential students intending to become Incorporated or Chartered Engineers. With this in mind, the Engineering Council has developed template statements for use by institutions offering accredited programmes when preparing their Key Information Set (KIS) Statements and when developing their promotional material and recruitment web pages.

For further information: Guidance on Promoting accredited degree status.

For examples of best practice:  Best Practice

To download up to date logo: Logo

Support for KIS statements: KIS statements

For information on accreditation: Accreditation

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

In our Curriculum Development and Teaching Innovation Toolkit you’ll find just a sample of the range of resources available to support curriculum development and innovation in teaching engineering programmes, with links to some of the engineering education research centres.  This is an area which is developing constantly so please do contribute links and resources to keep it up to date by starting a discussion or contacting us directly.

 

A distinctive approach to quality is taken in Scotland- the Quality Enhancement Framework (QEF) which provides a means for institutions, academic staff, support staff and students to work together in enhancing the learning experience. The following link provides a useful portal of case studies in Scottish Universities on issues ranging from improving student experience through articulation through to postgraduate learning methods: http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/institutional-plans/case-studies

See also the Accreditation & Quality Assurance Toolkit

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

In our Curriculum Development and Teaching Innovation Toolkit you’ll find just a sample of the range of resources available to support curriculum development and innovation in teaching engineering programmes, with links to some of the engineering education research centres.  This is an area which is developing constantly so please do contribute links and resources to keep it up to date by starting a discussion or contacting us directly.

 

 

There’s a range of resources available on the Higher Education Academy’s website developed by the former Engineering Subject Centre.

HELM – Helping Engineers Learn Mathematics – was a major curriculum development project undertaken by a consortium of five English universities – Loughborough, Hull, Reading, Sunderland and Manchester.  Its resources are available here.

The National HE STEM Programme was a three-year initiative funded by the Higher Education Funding Councils for England and Wales (HEFCE/HEFCW). It started in August 2009 and completed in July 2012. The Royal Academy of Engineering led the engineering strand of the programme. It supported the National HE STEM Programme through collaborations with HE institutions to encourage new approaches to recruiting students and delivering programmes of study in engineering. It enabled the transfer of good practice across the HE STEM sector, facilitating its wider adoption, and encouraged innovation, supporting those in particular with the potential to achieve long-term impact within the Higher Education sector. There’s a range of case studies available here.

European Journal of Engineering Education (EJEE): the Official Journal of SEFI. Published bi-monthly, the journal examines the economic, cultural, and social factors which influence the education of engineers in different societies and provides a forum in which teachers in engineering schools, institutions and industry can share accounts of good practice and discuss methodology.

 

Grant Campbell and Daniel Belton at the University of Huddersfield have published a useful paper about introducing a new engineering programme in a high cost subject at a time of constrained resources but high demand. The full paper is available here.

 

Degree Apprenticeships Toolkit

In September 2015 the first university-business co-developed Degree Apprenticeship programmes were launched – having been designed and eligible for funding under the government’s new model for apprenticeship training (Apprenticeship Standards), and expected to be resourced via the so called “apprenticeship Levy”. Whilst still at a relatively small scale and early stage, as at March 2016, Apprenticeship Standards are ‘ready for delivery’ at the Degree Apprenticeship level in three discipline areas – two of which are engineering-related. A further seven are awaiting approval, five of which are engineering-related.

Our two Placements Toolkits are the result of the research conducted to address the recommendations of the Perkins Review of Engineering Skills and the Royal Academy of Engineering’s Universe of Engineering Report about engineering student’s placements in companies.

Quality assurance & enhancement

A distinctive approach to quality is taken in Scotland- the Quality Enhancement Framework (QEF) which provides a means for institutions, academic staff, support staff and students to work together in enhancing the learning experience. The following link provides a useful portal of case studies in Scottish Universities on issues ranging from improving student experience through articulation through to postgraduate learning methods: http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/institutional-plans/case-studies

See also the quality assurance toolkit

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

In our Curriculum Development and Teaching Innovation Toolkit you’ll find just a sample of the range of resources available to support curriculum development and innovation in teaching engineering programmes, with links to some of the engineering education research centres.  This is an area which is developing constantly so please do contribute links and resources to keep it up to date by starting a discussion or contacting us directly.

 

The University of Manchester’s Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences publishes a range of resources to support teaching innovation in an online collaborative space “created for staff …with an interest in enhancing their teaching, and an enthusiasm for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.”

 

Established in 2011, the University of Liverpool’s Centre for Engineering Education “researches, develops, shares and supports best teaching and learning practice, within the School of Engineering and nationally“.  

 

“The Aston Engineering Education Research Group is focused on developing the understanding that will enable colleagues across the sector to introduce innovative and relevant learning and teaching practice that addresses the needs of industry whilst engaging students in their learning.”

The group is made up of both engineering and social science academics and examines the whole ‘engineering education pipeline’ from primary school to the employment of engineers and their continued learning.

The Centre for Engineering and Design Education (CEDE) is “funded to help the engineering and design Schools at Loughborough University by undertaking research or projects to improve the student learning experience and encourage effective and efficient practice and innovation in teaching“.

Established in April 2015, UCL has brought together expertise from its Institute of Education with its Faculty of Engineering Sciences to form the UCL Centre for Engineering Education. The centre is “interested in not only supporting developments in primary and secondary education and but also how to create a better articulation between the vocational (FE and apprenticeship) and HE routes into engineering, as well as working with companies to address their changing skill needs“.

Royal Academy of Engineering logo

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.

Let us know what you think of our website