“If we are to double the number of engineers to meet demand, it is clear that we can no longer simply rely on recruiting committed engineering enthusiasts alone.” This is a quote from the
Five Tribes: personalising engineering education report published at the end of last year.
The report suggests that if young people are the potential customers for the engineering ’market‘, then efforts to attract them into the engineering profession should be tailored by their values. It identifies five types - or ‘tribes’ – and consider their attributes and potential for working in engineering.
Recently
UCL got a lot of publicity for its engineering courses which no longer specify maths and science A-levels. Bright students, many of them girls, were missing out on the chance to study engineering even if they had done well at GCSEs, because they had not chosen STEM subjects for A-level. This prompted me to think of our Five Tribes report.
I suspect some of these young people fit neatly into the Social Artists category, as they had chosen “not to consider STEM because they have insufficient interest rather than being difficult to understand”.
The report goes on to say that: “This group is highly engaged in school, with a large network of support and developed views on the wider world. Their connection with what traditionally have been considered ‘creative’ subjects makes them less likely candidates for a future in STEM – academically or as a career. Yet this tribe comprises many potential engineers who would be more inclined to contemplate what is on offer if the engineering community were better able to promote its creative side.”
If we’re going to bring more people into engineering; be they girls, people changing career or non-archetypal males, then we have to change what we are currently doing. We must accept that the ‘essential’ skills may not always be assembled in the previously accepted sequence. We must look at providing the required knowledge when the individual is ready and motivated to learn. If we’re looking for numerate creative thinkers, might we be able to start with the ‘creative’ first and build the mathematical skills?
So if changing the entry requirements and adding a module of mathematics is attracting students, then it is to be encouraged. It’s not the bold radical step portrayed by the media, just a sensible step in the right direction!
In the ideal world I would like to see an education system which does not require pupils to make major life choices at 13 that narrow their career options. I suspect our education system will move to a more baccalaureate style system which will be focused on 18 not 16, where vocational and academic options are equally valued and interchangeable.
As
Tristram Hunt says: “These young people are going to be in education and training until 18 and we have to think more intelligently about the kind of qualification and curriculum which naturally ends at 18.”
Keeping options open for longer is part of the solution, but so is a new modernised careers programme. We need cultural and structural changes that place careers guidance at the heart of learning and not the clunky bolt-on, box ticking exercise it so often turns out to be. I would strongly advocate a comprehensive careers programme that presents technical and academic routes equally, and helps pupils understand the impact of their choices. I believe that would lead more young people into engineering careers.
Rod Bristow, president of Pearson UK describes how in Singapore there is: “A system of ‘bridges and ladders’ so that young people can follow vocational pathways and later cross to academic ones, or vice versa. They understand that people learn things in different ways at different points in their lives. In Singapore, many young people opt for the practical route, because they can see it leaves their options open; they can go to university or get a job. The advantage of these flexible routes is to make the system more responsive to fast changing economic needs.”
In the meantime, while we are waiting for a more perfect education system, we need to be improving what we have. We need to make it OK to change your mind. We must provide a path into an engineering career, regardless of your school examinations or your first job.
As we look beyond the election, I would urge policy makers to check whether we have any ‘bridges and ladders’ in place. The
Five Tribes report recommended that: “Government, teachers, industry and STEM organisations must take into account young people’s diverse values and attitudes, when developing programmes, courses and activities, if we are to significantly increase numbers to desired levels.”
UCL, and indeed many other universities that are offering foundation courses, are to be congratulated on opening doors to potential engineering undergraduates that used to find that the door was shut. They are making a positive step towards attracting those who do not fit the conventional engineering archetype – which I wholeheartedly support.
Peter Finegold is the Institution's Head of Education and Skills. He is a thought leader on education policy, and has been involved with strategic policy campaigns and promoting effective formal and informal learning initiatives. He is also an advocate for better careers advice – for school children, graduates and engineers following technical careers.
Contact Peter via Twitter @Peter_IMechE.