Figure 1.
DODRIDGE, Melvyn
School Of Engineering, University Of Derby, Kedleston Road, m.dodridge@derby.ac.uk
Abstract:
The majority of undergraduate degree programmes offered by universities in England and Wales are of three years duration.
Whilst many students enter higher education directly onto a degree programme, normally governed by input standards,
others not meeting this standard are limited to being admitted to a Higher National Diploma Programme which is normally two years in duration.
Many students at the end of this type of programme have aspirations to proceed to a degree programme and it is the point of entry which causes most debate.
Some universities will not offer any advanced standing arrangements and therefore students would take typically five years to complete a degree programme via the diploma route.
Many however, offer what is traditionally known as the two plus two route.
Students complete their Higher National Diploma and subject to the level of attainment are admitted to the second stage of a relevant degree programme.
Less common is the two plus one route in which a student again completes the diploma and subject to a high level of attainment is admitted to the final year of a relevant degree programme.
In the past this route has been largely unacceptable in accredited BEng Programmes but has been accepted in a number of degree programmes accredited for incorporated engineer status.
This paper examines the two approaches that have been used to date and reflects on the experience gained at the University of Derby in which the Division of Electronic Systems has successfully offered a range of accredited two plus one degrees.
The new regulations imposed by SARTOR 97 (Standards and Routes to Registration) has increased the academic standards for accredited Chartered Engineer (CEng) and Incorporated Engineer (IEng) status.
Students holding a Higher National Diploma will no longer meet the academic requirements.
This coupled with the Engineering Council's statement that the incorporated engineer is an exponent of today's technology and that there is a shortage of engineers with the required skills suggest that many students holding a diploma will wish to upgrade to a degree.
Input and output standards of the diploma and the degree are examined as well as the accreditor's specification.
The university's degree and HND programmes have been outcome based since 1996 and the discussion looks at how the difference between the two types programme can be quantified.
Life Long Learning is discussed in the context of part time students who need to update their skills.
In conclusion the case for the two plus one degree is defended.
Keywords: undergraduate, degrees, standards, accreditation, curriculum
There are two distinct routes in undergraduate higher education engineering programmes namely the internationally recognised BTEC Higher National Certificates/Diplomas (HNC's/HND's) offered by the awarding body, the EdExcel (Educational Excellence) foundation and degree programmes offered by in the main the University sector. BTEC programmes are designed with a vocational flavour and provide students with the right balance between knowledge and skills. Students gain real employment options at the end of only two years if they study for a diploma full-time as well as opportunities to progress further in higher education. Students can also opt for a three year programme offering up to one year of work placement.
Degree programmes are now increasingly vocational as traditional academic qualifications are not enough for today's employers and do not prepare students sufficiently for a role in today's society. The majority of study programmes in England and Wales are of three years full-time study. Again this period can be extended to four years with the placement year. Of course not all students are able to enter a degree programme at the first stage because they do not have the required input standard and are therefore confined to entering a BTEC HNC/D programme.
A survey in 1997 on destination figures [1] showed that 89% of HND holders were working or undertaking further study within six months of completing their studies.
Over half (58%) were continuing their studies, the unemployment figure being just 7% which compares favourably with that for graduates at just over 9%. There is therefore clear evidence, despite a small downturn in BTEC registrations in recent years, that BTEC programmes not only offer a suitable alternative to degree programmes but provide the necessary route for progressing within higher education.
It is the point of entry to a degree programme by a student holding a BTEC HNC/D that causes debate and in some cases with a reference to falling standards. Advanced standing is the usual terminology applied in such cases but the reasons for differences in the point of entry are many. Where degree programmes are non-vocational there may be no advanced standing offered at all but more usually transfer is available to the second year of a degree programme holding a relevant diploma and hence the term 'the two plus two degree'. In many cases the programme design of degree and BTEC programmes in the same subject is substantially different even if both types have a vocational focus and therefore entry to the final year of the degree programme is not a practical proposition. A student therefore taking this pathway takes four years to complete the degree programme.
Some universities have employed a common first year for diploma and degree students and dependent upon the level of attainment at the end of that year they enter the diploma or degree programme. Students entering the degree programme in this way take three years to gain the award. However in cases where strict input standards are observed this may not be an option. The 'two plus one degree' is relatively new and allows students to progress to the final year of a degree programme where they hold a relevant diploma. This approach has been frowned upon by institutions such as the IEE where accreditation is sought. Clearly there are substantial differences in the philosophy of BTEC and BEng honours programmes and therefore the two plus two option is preferred. There has however been an increase in the number of engineering and technology programmes in particular being offered by the newer universities which are also honours degrees but normally titled Bachelor of Science with honours (BSc(Hons) ) or Bachelor of Technology (BTech). Such programmes are likely to be aimed at Incorporated Engineer level as opposed to Chartered Engineer and accredited by, for example, the Institute of Incorporated Engineers (IIE). In suitable cases a two plus one degree is a viable option subject to certain input standards being maintained.
The Engineering Council last revised its Standards and Routes to Registration (SARTOR) in 1990 and therefore it maybe considered that SARTOR 97 [2] was long overdue. It has been recognised for some time that standards in engineering study programmes have been falling and that there is an over provision of engineers meeting the academic requirements leading to Chartered Engineer status and deficiency in the number meeting the requirements leading to Incorporated Engineer status. The number of registered Chartered engineers is at present around 200,000, whereas the number of Incorporated Engineers is only around 50,000. In industry and commerce it has been noted that many Chartered Engineers are performing an Incorporated Engineers role. SARTOR 97 aims to address this situation by raising both input and output standards with the intention of reducing the number of engineers qualifying for Chartered Engineer status whilst at the same time increasing the number qualifying for Incorporated Engineer status.
The outcome of SARTOR 97 for the profession are clear: the Chartered Engineer will become a Master's level programme, the Incorporated Engineer will be an undergraduate honours degree level programme. Despite the length of study in a masters programme being one year post honours degree it is important to draw a comparison of the roles for the Chartered and Incorporated Engineer [3]. They are described as "different but of equal value" but the difference lies in the fact that the Chartered Engineer is knowledge/understanding led but needs appropriate know how and is primarily concerned with the progress of technology through innovation, creativity and change whereas the Incorporated Engineer is know how led but needs appropriate knowledge/understanding and act as exponents of today's technology.
Having highlighted the differences it is important to relate to the notion of equal value, something which has not really been the case up and till now.
There has been a steady decline in the number of students entering engineering programme but this trend is now showing signs of reversing as many universities have been busy in developing niche programmes which are dynamic and innovative in nature and aimed more towards the status of the Incorporated Engineer.
Historically there has always been an input standard which has been set at one 'A'level or equivalent for entry to a BTEC HNC/D programme and two 'A' levels for entry to a degree level programme however the number of 'points' required and the relevant subjects varies considerably between universities and other colleges of higher education and with the type of programme. SARTOR 97 has set input standards in terms of 'A' level points or their equivalent. The masters degree (M Eng) has been set at 24 points and therefore is clearly for academic 'high flyers', the B Eng (Hons) degree with 18 points has only one purpose in preparing partial academic preparation for Chartered status. The Incorporated Engineer degree however is set much lower at 10 points and for those entering via the BTEC HND the requirement in just 2 points. Whilst many universities, particularly the new sector ones, are likely to experience difficulty in recruiting students with 18 points or more they may well be able to recruit at between 2 and 10 points and may, subject to demand and in the interests of intake quality raise these minimum standards. Despite the fact that these input standards are to be phased in at 50% in 1999/2000 rising to 80% by 2002/20003. Brown [4] talks about the ever looming shake out for university departments and describes several scenarios. The University of Derby is one of the new sector universities and has experienced difficulty recruiting to traditional study programmes such as BEng (Hons) in Electrical & Electronic Engineering. In 1996 the Division, of Electronic Systems made the decision to develop traditional; and niche market programmes aimed at supplying the much needed Incorporated Engineer and to pull-out of offering BEng programmes. This decision in retrospect was the correct one as the effects of SARTOR 97 would have certainly promoted such a decision. The division has subsequently seen a growth in engineering student numbers which is against the national trend.
In reflection of the decision to look towards Incorporated engineer degrees (IEng) the remaining sections of this paper are devoted to this type of degree and associated BTEC HNC/D programmes. To summarise from SARTOR 97 "The bench mark route for the IEng degrees is a three year full-time programme (or equivalent sandwich or part-time). Whilst it may be an 'honours degree' this is not a requirement. The title is at the discretion of the Higher Education Institute concerned but should not allow confusion with any three year degree accredited for CEng. Higher national and equivalent programmes will continue to be able to gain accreditation and qualifying for interim stage IEng registration. Students completing HNC's/D's need to complete 'matching sections' in order to satisfy requirements. To bridge the gap between HNC/D and IEng degrees, candidates will need to undertake further learning, equivalent to one to two academic years of study depending upon the type of higher national award obtained e.g final year of an IEng degree programme".
In 1996 the Division of Electronic Systems gained accreditation by the Institute of Incorporated Engineers (IIE) for a suite of programmes ranging from HNC's with endorsements, HND's, BSc and BSc(Hons) programmes which accounted for around 10% of IEng accredited degree programmes at that time. The challenge for 1998/99 was to address SARTOR 97 and certainly the notion of a 'two plus one degree' is available for consideration by curriculum designers.
The Institute of Incorporated Engineers (IIE) was recently formed from the amalgamation of the Institute of Electronic & Electrical Incorporated Engineers (IEEIE) and the Institute of Mechanical Incorporated Engineers (IMechIE) and now forms the largest body accrediting programmes for Incorporated Engineer status. Their recently published guidelines [5] provides information on curriculum design for programmes to meet the new requirements. The following points of interest are noted:
Distinguishing features of an IEng degree compared to an HND will include:
A degree programme for Incorporated Engineers could have significant areas of common teaching with internally validated HND programmes, but also a number of distinctive features. SARTOR states that "the IEng degree should not simply be derived by "adding on bits" to the end of the HND: the enhancement is pervasive throughout the programme".
The IEng degree is not to be a 'watered down' version of the current CEng accredited BEng(Hons) programme.
IEng degrees represent a different set of learning outcomes and a different course design philosophy, based on the different role of Incorporated Engineers. Incorporated Engineers form the mainstream of professional engineering practitioners, acting as exponents of today's technology. They need to be trained to provide leadership and control in a managerial role, have a practical approach, and have a detailed understanding of particular technologies.
The range of degree titles which can be accredited is not limited but they strongly recommend that the nomenclature BEng (Hons) is not used as this title is suited to programmes with a philosophy aimed at Chartered Engineer.
SARTOR Part 1 quite clearly says that an appropriate Matching Section might be the final year of an IEng degree programme. This leads us to the interesting possibility where a degree constructed by "adding on " a year to the HND is not acceptable, BUT and HND plus the final year of an IEng degree is. The IIE has to consider whether this is actually the case.
SARTOR 3 rd edition expects that a university/college will offer "matched sets" of degrees, HNDs and Matching Sections. from earlier, they might look like this:
Figure 1.
Input cohort to B1 must satisfy specified academic standards as a condition of accreditation. Input cohort to D1 is not subject to the same criteria.
B1 and B2 may have significant common content and teaching with D1 and D2, BUT B1 and B2 must be enhanced to some extent compared to D1/D2 as a condition of accreditation.
Ideally, a Matching Section must match D2 output to B3 output. So obviously B3 itself is a possible Matching Section (as SARTOR Part 1 itself suggests). If B3 is used in this way, the following questions are raised:
This finally leaves us with a possible scenario as follows. Suppose B1 and B2 are not viable, but D1 and D2 are accredited. Can D1, D2 and B3 be an acceptable route? SARTOR Part 1 suggests so, even if a degree is not awarded. The advantage is that cohort entry requirements are lifted, students are given a choice of exit points, and costs are minimised.
However, to achieve accreditation this route would have to be well written and be of impeccable quality, both in terms of content and progression philosophy (at least initially, as they are likely to be subject to some scrutiny by the Engineering Council). That said, it looks as if a well designed, well constructed and well delivered programme on the 2+1 model would be an effective way of addressing SARTOR 3rd edition requirements for IEng education.
The suite of programmes developed by the Division of Electronic Systems in 1996 [6] including traditional and novel programmes has commonality and shared activity between degree programmes and between degree and BTEC programmes. The differences in input standards was recognised then i.e. 1 'A'level for diploma entry and 2 'A' levels for degree entry and therefore it was considered that there should be some differences in the curriculum between the BTEC and degree programmes in the first two years. However unlike the other divisions in the School of Engineering and other Universities who have developed the curriculum with different themes in mind for these two types of programme, therefore restricting them to only be able to offer a 'two plus two degree'; the Division of Electronic Systems engaged in a development which ensured as much commonality as possible in the design of modules for the two types of programmes. The paper [6] refers to the use of Mode A and Mode B module variants. Eight modules in each of the first two years are studied in each type of programme. Typically five modules are common in each year and to both types of programme and therefore have no mode identification. All students taking these modules have to achieve identical learning outcomes. Mode A/B module variants are selected on the basis of those likely to be most effective in demonstrating intellectual skills. The degree programmes feature Mode A modules which carry the higher intellectual learning outcomes when compared with the diploma Mode B modules.
Given that at the end of two years degree students would have achieved some learning outcomes which are considered at a higher intellectual level but not at a higher academic level as defined by the stages/years of programmes the input standard for direct entry to the final stage of the degree programme from an HND programme needs to be defended. The standard was set at 10 modules out of a minimum of 16 graded at merit level or equivalent and that the requirement to achieve the Mode A learning outcomes would be waived on account of this high level of attainment. This facilitates a true 'two plus one degree' but is clearly designed for high level achievers. Other students will still have the opportunity to progress through a range of bridging studies which may be offered between the end of the diploma programme and the start of stage 3 of the degree programme or alternatively they could enter stage two of the degree programme carrying credit to that programme and complete via the 'two plus two' model although their first year of study may be a 'topping up' depending on the level of attainment in the diploma.
The Division is fortunate in that both the degree and diploma programmes run with adequate student numbers and a number have now progressed to the final stage of the BSc(Hons) programme in Electrical and Electronic Engineering. The alternative of providing bridging studies for all students wishing to progress was examined but rejected, except where already stated, in favour of setting the input standards at a high level. This has particular benefit to students admitted from other institutions both in the UK and overseas who clearly have the ability to succeed without the need for bridging. Bridging where offered however often has to be formulated on an individual basis.
Progression from an HND programme is becoming increasingly popular with part-time students who can complete the BSc programme in one year and the BSc(Hons) in one further year. The progression from a HNC through a HND and BSc and finally to a BSc (Hons) is an excellent example of curriculum design addressing the need for life long learning and is particularly important to part-time students who are normally in employment but need to update or enhance their skills. To date all students have gained an award or are progressing in the stage, the absence of failures therefore providing evidence that the 'two plus one' is a serious alternative to the 'two plus two route'.
Operational experience to date has indicated the need to review the modules with mode A/B variants as a result of some of these modules being optional and therefore in practice some students engaged in more mode A modules than others. This problem has been overcome by restricting mode A/B variants to core modules in some programmes. The influence of SARTOR 97 however has led to changes in formulating learning outcomes in mode A/B module variants. Previously the mode A modules had enhanced outcomes but not necessarily for all outcomes. The new model employs a grater enhancement to all learning outcomes in mode A modules in order to address the significant difference in input standards, despite raising the standard from 2 to 4 points for diploma programmes (10 points for degree programmes). Direct entry to the final stage of the degree programme has also been made more stringent. The 10 merit or equivalent still remains but with the additional requirement that this number must include all the mode B modules, which of course are core in the diploma..
Many institutions are still pondering on the way forward where their BEng programmes are coming up for accreditation. Are they going to be able to recruit sufficient students with 18 'A'level points or equivalent and what is the point of offering this type of programme unless a matching section is available. Since September 1998 students are now having to pay a substantial contribution towards their fees and therefore they will naturally look at the 'pros and cons' of the potential 3 year route leading to an Incorporated Engineer Degree directly or via the HND route as opposed to a non accredited 3 year BEng (Hons) programme or an accredited BEng (Hons)/MEng route taking 4 years. Only time will tell whether SARTOR 97 is considered as a success or will there be some further re-thinking as trends develop.
Figure 1 shows typical programmes designed for IEng and CEng status indicating the required input standards. Matching sections are best shown diagrammatically as in Figure 2 which shows the various routes and matching sections leading to IEng status. It should be noted that the matching section can be half of stage 3 in the case of BSc entry and all of stage 3 or both stages 2 and 3 in the case of HND entry.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.