Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog

Writing AER 5 has prompted me to signpost some guidance for the Phase 1s as they move to their site attachments.  It would also be useful for the next batch of phase 1s but I doubt they’ll see it unless one of the lecturers can pass it on.

Join the IStructE as a student member. I don’t think it was covered except for some structures ninjas attempt to charter with IStructE.  Maybe I slept through that advice in Phase 1 (my fault) or maybe it wasn’t covered (it should be).

It’s free, you get access to their online library, learning resources, student groups and talks, essential knowledge series, “Brohn” online modules, “The Structural Engineer” (online only), you can join their working groups (good CPR evidence)…….and most importantly it’s actually a navigable website unlike the ICE one.  I feel they support learning in the way that the ICE should be doing (clearly not a point i’ll be making at CPR).

Join here:

Membership

Specifically:

The essential knowledge series is really simple introductory reading.

The level 1 technical guidance notes would be useful pre-reading before the corresponding lectures on phase 1 and as a refresher when you come back to that topic on phase 2.

The level 2 technical guidance notes are a good starting point for any phase 2 or 3 design you need to do in that subject area and they all highlight recommended further reading, generally easily understood IStructE design guidance. These are still being written.

Level 3 notes looking at complex design issues will follow during 2018.

I plan on coming back to them as a handrail after i’ve finished the course as well.

Last night I attended an ICE event on the Written Exercise (WE) portion of the CPR. It was not a technical seminar or anything of the sort. It was one reviewer, Ian Jenkinson, giving us his opinion and guidance on the CPR in general, but focussed on the WE.

Ian Jenkinson has been an assessor for over 30 years and at some point or another has sat reviews with over 25% of all current reviewers. So his opinion on the review carries a bit of weight and shows a good spread of the opinions of most reviewers.

After the talk I felt much more at ease with completing the WE and taking the CPR on a whole. One of his key points (in the slides) was that the CPR is not an interrogation or a discussion between two adults (reviewers) and a child (us), it is a discussion between three engineers.

The slides you might find helpful, but I will summise a few of his key points here:

• The questions will be picked based on what you say in your report – through this you can essentially set your own questions.
• The reviewer will check you have some knowledge on the subject during the review, if they believe the question is unfair or they have not understood your report, they can still change the questions before you sit the WE.
• When answering the question:
  • Do an essay plan (If all else fails and you have cold sweats and palpatations – people have still passed the WE based on a good essay plan
  • Tell a story – this is not a technical paper
  • They are looking for a good first draft (not polished ICE Journal submissions)
  • Use minimal direct quotes and reference them properly – plagiarism will fail you
  • Better to use your own thoughts, reasons and communicate them succinctly
  • Some examples he gave had typed essays in the region of 1000-1500 words
  • Well laid out but no unnecessary formating, front pages etc
• Another key point he made was not to get wound up about the essay. You won’t fail CPR based on a shocking essay, if you fail CPR it is because of the interview session.
  • Alternatively, if you have a shocking interview, the WE might turn it around for you (on one attribute…maybe).
  • Less than 0.5% of people fail CPR with the WE stated as the reason.

The marking rubric consists of three pairs of characteristics of the WE:

• Knowledge and relevance
• Grammar and syntax
• Clarity and presentation

Questions asked:

• What if the questions you get you cannot answer – Speak to the invigilator and they will help as best they can – he implied that there is always a way to answer the questions they set.
• What attribute do most people fail on – Independant judgement and responsibility. Ian spoke about taking responsibility and saying “I” and what the outcomes and consequences were to your actions. Secondly he said commericial awareness lets people down, but having a base knowledge of the contracts your projects were under would get you 90% of the way there.

His last point, and a slide that isn’t included in the pack was that they are not looking for the ultimate polished engineer, but an engineer who has the potential and drive to become a good engineer.

I hope this helps and sets a few minds at ease about the CPR process as a whole. It would be interesting to hear some of the guys opinions who have been through CPR last year?