Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Are you getting enough CPD, Institution to ask

ICE NEWS Reported by Damian Arnold damiana@construct.emap.co.uk

THE CONTINUING professional development of a sample of ICE membership will be monitored in October for the first time, it emerged last week.

Professional development committee confirmed that a postal questionnaire probing the nature and benefits of CPD taken this year will be sent to a random one per cent taken from all classes of membership. It was agreed that the survey would run every year for 10 years.

Recommendations from the ICE's CPD working party that 'where performance was judged to be unacceptable, members would be invited to attend an interview to discuss their CPD practice', were rejected by the committee. Members whose CPD was judged to be unacceptable would not be called to account.

Chairman of Professional Development Mark Whitby said: 'We are not going for the 'big brother' approach. What we will do is increase the sample on occasion so that we can corroborate whether or not the one per cent sample is a good sample or not.'

The Cawthra Commission recommendation that monitoring should be carried out as an interview by Regional Liaison Officers, was also thrown out because RLOS were said to be too busy.

David Rogers said that monitoring needed to be operational before the Engineering Council's audit of the ICE next year.

He said: 'The Engineering Council will be carrying out its five-year audit of the institution next year. One of the questions we will be asked is: 'What are you doing about CPD and what are you doing about monitoring it?' All the institutions I have seen have installed some sort of monitoring; some institutions are monitoring 10% of their membership.'

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.