PROPOSALS FOR the revised Professional Review to operate from spring 2000 were approved by Education, Training & Membership on 8 July.
Chartered candidates would be required to take a four year masters engineering degree or top up a bachelor engineering course with a period of further learning.
'A bridge still needs to be built to develop a matching section for people from three year courses who want to go for chartered status. We are devising guidelines for that now. We favour a partnership between the university and employer over the period of a year,' said director of ET&M Richard Larcombe.
'We regard the fourth year as vital for the candidate to develop links with industry which is an important future framework recommendation.'
In line with the parallel publication of Future Framework and SARTOR 97 third edition, the requirement for incorporated candidates will also be driven up from an HND to a three year degree.
Revisions in the Professional Review are planned for all three classes to create greater consistency. 'Our aim is to create a feeling of family about the documents 101, 102, and 103 for chartered, technical and associated status; to make them similar in format and different in demand,' said Larcombe.
Core objectives could be introduced to the Associate Member and Technical Member classes for the first time, such as the need to demonstrate knowledge of civil engineering procedures and manage and apply safe systems of work.
New objectives for chartered candidates could be added such as the contentious proposal of communicating in a second language.
Plans to improve training advice for candidates include mandatory mentoring, counselling and advice for chartered and associated candidates not under the training agreement, and third party mon-
itoring of continuing professional development at all three classes.
Said Larcombe: 'At the moment, the 108 document for CPD is self-monitoring. We are looking at independent monitoring of a sample of ICE membership. Every professional institution in the land is reviewing how it looks at professional development. It is a sensitive issue that will be expensive to implement.'
A presentation at the AM professional review along the lines of the chartered one hour presentation is planned to bring the format into line.
An interview and written test at the TM professional review which is presently a desk top study, was cited by Larcombe as an 'example of ICE bench marks being higher than the Engineering Council's minimum benchmarks'.
Larcombe and his team are hoping for a clear signal from the Executive Committee, before preparing the documents so that training of reviewers and supervising civil engineers can start in the autumn.
'It will only be a matter of weeks after Council's decision on the proposals in September,' said Larcombe.