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

IStructE stands rm over exam debacle

News

INSTITUTION OF Structural Engineers (IStructE) chief executive Keith Eaton this week stood firm on his controversial decision to force 40 of this year's chartered membership exam candidates to resit because of an error on the paper.

'It's important that we maintain the standard of the institution and this is the only satisfactory approach, ' said Eaton.

He said that none of the candidates had complained to the institution about the decision despite the numerous objections posted on its website in online forums.

They may have been objecting (to it) to NCE but they haven't said anything to us, ' he said.

More than 700 people sat the exam in April. Candidates had to answer one question from a choice of eight. Problems surround Question 1 of the paper that should have asked candidates to present two viable schemes in their answer.

Only one scheme was in fact requested.

Of the 250 candidates that opted for Question 1, 40 of them answered with a single scheme.

They will not have their paper marked but instead face a re-sit in September.

Many examination bodies spoken to by NCE disagreed with the IStructE's approach, sympathising with the candidates and suggesting a better approach would be to moderate the paper for the error.

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.