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

The making of a MICE

CHARTERED PROFESSIONAL Review is a phrase which continues to strike fear into the hearts of graduate engineers - hence the packed house last week at the Association of London Graduates and Students' half day meeting on how to pass.

'So many people came up to me at the end of the day and said that for the first time they actually understood what they had to do to pass the CPR,' said North West liaison officerMac Steels, who set out to more than 200 graduates the do's and don'ts of preparing for the review.

With Steel's claims that his region has the highest pass rate in the UK, his advice is worth listening to, although he insists that he will not enter engineers for the review if he does not feel they are ready.

Steels' views and tips were backed up by CPR reviewer Phil Parker, whose advice basically boiled down to one thing: make sure you are fully prepared before you enter for the review. He added that although reviewers will be trying to pass candidates, 'you must be able to say what you have become and not what you have done'.

A personal account of how to prepare for and pass the CPR was presented by Whitby Byrd engineer Manoj Mistry, who was chosen specifically as an example of someone who did not follow a 'traditional' route to membership.

Mistry insisted that regardless of the route to CPR - in his case HND, degree and then an

industrial placement which took seven and a half years - the important thing was being able to demonstrate how your working experiences made you an engineer.

'I looked at it from a pragmatic viewpoint,' said Mistry, speaking after the meeting about his varied career to date.

'I looked at the experience I was gaining and always thought about how to tailor this to what I needed to do to satisfy the Institution's requirements.'

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.