Vocational route vs Academics - research thread
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vocational route vs Academics - research thread
I'm conducting a little research for my teacher training degree: I would like to know what your opinions are regarding the two main routes of entry to the EASA Pt66 B1 license.
1: Academic - HE College in an aircraft engineering specific college (2 yrs), followed by 2 years in an EASA pt147 Academy studying for the license exams, followed by a minimum of 2 years experience in a part 145 company as a mechanic.
2: Vocational - Apprenticeship or direct entry into a part 145 company, minimum 5 years experience, and EASA modules taken as self-study (license by post)
In your opinions, what makes for the easiest route?
Is an academic route candidate given the same level of respect as a vocational entrant?
Which route will provide a 'better' class of engineer in 5-10 years?
Which do employers prefer to see on the CV?
Personally, I have done both... I joined the RAF as an apprentice, and when I left, went to a part 147 Academy. I contracted for a couple of years as a mechanic, but never applied for the license - I became a teacher instead...
I know what some people will say, but I welcome the views of all..
1: Academic - HE College in an aircraft engineering specific college (2 yrs), followed by 2 years in an EASA pt147 Academy studying for the license exams, followed by a minimum of 2 years experience in a part 145 company as a mechanic.
2: Vocational - Apprenticeship or direct entry into a part 145 company, minimum 5 years experience, and EASA modules taken as self-study (license by post)
In your opinions, what makes for the easiest route?
Is an academic route candidate given the same level of respect as a vocational entrant?
Which route will provide a 'better' class of engineer in 5-10 years?
Which do employers prefer to see on the CV?
Personally, I have done both... I joined the RAF as an apprentice, and when I left, went to a part 147 Academy. I contracted for a couple of years as a mechanic, but never applied for the license - I became a teacher instead...
I know what some people will say, but I welcome the views of all..
In my opinion, the degree route is forced on us by EU rules that EU colleges teach to degree levels in almost every vocation - hence the UK rush to push the degree route for almost everything here.
Notwithstanding that;
The Academic Route:
A mate of mine says that he has seen some newer (degree-taught) engineers making some really talented diagnoses of faults. Fair enough, some would be talented, some may not be talented. This means they are no different from non-degree engineers who may or may not have a talent for the job. They may have more business acumen, but maybe no greater understanding of systems than vocational engineers.
In 5-10 years time a great deal of degree'd engineers will be about and no-one will be able to tell the difference between them and the non-degree types (unless there is some real difference in retention and implementation of theoretical standards). The degree engineers may move into business or management earlier - if thats what they want to do? I would wager that that would happen more for degree engineers who now learn by computer and calculator and not in wind and rain.
Some management may tend to use degree engineers to release aircraft from Base Maint - but I can't see what that would gain? Except releasing aircraft to achieve better KPIs.
At the moment I cant see degrees making more value on the working front, and I cant see the point of doing all the studying and exams for a degree just to bend rivets, change bulbs and turn spanners?
The Vocational Route:
Will generally stay the same, stopping the new guys stuffing up when they can.
Employers will pick who's cheapest.
...and good luck for your teaching training.
Notwithstanding that;
The Academic Route:
A mate of mine says that he has seen some newer (degree-taught) engineers making some really talented diagnoses of faults. Fair enough, some would be talented, some may not be talented. This means they are no different from non-degree engineers who may or may not have a talent for the job. They may have more business acumen, but maybe no greater understanding of systems than vocational engineers.
In 5-10 years time a great deal of degree'd engineers will be about and no-one will be able to tell the difference between them and the non-degree types (unless there is some real difference in retention and implementation of theoretical standards). The degree engineers may move into business or management earlier - if thats what they want to do? I would wager that that would happen more for degree engineers who now learn by computer and calculator and not in wind and rain.
Some management may tend to use degree engineers to release aircraft from Base Maint - but I can't see what that would gain? Except releasing aircraft to achieve better KPIs.
At the moment I cant see degrees making more value on the working front, and I cant see the point of doing all the studying and exams for a degree just to bend rivets, change bulbs and turn spanners?
The Vocational Route:
Will generally stay the same, stopping the new guys stuffing up when they can.
Employers will pick who's cheapest.
...and good luck for your teaching training.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: luton
Age: 56
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My brothers son went down the academic route, he is now a qualified engineer but is finding securing employment very hard, it appears that engineers coming from this route are not well regarded by employers, sadly this harsh fact of life was not made clear when he forked out a lot money in good faith
Sadly most of his fellow students are it appears facing the same type of discrimination from airlines
Sadly most of his fellow students are it appears facing the same type of discrimination from airlines
Its been my experience that both routes produce good & bad engineers (you know this already).The route taken matters little to prospective employers only the ticket.
If taking a career path involving less time on the tools eg Quality,Safety the degree might matter a lttle more.There are career paths in the industry, which graduates have easier access to, over those vocationally trained.
Vocationally trained guys have an initial advantage in skill of hand,but as a learned skill,the academic guys quickly catch up.There also seems to be more 'weeding out'amongst aprentices,but thats just my impression.
If taking a career path involving less time on the tools eg Quality,Safety the degree might matter a lttle more.There are career paths in the industry, which graduates have easier access to, over those vocationally trained.
Vocationally trained guys have an initial advantage in skill of hand,but as a learned skill,the academic guys quickly catch up.There also seems to be more 'weeding out'amongst aprentices,but thats just my impression.
