5 Equipping the Workforces
103. If the United Kingdom is to maintain its
global leadership in these two industries it is vital to develop
workforces with the skills to meet the needs of industry. During
the course of this inquiry several issues relating to skills and
education were raised by representatives of both the industries
and academia. Covering all of these issues in detail merits a
report in itself. Therefore this Report has deliberately focused
on those topics raised by our witnesses: how to encourage more
students to embark on scientific, and ideally engineering careers;
the current work developing sector skills strategies; and how
to ensure that university courses are equipping student with the
skills that industry requires.
Promoting science-based careers
104. The insufficient number of young people
studying STEM [science, technology, engineering and maths] subjects
was a concern raised several times by our witnesses. BAE Systems
argued that "the Government needs to ensure that careers
in these sectors are seen as attractive propositions,"[160]
while Lola stated that:
engineering which is the back bone of innovation
in these sectors is no longer a prized degree […] with the
result that fewer people choose to study for a qualification in
the engineering disciplines.[161]
105. Engineering UK, an engineering lobbying
group, recently produced a report examining the perceptions of
its professions amongst young people, and some of its findings
make unhappy reading. Only 12% of 11-16
year-olds claimed to know what engineers do, while:
A worrying 49% of 7-11 year-olds think that it would
be 'boring' to be an engineer. Their perceptions of engineers
revolve around fixing and repairing things in the manual and mechanical
sense plus the view that it is a dirty or messy job.[162]
They are not the only voice raising concerns about
the image of engineers in the UK. Dick Oliver, Chairman of BAE
Systems, was reported in the press complaining that the use of
the word "engineer" to describe people in a range of
technical jobs had damaged the reputation of real engineers, making
it more difficult to attract young people into engineering careers.
He said:
Britain suffers from a language problem in that the
word 'engineer' is applied to a lot of different people who do
a range of jobs. Professional engineers need to take ownership
of the brand and keep it for themselves.[163]
Other countries draw a much stricter division between
engineers and technicians which is articulated in everyday language.
Germany has gone even further allowing professional engineers
to prefix people's names with the title "Engineer",
with the abbreviation "Ingr" being used in much the
same way that doctors and professors prefix their names with "Dr"
and "Prof". [164]
China and India have also adopted this practice. Furthermore
they are often referred to as "Engineer" when being
addressed.
106. We endorse the views of Dick Oliver, Chairman
of BAE Systems that there is a need for professional engineers
to reclaim the title of Engineer for themselves. One possible
solution to this problem which other countries have adopted is
the use of Engineer as a prefix to a person's name, in a similar
way that doctors and professors use their profession to refer
to themselves. The image of the engineering profession needs to
be enhanced for the sake of the aerospace and motorsport industries
and the wider economy.
107. However, Engineering UK's Report offers
some hope that young people can be attracted into engineering
careers, if they understood what the work really involved. It
found that the same age group chose art, design and technology
as among their favourite subjects in school. The reasons they
gave for enjoying those subjects included "the design and
building element and the opportunity to be creative." These
are core aspects of the work of an engineer. During our visits
we have constantly been impressed by the enthusiasm engineers
had for their work, in particular the intellectual and creative
challenges posed by their jobs. This enthusiasm was not lost on
the Minister:
One of the joys of my present job is seeing the excellence,
innovation and intellectual challenge that exists in manufacturing
facilities that I visit. […] I think what young people need
to recognise is that we have got huge challenges ahead—low
carbon challenges and the future of the planet—it is ideas,
intellect and scientific innovation that will deal with those
issues […][165]
We agree. However the challenge remains to help children
make the link between STEM subjects, the activities they enjoy
and a career in engineering.[166]
108. In motorsport and aerospace, both the Government
and industry have a wonderful resource to spread this message.
The exciting image of motorsport has real potential to get young
children interested in science and maths. This has not gone unrecognised.
In 2005 the Learning Grid programme was set up to utilise motorsport's
image in the promotion of activities designed to engage young
people in science and engineering. It encompasses about twenty
curriculum-related and quality assured activities from early school
age to university.[167]
109. The industry itself is very supportive of
the programme. Mr Aylett, Chief Executive of the Motorsport Industry
Association, described the sector's efforts to motivate young
people to consider a career in science as "the most important
thing that we do".[168]
The aerospace industry is engaged in similar work. Rolls-Royce
told us about projects that it ran in schools with its graduates
going to classrooms to engage with school children and promote
scientific subjects with "fun" engineering and aerospace
projects.
110. However, some of the evidence we received
has cast doubt over the effectiveness of these programmes in influencing
young people's career choices. TTXGP, the organisation that runs
the "zero carbon, clean emission" Grand Prix, commented
that while programmes such as Learning Grid were to be commended
they were "not succeeding in influencing teenagers sufficiently
when they are considering their career path."[169]
Mr Dickison, Principle Lecturer in Automotive Engineering at Coventry
University described it as "an extremely valuable activity"
but concluded that "I think you can do more."[170]
Similarly the Association of Colleges argued that while "the
Learning Grid has had a beneficial impact raising awareness"
it believed that "more could have been done to invest in
and attract the next generation of skilled people to create a
sustainable industry."[171]
111. The Minister told us that the Government
had recently established Manufacturing Insight, which was aimed
at raising "the profile of manufacturing by enthusing young
people so that they seriously consider a career in manufacturing."
He said that it would ensure that media coverage for the sector
provides a stronger focus on the positives, particularly in media
accessed by young people, their parents and teachers."[172]
Furthermore, he believed that:
the design, the innovation and the levels of intellect
that are applied within both aerospace and motorsport to take
forward the respective industries is really beguiling and, I think,
is something that can draw [in] pupils of the highest intellect.[173]
112. We support the work of
Manufacturing Insight to attract young people into the engineering
and manufacturing professions. It is important that young people
are made aware of the exciting and rewarding careers that manufacturing
has to offer. The Government needs to ensure that the work of
this body compliments the many excellent projects already being
run by industry. We recommend that the Government sets out how
Manufacturing Insight will co-ordinate its work with the existing
activities in this area run by professional bodies and companies.
113. Engineering UK also highlighted the lack
of awareness of routes other than higher education into the profession
as a barrier to young people pursuing a career in engineering.
It argued that the perception that a degree is essential to enter
the profession, which combined with the fact that physics, the
most unpopular subject amongst 11-16 year olds, is normally a
pre-requisite for university engineering degrees, led many young
people to think that engineering is not for them.[174]
Higher education is one route into engineering but it is not the
only one. Many engineers who worked as technicians secured vocational
qualifications, and at Rolls-Royce and Filton we saw senior managers
who had started their career in those companies as apprentices.
This alternative route however, is not given sufficient prominence.
As UK Engineering's Report notes:
40% of educational professionals and 31% of the general
public believe that a first degree is the minimum educational
requirement to become an engineer.[175]
Even amongst 16-24 years olds, who had the most awareness
of vocational qualifications, only around a third knew about this
method of entering the profession.[176]
114. One mechanism which has been successful
in raising awareness is the Young Apprentices Scheme. The scheme
offers young people at Key Stage 4 (age 14-16) the opportunity
to undertake a work-related qualification delivered through a
college alongside their school-based GCSE programme. In addition
it seeks to provide 50 days of extended high quality work experience
with an employer.[177]
115. In September 2009, some 9,000 places were
made available and the Government plans to increase this to 10,000
in 2010. Research has shown that 95% of the third cohort's entrants,
who completed the Young Apprenticeship programme, progressed to
further education or training.[178]
The Department for Children Schools and Families is currently
exploring the future options for the Young Apprenticeship programme
including reviewing the funding arrangement, so that Local Authorities
have control of both the funding and the commissioning of the
programme.[179]
116. We congratulate the Government
on the Young Apprenticeship Scheme which has been highly successful
in attracting young people into further education and training.
We recommend that BIS be involved in any discussions about the
programme's future to ensure that it continues to properly align
the demands of young people with the needs of business. We would
welcome an update on these discussions in its response to our
Report.
Skills strategies
117. The Sector Skills Council for Science, Engineering
and Manufacturing Technologies (SEMTA) leads the delivery of government
funding for training and skills development for these sectors.
It works with industry, the National Skills Academy for Manufacturing
and universities to develop training programmes.
118. Both sectors are currently in the process
of designing skill strategies which will identify the skill needs
of their industries. For example, A|D|S is developing a Skills
Roadmap which will identify requirements to deliver the National
Aerospace Technology Strategy. It is intended to inform the work
undertaken by SEMTA to ensure that its skills provision is aligned
to demand.[180]
119. However concerns were voiced that SEMTA
was not properly considering the needs of business in developing
its skills programmes. Mr Aylett reported that:
SEMTA did create some very original course structure,
but it was disjointed, not connected with industry, there was
no other connection with any other sector skills council.
The motorsport industry told us that as a result,
it withdrew from the debate:
again we ran up a white flag and said, "There's
only so much one can do. The engineering courses are excellent
in the UK, so let us just go with those and allow this incredible
complexity of sector skills councils to run its course".
Indeed, in the last few months, since the demise of MDUK, we have
tried to re-engage, but we have not had much of an answer yet.[181]
120. When we put the views of the motorsport
industry to the Minister he replied that he wanted to see "motorsport
companies come forward with what they think needs to be done by
Government to support the sector, and we will work to try to provide
that."[182]
121. The industry's experience
of working with the Sector Skills Council for Science, Engineering
and Manufacturing Technology (SEMTA) does not give us confidence
that the sector skills agencies have properly engaged with industry,
especially in the motorsport sector. The development of a skills
strategy for the sector is vital to its success. We recommend
that the Minister, as a matter of urgency, facilitate a closer
working relationship between SEMTA and the motorsport industry
to resolve these differences of views.
Higher education
122. Both the aerospace and motorsport industries
also expressed concern about the number of university students
studying STEM subjects, and highlighted the particular problem
of retention. Dr Williams compared the attention given to retention
rates in STEM subjects to that of medicine:
if 50% of medical students failed to go on to be
doctors there would be an outcry, so why is there not an outcry
when 50% or thereabouts of engineering students fail to go on
to be engineers?
Rolls-Royce agreed saying that it struggled to find
undergraduates with sufficient skills. It believed that the shortage
was particularly acute in the aerospace industry, as the positive
image of the motorsport industry helped it attract engineering
graduates.
123. The Higher Ambitions framework has
outlined the Government's proposals for using funding levers in
cases where demand-led pressures from employers and students do
not stimulate the provision of important skills. The framework
stated that it would provide "enhanced support for
the 'STEM' subjects […] and other skills that underwrite
this country's competitive advantage."[183]
124. The framework also signals the introduction
of a greater element of competitive funding, with more money going
to universities "who can best respond to these evolving economic
challenges."[184]
The Department explicitly stated that:
To allow funds to be diverted to courses that meet
strategic skills needs they will be diverted away from institutions
whose courses fail to meet high standards of quality or outcome.[185]
125. We asked the Department for more information
about how it planned to implement these proposals. We were told
that HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England) would
keep back £10 million from the funding it gives to universities,
which would be directed to help universities increase the proportion
of students on STEM courses.[186]
However we are not clear whether this is funding for the provision
of extra place or funding to promote science to stimulate demand
for existing places.
126. In the longer term, the Department has asked
HEFCE to report by spring 2010 on a wide range of issues and options
aimed at increasing the proportion of STEM students. The Department
has made it clear that it expects HEFCE to have a firm timetable,
drawn up by autumn 2010, for implementation in the academic year
2011-12.[187]
127. We welcome the decision
by the Government to take steps to encourage more young people
to study STEM subjects at university. Equally we recognise that
its proposals to provide greater resource to STEM subjects will
result in a reduction in funding to some other courses. This is
a decision that we support in times of great stringency for public
expenditure. We seek clarification on how the £10 million
of funding HEFCE has kept back to increase the proportion of students
on STEM courses will be used, and whether it will be used to fund
additional places or stimulate student demand for science courses.
MOTORSPORT COURSES
128. There are already a number of motorsport-focused
engineering courses at university, which we were told were popular
with students. However, several of our witnesses were not convinced
that they fully met the needs of industry. When we visited Silverstone,
we heard that employers would rather employ a graduate with a
degree in engineering than a motorsport degree. This was because
motorsport specific courses tended to drop some of the more complex
engineering content, such as thermodynamics, for motorsport specific
modules such as motorsport management. The MIA highlighted the
fact that:
the real quality of the motorsport educational provision
is deemed by UK employers to be generally poor and not serving
the industry well.[188]
Mr Dickison, an academic who previously worked in
the industry expanded on this point:
I have actually been recruiting in people from the
university courses for many years and I have found that some of
the motorsport courses were very, very light on the real technical
subject […] when you said, "Can you calculate how thick
that piece needs to be?" they say, "Oh, I didn't do
that module".[189]
129. Mr Dickison believed feedback from industry
was necessary to ensure that motorsport courses reflected the
needs of industry.[190]
He argued that:
there is a huge variety of higher education establishments
and their courses are not all the same. What is needed is some
formal feedback. It is very difficult for the universities to
react when it is just really based on maybe sort of anecdotes.[191]
130. Representatives of the industry told us
that there had been little consultation with industry over the
design of the courses. MDUK, the government-industry partnership
body was given the task of helping industry to engage with universities
and explain to them the sector's requirements. However, industry
representatives told us that MDUK had not delivered on this objective:
Originally, the idea for MDUK was that industry would
help go through the universities and not accredit them, these
poor guys are accredited to death, but actually engage with them
and explain this fast-moving business, and that has failed to
take place.[192]
131. Mr Aylett also expressed concern that the
current funding system had led to universities using the motorsport
brand to fill spaces on courses rather than focus on training
which met industries requirements:
Sadly, during this period the universities have been
led on a 'bums on seats' reward basis, so they are using the power
of motorsport, and it has worked, to attract a lot of students
into engineering courses that were otherwise overlooked, but unfortunately
the quality and connection with the industry [has not been good
enough].[193]
132. The Minister was clear that there needed
to be better engagement between universities and businesses. He
argued that "the industry needs to engage with the universities,
in that case, and say 'We do not think that what you are providing
is right and you need to provide something different and distinctive.'[194]
Furthermore, he told us that:
the UK Automotive Council should be involved in that
process, or could be involved in that process, so that a more
collective view is brought forward. I think that is a good example
of how the Council can work.[195]
133. Other sectors have been able to overcome
these challenges through the establishment of accreditation schemes.
One such example is Skillset, the sector skill council for the
creative industries, which established course accreditation schemes
in animation, computer design, and screenwriting. Its submission
described how through working with industry it:
accredits those practice-based courses that most
effectively provide students with the skills and knowledge that
employers need. Currently, there are: in Animation seven under-graduate
and one post-graduate; in Computer Games five under-graduate and
one post-graduate; and in Screenwriting ten post-graduate.[196]
134. Courses purporting to be
"motorsport" engineering must produce graduates with
the skills that the industry requires, this is currently not the
case. We welcome the approach to accrediting courses that has
been taken in other sectors. We recommend that the Government,
working with SEMTA, industry and universities explores the feasibility
of establishing a similar programme for the motorsport industry.
OVERSEAS STUDENTS
135. The aerospace industry highlighted its concerns
on the UK's over-reliance on overseas engineering students, in
particular at post-graduate level. BAE believed that the growing
dependence on overseas postgraduates for aerospace research was
starting to affect the UK's ability to transfer knowledge to other
wealth-creating industries.[197]
Mr Keen, its Head of Government Relations, expanded on this point
in relation to the defence industry:
That is an issue particularly in the defence field,
[…] inasmuch as it is more problematic to have overseas students
involved in defence matters. […] The ideal solution would
be to see more UK graduates going into postgraduate study, but
it is difficult to see how that is going to happen.[198]
Dr Williams, Head of Business Development, Research
& Technology at Airbus agreed that it was a problem and pointed
out that Airbus had recruited the majority of its previous year's
intake of graduates from France and Germany.
136. However, when we raised this issue with
academics at Bristol University they did not see it as a problem.
They asserted that many foreign students remained in the UK after
they had trained and made a valuable contribution to the economy.
Rather than reducing the numbers they believed that the Government
should actively encourage the best overseas students to come to
Britain through the provision of scholarships. Furthermore they
argued that universities benefited from overseas post-graduates
as they made larger contributions to the costs of their education
than their domestic equivalents.
137. Mr Mans acknowledged that there were two
sides to this argument:
On the one hand, clearly universities want to attract
as many foreign students as possible. There is a high percentage
of postgraduates in the UK from abroad. That in one sense is a
good thing, but, on the other side, I would argue that there is
probably going to be a steady migration of some of the knowledge
to our competitors in the medium and long term.[199]
138. There is clearly a balance
to be struck between supporting home-grown talent and utilising
the skills which come from overseas students; attracting the best
international talent to the UK will enhance our industry's competitiveness
but only if those students continue to work for British companies.
The Government needs to keep this under review to ensure that
an appropriate equilibrium is maintained; it is right that the
skills of young people in the United Kingdom are fully developed
so that we do not become over-dependant on overseas students.
160 Ev 93 Back
161
Ev 114 Back
162
Engineering UK, Engineering UK 2009/10, p 42 Back
163
"BAE chief throws a spanner in the works for gas fitters
and repairmen", The Financial Times, 1 March 2010 Back
164
For example, in German, 'ingenieur' means a chartered engineer,
and 'techniker' means a technician; in French, 'ingénieur'
means a chartered engineer and 'dépanneur' means a technician. Back
165
Q 362 Back
166
Engineering UK, Engineering UK 2009-10, p 42 Back
167
Ev 68 Back
168
Q 183 [Mr Aylett] Back
169
Ev 143 Back
170
Q 181-182 Back
171
Ev 91 Back
172
Ev 74 Back
173
Q 344 Back
174
Engineering UK, Engineering UK 2009-10, p 42 Back
175
Engineering UK, Engineering UK 2009-10, p 42 Back
176
Engineering UK, Engineering UK 2009-10, p 42 Back
177
Ev 74 Back
178
Ev 74 Back
179
Ev 74 Back
180
Visit to Airbus, Filton. Back
181
Q 190 Back
182
Q 353 Back
183
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, Higher Ambition:
the future of universities in a knowledge economy, November
2009, p 45 Back
184
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, Higher Ambition:
the future of universities in a knowledge economy, November
2009, p 12 Back
185
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, Higher Ambition:
the future of universities in a knowledge economy, November
2009, p 45 Back
186
Ev 75 Back
187
Ev 75 Back
188
Ev 121 Back
189
Q 186 Back
190
Q 186 Back
191
Q 187 Back
192
Q 189 Back
193
Q 189 Back
194
Q 360 Back
195
Q 361 Back
196
Ev 135 Back
197
Ev 94 Back
198
Q 111 [Mr Keen] Back
199
Q 111[Mr Mans] Back
| 
