G.— ENGINEERING 169 



If this is first-class ability, let it reveal itself in the only way that leaves 

 no doubt, by research actually performed. Restricting our examinations 

 in the way that I have suggested, we shall provide the requisite oppor- 

 tunity ; for what the normal student can absorb only in three years the 

 ' really first-class ' student will be able to absorb in two. We shall have 

 time to give him what he really needs, which is training specially suited 

 to the individual. 



Do not think I want my views (even assuming that they are sound) 

 to have result in closer standardisation. As Sir Henry Tizard emphasised 

 in his presidential address to Section L at Aberdeen, in education diversity 

 is a sign of health. But speaking for myself alone I would say : On all 

 counts let us shun ' harder papers ' in our examinations ! No one could 

 claim that they are tests of personality, and very seldom, as I believe, 

 are they concerned with new principles not to be covered in easier papers. 

 (How should they be, seeing that ours is not a separate branch of science, 

 but science studied with a special purpose ?) At the worst they are founded 

 on some special course of lectures, delivered with a view to some special 

 paper : a vicious circle in truth ! At best, too often they provide for the 

 intending specialist a test of knowledge in mathematics, chemistry or 

 physics which could be acquired better, and tested as well, if a more 

 restricted examination in principles were followed by further study of 

 those subjects in their special schools. 



8. Secondly, in discussing this and consequential problems I would 

 call industrialists into council. In the jargon of Section F, they and we 

 are in the relation of consumers and producers ; and though in the past 

 it was our part to stimulate demand by producing something that they 

 needed without realising the fact, we cannot now afford to disregard the 

 consumer's point of view — as in some fields, it seems, British producers 

 are prone to do. But I mean more than this : I mean that the time is 

 past, or all but past, when his three years at a university and his two years 

 of apprenticeship could be regarded as wholly distinct phases in the train- 

 ing of an engineer, to be planned both separately and independently. 

 Most of us will remember, either from hearing or from reading it, the 

 paper on ' Training for Industry ' which last year, at Nottingham, Mr. 

 Fleming and Dr. Willis Jackson (now Professor) presented to this Section. 

 To me its most striking feature was its view of engineering training as an 

 integrated whole, as five years devoted to a single objective. Whether or 

 not we should agree regarding details in our planning for those five 

 years, this I believe to be a most important principle. Much in the same 

 way medicine (of all professions the nearest to ours, I think, in its nature 

 and requirements) calls for university preparation followed by practical 

 experience in the hospitals. Like medical schools we should plan, I 

 think, with all five years in mind— not think of our responsibility as ending 

 with the conferment of a degree. 



And to industrialists, having called them into council, I would say : 

 ' Let us seek to work out a plan whereby you may be provided with 

 the recruits you say you want — men who with adequate knowledge of 

 engineering principles combine some breadth of background, who by 

 intercourse with men of other training have gained some maturity of 

 bearing. To achieve this end it is essential, as I believe, that we forbear 



G 2 



