The School of Engineering Questions

Introduction

In this edition of The Brighter Beacon, we are looking at "The School of Engineering Questions". They are multiple issues about the representation and activities of engineering undergraduates that underlie the current student landscape in the School of Engineering.

What are the School of Engineering Questions?

The School of Engineering Questions (SEQs) concern ...

1. ... whether the numerous engineering and technical societies, the focus on internships and placements, and the general academic difficulty of the engineering curriculum decrease the interest of being Programme Representatives and hence weaken the effectiveness of representing all engineering undergraduates, ...
2. ... whether the various technical societies develop a sense of belonging that is different with the rest of the University of Edinburgh and the Edinburgh University Students' Association (EUSA), and ...
3. ... whether the different engineering discipline societies should merge into one unified engineering society, a redeveloped EngSoc, for the primary reason of eliminating disparity and reducing the chances of student society collapse.

These questions were very recently, on Saturday, 7 October 2023, with respect to my role as Engineering Undergraduate School Representative, to investigate if they are true. There may be more parts to the SEQs, but this article is dedicated to these three issues until I realized we do not have EngPALS (the Engineering Peer-Assisted Learning Scheme) for this current academic year yet. The dormancy of EngPALS is now considered to be the fourth SEQ.

What are My Conjectures About the 3 SEQs?

SEQ 1: The Few and Far Between Programme Representatives

Let's start with the first SEQ. My conjecture here is that the engineering undergraduates who have natural leadership and teamwork skills would become the committee members of the engineering discipline societies where they host social events, such as pub crawls and the annual ball, and organizing industrial seminars and networking events for their members.

There is another set of engineering undergraduates who would join a technical society where they work on either building hyperloop pod prototypes, racing cars, or rockets to develop the technical skills alongside their soft skills. There are more technical projects, but I have given some examples to illustrate this point.

There is a third set of engineering undergraduates who focus on working part-time jobs, internships, and placements and finding them more desirable than any student representative role. This section I do not distinguish the type of work whether it is related to engineering or not. Non-engineering work is still valuable for developing transferable soft skills such as effective communication and time management.

Lastly, there is a handful of engineering undergraduates who want to develop their soft skills through being student representatives but they may be discouraged by their perceived academic difficulty of the engineering curriculum.

Combining these four cases, it seems there would be an insufficient number of Programme Representatives to represent all engineering undergraduates in the School of Engineering. As of writing this article, there are nearly no first-year Programme Representatives and no Civil Engineering Programme Representatives. These two faults should be rectified or else I may receive emails that require me to pass over to the relevant staff members or could be outside of my remits. Back to the SEQs, let's move the second one.

SEQ 2: The Culture of Technical Societies

My conjecture here is based on theory and a few testimonies from my friends, because I never took part of a technical society. Technical societies are interesting, because they attract a wide range of students from various disciplines such as mathematics, physics, and computer science - not just engineering. In addition, they work in teams in building part of something physical whether it is either a hyperloop pod prototype, a racing car, or a rocket. For example in HYPED, there is the business team, the European Hyperloop Week team, the outreach team, the research team, and the technical team. All of these teams work in tandem as a coherent structure to advance their collective pursuit of the future.

You may ask yourself, "When are you going to get to the main point of this conjecture?", this paragraph explains it. Technical societies represent an extreme form of a STEM-wide sense of belonging, because these students are working on a project with initially strangers but you build this bond of familiarity over time. The second part is that these technical societies also have a sense of belonging to the university. This is because these students of their respective technical societies are representing the university at the international level. Take for example HYPED again, they are competing in the European Hyperloop Week where university teams are demonstrating their pods in different categories. In essence, technical societies not only foster a profound sense of camaraderie among students from diverse disciplines, but they also forge a strong connection between their members and the university, as they proudly represent their higher education institution on the international stage.

SEQ 3: The Case for A Unified Engineering Society

My conjecture here is that my predecessor resurrected the Mechanical Engineering Society during his second term, but when I became School Rep, the Engineering Society and Electronics and Electrical Engineering Society become dormant with no known committee members for either society. I do not understand how my predecessor overlooked these 2 societies, because both of them were led by younger students who share the same discipline as him, Electronics and Electrical Engineering.

I have an absurd prediction where all engineering discipline societies will collapse by 2026 and no engineering undergraduates studying in that year will have no interest to rebuild any of them. The best way to prevent this potential catastrophe is to unify all the different engineering discipline societies into one, a redeveloped EngSoc. I have came up with the committee structure for this hypothetical society. If you are interested, it is available by request.

The introduction of the new student support system, especially the role of Cohort Leads, could justify for the redesigned EngSoc, because of a little idea called the "duplication of efforts". Let's start with defining the definition of a Cohort Lead and their role with students and other relevant staff members. A Cohort Lead is an academic staff who lead a group of students from your programme and year, run both social and academic activities, and provide academic guidance. Next, let's define the concept of "duplication of efforts". In this case, duplication of efforts state that if the School of Engineering staff members encourage the vertical interaction of cohorts (i.e. same discipline, different years), it would be similar to the existing student-led engineering discipline societies. Engineering discipline societies and Cohort Leads serve different purposes. The former unites and empowers students of the same discipline to take initiative hosting events. Meanwhile, the latter facilitates community-building between students and their teaching academics. We are currently in the first year of the new student support system, so we will need to wait 5 more years to know which will collapse first, the student-led engineering discipline societies or Cohort Leads. Then, we will know whether or not we need a new approach for student groups in the School of Engineering.

SEQ 4: The Dormancy of EngPALS

For this section, I am going to say a few things. Firstly, my predecessor was also the Vice-Coordinator of EngPALS in 2022 to 2023. The statement goes hand in hand with the concept of students holding two or more roles at the university. Secondly, shouldn't EngPALS be a self-fulfilling cycle where the first years who take part in EngPALS become leaders next year?

How Can My Conjectures About the 3 SEQs Be False and Still Perplexing?

There are ways for some of my conjectures to be false and the others to be puzzling when given more time to ponder over them.

SEQ 1: The Few and Far Between Programme Representatives

From my conjecture of the first School of Engineering Questions, you may think being a Programme Representative is demanding even though it is incorrect. This role takes approximately 10 hours per semester which includes asking their cohort's opinions of the programme of study, holding a deliberation session with their cohort, talking with the various relevant staff members such as the Course Organisers, Academic Year Coordinator, Cohort Lead, and Degree Programme Manager, taking part of Student Staff Liaison Committee meetings, and working with the Academic Year Coordinator and Cohort Lead to host a cohort social gathering. I was never a Programme Representative, because I got snubbed in my first year and was a Global Buddies Group Leader in my second year.

The second point is about the academically diligent students who are able to take up two or more roles. From the current list of Programme Representatives, I can identify a few students who fit in this category. In recognizing the capacity of academically driven students to excel in multiple roles, it becomes evident that the commitment of Programme Representatives is well within reach for those who choose to take it on. With this in mind, it's worth noting that there are vacancies for the role of Programme Representatives, and this presents an opportunity for enthusiastic students to actively contribute to the academic community.

As I mentioned before, there are nearly no first-year Programme Representatives and no Civil Engineering Programme Representatives. If I remember correctly, there are more civil engineering undergraduates compared to chemical engineering undergraduates. However, we have 2 Chemical Engineering Programme Reps for each year from Year 2 to Year 5. CEE undergraduates, explain this screenshot below to me. As your School Rep, I am not here to shame any students, but I am here to encourage students to strive for their best. I still vividly remember talking to more than 200 CEE undergraduates from all years during Welcome Week about becoming Programme Reps. I feel like I already failed my role as a School Rep.

Besides this small inconvenience, let's move on to the second SEQ.

SEQ 2: The Culture of Technical Societies

This School of Engineering Question is hard to debunk, because you can ask any student who is part of a technical society and they would agree with my points that were made speculatively.

SEQ 3: The Case for A Unified Engineering Society

The third SEQ is complicated, because the history of the five engineering discipline societies is still unknown. The instance of unknown history is one of my pet peeves, because as a visionary leader I need to know the past in order to build the future. If the past is unknown and the information about it is inaccessible or worse non-existent, how am I supposed to lead? I am still critical of our students' union for this issue as I am shunned for asking anything about the King's Buildings Union, or their annexation and dissolution of other smaller student collectives such as the Edinburgh College of Art Union and the Moray House Institute of Education Union. At this point, I would ask our school's alumni but they have no interest to provide answers to my questions.

Besides my tangent about King's Buildings and other University of Edinburgh campuses, it is a matter of time if all five engineering discipline societies will collapse by 2026 according to my absurd prediction. The absurdity of this prediction relies with a few odd conditions being met. These conditions are:

• The School of Engineering allows Cohort Leads to host events which span different years of the same discipline.
• The engineering discipline societies are unable to form a functioning committee. The 2023-2024 committee of the Chemical Engineering Society was formed with half of the members volunteering, as no students contested their roles before the election during the Annual General Meeting. It is a matter of time that no one wants to run for any committee position for any engineering discipline society.
• The expansion of the outreach and technical societies. The 2023-2024 edition of Engineering for Change has 8 projects (3 university-based, 3 outreach, and 2 international competition-based) under its belt. Two of these projects, AquaEats and BioBlocks, are new and introduced this academic year. We have other active outreach and technical societies such as HYPED, Formula Student, Hands-On!, endeavour, Asteria, and HumanED. In total, they contribute for roughly 300 students as of now.
• The increase of the silent majority. There are students who just want to study well, get a top degree, hang out with friends, spend time with fellow hobbyists, exercise regularly, get internships, and much more. They would lead to the decrease of the number of Programme Representatives, EngPALS Leaders, and Society Committee Members, the weakening of student engagement with their School Representative, and the widening of the social fragmentation in our university.

In considering the potential challenges and uncertainties surrounding the engineering discipline societies, it becomes apparent that the future holds a range of possibilities. While some conditions may seem unlikely, they provide important factors to ponder as we navigate the evolution of these societies. Ultimately, the fate of these groups rests on a dynamic interplay of various elements, including student participation, society functions, and the broader academic landscape.

Outside The School of Engineering

In truth, the School of Engineering Questions (SEQs) are one part of a larger complex of university-wide student issues. Going back to this September, I was in a EUSA Student Council Meeting where we had a discussion on the topic of "Sense of Community and Belonging" and how it impacts students across various schools, including the School of Engineering.

Points Raised in the Discussion:

1. Inclusivity of the King's Buildings Campus: It was noted that students on the King’s Buildings campus may feel somewhat isolated from the rest of the university community. There's a perception of reduced communal activity, and a number of historically significant events or initiatives have ceased operations.
2. Importance of Staff-Student Interaction: The need for meaningful interaction between staff and students was emphasized as pivotal in fostering a sense of community. This connection is seen as essential for building a strong university-wide community.
3. School-Specific Affiliation: Some students expressed a stronger sense of belonging to their respective schools rather than feeling integrated into the broader university environment. A more distinct sense of community was often associated with smaller schools, where it's easier to establish connections and feel a sense of belonging.
4. Significance of Dedicated Spaces: Having a dedicated space or building within a school was highlighted as instrumental in building a sense of community. This was especially true for smaller schools, where it's easier for students to bond and feel a sense of belonging.
5. Accessibility of Event Information: Participants felt that information about various events should be more readily accessible, particularly for students who may not be active on social media platforms.
6. Impact of Numerous Events: The abundance of diverse events might potentially impact the overall sense of community. Striking a balance between a variety of events and fostering a unified community was deemed important.
7. Size of the University Cohort: The sheer size of the university cohort can sometimes make it challenging for students to form connections and feel a part of the larger community. This was contrasted with a stronger sense of community found within societies and clubs, where the number of students involved is more manageable.
8. Involvement in the Students’ Association: Some students expressed a feeling of disconnect from the Students’ Association, suggesting that the university should actively encourage student involvement and enhance communication.
9. Need for Transparency and Communication: Students emphasized the importance of increased transparency and communication between students and staff. There's a prevailing sense that the university needs to do more to support students as individuals.
10. Impact of Industrial Action: It was noted that instances of industrial action can affect the sense of community and belonging, as students often support academic staff and may view the university as the source of these issues.
11. Challenges for International Students: International students highlighted difficulties in meeting others in their course and in classes, which can sometimes hinder their sense of belonging.

These points collectively underscore the complexity and multifaceted nature of the "Sense of Community and Belonging" issue, which extends beyond the School of Engineering to impact students across the entire university. It's imperative that we address these concerns holistically to create a more inclusive and supportive environment for all students.

Conclusion

In conclusion, "The School of Engineering Questions" provide a comprehensive overview of critical issues concerning the representation and activities of engineering undergraduates within the School of Engineering. These questions delve into the intricacies of student engagement, society dynamics, and the broader academic landscape.

As we've explored, each question offers unique insights and conjectures, shedding light on the challenges and potential solutions facing our engineering community. From the need for more Programme Representatives to the dynamics of technical societies, and the prospect of a unified engineering society, each aspect demands careful consideration.

Furthermore, the discussion on the "Sense of Community and Belonging" highlights the broader university-wide student issues that intersect with the SEQs. It is evident that creating an inclusive and supportive environment is paramount, touching on aspects such as campus inclusivity, staff-student interactions, and transparent communication.

In essence, "The School of Engineering Questions" serve as a catalyst for ongoing reflection and action. They prompt us to rethink and reimagine the ways in which we engage with our academic community. By addressing these questions collectively, we can work towards a more integrated, empowered, and thriving engineering community within the University of Edinburgh.