DIT 4th year follow on course

fatchops

The meeting in Bolton Street was a fairly sedate affair. The first speaker was from visa first who outlined their services to assist tecchies with their visa applications for Auz, NZ and Canada, although of all the preferred skills in the powerpoint presentation, Architectural Technology didnt feature too often.
Cormac Allen then followed and presented the proposals for the full and part time hons degree course to be rolled out soon. The main emphasis was the srtucture of the two courses in accordance with the Barcelona Accord. One of the more interesting items I felt he mentioned was parity of esteem with Architects (long overdue), exciting times to be a tecchie and a student. There's a main event being arranged for May this year, all info will be posted on the web site.
A presentation from CODEMA in relation to DEAP and BER followed with regard to the proposed Part L changes for this year following on to 2016 and how to design to adapt to these changes. A big chance for Technicians to take the lead on this one and not to leave it for the M&E guys to gobble up.
All in all not a bad way to spend two and a bit hours on a cold Thursday evening

armchairninja

Interesting night alright, I got the feeling that the visa first guy geared his presentation more towards architects, and every now and then remembered he was addressing a room full of techies.
Found the part about the new course interesting, will be applying straight away for that, seems there could be a big opening in the energy ratings department alrite, good to see that the regulations are finally being sorted, not that they will be followed on site however!

pseudo-tech

fatchops wrote: »

Cormac Allen then followed and presented the proposals for the full and part time hons degree course [to be rolled out soon]. The main emphasis was the srtucture of the two courses in accordance with the Barcelona Accord. One of the more interesting items I felt he mentioned was parity of esteem with Architects (long overdue), exciting times to be a tecchie and a student. There's a main event being arranged for May this year, all info will be posted on the web site.

Was there a time line on when the courses would be rolled out or was it as mentioned above "to be rolled out soon"? If so, was the time line for rolling out the full and part time courses different. It would be nice to think that academia may for once have their finger on the pulse!

fatchops

As far as I can recall the courses will be advertised in September and the part time course starting around January. They will be heavily advertised, but it all depends on space in Bolton Strees and Staff, also the course fee has to be decided but i'm sure more information will be made available in May. Anyone please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong

armchairninja

Yea, the part time course is planned to commence in January, the reason being that having too many courses starting up at the one time might cause too many problems and its easier if they are spaced out. The cost of it will depend on the Budget in the coming weeks, until then, they can't make a decision iirc.
More info will be made available on the DIT site etc, when it comes closer to the commencement date, and through the IATGN also i'd imagine. But he was reluctant to put up too much information at the minute, in case others take it upon themselves to basically copy the set up and start up the course in another college, apparently other colleges were asked to come on board with this at the early stages, but declined, so now he wants to keep the detailed information scarce i think

pseudo-tech

armchairninja wrote: »

But he was reluctant to put up too much information at the minute, in case others take it upon themselves to basically copy the set up and start up the course in another college, apparently other colleges were asked to come on board with this at the early stages, but declined, so now he wants to keep the detailed information scarce i think

I really hope that you misunderstood the situation armchairninja. It would be a terrible situation if one Institute was taking a protectionist stance, for there own benefit in a time when we need co-operation and collaboration amongst the Technician community. This situation is not about one institute but about every graduate Technician in the Country!

topcatcbr

ITC, CIT and WIT already have hons degree courses. Is it a case of pot and kettle.

pseudo-tech

topcatcbr wrote: »

ITC, CIT and WIT already have hons degree courses. Is it a case of pot and kettle.

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by the above statement? It would be a terrible game that academia would be playing with people's careers!

armchairninja

I've been thinking about that myself, and hopefully it was just a misunderstanding on my behalf.

The other institutes that have the honours degree are not RIAI accredited afaik, I think WIT is only accredited to level 7, and that they're Level 8 is not RIAI accredited?, I am however open to correction on this

pseudo-tech

armchairninja wrote: »

I've been thinking about that myself, and hopefully it was just a misunderstanding on my behalf.

The other institutes that have the honours degree are not RIAI accredited afaik, I think WIT is only accredited to level 7, and that they're Level 8 is not RIAI accredited?, I am however open to correction on this

You are correct about none of the others having RIAI accreditation. However, I would be interested to hear whether your original assertion about the ITs trying to out do one another is correct or not. It would be a pitiful situation if DIT were holding back information to try to restrict another It or vice versa.

topcatcbr

What i mean is why would other IT's copy DIT's hons degree programme when the most of them are already running their own. And as it took DIT 5+ years to develop their addon how could another copy it and have it up and running before them.

pseudo-tech

topcatcbr wrote: »

What i mean is why would other IT's copy DIT's hons degree programme when the most of them are already running their own. And as it took DIT 5+ years to develop their addon how could another copy it and have it up and running before them.

What benefit is there to being secretive??

topcatcbr

pseudo-tech wrote: »

What benefit is there to being secretive??

I can think of none that make sense. I have been listening to this kind of thing for years now. It always seems to be around the corner.

I am booked onto a distance Masters for sept and i think i wont be changing my plans now.

pseudo-tech

topcatcbr wrote: »

I can think of none that make sense. I have been listening to this kind of thing for years now. It always seems to be around the corner.

I am booked onto a distance Masters for sept and i think i wont be changing my plans now.

Exactly the point. I have also heard these stories for years now. I also have had to go elsewhere to do my Masters. This links in with the concern i have spoken about ad nauseam, the same academics that are trying to out do one another are meant to be representing us on professional bodies. It leaves you wondering who is being served here.

Nice to hear people speak out about this! Nothing will ever change if we keep listening to the same old rhetoric that doesn't deliver any results!

armchairninja

Maybe I did take it up wrong, but as you said, what would be the reasons for being secretive, unless, they're just waiting until everything is finalised to release the details, that way it prevents confusion, or people getting the wrong idea, and then complaining?, as it is, the course is still being fine tuned with regard to content etc. afaik

fatchops

armchairninja wrote: »

Maybe I did take it up wrong, but as you said, what would be the reasons for being secretive, unless, they're just waiting until everything is finalised to release the details, that way it prevents confusion, or people getting the wrong idea, and then complaining?, as it is, the course is still being fine tuned with regard to content etc. afaik

I think the reason for this is that the ATI has gone to great lenghts over the last year or so to produce a water tight case for accreditation for the course and according to Cormac Allen there was quite a volume of documents produced to back this up. From what I can gather is that the course structure is one that has not been adapted by any other institute and to that end they dont want to be gazumped. With the RIAI accreditation on board the next stop must surely be The Law Society.

pseudo-tech

fatchops wrote: »

I think the reason for this is that the ATI has gone to great lenghts over the last year or so to produce a water tight case for accreditation for the course and according to Cormac Allen there was quite a volume of documents produced to back this up. From what I can gather is that the course structure is one that has not been adapted by any other institute and to that end they dont want to be gazumped. With the RIAI accreditation on board the next stop must surely be The Law Society.

Gazumped by whom??? Another I.T. So DIT wants competitive advantage over the other I.T.s. This is truly an appalling situation. This will ensure that graduates that attended DIT will have priority over people who graduated elsewhere. Great if you graduated from DIT but not if you graduated eleswhere. Why is academia so fragmented?? Again, i will raise the point that the very same academics that are trying to get one over on their academic counterparts are meant to be cooperating within ATI, RIAI for the general good of the Technician community. I think that this is a reflection on why there have been no inroads within these organisations to progress the situation that Technicians find themselves in.

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Gazumped by whom??? Another I.T. So DIT wants competitive advantage over the other I.T.s. This is truly an appalling situation.

Lets enter the real world here PT....Colleges are businesses too. Their success and longevity depend on being one-step beyond their competitors and having the ability to provide a better service than others.

Where do you think the finances come to run a research and teaching college??

As DIT are making all the effort to get this follow-on course syllabus accredited and recognised, why should they make the details of the course available to competing colleges??

Once the course is up and running then the details will be there for all to see, otherwise i think DIT are competly correct and entitled to withhold this information??

pseudo-tech wrote: »

This will ensure that graduates that attended DIT will have priority over people who graduated elsewhere.

what possible evidence have you for that statement???

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

Lets enter the real world here PT....Colleges are businesses too. Their success and longevity depend on being one-step beyond their competitors and having the ability to provide a better service than others.

Where do you think the finances come to run a research and teaching college??

As DIT are making all the effort to get this follow-on course syllabus accredited and recognised, why should they make the details of the course available to competing colleges??

Once the course is up and running then the details will be there for all to see, otherwise i think DIT are competly correct and entitled to withhold this information??

My real world is about the good of all graduate Technicians not just the select few. DIT have been behind their competitors for a long time now and it is good to see them raise their profile again. However, I feel that this one up manship is closely related to how ATI is run. Where the different interests are looking after their own personal career and not the general good.

"As DIT are making all the effort to get this follow-on course syllabus accredited and recognised, why should they make the details of the course available to competing colleges??"

Because firstly its the right thing to do. The mantra that has come from the DIT academics over the last 2-3 years has centred around the professional development of all Technicians. I don't see that in the actions taken!!!

sydthebeat wrote: »

what possible evidence have you for that statement???

Firstly, when applications are finally made, the college will obviously favor their graduates over those from another Institute. Secondly geography, if you are not from or close to Dublin it may not suit someone to leave their family to go to college in Dublin.

armchairninja

Call me bias if you want, being a DIT grad, but I think it is only fair that for the min, DIT grads get a small level of priority, when I went into the course I was promised the honours course would be available, now it is, but its a year to late for me to just continue, so I am now going to have to apply, and depending on who else applies I still may not get it.
In reality all courses are the same, its guaranteed that there is some form of favouritism given towards grads of WIT's level 7 who want to do the Level 8, im nearly sure it says as much somewhere.

And the new syllabus that DIT as created, is a major step forward for the Technicial community, its been put together in a professional manner, not just thrown together to meet the demand, and as such I think that they may infact be right to hold off on releasing the details, as was said, other IT's were asked to come on board to devise the syllabus, not just for a level 8, but for a whole new way of teaching, and to change the landscape, DIT could easily have copied one of the earlier mentioned courses, but they didnt, and now that its available, I dont see why other institutions should be able to just take the content, without the hardwork, it just wouldnt seem right, in any context! As you said, if this is about the greater good of the AT community, why didnt all the other IT's jump at the chance to work on it?

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Firstly, when applications are finally made, the college will obviously favor their graduates over those from another Institute. Secondly geography, if you are not from or close to Dublin it may not suit someone to leave their family to go to college in Dublin.

so you have no evidence to back up your claim.

pseudo-tech wrote: »

The mantra that has come from the DIT academics over the last 2-3 years has centred around the professional development of all Technicians. I don't see that in the actions taken!!!

I think you need to take a step back on this. I feel your falling foul of 'not seeing the wood for the trees'. You are claiming not to see action yet your posting in a thread dedicated to it.

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

so you have no evidence to back up your claim.

Look at post no 177 by arnchairninja a DIT graduate. If you feel that this is not the case then maybe its your goodself that 'cannot see the wood from the trees'.


I think you need to take a step back on this. I feel your falling foul of 'not seeing the wood for the trees'. You are claiming not to see action yet your posting in a thread dedicated to it.

The action is taken by one Institute which is positive action for a small group of Technicians not all Technicians who would benefit from all the I.T.s having RIAI or even CIAT accreditation. Its really not the time to be playing games or looking after your own career or college at this stage.

Don't get me wrong, i don't need a level 8 degree, so my comments are about others who have not had the opportunity to further their education to date.

From your post i will take it you graduated from DIT!!

sydthebeat

yes i graduated from DIT, but i dont see how or why this would make any difference for selection if i applied for a follow-on course... .which is my point.

I really dont understand your negativity at all. Cormac Allen and his collegues should be applauded and not castigated for their work.

jozi

I think we need Cormac on here to clarify a few things.

Surely in reality whats going to happen is DIT starts their new course and other colleges will follow with a similar setup (if DIT's is different to theirs).

I nearly think Cormac was being a little sarcastic on his reasons why he was holding back information, things are prob not full finalised as of yet.

sydthebeat

isnt WITs add-on year up and running??...

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

yes i graduated from DIT, but i dont see how or why this would make any difference for selection if i applied for a follow-on course... .which is my point.

I really dont understand your negativity at all. Cormac Allen and his collegues should be applauded and not castigated for their work.

I'm sure we are all entitled to our own opinions and in this case mine differs to yours. My opinion relates to the point raised. If academics are trying to out maneuver one another for advantage and them meeting seperately to discuss how to promote Architectural Technicians in general, i find it hard to see how this can be achieved with the participants not singing from the same hymn sheet. And that is for all the academics involved!

pseudo-tech

jozi wrote: »

I think we need Cormac on here to clarify a few things.

Surely in reality whats going to happen is DIT starts their new course and other colleges will follow with a similar setup (if DIT's is different to theirs).

I nearly think Cormac was being a little sarcastic on his reasons why he was holding back information, things are prob not full finalised as of yet.

That could also be the case as mentioned in a previous post. We are poorly represented from the I.T.s and from the professional bodies but there are some of us who are happy to clap like performing seals and accept the inadequate situation.

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

isnt WITs add-on year up and running??...

Yes!

muffler

Maybe a new thread for this. Syd?

sydthebeat

i agree

muffler

Thanks Syd. This will keep the place a bit tidier

ConfusedTech

I havent read all the posts above as I am restricted for time, but picked up a few things from above.
I think that Cormac and the team have done a sterling job. It took some time to do this and there was a massive amount of work involved. I am sure that Cormac is playing his cards close to his chest because it would be suicide to release too much information at this time without everything properly tied down. I for one would not have a problem with him looking after his own IT first, as I have seen first hand the work that the team put in and obstacles that other ITs put in the way.

His invovlement in the IATGN is probably unfortunate on the basis that having the same person invovled in both the course and the IATGN could be a conflict of interest, but he has done great in both.

As a DIT student, I would hope that the promise that we got of a degeree course will follow through and I will be given the option of getting in on it, as I feel that it is a continuation of what I did there!

pseudo-tech

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I think that Cormac and the team have done a sterling job. It took some time to do this and there was a massive amount of work involved. I am sure that Cormac is playing his cards close to his chest because it would be suicide to release too much information at this time without everything properly tied down.

Agree with you1

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I for one would not have a problem with him looking after his own IT first, as I have seen first hand the work that the team put in and obstacles that other ITs put in the way.

Is there something that everyone else is not aware of. If other I.T.s are being difficult, they should also be exposed for doing so. It is not right that these people (who are public servants after all), should be allowed to play with peoples futures. Its a joke and a clear example of how there is no such thing as joined up thinking in the Civil Service!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

His invovlement in the IATGN is probably unfortunate on the basis that having the same person invovled in both the course and the IATGN could be a conflict of interest, but he has done great in both.

There is certainly a conflict of interest! How can one be objective when your goals are personal and parochial? I would love to hear your explaination on how the performance within the IATGN was great when the results to date are poor!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

As a DIT student, I would hope that the promise that we got of a degeree course will follow through and I will be given the option of getting in on it, as I feel that it is a continuation of what I did there!

The best of luck in with this, if you return!

ConfusedTech

Pseudo, Most colleges and universities are run as business'. I have never seen any sense of unity in my times there. I wont get into it, but I do know for a fact that the staff of DIT have done a lot of work over the past 7 years, and some of the other ITs just re-hashed their course work to comply. I can be corrected on this, but this is what I saw.

My comments re the IATGN is that Cormac did a lot of the ground work at the beginning. I totally agree that in recent times it has slowed significantly. I would like to be a fly on the wall there, as I dont know why this is.

I agree totally with you in that a united front is the only way forward. To be honest, I am a bit lost at the moment as to what the hell is happening. Frustrated.........

pseudo-tech

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Pseudo, Most colleges and universities are run as business'. I have never seen any sense of unity in my times there. I wont get into it, but I do know for a fact that the staff of DIT have done a lot of work over the past 7 years, and some of the other ITs just re-hashed their course work to comply. I can be corrected on this, but this is what I saw.

I understand the concept of the business need, to create a point of difference. However, DIT has an advantage anyway with the vast majority of our population situated around Dublin. Differentiating themselves by creating the only Degree that is accredited is neglecting all the other Technicians that dont have easy access to Dublin for family reasons etc. By not having a collective approach to this problem and by DIT being secretive will only exacerbate an already poor situation. This is unacceptable in my eyes!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

My comments re the IATGN is that Cormac did a lot of the ground work at the beginning. I totally agree that in recent times it has slowed significantly. I would like to be a fly on the wall there, as I dont know why this is.

Again, i agree with you in full that the work at the beginning has to be commended. I can also recall that the aforementioned Degree was presented by the IATGN at the start as the future standard for membership of the new ATI. When you tie this and the fact that the DIT will have the only accredited Degree course, it make you wonder. I have no problem if Cormac or any of the other academics on the ITAGN committee were to be straight and say we have created a need for a Degree but i do have a problem with a recognised Degree being restricted to one Institute and that Institute having a captive audience on the back of the IATGN!

ConfusedTech wrote: »

I agree totally with you in that a united front is the only way forward. To be honest, I am a bit lost at the moment as to what the hell is happening. Frustrated.........

Agree with you in full!

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I understand the concept of the business need, to create a point of difference. However, DIT has an advantage anyway with the vast majority of our population situated around Dublin. Differentiating themselves by creating the only Degree that is accredited is neglecting all the other Technicians that dont have easy access to Dublin for family reasons etc.

this is not a strong argument at all IMHO.

We live on a small island. Come the end of the year you will be able to drive from galway to dublin and from cork to dublin direct, both in less than 2.5 hours.

This argument is a kin to the 'regional hospital' argument. A 'centre of excellence' makes so much more sense in the context of a small country like ours.

thinking that a dublin based college, having gone through all the effort to achieve accreditation, should somehow farm out its courses to smaller regional colleges, just so non-dublin based technicians have less distance to travel, is nonsensical. If one has a family, then one needs to make an oppurtunity cost decision, as one does with everythng else in ones life.

fatchops

I think the DIT are right to keep their cards close to their chest. Someone has to dip their toe in the water and they will succeed of fail on the merits of their course structure and content. If they crash and burn they will do it alone, if they succeed, they pave the way for all other IT's to follow and negotiate all the pitfalls they may otherwise have encountered.

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

this is not a strong argument at all IMHO.

We live on a small island. Come the end of the year you will be able to drive from galway to dublin and from cork to dublin direct, both in less than 2.5 hours.

This argument is a kin to the 'regional hospital' argument. A 'centre of excellence' makes so much more sense in the context of a small country like ours.

thinking that a dublin based college, having gone through all the effort to achieve accreditation, should somehow farm out its courses to smaller regional colleges, just so non-dublin based technicians have less distance to travel, is nonsensical. If one has a family, then one needs to make an oppurtunity cost decision, as one does with everythng else in ones life.

I suggest that you might review the National Spatial Strategy Plan which positions Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford as gateway cities. The purpose of this is to provide centres of excelence in all these cities. The centralisation of everything has failed and is a National planning disgrace at this moment in time.

On top of that there are Degree courses out there that should be supported and there should be a National standard that they should all reach. There are other I.T.s ouside these gateway cities and there should be a question on whether these should continue to run or not.

I would also suggest that your comment about smaller regional colleges is wide of the mark and without foundation. DIT has been lagging behind many of its smaller friends for a long time now!

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I suggest that you might review the National Spatial Strategy Plan which positions Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford as gateway cities. The purpose of this is to provide centres of excelence in all these cities. The centralisation of everything has failed and is a National planning disgrace at this moment in time.

On top of that there are Degree courses out there that should be supported and there should be a National standard that they should all reach. There are other I.T.s ouside these gateway cities and there should be a question on whether these should continue to run or not.

I would also suggest that your comment about smaller regional colleges is wide of the mark and without foundation. DIT has been lagging behind many of its smaller friends for a long time now!

i think you'll find 'de-centralisation' has failed as well... in the typical irish way...

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

i think you'll find 'de-centralisation' has failed as well... in the typical irish way...

Agreed, however we won't solve the management of the Country here!

ConfusedTech

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I understand the concept of the business need, to create a point of difference. However, DIT has an advantage anyway with the vast majority of our population situated around Dublin. Differentiating themselves by creating the only Degree that is accredited is neglecting all the other Technicians that dont have easy access to Dublin for family reasons etc. By not having a collective approach to this problem and by DIT being secretive will only exacerbate an already poor situation. This is unacceptable in my eyes!

Pseudo: You are right, DIT have more people around Dublin, but a point against them is that other colleges managed to get Degree courses before them, whether accredited or not! Before this issue and what is written above arose, DIT were already rewriting their own course material numerous years ago to make it a degree course. This was then altered as directed by the Bologna accords, which outlined what was and what was not a degree course and now the issue of accreditation came up, to which DIT will respond. DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it). I think that they have full right to hold onto this if they wish and I would not think it secretive, although I do think that it should be rolled out across the country. When Waterford had a Degree course and DIT didnt, did they offer to give DIT the course material. I wouldnt think so! and wouldnt have expected them to.

pseudo-tech

ConfusedTech wrote: »

Pseudo: You are right, DIT have more people around Dublin, but a point against them is that other colleges managed to get Degree courses before them, whether accredited or not! Before this issue and what is written above arose, DIT were already rewriting their own course material numerous years ago to make it a degree course. This was then altered as directed by the Bologna accords, which outlined what was and what was not a degree course and now the issue of accreditation came up, to which DIT will respond. DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it). I think that they have full right to hold onto this if they wish and I would not think it secretive, although I do think that it should be rolled out across the country. When Waterford had a Degree course and DIT didnt, did they offer to give DIT the course material. I wouldnt think so! and wouldnt have expected them to.

I appreciate that WIT were first to the post and may not have shared their information with DIT. Now DIT looks like they are going to pass them out and will not share their information. It all sounds a little bit childish to me. No wonder the Country is in the mess it is in with our academics playing GOD!

Surely, collaboration between the different Institutes will provide better graduates across the board and lead to more innovation. As mentioned this approach is unproductive.

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

I appreciate that WIT were first to the post and may not have shared their information with DIT. Now DIT looks like they are going to pass them out and will not share their information. It all sounds a little bit childish to me. No wonder the Country is in the mess it is in with our academics playing GOD!

Surely, collaboration between the different Institutes will provide better graduates across the board and lead to more innovation. As mentioned this approach is unproductive.

not necessarily.... competition is the mother of innovation, not collaboration...

if 'collaboration' was to have happen between WIT and DIT when WIT commenced their degree year... what requirement would there have been to keep progressing the courses???

as you have admitted yourself, DIT (who would have been the top course when i attended in mid 90's) fell behind to WIT due to WITs great efforts. Now DIT are trying to go one step beyond WIT with an accrediated degree course... again, all of which progresses the profession... which is what you claim to be in favour of.

If you stand still you go backwards.

No6

ConfusedTech wrote: »

DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it).

I'm not sure where you heard this confused RIAI recognition only for DIT. CIAT are the evil empire according to Mr Allen and he and DIT will not have anything to do with them. The RIAI will not do anything ever to further the cause of the AT.

I do however welcome the provision of the honors degree course in DIT and look forward to seeing how the part time and even better the distance learning option with recognition of Prior learning goes but without proper international professional recognition I do have to wonder is there a point to it at all. (this applies to all courses available)

pseudo-tech

sydthebeat wrote: »

not necessarily.... competition is the mother of innovation, not collaboration...

if 'collaboration' was to have happen between WIT and DIT when WIT commenced their degree year... what requirement would there have been to keep progressing the courses???

as you have admitted yourself, DIT (who would have been the top course when i attended in mid 90's) fell behind to WIT due to WITs great efforts. Now DIT are trying to go one step beyond WIT with an accrediated degree course... again, all of which progresses the profession... which is what you claim to be in favour of.

If you stand still you go backwards.

Valid argument. However, the student/ graduate get caught in the middle. Do we now have to wait years for WIT, CIT and LIT to catch up. It has been mentioned above that it has taken a long time (too long) for DIT to get to the position that they are in today. Its not right that a generation of graduates have to suffer!

ConfusedTech

I would disagree with you there Pseudo. Whether funded or not, each college or university has the right to hold onto its class materials, course materials and sylabus. They are business', and that is the reality. Each institution is trying to get in as many students as possible past their doors to increase their own course and justify its existance. It is the job of the IATGN/RIAI/CIAT/BUPA!!! US, whoever, to promote the establishing of new accreditted courses, not the college/university.

I think that you need to seperate the two, as I dont think that you fully understand the function of a college or uni, and are putting unfair requests on them.

A seperate body/committee should be/is set up to promote cross fertilisation, but this should not fall at the feet of DIT, whether driving things or not.

The other danger there is that you end up with numerous identical courses. I think the beauty of the courses previously was that there were numerous courses with different content and differing levels giving a bit of variation. Creating identical courses flies in the face of 3rd level academia, where each college or university is meant be try to be the leader in their area. Thats what fuels research and progress... All the others should be spurred on to move and make something better than DIT. That is where we all stand to win.

armchairninja

No6 wrote: »

I'm not sure where you heard this confused RIAI recognition only for DIT. CIAT are the evil empire according to Mr Allen and he and DIT will not have anything to do with them.

Wouldnt be so sure about that particular comment, all the studios in DIT have a CIAT information board, which is regularly updated with literature, also, I, as were all students in my class, was encouraged to join them as a student member at the first chance I got, as it would only further me as a professional etc, I think the reason that they seek the RIAI recognition, is that at present, sadly, it is the main body for all things architecture, even technology, so it is only natural to go for the "best" is it not? Not to be bringing up the old CIAT v IATGN v RIAI debate again, but that must be the reason why RIAI recog. is so sought after, because for years they were the only ones...

ConfusedTech

No6 wrote: »

ConfusedTech wrote: »

DIT were always seeking RIAI and BIAT recognition (and had/have it).

I'm not sure where you heard this confused RIAI recognition only for DIT. CIAT are the evil empire according to Mr Allen and he and DIT will not have anything to do with them. The RIAI will not do anything ever to further the cause of the AT.

It was always part of the course to get RIAI and CIAT recognition and their stamp of approval on the course throughout the country. This is why they, the RIAI, visited the student exhibition each year and the CIAT were invited, is it not! I used the past tense on that statement though for a reason.

Also, please separate Cormac's statements within the IATGN and for the DIT. My understanding is that the course will always have to get the thumbs up from the RIAI as the governing body of Architecture in the country until our own is set up!?!?!?!?

sydthebeat

pseudo-tech wrote: »

Valid argument. However, the student/ graduate get caught in the middle. Do we now have to wait years for WIT, CIT and LIT to catch up. It has been mentioned above that it has taken a long time (too long) for DIT to get to the position that they are in today. Its not right that a generation of graduates have to suffer!

I understand this, and im see where your arguments are coming from.
But unfortunately i cant see a practical alternative in our particular sociology.

Arrakis

Hi
I was at Cormac's presentation...alot of work put in and with luck, it'll take hold. He (& department) will be cherry picking who will have access to these new courses, which brought back memories (personally) of the blinkered attitute that existed in Bolton Street when I tried to return to it in the early 90's...but that's another story.

If we (AT's) sit around waiting for further development to just happen then we're fooling ourselves. DIT should be shouting out loud about these new courses, releasing data to the IATGN to issue to its members and seeking support from the CIAT. My advise, join the CIAT study the POP's and use your years of experience to further yourselves.

On a final note, I was really shocked when entering DIT for the 1st time in years. It could do with a bit of a clean, dare I say it, upgrading. I mean for a college so support by the RIAI, it really showed it! So one can only imagion how orginized & supported they really are behind the scenes. Its no wounder WIT and others are spring boarding ahead.

archtech

I don't have a great issue with DIT keeping their information to themselves, until the course is up and running, however, if DIT's course is going to be the benchmark for entry / membership or is the sole educational establishment to permit automatic entry to ATI when the time comes and graduates of other courses are restricted then there's a problem.

DIT's level 8 qualification should see it accredited with CIAT,( if they apply for accreditation of course) I was of the understanding that WIT were in the process of getting their level 8 accredited, however I don't know what stage it is at present.

As for DIT or anywhere else getting the thumbs up from the RIAI, as I understand it, the RIAI will only give a course the thumbs up, if they are happy with the content of the course and the course contains what the RIAI want to see in it. It is up to the individual educational establishment to pursue the RIAI for approval not the other way round as it is with CIAT. and most properly will be with ATI.