Academic Review of the Master of Engineering in Fire
Engineering (MEFE)
Panel
Associate Professor Susan Krumdieck – Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, University of
Canterbury (Chair)
Nick Saunders – Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employement (MBIE)
Dr. Peter Cumber – Heriot-Watt University, United Kingdom
Kim Rutter – Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Canterbury.
Date of review: September 2013
Terms of Reference
1. Does this programme meet the University of Canterbury standards for a Master’s
qualification?
2. Does the programme meet the national and international standards for a Master’s
qualification?
3. Is there evidence that the curriculum is being research informed?
4. Does this programme meet the needs of industry or the engineering profession
requirements?
5. Is this programme sustainable and is growth desirable or attainable?
6. Are the programme philosophy and the attributes of the Graduate Profile accurately
reflected in the delivery of the programme.
Summary
The University of Canterbury (UC) provides several options for professional development
and postgraduate qualifications in Fire Engineering: Master of Engineering in Fire
Engineering (MEFE), the Master of Engineering Studies endorsed in Fire (MEngSt (Fire))
and the Postgraduate Certificate in Engineering endorsed in Fire (PGCertEng (Fire)). This
is a review of the main qualification in this suite, the Master of Engineering in Fire
Engineering (MEFE), however references have been made to other fire-related
programmes.
For point of clarification between the degrees which offer Fire; the MEFE is a full-time
only programme that consists of 6 courses (90 points) and a thesis (minimum of 120
points research). The Master of Engineering Studies and the Postgraduate Certificate in
Engineering can be completed with an endorsement in Fire. The MEngSt can be
completed either by part-time or full-time study and is a taught programme consisting of
6 courses (90 points) and a project. The PGCertEng can be completed either by part-time
or full-time study and is a taught programme that requires a total of 60 points (4 courses)
to complete.
The industry need for Fire Engineers is currently substantial, with demand for either of
the Masters qualifications (MEFE or MEngSt(Fire)). The review has verified that the
curriculum and content of the fire coursework is appropriate for an international
qualification in Fire Engineering as benchmarked against well-known programme
overseas. The review has verified that the six-course structure and thesis are necessary
and sufficient for delivery of the MEFE qualification, given the diverse and
interdisciplinary backgrounds of the incoming students and the curriculum coverage. The
MEFE meets the UC and national standards for a Master’s qualification. The course
content and staff activities give evidence of being informed by research. The current
academic team are a great asset to the university and the programme and are working
well together. The current staffing level is necessary for delivery of the courses and
supervision of research.
Feedback from both students and staff, results from the curricula review, students work
exemplars and benchmarking information support the conclusion that the philosophy and
delivery of the programme meet the attributes of the graduate profile
While there was concern regarding the numbers within the MEFE full-time only
programme, the overall student numbers in the courses from the various fire
programmes appear sustainable.
The panel makes the following specific recommendation to Faculty and Academic Board:
Recommendation 1
It is recommended that the Master of Engineering in Fire Engineering programme at the
University of Canterbury be continued.
The panel also makes the following general recommendations:
Recommendation 2
The ENCI601 Risk Management course was seen as the least relevant course in the
curriculum. The panel recommends that any core Risk Management materials in ENCI601 be
added to one of the ENFE courses, and ENFE 613 Human Behaviour in Fire be added to the
curriculum as one of the 6 required courses.
Recommendation 3
That the programme content be reviewed against the graduate profile for all the Fire
Engineering programmes, with a view to reorganise content across the courses to enhance
and differentiate each of the qualifications.
Recommendation 4
The MEFE staff should work with the College Teaching and Learning Resources Committee
and the Academic Development Group (ADG) to investigate alternative methods and
technology available to deliver remote learning and distance courses to enhance the
learning experience for the students.
Recommendation 5
That the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering and the MEFE Programme
Director review the low enrolment numbers and formulate a marketing plan to raise the
profile of the programme.
Academic Review
Benchmarking and Verification
Scope
The panel discussed the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the review, the various issues
which could be discussed, and the most benefit to be gained from the review. The panel
decided to focus this review on the following actions:

Verify that the content and coverage of the curriculum positioned the UC Fire
Postgraduate qualification(s) to meet international standards, the needs of
industry and students.

Verify that the current 6-course and thesis structure was successfully delivering
the curriculum for the MEFE

Investigate the teaching and learning delivery methods for the courses and probe
whether there could be modernisation/improvement.

Investigate the degree structure to assess how well they fit with the UC standards
for a Masters qualification and how well they fit with the needs of industry and the
interest of students.

Make recommendations and provide verifications.
Content Review
The undergraduate elective ENGR403 Introduction to Fire Engineering gives an
introduction to the subject. The MEFE staff stated that undergraduates are not currently
allowed to take 600 or postgraduate level fire courses as technical electives as the
Undergraduate Engineering degree is not meant to be a specialist qualification, and
students are unlikely to have met the pre-requisite requirements for the course. There
are only a few undergraduate Fire Engineering degrees in the world. The normal
approach for the fire specialisation is at a post-graduate level.
Postgraduate subjects have been benchmarked over the years against University of
Maryland (United States of America) and the programmes that Erskine visitors and others
are involved in. Maryland has undergraduate and full postgraduate programmes with a
dedicated department so it is a good benchmark. The staff felt there is always scope for
teaching more, but these 6 courses are a good coverage of the core knowledge and
graduate profile. Students offered the following feedback regarding perceived importance
for the courses and how these relate to the attributes of the programme:
ENCI601Risk Management
It was felt that this course was the least focused on Fire and the least challenging. It would
be better to offer ENFE 613 Human Behaviour in Fire more regularly so that students
could take this seemingly more valuable course.
ENFE 601Structural Fire Engineering
Well-described course using a well recognised standard text.
ENFE 602Fire Dynamics
Use of the handbook as a text ensures that the curriculum is synched with the
professional competencies.
ENFE 603Fire Safety Systems
There is recognition that technology and regulations change and the course is kept
updated. Students were enthusiastic about the course.
Fire Design Case Study ENFE 604
Project-based course with some research component. This course could fulfil the project
component of the MEngSt. This is more of a capstone design activity – the name could be
changed to “Design Project”.
ENFE610 Advanced Fire Dynamics
More focused on modelling. Uses case studies.
Verification:
1. The material coverage of 6 courses is appropriate for the postgraduate Masters level
qualification. The courses are at the academic level expected for postgraduate level study. It
was felt that these courses will inform the required research in the MEFE.
2. The MEFE meets the national and University of Canterbury standards for a Masters
qualification.
Recommendation 2:
The ENCI601 Risk Management course was seen as the least relevant course in the
curriculum. The panel recommends that any core Risk Management materials in ENCI601 be
added to one of the ENFE courses, and ENFE 613 Human Behaviour in Fire be added to the
curriculum as one of the 6 required courses.
Recommendation 3:
That the programme content be reviewed against the graduate profile for all the Fire
Engineering programmes, with a view to reorganise content across the courses in order to
enhance and differentiate each of the qualifications.
Programme Review
Number of Courses
The review panel accept that very limited exposure to the topics in the qualification
would have been normal for engineering undergraduates coming into the programme.
Six 15-point courses is considered by the panel to be a large amount of teaching for one
Master’s level subject discipline.
The Fire Engineering staff feel that they cannot deliver the appropriate content for a
qualification in Fire Engineering without having at least the 6 courses or 90 points of
material. They identified three of the courses as “Core Knowledge”, but stated that the
other three courses of applied material were necessary for practicing professionals. The
staff would like to add to the curriculum in the areas of behaviour and advanced
structures (modelling).
Verification: Given the current resources and industry expectations, 90 points (0.750 EFTS)
of coursework is appropriate.
Recommendation: None
Teaching and Learning
The review panel investigated the quality of course delivery and assessment. The current
course structure uses independent study and block courses. The panel carried out the
following processes to review the teaching and learning pedagogy and to assess the
effectiveness:
 Review the syllabus for each course
 Discuss each course with the instructor
 Review the student work
 Discuss with four current students
 Review course surveys
The MEFE staff gave numerous anecdotal references about students who are enrolled in
the fire courses in programmes as part-time students. Students were said to be reluctant
to spend the time at the block-course (arriving late, going out to take phone calls) and
were finding it challenging to engage with the course activities, including doing
assignments.
The student demand for the Fire Programme is understood to be primarily from
practicing engineers. This demand means that the delivery method should be suited to
both part-time students working full time, and full time students.
Student Experience
The student feedback is universally positive regarding the quality, relevance and rigour of
the MEFE qualification and the courses. Students perceive that the programme provides
good outcomes and job opportunities. Students do not feel that industry differentiates
between a research degree (MEFE) or the taught Masters endorsed in Fire (MEngSt
(Fire)).
The students who complete a thesis choose this option for their own reasons and feel
satisfied with their choice. The students currently in the programme made the decision to
pursue the qualification without having a scholarship or financial assistance. The students
interviewed were able to gain some scholarship funding for their thesis projects.
The full-time students benefited greatly from weekly tutorials, contact time with
officemates in fire engineering, and access to the staff. Students felt that professionals
would find value in taking even an individual course. However, the 3 years needed to
complete all six courses and a project for the MEngSt (Fire) part-time would make it
difficult for remote students to maintain their energy levels.
Verification: The current course delivery works adequately for self-actuated, high
capability students, particularly for on-site students. The methods of delivery cater to both
the full-time MEFE students and part-time professional students enrolled in other fire
programmes.
Recommendation 4:
The MEFE staff should work with the College Teaching and Learning Resources Committee
and the Academic Development Group (ADG) to investigate alternative methods and
technology available to deliver remote learning and distance courses to enhance the
learning experience for the students.
While this review focussed on the MEFE full-time students, it was noted that the students in
the same classes comprised both full-time and part-time students from the various
programmes.
The following specific points should be considered:
a. the teaching and delivery of the courses should be reviewed to ensure both oncampus and distance students receive the required tools to complete the course;
b. the students, whether remote or on-campus, require access to tutorial sessions
and interaction with other students and staff.
Perceived Degree Structure and Marketing
The current structure within the Fire suite of programmes has three outcome levels. The
three levels of qualification are necessary to fit the diverse range of backgrounds and
abilities of students. The different routes to completion are also needed for the
professional development students due to their different study environments and life
situations. For the purpose of this review, the panel has focussed on the MEFE structure,
however there had to be thought given regarding how the other degree programmes ‘fit
together” and how they meet the needs of the incoming cohorts.
The panel felt the degree regulations and the information advertised in the department
should be annotated to ensure clear pathways are noted for potential students. The
regulations should emphasise the stepping stones through the qualifications rather than
exit points due to failures and difficulties. For marketing purposes, the value of the
different levels of qualification must be clear to industry and students.
The department should develop the departmental website to create a set of logical steps
that reflect the increased VALUE of the continued study at each level. Given that the
programme has low student numbers, clear value of the course through each completion
stage needs to be illustrated in a clear manner. The panel firmly believe that a course
structure like the one pictured below would be more clear to students considering the
programme.
Recommendation 5:
That the Department of Civil and Natural Resources Engineering and the MEFE Programme
Director review the low enrolment numbers and formulate a marketing plan to raise the profile
of the programme.
Specific consideration should be given to:
a. the College increasing the marketing and visibility of the Fire programme;
b. promoting to a wider intake of students, in particular Mechanical Engineers and
Chemical Engineers;
c. the Department should liaise closer with industry to offer scholarships or
sponsorships for professionals;
d. the Fire programmes are high calibre programmes and should be marketed
more clearly to attract International Students;
e. the ENGR403 course (Introduction to Fire Engineering) could be used more
wisely to recruit potential MEFE students.
PGCert (Fire)
4 courses
60 points
•
(Full time or part time)
MEngSt (Fire)
6 courses + project
120 points
(Full time or part time)
MEFE
6 courses + Thesis
(full time only)
Semester 1
Semester 2
Semester 3
Note: The above flow diagram is a concept of how the structure of the programme may appear to improve clarity for
potential students. Students can enrol in a programme which suits their lifestyle and personal preference and they may
choose to transfer across the qualifications if preferred.