Maui
Materials
- Mar 5, 2003
- 1,917
The report summarized below contradicts the rumors that are frequently circulated in the media regarding anticipated shortages in qualified engineering candidates for industrial positions in the United States. Such rumors lead me to wonder why this topic has received so much attention when I personally have seen little evidence of it during the course of my career. When it comes to mechanical, electrical, and civil engineers I have seen no evidence of a shortage in the talent pool over the course of the last 15 years. If anything, I have seen a surplus of engineering candidates. Disciplines such as metallurgical engineering are the exception rather than the rule - qualified candidates in such specialized areas are usually difficult to find. North of the border in Canada there are degreed engineers driving cabs today because they can't find engineering positions. So who stands to profit from such rumors? The colleges who educate engineers need to fill the seats in classrooms, so they would benefit by enrolling more students. But I think that the companies who hire us would stand to benefit a great deal more since the availability of a larger talent pool would tend to keep wages down. In other professions such as medicine it's interesting how the AMA appears to have a hand in limiting the enrollment of MD candidates each year to keep the number of medical doctors from outpacing demand. Perhaps engineers would benefit from such a practice as well. If we could do it, do you believe that we would all benefit from limiting the number of engineering candidates that are allowed into a given program of study each year? I'd like to know what your thoughts are on this subject, both positive and negative.
Maui
Study Questions U.S. Shortfall in Math, Science
EE Times (11/06/07) ; Riley, Sheila
The common belief that U.S. students are falling behind in science, technology, and engineering, eventually leading to a worker shortage crisis, is mistaken, concludes an Urban Institute report, which says that not only are U.S. students doing well in science and technology subjects, but that the U.S. is educating a sufficient number of scientists and engineers to maintain its current global competitiveness. Urban Institute senior research associate Hal Salzman, who co-authored the report, says international tests ranking students, which frequently show that U.S. students are weak in math and science, are flawed. The study found that over the past 10 years U.S. students took more math, science, and foreign language courses than in previous decades. In 1990, only 45 percent of high school students took chemistry, but by 2004 the percentage of students taking chemistry rose to 60 percent. The percentage of students who took three years of math rose from 49 percent in 1990 to 72 percent in 2004, and the percentage of students taking four years of math rose from 29 percent to 50 percent. Salzman says the education systems in Japan, Singapore, and South Korea do lead to better test scores, but that does not necessarily lead to better jobs, a better economy, or more innovation. Salzman highlights the fact that Singapore is promoting a national "creativity initiative" because the Asian city-state's leaders realize the need to de-emphasize its narrow educational approach. Center for International Industry Competitiveness at the University of New Haven director George Haley says that testing a broad selection of countries puts the United States at a disadvantage because in the U.S. poor-performing students reduce the U.S. average, but in other countries those students would not be eligible to take the tests.
Maui