Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

http://www.eweek.org/site/news/stats/03report.shtml
National Engineers Week

The U.S. should have the most-educated Wal-Mart and McDonalds
workers in the world.

--Jerry Leslie
Note: leslie@jrlvax.houston.rr.com is invalid for email

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

Gentlemen, the phrase "but nanotechnology..." has become the latest
buzz in the upcoming impending shortage of scientists and engineers.

Will this tomfoolery ever end? Aren't there enough engineers and
scientists working at Home Depot and Costco to offset the *impending
shortage*?

Personally, I have no intention of leaving my soon-to-be job as a
medical resident to be a future nanotechnologist even though I have a
BS/MS in chemical engineering (a nano-friendly discipline) albeit I
might inject future *nanomedicines* (a.k.a antigen specific drug
delivery) into my patients for a fee.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

leslie wrote:
>
> http://www.eweek.org/site/news/stats/03report.shtml
> National Engineers Week

National Engineers Week? Why isn't there a National Scientists Week?

> The U.S. should have the most-educated Wal-Mart and McDonalds
> workers in the world.

Yes, I'm sure it is the Official Stated Policy that the U.S.
maintain a preeminent position in the educational level of our
burger flippers. :-)

The ACT policy statement begins its executive summary with, "As the
twenty-first century begins, the demand for an abundant, diverse,
and talented engineering workforece remains strong." Any engineers
out there care to give your assessment of the demand? Strong demand
would imply significantly increasing wages, especially in light of the
concern about supply that the study addresses. (Of course that assumes
economics works like our textbooks tell us it does. ;-) ) Are you
engineers making more money?

Now for the Committee on Economic Development's contribution to the
debate. In the executive summary of that study we find, "Student
interest in math and science topics has declined. Fewer children
respond positively on surveys to such basic statements as 'I like
math.' This trend is especially prevalent among high school
seniors." Hmmm...

Then there is the statement, "The expansion of the economy and the
retirement of the baby boomers will leave a gap in professional
technical market. Both the private and public sector will face labor
shortages if the pipline for scientists and engineers is not widened."
Well, the biggest pipeline in the world is useless unless there is
something to carry, and most people will not go into the pipe if they
can't see a light at the other end. The recommendations say nothing
about providing more and better jobs. Of course they don't, because
their fundamental assumption, apparently unexamined, is that the jobs
will be there. We've seen how good forecasts of the economy and labor
needs have been in the past.

Now for the Gallup survey. "In the survey, nine in 10 Americans say
a strong national science and technology capability is a critical
component of U.S. security at home and abroad and eight in l0 believe
it will be "very important" in helping the U.S. meet future terrorist
threats. They characterize U.S. military preparedness (95%),
intelligence preparedness (93%) and law enforcement preparedness (86%)
as reliant on S&T and report that the country's new emphasis on
homeland security will create new job opportunities in S&T for today's
students (75%)." Yet 52% of the voters voted for someone who will
work to cut taxes and drive up deficits to the point the the government
will either have to cut all nondiscretionary spending to zero or go
massively further in debt (or both). What money is going to be left
for science?

Later we read, "Interestingly, when asked if they consider themselves
science literate, two-thirds (66%) say they are..."

Talk about disconnects! If two thirds of Americans think they are
scientifically literate, about one third are lying or deluded, IMO.

Cheers,
Russell
--
All too often the study of data requires care.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

rrcolby wrote:
>
> Gentlemen, the phrase "but nanotechnology..." has become the latest
> buzz in the upcoming impending shortage of scientists and engineers.
>
> Will this tomfoolery ever end? Aren't there enough engineers and
> scientists working at Home Depot and Costco to offset the *impending
> shortage*?

Ahh, we need new, young, fresh, scientists to crush and drain the
spirit out of. :-)

>
> Personally, I have no intention of leaving my soon-to-be job as a
> medical resident to be a future nanotechnologist even though I have a
> BS/MS in chemical engineering (a nano-friendly discipline) albeit I
> might inject future *nanomedicines* (a.k.a antigen specific drug
> delivery) into my patients for a fee.

How can you say that when your country needs you, what with the
looming shortage of scientists and engineers who are so vital to our
national strength? It says so in studies and polls that are on the
Internet, so they must by true! ;-)

Me, I'm still waiting for that call from the President, or at least
the head of the NSF or NASA, saying "Russell Martin, your country
needs you, and to prove it we'll triple your salary." I've been
waiting for years, but I'm sure it will be coming any day now. All
the government studies say so... (Actually, what I'm afraid of is
the part of the government telling me, and a lot of other people, it
needs us will be the Selective Service System.)

Cheers,
Russell
--
All too often the study of data requires care.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

R. Martin wrote:

<snip>

> Yes, I'm sure it is the Official Stated Policy that the U.S.
> maintain a preeminent position in the educational level of our
> burger flippers. :-)
>
> The ACT policy statement begins its executive summary with, "As the
> twenty-first century begins, the demand for an abundant, diverse,
> and talented engineering workforece remains strong." Any engineers
> out there care to give your assessment of the demand? Strong demand
> would imply significantly increasing wages, especially in light of the
> concern about supply that the study addresses. (Of course that assumes
> economics works like our textbooks tell us it does. ;-) ) Are you
> engineers making more money?

Do any of us have jobs?

>
> Now for the Committee on Economic Development's contribution to the
> debate. In the executive summary of that study we find, "Student
> interest in math and science topics has declined. Fewer children
> respond positively on surveys to such basic statements as 'I like
> math.' This trend is especially prevalent among high school
> seniors." Hmmm...

That's hardly new. Students hated math even when I was in high school
over 30 years ago.

>
> Then there is the statement, "The expansion of the economy and the
> retirement of the baby boomers will leave a gap in professional
> technical market. Both the private and public sector will face labor
> shortages if the pipline for scientists and engineers is not widened."
> Well, the biggest pipeline in the world is useless unless there is
> something to carry, and most people will not go into the pipe if they
> can't see a light at the other end. The recommendations say nothing
> about providing more and better jobs. Of course they don't, because
> their fundamental assumption, apparently unexamined, is that the jobs
> will be there. We've seen how good forecasts of the economy and labor
> needs have been in the past.

The gap left by the retiring baby boomers are either filled by young
inexperienced adults or not at all. Many of the hiring managers who
might understand my qualifications aren't there any more.

I had an interview with a company run by a bunch of twenty-somethings.
When I explained my experience and qualifications, I got a lot of blank
stares.

>
> Now for the Gallup survey. "In the survey, nine in 10 Americans say
> a strong national science and technology capability is a critical
> component of U.S. security at home and abroad and eight in l0 believe
> it will be "very important" in helping the U.S. meet future terrorist
> threats. They characterize U.S. military preparedness (95%),
> intelligence preparedness (93%) and law enforcement preparedness (86%)
> as reliant on S&T and report that the country's new emphasis on
> homeland security will create new job opportunities in S&T for today's
> students (75%)." Yet 52% of the voters voted for someone who will
> work to cut taxes and drive up deficits to the point the the government
> will either have to cut all nondiscretionary spending to zero or go
> massively further in debt (or both). What money is going to be left
> for science?

Look at it this way: it all makes for good politics. First, promise
lots of money to certain research agencies or institutions to give the
impression of having a vision for the future and a concern for national
prestige. Then, claim that there's a financial crisis and that cuts
have to be made. Finally, make them at those same agencies or
institutions to convey the image of being economically prudent.

We can't win, can we?

>
> Later we read, "Interestingly, when asked if they consider themselves
> science literate, two-thirds (66%) say they are..."

Yeah, right. Last year, right around the time that Mars made its
closest approach to us, I was chatting with a bank employee about it and
mentioned that the polar ice cap changes in size with the seasons. He
looked at me, dumbfounded that seasons actually existed on other planets.

>
> Talk about disconnects! If two thirds of Americans think they are
> scientifically literate, about one third are lying or deluded, IMO.
>
> Cheers,
> Russell

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, leslie wrote:

> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 12:03:33 GMT
> From: leslie <LESLIE@JRLVAX.HOUSTON.RR.COM>
> Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
> Subject: U.S. Engineering Workforce Crisis
>
> http://www.eweek.org/site/news/stats/03report.shtml
> National Engineers Week
>
> The U.S. should have the most-educated Wal-Mart and McDonalds
> workers in the world.
>
> --Jerry Leslie
> Note: leslie@jrlvax.houston.rr.com is invalid for email
>

Most of the content of this came to me as an email sent from someone and
I'll still say what I've said before:

i) There has been a decline in interest in S&E for years but I have yet to
read about a comprehensive analysis, or at least an attempted analysis,
of the mindsets of kids going to college today vs. 2-3 decades ago. This
would have to include reading the 1-2 paragraph essays that kids have to
write on application forms and see not only for kids interested in
engineering/science curricula but also for kids interested in
non-sci/non-eng themes to figure out what is going on here.

ii) One also needs to look at whether new degree programs are appearing
and WHERE kids are concentrating, if they are concentrating anywhere, to
correlate that with what was going on 2-3 decades ago. In recent years all
kinds of programs have appeared in such things as "parks management" and
"multiculturalism" and "X-minority" programs. How does all this compare
with the demographics of the incoming students.

iii) Where do the graduates end up, what kind of career-halflife
are they seeing (there have been a few articles about the relatively poor
prospects for sci/eng careers and jobs moving overseas).

iv) What cultural factors may be present to influence people? Soap opera
TV? Media limelight on corporate executive lifestyles? Or, do we have a
society where our material technological status is so advanced that most
young people subconsciously think "we're already 'peaked out' why do I
need to study this sci/tech when we've already 'arived'"? Or something
like that. Is our standard of living so advanced and comfortable that
young people don't see any need for 'hard work' working towards
technological (and scientific) goals?

v) Where are the 'images' of role models? Is Star Trek on many TV channels
any more? Is the SciFi channel focused on sci-fantasy instead of "the
quest"? How do these themes differ between us and societies where kids are
all cranked up to go to the USA for school, jobs, careers and our kids
are just all cranked up to jaw on cell phones all day?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

"R. Martin" <russell.martin@wdn.com> wrote in message
news:41C8ACC5.59B@wdn.com...
> rrcolby wrote:
> >
> > Gentlemen, the phrase "but nanotechnology..." has become the latest
> > buzz in the upcoming impending shortage of scientists and engineers.
> >
> > Will this tomfoolery ever end? Aren't there enough engineers and
> > scientists working at Home Depot and Costco to offset the *impending
> > shortage*?
>
> Ahh, we need new, young, fresh, scientists to crush and drain the
> spirit out of. :-)
>
> >
> > Personally, I have no intention of leaving my soon-to-be job as a
> > medical resident to be a future nanotechnologist even though I have a
> > BS/MS in chemical engineering (a nano-friendly discipline) albeit I
> > might inject future *nanomedicines* (a.k.a antigen specific drug
> > delivery) into my patients for a fee.
>
>

I think anything having to do with Defense/Homeland Security is the best
thing going right now.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Not Yet
Location:
Posts: N/A

straydog wrote:

> There has been a decline in interest in S&E for years but I have yet
to
> read about... the mindsets of kids going to college today vs. 2-3
decades ago

I would suggest to legislate the following thing to increase the
awareness of kids about dire prospects of S&E careers, and make them
think before they go to uni to study the said S&E. I would mandate the
college apllicants to write an essay as a part of the entrance
examination about the lack of prospectives for S&E occupations in the
US, and quote such sources as s.r.c. and Art Sower's website on
careers.

\|/.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged