Science Education and Science Careers
We live at a time where emotions and feelings count more than truth, and there is a vast ignorance of science.
—James Lovelock
We learn . . .
10 percent of what we read,
20 percent of what we hear,
30 percent of what we see,
50 percent of what we both see and hear,
70 percent of what we discuss with others,
80 percent of what we experience personally,
95 percent of what we teach to someone else.
—(taken from an old proverb)
I hear and I forget.
I see and I remember.
I do and I understand.
—Confucius
Introduction
Unless we are born with innate or infused knowledge, we all must learn the conventional way—whatever the conventional way might be. Some have come to define the conventional way of learning by describing it as a step-by-step-process, basically a construction, a building process—building knowledge from the basic (foundation) to the complex (upper structure).
The learning process (however you wish to define, to describe or to explain it) begins shortly after birth. For example, we learn to vocalize our discomfort because we are hungry, needy, or wet. We do it, and if it pays returns in fulfillment as a result of nourishment, comforting attention, and the comfort of dryness, then we have learned what we need to do to get what we want or need; namely, attention.
Again, there can be little doubt or question about the validity of premise that states that learning is a step-by-step process. For example, at the earliest stages of our growth we learn to walk. Normally learning to walk is done by taking one step at a time—a step-by-step process with a careful balancing act. Learning to walk is accomplished by most of us without having to expend much thought about the process; we just do it.
Some might argue that learning to walk is nothing more than a matter of exercising inherent motor skills and thus is a physical activity that requires little cognitive effort. It is not our purpose in this text to argue this point but only to use it as an example of one of the things we learn to do, in a step-by-step sequence. And for those who would argue that learning to walk is not sequential learning but instead it is natural, normal, and automatic, we simply counter with the fact that we can’t learn to run until we learn to walk—walking leads to running, etc. and is thus a sequential learning process.
Learning science is similar to learning to walk and then learning to run, in that the basics must be learned before learning increasingly complex technical functions (skills sets) and information. For example, in the science of medicine, to become a surgeon the medical student must learn many basic science and medical aspects leading to the skill set known as medical surgeon. Before learning surgical skills, one must learn the basics. The basics (or pre-med) generally include required college courses before specializing in anatomy and diagnostic courses in medical school. Simply, it is paramount that medical students be well-versed in several lower level (foundational) science courses including biology, chemistry and organic chemistry, mathematics, often up to basic calculus, genetics and taxonomy, and calculus or trigonometry-based physics. In addition, pre-med students may be required to take biochemistry and human or vertebrate physiology courses. Some schools also require a human science or psychology course.
Learning the basics is like building a house; the foundation must be in place before the ascending structure can be built. This requirement is also necessary, for example, in attempting to understand many of the basic theories in science. For example, one of the most basic concepts in the science of physics (even though the concept is something that we hear or read about all time), has to do with the danger associated with drivers tailgating. When informing the public about car braking distances to reduce the danger of tailgating, how much of this important safety information provided by automotive and public safety officials actually is understood by drivers? Based on our experience we have found that few seem to understand the provided information and thus the dangers associated with tailgating. Maybe this is because of a lack of perceived risk in tailgating.
Maybe a driver is driving slower than the flow of traffic in one of the fast lanes of a multi-lane road. A faster driver approaching from behind may tailgate to indicate his desire to pass the slower driver in front and attempt to make him change lanes. Or a driver traveling at a higher speed catches up with a car traveling in the same direction at a lower speed, and the faster driver may tailgate while awaiting the first opportunity to pass. Such expressions of impatience may be conscious or unconscious, but they are also dangerous. Whatever the reason, tailgating is a dangerous practice not only to the driver being tailgated but also to the tailgater, especially if he or she is driving closely behind a large vehicle (such as a tractor-trailer, or gas tanker). If the leading vehicle decelerates suddenly (such as when encountering a traffic light, traffic jam, blown tire, obstruction in the road, avoiding pedestrians, etc.), the tailgater has a high risk of causing a rear-end collision.
Maybe it is the delivery method used to convey the hazards of tailgating that many drivers do not get or pay attention to. Maybe the information is presented in scientific terms and any mention of science in general or in particular is the ultimate turn-off switch to these folks. On the other hand, a small percentage of the public who follow science, are well-versed in science, work with science every day, or are just curious, may try to absorb every tidbit of scientific information delivered in their direction.
Again, when trying to sell something to anyone, the product or subject information must be presented in a manner that will not only attract the receiver’s attention but also be relatively easy to perceive and understand. With regard to tailgating and the dangers associated for both the lead and tailgating driver, one might think that common sense and fear (being safe is all about fear; if we fear getting hurt, we usually practice safety) more often than not probably come into play in preventing a serious collision. However, as many as one third of all rear-end collisions involve tailgating (USAFE 2005).
In informing drivers of the dangers of tailgating, usually the safety message, in whatever form presented, deals with car braking distances. Simply, when driving a car, nothing is more important than the car’s ability to stop itself. Thus, knowing something about braking distances (how much ground a vehicle covers before it can fully stop) can make for a safer and more enjoyable drive.
CSI Syndrome
Earlier, we pointed out that popular television shows such as the CSI franchise and Forensics Files have spotlighted the importance of using science to find clues during a crime scene investigation. These programs have not only raised crime victims’, jury members’, and even criminals’ real-world expectations of crime scene investigation and DNA testing, but also crime scene investigation in general. This phenomenon is known as the CSI Syndrome (sometimes referred to as the CSI effect). In addition to jury members, crime victims and criminals, academia has also felt this effect. Not only have universities absorbed an increase in students enrolling in forensic sciences they have also seen an increase in students enrolling in related science programs.
On the surface, the overall affect of the CSI Syndrome appears to be positive with regard to increasing the visibility and importance of college science courses and science education in particular. A closer look, however, reveals shortcomings manifested through over-dramatizing and glamorizing the profession, overstating the accuracy of forensic techniques, and exaggerating the abilities of forensic science and crime scene investigation techniques presently employed in the real world of criminal science. These shortcomings become particularly apparent with the increased influx of ill-prepared students attempting to pursue general science courses in college. For any number of reasons, many of these students avoided science in high school. Thus, many prospective science students are glamour-driven to pursue science and forensics-related courses at the college level, even though they lack the basics needed to successfully complete these upper level courses—remember, a basic science foundation is required to succeed in advanced science.
Another problem with the CSI Syndrome is the way in which the laboratory part of the crime investigation process is shown on television. For example, when CSI technicians gather various biological samples (hair, skin cells, saliva, semen, and blood) in the field, they are shown collecting the sample, packaging and labeling each sample, and then shipping the sample to the forensics laboratory for analysis. These procedures are reflective of real-world practice. The problem occurs when the sample reaches the laboratory and the laboratory technician begins the analysis process. Because of time constraints in presenting televised productions, the lab analysis protocol is shown in abbreviated format. Thus, the viewer (including some prospective students) is given the impression that many analytic procedures are simple matters of one-two-three step processes with the result being a computer printer spreadsheet of what appears to be almost instant results. Earlier, we pointed out that learning science is a step-by-step process. We also pointed out that some scientific practices and procedures are accomplished a few steps at a time. Rarely is this the case, however. Many laboratory protocols require several steps painstakingly accomplished to ensure accuracy and suitability for legal evidentiary reasons. The ease by which biological samples are analyzed on forensic television shows is not realistic.
To demonstrate that typical laboratory procedures are shortened to glamorize, dramatize, and to fit into a very limited televised format and therefore not accurate portrayed, and to show that actual CSI lab procedures require patience, accuracy, attention to detail, and time, we have included a real-world DNA extraction from blood protocol (i.e., and step-by-step “recipe,” of sorts) in the following. Note: We have provided annotation or explanation in parentheses as we deemed necessary.
Exmaple: DNA Extraction from Blood Protocol
Procedure: Nucleon BACC3
Advisory: Read and sign the Risk Assessment Form before proceeding with this procedure (Note: This is required standard procedure to ensure safety compliance while working with hazardous chemicals).
Protocol:
1. Blood samples are received in EDTA tubes (anticoagulant for blood samples); samples can be stored at −40ºC until they are ready to be processed. Do not process any bloods that have not been entered into STARLIMS (i.e., lab information management system).
2. Retrieve 14 samples from freezer and defrost at 37ºC in a water bath if required.
3. Steps 4 to 14 are carried out in the Class 1 hood (i.e., carried in a box like structure enclosing sources of potential air contamination, vented outdoors).
4. Before starting the extraction procedure, spot 100µL of each sample onto a Whatman FTA card (i.e., special chemically treated cards that simplify handling and processing of nucleic acids and stabilize DNA). Number and date the card accordingly, with sample number processed and the process date. Cards are stored at room temperature in sealed bags containing silica desiccant (removes moisture).
5.Carefully pour blood from EDTA tube into labeled 50mL EZ Flip tubes (i.e., hinged cap conical centrifugal tubes). Check that the correct sample is being put into the correct tube before carrying out the transfer. Note the volume of blood transferred.
6. If the samples were received in duplicate, check that the two tubes for each sample have the same ID. Samples can then be mixed together to make one extraction, ensuring the total blood volume doesn’t exceed the maximum of 10mLs.
7. Add 4 volumes of dilute Reagent A to each 50mL EZ Flip tube, seal tube and place on rotating wheel and mix at room temperature for 4 minutes. Centrifuge at 2600 rpm for 5 minutes. Reagent A is supplied as a 4x concentrate. Prior to first use Reagent A should be diluted four fold with deionized water and autoclaved.
8. Discard the supernatant into a 1 percent Virkon Solution (medical disinfectant), taking care not to dislodge the pellet from the bottom of the tube. Invert the tubes onto several layers of lab roll to remove the dregs.
9. Add 2mL of Reagent B to each tube containing pelleted material and vortex to re-suspend the pellet. If the pellet does not re-suspend, it can be placed in a water bath at 37ºC. Transfer to a 15mL EZ Flip tube. Ensure that the Reagent B is completely dissolved before use (this is achieved by warming it at 37ºC in a water bath).
10. Add 500µL of sodium perchlorate (inorganic compound non-reactive electrolyte used in DNA extraction) to each tube, seal tube and mix by inverting the tubes at least 7 times.
11. Add 2mL of chloroform to each tube, seal tube and mix by inverting at least 7 times.
12. Without remixing the phases add 300µL of Nucleon resin (suspends extract) to the tubes (check that the resin is in solution before use, vortex if required). Centrifuge at 2600 rpm for 3 minutes.
13. Holding the tube vertically without disturbing the nucleon resin layer transfer the upper phase to a clean 15mL EZ flip tube.
14. Add 2 volumes of absolute ethanol [anhydrous (without water) ethanol] to each tube. Seal tube and invert immediately after the addition of ethanol and continue to invert until precipitate appears.
15. Hook out precipitated DNA using a pipette tip or a glass Pasteur pipette and wash in 1mL of 79 percent ethanol.
16. Remove precipitated DNA from ethanol and allow to air dry for a few minutes.
17. Re-dissolve the DNA in 1mL of TE buffer (T from Tris—common pH buffer—and E from EDTA; TE buffer protects DNA from degradation).
18. DNA may take 1-2 weeks to re-dissolve when using a rotating wheel.
19. Glass Pasteur pipettes and 10mL pipettes are placed into sharps bin after use; all other waste is placed in lab waste orange bag. 1 percent Virkon solution containing blood waste is left for several hours then poured down the sink and flushed down with plenty water.
20. Wipe down hood with 1 percent Virkon after use.
From review of the preceding laboratory protocol, understanding can be gained as to why we have consistently stated that science is a step-by-step-by-step process. Working in any field of science is work best characterized as complex, requiring a high level of judgment, and an even greater level of responsibility. The engineer who designs and constructs bridges and skyscrapers does so by beginning with the first step and proceeding to the multi-steps required to complete the process; the same can be said for any other type of science-based occupation.
If you are a person who can complete assignments in a step-by-step process, have an affinity for attacking the complex using good judgment, and proceeding with a high degree of responsibility, then a career in science may be your calling. Keep in mind, however, that to work in any field of science requires an education that begins with the basics and proceeds step-by-step to the ultimate goal. In the following section, we discuss one methodology currently being used to educate those who wish to pursue an education in science.
End of the Aughts
January 1, 2010, brought relief and a lot of hope for the future to a lot of different people throughout the globe; the decade of the aughts was over, gone, caput, terminated, ended, history. New Year’s Eve revelers were singing “Auld Lang Syne” (or was it “Aught Lang Syne”) and chanting “Hallelujah! And, please extend my unemployment checks and give me more food stamps, please!” You might ask why some people are so jubilant that the past decade—the aughts—are history. Depends on who you talk to and what their particular interest, point of view, or agenda is. Actually, when we report the feelings of those we have observed and overheard demonstrating and stating their opinion of the aught decade, we have to sort out the events from that period that they most often mention. We have chronologically bulleted these events below.
• January 1, 2000—the Y2K scare; Americans were worried their computers were going to turn on them.
• March 10, 2000, the NASDAQ peaked at 5,134 before beginning a downwards descent as the dot-com bubble collapsed.
• Election 2000
• 9/11
• Anthrax
• Enron
• WMDs
• Bernie Madoff
• The global financial meltdown
In hindsight (isn’t it just great to be so right, every time, after the event has occurred?), it is ironic that we were wrong about the computers, microprocessors, and all those other digital chips out there in la la land that did not keep us in the bunkers after all. And what happened to all that money taken out of our ATMs because we feared that Y2K might eat our money or just plain lose it? We just had a great time spending the money—once money is out of the bank and in hand, it is meant to be spent, or so many of us thought at the time.
The sad truth is that even if Y2K had raised havoc with ATMs and other digital financial processes, a significant percentage of people out there would not have noticed. They would not have noticed because they had no money in the bank—many had no money at all. It is difficult for the average person to accumulate money if they do not have a job.
Even before the aught decade, jobs were being lost in the United States, and worldwide, for that matter. But at no time, excepting the Great Depression, of course, was this job loss more apparent, more striking, and more painful than during the aught decade. It seemed like we could pick up a newspaper daily and read about a different manufacturer or other business shutting down. The sad news is we project that this trend is not over; it has not reached its apogee; not even close. This leads to questions about the problems with the rash of business closings and subsequent workforce dismissals.
Why?
What is the problem with the United States?
What is the problem with the world in general?
What happened to all the jobs?
Have you heard these questions before? Or, maybe the more pressing question is, have you thought about these issues before? One thing is certain; if you are a former employee, or one of 1,100 former or soon to be former employees of the International Paper Plant in Franklin, Virginia, then you have asked yourself these questions not once, not twice, but over and over again, before and as you walk out that plant door for the last time. In interviewing a few of the paper mill employees it is obvious that the reality of job loss has not set in for some of them. One 49-year-old mother of six told us that she had graduated high school on a Friday and went to work in the mill on Monday; that was 30 years ago. “Not sure what I will do,” she said. “Seems like I’ve been in that mill all my life and it is all I know . . . it is all I ever wanted to know.”
A sixty-one-year-old, laid-off plant worker stated that he was going to take advantage of the state’s continuing education plan and enroll in the local community college. He stated that he wanted to learn computers. “Everything is computerized today,” he said. “I got to get me an education on those electronic things so that someone out there will hire me . . . that is, if anyone will hire a 61-year-old like me? Actually, by the time I finish training and graduate, I will be 63.” Shaking his head in bewilderment and staring straight ahead with eyes blank he said, “The lesson I have learned . . . the days when someone could drop-out (like me) or graduate high school and step right into some type of good paying job or learn a trade while making good money are over with . . . it’s a pipedream to think otherwise. The boom days are over in the U.S. . . . I am worried about this country. Yes, sir, I am plain worried. We all might be doomed . . . or worse.”
You think this paper mill scenario is an isolated event, an anomaly, just one of those rare happenings in an industrial society? Well, think again. Think about that café in Martinsville, Virginia, where the pie and cake plates are gone. So are the dogs, and bumper covers, and sports boats, and RVs, and rolls of fabric and stacks of lumber. Even the toilets in many buildings have been flushed away. Martinsville, a northwest Virginia town of 15,414 (2000), has suffered and continues to suffer greatly because changes in global economic conditions and new trade treaties made its textile and furniture manufacturing economically unsustainable. This has been a hard economic fact of life, a bitter pill to swallow for those who used to occupy the thousands of jobs that have disappeared; in a city that was ironically called the “sweatshirt capital of the world.”
The job loss horror stories that we have related to this point have occurred or are taking place in Virginia. However, Virginia, with a current unemployment rate of 6.5 percent is in relatively good shape, especially when compared, for example, to the so-called rust belt states.
Northwest Ohio and southwest Michigan lost nearly 5,300 manufacturing jobs in less than two years, with jobs still disappearing at an alarming rate, according to state and federal unemployment filings (Troy and Vellequette 2008).
The question is, “what is contributing to all the aughts decade and on-going job losses?” When you ask politicians of either party they express concern, especially to their constituents, but they act as if they are powerless to do anything about it. They have any number of excuses. First on the list is that it is always the other party’s problem; they are the cause of all the job losses. Then the argument shifts to the ineffectiveness of all those regulations and treaties that are siphoning away many of our high paying manufacturing jobs. Others argue that it is all the unions fault. They say the unions want more, more, more, for less, less, less. Exorbitant union wages, benefits, job banks, and other demands have simply priced American manufactured good out of business, they argue. Employers make the same complaints, of course. “It is the ridiculous high cost of labor that is killing me,” one business owner friend told us.
Not only do I have to pay for the employee’s wages and benefits but also for their social security, medical, unemployment taxes, city taxes, state taxes, and federal taxes. And then I have to worry about paying for a lawyer and court costs when I fire some slug who does not show up for work or could care less about working, about his co-workers, or about anything else. Then I have to worry about the fired employee showing up with Colt 45 and double-barrel shotgun to get even.
Others argue that American manufacturing jobs are disappearing because of the current energy situation; specifically due to oil related issues. Because we have to import more and more foreign oil at higher prices and because the environmentalists have limited the number of oil refineries we have, and will not allow drilling in Alaska, or in many offshore locations, the price of energy is expensive which makes the cost of manufactured goods even more expensive. The point is that because of higher costs of manufacturing due to several causes, it is difficult, if not impossible, for American manufacturers to compete in the global market. Complicating this situation is the fact that those we are competing against are either communist countries or third world regions where manufacturing costs are not only low but also subsidized by the ruling authorities.
One of the things we have found in the local layoffs here in southeastern Virginia is that many laid-off manufacturing employees still have not come to grips with the reality of their situations; that is, that they no longer have their old jobs. This lack of reality was apparent in discussions with several laid-off local manufacturing employees. During the discussion their future plans were discussed and many of the former workers stated that they planned on drawing their unemployment benefits until they expire. Then, they would look around for work. One long-term employee in her mid-fifties, while stirring her coffee said that she had faith that some other company would come to town and occupy all the empty plant buildings and offer the laid-off workers new jobs at high wages and great benefits. “I just can’t see anyone leaving all them buildings empty . . . and besides we are good workers who are not afraid to get dirty and sweat a bit . . . yep, someone, maybe one of them so-called ‘white knights’ will come in and save us . . . I can feel it.” Others stated that unemployment benefits alone were not enough to sustain their lifestyles so they would immediately look for work elsewhere, even though the reality is that for each job that opens in this area at least 7 (or more) people apply for the same position. Additionally, many of these former workers were offered tuition assistance to continue with higher education or trade school training during the many years of their employment, but said they did not take advantage of this substantial benefit.
One thirty-something former worker was rather pessimistic about his entire future employment situation.
“Manufacturing in America is dead. I do not think any of these lost jobs are coming back . . . no, way . . . the old jobs were shipped overseas to China and other places. I do feel somewhat lucky because I am still eligible to use my GI Bill benefits and I am going use them and go back to school fulltime . . . and become a nurse. Medicine and other technological specialties are the future of this country. Unless you want to do service work like furnace repair, plumbing, replacing roofs and windows and work such as that . . . there simply are no viable jobs anymore in manufacturing . . . unless you are the engineer who designed the device for production . . . and when you do, it will simply be shipped to China or somewhere to be produced.” He then paused, looked at his former co-workers (especially the woman who had said she expected a white knight to ride into town to fill the empty manufacturing buildings with work to be done by local laid-off workers as its new employees) and said, “my last day on the job I walked out and the doors to the factory closed behind me, I told myself: Don’t let that door hit me. The answer is to move on and up . . . and to do that I must go back to school and learn a skill set with a future.”
The Gathering Storm, Still Gathering
In our discussions with many unemployed laid-off workers, we have sensed not only the shock at their dismissal, and the disbelief that it could happen to them, but also, in many cases, a profound attitude of denial. We illustrated this attitude with the out-of-work woman (we could have included many others) and her belief in the eventual appearance of a white knight who would ride into town with his saddlebags jammed full of thousands of job application forms for new jobs; “he will surely restore things as they once were,” she said.
In the gathering of real-world information for this book (considering current economic conditions, this was a relatively easy task), related to economic conditions and the loss of jobs, we found two reoccurring themes: The first prevalent point throughout our discussions with people recently laid off from long-term jobs was the disappointment in themselves for having chosen the wrong employment pursuits; that is, they were upset that they had made the wrong choice or bad choices regarding their skill sets. The second point was even more dominant and widespread than the first. Over and over again we heard the following from U.S. citizens: “What has happened to this country?”
The example we chose to use to illustrate the first point centers around one individual who summed it up for everyone in the same leaky boat (or in his case, sunk boat), so to speak. His story is related as follows:
I quit high school when I was 16 . . . just saw no need for any more learning . . . had enough of them smart-&**%$ teachers and all . . . shoot, my co-students weren’t much better. Anyway, I went to work in a gas station pumping gas for a buck an hour . . . those were the good old days because a buck went a long way, a real long way. Was able to purchase a 1950 Ford sedan. Was a great car, that one . . . drove it until the wheels fell off, literally. Anyways, I pumped that gas for about a year and in the meantime . . . I applied for a job in the town furniture factory . . . wanted that job bad . . . real bad . . . even in those days they paid $1.10 an hour with tons of overtime . . . and you even got benefits . . . a week of vacation every year. Finally I was hired at that factory . . . was a happy day for me . . . for sure. I was put under the care of an old timer who taught me how to run the fabric roller machines; these were used to roll out the measured amount of material needed to cover furniture pieces. It took a few years but eventually I was able to make them machines hum and keep them running . . . heck they would probably still run today . . . well, that is if they had not tore them down and sold those old girls for scrap . . . what a waste!
I had worked there 26 years when the roof fell in . . . when we got notice that the plant was shutting down and the business had relocated some place in Korea. Can you imagine? Anyway, I was given a month’s wages and booted out the door along with 725 co-workers. I drew unemployment until it run out and then worked for a landscaper until winter set in . . . not much landscaping going on when everything dies off, you know.
I have had 4 years to think about my situation and have come to several conclusions.
First, I quit high school . . . big mistake. Then instead of going into the military to learn something worthwhile, a trade or something . . . I pumped gas . . . was happy as a lark but did not realize that I had set myself up for ultimate failure . . . well, that describes me, the ultimate failure. I only have one wish: I wish I could go back and do it over again. Finish school and maybe trade school . . . I think I would have been one heck of a good plumber. Yes, sir, plumbers will always be needed . . . even if the country dries up and goes completely broke . . . them plumbers will be busy. You know . . . I would have been one hell of a plumber . . . yes, sir.
Unfortunately, over and over again, we heard stories like this, or similar to the one just related. The old saying about hindsight being 20-20 seems to be so true in these sad tales. But, of course, when we think about or practice hindsight we need to recall the words of John Fletcher (1999): “Of all the forms of wisdom, hindsight is by general consent the least merciful, the most unforgiving.” Unfortunately, words of wisdom garnered from hindsight usually do not feed the kids, the bulldog, or anyone else, for that matter.
“Where have all the jobs gone. What is going on? What happened to the United States of America? Will the jobs ever come back?” Unfortunately, we heard these common refrains from several unemployed workers. Not only were these workers unemployed, they were also unable to find what they called “suitable employment.” When asked to define “suitable” the common response was “a good fulltime position, with good pay and benefits . . . a job where I can learn and advance to higher levels.” One chronically unemployed woman stated that she had sent out at least 100 resumes, had only been interviewed 4 times, and had never heard a word in return.
“Gee, I can remember the days when the Sunday paper arrived and the help wanted section was thick with job opportunities. Have you seen the Sunday edition these days?” she asked. “Well, believe me when I say that today’s Sunday editions are a mere shadow of what they used to be . . . heck, the help wanted ads have shrunk in number from several pages to half a page and no more. It is ridiculous, that’s what it is . . . even minimum wage jobs are all gone . . . or non-existent . . . what is a body to do?”
Believe it or not there are those around—organizations and study groups—besides the unemployed, who are asking the same types of questions. Maybe the questions these others ask are formatted differently, presented in better prose, and with a more professional slant but they are the same as the laid-off workers. Basically, the same. “Where are the jobs? What are we going to do about U.S. jobs in the future? Why are we losing jobs?”
Ah, it is that last question that is the arrow that strikes the bulls-eye of our current economic crisis related to jobs and job loss. So, why are we losing jobs? The answer to this pressing problem is not that difficult to articulate. It is has to do with science, in part, but not rocket science. In a word it is competitiveness, competitiveness, and competitiveness. In the U.S., we are losing the competitive edge that we have held for so many years and as a result we are losing jobs (many that will never be reinstated) for economic, educational, and research reasons. These U.S. indicators of employment problem areas, presented below, are quite apparent when compared to other countries throughout the globe. Let’s take a look of some of these indicators and compare the U.S. economy and educational system with other countries.
Education and Comparative Education
• Over 70 percent of persons born in India aged 25 and over had a bachelor’s degree compared with 30.1 percent in the United States in 2014. (Census Bureau)
• In 2014, non-citizens studied engineering for their bachelor’s degree at a rate four times higher than citizens born in the United States. (U.S. Census Bureau)
• The percentage of all freshmen intending to major in mathematics, statistics, or computer sciences declined for more than 10 years since the late 1990s, but has increased since 2011. (National Science Foundation)
• High school dropout rates declined for Black and Hispanic students by approximately a factor of three between 1972 and 2012, then almost doubled between 2012 and 2014. (U.S. Census Bureau)
• In 2015, there were 18 education systems with higher average science literacy scores for 15 year-olds than the United States, 14 with higher reading literacy scores, and 36 with higher mathematics literacy scores. (National Center for Educations Statistics [NCES])
• At the grade four level in 2015, ten education systems had higher average mathematical scores than the United States and nine had scores that were mot measurable different. (NCES)
• In 2015, at the grade eight level, eight education systems had higher average mathematical scores than the United States. (NCES)
• The overall reading average scores of fourth grade students were higher in 14 countries than they were in the United States in 2016.
Comparative Economics
• The United States was a net importer of Advanced Technology Products in 2017.
• Between 2014–2016, China’s portion of world gross domestic product (GDP) increased from 16.6 percent to 17.9 percent while the United States’ portion declined by .3 percentage points.
• China became the world’s largest economy in 2013—surpassing the United States—measured by purchasing power parity (PPP).
• In 2017, the United States taxed corporations at 35.0 percent, China at 25.0 percent, Russia at 20.0 percent and the world average corporate tax rate was 23.8 percent. In December 2017, the income tax rates in the United States were reduced, effective January 2018, to 21.0 percent for corporations and 37.0 percent for the highest personal income tax bracket.
• Chemical companies closed 70 facilities in the United States and tagged 40 more for shutdown in 2004 alone. Of the 120 chemical facilities being built around the world with price tags of $1 billion or more, one is in the United States and 50 are in China. No new refineries have been built in the United States since 1976. (Arnt 2005)
In late 2005, one of these preeminent committees, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), comprised of top scientists, university presidents, and industry leaders, put together a congressionally requested report, entitled Rising Above the Gathering Storm. This report sounds the alarm that the United States is not producing enough scientists and engineers to keep us competitive for the long haul. Or as the study’s members put it: “The scientific and technological building blocks critical to our economic leadership are eroding at a time when many other nations are gathering strength.” The study makes four recommendations and several implementation actions that federal policy-makers should take to create high-quality jobs and focus new science and technology efforts on meeting the nation’s needs, especially in the area of clean, affordable energy. These include increasing America’s talent pool by vastly improving K-12 mathematics and science education; long-term research; developing, recruiting, and retaining top students, scientists, and engineers; and, ensuring that the U.S. is the premier place in the world for innovation (NAS 2007).
With regard to jobs of the future and where they will be located, in their report, the NAS study group reported the same criteria used by multinational companies to determine where to locate their facilities (along with the resulting jobs) (NAS 2007):
• Cost of labor (professional and general workforce).
• Availability and cost of capital.
• Availability and quality of research and innovation talent.
• Availability of qualified workforce.
• Taxation environment.
• Indirect costs (litigation employee benefits such as healthcare, pensions, vacations).
• Quality of research universities.
• Convenience of transportation and communication (including language).
• Fraction of national research and development supported by government.
• Legal-judicial system (business integrity, property rights, contract sanctity, patent protection).
• Current and potential growth of domestic market.
• Attractiveness as place to live for employees.
• Effectiveness of national economic system.
As mentioned, the NAS (2007) committee identified several key challenges and made four recommendations. In the following, these recommendations are again briefly outlined and the recommended actions to be taken are listed.
Recommendation 1: Increase America’s Talent Pool by Vastly Improving K–12 Science and Mathematics Education
Implementation
Action 1
Annually recruit 10,000 science and mathematics teachers by awarding 4-year scholarships and thereby educating 10 million minds.
Action 2
Strengthen the skills of 20,000 teachers through training and education programs at summer institutes, in master’s programs, and in Advanced Placement (AP) and International baccalaureate training programs.
Action 3
Enlarge the pipeline of students who are prepared to enter college and graduate with a degree in science, engineering, or mathematics by increasing the number of students who pass AP and science and mathematics courses.
Recommendation 2: Sustain and Strengthen the Nation’s Traditional Commitment to Long-Term Basic Research That has the Potential to Be Transformative to Maintain the Flow of New Ideas That Fuel the Economy, Provide Security, and Enhance the Quality of Life
Implementation
Action 1
Increase the federal investment in long-term basic research by 10 percent each year over the next 7 years through reallocation of existing funds or, if necessary, through the investment of new funds.
Action 2
Provide new research grants of $500,000 each annually, payable over 5 years, to 200 of the nation’s most outstanding early-career researchers.
Action 3
Institute a National Coordination Office for Advance Research Instrumentation and Facilities to manage a fund of $5,000 million in incremental funds per year over the next 5 years.
Action 4
Allocate at least 8 percent of the budgets of federal research agencies to discretionary funding that would be managed by technical program managers in the agencies and be focused on catalyzing higher-risk, high-payoff research of the type that often suffers in today’s increasingly risk-averse environment.
Action 5
Create in the Department of Energy an organization like the Defense Advanced Research Projects agency called the Advanced Research Projects Agency. The new agency would support creative “out-of-the-box” transformational generic energy research that industry by itself cannot or will not support and in which risk may be high but success would provide dramatic benefits to the nation.
Action 6
Institute a Presidential Innovation Award to stimulate scientific and engineering advances in the national interest.
Recommendation 3: Make the United States the Most Attractive Setting in Which to Study and Perform Research so That We Can Develop, Recruit, and Retain the Best and Brightest Students, Scientists, and Engineers from within the United States and throughout the World
Implementation
Action 1
Increase the number and proportion of US citizens who earn bachelor’s degree in the physical sciences, the life science, engineering, and mathematics by providing 25,000 new 4-year competitive undergraduate scholarships each year to US citizens attending US institutions.
Action 2
Increase the number of US citizens pursuing graduate study in “areas of national need” by funding 5,000 new graduate fellowships each year.
Action 3
Provide a federal tax credit to encourage employers to make continuing education available (either internally or through colleges and universities to practicing scientists and engineers).
Action 4
Continue to improve visa processing for international students and scholars to provide less complex procedures and continue to make improvements on such issues as visa categories and duration, travel for scientific meetings, the technology alert list, reciprocity agreements, and changes in status.
Action 5
Provide a 1-year automatic visa extension to international students who receive doctorates or the equivalent in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, or other fields of national need at qualified US institutions to remain in the United States to seek employment. If these students are offered jobs by US-based employers and pass a security screening test, they should be provided automatic work permits and expedited residence status. If students are unable to obtain employment within 1 year, their visas would expire.
Action 6
Institute a new skills-based, preferential immigration option. Doctoral level education and science and engineering skills would substantially raise an applicant’s chances and priority in obtaining US citizenship. In the interim, the number of H-1B visas should be increased by 10,000, and the additional visas should be available for industry to hire science and engineering applicants with doctorates from US universities.
Action 7
Reform the current system of “deemed exports.” The new system should provide international students and researchers engaged in fundamental research in the United States with access to information and research equipment in US industrial, academic, and national laboratories comparable with the access provided to US citizens and permanent residents in a similar status. It would, of course, exclude information and facilities restricted under national-security regulations.
Recommendation 4: Make the U.S. Competitive by Providing Incentives for Innovation
Implementation
Action 1
Enhance intellectual-property protection for the twenty-first-century global economy to ensure that systems for protecting patents and other forms of intellectual property underlie an emerging knowledge, but allow research to enhance innovation.
Action 2
Enact a stronger research and development task credit to encourage private investment in innovation.
Action 3
Provide tax incentives for U.S.-based innovation.
Action 4
Ensure ubiquitous broadband Internet access.
Weathering the Storm
The Great Recession, which began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009, was the longest recession in U.S history since World War II. During this time, the net worth of households declined, real GDP shrank, housing starts fells, and millions of jobs disappeared. The unemployment rate increased to 10.0 percent in October 2009. The last time the U.S. unemployment rate had reached double digits was December 1982. The recovery from the recession has been slow but generally steady. By 2017, the annual unemployment rate was down to 4.4 percent. Economic prosperity is impossible without job growth. We must create more jobs and not the temporary band-aid type jobs that are resulting from TARP and so-called bailout money. Think about it: When bailout money is used to employ workers to replace or repair the country’s infrastructure (e.g., roads and bridges) what happens to the small number of additional workers when these short-term projects are completed?
Moreover, an article in the Virginian-Pilot pointed out that localities’ jobless rates remain unmoved by the spending binge on highways; undercutting the argument for a second stimulus bill. The article goes on to point out that an analysis of stimulus spending “found that it didn’t matter whether a lot of money was spent on highways, or none at all: Local unemployment rates rose and fell regardless. And the stimulus spending only barely helped the beleaguered construction industry.” Reality check: Band-aid-like, pie-in-the sky temporary fixes applied in desperation to a hemorrhaging economy are not the answer. The damage to the American workforce has been deep and profound. We can’t allow it to get any worse. No one knows this better than those who have lost their jobs; or those who can’t find jobs.
We have found that when you interview people about current issues or problems, for example about their being laid off from a long-term job, usually interviewees are eager to talk. Right after a plant shutdown and the loss of several hundred or thousands of jobs, former employees will answer questions, state their opinion about the plant closure, and discuss their new status as members of the unemployed. However, these answers are usually delivered with an attitude and tone of shock, sadness, and/or extreme bitterness. This attitude stands to reason because of the gripping aftershock associated with losing one’s job. The aftershocks can reverberate for years, decades, even lifetimes, and take an enduring toll on everything from countless upended personal lives to government finances. For this reason, we have found it is best to wait a day or two after plant closures and mass layoffs before attempting to question former employees.
In conducting the post-layoff interviews reported in this text, we found that after several minutes of our questions it was not too long before the tables were turned and the respondents became interviewers of us, the interviewers. The number one question we were asked was always simply stated: “What do you think about all this . . . this mess the U.S. is in?” Usually we do not answer that question or similar generalized questions because we do not know the answer(s); we have no clue. We do have opinions, but they ask for answers.
However, there is one question that has been a different matter for us; it always solicits a different kind of response from us. Whether we are right or wrong in our reply to this question is for others to judge. Based on our experience, however, we feel we are correct in our assessment. The question; three simple words: “What went wrong?” Usually this statement is made with a string of qualifiers like “What went wrong? This is America; this is not supposed to happen . . . not to hard working, God-fearing folks like us! We have a right to work for a living. Where are the jobs? Where have they gone? What happened to them? Will the jobs come back? When will the jobs come back?”
We found that this last question—when will the jobs come back?—prevails in the thoughts of almost all job losers. Many assume that when economic times get better, they will go back to work (what we described as the white knight riding into town to fill empty factories with new jobs syndrome). Laid-off workers often don’t quite get the long-lasting impact. Current economic conditions and the loss of jobs will bend the trajectory of their lives in unexpected ways. Some are dealt blows from which they will never truly recover, with the economic impact hardening like a footprint in wet cement. The reality is many of these workers have lost their hold on the labor market and will see their incomes become permanently reset to a much lower level. Those who made twenty dollars per hour with full benefits as factory workers will be lucky to find employment that pays eight dollars per hour (and without benefits.) Moreover, there are ripple effects: Young people currently entering the workforce can expect to earn substantially less during their careers than those who started their careers when the economy was booming.
The question that reverberates is this: “What do we do now and how can this job problem be fixed?”
In response to this question, our standard reply is “You can go to school and learn a new skill set . . . and the job problem in the U.S. can only be solved by innovation. The solution today can be summed up in one word: Innovation! Innovation! Innovation!”
We are greeted with either quizzical looks or blank stares whenever we say this. We are used to this; we expect it. When we speak of innovation in America, what we mean is a multifaceted approach to correct the current situation for finding permanent jobs in the United States. First, we mean that we can’t survive as the globe’s privileged, leading edge country unless we solve our dependency on foreign oil. We must throw off our oil hostage chains; break the links through innovation, harvest energy by using post-oil energy technology. Simply, dependency on foreign oil is not an option for restoring our economy. We must end our dependency on foreign supplies of energy.
Energy Innovation Must Be the First Step in Replacing Lost American Jobs
While it is true that unemployment wounds, it is also true that these wounds can be healed. We must start this process by converting from gasoline to natural gas. Natural gas conversion is not the panacea for all our energy needs; however, it is a lifeline to get us off foreign oil and other energy imports and on our way to innovation via renewable energy. According to EIA (2008), the U.S. has natural gas reserves, both dry and liquid natural gas that exceeded 245 trillion cubic feet. Thus, we have enough natural gas supplies to get us through this century.
Once Innovation Is Underway, Our Next Move Must Be Research and Development
At the same time they were doling out TARP and other stimulus funds, administration officials should have gone to an outstanding engineering and technology university like Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia, and simply informed the school administrators that they would be given a $250 million grant to do whatever it takes to develop some sort of super battery or fuel cell to power the cars of the future.
Accompanying specifications and directions would simply state that this battery or fuel cell needs to be large capacity (large ampere-hour capacity) that can be continuously recharged with super-sensitive solar sensors. In order to charge a battery, a certain amount of current or electron flow is necessary. Solar super sensors will produce current flow. These super sensors are wired from the battery itself to at least four positions on the roof of the automobile where they can constantly be exposed to daylight—any level of daylight.
In addition, we know what you’re thinking; you are thinking that it does get dark at night, so how are you going to continuously recharge the car’s battery, fuel cell, or whatever we call it? Good question; it has a simple answer. Two additional wires and super-super light sensors are to be run from the battery to the car’s headlamps; one to each. Thus, during nighttime driving, the light from the head lamps would be sensed by the super-super sensors and sent back to the battery.
Now, we know electrical engineers out there in la la land are scratching their heads and wondering where did we get such an unworkable idea? We are not finished with our explanation . . . hold onto your brain cells. An amplification or booster device (like a transistor that amplifies a signal) is to be placed in the wiring between the battery and the external and headlamp cells connections.
Is this scenario possible? Anything, absolutely anything is possible. We are Americans; we think we can do anything if we put our minds to it and history has shown this to be true. Now is the time.
Let’s say that we are able to create or devise a power plant arrangement consisting of a powerful battery or fuel cell with a built-in recharge system, what’s next? Another good question. What’s next is the final ingredient: education, training, and on-the-job training (OJT).
In order to come up with innovation and research and development grants, we must have personnel who are highly educated and trained. Unfortunately, in the U.S. at present, we are losing (or have already lost in some areas) our edge in higher education. The U.S. will not restore itself to preeminence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics unless we shift our focus, money, and talent to educate our youth in these critical subjects. We discuss this need and our present strategy in the next section.
STEM Fields
Based on our research and interviews conducted locally and in various regions of the Midwest and southwestern U.S., it is obvious to us that even when the economy recovers from the deep recession, many U.S. jobs will continue to move overseas or be replaced by technology. Compounding the problem will be the lack of consumer confidence and spending. It is consumer spending that fuels economic and job growth, and it is likely, at best, to remain weak as consumers continue to grasp at the reality of credit card, home-equity loan binge-spending of the past several years.
In order to step out from the oppression of the present economic abyss and into the recovery mode, unemployed workers must recover from the aftershock of losing their jobs (if you have not been in their shoes, this is easy to say). They must get smart, literally. Smart not only regarding the reality of the US economic conditions but also to the dynamics of job losses that will continue to occur throughout this decade (and probably longer).
For example, if they hold or have lost a factory manufacturing job, it is time to shift gears and to move on. From our research and conservative estimates, it seems likely that at least 1.1 million manufacturing jobs will be cut by 2018. Simply, if you work in the manufacturing of furniture or textiles, for example, the days of your employment are numbered.
The ability to move on with your life and to get smart can only be accomplished through gut-wrenching determination and deliberate direction. This statement is worth repeating: It does little good to tell yourself that you are determined to get a new job and put the past behind you unless you comprehend the correct direction (the future) in which to guide yourself.
A thorough review of the skimpy help wanted ads in the local newspapers or the sparse computer-listed jobs at the regional unemployment office can be quite revealing. When (and if) you do find job listings, it is apparent to most former factory workers, office workers, laborers, truck drivers, construction types, and others that the job market has not only shrunk but has narrowed to a few select fields. You will also notice a few part-time and temporary jobs here and there and you may be forced to apply for one or more until you land something a bit more long term. Then the reality sets in: you are working less hours for far less money and zero benefits.
Thus, it does not take long to note that the full-time, good-paying jobs with a future; (we are not sure there is a future for full-time anything) are in the narrow, advanced, technological fields requiring on-the-job experience, a certain skill set, and/or trade school or college training. For example, several promising positions are available in the medical field. These jobs include home medical aides, nurses, medical scientists, physical assistants, biochemical engineers, and biomedical engineers. And remember, it is the medical specialties that will not be exported overseas; these jobs are going to stay closer to home. How do we know this? Well, ask yourself: What doctor or nurse is going to pack up his or her belongings and transport their profession to some third world nightmare when they have all they could want to have in the good ol’ USA?
Simply, the need for medical services is not going to disappear in this country. In addition, job opportunities still look promising for customer service fields, trades (plumbers, service techs, etc.), administrative assistants, customer service representatives, office clerks, retail sales, and food service and preparation. The problem with these job specialties (the exception being the trades) is that they do not take a lot of training or experience to enter into. However, keep in mind that at least six, seven, or more applicants per job are applying for these positions. Competition for jobs is intense and even for the most menial work tasks, such as custodians, it is increasing exponentially with each passing day.
Again, when the unemployed worker recovers from the aftershocks of losing his or her job and has had time to review their options, it usually comes down to three choices: go back to school and learn a marketable skill; take any part-time or full-time menial type job available; or decide to wait it out as an unemployed member of society, at least until all unemployment benefits evaporate.
As part of many severance packages laid-off workers are usually provided with some type of continuing education package paid for by their previous employer. Many states also provide educational grants so that the unemployed can get into school and learn a different skill set that will hopefully lead them to a permanent job position; one with a future. In addition to educational grants, some organizations and state governments provide remedial training opportunities for those individuals who have been away from the classroom for several years.
In addition to the unemployed, there is another large segment of people who will soon be joining the workforce, if they can find a job. It is this group of individuals, the students, who we must focus most of our attention on because they are the future of this country. One thing we point out to our students on a consistent basis is that they must think ahead, down the road, 5, 10, 20 years ahead, and ask questions. For example, will the skill set I am learning now help me 20 years from now; will my history major get me a job upon graduation; will there be jobs in my field, long term?
With the present state of the economy likely to remain as is for some time to come, it is important for college level students to focus on those fields that will provide long-term employment. A close look at science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), commonly called the STEM fields, is an absolute must. Just about any work sector specialty with jobs available and projected to have jobs in the future requires some kind of training in these four major areas. Note that not only should we be concerned with educating the students of tomorrow, in the high tech fields, but also we need and will continue to need highly trained instructors at both the high school and college levels. Instructors must be fully qualified to teach these topics because not only do the students need expert instruction, but the country needs the end result of this expert instruction.
With regard to STEM, the Congressional Research Service (CRS, 2008), in a prepared report for Congress, reported basically the same information we provided earlier in this section. Specifically, the CRS report pointed out that there is growing concern that the United States is not preparing a sufficient number of students, teachers, and professionals in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
The Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) measures the performance of 15-year-old students in mathematics, science, and reading literacy every three years. Coordinated by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), PISA was first implemented in 2000 in 32 countries. It grew to more than 70 education systems in 2015. In 2015—the latest study that was completed—twelve education systems had higher average scores than the United States in science, reading, and mathematics including: Canada, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong-China, Ireland, Japan, Macao-China, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Slovenia. It also revealed that average science, reading, and math scores in 2015 were not significantly different from scores for the following years: 2006, 2009, and 2012 for science; 2003, 2009, and 2012 for reading and 2003 and 2006 for mathematics. PISA 2015 mathematics scores were lower compared with average mathematics scores in 2009 and 2012.
There are many possible reasons why some students may perform poorly. Some attribute poor student performance to an inadequate supply of qualified teachers. Many U.S. math and science teachers lack an undergraduate major or minor in those fields—as many as half of those teaching in middle school math. Indeed, postsecondary degrees in math and physical science have steadily decreased in recent decades as a proportion of all STEM degrees awarded. Although degrees in some STEM fields (particularly biology and computer science) have increased in recent decades, the overall proportion of STEM degrees awarded in the United States had historically remains relatively low. Meanwhile, many other nations have seen rapid growth in postsecondary educational attainment—with particularly high growth in the number of STEM degrees awarded. Once a leader in STEM education, the United States is now far behind many countries on several measures. Let’s say that one more time: The U.S. was once the leader in STEM education.
Assessments of Math and Science Knowledge
National-level assessment of U.S. elementary and secondary education students’ knowledge of math and science is a relatively recent phenomenon, and assessments in other countries that provide for international comparisons are even more recent. Yet the limited information available thus far is beginning to reveal results that concern many individuals interested in the U.S. educational system and the economy’s future competitiveness. The most recent assessments show improvement in U.S. pupils’ knowledge of math and science; however, the large majority still fail to reach adequate levels of proficiency. Moreover, when compared to other nations, the achievement of U.S. students is seen by many as inconsistent with the nation’s role as a world leader in scientific innovation.
Teacher Quality
Many observers look to the nation’s teaching force as a source of national shortcomings in student math and science achievement. A recent review of the research on teacher quality conducted over the last few decades reveal that, among those who teach math and science, having a major in the subject taught has significant positive impact on student achievement (Allen 2003). Unfortunately, many U.S. math and science teachers lack this credential. The Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) was originally conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) as the only nationally representative survey that collects data on preparation and subject assignments. After the 2011 survey, NCES renamed it the National Teacher and Principal Survey (NTPS). In 2015–2016, there were over 3.8 million teachers in the United States. Nearly 47.3 percent of these teachers reported having a master’s degree as the highest degree earned while 40.5 percent reported having a bachelor’s as the highest degree earned. Only 2.4 percent of teachers did not have a bachelor’s degree. Most teachers took undergraduate courses in the following areas:
Classroom management techniques: 73.9 percent
Lesson planning: 78.9 percent
Learning assessment: 75.9 percent
Using student performance data to inform instruction: 53.1 percent
Serving students from diverse economic backgrounds: 64.1 percent
Serving students with special needs: 69.7 percent
Teaching students who are limited English-Proficient (LEP) or English Language Learners: 37.6 percent
The latest version of the NTPS does not track how many teachers had a major or minor in the subject that they taught. However, earlier versions of the studies did. Among middle-school teachers, 51.5 percent of those who taught math and 40 percent of those who taught science did not have a major in these subjects. By contrast, few of those who taught high school math or science lacked and undergraduate or graduate major or minor in that subject. Among high school teachers, 14.5 of those who taught math and 11.2 percent of those who taught science did not have a major or minor in these subjects (USDE, 2002).
Postsecondary STEM Degrees
The number of students attaining STEM postsecondary degrees in the U.S. more than doubled between 1960 and 2000; however, as a proportion of degrees in all fields, STEM degree awards stagnated during this period. In 2013–2014, about 17 percent of the 1.8 million bachelor degrees awarded were in STEM fields. The number of those receiving STEM degrees or certificates at all levels increased each year from 2008–2009 to 2013–2014. In 2008–2009, 472,262 degrees were awarded and by 2013–2014 that number had increased to 603,992.
In 2013–2014, a much lower percentage of bachelor’s degrees were awarded to women than to men (35 versus 65 percent). In addition, women only hold 25 percent of STEM jobs. Minorities are also underrepresented in STEM fields. Only 2.2 percent of Hispanics and Latinos, 2.7 percent of African Americans, and 3.3 percent of Native Americans and Alaska Natives have earned a first university degree in the natural sciences or engineering by age 24.
Within the STEM field, engineering, computer and information sciences, and biological and biomedical sciences remain most popular but specialization also varies by academic level. Physical science is more common at the doctoral level while biological science is more common at the baccalaureate level.
The Department of Education projects that STEM jobs will increase much faster than all occupations. Between 2010 and 2020, the number of biomedical engineers is projected to grow by 62 percent while the number of medical scientists is anticipated to increase by 36 percent. In addition, the number of systems software developers is expected to climb by 32 percent, and the number of computer system analysts is predicted to increase by 22 percent. Meanwhile, the number of all occupations is only anticipated to increase by 14 percent during that same time period.
U.S. STEM Degrees Awarded to Foreign Students
The increased presence of foreign students in graduate science and engineering programs and in the scientific workforce has been a concern to some in the scientific community. Enrollment of U.S. citizens in graduate science and engineering programs has not kept pace with that of foreign students in these programs. Recently, international undergraduate enrollment has been on the rise. The number of international students enrolled in undergraduate programs in U.S. academic institutions increased 9 percent from the previous year. The number of international students undergraduates enrolled in 2013–2014 was 42 percent higher than the number in 2001–2002 before the post 9/11 decline. Countries that accounted for large number of international students enrolled in U.S. institutions included China (111,000), South Korea (37,000), Saudi Arabia (27,000), Canada (14,000), India (13,000), and Vietnam (12,000).
Federal Program Support
In recent years, the federal government has made supporting STEM programs a priority. Dozens of programs exist to ensure that students have access to learn in STEM fields. In 2013, a five-year strategic plan was submitted by the National Science and Technology Council on ways to improve STEM education. Among some of the highlights of that plan were to increase funding to the Department of Education, the National Science Foundation, and the Smithsonian Institution.
Some of the programs at the federal level with a STEM emphasis include:
• Math Science Partnerships
• Teacher Incentive Fund—STEM
• RESPECT and STEM Master Teacher Corps
• Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program
• Special Education Research Grants—Professional Development for Teachers
• Race to the Top
• Transitions to Teaching
• Teachers for a Competitive Tomorrow.
The Bottom Line
Statistics, statistics, and more statistics. The previous section was filled with stats—most of them grim. Statistics never tell the full story, however. Stats do not tell us the full story about the future for good paying, steady, permanent jobs, and more importantly the hurt suffered by laid-off U.S. workers. No, we did not know what we did not know until we had a revelation of sorts. The real story about what is going on in this country can only be seen in the eyes of the recently laid-off workers. We have looked into those eyes, but only briefly. Those eyes penetrate you like X-rays; penetrate you to the core; pinch your heart; make you thankful you are not in their workers’ shoes; and make you wonder when the hell will it end or get better, or, if it will?
One thing is certain; we can’t sit back and feel sorry for ourselves. We must jump back up, stand tall, and take the bull by the horns, so to speak. Yes, we do need to learn trades and science-based skills that are marketable; that is a given. For those who have been laid off, retrained, and have found new jobs, it will be a rude awakening doing something new for a lot less money. Hopefully this will be a temporary arrangement. But the only way it will be temporary is if we innovate and get our country back to the absolute forefront in technology. We must retake the lead in all things technical. But this time there must be a difference. The difference is trade secrets. That is, once we find the ultimate renewable energy source and other new technologies, we need to protect them like Coca Cola protects its formula. The opposite of this is partly to blame for putting us in the present predicament, making us a second rate economy. America needs to hang on to what it has, what it creates. We need to make the rest of the world come to us. We need to be the leading exporter of finished products. However, whenever we outsource or export our technological genius, we also export our jobs. Hanging on to what is ours, what we have created is the only way we are going to be able to obtain good paying jobs and maintain the lifestyle we want.
References and Recommended Reading
AAAS 2004. Trends in federal research by discipline, FY 1976–2004.
Allen, M., 2003. Eight Questions on Teacher Preparation: What Does the Research Say? Washington, DC: Education Commission of the States.
Arndt, M., 2005. No longer the lab of the world: U.S. chemical plants are closing in droves as production heads abroad. Business Week. May 2.
BLS 2005. International Comparisons of Hourly Compensation Costs for Production Workers in Manufacturing, 2004. ftb://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/history/ichcc.11182005, news. Accessed September 2, 2009.
Boskin, M. J. and Lau, L. J., 1992. Capital, Technology, and Economic Growth. In Nathan Rosenburg, Ralph Landau, and David C. Mowery, eds. Technology and Wealth of Nations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Boylan, M., 2004. Assessing changes in student interest in engineering careers over the last decade. www.edu.nae/careercomnew.nsf.
BR 2006. Innovation and US Competitiveness: Addressing the Talent Gap. Public Opinion Research.
CMS 2005. National Health Expenditures. http://www.com.hhs.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/tables.pdf. Accessed January 5, 2010.
CRS 2006. Analysis of Schools and Staffing Survey Data. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
CRS 2008. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education. Washington, DC. Congressional Research Service.
Fletcher, J., 1999. Jean-Claude Favez’s introduction in The Red Cross and the Holocaust. London: Cambridge University Press.
GAO 2005. Federal Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programs and Related Trends. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office.
GAO 2006. Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Trends and the Role of Federal Programs. Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office.
Goo, S. K., 2005. Airlines outsource upkeep. Washington Post, August 21.
Gereffi G. and Wadhwa, V. 2005. Framing the Engineering Outsourcing Debate: Placing the United States on a Level Playing Field with China and India. Accessed January 2, 2010.
Kanellos, M., 2004. IBM Sells PC Group to Lenovo. Accessed November 11, 2009.
Laudicina, P. A., 2005. World Out of Balance: Navigating Global Risks to Seize Competitive Advantage. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lim, P. J., 2006. Looking ahead means looking abroad. New York Times. January 8.
Morgan, W. E., 1967. Taxes and the Location of Industry. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado Press.
Troy, T, and Vellequette, L. P., 2008. Ohio’s rust belt struggles with loss of manufacturing. ScrippsNews. Accessed January 4, 2010.
USAFE 2005. Military Police: Drivers Handbook and Examination Manual for Germany. Washington, DC: U.S. Army.
USCIS 2000. Executive Summary: Estimates of Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: 1990–2000.
USCIS 2005. Public Notice: USCIS Announces Update Regarding New H-1BExemptions. July,
US DE 2002. Qualifications of the Public School Teacher Workforce. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
US DE 2005. Digest of Education Statistics. Washington, DC: NCES 2005-025. U.S. Department of Education.
US DE 2006. A Test of Leadership: Changing the Future of U.S. Higher Education. Washington, DC. U.S. Department of Education.
US DE 2008. Digest of Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
USPTO 2006. USPTO annual list of top 10 organizations receiving most U.S. patents. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/06-03.htm. Accessed January 7, 2010.
Wheat, L. F., The determinants of 1963–77 regional manufacturing growth: Why the South and West grow, Journal of Regional Science, 26, pp. 635–59.