An education in any science is more importantly about training in thinking than it is about just memorizing facts. Facts are important, yes, but it is how one thinks creatively and processes facts into new knowledge and wisdom that are the critical skills for today. And an education in chemistry can be a great opportunity to learn how to do that. Good high school and undergraduate chemistry programs should combine all aspects of an excellent liberal arts education: science, mathematics, history, languages, and art. People trained in chemistry are well-equipped to pursue a variety of career paths.

So while many in this thread are understandably lamenting the lack of positions for trained scientists in the U.S., I think the danger of a scientifically-illiterate public is an even greater threat to our security and continued economic growth, regardless of the number of positions available in individual fields of science. A recent Gallup poll on the anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birthday showed only 39% of Americans believe in evolution, one of the greatest scientific discoveries in history. If we continue down the path of fewer and fewer people with science and engineering educations or basic scientific literacy, not only will the job situation get worse, but so will our country’s general welfare.

Masha’s headline is right: America’s technology education is suffering. I applaud the work that Mr. Endre at the Franklin institute is doing, and thank Masha for bringing it to our attention.

Perhaps the Franklin Foundation could expand its mission to include educating business leaders about the importance of investing in America, in particular in the manufacturing industries of America. This is not isolationism, nor protectionism. It is good business. A strong industrial base gives us the leverage to better manage our affairs in world commerce. I believe strongly that an America operating almost exclusively as a service based economy (and even the worse, a predominately financial services based economy) will not be able to retain a top position in world trade affairs much less be a leader. With investment at appropriate levels will come the jobs for scientists (as well as many other skills). Those jobs are being filled now in China, India, and elsewhere (the centers of heavy investment today). The population of skilled scientists in the USA will adjust to the need. The educational system of the USA will meet the demand placed on it to fill that need.

It would be a daunting task, but if taken up succesfully it could be the force that turned the tide on a declining world position we now face as a nation. I think there is a greater need for attention to this in the board rooms of the Fortune 500, and the managers of Wall Street, rather than adjustments at the school boards of our communities and Deans of Colleges.

Firstly, we’re talking about long-term not short-term here. In the long-term, innovation in America is at risk, and it shows in more areas than just the physical sciences. What we’re saying is that it all starts with Education. I don’t believe anyone here is actually against educating tomorrow’s future scientists…

Secondly, the idea that there aren’t jobs has little to do with the country’s innovation base and more to do with (a) the quality of the existing product relative to its price, and (b) the availability. So many companies are selecting to go overseas and import people in or outsource offshore altogether and that’s something that we can only fix if we improve the balance of education for future generations.

One of our major plans is to provide programs that help teachers gain certification and education in a scientific, mathematical, or technological field to prevent English teachers from having to explain the theory of relativity to our children.

To the point of other organizations existing; there are always others. Perhaps this is one of things I find interesting about some of the posts here - a lack of competitive edge. Because there are others, regardless of their effectiveness or approach, why should anyone try to do better? By starting a new foundation we’re definitely not saying that others don’t exist, we are saying that we believe we can be more competitive in developing, delivering, maintaining programs that will make a difference in this area. Additionally, STEM has had limited movement since June of 2008; one of the main reasons, a lack of effectiveness in fund raising and program development. All that aside, we aim to be different, better, and more effective.

Some examples include: the STEM education coalition (see http://www.stemedcoalition.org), ASME (see http://www.asme.org/Education/PreCollege/), Tau Beta Pi (see http://www.tbp.org/pages/About/Programs/K12/index.cfm), and I am sure many others (try googling STEM Education).

The can’t be too much effort in this area, and new resources should take advantage of the previous efforts of many people.

By definition, almost, science is suppose to change, as you learn new things, you should not keep doing the same old experiments. Whether universities change or not, is really a matter of perspective and at least in terms of research, will be strongly influenced by the direction gov’t funding (RO1 grants, etc.) take.

For people that are some years out of their graduate studies, it would be hoped they would continue to learn some new skills (yes, sometimes easier said then done)…

And I will close this discussion with this, why do you think some jobs are going to cheaper markets? Think prescription drug costs!

I know I have can. 30 years left of work in front of me….thus, while I certainly think universities should continue to graduate chem and bio majors, etc… it really may be very counterproductive to keep producing 1000s of Phds each year, especially when times are lean in the job arena.

Perhaps there should be an accelerated program for advanced degree chemists to become pharmacists or something… perhaps this is a myth too, but I have heard there is a shortage in this field.

I am sorry if I offended you in anyway with this blog’s title. That by any means was not my intention.

Yes, there are many, many credible sources that site statistics showing the numbers of engineers and scientists “dwindling” and that they will continue to dwindle in the years to come.

Here is just one of MANY examples:
http://www.mlive.com/rebrandingmichigan/index.ssf/2008/08/lack_of_engineers_threatens_hy.html Summary:
“A shortage of engineers and a lack of science education in the U.S. could hamper the automotive industry’s ability to transition toward a focus on hybrid and plug-in vehicles, a Johnson Controls executive said this morning.”

The problem is that, as you noted, the numbers of STEM jobs are also rapidly declining due to overseas outsourcing and the recession.

So, does it mean that we advise every college graduate hopeful against going into engineering or science?

Or do we get involved with organizations like the Franklin Foundation, and change our educational system so that the STEM graduates have the skills and the creativity to keep STEM jobs in the USA?

By the way, based on history, recessions do tend to end. Which means this recession will end. Which means that companies will be looking to hire scientists and engineers. And when they don’t find them in the USA, due to students being discourages from going into STEM fields…guess where those companies are going to go look for that expertises?

Thank you for sharing the links to the studies.

One of the main points in the “Steady as she goes” paper is that more foreign graduates are taking over the STEM (science,technology, engineering, and mathematics) USA jobs. Once again, that is why the Franklin Foundation has set out to bring about the changes that would give american STEM graduates the tools, skills and education needed to take those jobs back.

The other point that you, Fenton, and David have brought up is that the numbers of STEM jobs have been rapidly declining over the recent year.

Of course the number of jobs is declining. We’re in a recession. Thats when jobs get slashed.

However, I do not believe that the solution to the declining job market is to discourage students to go into the STEM fields. Because that’s not gonna solve anything. Except, perhaps, stroke the ego’s of currently unemployed STEMs.

It would make sense however to change our education system in a way that would increase innovation and creativity, so that when hard times like this recession come about, USA STEM graduates are able easily and creatively adjust to their new environment. Which currently is not happening, due to lack of innovation and creativity.

Innovation is a child of growth and growth is a product of innovation. It is a cycle that can only continue and build in a country if the entities controlling the economics in that country allow it to continue. When corporate America changed its vision from building the American economy to building the “global economy” we started down this slippery slope.

What is needed is a new breed of American business leadership that appreciates the need to build American industry, particularly manufacturing industries, and has the courage to invest for long run return. One example of how dysfunctional we have become can be mentioned, there are many others. In our current drive to build alternative engergy sources as a benefit to America, using wind power is one of the approaches. Building generators for this was claimed as a source for new jobs, along with the reduction in fossil fuel import. Guess what? The major suppliers of the blades for these wind turbine projects are European.
How is it possible that contracting parties, even in some cases given taxpayer money to invest, spend the money overseas instead of using it to build up American manufacturers? These contracting parties set maximizing immediate profits as the highest priority agenda.

Meanwhile we continue to increase our deficit, diminish the standard of living for many people, reduce broad consumer spending further exacerbating the situation, and increase the disparity in distribution of wealth to a point where the American Dream is something only for the few and far between. Wake up America, if we do not change things, we lose big time!