Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because not everyone can be a scientist or an engineer or a doctor--and some people will need to fill the less desirable, lower paid jobs--I ultimately agree with you. And, ultimately, trying to force your kids to do something that they aren't otherwise interested in is a recipe for disaster in many ways.
That said, I sit back and look at those who heeded my advice--to include family members--and those who didn't in terms of college degree programs as a means of charting a particular path. I stressed the importance of STEM to one of my cousins numerous times during his college studies. I said even if you don't major in STEM, at least take some core STEM concentration courses and go after certain certs, etc. Didn't listen and decided to do a social science program. He's not one year removed from his BS degree and is working as a waiter in the DC area earning significantly less than his colleagues who did major in STEM.
Contrast this with two other cousins (one who is wrapping up his senior year at Columbia and the other who just started at Northwestern), both of whom are majoring/focusing in STEM. The senior already has lucrative job offers lined up but is considering business school. The other is on the right glide slope that will increase significantly the chance of financial success down the line.
All of this is to say do what you want, but don't come crying to me and others who are more successful that you need student loan relief, that you're struggling to make a living, etc., when you chose a certain education/career path. Decisions have consequences.
Of course.
But since we are being anecdotal...I know a family where the father bullied his son into going into a certain profession that the boy wasn't interested in. But the father said...repeatedly...'my house...my dollars...my decision'. The kid went into the profession involved and HATED it every day of his life. The son walked away from the parents COMPLETELY. Parents beg the son to be a part of their life...no deal. The family relationship disintegrated, and now the parents are old and thinking of their declining years, essentially without a son...cause dad had to have his way.
Lots of jobs in medical physics and radiation physics. But kids cringe when you mention physics…
Kids cringe when you mention physics because they have been taught to cringe. By society. By their parents. By their friends. By their teachers. Physics involves math. Kids learn to hate math by middle school. There have been quite a few studies on this phenomenon.
This really talks right to the point of this thread. We've created an image that scientists are abnormal, maladjusted, geniuses just on the edge of going completely nuts. I ask kids what image they think of when they think about a scientist. They picture a goofy looking guy with wild white hair like Einstein or someone with thick glasses and a lab coat with lots of bubbling bright colored liquids.
They don't picture someone like Dr Becky Smethurst https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DLylJZBBLo or Katherine Johnson. It's exciting when the light goes on in their eyes that a scientist looks like them if they want to be one.
Because not everyone can be a scientist or an engineer or a doctor--and some people will need to fill the less desirable, lower paid jobs--I ultimately agree with you. And, ultimately, trying to force your kids to do something that they aren't otherwise interested in is a recipe for disaster in many ways.
That said, I sit back and look at those who heeded my advice--to include family members--and those who didn't in terms of college degree programs as a means of charting a particular path. I stressed the importance of STEM to one of my cousins numerous times during his college studies. I said even if you don't major in STEM, at least take some core STEM concentration courses and go after certain certs, etc. Didn't listen and decided to do a social science program. He's not one year removed from his BS degree and is working as a waiter in the DC area earning significantly less than his colleagues who did major in STEM.
Contrast this with two other cousins (one who is wrapping up his senior year at Columbia and the other who just started at Northwestern), both of whom are majoring/focusing in STEM. The senior already has lucrative job offers lined up but is considering business school. The other is on the right glide slope that will increase significantly the chance of financial success down the line.
All of this is to say do what you want, but don't come crying to me and others who are more successful that you need student loan relief, that you're struggling to make a living, etc., when you chose a certain education/career path. Decisions have consequences.
1. Too much of modern STEM is "IT". Where are the jobs for physicists or mathematicians, who are not computer programmers, who aren't interested in computer programming, and who actually want to do pencil-and-paper theory? The point being, that we don't have a STEM graduate problem, but instead, a STEM jobs problem.
2. If you think that much of modern science is political, OK, let's stipulate the point. But along similar lines, too much of modern science is mired in business. What percentage of an academic scientist's time is spent in fundraising? Whatever happened to book-smart scientists who can't shake the money-tree? What are their odds of getting tenure?
When we import 28% of our medical doctors and 35%+ of our medical researchers we most certainly do have a K-12 and college STEM shortage.
Further, and I don't have specific numbers, but also import large numbers of math and physics types as well. FWIIW a CD poster is a foreign born physicist in Dallas.
Important facets of our STEM shortages are a little weeds........FE there is no contextual shortage of those with BS biology degrees. However, there are significant shortages of MS and Ph.D level talent across some areas of biology.
Per your fundraising argument would you rather brand-X researcher spend time fund raising or would you rather s/he work directly for the government?
I wanted to do research in the biological field, specifically photobiology. It was the idea of endless fundraising and relatively low pay/limited earnings that put me off. It wasn't because someone didn't expose me or encourage me enough. If I was encouraged with cold cash and grants, well, I'd probably be researching something with little (apparent) economic value (so far).
Bolded: nail on head
As for programming, I'm not sure to what depth/volume of programming you are asserting makes up STEM, but basic programming/computers is now part and parcel of STEM, and is the contemporary vehicle of "pencil-and-paper theory".
If you are saying that STEM is just a bunch of economically-driven app development rather than genuine scientific development, then I 100% agree.
Yep. In my 3rd-grade understanding of history, scientific progress is not 100% driven by economics anyway, but just as often by governments and aristocrats seeking scientific development for its own sake. Even when for military/empire domination purposes, it transcends the "sell to consumer" paradigm of scientific development that is entrenched in modern culture. This paradigm works very well, but it is not without flaws.
I like the other guy his post above is way off the mark.
My DIL is in a MD fellowship research year......her related work is 100% about scientific development.
As someone who went to public schools in an average semi rural middle class part of America during the 2000s I don't recall anyone I knew from my school years who went into science and engineering.
I don't recall anyone from my elementary school years saying they dreamed of being an astronaut let alone a scientist or engineer.
I heard the 1960s "Space Race" inspired many of the youth of America during that era to go into science and engineering and they ended up giving us the tech boom of the 1990s.
It seems like American society in the 90s and 2000s were more excited by Hollywood level wealth and materialism rather than build a better future.
Could 90s and 2000s America done a better job at inspiring youth to go into science and engineering?
For record USA to some extent USA always had an immigrant population making up part of engeinering, math, STEM, etc. One founder of what is now NASA; a German Nazi named Wernher von Braun.
When we import 28% of our medical doctors and 35%+ of our medical researchers we most certainly do have a K-12 and college STEM shortage.
Further, and I don't have specific numbers, but also import large numbers of math and physics types as well. FWIIW a CD poster is a foreign born physicist in Dallas.
Important facets of our STEM shortages are a little weeds........FE there is no contextual shortage of those with BS biology degrees. However, there are significant shortages of MS and Ph.D level talent across some areas of biology.
Per your fundraising argument would you rather brand-X researcher spend time fund raising or would you rather s/he work directly for the government?
What you are actually pointing to is the fact that we have a shortage in the number of medical schools in this country. Which are very expensive to build and operate so most states are reluctant to build more.
As a result of that shortage, many Americans are forced to go overseas to get medical educations if they want to work as doctors. And many residency programs are forced to hire foreign-doctors through H1B and J-2 visas.
In many other STEM fields there is actually a big surplus. Talk to any PhD in most areas of chemistry, biology, or physics, about what kind of job prospects they have in academia or the private sector.
What you are actually pointing to is the fact that we have a shortage in the number of medical schools in this country. Which are very expensive to build and operate so most states are reluctant to build more.
As a result of that shortage, many Americans are forced to go overseas to get medical educations if they want to work as doctors. And many residency programs are forced to hire foreign-doctors through H1B and J-2 visas.
In many other STEM fields there is actually a big surplus. Talk to any PhD in most areas of chemistry, biology, or physics, about what kind of job prospects they have in academia or the private sector.
Not really, although you make some good points.
1. Many medical researchers are not MDs or DOs.
2. Just about every US kid who attends medical school overseas is a lesser qualified student than those accepted into US based medical schools. Overseas schools are very expensive and offer much lower success metrics.......poor US main residency match stats for one.
2.1. IOW we do not produce enough medical school ready students which leads to residences importing FMGs/foreign students.
2.2. Adding medical school slots is a whole lot easier than adding residency slots. FE Texas has added several hundred net new medical school slots over the last few years.
When we import 28% of our medical doctors and 35%+ of our medical researchers we most certainly do have a K-12 and college STEM shortage.
Further, and I don't have specific numbers, but also import large numbers of math and physics types as well. FWIIW a CD poster is a foreign born physicist in Dallas.
Do we have data, on what percentage of STEM majors ends up not pursuing a STEM career, simply because it's too unstable or insufficiently remunerative? Or what percentage of STEM undergrads eschew grad school, because it detracts too much from viable career goals? Or for that matter, how many math or physics PhDs just end up working for Wall Street?
From my vantage point, one of the fiercest competitive environments in the US jobs market, is for a fresh STEM PhD (excluding of course computers) to find a technical job in his/her field, that pays well, treats the employee with dignity, and actually uses said person's scientific training.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_
Per your fundraising argument would you rather brand-X researcher spend time fund raising or would you rather s/he work directly for the government?
Far, far better would be to have the researcher either work directly for the federal civil service, or for an FFRDC (JPL, Lawrence Livermore,...). But now my fellow libertarians will disavow me, and brand me a socialist...
Do we have data, on what percentage of STEM majors ends up not pursuing a STEM career, simply because it's too unstable or insufficiently remunerative? Or what percentage of STEM undergrads eschew grad school, because it detracts too much from viable career goals? Or for that matter, how many math or physics PhDs just end up working for Wall Street?
From my vantage point, one of the fiercest competitive environments in the US jobs market, is for a fresh STEM PhD (excluding of course computers) to find a technical job in his/her field, that pays well, treats the employee with dignity, and actually uses said person's scientific training.
Far, far better would be to have the researcher either work directly for the federal civil service, or for an FFRDC (JPL, Lawrence Livermore,...). But now my fellow libertarians will disavow me, and brand me a socialist...
I believe that data is out there, at least for some subsets of STEM. Part of the problem in that discussion of course is that STEM by itself covers a very broad range of knowledge and skills. Meaning some subsets may be unstable while others are simultaneously very stable. And remunerative is a relative term. There's a great scene in the movie Margin Call where Zachory Quinto's character explains he has a PhD from MIT but he works for the (undefined Wall Street financial corp) because it pays better. Cool movie by the way. Most of the field of data analytics grew out of Astrophysicists and Particle Physicists developing the analytics tools to handle enormous data sets.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
