A little steamed about STEM
Monday, August 11, 2014 at 05:56AM
Is it just me or does questioning the motives of educational "reformers" just sort of come naturally?
The big push to get more kids pursuing careers in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) always seemed somewhat dubious to me. Anytime one has to make special efforts to get someone to take classes or enter a field* makes one naturally wonder why. Could it be the way the classes are taught, the working conditions in the field itself, or the image of the professions involved?
The reason most often given for the STEM push is that our economy needs more workers in these fields and that by having jobs which are in demand, students will be making a smart career choice. Sound plausible given the degree to which technology seems to dominate economic growth news and that math, science, engineering are components of doing technology well.
But not everyone agrees. Last year in the IEEE's Spectrum newsletter, Robert N. Charette's well-researched and well-sourced article The STEM Crisis is a Myth states:
And yet, alongside such dire projections [of the need for more STEM workers], you’ll also find reports suggesting just the opposite—that there are more STEM workers than suitable jobs. One study found, for example, that wages for U.S. workers in computer and math fields have largely stagnated since 2000. Even as the Great Recession slowly recedes, STEM workers at every stage of the career pipeline, from freshly minted grads to mid- and late-career Ph.D.s, still struggle to find employment as many companies, including Boeing, IBM, and Symantec, continue to lay off thousands of STEM workers.
and
[A] Georgetown study estimates that nearly two-thirds of the STEM job openings in the United States, or about 180 000 jobs per year, will require bachelor’s degrees. Now, if you apply the Commerce Department’s definition of STEM to the NSF’s annual count of science and engineering bachelor’s degrees, that means about 252 000 STEM graduates emerged in 2009. So even if all the STEM openings were entry-level positions and even if only new STEM bachelor’s holders could compete for them, that still leaves 70 000 graduates unable to get a job in their chosen field.
and
Clearly, powerful forces must be at work to perpetuate the cycle. One is obvious: the bottom line. Companies would rather not pay STEM professionals high salaries with lavish benefits, offer them training on the job, or guarantee them decades of stable employment. So having an oversupply of workers, whether domestically educated or imported, is to their benefit. It gives employers a larger pool from which they can pick the “best and the brightest,” and it helps keep wages in check. No less an authority than Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve, said as much when in 2007 he advocated boosting the number of skilled immigrants entering the United States so as to “suppress” the wages of their U.S. counterparts, which he considered too high.
So do we encourage our own children and our students to take STEM classes and for our schools to make STEM curricula a priority?
While it's not as sexy or PC as promoting STEM right now, I'd rather see us do a better job of career counseling, encouraging the exploration of many academic disciplines, and sending a strong message that pursuing training and work in any field can be rewarding. And no matter what your vocational choice, good communications, problem-solving, personal technology skills, critical thinking, and a host of dispositions are needed for success.
Maybe we just need a catchier acronym.
OK, STEM winders - have at me.
*Increasingly such as education.
Reader Comments (4)
I'm right there with you. We have a STEM lab at our school taught by an amazing teacher who is always having to say why her lab is so much different than the Science lab. I mean, hey, they both look like great classes and I'm a big science promoter so I probably shouldn't knock it, but the whole idea has a very trendy feel to it. I just can't get enthused by something I doubt is going to be around in ten years. At least not by that name. There will be some other "crisis" we need to teach for by then I'm sure.
Hi Ninja,
I feel the same way about the Common Core too - lots of heat and not much light. Or my mantra as a teacher says "This too shall pass."
Doug
<Note: new email address>
Although I was just hired to run the STEM programs at my new school, I do agree that equality, consistency and variety should be the main aspects of a quality education. I do disagree with the idea that computer science and STEM are classes that should be offered. The need for computer literacy and technology skills does apply to all careers and all fields. Maybe everyone doesn't need to learn Java or C++, but the expectation that a high school and college student can follow and complete the technology requirements during their education is still there.
"Back in the day" when only the geeks and nerds used computers live was different...
Hi Kenn,
I see programming vs basic computer literacy as analogous to auto mechanics vs drivers ed.
Doug