Slashdot Mirror
No Future in American Science
An anonymous reader writes "Science Blog reports America is facing a dangerous shortage of eggheads: "America's top college graduates increasingly reject careers in science and engineering, researchers have found, raising concerns about America's technological future. Faced with the prospect of low-paid apprenticeships and training lasting a decade or more - and constricted job opportunities even after that - more of the brightest young Americans are instead pursuing the quicker and surer payoffs offered by business and certain professions.... 'With the notable exception of biological sciences, many of the top U.S. students with potential to become scientists are turning toward other career paths,' said one of the study's co-authors.""
Let supply and demand sort it out. The really gifted kids will be drawn to science no matter the financial rewards. The lab cogs will come back once the pay and opportunities increase.
We already have highly selective scientific posts - they're at the best universities and research institutions. I don't see how the author thinks that adding a few more would make much of a difference. The best of the best still get good jobs, and there's still a lot of jobs at 2nd & 3rd tier universities.
Anonymous posts are filtered.
Now, midstream, I'm bailing on all of this (with 2 kids to support) to go back to school & get a PhD in physics. Why? Because I'm no longer as passionate as I once was about technology and want to find something to keep me happy. Contrary to (apparently) popular belief, a raised income doesn't give you some massive nest egg [even if the government didn't take close to half of it], you just spend more - i.e., I'm not suddenly able to do this because I have a fortune to support me. I'll be essentially broke by the time I get a PhD and pretty much be starting at square one.
So what? I wasn't in technology for the money - that was just icing. I did it because it was what I was passionate about.
If the only reason people are pursuing a career is for money, they'd be a lot better off being a lobbyist [or a drug dealer, for that matter]. Just do what makes you happy.
That's my 00000010 cents.
Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the
They are definitely part of the problem. A good friend of mine wanted to build bridges for a living. Graduating high school, he asked the guidance counsellor, followed by several college recruiters, all of whom told him to go into architecture.
After less than one semester of architecture he transferred to Civil Engineering, because he wanted to design and build bridges.
The sad truth of the matter is no one knows what engineers do, they think it's a fancy title. They don't realize "real" engineers are licensed like doctors and lawyers (EIT, PE, etc.) to build things.
No offense to software engineers intended.
Could it also be that kids are discouraged from experimenting in their own back yards? Look at Thomas Edison. He was blowing up his shed when he was what? 11? And while he wasn't exactly encouraged, he wasn't thrown in jail. Nowaday's you'd get your tail kicked by the authorities for trying to make a bomb. Isn't exactly conducive to nerdy behavior.
Never give any object more potential energy than you want it to have.
I finished a PhD in astrophysics in 1999. Wanna know why I went into IT? Better starting pay and no moving around.
If you want to do anything in this country in the hard sciences (especially physics), you have to take a series of 1-2 year post-doctoral assignments. You take them where you can get them, and it's rare that there are more than 1-2 institutes in a metropolis that even have such a program.
When I got out, AIP published a report indicating that there were, on average, 125 applicants for every tenure-track faculty position in astronomy/astrophysics in the US.
Constant moving, few openings, low pay... not too attractive.
A lot of posters have commented on the fact that those that are really interested in science and engineering will tough it out, regardless of how the pay goes. So far in my life I've found that to be true.
I grew up in a small town, and when I was in high school I was really passionate about chemistry. I talked to my chem teachers about chemistry, and they told me flat out, "find something else, you'll never be able to support yourself the way you'd like." When I neared the end of my high school days, and everybody and their dog was asking me what I was going to do next, if I said "engineer" I'd get something like "you mean the guys who drive trains? Don't have to go to school for that you know!" and if I said "physicist" I got "you mean like a gym teacher?" As I said, it was a pretty small town. :)
Anyway, no matter what I said, it always involved some kind of science (usually physics). And I'd always hear "You know, you'll never make as much as your Dad." But I went through with physics anyway, because I liked it. I liked the idea of getting trained in the whole scientific process, giving me the mental toolset that basically lets me handle just about anything thrown at me.
So here I am a few years later. My Dad, the blue collar worker, still makes more than me. My cousin who had similar interests in science but was pushed into business, makes more than I do and he's ten years younger. Do I wish my background had proved a little more lucrative? You bet. Would I have changed studies, knowing then what I know now? No way.