Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Engineers Undercounted
mcho writes "Red Herring reports that 'The United States graduates far more engineers annually than typically reported in the press, a study said Monday, while the number of engineering graduates in India and China, long considered threats to the U.S.' status as a technological superpower, may be overstated ... the data implies that per every 1 million citizens, the United States is producing more technology specialists than China and India.' Are U.S. Engineers undercounted?" We've reported on the trend of U.S. students leaving the field previously.
You know I really don't want to sound like a troll, but I see a problem in this logic. For the reason "so (I/my son/daughter/whatever) can be more marketable (i.e. get more money)" there should be less engineers around. This doesn't really benefit everyone else though does it? The progress of technology requires people competent enough to perform, and the less we have, the more our technological infrastructure suffers, then everyone suffers. This isn't even getting into the standard competition arguments about improving quality either (because they don't always hold water, but in some cases they do).
I see this "less is more" idea all over the economy and I don't like it. I think we need to rethink this whole "scarcity" thing, to say nothing of considering the bigger picture.
Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know. - M. King Hubbert
The Red Herring article fails to link to its source. Ironically the actual study criticizes articles like these for failing to identify their sources. So here is the study itself. Enjoy.
funny, Hong Kong didn't have public schools for the longest time, and they were doing better than the US is now.
In Canada at least, you're not supposed to call yourself an engineer unless you graduate from recognized engineering school. There are a couple of exceptions (driving trains etc) but I'm pretty sure "broadcast engineers" isn't one of them. I'm not saying these people are not as valuable as "real" engineers or aren't as good at their jobs, but I doubt they are officially recognized as engineers or that the numbers in this article include them.
Its very important from an economic standpoint.
Micro/macro economics teach the following. The larger the supply the less demand per unit and vice versa.
When MS went after netscape they bundled IE all over the place in order to bring the demand so low that a browser market could only exist below cost. IT was a trick that Bill Gates used.
Same is true with labor.
If your an engineering student or professional you have to compete with whoever is willing to work for the lowest price. Vice versa if the demand for qualified engineers overtakes supply wanted in the market, then the engineers dictate their salary. Now the employer decides and if you dont like it tough.
An equalibrium with supply and prices is reached when excess demand or supply leaves a market and a price point for an X amount of quantity is picked. The hope was with less engineering students and a better economy is that the demand (wages) would increase again to reasonable levels.
http://saveie6.com/
There's more. In Canada the title "Engineer" is legally restricted to registered members of a Provincial Association of Professional Engineers. Just like graduating from law school doesn't make you a lawyer (you have to pass bar exams and be "called to the bar"). The normal route to getting there is to graduate from a recognized engineering school, have about 2 years equivalent of engineering experience, pass the professional practice exams, and if your application for registration is accepted then and only then are you an engineer.
I understand that in the US of A things aren't quite so rigorous, but in Canada the P. Eng. Associations have swarms of lawyers waiting to pounce on any non-member who calls himself an engineer.
There was a big fight with Microsoft over MCSEs calling themselves engineers in Canada, and a university almost lost accreditation for their engineering school when their computer science school wanted to grant degrees in "Software Engineering" without the approval of the local P.Eng Association.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
Having done an undergraduate degree in India, an MS in the US and been working in India, I [shakthimaan.com] can definitely tell you that the quality of so-called "engineering" education is poor in India. I don't even consider students in engineering colleges as "engineering students". The syllabus is outdated and never reviewed, often. Students are not taught to think laterally or do they involve themselves in problem solving. Most of the time they just get a degree for the sake of a job. The HR give the tag of "software engineer" for most of the people who work in the service industry, and they really don't do any "software engineering". Its usually testing/maintenace work that comes to India. Its only cost cutting that companies send their jobs to India, trading quality for cost.
I really enjoyed the study culture in US universities. It was so dynamic and flexible. Its quite unfortunate in the US that they have good facilities and professors, but, no jobs for their quality of work.
Most Indian companies have half-implemented stringent policies in the name of corporate culture and ISO. If you get the time, do read my article on "/Work.in.India" at shakthimaan.com.