Report Seeks to Answer New Questions in Science Field
Academics and policymakers have been debating the question for years: Is the United States doing enough to attract young people to study science and technology in college? But what these experts have failed to question more thoroughly is whether students of these disciplines do well academically and whether they work in these disciplines upon graduation. A new report from the Department of Education's National Center for Education and Statistics aims to fill that research gap, Inside Higher Ed reports.
The report, titled "Students Who Study Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) in Postsecondary Education," outlines the demographic profile of the 23 percent of students who choose to major in STEM fields as undergraduates. These students are disproportionately male, Asian or of foreign descent, and of traditional age.
The study compares these students with their peers in other fields of study and finds that the STEM majors measure up favorably. Students who entered college in 1995 and majored in a STEM field sometime between then and 2001 earned a degree of certificate at a rate of 54.9 percent, while students who did not choose a STEM major did so at only 50.6 percent. Within the range of STEM fields, physical scientists, natural scientists, and mathematicians had the highest rates of graduation and certificate completion—as high as 68.4 percent. Computer and information scientists had the lowest rates.
The report also uncovered an oddity: 20.6 percent of students who majored in a STEM field at some point during their undergraduate careers had left STEM entirely, and 26.7 percent had left postsecondary education.
Searching for a college? View our college rankings of America's Best Colleges.
Tags: colleges | technology | science
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (6) | Print
Reader Comments
northern consensus tonne statement
heat program record new infrared
.
i think that the government need to step it up NOW!!
Degree doesn't guarantee ability
I'm a computer science professor at a respected university, and have also worked as a software executive and technical hiring expert for a major US software firm. From this dual perspective, I'd like to make a few comments on the above article.
The study in question seems to assume that obtaining a degree or certification means that a student has achieved competence in their STEM area, but at least in software, the truth is more complex. A remarkable number of computer ccience graduates (probably over half) are not really good enough at software development to contribute in a 21st century software shop. Computer science covers many things, and the ability to program well is only a side-issue in many computer science programs. Indeed, I've personally interviewed candidates with PhD's in computer science who could not program a computer at all.
So, it is not accurate to gauge the number of actually useful software engineers by the number of CS degrees or other certifications. Even worse, a borderline-effective CS graduate will often drop out of software development within a few years of graduation because the field changes so fast that the only software engineers who remain employable are those so interested in and capable at programming that they eagerly and quickly learn new software skills on their own. A student who has barely cleared the professional bar with the support of a university program is unlikely to increase his/her knowledge by self-instruction.
There is a huge range of ability and effectiveness among professional software engineers. Most studies estimate this range as a factor of 10 in productivity-difference between the best and worst engineers, but my own experience suggest more like a factor of 20. Formal degrees and certifications are poor predictors of effectiveness. This helps explain phenomena such as US firms desperately hunting for software talent, and seeking H1-B visa increases, while many US software developers remain unemployed.
advertisement
