Posted on 12/20/2005 2:01:37 PM PST by Sonny M
If China graduates more than eight times the number of engineers that the United States does, is it thrashing America in the technology race?
That's what many scientists and politicians are suggesting in the wake of an October report by the highly regarded National Academies. Its numbers are startling: China adds 600,000 new engineers a year; the US, only 70,000. Even India, with 350,000 new engineers a year, is outdoing the US, the study suggests.
But that gloomy assessment depends on how one defines engineers: Those with at least four years of college training? Or do their ranks include two-year graduates of technical schools and even, in China's case, auto mechanics?
By making more specific comparisons, US competitiveness, as measured by newly minted engineers, is not eroding as fast as many say - if it's eroding at all, according to a Duke University study released last week. "Inconsistent reporting of problematic engineering graduation data has been used to fuel fears that America is losing its technological edge," the study states. "A comparison of like-to-like data suggests that the US produces a highly significant number of engineers, computer scientists, and information technology specialists, and remains competitive in global markets."
In some ways, experts say, today's debate over engineers reflects the cold-war controversy over the so-called missile gap in which the Soviets' advantage in missile numbers was counterbalanced to some extent by the quality and accuracy of America's nuclear arsenal.
"During the 'missile gap' and post-missile gap until the fall of the Berlin Wall the same sorts of issues were being raised about Russia as are being raised now about China and India," says Frank Huband, of the American Society for Engineering Education in Washington.
Is there an "engineer gap" today? Many groups say yes. In a report last summer, the Business Roundtable and 14 other corporate groups called for doubling the number of graduating US engineers, citing China's lead.
"As others have copied our blueprint, we have departed from it," said House minority leader Nancy Pelosi in a speech last month. "They are investing heavily in improving their educational systems, and creating world-class universities, particularly in science and technology. We have fewer students studying math and science."
But some researchers say such fears are overblown and argue that US corporations are trying to cloud the issue as they go in search of cheaper engineering talent overseas.
"Business groups have been very smart about trying to change the subject from outsourcing and offshoring to the supposed shortfall in US engineers," says Ron Hira, an outsourcing expert at Rochester Institute of Technology. "There's really no serious shortage of engineers in this country."
India provides the clearest example of how the numbers can be interpreted differently. The 350,000 engineers that it supposedly graduated last year is almost certainly false. After publishing that number in October, the National Academies revised it downward to 200,000 in a note issued last month. The Duke study pegs the number at 215,000, but it also points out that nearly half of those are three-year diplomas - not the four-year degrees counted in the US.
More four-year diplomas than India
Last year, the US awarded bachelor's degrees to 72,893 engineering students, according to the American Society for Engineering Education. But using India's more inclusive definition, the Duke study finds the US handed out 137,437 bachelor's degrees last year, more than India's 112,000. The US number is far more impressive in rela-tive terms, since India has more than three times as many people.
China's numbers are more problematic because its government does not break them down. In its revised figures, the National Academies reduced the Chinese total from 600,000 to 500,000. The Duke study pegs the total at 644,106, as reported by the Chinese Ministry of Education. But the study also points out that, as with India, the Chinese total includes engineering graduates with so-called "short cycle degrees" that represent three years or less of college training.
"China includes in its count a lot of graduates - including auto mechanics - who would not be included as engineers in the US or many other nations," says Gary Gereffi, a coauthor of the study and a professor of sociology who directs Duke's Center on Globalization, Governance, and Competitiveness.
A press spokesman of the Chinese embassy in Washington declined comment, and its education office there did not respond.
China still graduated 351,537 engineers with four-year degrees. That's 2-1/2 times the US total (although China has four times the US population).
For its part, the National Academies stands by its report, even after its revisions. "I don't think we believe at all that these new numbers change the ultimate recommendations we have," says Deborah Stine, of the National Academies. "The US is well behind other countries."
Back toward 1986 graduation peak
The number of US engineering graduates peaked in 1986, fell back, then has slowly built back up since the late 1990s, says Daniel Bateson, of the Engineering Workforce Commission.
While US numbers don't approach China's, some experts say the quality of US graduates remains superior. A McKinsey Global Institute study last summer found that only 10 percent of Chinese engineers and 25 percent of Indian engineers were capable of competing for outsourced work.
Other experts say what's needed is a greater focus on improving engineering education. "The basis for US technological success so far hasn't been because of the raw numbers of people we have, but the particular type of thinking and capability they bring to the table," says Richard Miller, president of Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering in Needham, Mass.
And if one stands and one falls, is it half-right?
sheesh, engineers
Neither does engineering. You have to hire a contractor. He has to hire illegal aliens.
Thanks for the ping!
Where to start.
First off; of ALL the engineering degrees; you are taking the HIGHEST paying Engineering discipline as your base point. This is a false data point. Consider Mechanical, Electrical, Software, Manufacturing, Agricultural and Civil; the truth is closer to $51K. This yields a difference of about $12K between the Business and the typical engineer.
How secure is a job with a Business degree? These tend to be managment types, bank jobs, or dealing in the HIGHLY STABLE economics sector. How many banks have layoffs? How many Wall Street brokers have whole sale layoffs? Care to compare the difficulty in classes between Business or Economics with Engineering? Engineers work for BIG companies, and unfortunately this is where the big layoffs hit the hardest. Boeing, Ford, GM, Hewlett Packard to name a few. Can you name a similar scale of layoff-prone industry for the Business orientated graduate?
Your assertion with regard to the Chem Engineering going to the top is a false one. How many senior managers and executives of the Chemical company of your choice are Chemical Engineers? I'll wager that a bulk of them are Business degrees, or Chem Engineers with an MBA. Michael Dell does not have a degree, and his second in command has a degree in business; NOT ENGINEERING. Engineers as a whole do not tend to migrate into the managerial ranks at the rate one would expect. In fact, more often than not the Enginering Manager of a company is not an Engineer himself.
I do agree that getting an Engineering degree as a platform from which to diverge into Law, Business or any other field is a wise decision. This backs up my assertion that staying in a technical field (ie. engineering) is simply not a smart thing to do.
However, rest assured that I do manage more than one Rice graduate and an MIT grad. If they stay focused on Engineering (without regard to their pedigree) they will likely stay in a cubicle (aka tomb of the unknown bureacrat); however if they augment their degree with something else, and move OUT OF ENGINEERING, the sky is the limit.
Some people are Engineers because they love technology. These are not necessarily dorks or nerds; just people who love what they do. Unfortunately, there is a salary cap for this talent. H1-B Visa's create an artifical limit on the pay these individuals can get; by modifying the law of Supply and Demand. A brilliant designer rarely makes a good manager; conversely a medicure engineer may make an excellant manager; odd though it may seem.
Congratulations are in order.
A Chemical Engineering degree should be high paying, and hopefully a stable field to go into. I'm an Electrical Engineer, and MY area has been very unstable since the late 80's. I hope your daughter never experiences a layoff; and as a lot of Chemical Engineers tend to work in the energy areas (ref Petrolium Engineering), I hope she has a high paying, stable job until she retires.
After she has worked for a year or two; ask her how many members of management are ex-engineers; and how many of senior management are engineers. I think the answer will surpise you.
you do not get high pay, and the requirements placed on you to graduate with the engineering degree are higher than in almost any other area of study. Why bother?
I disagree on the low salary. Most of the guys I work with make six figures. If you really want to make $200,000+ as an ordinary non-management engineer you can always work in Dubai, Saudi, Iraq, Alberta, Australia, etc.
One of the reasons I became an engineer was because my skills are transferable to almost any industry in any place in the world. Can't say that for any other profession.
Hmmmmm, I'll have to ask my wife about this part. I'll pass on Iraq, probably Saudi; however Dubai and Australia have a definite appeal.
True, the skill sets are transferrable; but let's put things in perspective. How many engineers do you know that were laid off, have decades worth of technical experience; and left the tech industry to do something totally different? I know engineers who became commercial truckers, pilots, a medical doctor, opened a photography studio, a couple bought a Starbucks franchise, a Subway franchise, one opened a store that sells lamps.
Part of the reason we have these people leaving the technical field is the artifical competition created by the H1-B Visa. A great number of engineers become disgusted with the stress and pace of the technology sector, and leave. This exodus of technical talent is TEMPORARILY met by H1-B Engineers; however these people are NOT AMERICANS and will leave the country as soon as the money is better elsewhere. Not leave a company, city or state .... the USA.
If you had it all to do over again, would you still be an engineer? I think I would have chosen something different.
Chemical Engineering - $54,256
Business Administration - $39,448
Thats about right. Electrical Engineers are at around $50,000US on average for first year earning on a standard 50 hour work week.
I do not plan on being an engineer for another 30 years. No one stays in the same field their whole lives anymore. But what engineering does is open doors for you. Loan Officers love engineers. Franchise owners love engineers. Most mortgage companies will give you better rates and/or higher limits if you are an engineer because statistically they are great credit risks.
I do not know what area you live in but engineering is a very geocentric field. You have to be where the action is. Chem Engineers do well in Houston.
BTW, the negative stereotype for engineers is mostly an American/British thing. Even in Canada engineers is much more respected than in the US. Relative salaries in Canada for engineers vs. business majors is much higher for engineers. Management opportunities for engineers is better in Canada than for business people. Problem there of course is that overall salaries are very low compared to the US hence the migration to the US.
The "problem" isn't that the US underpays its engineers, it that lawyers, doctors, and brokers make so much more money in the US than anywhere else in the world.
Its a wrong assumption to think that someone with a 3 year diploma is inferior to someone with a 4 year degree. The economy in that part of the world is different. People with 3 year degrees do the same job as people with 4 year degrees.
The article also fails to mention that many of the engineering schools have high foreign student enrollment and so those folks get counted as part of the degrees awarded in the US but they will more likely go back to China or wherever they came from. So those are not really American degrees.
The USA students are every bit as good and sometimes better than these Indians, but the Indians are the majority.
Fortunately, most of these Indian students want to stay here. So we are "brain draining" India.
I wish I could do the math and be an engineer. I also wish for hair on my bald head and a green sky. :)
"If one is a dork who is content to sit in a cubicle with your pocket protector and star trek memorabilia, than yes, you are only going to go so far, but if one has the social graces and verbal ability (she had a verbal SAT of 740 and has nothing but A's in English classes) of a typical Rice graduate, one is not going to be confined to a cubicle for very long."
That's what you think.
The reality is, promotions, etc. in any corporation is based on your ability to gain peer support, your boss support, etc. It's far more political than you think.
An engineer can rely on his/her ability to move up in the technical track, mainly, or he/she will switch to a different company. A manager/MBA, however, relies far more on networking than anything else to get him/her move up on the field.
BOTH can get stuck at a job they don't want, but only if they allow it to happen.
"It seems that many/most American graduate students need tuition assistance, teaching assistantships, and/or government loans."
Largely due to the fact that so much money is taxed and given to the useless and unambitious. I'll admit I've said it a million times, but it is true.
"I don't have the data to make an informed judgment about our relative numbers, but if we are falling behind, I tend to believe that it is primarily because of the policies of our own government (state and federal)."
I agree. Our culture also degrades people who seek to better themselves through education and due to societal dysfunction many, many kids are unable to concentrate on academics.
"Let there be no mistake, we are in economic competition with China, India, and the EU. And many of our state-sponsored universities are educating the competition."
I agree with you there. And we're wasting most of our learning on uselesss things that will NOT help. Studying lesbianism, black culture, etc. will not teach us the practical things we as a nation need. Furthermore, the corporations are single handedly sending our manufacturing jobs, therefore creating our economic competition.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.