Page 19

2
THE EMPLOYMENT OF GRADUATE SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS

2.1 CURRENT EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS

The economy of the United States is absorbing rapidly increasing numbers of graduate scientists and engineers, but continued growth is less certain.

The number of people with science and engineering PhD degrees from US universities who are working in this country has nearly doubled since 1973, from 220,000 to 437,000 in 1991.1 Figure 2-1 shows this growth by major field. Currently, more than 25,000 scientists and engineers earn PhDs from US institutions each year, most of whom enter the US labor

1 National estimates of employment-related characteristics of scientists and engineers used here and throughout the report are from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients (SDR). The SDR is a biennial panel survey of a nationally representative sample of recipients of doctorates in science and engineering from U.S. institutions working in the United States. It is conducted by the National Research Council and has gathered employment related information since 1973 for NSF and other federal agencies. Major changes in survey timing and procedures were made in the 1991 survey that limit the comparability of estimates with those of the 1973-1989 surveys. More vigorous follow-up increased the response rate from 58% to 80%, which reduced nonresponse bias among those outside academia or who had left the country. This should have reduced overestimates of the number of U.S. PhDs remaining in the U.S. and of those employed in academia of perhaps 5% in the earlier surveys. The SDR is described more fully in Appendix C, which has a fuller discussion of changes in the 1991 and 1993 surveys and their implications for comparability of time-series data and longitudinal analysis.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 19
Page 19 2 THE EMPLOYMENT OF GRADUATE SCIENTISTS AND ENGINEERS 2.1 CURRENT EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS The economy of the United States is absorbing rapidly increasing numbers of graduate scientists and engineers, but continued growth is less certain. The number of people with science and engineering PhD degrees from US universities who are working in this country has nearly doubled since 1973, from 220,000 to 437,000 in 1991.1 Figure 2-1 shows this growth by major field. Currently, more than 25,000 scientists and engineers earn PhDs from US institutions each year, most of whom enter the US labor 1 National estimates of employment-related characteristics of scientists and engineers used here and throughout the report are from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients (SDR). The SDR is a biennial panel survey of a nationally representative sample of recipients of doctorates in science and engineering from U.S. institutions working in the United States. It is conducted by the National Research Council and has gathered employment related information since 1973 for NSF and other federal agencies. Major changes in survey timing and procedures were made in the 1991 survey that limit the comparability of estimates with those of the 1973-1989 surveys. More vigorous follow-up increased the response rate from 58% to 80%, which reduced nonresponse bias among those outside academia or who had left the country. This should have reduced overestimates of the number of U.S. PhDs remaining in the U.S. and of those employed in academia of perhaps 5% in the earlier surveys. The SDR is described more fully in Appendix C, which has a fuller discussion of changes in the 1991 and 1993 surveys and their implications for comparability of time-series data and longitudinal analysis.

OCR for page 19
Page 20 FIGURE 2-1 Growth in employment of doctoral scientists and engineers in the United States, 1973-1991. SOURCE: NSF, 1991:Table 1, for 1973-1989; NSF, 1994d:Table 1, for 1991. NOTES: In this figure, postdoctoral appointees are included in the labor force. The data are national estimates of the numbers of scientists and engineers with doctorates from US institutions. The estimates are derived from the biennial sample Survey of Doctorate Recipients conducted for the National Science Foundation by the Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, National Research Council. In 1991, survey procedures and timing were changed in ways that improved the estimates but introduced major comparability problems. The response rate, which had fallen steadily during the 1980s (from 66% in 1979 to 58% in 1989), increased to 80% in 1991. Nonresponse bias in the earlier surveys had led to overestimates of 5% or more in the total number of scientists and engineers in the United States. The new procedures, which involved much more intensive followup of those who did not respond initially, no doubt reduced the overestimate, but the extent is not known. The drop in number of employed scientists and engineers from 1989 to 1991 is due at least in part to the change in survey procedures. For example, if the estimates in 1989 were reduced by 5%, the number of doctorates working in the United States would have increased by 3% instead of decreased by 3% from 1989 to 1991.

OCR for page 19
Page 21 market either immediately or after a period of postdoctoral study.2Appendix C discusses employment trends among graduate scientists and engineers in more detail. Although increasing numbers of new PhDs have been readily absorbed into the job market over the years, there are clear indications that the most recent new PhDs in some fields are not finding employment as easily as earlier ones, and graduates who have found employment have been more likely to find less-desirable or less-secure positions than earlier graduates. Employment Trends Among recent PhDs, there is a steady trend away from positions in education and basic research and toward applied research and development and more diverse, even nonresearch, employment. Graduate scientists and engineers have traditionally been educated and prepared for employment positions in which the ability to perform original research is the skill of highest value. The traditional positions include research-intensive occupations in academe,3industry, and government laboratories where scholarship and research—especially basic research—constitute the primary focus of employment. During recent decades, such research-intensive jobs have increased steadily, and many new PhDs have been able to choose from an expanding number of such traditional jobs. However, available information on job distribution and trends in terms of both primary work activity and the location of that work indicates a persistent long-term trend away from employment in traditional research and teaching positions and toward applied research and development and non-academic employment (see Figure 2-2). For example, the proportion of scientists and engineers engaged in basic research and teaching as their primary activity has declined while the proportion of people involved in applied research and development and other types of work has increased. According to the SDR, in 1973, 52% of scientists and engineers with PhDs from US universities were engaged in basic research or teaching activities, but, in 1991, only 37% were in such positions (Table C-3B). On the other hand, individuals employed in applied research and development increased by about one-third, and the fraction employed in business and industry increased from about 24% in 1973 to 36% in 1991. Within that group, the share of self-employed people more than quadrupled, to nearly 9% (Table C-3B). 2 An unknown number of graduate scientists and engineers graduating from foreign institutions also enter the labor market. 3 Academe is defined in this report to include 4-year colleges, universities, and medical schools, but not 2-year colleges or precollege (K-12) educational institutions.

OCR for page 19
Page 22 FIGURE 2-2 Scientists and engineers with US PhDs, by employment sector, 1973-1991. SOURCE: Calculated from NSF, 1991:Table 3, for 1973-1989, and from NSF, 1994d:Table 9, for 1991. NOTES: See notes for Figure 2-1 for important information about the comparability of 1991 estimates with the estimates for previous years. Academe includes those employed at 4-year colleges, universities, and medical schools (including university-affiliated hospitals and medical centers). Business/industry includes those who are self-employed. Other employment includes other education (junior colleges, 2-year colleges, technical institutes, and elementary, middle, and secondary schools); state and local governments; hospitals and clinics; private foundations and other nonprofit organizations; other employers; and those who did not respond to the employment-sector question.

OCR for page 19
Page 23 Furthermore, the fraction of total PhDs in science and engineering who are employed in academe has declined to less that half in recent years (see Figure 2-3). In addition, basic-research positions in some industry and national laboratories have also been declining. As a result, the activities and employment sectors that scientists and engineers with PhDs have been going into have been diversifying. Those long-term trends are the basis for a major conclusion of this report, i.e., that PhDs are increasingly finding employment outside universities and more and more are in types of positions that they had not expected to occupy. Employment difficulties are most acute among new PhDs, many of whom are unable to find desirable positions in their field. Barry Hardy, who has done postdoctoral work at the National Institutes of Health and is currently a postdoc at the University of Oxford in England, has spoken out about these difficulties and offered suggestions for change. With several other members of the Young Scientists' Network Internet discussion forum, he wrote an open letter to Harold Varmus, director of the National Institutes of Health, outlining options for change. At the committee's invitation, Dr. Hardy offered a series of suggestions for improving the graduate education experience: • Include young scientists and engineers on policy panels, especially those affecting the funding of graduate students. • Improve the evaluation of training grant programs. • Fund an Internet-based information gathering and sharing system. • Modify graduate student programs so they are more flexible and diverse. • Improve employment conditions for postdocs so they can support their families and expect reasonable job security. • Increase participation of young scientists at conferences. • Reduce constraints on expression by graduate students. • Balance immigration policies and fair treatment of foreign students. • Develop computer simulation models to better predict science and technology employment patterns. Box 2-1: The plight of the new PhD-Suggestions for change It should be noted that different fields and subfields of science and engineering vary widely with respect to employment patterns, job availability, and degree requirements. For example, in chemistry and engineering, many PhDs have long worked in industry; in other fields, many still work in universities. Within nearly all fields, however, the broad trend is consistent: a smaller proportion of PhDs is going into universities and the federal government, and a larger proportion is going into business and industry (engineering was the only field in which the proportion of PhDs entering universities increased substantially. With the SDR data, it is possible to compare cohorts of scientists and engineers 5-8 years after receipt of PhD, i.e., after most of them have completed a period of postdoctoral study. More than half the 1969-1972 science and engineering PhDs were employed in universities in 1977, compared with less than 43% of the 1983-1986 PhDs in 1991 (Figure 2-4). Only 26% of them were employed in business and industry in 1973, compared with 35% in 1991. Appendix C provides an in-depth analysis of the employment distribution of new and recent science and engineering PhDs by discipline. This is an original analysis based on data from the SDR. Information on a sectoral basis is also provided in the next section of this chapter.

OCR for page 19
Page 24 FIGURE 2-3 Primary work activity of scientists and engineers with PhDs from US universities, 1973-1991. SOURCE: Calculated from NSF, 1991:Table 3, for 1973-1989 and from NSF, 1994d:Table 10, for 1991. NOTES: See notes for Figure 2-1 for important information about the comparability of 1991 estimates with the estimates for previous years. The other activities surveyed, which accounted for nearly 20% of the PhD scientists and engineers in 1973, increasing to almost one-third in 1991, included management of non-R&D activities, consulting, professional services, statistical/data analysis/reporting, and "other" and "no report."

OCR for page 19
Page 25 FIGURE 2-4 Change in employment sector of scientists and engineers 5-8 years after receipt of US doctorates, 1977 and 1991. SOURCE: Special runs of data from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients on employment sector of US doctoral scientists and engineers 5-8 years after receiving the PhD (in this case, 1969-1972 PhD recipients in 1977 and 1983-1986 PhD recipients in 1991). Psychology PhDs, many of whom go into clinical psychology, are not included in the totals. NOTES: See notes for Figure 2-1 for important information about the comparability of 1991 estimates with the estimates for previous years. Academe includes those employed at 4-year colleges, universities, and medical schools (including university-affiliated hospitals and medical centers). Business/industry includes those who are self-employed. Other employment includes other education (junior colleges, 2-year colleges, technical institutes, and elementary, middle, and secondary schools); state and local governments; hospitals and clinics; private foundations and other nonprofit organizations; other employers; and those who did not respond to the employment-sector question. Not employed includes the unemployed (seeking work) and those not seeking employment, retired, or otherwise out of the workforce or not reporting workforce status.

OCR for page 19
Page 26 Unemployment and Delayed Employment Recent graduate scientists and engineers have been experiencing increasing delays in securing permanent employment. The employment picture for scientists and engineers, especially for recent graduates, is not clear, partly because the pertinent national surveys of new and recent PhD recipients lag by several years. The picture is complicated by wide differences among fields, some of which are shrinking as others grow. Nonetheless, we find clear evidence of employment difficulties in many disciplines. Such difficulties are hard to detect with traditional measures, such as the SDR. According to SDR data, unemployment rates for PhD scientists and engineers have remained steady and low for the last decade, compared with those in other segments of the economy. Unemployment rates for PhD scientists and engineers were about 1% in the 1980s surveys and about 1.5% in the 1990s. Unemployment rates for the most recent 2 years of science and engineering PhD graduates were about 1.5% in the 1980s, but rose to 2% in 1993, the last year for which data are available—a disquieting increase that bears watching.4 The latter rate compares favorably not only with the overall unemployment rate (above 6% in the early 1990s), but also with unemployment among professional occupations generally (2.6% in 1992 and 1993) and among those with at least a college degree (around 3% in the early 1990s) (see Figure 2-5). The evidence obtained through committee panels and submitted comments (see Appendix G) and through surveys of recent PhDs by some of the scientific societies shows that an unusually high percentage of scientists and engineers are still looking for employment at the time of or soon after receiving their doctorates. Results of surveys by the professional societies of physicists, chemists, and mathematicians indicate that graduates in some fields are experiencing double-digit unemployment for increasing periods after graduation. Recent scientific and engineering PhDs do eventually find employment, but in some fields the process is taking much longer than it did for their predecessors. For example, the mathematical societies conduct surveys of new PhDs each summer and update them in the spring. The percentage of new PhD mathematicians still looking for positions in the summer was about 5% during most of the 1980s but in 1990 began to rise to more than 12% for the classes of 1991-1993.5According to the American Mathematical Society (AMS) the percentage of new mathematicians looking for employment the summer after receiving their PhDs was 14.4% for the class of 1994, even though the number of new PhDs was 12% smaller than the class of 1993 (AMS, 1994b). Similarly, the percentage of new PhDs still unemployed in the next spring was about 3% in the late 1980s, 5% for the class of 1991, 7% for the class of 1992, and 9% for the class of 1993 (AMS, 1994a). The American Institute 4 It is not known how much of this increase in unemployment rates should be attributed to a change in survey methods. 5 A class is defined as those graduating each year from June to June.

OCR for page 19
Page 27 FIGURE 2-5 Unemployment rates among different occupational and educational groups in the civilian noninstitutional labor force, 1985-1993. SOURCES: US Bureau of the Census, 1994:Table 616, for average monthly unemployment of the civilian noninstitutional labor force aged 16 or older. US Bureau of the Census, 1994:Table 650, for average monthly unemployment of the civilian noninstitutional labor force aged 25 or older with 4 years or more of college. US Bureau of the Census, 1994:Table 649, and unpublished Bureau of the Census tables, for average monthly unemployment among civilian noninstitutional labor force aged 16 or older in professional specialty occupations (includes S&Es). NSF, 1991, NSF, 1994d, and unpublished SDR tables, for unemployment among S&Es with doctorates from US universities. Unpublished SDR tables, for unemployment among S&Es 1-2 years after receiving PhD from US university.

OCR for page 19
Page 28 of Physics (AIP), which also surveys new PhDs each year, found that in 1993, 14% of new doctoral physicists looking for employment had not received a job offer around the time of graduation, a figure that dropped to 6% six months after graduation. Preliminary estimates for the class of 1994 indicate that those numbers were about 12% and 4% respectively (unpublished AIP data). An American Chemical Society survey of new chemists found that more than 16% of the PhD class of 1993 were seeking employment during the summer of 1993 (Table B-la in ACS, 1993). Underemployment and Underutilization When recent graduates do find employment, they are increasingly underemployed or underutilized. Doctoral students trained in American universities are traditionally well educated for permanent or tenure-track positions in which they conduct significant research in universities, industry, or government agencies. In the recent past, the US science and technology enterprise has grown so rapidly that most advanced-degree holders could expect such a position after graduation. Testimony provided to the committee, however, indicates that today many more new science and engineering PhDs are able to obtain only part-time positions, short-term nontenure-track positions, postdoctoral positions that are extended for nonacademic reasons, or positions that are not of the expected type and for which one does not explicitly require a PhD degree.6 The National Science Foundation (NSF) uses two technical categories to describe such conditions. The underemployed are defined as those working part-time but seeking full-time work or those working in a nonscience and nonengineering job but desiring a science or engineering job. The underutilized are the unemployed (those who do not have positions but are seeking positions) plus the underemployed (NSF, 1994d:69). When considering the employment trends that graduate scientists and engineers have generally had since World War II, underutilized recent PhDs might be described as scientists and engineers whose present employment positions have not matched their career expectations. The SDR includes both underemployment and underutilization rates. In 1991, for example, 89.7% of scientific and engineering PhDs were employed and 1.4% were unemployed (together, these are considered the total scientific and engineering labor force).7 Of those employed, 1.7% were underemployed as defined above. Therefore, of the total labor force, 3.1% were underutilized. The underemployment rate was 1.3% in 1985, 1987, and 1989 and 6 Data limitations prevent quantitative analysis and verification of some of these claims. 7 The remaining 8.9% were retired, not looking for work, or otherwise out of the workforce. It is important to note that the survey retains people in the sample for 42 years, so some people are past common retirement ages.

OCR for page 19
Page 29 1.7% in 1991.8 The underutilization rate was 2.1% in 1985, 2.4% in 1987, 2.1% in 1989, and 3.1% in 1991. Those figures, of course, differ by field. Anecdotal information also indicates that although recent scientific and engineering PhDs are seldom working in jobs for which their graduate work is not relevant (e.g., working in a restaurant), they are increasingly able to obtain only part-time or temporary positions. Data collected by the scientific societies are also useful. For example, results of the AMS survey cited earlier indicate that beyond the 9% unemployment rate, an additional 5.5% of recent PhDs were able to obtain only part-time positions, and more than half those taking faculty jobs were in non-tenure-track positions (AMS, 1994a). About 10% of the physics PhD class of 1992 was working in temporary or part-time positions (Kirby and Czujko, 1993:23). Another statistical indicator of underutilization is the rising percentage of new PhDs taking postdoctoral positions. A postdoctoral position is intended to provide further depth of education and job preparation, but it can also act as a safety net when the labor market is poor. The number of scientists and engineers in postdoctoral positions has grown substantially, from less than 15,000 in 1982 to more than 24,000 in 1992 (see Table B-38). From 1991 to 1992, the number increased by 5%. Surveys do not determine the extent to which young scientists and engineers take postdoctoral positions for lack of regular employment. In chemistry, for example, the pool of postdoctoral scientists and engineers is estimated to have doubled during the last 10 years to more than 4,000. This is equivalent to the number of chemists who receive PhDs in 2 years (Rawls, 1994). Some attribute at least part of this increase to the preference of employers—especially pharmaceutical companies—for chemists with 3 or 4 years of postdoctoral experience. 2.2 EMPLOYMENT TRENDS BY SECTOR Most of the long-term growth in employment demand for graduate scientists and engineers has occurred in business and industry. Professional careers are becoming increasingly varied and nonacademic, although this varies somewhat by discipline (see Figure 2-6). More and more scientists and engineers are being exposed to nonacademic fields before, during, or after their academic preparation. In 8 As this report was going to press, NSF released a Data Brief citing 4.3 percent underemployment among doctoral scientists and engineers in 1993. This rate should not be compared with the reported 1991 rate of 1.7 percent, however, because the definition of underemployment was broadened between the 2 survey years. In 1991, individuals were counted as underemployed if they were working part-time or outside of science or engineering when they desired a science or engineering position. In 1993, the requirement was expanded to include those working part-time or outside their doctoral field when they desired a position within their doctoral field.

OCR for page 19
Page 36 There are niches of opportunity in specific fields, such as energy and environment, but the overall numbers are steady or declining because of staff reductions and low turnover. Business and Industry Over the long term, demand for graduate scientists and engineers in business and industry is increasing; more employment options are available to graduate scientists and engineers who have multiple disciplines, minor degrees, personal communication skills, and entrepreneurial initiative. In the business and industry sector, according to the 1989 SDR, of the 113,000 working in for-profit organizations, half listed research and development as their primary activity. Most—35,000—were in applied research, and another 18,000 did development work. Another large group—29,000—were administrators and managers (primarily of research and development). Less than 3 % of the PhDs in industry were doing basic research. Of the 32,000 who were self-employed, half were in professional services and one-fourth were consultants (calculated from NSF, 1991). As shown in Table 2-3, the proportion of scientists and engineers employed in business and industry for all fields has increased from 26% in 1977 to 35% in 1991. In some fields—such as chemistry, engineering, and computer science—graduate scientists and engineers have long found employment in nonacademic markets. But survey data, buttressed by testimony of committee witnesses and correspondents, show that this trend now applies to Some PhDs are now adapting to fields once considered remote from science and engineering. Albert Bellino, an executive at Banker's Trust in New York, told the committee that investment banking is one such field in which advanced scientists and engineers are held in high esteem. Mr. Bellino is a managing director at Banker's Trust, one of a number Wall Street firms that hire a total of perhaps 100 PhDs in science each year. His firm, for example, hires about 1015 PhDs each year. In total, the company now employs approximately 150 PhDs among its 5,000 employees. Most newly hired employees have traditionally been economists, but the number of PhDs in physical sciences and mathematics is rising. The company believes that such training is excellent preparation that is easily transferred to financial markets. There have been other changes in the qualities desired at Banker's Trust. In the past, said Mr. Bellino, the bank looked for these traits: hardworking, reliable, local, team player, consistent performer. Now, it prefers "smart,intense, driven, problem solver, entrepreneur, quixotic, a little abrasive. It used to seek out people who were involved in jogging, swimming tennis, and travel; now it looks for bridge, chess, crossword puzzles, trading of baseball cards or stamps, linguistics, music. Mr. Bellino explained that the latter traits are, desire because investment banking has become an "ideas business". It wants people who have the best ideas, who know how to implement ideas, and who can manage risk on behalf of their clients and themselves. It also seeks those with an interest in markets(for example, someone who ran a family fund or had such a hobby as trading baseball cards) and those whose communications skills enable them to be effective in a less-hierarchical organization. Box 2-3: Investment Banking

OCR for page 19
Page 37 TABLE 2-3 Changes in Percentages of Scientists and Engineers Employed in Business/Industry 5-8 Years after Receiving US PhD, by Broad Field, 1977 and 1991   1977 1991 TOTAL 25.6 34.5 PHYSICAL SCIENCES 30.4 44.2 Mathematical sciences 12.2 18.6 Computer sciences 42.0 50.3 Physics/Astronomy 25.1 38.2 Chemistry 45.5 60.9 Earth/Environmental sciences 18.6 22.7 LIFE SCIENCES 12.9 26.4 Agricultural sciences 17.9 30.8 Medical sciences 15.9 26.4 Biological sciences 11.4 25.4 SOCIAL SCIENCES 5.6 13.1 Psychology 15.4 36.5 ENGINEERING 50.5 56.7 NOTES: See notes for Figure 2-1 for important information about the comparability of 1991 estimates with the estimates for previous years. SOURCE: Special runs of data from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients of employment sector of US doctoral scientists and engineers 5-8 years after receiving the PhD (in this case, 19691972 PhD recipients in 1977 and 1983-1986 PhD recipients in 1991). Psychology PhDs, many of whom go into clinical psychology, are not included in the totals.

OCR for page 19
Page 38 other fields as well (see Table 2-1). For example, in biological sciences, the percentage employed in business and industry increased from 11% in 1977 to 25 % in 1991. The evidence received by the committee indicates that the trend will continue and that most job creation for scientists and engineers in coming years will occur in business and industry. However, for a variety of reasons, some large industries are modifying or closing their central research laboratories: some have become smaller, and some have shifted into enterprises that emphasize development, marketing, and R&D activities that are designed primarily for short-term economic gain. Hence, although industries will continue to perform research and to offer employment, they might not support traditional research to the degree that they have in the past. In small and medium-size companies, new and emerging technologies develop rapidly. Such companies provide one of the few increases in R&D funding. Because staff sizes in such companies are limited, successful science and engineering employees are those who can cross disciplinary boundaries and have talents in product development, manufacturing, or technical services. Jobs in industries that depend on emerging technologies show steady increases (which, however, can fluctuate with the business cycle). Within those industries are fields that are expanding, such as manufacturing simulation, information science, computational simulation, software engineering, data processing, visualization, forensic science, and electronic networking. 2.3 EMPLOYER PERSPECTIVES As part of its outreach effort, the committee sent out a call for comments to over 1,000 persons: graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, professors, university administrators, industry scientists and executives, and representatives of scientific societies. The 100 responses received (50% of which came from industry) are summarized in Appendix F. This section provides an overview of graduate education from an employer perspective. Why do organizations employ individuals with a scientific background? Here is a view from the president of a biotechnology company: We employ people with a scientific background in almost all aspects of our operations: general management, marketing and sales, business development, regulatory and quality affairs, clinical development, manufacturing and, obviously, research and research management. We find that a scientific education prepares people well for a number of careers, because it teaches them to be analytical, adaptable, and pragmatic problem-solvers. Furthermore, the spirit of scientific enterprise encourages them to be entrepreneurial which is an increasingly valuable personal quality across the breadth of today's commercial environment.

OCR for page 19
Page 39 What do employers think of the current science and engineering graduate education program? Generally, industry and academic administrators responded favorably to the current concept of graduate education, although they expressed some concern as to the relationship between that education and the positions eventually attained. The following statement typifies the general sentiment: "We may see some specific difficulties in the relationship between academe and the profession it is intended to serve, but the structure itself is sound." Some concerns were also expressed about the level of additional education that is needed to enable recent graduates to become fully participating employees. Consider the response from one major industrial employer who hires several hundred people with graduate science and engineering degrees in laboratories each year from many universities and in many disciplines: Even "the best of the crop" take anywhere from 6 months to 2 years to become good, productive industrial researchers. Most recent graduates, particularly those who have not summer-interned, do not have the foggiest idea of what industrial research is all about. Some even think that using or developing technology to do something useful is not research and if it is a product that makes a profit, is even slightly dishonorable. Those from the academic arena had concerns as well—focused primarily on the teaching and mentoring skills of students trained in the science and engineering graduate system. The following comment is from a graduate dean and provost: I have long been concerned about the teaching expectations of graduate students—all graduate students, not just in the sciences and engineering. How we can expect that an individual will intuit teaching skills is an amazement. While teaching is somewhat an art, there are many skills and techniques that need to be learned before an individual should be turned loose to teach a course. We do our graduate students no service, and certainly provide no service to the teachers, if we expect them to function in that capacity.... They also need to be prepared to be academic advisers. It is not enough to walk into a class and conduct that experience. If graduate students are to be teachers, they need to know how to interact outside the classroom with undergraduate students, providing them the support that they should have during their undergraduate experience.

OCR for page 19
Page 40 A common subject was the changing environment—in both the industrial and the academic world. The following is from the dean of a major graduate school: Graduates are not necessarily being well trained to participate in much of our higher educational system as faculty: facilities for front-line research in sciences are not likely to get less costly. Not many colleges and universities will be able to afford the kinds of equipment required for faculty to make significant contributions to science in many areas. If this is true, most academic PhD positions will be in institutions which do not have essential facilities for what is viewed by these fields as cutting-edge research. Either the faculty in such institutions will have to carve out areas of research which don't rely on expensive equipment, or they will have to change their expectations of being significant players on the national and international science scene. It may be that there should be some effort devoted to training PhDs for research appropriate to those other institutions, either for enhancing their instructional roles or for providing them with realistic lines of research. These are from an industry perspective: In my judgment, educating and training students to do research as well as conducting basic research are still the primary objectives of graduate programs. However, [the programs] must be responsive to changing national policies and industrial needs.... I would agree that the American graduate system has been/is a great success. However, to ignore the indicators that show change is needed would be a mistake. Clearly, the challenge ahead is to retain the best of the system while making the changes that will strengthen the nation's outstanding research universities and make them more responsive to the nation's needs. The days when a person could do a PhD thesis in surface thermodynamics (as I did) and reasonably expect to work in the field for a career are over—and I think will never return. One must be ready with the skills to change one's area of focus several times over a career. Most PhD education is training people in the exact opposite direction, and I think this needs to be changed promptly.

OCR for page 19
Page 41 This comment from a university graduate dean shows both perspectives: Unfortunately, the training the graduates receive in universities is not directed to any specific career path. Most of the time, after some necessary training in their background, graduate students are pushed into narrow specialization. The consequence of such training is that many of them lack the breadth for work in industry. From what I have seen from the job offers received by our engineering students, they are successful with relatively less effort if their research topic and/or their assistantship experience is closely related to the prospective job description. The universities are not doing any better in training PhDs for academe either. Except for the recent initiatives taken by some universities in giving them pointers on effective teaching, generally their training is in a narrow area of research and they are faced with on-the-job training. There was also a general concern that although the scientific and technological education received was sufficient, the skills training that is part of that educational experience was not. The following comment is from a major consulting firm: It is our general finding that US graduate schools successfully continue their tradition of producing well-educated scientists and engineers that are capable of making important contributions in their chosen fields. We also believe that the effectiveness of these graduates could be enhanced through practical (''hands-on") experiences/traineeships, functioning as a member of a (multidisciplinary) team, strengthened interpersonal skills, ability to communicate clearly the purpose (including the "strategic" value and relevance) of the activity in question, and substantial knowledge of the business environment/culture (including project-management fundamentals, time/effort/budget deliverables, sensitivity to human-resource concerns, safety, intellectual property, etc.). These are from international corporations: Why are industries such as ours not more accepting of PhDs with little or no experience? Because many fresh PhDs see their research area as their sole focus, at least for the immediate future. They generally tend to be very narrow. And, more important, they generally have no meaningful understanding of the business of business. Some might say that such understanding is the responsibility of

OCR for page 19
Page 42 business to provide. I say no. A highly trained scientist or engineer cannot be very effective if she/he has no knowledge at all of how a company is organized and why, lacks understanding about the principal staff and operating functions, is ignorant of the rudiments of accounting and finance, is unaware of product-liability issues that directly affect product development, etc., etc. Industry cannot be expected to deliver such training and education in a short period of time. True, with years of experience working in industry such knowledge is slowly acquired—but it is an extremely inefficient transfer mechanism. Meanwhile, in the early years when the new technologist is working without awareness of these forces and boundary conditions, that person cannot be as effective as she/he otherwise might be. Careers are throttled. Most of the new PhDs that we hire seem to be relatively well prepared for careers in our organization. I would urge, however, that rather than move towards increasing specialization, which occurs very early in their training, the students should be given a broad array of courses in related areas early in their training. I have the impression that, also from day one in their program, students are now put into laboratories and given a research project so that they can develop the knowledge and skills in their specific area of activity to allow them to compete for grants in the future. However, it has been my observation that this type of training limits their ability to participate in multi-disciplinary teams that are often necessary in the industrial setting. We look for top-notch technical skills and some evidence of ability to "reduce to practice" the technologies the candidate has been involved in. If we look at new graduates, we look for curiosity about and an appreciation for practical applications of science. As we move away from independent, stand-alone research and toward more team projects, we screen and hire candidates based on their ability to work in teams, to lead collaborations and teams in an effective way. Skills like project management, leadership, planning and organizing, interpersonal skills, adaptability, negotiation, written and oral communication and solid computer knowledge/utilization are critical for an industrial R&D scientist/engineer. If you walk on water technically but can't or won't explain or promote your ideas and your science, you won't get hired. If you do get hired, your career will stall.

OCR for page 19
Page 43 Expectations are slightly different for those with master's degrees and PhDs. Here is an overview from a major company: In the case of PhDs we are looking for high intelligence and creativity, the ability to originate and conduct independent research, a research background involving at least a solid thesis research experience, and the potential breadth of talent to move from one research field to another. The flexibility required by the latter point is important to us because we cannot hire new talent every time we wish to enter new research fields. We are also looking for excellent communication and interpersonal skills, so that with proper training they can develop into potential management candidates both in the research organization and in management positions in our operations. We have had a good track record in our research organization in supplying high-caliber talent to our operations. In the case of master's-degree candidates, we are looking for the same kind of talents, except we do not expect experience in conducting research. In summary, the anecdotal information collected via the committee's call for comments indicates that although employers are generally pleased with the result of US graduate education, they have some specific concerns as to its breadth, versatility, and skill development. In particular, employers do not feel that the current level of education is sufficient in providing skills and abilities to the people that they are interested in employing, particularly in A number of universities are attempting to improve the preparation of graduate students who plan to become professors. One example is a pilot program at North Carolina State University, "Preparing the Professoriate." N.C. State found in focus-group discussions that doctoral students wanted "opportunities to prepare more fully for the academic life of a professor...to learn to teach in the same way that they learn to do research in a significant and extensive advising atmosphere." The program uses "mentoring pairs," each of which teams a doctoral candidate with a current or emeritus professor. Throughout an academic year, the mentors work with their graduate students ("teaching associates") to develop individualized plans for substantive teaching experiences; these range from course preparation and planning to final course evaluation. Students document their experience by developing a professional portfolio, which can include student evaluations, letters of recommendation that specifically address teaching, and evidence of course planning and preparation with videotapes. The portfolio may be used when a student applies for a position in academe. Box 2-4: Preparing Professors

OCR for page 19
Page 44 · Communication skills (including teaching and mentoring abilities for academic positions). · Appreciation for applied problems (particularly in an industrial setting). · Teamwork (especially in interdisciplinary settings). They are also concerned that the graduate-education system—although acceptable for the past employment world—is less and less acceptable in today's more global world. 2.4 THE CHANGING CONTEXT OF EMPLOYMENT During the preparation of this report, the committee heard sufficient testimony to be convinced of the considerable pain and dislocation among new PhDs. One forum for such discussions is the Young Scientists' Network (YSN), through which junior scientists and engineers discuss employment and other issues on an Internet bulletin board. For example, the YSN recently posted an open letter that said, in part: "Jobs in research are more than scarce today: advertised research positions routinely attract hundreds of excellent applicants." The tone of the letter carried the urgency and anxiety that the committee heard during panel discussions with members of the YSN and with other young scientists and engineers. The changes in the employment market described earlier suggest that the most effective graduate-education programs are the ones that prepare students not only for independent careers in academic research, but also for nontraditional employment in a variety of nonacademic settings (see Box 25). Universities and their professors need to revise the science and engineering graduate curriculum so that students are educated and prepared for the opportunities available. For example, although employers prefer to hire people who have a strong background in basic These are some nontraditional positions and employment sectors identified for physicists with graduate degrees (APS, 1994). A list could be developed for other fields. Medicine: medical-physics practitioner, radiological technician, CAT scan and MRI technician. City, state, and federal government: science adviser, science attache, state-level educator or administrator, transportation staff, environment staff, statistics personnel, computational staff, World Bank staff, international trade personnel, International Atomic Energy Commission (UN) staff. Computing: software developer, business-data handler, securities broker, banking personnel. Small business: consultant, computational staff, forecaster, data analyzer, instrumentation expert, indexer, abstracting staff. Law: patent attorney, expert witness. Education: precollege teacher, community and technical college staff, museum staff, librarian, educational- materials, developer, district-level school administrator. Science journalism: newspaper journalists, scientific journalist. Box 2-5: Nontraditional Positions and Employment Sectors

OCR for page 19
Page 45 principles and reasoning, graduate research activities often focus on specialized training and techniques. In addition, more opportunities are available to graduates who are flexible enough to shift careers. The field that is "hot" when a student enters graduate school might cool by the time of graduation. The first permanent job will seldom be the last, as workers in all fields are expected to change positions and even careers with greater frequency. Job-seekers who do not limit their educational preparation—or their job search—to traditional research positions might be better able to take advantage of a vocational environment that is changing rapidly. As indicated in Appendix F, committee testimony and written comments from a variety of employers supported that point of view—that employers favor potential employees who · Can collaborate across disciplines, in various settings, and learn in fields beyond their specialty. · Can adapt quickly under changing conditions. · Work well in teams and demonstrate leadership ability. · Can work with people whose languages and cultures are different from their own. In some cases, multiple advanced degrees or multidisciplinary backgrounds will be useful. For example, a student who combines a degree in life sciences with a law degree might be well qualified for the specialty of patent law within biotechnology. Likewise, a minor in geology might help an ecologist to obtain employment. Other growing multidisciplinary fields are biostatistics, numerical analysis, operations research, and digital signal processing. In some fields, single projects require multiple skills. For example, engineers with specialties in interdisciplinary fields like transportation are more likely to find employment than their mechanical- or civil-engineering counterparts. Others have emphasized the extent to which strong scientific training—with its emphasis on analytical problem-solving, experimental strategy, and creativity—prepares a person for productive roles in government, business, and industry beyond roles that require the specific scientific or technical expertise acquired in the education process. It is impossible to predict whether the rapid growth of traditional positions will resume during the 1990s, as was widely predicted in the late 1980s (Atkinson, 1990; Bowen and Sosa, 1989; NSF, 1989). History has shown that employment trends for graduate scientists and engineers are particularly difficult to forecast (Fechter, 1990; Leslie and Oaxaca, 1990; Vetter, 1993). Public spending on R&D and employment of scientists and engineers can change suddenly in response to unexpected events, such as the launching of Sputnik in 1957 and the collapse of the Soviet Union and the economic recession of the early 1990s. The continuing debate over employment of scientists and engineers clearly requires a continuing re-evaluation of the graduate education and training of scientists and engineers.

OCR for page 19