An Interim Report on
Assuring DOD a Strong Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce
Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Workforce
Needs for the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Board on Higher Education and Workforce
Division on Policy and Global Affairs
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract No. HQ0034-10-D-0003, Delivery Order 0003, between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26004-6
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26004-3
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS WORKFORCE NEEDS FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE U.S. DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL BASE
NORMAN R. AUGUSTINE (NAS/NAE), Co-Chair, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired)
C.D. (DAN) MOTE, JR. (NAE), Co-Chair, University of Maryland, College Park
BURT S. BARNOW, The George Washington University
JAMES S.B. CHEW, L-3 Communications
LAWRENCE J. DELANEY, Titan Corporation (retired)
MARY L. GOOD (NAE), University of Arkansas at Little Rock
DANIEL E. HASTINGS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
ROBERT J. HERMANN (NAE), Private Consultant, Bloomfield, Connecticut
J.C. HERZ, Batchtags, LLC
RAY O. JOHNSON, Lockheed Martin Corporation
ANITA K. JONES (NAE), University of Virginia
SHARON LEVIN, University of Missouri-St. Louis
FRANCES S. LIGLER (NAE), Naval Research Laboratory
AARON LINDENBERG, Stanford University
PAUL D. NIELSEN (NAE), Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University
DANIEL T. OLIVER, Naval Postgraduate School
C. KUMAR N. PATEL (NAS/NAE), Pranalytica, Inc.
LEIF E. PETERSON, Advanced HR Concepts and Solutions, LLC
STEPHEN M. ROBINSON (NAE), University of Wisconsin-Madison
MICHAEL S. TEITELBAUM, Harvard Law School
RONALD WILLIAMS, The College Board
TERRY JAGGERS, Lead Board Director
MARTIN OFFUTT, Study Director
GAIL GREENFIELD, Senior Program Officer
DANIEL E.J. TALMAGE, JR., Program Officer
MARGUERITE SCHNEIDER, Administrative Coordinator
DIONNA ALI, Senior Program Assistant
This interim report on the science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) workforce of the Department of Defense (DOD) and the U.S. defense industrial base is part of an 18-month study to assess the STEM capabilities that the DOD will need in order to meet its goals, objectives, and priorities; to assess whether the current DOD workforce and strategy will meet those needs; and to identify and evaluate options and recommend strategies that the department could use to help meet its future STEM needs. The study has been undertaken by the National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council at the request of the Honorable Zachary J. Lemnios, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD[R&E]).
This interim report is being issued for the purpose of assisting ASD(R&E) with its fiscal year (FY) 2014 planning process and with laying the groundwork for future years. Earlier in the project, the Committee on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Workforce Needs for the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base convened a workshop, on August 1 and 2, 2011, in Rosslyn, Virginia, for the purpose of gathering a broad range of views from the public sector and the private sector, including major defense contractors, and from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), all of which are stakeholders in the future STEM workforce. A report issued in early 2012 summarizes the views expressed by individual workshop participants.* At the conclusion of the study, a final report will be issued.
The committee will make specific recommendations in the final report. The present report offers interim findings and observations. These represent the committee’s attempt to sift out the salient understandings that might inform the DOD’s actions with regard to its STEM workforce. The observations identify areas in which the DOD may need to act.
The following terms of reference were established for the committee’s work:
A joint National Academy of Engineering (NAE)-National Research Council (NRC) study committee will assess the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) capabilities that the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) needs to meet its goals, objectives, and priorities; assess whether the current DOD workforce and strategy will meet those needs; and identify and evaluate options and recommend strategies that the department could use to help meet its future STEM needs.
The study work scope will involve five major tasks:
*National Research Council. 2012. Report of a Workshop on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Workforce Needs for the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
- Review the current and projected STEM workforce demands over the next five years relevant to DOD needs and to the needs of the industrial base supporting DOD programs and missions, including an overview by science and engineering discipline, quality, and skill level.
- Provide an assessment of current limitations to meeting these needs over the next five years and an analysis of observations by recognized experts on the forces shaping limitations on future needs.
- Review alternative options for overcoming identified limiting factors and other impediments to fulfilling near-term DOD STEM needs.
- Identify emerging science and technology fields that will likely have significant impact on the DOD and national needs over the next 5-15 years and where targeted national investments could have the most impact on developing human resources in the identified fields.
- Provide an overview and analysis of expert views on the capacity of the nation’s higher education enterprise in meeting the necessary scale and scope of STEM workforce needs for DOD and the U.S. defense industrial base.
The study committee will convene a two-day public workshop on US defense-related workforce needs. The workshop will feature invited expert presentations and discussions. The committee will develop the workshop agenda, select and invite speakers and discussants, and moderate the discussions. Experts to be invited to participate in the workshop will be drawn from the membership of prior NRC studies and related activities, the public and private sectors, and from academic organizations. Following the conclusion of the workshop, a summary report of the event will be prepared by the committee. There will be one administrative progress report and one interim report, as well as a final consensus report based on the committee’s work on the five study tasks, including the information presented in the workshop.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Amy Alving, Science Applications International Corporation,
Wanda M. Austin (NAE), The Aerospace Corporation,
Paul G. Gaffney II (NAE), Monmouth University,
Robert H. Latiff, Private Consultant, Alexandria, Virginia,
Norine E. Noonan, University of South Florida St. Petersburg,
Kaushik Rajashekara (NAE), Rolls-Royce Corporation,
Hal Salzman, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey,
John C. Sommerer, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory,
David A. Whelan (NAE), The Boeing Company, and
Steven Wise, Northwest Evaluation Association.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Lawrence D. Brown (NAS), University of Pennsylvania. Appointed by the NRC, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.