Engineering Shortage or not?

College Majors Engineering Majors
161

<p>Getting strictly back on topic, as a result of seeing a few letters to the editor, I believe there was a rather extensive article in the WSJ which dealt with the current GLUT of engineers. I believe the article was published on November 16th. The letters seemed to support the claim that the "engineering shortage" is a myth. If someone is a subscriber to WSJ "on-line", I think the article can be accessed there. I will try checking the library for a copy the next time I'm near it, as I'm fascinated mostly by the fact that such a debate continues on something which I see as so obvious.</p>

<p>Since my two prior postings on this thread were perhaps insightful, but nevertheless slightly off-topic, consider this perspective on the supposed "shortage"....let's at least concede (hopefully without any argument) that entire manufacturing industries have moved off-shore (to name a few HUGE categories: [1] consider televisions, and pretty much any consumer appliance, [2] consider textile industries and a huge chunk of clothing manufacturing, [3] consider plastics and essentially ALL TOYS, [4] etc.). Along with the off-shoring of these entire industries, most of the process engineering and product development engineering departed also. Therefore, if one will at least concede that the output of the aggregate total of the engineering schools in the country has stayed relatively constant, where are all the engineers for these entire manufacturing segments obtaining employment? All that needs proven to dispell a shortage is whether the engineering ranks are being filled at a rate faster than they are being "consumed" by DOMESTIC jobs.</p>

<p>Where my point gets somewhat debatable is whether you think that new engineering segments have appeared at a rate which meets or beats the obvious decline. I admit to a lack of data on that point, and I surely acknowledge that a few fields such as environmental engineering are growth segments. I think the end-game comes down to whether you consider "computer engineering" to be engineering in the traditional sense of the word. I do not consider "software engineering" to be engineering whatsoever, and therefore do not consider jobs at Microsoft, Oracle, Google, etc to be offsetting against the losses. In fact, I'm one of those engineers who takes great exception to Microsoft flinging around the term "engineer" in association with computer science ("MCSE" or something like that?). If our national organization (NSPE) had any teeth (which it doesn't), there would have been a lawsuit (likely yielding a "default judgementon" for you legal types) on that terminology awhile ago. However, even if you take the position that software engineering uptake is offsetting, you're in for disappointment since those jobs are now being offshored to India at an alarming rate as well. The most you'll get from that argument is perhaps a 20 year deferral of the same result.</p>

<p>Coming full circle on my own logic here, it occurs to me that the general career health and professionalism of engineers might well be characterized by the blatant, yet permitted, abuse of the term "ENGINEER"....sanitary ENGINEER, microsoft certified systems ENGINEER, etc. Please just consider and concede this: How long would somebody get away with adding the suffix "M.D." to their title or name before being the proud recipient of a personalized legal summons? Even Bill Gates knows he'd best not have certification courses for M.M.D. types (of course that would mean "Microsoft Media Doctor") Yes, that last paragraph went off-topic again.</p>

162

<p>so after reading some of the posts I have an honest question, do you guuys think the best engineers can only be found at elite schools?</p>

163

<p>The off-topic part of your posting is interesting too ...</p>

<p>I see where you are coming from regarding Software Engineering not being true Engineering. It is probably safe to assume you do not consider Financial Engineering to be true Engineering either (someone else has posted in one of these threads that Financial Engineering should not even be an undergraduate major due to the narrowness of its scope).</p>

<p>Would you consider Industrial Engineering / Operations Research to be true Engineering, then?</p>

<p>How about control theory, often taught in Electric Engineering departments, but in fairly abstract settings?</p>

164

<p>4thFloor,</p>

<p>Your general question about what is and is not engineering is certain to elicit a firestorm of debate -- the only thing I'm sure about is that it's "off-topic" for this thread. I have opinions, but they're only opinions, and frankly such discourse is probably only counter-productive, since it's one of those topics that just doesn't have a definitive answer. Whereas, I feel strongly that the "engineering shortage" question can, and has been, answered to the satisfaction of at least those not having a political and/or economic agenda (i.e. CEO's wanting more H-1B's to improve the bottom line).</p>

<p>However, thanks for asking. Maybe the all-knowing Wikipedia has some definition of Engineering that could wrap up such a topic.</p>

165

<p>OH_DAD, unlike certain other people that shall remain unnamed, seems to be a respectable debater with valid points.</p>

<p>However, I would provide pushback on several points that he made</p>

<p>
[quote]
if one will at least concede that the output of the aggregate total of the engineering schools in the country has stayed relatively constant,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I do not concede this. The aggregate output of engineering schools has NOT remained constant, in fact it has declined significantly in recent years. A study that I read (which I shall attempt to locate) indicated that about 60,000 engineering bachelor's degrees are produced per annum in recent years, down from, I believe, something like around 90-100,000 in the 90's. And because the total number of bachelor's degrees (in all disciplines) continues to rise, this means that the percentage of engineering degrees conferred is at one of the lowest levels in recent times. </p>

<p>Furthermore, the total value of manufactured goods in the US continues to rise. Manufacturing, as a percentage of US GDP, has held steady for the last couple decades and will continue to remain so. </p>

<p>
[quote]
consider plastics

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree with what has been said about consumer electronics. But not with plastics, if what you mean is bulk polymers. Is there a large international polymers import/export trade business? Not really. That's because these polymers are extremely bulky and therefore extremely expensive to transport. Furthermore, plastics manufacturing is extremely capital intensive, which means that the labor costs are vanishingly small. What that means is that there is little incentive to move plastics manufacturing offshore. After all, how much are you really going to save? Whatever you might save on labor costs will be eaten up by transport. </p>

<p>
[quote]
where are all the engineers for these entire manufacturing segments obtaining employment?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, obviously they are shifting to the manufacturing that has stayed in the US. Again, I would point to microchip fabrication, which is a tremendously capital intensive industry for which labor costs are not a compelling reason to move production. Intel, for example, has given no indications that they are going to move any of their US fabs to countries like China and India. Intel may ultimately build fabs in China and India, but not at the expense of Western fabs. Heck, Intel continues to EXPAND its Western fabs. For example, I noticed that Intel has announced a building of another fab in Israel. Israel is not a low-cost country. I know Intel has announced continued expansion of its production facilities in Oregon and Arizona. In fact, I think the Intel Arizona fab facility may soon be the largest such facility in the world. The same is true of the other Western semiconductor companies. </p>

<p>Or consider Boeing. Boeing is hiring like hotcakes for engineering positions in the Seattle area. Nobody is talking about moving aircraft manufacturing to China or India. The reason, again, is that aircraft manufacturing is so capital-intensive. It makes little sense to move production to save on labor costs when labor costs are such a small part of the equation anyway. </p>

<p>Then there is production and engineering jobs that have to stay here for pure proximity reasons. I would point to the growing boom in energy production. The US still has a lot of oil and gas, and somebody has to produce it. Somebody has to be out there doing the deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Somebody has to be managing the reservoirs in West Texas. I don't see how any of these jobs can be easily outsourced, not unless you're talking about flying in engineers from China and India. Then consider all the refineries in the Gulf Coast and all the discussion of expanding refinery expansion in the US to improve gasoline supplies. Who is going to man those refineries? I foresee a steady increase in demand for chemical and petroleum engineers. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I do not consider "software engineering" to be engineering whatsoever....

[/quote]
</p>

<p>On this point, I would have to disagree that software engineering cannot be considered engineering. I agree that Microsoft flinging around terms like MCSE is damanging, but that's not software engineering, that's systems administration, which is a different beast entirely. More to the point, ABET accredits Computer Science programs as engineering programs. If ABET considers that to be engineering, then I guess it's engineering. </p>

<p>I would also take a stand against the supposedly inexorable force of offshoring. The fact is, offshoring is not the specter that everyone thinks it is. Think of it this way - there have always been ways for companies to source cheaper labor. During the dotcom boom of the late 90's, why did all these Internet companies hire Silicon Valley engineers for 150-200 k a year plus stock options? Why didn't they just hire cheaper software writers from Canada or Mexico or wherever? Those countries had plenty of good and cheap coders. In fact, many of those Canadian and Mexican coders immigrated to Silicon Valley so that they could be the ones to earn 150-200k during the boom. Were all these companies being stupid? Even today, I see a lot of tech companies hiring engineering jobs located in Silicon Valley. Yeah, in Silicon Valley. Why offer those jobs, if it really is so easy to just hire all your engineers from India? Why doesn't Oracle fire its entire Redwood Shores engineering staff today and replace them all with Indians? Why doesn't Cisco shut down its entire San Jose engineering staff and replace them all with Indians? </p>

<p>The answer is that it is not that easy to do. Certain computing tasks can easily be offshored. Others cannot. In particular, those engineering jobs that require close interaction with management and with customers are very difficult to offshore. That is why these tech companies are actually continuing to hire Silicon Valley engineers.</p>

<p>Now don't get me wrong, it is true that they aren't hiring as many in Silicon Valley as before. Hence, this is really a race to demonstrate value. Everybody in the world needs to find his niche. I completely agree that those engineering jobs that have few independencies to the rest of the business, where you just sit alone in a room and write code, will probably be offshored. However, other engineering jobs have emerged that require close interaction with other business units, like marketing, like finance, like sales, etc. These jobs are less easily outsourced. </p>

<p>I would also point out that the reason why offshoring to India is popular is because of, unsurprisingly, low cost. However, India continues to get richer and richer, meaning that salaries are accelerating, which removes the impetus to offshore. You say that in 20 years time, all computing jobs will be outsourced. I would counter by saying that in 20 years time, Indian software salaries may be high enough that there will be little reason to offshore computing to India. </p>

<p>I think all of this gets to a basic misunderstanding of the value of free trade. The fact is, countries benefit as an aggregate from free trade. You're not going to win as a nation by erecting protectionist walls. Free trade of goods was beneficial to the US. Yes, some people (namely US factory workers) lost, but as a whole the country benefitted. Free trade of services will be similarly beneficial. Again, yes, some people will lose, but the country as a whole will gain. The US has been a high cost country for at least a century, and outsourcing and offshoring has existed for at least half a century. Yet the nation's economy has continued to grow and expand. The US has tremendous economic strengths, such as a strong entrepreneurial tradition, tremendously strong universities (especially the graduate schools), high labor and capital flexibility, an extremely stable legal and political system, and tremendous social mobility. The US should not be afraid of more free trade. Read the works of Schumpeter and how the creative destruction of capitalism ultimately produces higher standards of living. </p>

<p>I think that if any region of the world could really be hurt by outsourcing, it's not the US, it's Western Europe. Western Europe is also a high-cost place, and yet does not have the entrepreneurial tradition and capital/labor flexibility that the US does. </p>

<p>Finally, I would point out, relatively speaking, look at how marketable all the other bachelor's degrees are. For all its problems, an engineering degree is still more marketable than the vast majority of them. Some have said to pursue a degree in accounting, yet accounting jobs are also being outsourced to India. So it's the same thing. Some have said nursing, yet as I have shown, nurses make significantly less than do engineers, on average. I agree that in certain parts of the country, nurses may make more, but across the country, this is not true. And clearly, whatever career problems that the engineers have, it's surely better than what the English majors have to put up with. Or the PoliSci majors. Or the History majors. Or the Physics majors. Sure, an engineer can work until he's 30 and then get laid off. But so can an English major. So can a Psychology major. Hence, relatively speaking, engineering as an undergrad major is still a pretty good deal.</p>

166

<p>Sakky,</p>

<p>Please name an engineering school which has trended consistently smaller (graduated fewer students) in the last couple decades. I say "trended" to allow for the occasional year-to-year decline which all schools sometimes experience.</p>

<p>Thank-you.</p>

167

<p>I can't give you a school name, but I can give you these studies:</p>

<p>"The long-term trend has been for fewer students to enter engineering programs. From 1983 to 1990, engineering enrollment decreased sharply, followed by fluctuating and slower declines in the 1990s. Trends differ by degree level. At the bachelor’s degree level, undergraduate enrollment declined by more than 20 percent from 441,000 students in 1983 (the peak year) to 361,000 students in 1999. (See figure 2-7 and appendix table 2-9.) At the associate degree level, enrollment in engineering technology dropped precipitously from 1998 to 1999. The number of first- and second-year students enrolling in such programs declined by 25 and 36 percent, respectively. This associate degree level of engineering technology may be shifting somewhat to workplace training. Graduate engineering enrollment peaked in 1993 and has continued downward since. (See appendix table 2-10.)"</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c2/c2s2.htm#c2s2l3%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c2/c2s2.htm#c2s2l3&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"In 1986, the year in which most S&E degrees were earned, engineering represented 8 percent of all bachelor’s degrees earned, followed by a long, slow decline to 5 percent in 1998 (NSF/SRS 2001c)."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c2/c2s2.htm#engineering%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c2/c2s2.htm#engineering&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"In 1998, U.S. colleges awarded 63,262 bachelor’s degrees in
engineering, the lowest total since 1981. The number of
engineering students earning bachelor’s degrees has declined
about 19 percent since 1986."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ipsdb.com/pdfs/newsltrs/10.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ipsdb.com/pdfs/newsltrs/10.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>So while I don't know exactly which schools have trended smaller, the fact remains that somewhere along the line, enrollments and degree conferments have declined.</p>

168

<p>"So while I don't know exactly which schools have trended smaller, the fact remains that somewhere along the line, enrollments and degree conferments have declined."</p>

<p>Well, it looks like students are wisening up and getting the heck out of engineering....maybe the huge unstability and outsourcing of jobs has something to do with it. </p>

<p>Or maybe they're finding the medical field is a safe haven, where they can make a cool 200k/yr, have a cushy life, a wife+kids etc. and don't have to give a s**t about listening to anybody else case they're the boss of their own clinic - along with their partners.</p>

169

<p>
[quote]
Well, it looks like students are wisening up and getting the heck out of engineering....maybe the huge unstability and outsourcing of jobs has something to do with it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, I don't know about that. As you can see from the data, engineering enrollments were declining years before engineering outsourcing became an issue. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Or maybe they're finding the medical field is a safe haven, where they can make a cool 200k/yr, have a cushy life, a wife+kids etc. and don't have to give a s**t about listening to anybody else case they're the boss of their own clinic - along with their partners.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And again, I think this is something that we ought to bring up with the doctors on this board. I agree there are some good things about being a doctor. But there are some bad things too. This is something that we should ask actual doctors about.</p>

<p>But I find no evidence that people left engineering for medicine. If anything, people were leaving engineering for fields like "Parks & Recreation/Leisure Studies".</p>

170

<p>I doubt people are leaving it for medical school, don't be ridiculous. I think that engineering doesn't have the reputation it used to or interest with the decline of science infomation/intelligence in general (intelligent design, ban gov't spending on stem cell research, no huge gov't funded projects coming out of universities [all private now], and other science related issues) that people just aren't interested anymore. Why believe in evolution when saying it popped into existence is so much easier? Look I'm not flinging stones but the there is a War on Science and with gifted programs losing funding to go to average students so they're not "left behind." It has to do with low income schools failing and decreased gov't spending for need-based scholarships that cause some of the most hard-working but needy students behind. And the rich spoiled kids who don't want to work hard get into engineering because they have nice lives and they never had to work in high school b/c they're smart and no one who's smart actually works in high school anymore.</p>

<p>Look I'm just saying there is no to inspire people for math and science. Whenever I say I'm an engineer I either get looks of disgust, questions about "WHY!?", or comments about it being hard or too much work. Kids today are too lazy and don't see the benefits of the increased knowledge that engineering can give you. Why work in college when you can party all the time? There has been no space program, no code-breakers, but there seems to be significant developments all the time. Japan usually makes a big deal out of there's, I think that big new things should be announced along with the details and engineering behind it, not just what it does. People take technology for granted in this country and don't realize that someone has to think of it, someone has to create it, design it, come up with a process for it.</p>

<p>I really think engineering is cool. All the things it can do for society, your life. Too bad no one else shares my views. There's such an influence on stupidity anymore it's a wonder people don't forget how to breathe.</p>

171

<p>I don't think the medical life is as cushy as you make it sound. At times' it's demanding, time consuming, and difficult. If you have a wife kids, how much time do you get to spend with them? How about when you're on call? How many doctors make that cool 200k a years? Do you think doctors don't take "s**t" from patients, insurance companies, and lawyers of clients? They are required to go to conferences to learn things yearly, and attend trials for various reasons. At times it's cushy, but it at other times, it's freaking tough.</p>

172

<p>illinijbravoecho, maybe people are turned off by your "You-are-an-idiot-if-you-don't-find-engineering-to-be-the-best-thing-in-the-universe" attitude. Are you really going to blame the current situation on some War on Science?</p>

173

<p>Something tells me that all those missing engineers didn't go into doctoring. I would certainly be surprised if the AMA suddenly decided to allow 30,000 more new doctors each year!</p>

174

<p>IlliniJBravoEcho may have gone a little far on the political aspects of the anti-science sentiment, which has a long tradition in, say (liberal) Hollywood, and even further back in popular literature.</p>

<p>On the other hand, there may be something valid in his observation on the baby boomers' rich spoiled me-first kids and their aversion to anything difficult. Such an attitude was indeed evident in a recent Wall Street Journal article on children of engineers deciding against engineering careers. A real jaw-dropping story for me was a recent article in the New York Times, I believe, that described how American kids are paying Chinese kids to play on-line computer games to advance in the standings and gain on-line status symbols. (By the way, you can be a "rich spoiled kid" without actually being rich; it's more of a sense of entitlement than an economic definition.)</p>

<p>As for where the engineering majors went, I suspect a lot of them may have gone to Econ, a major that has swelled in popularity in many colleges.</p>

175

<p>Sakky,</p>

<p>Thanks for your thorough assessment of my post, and the associated links in your post. After reviewing the links, however, I would proposed that there is a completely different way to interpret the data, especially with respect to the third link you posted.</p>

<p>The 19% decline in engineering undergraduate degrees conferred could largely (or possibly entirely) be explained by a higher dropout and/or failure percentage, for potentially the same or even a higher number of initial enrollees.</p>

<p>I say again, with the exception of a few schools (example: Tulane, probably due to the impact of Katrina), I see no evidence of schools bragging on their reduction in size of their engineering programs. It's simply a non-sequitor. However, if the 19% drop is valid, I guess the counter-point to my position is validated somewhat. You seem to have a great amount of time to dedicate to these posts (which I do not), and I wish I had the time to quantify the loss of engineering jobs - my intuition says it's far larger than the 19% decrease in bachelors degrees conferred. Also, I question what a university does in the case of a BS graduate proceeding seamlessly through to an MS or PhD...do they post BOTH degrees in their stats, or is the one graduate simply categorized as an advanced degree recipient? This is extremely relevant, since it's well known that during tough times, graduates who can't find work defer the pain by moving into graduate work in hopes of salvaging good employment via a more advanced degree. It is plausible that a very high percentage of the 19% stated reduction is actually accounted for by people shifting to higher degrees.</p>

<p>I say again to all those reading, if you have real data for real reductions in engineering program sizes (beyond Tulane), this would be most helpful in addressing the original "shortage" question. Every program I've encountered is building new buildings and bragging about their growth. EVERY ONE OF THEM!</p>

176

<p>Heh I wrote that post at 2 AM . . . I think I came off worse than I meant to but I'm serious as far as people not thinking science is important anymore. I'm not blaming it on the War on Science but I think that has something to do with it. I know that if I were a student and my school was debating on teaching evolution (I've known about evolution since grade school, I read a lot when I was little, mainly dinosaurs -> birds) I would probably feel frustrated. It is the fundamental theory of biology. It is perfect? No. Is it proven? YES!</p>

<p>I never said the engineering was shrinking. But the number of degree's gotten by US students has. There is something wrong with that. Why is my class full of foreigners when there are plenty of capable US students out there for it? (Nothing against foreigners here but it is a good question.) How come so many of my friends have dropped or are thinking of dropping? People still want to drop and it is getting into sophomore year!</p>

<p>It is hard, time-consuming, and demanding major and I(!) love it. As far as DRab, I never said it was the best. It's not for everybody. I'm just saying there should be more of an influence. Why are kids graduating high school and going into majors completely unaware of what they are and are about? Why have I heard stories of teachers telling students to go into engineering because "they're good at math"? I'm sorry to say that this country's attitude about technology and science has to change. It has to. Regardless of how great or not great one thinks engineering is. But to reinforce my original point, I'm not saying everyone should do engineering in college; there are plenty of people who love writing, art, etc and are better and that and thank god for them. But for those who quit because "it's hard . . . I have no life". C'mon just because you aren't going out during the week doesn't mean you don't have a life. I know Tuesday is Wine Night but you're gonna have to skip it.</p>

<p>DRab, believe me there are people who know next to nothing about me and I mention my major and even after a great conversation I get dirty looks. What is that for!? Why is engineering so gross? What's wrong with chemistry? Is it that unbearable you can't hear the word without cringing? The retorts have gotten to a certain point. I mean you go to a school #4 in engineering and act like I'm the first one you ever met? "So that's like really hard, you're probably too smart for me?" Well I wasn't two seconds ago. "Do you ever get out?", " I'm obviously out of the dorm and good-looking enough to talk to. "So are there like tons of Nerds in your classes?" Yeah, your point? "That must really suck!" Yeah that's why I'm doing it. I really like things that suck.</p>

<p>So instead of talking about benefits/frustration/class/ [and apparently] "you're-an-idiot-if-you-don't-think-engineering-is-the-best" attitude like I do here (where I thought it was an open forum and was just throwing out ideas at 2 AM!), I "well, I like it. I think it's cool sometimes." and just change the subject and don't bring it up again.</p>

<p>I mean do any other majors get that reaction? Economics? English? Art&Design? No they don't. I could see if I was ugly and they finally understood why or something like that but seriously I'm just sick of that reaction and I was voicing it here as a point to why maybe guys/girls, young people don't stay in engineering.</p>

<p>And I pointed to what I thought the reasons why were and I think those are a subconcious disgust for science, enforced by our education system, the views on science in the US, and selfish, lazy nature of people my age who don't know how/don't want to work hard.</p>

<p>Also 4thFloor I'm toward lower end of middle class so almost everyone in my major lives in a nice rich area (which may be lower or even to you) but when I say spoiled rich kids I mean richer than me, more oppotunities for education, nice area to live in, Chicago suburbs. When I say rich that's what I mean.</p>

<p>Also about politics and science say what you will but they are closely related nowadays especially because religion is closely related to gov't nowadays. And yes it has gone on a long time all the way back to Galileo (spelling? shoot!) who was punished for saying what we all know to be true now. So to say I went to far may be right but to not factor it in at all when govt controls education, funding, and national scientific organizations . . . is wrong.</p>

<p>Also about engineering going to econ . . . Wow perfect a lot of my friends that dropped engineering went to econ (not from my major though, a lot of those went to bio or chem) and a few have done poly sci.</p>

<p>So, btw, is this one topic anymore. I forgot what shortage we were talking about: jobs or students?</p>

177

<p>
[quote]
Thanks for your thorough assessment of my post, and the associated links in your post. After reviewing the links, however, I would proposed that there is a completely different way to interpret the data, especially with respect to the third link you posted.</p>

<p>The 19% decline in engineering undergraduate degrees conferred could largely (or possibly entirely) be explained by a higher dropout and/or failure percentage, for potentially the same or even a higher number of initial enrollees.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, no I don't think so. Consider the following quote:</p>

<p>"At the bachelor’s degree level, undergraduate enrollment declined by more than 20 percent from 441,000 students in 1983 (the peak year) to 361,000 students in 1999. (See figure 2-7 and appendix table 2-9.) At the associate degree level, enrollment in engineering technology dropped precipitously from 1998 to 1999. The number of first- and second-year students enrolling in such programs declined by 25 and 36 percent, respectively. "</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind...c2s2.htm#c2s2l3%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind...c2s2.htm#c2s2l3&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Note that these numbers are for ENROLLMENTS, not for bachelor's degrees conferred. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I say again, with the exception of a few schools (example: Tulane, probably due to the impact of Katrina), I see no evidence of schools bragging on their reduction in size of their engineering programs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, think about why. Is this something that you would go bragging about? For example, when Berkeley shut down its undergrad petroleum engineering program, Berkeley didn't exactly hold a press conference to announce it. In fact, the shutdown was so quiet that even a lot of people in the Berkeley engineering department didn't know that it happened. The same thing happened recently when MIT announced that it is in the process of shutting down its Ocean Engineering department (merging it with ME). MIT didn't exactly publicize the event widely. </p>

<p>Look, the truth is, universities are like companies. Companies always want to widely publicize any new products and new services that they offer because they want them to succeed. But if a product fails, companies quietly pull them off the shelves. Similarly, no university really wants to admit that one of its programs is failing such that it has to be pulled. A university can gain by announcing large increases in funding or student enrollment in such-and-such a program, just like a company can gain by announcing the popularity of a new product. What does a university have to gain by bragging about how one of their programs is declining? </p>

<p>
[quote]
I wish I had the time to quantify the loss of engineering jobs - my intuition says it's far larger than the 19% decrease in bachelors degrees conferred.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm afraid I have to disagree with this. Just think about the economy at large. The economy as a whole is significantly larger today than it was 20 years ago. However, the absolute numbers of enrolled engineering students have actually DECLINED.</p>

<p>I think the more telling stat is that in 1983, 8% of all US bachelor's degrees conferred were engineering degrees, whereas today it's 5%. Hence, really, that's actually a 37.5% decline, in terms of engineering grads relative to all other grads. I have a hard time believing that the engineering economy has declined by 37.5%. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, I question what a university does in the case of a BS graduate proceeding seamlessly through to an MS or PhD...do they post BOTH degrees in their stats, or is the one graduate simply categorized as an advanced degree recipient? This is extremely relevant, since it's well known that during tough times, graduates who can't find work defer the pain by moving into graduate work in hopes of salvaging good employment via a more advanced degree. It is plausible that a very high percentage of the 19% stated reduction is actually accounted for by people shifting to higher degrees.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First off, most such programs will actually award your bachelor's degree in the interim, not at the end of your seamless program I know that's what MIT does, and the reason for that is because if they didn't do that, then you would be continued to be classifed as an undergrad (because you would not have gotten your bachelor's degree) for your entire time in school which impacts what kind of financial aid you can get, what academic privileges you have, whether you are eligible for TA/RAships, whether you are eligible for graduate housing or have to stay in undergrad dorms, etc. Hence, as soon as your bachelor's degree is earned, it's recorded as such. </p>

<p>However, even if this was not true and what you say is happening (students are camping out in graduate school to avoid a bad economy and thus avoiding the statistics), honestly, how do you think that would impact the statistics? This decline in engineering degrees conferred has been going on for over 20 years now. Sure, you can hide out in graduate school, but not for 20 years. Maybe 5 or 6, but not 20. So let's suppose what you are saying is true. That would only shift the date of the initial decline by 5-6 years. But that would still mean that a significant decline would be happening. </p>

<p>The point is, a 20 year decline in the percentage of engineering degrees conferred is not something that can be easily explained away.</p>

178

<p>
[quote]
if the AMA suddenly decided to allow 30,000 more new doctors each year!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, especially when, according to AMCAS, only 17,000 people matriculate into US medical schools every year.</p>

179

<p>"I really think engineering is cool. All the things it can do for society, your life. Too bad no one else shares my views. There's such an influence on stupidity anymore it's a wonder people don't forget how to breathe."</p>

<p>I think engineering is fine. Of course you can say whatever you want in these forums, and you should in the rest of your life, but if you say things like these, you are going to come off as a pompous engineering snob. I think engineering is fine and important, and difficult, although I probably don't understand each aspect of it (as in how important it is, how difficult, ect). When you talk down to people, you will get negative reactions back. There are stereotypes about every major, and yes, they tend to be true to some extent, from almost not at all to what seems like a lot. Hey, sometimes they're just plain wrong. My cousin who did engineering is one of the coolest guys that I know. He's social, and loves to have fun and go out, and I'm sure the ladies think he's good looking. Anyway, I'm sorry you get these sorts of responses, but just do your best with it. People have their preconceived and often unexperienced or well developed attitudes about the various majors or areas of study. Some hard science people will laugh at the humanities majors, thinking that they will have inferior job prospects and become starving artists or academics or something, and that what they're doing is so very easy, and some humanities majors will tell the hard science people how they're wasting their life or something. Their is a lot of miscommunication and straw-man bashing everywhere, from these boards to college campuses. Try to educate the ignorant or the stupid, but if someone doesn't want to hear it or doesn't care, there is nothing that you can do.</p>

<p>As to the education system, I think it varies by general area and specific location, as well as who is running the place.</p>

<p>As to your history of the relationship between science and politics, it's been that way since the beginning of human civilization, and only recently does it seem to be drifting from religion. Yes, throughout history different socio-cultural groups of different religions and origins have lived together, under an accommodating law, but it's not as if the cross between politics and religion is some new development. Man is a political animal, and man is a religious animal. I don't find it surprising that these two often blend or clash.</p>

180

<p>"It is hard, time-consuming, and demanding major and I(!) love it. As far as DRab, I never said it was the best. It's not for everybody."</p>

<p>Yeah, but bravoecho, Engineer major is NOT the same as engineering work-life! I LOOOVE engineering classes and concepts, but I've spent a lot of time interning at companies and/or just sitting in my uncles cubes (when I tagged along) and decided that engineering WORK is a 180-degree turn around...it's a hot boiler with tons of presentations, business discussions, sales discussions, logistics talks, powerpoints, excel spreadsheets....and the worst part is that engineers get bossed around by everyone! </p>

<p>Unless you like explaining why two mouses are better than one mouse, and then being attacked by MBA types about the "value proposition, incremental revenue, technical support numbers, pros+cons of one brand over another brand, expected life of a logictech mouse", I don't think you'll like engineering work. Engineers have to defend against these types of questions which don't have anything to do with what you studied at school.....engineering courses are great (i love them), but corporate engineering life is not.</p>

<p>....btw, the example above is a real-life one and quite mainstream....if you can follow that example, maybe it will give you a glimpse into why engineers get shafted. They can't possibly know the answers to these questions, but since they're supposed to be the "experts", it's their responsibility to call up vendors and find out....which can take a long time, and is certainly not what they studied at school.</p>