Why Science Majors Change Their Minds (It’s Just So Darn Hard)

[mazewanderer]

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/education/edlife/why-science-majors-change-their-mind-its-just-so-darn-hard.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/education/edlife/why-science-majors-change-their-mind-its-just-so-darn-hard.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>NYT article.</p>

<p>some quotes

[quote]
</p>

<p>...The president and industry groups have called on colleges to graduate 10,000 more engineers a year and 100,000 new teachers with majors in STEM — science, technology, engineering and math. All the Sputnik-like urgency has put classrooms from kindergarten through 12th grade — the pipeline, as they call it — under a microscope. And there are encouraging signs, with surveys showing the number of college freshmen interested in majoring in a STEM field on the rise. </p>

<p>....
...
Other deterrents are the tough freshman classes, typically followed by two years of fairly abstract courses leading to a senior research or design project. “It’s dry and hard to get through, so if you can create an oasis in there, it would be a good thing,” says Dr. Goldberg, who retired last year as an engineering professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and is now an education consultant. He thinks the president’s chances of getting his 10,000 engineers is “essentially nil.” </p>

<p>....</p>

<p>MATTHEW MONIZ bailed out of engineering at Notre Dame in the fall of his sophomore year. He had been the kind of recruit most engineering departments dream about. He had scored an 800 in math on the SAT and in the 700s in both reading and writing. He also had taken Calculus BC and five other Advanced Placement courses at a prep school in Washington, D.C., and had long planned to major in engineering.</p>

<p>But as Mr. Moniz sat in his mechanics class in 2009, he realized he had already had enough. “I was trying to memorize equations, and engineering’s all about the application, which they really didn’t teach too well,” he says. “It was just like, ‘Do these practice problems, then you’re on your own.’ ” And as he looked ahead at the curriculum, he did not see much relief on the horizon.</p>

<p>So Mr. Moniz, a 21-year-old who likes poetry and had enjoyed introductory psychology, switched to a double major in psychology and English, where the classes are “a lot more discussion based.” He will graduate in May and plans to be a clinical psychologist. Of his four freshman buddies at Notre Dame, one switched to business, another to music. One of the two who is still in engineering plans to work in finance after graduation. </p>

<p>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>In China and India and all other developing countries, an Engineering degree is the passport to success. In the US, there are so many other opportunities, so I can understand it is not attractive. Also, the concern is even 'If I put in the effort, my job may be outsourced, so why struggle...."</p>

[cobrat]

<p>That and US K-12 education on average provides poor preparation for college STEM majors. In the 2 CS for majors courses that I took, the second most common reason why classmates flunked(Grades below C-) besides lack of willingness to put in the effort is their lack of adequate mathematical and science preparation in middle/high school. </p>

<p>In contrast, nearly every international student…especially those from Europe, India, and East/SE Asia had few issues with majoring in a STEM field in US colleges. In some cases, what we regard as college-level math was high school or sometimes even middle school material to them.</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>Hmmm, something seems odd here. Shouldn’t good engineers be good at, and enjoy learning about, the theory that is the background for the application and design that they will be doing? Shouldn’t good scientists and mathematicians be good at, and enjoy learning about, the theory behind their scientific fields? Simply memorizing equations is not the same as understanding the theory behind them.</p>

<p>But perhaps the high washout rate has to do with the relatively weak math and science education in typical US K-12 schools. Some students who thought that high school math and science was easy may not realize what is coming in college.</p>

<p>The article also has a chart of the popularity of majors. Seems odd that biology has held steady over the long term, despite the huge oversupply of biology graduates in the job market. This is in contrast to computer science, where popularity greatly increased during the tech bubble, and fell after the crash.</p>

[starbright]

<p>^ Exactly what I was thinking. If you aren’t intrinsically interested in the material and need to be entertained to stick with it, maybe you should not be in engineering. That is true for all fields, but I would imagine there are way too many going into potentially safer occupational paths (especially now) strictly because they were told to and not because they have any intellectual interest or aptitude.</p>

<p>I think the biology bulge reflects all the pre-meds, not those dreaming of a biology job…like engineering, too many flock to the med path who probably shouldn’t be there and will never attain their goals.</p>

[emeraldkity4]

<p>*But perhaps the high washout rate has to do with the relatively weak math and science education in typical US K-12 schools. *</p>

<p>I agree- very poor math instruction in our district schools.</p>

[vlines]

<p>Ditto Cobrat and Emeraldkity4. Another thread on CC is discussing whether or not AP classes should be dropped from HS curriculums. Lack of rigor and opportunity for top students is one reason why they should not.</p>

[ucbalumnus]

<p>Some of the discussion in the AP thread suggests that AP level is not rigorous enough for the top students (since it is common to water down AP courses by spreading calculus over two years and taking a whole year to teach the equivalent of a relatively easy college course) – but that dropping AP would likely cause most high schools to reduce the level of rigor (although a few elite public magnet and private high schools may increase the level of rigor if unconstrained by AP).</p>

[vlines]

<p>True UCB, dropping AP would make the available courses even less challenging in MANY public school districts.</p>

[bovertine]

<p>Let me head off one discussion I am certain is going to come up. I know there are people who believe that these days you need a 3.9 from MIT to get an engineering job. Maybe they’re right. It’s not my experience, but maybe they’re right. But I personally am not interested in that discussion.</p>

<p>This is very telling to me –

“You’d like to think that since these institutions are getting the best students, the students who go there would have the best chances to succeed,” he says. “But if you take two students who have the same high school grade-point average and SAT scores, and you put one in a highly selective school like Berkeley and the other in a school with lower average scores like Cal State, that Berkeley student is at least 13 percent less likely than the one at Cal State to finish a STEM degree.”

</p>

<p>I would have predicted this, because when that Berkeley student starts finding things tough, and gets his or her first B, they are unaccustomed to it. I say this as someone who pretty much never opened a book in high school and breezed through with close to all As. When I got to UCSD as a Physics major (certainly not MIT by any means) I was taken aback by the fact that I didn’t understand everything right off, I had to work some problems, and certainly didn’t get all As. And this at a school I considered mediocre.</p>

<p>I believe Mr. Moniz from the article could easily have done as well as I did, probably much better. Of course, if he just hated it, or more importantly if he actually had a passion for something else, I see why he might change. And he’s probably in a better position to pick and choose his major graduating from a more elite school. I just think that’s the way it is. Someone at Cal State is less likely to drop out because they see STEM as the more practical option for a State grad, whether that’s true or not. </p>

<p>But I couldn’t see myself majoring in anything else, and wasn’t certain anything else would necessarily be any easier so I just finished. I managed to get a job, and have been employed one place or other ever since. I had the same feeling when I got my EE degree years later. I’m sure I probably only fully understood about 50% of what I supposedly learned. And I know I’m not unique. My place of employment gives an actual pre- interview technical test to engineers, and it’s surprising how poorly some applicants perform. Even some from elite schools. Look at the pass rates on the Professional Engineering Exam sometime.</p>

[bluebayou]

<p>

But perhaps the high washout rate has to do with the relatively weak math and science education in typical US K-12 schools. Some students who thought that high school math and science was easy may not realize what is coming in college.

</p>

<p>While I concur that education in the US in general has pockets of significant weakness, that doesn’t explain why students at top colleges would drop STEM. It is not the lack of math knowledge, it is The Curve and The Rigor. Biology is a STEM major that requires no math beyond AP Calculus. It is mostly memorization, but a LOT of it. Campbell’s AP Biology text, which is also used by many colleges, is 1,000 pages, and it is all covered.</p>

<p>The simple fact is that science majors have to work a whole lot harder in college, and the courses are curved. Lit/hume courses may tend toward 50% A’s (and more); it takes a really bad paper to earn a C. Science courses, even at schools noted for grade inflation, tend towards 30-35% As, and a bunch of Cs. </p>

<p>Of course, that begs the question: why do STEM courses require that much more work? Why does a 1-unit science lab require nearly as much effort as some 3 unit Lit courses (to earn an A)? Why do STEM departments perpetuate the inequity? They are losing students, and therefore, department funding?</p>

[ALF]

<p>I’m sorry, but getting a Bachelor’s degree in Engineering IS darn hard. And, as the article points out, some students are disappointed at the high proportion of theoretical and abstract material in their coursework, when they were looking forward to more hands-on practical work. Even well-prepared students are deeply challenged by the Math (at least up through Differential Equations), Physics (a year of calculus-based Engineering Physics), and the ‘Core’ curriculum of Statics, Dynamics, Strength of Materials, Thermodynamics and Electrical Circuits. And, all of that occurs mostly in your Freshman and Sophomore years!</p>

<p>I have a lot of respect for anyone who holds a Bachelor’s degree in any Engineering field. It means that they are organized, disciplined, can think critically and abstractly, and can deal with complex highly quantitative problems.</p>

[Shrinkrap]

<p>Bookmarked</p>

[crizello]

<p>I’m not sure it is the weak math and science education, per se, but the way in which these subjects are taught. Studies show that math and science courses with a practical bent create more successful and prepared students. For example, health academies in high schools do a great job of preparing students for college, and helping them have a goal for their studies. </p>

<p>Teaching theory is nice, and it should be combined with practical, hands-on experience, especially in HS. Studies also show that students in science majors do better with more supportive counseling, etc to help them get through the first few years. The reality is that the lower division coursework is intended to weed students out, rather than prepare them for the future. Maybe if schools changed their focus to provide an environment of success.</p>

[emeraldkity4]

<p>I’m sorry, but getting a Bachelor’s degree in Engineering IS darn hard.</p>

<p>But not undoable.
My brother who worked towards his degree while he was in the military, finally earned his EE degree at the University of Colorado and was promptly hired to teach classes there.
However it took him 4 tries to pass the sergeants exam!</p>

[kjcphmom]

<p>Agree with ALF that the engineering courses are extremely hard. Talked to my son yesterday who is a sophomore looking to get a mechanical engineering degree and he is overwhelmed by all the classes. In his material science class, he said the average for the last exam was 37%, and only one person actually finished the test. He studies all the time. In contrast, I just ran into mom’s of sophomores and discussed their children. 1 is in business and 1 in education and they were saying how their kids are breezing through their classes, besides having a part-time job and a very active social life. I don’t know if it is just my son (he’s a perfectionist so I know some is his fault) or the difficulty of the engineering courses - I’d like to think its the difficulty!</p>

[JHS]

<p>My sense is that in China and India, an engineering degree is the common entry path to all sorts of careers, far more than any other type of degree. Here, it just isn’t. It’s the common entry path to engineering careers, which means a relatively high starting salary but quick max-out, and a struggle to get beyond a middle-management level without retraining and shifting careers. And you are competing with engineers in China and India (not to mention Malaysia) who can do everything you can and are willing to do it for compensation that would be poverty-level here. So why the heck should people who don’t love it stick with it?</p>

<p>As the parent of a washed out science major, I would suggest that the people who stick with it are the people who get involved with it outside the classroom, through research mainly. I don’t see those people wash out so much, and they tend to understand the relationship of the boring stuff in the classroom to things that are actually interesting. The kids who wash out are smart kids – like mine, like the kid in the story – who did well in science in high school and like the idea that they could be doctors or scientists, but have no real engagement in doing actual science work. My kid had some in high school, but much less than the real STEM jocks, and he didn’t get involved with research in college before getting disenchanted.</p>

[cobrat]

<p>

@ucbalumnus

Some of the discussion in the AP thread suggests that AP level is not rigorous enough for the top students (since it is common to water down AP courses by spreading calculus over two years and taking a whole year to teach the equivalent of a relatively easy college course) – but that dropping AP would likely cause most high schools to reduce the level of rigor (although a few elite public magnet and private high schools may increase the level of rigor if unconstrained by AP).

</p>

<p>AP course rigor is extremely variable depending on school district and even individual teacher. Worse, even getting a 5 on the AP exam is no guarantee a student can excel in the equivalent college course…especially at an elite school. </p>

<p>As for AP restraining course rigor…that wasn’t an issue at my NYC Specialized high school nor that of its direct rival. They just went further than the standard curriculum. </p>

<p>This depends on the school culture as even the standard courses(a.k.a. “■■■■■■ track”) were rigorous enough that many classmates took the AP tests anyway and routinely got at least a 4-5. </p>

<p>This is underscored by the dozens of high school classmates who were C/D average high school students who continued to excel as STEM majors (3.5+ GPAs in mostly Engineering/CS/Math upon graduation) after transferring up to elite private colleges like Reed, Columbia, Cornell, and CMU despite never having been allowed to take an AP course. </p>

<p>Like myself, they were also floored by the numerous classmates who did take AP courses and yet, were struggling in the very same courses they felt were manageable or even a breeze. </p>

<p>In short, the presence of AP courses alone doesn’t necessarily say much about a given high school’s academic rigor.</p>

<p>

@bluebayou

While I concur that education in the US in general has pockets of significant weakness, that doesn’t explain why students at top colleges would drop STEM. It is not the lack of math knowledge, it is The Curve and The Rigor. Biology is a STEM major that requires no math beyond AP Calculus.

</p>

<p>Not necessarily. My former roommate and several high school classmates cited lack of strong math & science preparation as one critical factor in the 50%+ flunkout* rates in STEM intro courses. In my former roommate’s experience as a bio major at Tufts, his intro bio sequence had a 60% flunkout rate at the end of his freshman year. </p>

<p>Contrary to your assertion, this problem exists even at the elite private colleges admitting the best US high school students.</p>

<ul>
<li>Am talking Fs and Ds here…not “pre-med flunk”.</li>
</ul>

[HPuck35]

<p>If Mr. Moniz was trying to memorize the equations, he’s already blown it. You learn the principles and the theory and then the equations that describe the physics of what is going on are a natural outcome. It is knowing and understanding the principles and theory that make a good engineer (and doctor or lawyer).</p>

<p>Talking and listening to my kids, IMHO, high schools today are teaching by having the students just memorize the material and echo it back a few days later on a test. My son’s AP calculus teacher was the worst. My son was struggling in the class and I was tutoring him a little. I would talk to him about theory and then he got what was going on. When I went to discuss this with his teacher, she could recite the equations and definitions. But any discussion beyond that into the theory she would get all huffy and not want to talk any more. I was amazed that she was even considered for teaching such a class. </p>

<p>From my experience, I can see why college students are dropping engineering. High school has typically done a poor job of readying them for it. The students need more hands on teaching and teachers that actually UNDERSTAND the material and not just memorize it out of the book.</p>

[vlines]

<p>cobrat…yes, some AP courses are better than others. Without a doubt. But without AP courses, in my school district at least, there would be no advanced education at all. It would all be vanilla, aimed at the lower 50% of the students. AP courses are the only opportunity to bump up that rigor. </p>

<p>I think you posted on teh AP thread too, but for those that did not, many people chimed in the the AP debate: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1236446-race-nowhere-recommendation-limiting-eliminating-aps.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1236446-race-nowhere-recommendation-limiting-eliminating-aps.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[jvtDad]

<p>^^ you can think of it this way, a person with a BA or BS in math, more than likely, can’t be a TA teaching Calc I or II class at any decent college. Or, at least, at my old college, you have to have a MS or equivalent to teach. Many HS AP teachers are not even math major; they have a BS in education with a math concentration! Hence their theoretical knowledge is rather limited.</p>