Science & Engineering Majors Changing to English

[Phoenix84]

I found the following article, it discusses why a lot of STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) majors end up switching majors and why the U.S isn't graduating sufficient numbers of science, math, and engineering students.

www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/17/education.stem.graduation/index.html?hpt=C1

As someone who graduated with a degree in physics in 4 years, I can relate to much of what this article says. My professors seemed to have the attitude of "sink or swim" and "weeding out the low performers" rather than try and help people. It was quite isolating the last two years when I took upper level classes. No one except the professor was able to help out with any outside of class help.

The reason STEM professors adopt a "sink or swim" attitude is because that's how it was when they were in school. And don't get me started on graduate school practice, they basically make you a minimum wage earning research lackey for a few years to earn your degree.

The article also mentions that science engineering teachers get promoted and tenure based more on research than being good teachers, this is also true.

It also touched on the general attitude toward math and science. In general it seems "okay" to be not good at math or science, unlike admitting you can't read or write very well. A lot of people decide at a very young age that they aren't good at math or science without really giving it a shot.

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

One of my undergrad degrees is in English (but I never planned to major in Science or Math or Engineering!)

[Opti]

" found the following article, it discusses why a lot of STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) majors end up switching majors and why the U.S isn't graduating sufficient numbers of science, math, and engineering students."

I think is BS because if it were true there wouldn't be age discrimination in these fields that starts before the age of 50. Employers typically only want people with experience in their particular pieces of hardware, software, whatever and no longer train Americans that could do the job. Instead they complain there aren't enough people to fill these jobs and more H1B Visas flood in leading to the continual drop in salaries in these fields. IMO.

I did experience the sink or swim thing too. My employers have done the same.

[mtntigger]

As for the large lecture halls and professors with foreign accents... it depends on the university. Research, research and research what university is right for you. With all the money that you are spending, you may as well get what you want.

Do you really want people holding science and engineering degrees to be able to have an easy time getting through college?

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

I dealt with the science professors with a less than intelligible accent and large lecture halls with hundreds of students. Yes, they do weed out a lot of people, which is smart. If you can't get through the basics, how are you supposed to get through the more complicated upper division classes. IME, most were pretty small and nothing like the basics of biology, chemistry, physics and calculus.

You can have good professors that do research and those that have never stepped foot in a lab. Personally, I prefer those who do research because they do have a better understanding of the thought process.

Starting salaries suck, granted. But then starting salaries suck in pretty much every field. The major advantage in getting a job in this field is that higher education is appreciated and many jobs will pay for your MS and or PhD once you get them. My PhD has been fully covered by my education benefits from my job and my boss is my largest proponent.

[Deleted]

I double majored in biology and a humanities discipline, so I saw both sides. I attended a large research institution, so yes, there were 500 kids in my freshman chemistry lecture. But we also had sections where you could actually get some personal attention in a small group.

toughtimes, I think your point about lab courses is invalid. The expectation for a 3 credit college course is typically 3 hours of work in class and 6 hours of work out of class each week. For a lab, the work can only be done in the lab - so you may have had a 5 hour class, but only an hour or two of work out of class. You were more regimented as to what time you devoted to the class, but you spent less time overall.

I've had a lot of professors and instructors over the years for whom English was not their first language. Admittedly, the first class was often a process of learning their accent and to hear through the accent to the content. Instructors would do well to know that is what is happening during week one, and go easy on the content. But I have never had a teacher that I couldn't understand if I listened.

Phenoix has a point that it is more socially acceptable to struggle with math or science, but I hardly think the humanities courses qualify as easy or even easier. Just different.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

We don't have such a surfeit of students in the sciences that we have to "weed them out.

Actually, we do. Personally, I don't want to have to worry that the student I'm teaching in the lab is going to blow the lab up, or some other dumbass move that you should know better NOT to do. I had some incredibly stupid people in my class and they NEVER were able to grasp the basics of how to even calculate the amount of chemical to add to make a solution, and this was after a semester of basic chemistry. If someone can't grasp the principles in that period of time, passing them on through to higher division classes makes absolutely NO sense. It's like what we're already seeing in HS, where people are graduating without being able to read.

I've been teaching undergraduate, graduate, PhD and dental/medical stucents in the lab for the last 25 years. Currently, the standards ARE lacking and some of the things that I graduated from college with my BS knowing how to do, I have to teach.

When was the last time the nerd got the girls?

Huh? What does this have to do with anything? I work in a research lab and at this point, everyone I work with is either married or has a SO. I kinda think that most of us nerds have gotten partners.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

Add a few labs and your "12 credit load" will consume as much time as 18 credits for the liberal arts major.

But it does. I had a lot of liberal arts majors as friends and they had the time to do a hell of a lot more partying than I did. I guarantee you that I spent a fraction of the time in that (single) class than I did for the lab of one of my science classes.

I would take 3 - 4 credit science classes, each of which included a lab or two and a 3 credit liberal art elective (requirement for the degree). 15 credits/semester was about all I could handle.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

I've had a lot of professors and instructors over the years for whom English was not their first language. Admittedly, the first class was often a process of learning their accent and to hear through the accent to the content. Instructors would do well to know that is what is happening during week one, and go easy on the content. But I have never had a teacher that I couldn't understand if I listened.

Ditto....and to make matters worse for me, it was in one of the most difficult subjects that I had to take. But after about 2 weeks, I understood what he was saying and it wasn't a problem.

One particular word I remember being confused over was pronounced 'kasai'. I had absolutely no idea what that meant, until it dawned on me that the professor meant cosine. Once I got that, the rest was simple.

[Deleted]

May 22, 2011 8:54:03 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

I had a lot of liberal arts majors as friends and they had the time to do a hell of a lot more partying than I did.

Surely as a scientist, you see the flaws in that logic?

This is like all of the "friend X is my age and we work in the same field, why is their house twice as big as mine?" threads on this board.

A class that is easy for you is not the same as one that is easy. A class that is time consuming for you may not be time consuming for everyone. Just because a person spends more time partying, doesn't mean that the decrease in studying time wasn't detrimental.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

You would really have to be very devoted to put up with all this abuse when your classmate can fill out tax returns for a corporation and help cook books like Julia Child and make a helluva a lot more money with less time and money spent on the degree.

But I don't WANT to do those things. Therein lies the difference. I know a hell of a lot of people who are utterly miserable in their jobs, but they make more money. At least I know that 25 years after entering this profession, I'm still intrigued. I still publish. I still develop new things. I still teach (granted, this is not my favorite part of the job) and I still like my job.

Most people would not want to do what I do either.

[Deleted]

I think some of this is that students begin college declaring a science major (usually some sort of pre-professional program like pre-med, pre-optometry, pre-pharm, etc.) because they've heard that's where the dollars are. The professors have to weed them out because the majority of them won't get accepted.

Another illustration . . . our freshmen used to have to do a career paper for their research project. All of them wanted to become anesthesiologists, including those who were failing. Hey, it's one of the first high-paying fields listed in the occupational handbook.

[Phoenix84]

I do recall having to study more than my teacher and humanities friends.

I also totally forgot about the language barrier. I was lucky initially as most of my basic math and physics instructors were American natives and spoke good english. I ran into some problems later. My thermodynamics professor was India and I could hardly understand her. My electronics professor was from China and I could hardly understand him either. I think that's a big reason I ended up doing worse in their classes.

As far as the labs go, at my university they did count as an extra 1-2 credits. But it was like taking an extra three credit course. The lab assignments were time consuming, particularly at the higher levels.

I'm not saying science needs to be dumbed down, but professors need to take a more supportive role.

As far as the pay goes, I think for engineers it's pretty good. But for science majors it's pretty bad, at least to start. My first job out of college paid just over 30k in a HCOL. I do a more than double that now, but I moved around a lot seeking better opportunities. I have a friend who has a masters degree in chemistry and makes only about 45k now. One of my co workers started out with a masters in chemistry at the same level I did (30k). I always am amused when they say college graduates with a B.S will earn 50k to start.

[Phoenix84]

"One of my undergrad degrees is in English (but I never planned to major in Science or Math or Engineering!)"

I thought you were a lawyer by training turned into a housewife?

[stats45]

Work spent outside the classroom has gone down for nearly all majors, but students in STEM classes on average do spend more time on their studies than other students.

The National Study of Student Engagement does some great research in this area. The majority of college students report studying less than 15 hours a week for classes. Time spent is lowest in general business majors and the social sciences and highest in engineering and a few other STEM disciplines.

[phil5185]

there have been moves afoot for years to make the Master's the first professional degree for Engineers or to turn Engineering into a 5 year degree.

If I remember (1960), engineering was a 158 hr program and most lib arts, edu, etc were 126 hrs. If you divide the 158 by 8 semesters the load gets pretty big, the counselors then advised 10 semesters, about a 16 hr load.

And I remember that 'look to your right, look to your left, one will be gone by year-end" speech. So it's been around a while, LOL.

As for language - we had an old German calculus prof - you had to listen carefully.

As for not getting enough help to drive home the basics - in my experience it doesn't work that way - there are analytical students and literary students. Calculus, diff eq, physics, thermodynamics could not be pounded into those whose brains were not receptive. In my case, I had a tough time passing History of Western Civ, Thomas Aquinas, etc. I had to spend disproportionate time on them to get a C compared to the 'easy A' math courses.

[mtntigger]

Toughtimes - you should pretty bitter. Ok, so science wasn't right for you. It's right for some people.

For example, I routinely took 18 credit units per quarter to get my B.S. in Engineering and a minor in English.... I studied most of my free time, yet loved almost every bit of it due to the intellectual stimulation I was receiving. Why would you want to give a student less of that by keeping people who aren't ready or who don't really desire to be in that major?

[Phoenix84]

"Principals of Engineering firms want new engineers to know everything, especially design, out of the box while professors believe that much of this is on the job training."

I think that's a problem in general with employers, not just specific to engineering. Employers don't want to invest in training for new employees. Instead, they expect the schools to do it.

This ties in with the other thread about college degrees. College was never meant to teach you everything to do a job but give you a good educational foundation on which build your skills. The foundation was so you could go into any number of different professions and succeed through learning. Now, as you said, employers expect someone to be a top performer "right out of the box."

[swamp]

I started out as a biology major at a small private college. My intro to biology course required a 3 hour lab and a 1 hour recitation in addition to the 3 hours a week of regular lecture class, and it also required significant out of class work/studying. I got one credit for it. My Intro to Basketweaving course was 3 hours a week of lecture and I was able to get through on bullshit. I did very well in it, but I saw the writing on the wall for what would be required of me for the rest of my college years. I switched out of the sciences.

[svwashout]

Here's my 2 cents as a born-in-the-USA engineer for over 20 years with Silicon Valley companies: If you can't deal with people who don't speak English perfectly, then you may have difficulty working among the international teams that seem to be the norm around here. Almost half of our engineers (and yes even some managers) are from China, India, Russia, Vietnam, or the Middle East. Those who have worked or attended school here for many years usually have better pronunciation than newer arrivals. Overseas factories are where it gets even more difficult to understand their staff because their main exposure to English is through teleconferences. We take it as a given that those who aren't great speakers know it and are working to improve, but we also feel that it is our responsibility to try to meet them halfway as best we can. Language difficulty is not recognized by management as a valid reason for schedule slips. They make no effort to homogenize the teams, and in fact I sense that they are trying to do the opposite (perhaps for security reasons). And complaining about a colleague's accent is about as taboo around here as pinching her backside. In short if you are unable or unwilling to work with people who have imperfect diction, then your career in engineering and many of the sciences would be limited, at least around here.

[mtntigger]

May 22, 2011 12:42:35 GMT -5 @toughtimes said:

Why is it "bitter" if I suggest that schools might hire people who can speak clearly and that employers might want to be realistic about their requirements and also consider that natives are less likely to steal their intellectual property and take it with them when they return to the "old country?" It certainly is easier to attack me than to answer my points.

Besides, we are discussing the article, not me. I am not the author of the article that speaks about why we have a shortage in the scientific and technical disciplines.

Let's see, you brought up:
* vast hours of time to get through the classes,
* foreign accents,
* enormous lecture halls,
* need of a masters degree to be the starting point,
* low starting salary,
* professors trying to get kids to drop out,
* insituated that colleges do not have minimal standards for their post-docs/professors,
* time it takes to get a degree (5 years vs. 4),
* your belief that engineering firms want new engineers to know everything from day one, and
* expense of an education

Most posters have disagreed with you on these points and yet since you know more than people who are actually in the field, you discount our points. We aren't talking about you? My bad.

[Deleted]

May 22, 2011 12:52:06 GMT -5 svwashout said:

Here's my 2 cents as a born-in-the-USA engineer for over 20 years with Silicon Valley companies: If you can't deal with people who don't speak English perfectly, then you may have difficulty working among the international teams that seem to be the norm around here. Almost half of our engineers (and yes even some managers) are from China, India, Russia, Vietnam, or the Middle East. Those who have worked or attended school here for many years usually have better pronunciation than newer arrivals. Overseas factories are where it gets even more difficult to understand their staff because their main exposure to English is through teleconferences. We take it as a given that those who aren't great speakers know it and are working to improve, but we also feel that it is our responsibility to try to meet them halfway as best we can. Language difficulty is not recognized by management as a valid reason for schedule slips. They make no effort to homogenize the teams, and in fact I sense that they are trying to do the opposite (perhaps for security reasons). And complaining about a colleague's accent is about as taboo around here as pinching her backside. In short if you are unable or unwilling to work with people who have imperfect diction, then your career in engineering and many of the sciences would be limited, at least around here.

[Phoenix84]

So what I'm getting from many of the posters is that the situation is fine as it is, the shortage of American born STEM people are just political talking point, and we should continue with the status quo because everything is fine the way it is.

[Phoenix84]

"If you can't deal with people who don't speak English perfectly, then you may have difficulty working among the international teams that seem to be the norm around here. Almost half of our engineers (and yes even some managers) are from China, India, Russia, Vietnam, or the Middle East."

But don't you think it's a concern that there are so many forigin born people on your staff? Aren't you concerned about these people stealing your company's intellectual property and taking it back to China, Russia, the middle east ect? Maybe I have a unique perspective on this since I work in government in a scientific related field. But around my workplace they won't hire forign nationals for security reasons.

[mtntigger]

I'm not saying that the situation is fine as it is. I'm saying that making it easier on the students is not the way to go. I would prefer to work with intelligent people from other places in the world than to work with U.S. born citizens who have to be lead through solving problems.

[mtntigger]

But don't you think it's a concern that there are so many forigin born people on your staff?

Nope. People in other countries work their butts off to get here and get jobs.

[mtntigger]

<snort> Nope, you aren't bitter at all.

[mtntigger]

I think that it might be problematic that we aren't training enough of our own - if there are people who would have been good, but didn't get the elementary education needed to develop their talents....

Exactly! I also think that the youth soccer example where everyone gets a medal and "no one is left behind" philosophy are hurting us. Healthy competition is a good thing and learning to struggle for what you want should be applauded.

And there is the rub, whether all those foreign imports might those very basic requirements.

[Sum Dum Gai]

on the other hand - importing the best minds from around the world? barring terrorism or corporate espionage I think it's great.

But you can't just bar corporate espionage can you? Even if they come here with the best of intentions, they leave with a head full of proprietary information, and in a lot of cases head back to a country that doesn't recognize our intellectual property laws. They aren't doing anything illegal by stealing ideas once they get back home.

[mtntigger]

What ludicrous requirements are you speaking of? Please explain. So far, you have been very general and haven't provided any specifics. Maybe I would understand where you are coming from then.