Youth and Technology
Fewer and fewer young people are taking up science and engineering as a career.
This is a topic that has reared its head numerous times over the last few years, and is a particular issue in the UK. It’s no secret among any industry especially the power industry which I work in, that the workforce is ageing with little to no new blood coming in to replace those retiring or otherwise leaving. Now, I know I’m hardly the best person to address this, being an engineering graduate who no longer engineers, is desperately trying to become a professional writer and artist, and who has absolutely no standing professionally whatsoever. But! Don’t mistake my desire for a more artistic career as dislike for my existing career. If anything, I’m bloody grateful for having been trained and am working in a highly technical field, as I feel it’s prepared me well for writing by giving me an expanded view of the world. And I’m incredibly keen to see young people head towards it as a career!
Let’s examine the root causes of the problem by working backwards. Why don’t we have enough grads entering businesses? Two main reasons: Extended downturn in the economy throttling funding (business problem), and a reduced number of people from the UK studying technical subject. Why are fewer people studying technical subjects? Less kids are aiming for technical career paths, and thus aren’t taking the subjects necessary to become engineers, scientists and the like. Why are less kids aiming for technical career paths?
Heck knows. The most commonly quoted cause is a ‘lack of interest in technology as a career’. Now, I’m speaking from my own experiences, and I’ve been out of the school education for a good eight years now (Christ, I’m supposed to be a grown-up by now), but I’m not 100% sure that’s the case. I think that science and engineering have ALWAYS had a kind of stigma attached to them; Being good at this sort of career demands excellent analytical, mathematical and learning skills. None of these makes you particularly popular in the playground (unless you’re in Hong Kong, in which case it’ll make you a goddamn rockstar if all the tutor advertising I’ve seen has told me anything). I fear that trying to get more young people interested in science and technology will fail; surely it would be better to focus on those kids who ALREADY display that curiosity and adaptability?
Then again, maybe I’m wrong. Looking around the general population at work, there is a MARKED difference in the personalities of the older vs. the younger engineers. At the elder end of the spectrum you tend to have the, for lack of a better terminology, more ‘manly’ types. Those for whom engineering was a MANLY profession, and are very ALPHA about EVERYGODDAMNTHING. And then at my end of the scale, there are the somewhat weedier, nerdier techie types, more adept with computers than the chunkier bits of kit. Maybe science and engineering HAS undergone a sea change in perception in the last 25 years or so.
I personally think a lot of it has to do with the perception of science and engineering subjects in the public eye as a whole. Scientists are seen as hiding in labs and being obsessed with narrow fields of interest to the detriment of the rest of their lives, while engineers are the people wot fix your telly when it’s broke. Both of which showing a certain lack of respect for the fields. And, to be fair, neither the media nor scientists/engineers/technologists ourselves do all that much to dispel those images: The insistence of the shallower newspapers that scientists be referred to as ‘boffins’, typical comedy depictions of nerdy, nerdy scientists and engineers, and the fact that we do identify with said stereotypes to an extent… It’s easy to see why science and engineering are not seen in the same professional light as lawyers, or doctors. Cases in point: Suits, House… Big Bang Theory. It’s not looking good for us!
It’s definitely not the only problem; Lack of investment, the lure of other career paths, even societal, cultural and familial expectations all have a part to play in this. But I think we can definitely do so much more in the industry and education sectors to help ourselves. Yes, we should engender a fierce curiosity and a fascination with science and technology at a young age. Yes, we should reach out and encourage the development of these into genuine skills throughout high school. We should DEFINITELY retain strong links to universities, providing support, funding wherever possible. In the workplace, we should work harder to ensure that graduates are given the opportunities to work in jobs that they genuinely enjoy and are capable of doing, with respects to the business’ needs as well of course. The point is, we need to capture imaginations and sustain the excitement in one long chain, rather than our current method of starting and stopping every few years, when we fail to get the results we wanted. For gods’ sakes, we’re scientists (well, engineers as well, but that’s really applied science): We should know by now that short term action will not yield the massive changes we want!
So, if you think your kid’s got an interest in science: encourage it, and keep them asking questions! We’re gonna need them someday.
M.
why do i have the feeling that something bad is happening back in atlantis also poor mara she is going go through such dresden level of angst soon
The whole “oh noes, we need moar scientists and engineers!” meme is an old song. The funny thing is that nobody ever seems to actually check whether the numbers check out. They were screaming for Moar Engineers back in the early 1980s too, back when there were three or four engineers to each engineering gig.
Or to be a little more blunt: Companies want a highly skilled, highly specialized workforce, but they don’t like paying for it. So they want people to take “science and engineering” degrees, because then somebody else pays for the skill and specialization. And they want enough people to take science and engineering degrees that they won’t command a premium over a phone bank operator.
Which is never going to happen in the real world.
So the “moar engineers” whining will stay current for the rest of our respective careers.
That being said, I think you are right in your observation that the demographic who find engineering appealing has shrunk. And I also think your reasoning is spot on: The “alpha male” demographic (to use the PG-13 term for it) has largely left the building (which is probably a good thing for the profession in the long term).
I think the most obvious reason for the disappearance of the “alpha male” from engineering is the rise of predatory finance. If you’re an extrovert dominant personality with a knack for numbers, do you go into engineering or banking? It’s a no-brainer, right? You go to Wall Street.
Used to be that it was a no-brainer to give the other answer. In previous generations, engineering was where Stuff Happened. You got to blow up mountains and build dams and span chasms with bridges. Fun stuff. While Wall Street was this somewhat boring place of stuffed shirts and two-bit shysters. And of course it helped win over the “alpha male” demographic that an ambitious, aggressive and moderately competent engineer could take home a similar sort of monthly check as your average hedge fundie.
– Jake
“Companies want a highly skilled, highly specialized workforce, but they don’t like paying for it.”
I think I agree with this statement; Certainly, I’ve had limited experience in that regard, but I’m not going to outright say that’s how every company operates; Mostly because I do think that somebody exceptional WILL be able to secure adequate remuneration, but also partially because my boss reads this 😛
Instead, I’ll expand the picture to include what you’re saying about extroverted personalities, success, and reward. I’m fully with you in that it’s getting harder and harder to earn big money being an engineer. Being an engineer used to be a massive deal; it showed that you had a damn good mind, and that you were capable of getting any job done. Nowadays, I think the industry has become more risk-averse (not always a bad or a good thing), and engineering is more or less a lower-level function of larger business schemes. Certainly, there’s smaller scope for someone to make a big impact in the business for themselves, unless they pursue the BUSINESS aspect. Having said that, I believe my statements to be subjective and based on personal observations.
The lure of big money has definitely poached a lot of potential talent from the engineering field. I know a couple of good engineers who jumped ship to the financial sector. Hell, like I said in the article, I’m not even an engineer myself anymore. Well, not in terms of my actual job: When it comes down to it, I can still DO the engineering, I’m just more likely to gravitate towards the IT side of things!
I stand by my call for a drive to encourage young interest in science. Even if they don’t go into a scientific career, they would at least (I hope) capture the same spirit of curiosity and wonder that makes me think. Then again, in another rant I would be perfectly happy to espouse kids getting interested in fine art, and literature, and classical music, and musical theory… Basically, everyone should have the opportunity to be exposed and engaged in stuff that makes them think and makes them build themselves up. Hell, it doesn’t even have to be ye olde classics, as long as it has substance and the kid starts to think for themselves and challenge the things they experience intelligently, I don’t care! I want everyone to think, and do, not to simply exist.
But I digress, and perhaps that’s a rant for another day! You make some good points sir, thanks for raising them!
To Manson,
Google STEMnet and sign up to become an ambassador!
(You only need to do one event a year)
To Manson’s Boss,
It’s always nice to get a bit extra good publicity on the “inspiring the next generation” front. You can contact STEM, send a flyer around your department/company, and give staff who have signed up one day off a year to do ambassador stuff.
… out of curiosity, why’d Mara lie to Rudy about her sexuality? Or, at least, about the gender of her partner?
Oh, Mint IS a dude, he’s just very effeminately drawn, apparently! You’re not the first person to think he was in fact a she! It’s rather interesting, it’s very clear in my mind that Mint is male, but perhaps that’s because I have to ‘live’ the characters while writing them even if their appearance makes aspects of them unclear? Fascinating 😀 It probably doesn’t help that most other male characters in the comic are musclebound, manly, beardy or paternal types, and Mint is creeping towards bishonen territory, if not holidaying there regularly!