2
The Talent Pipeline: Workforce Data and Trends
Susan Sinnott, Pennsylvania State University, introduced the first session’s speakers: Angus Rockett, professor and department head at the Colorado School of Mines; Joseph Roy, director of institutional research and analytics at the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE); and Julia Phillips, formerly of Sandia National Laboratories and chair of the Committee on Science and Engineering Policy for the National Science Board (NSB).
Following their remarks, Sinnott and Haydn Wadley, University of Virginia, moderated a broad question and answer (Q&A) discussion.
COVID-19 IMPACTS ON MATERIALS EDUCATION
Angus Rockett, Colorado School of Mines
Noting the important role materials science and engineering plays in supporting numerous areas of science and technology (Figure 2.1), Rockett emphasized the need to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected this laboratory-oriented, computationally intensive field. He shared input from a survey conducted by the University Materials Council, an organization of more than 100 materials programs across North America. The results indicate high levels of stress, disrupted research, and difficulties with online learning.
Stress
Stress is hampering students’ ability to learn, as well as professors’ ability to teach. Respondents perceived all groups as feeling very stressed and showed special concern for untenured faculty, older personnel, and those with young children. The work environment can compound this stress, with some faculty members reporting being told they must offer students face-to-face interaction despite the health risks.
The financial impacts of the pandemic are also creating stress. Some departments have already instituted layoffs, hiring freezes, or budget cuts, and uncertainty is high. It is difficult to plan for the future when students are not being hired, and respondents also noted concerns that staff could be stalled in their careers, furloughed, or even fired.
Other sources of stress that surfaced in the surveys include pre-pandemic stressors, political strife on campuses, “Zoom fatigue” and technology hiccups, a general lack of social interaction, and challenges recruiting graduate students, especially internationally.
Disrupted Research
While research activities were initially canceled during the first wave of COVID-19 shutdowns, respondents indicated that these activities are now slowly
recovering. However, students and staff still grapple with concerns about productivity and the safety of laboratory work. Rockett noted that with laboratory work canceled or limited, some researchers feel forced to focus on theory, which could create a long-term shift away from direct experimentation and toward more computation, modeling, and theory-based work.
Online Learning
A shift toward online learning has caused significant amounts of extra work for faculty, Rockett said. Many schools that were hesitant to move to online learning before the pandemic were forced to do so in a matter of weeks during campus shutdowns, and it is possible that this could fuel a long-term drift toward permanent online education. While online learning has some benefits, many students are struggling to adapt, and they miss the social activities that were previously a prominent component of their educational experience. Students can become unmotivated and are missing out on team-based learning, community support, and rewarding student–professor interactions. Survey respondents reported a sense that there has been a fairly significant loss in learning effectiveness.
While materials scientists and engineers are likely to continue to be in very high demand, and the economic situation may drive more people to graduate school, Rockett said these findings suggest that it will be a long time before the field recovers from the disruptions caused by COVID-19.
Q&A Discussion
Lori Graham-Brady, Johns Hopkins University, asked if the job market in the field is expected to worsen, and Rockett replied that a short-term decrease in hiring is possible. Although universities are preparing for worst-case scenarios, he said there is not yet an immediate threat of sweeping, permanent cuts. In response to a question from Phillips, NSB, Rockett noted that there has been a large drop in the number of international students and significant difficulties incorporating those that remain into synchronous online learning.
COVID-19 AND ENGINEERING EDUCATION: POTENTIAL IMPACTS IN MATERIALS SCIENCE AND MANUFACTURING PROGRAMS
Joseph Roy, American Society for Engineering Education
Roy shared results from “Profiles,” ASEE’s annual survey, which offers a detailed look at undergraduate and graduate enrollment trends in engineering disciplines,
with a materials science and manufacturing focus. He also reported on ASEE’s recent survey about potential changes in graduate admissions requirements.
Profiles Survey
The Profiles survey, conducted since 2001 and completed by more than 300 institutions, collects detailed information about enrollment, degrees awarded, tenure-track demographics, research expenditures, and thousands of other points of information. While it is assured that COVID-19 affected Fall 2020 enrollment, the data for this period are still being collected; previous surveys are being used to build a predictive model for enrollment to compare to Fall 2020 data when they are available.
Roy highlighted key trends in the data from previous years. Overall, there has been a large increase in the number of students enrolling in the 22 engineering disciplines since 2012. However, he pointed out that a small but significant slowdown in enrollment after 2015 suggests fewer degrees are about to be awarded, especially in chemical engineering.
Two other recent trends offer insights into the long-term engineering workforce and the financial pressures institutions are likely to face—full-time enrollment rates and the number of international students. Examining the proportion of full-time versus part-time enrollment in engineering programs can yield insights into downstream workforce trends. 2019 was the first year since the recession that saw a decline in full-time engineering enrollment. If this decrease continues, which is likely given the pandemic, it could be an early indicator of reduced student retention and time-to-completion issues, Roy noted. Studying “second-year persistence” shows that minority students, who also suffer increased impacts from COVID-19, are much less likely to persist in engineering programs, adding to workforce gaps and a lack of diversity.
Declines in full-time enrollment create the potential for both entry-level and mid-term workforce gaps. On the flip side, Roy noted that it is also possible that, if students reduce their course load only temporarily due to uncertainty or online learning struggles, there could actually be an overproduction of graduates in 5-7 years.
Trends in international enrollment in engineering programs can also shed light on workforce trends, as well as influence programs’ financial outlook. While international students make up a small but increasing percentage of undergraduate engineering degree awards, they have received the majority of master’s and doctoral engineering degrees since 2016. More than two-thirds of the 9,000 engineering postdoctoral researchers in the United States are non-citizens and the United States employs more than 125,000 international doctoral graduates, making foreign-born engineers a key component of the nation’s advanced engineering workforce.
Despite the overall importance of this group, Roy noted that engineering programs have seen a slight decrease in international students since 2017. This trend, in addition to the expected large drop in enrollment due to COVID-19, could have a significant detrimental effect on workforce numbers and university finances.
Looking ahead, Roy said that while it is not yet clear what impact COVID-19 will have on the points of information the Profiles survey assesses annually, workforce development and diversity are likely to suffer.
Admissions Requirements Survey
A recent ASEE survey focused on changes to graduate admissions requirements in light of COVID-19. It revealed that many schools have temporarily removed Graduate Record Examination (GRE) testing from graduate program requirements and that a sizeable proportion would consider making these temporary alterations permanent. The reasons for this relate to the perceived bias of the GRE, the diminished utility of GRE scores to rank applicants, and areas of conflict between campus-wide policy and the specific needs of engineering programs, which place a higher emphasis on quantitative scores and a lower emphasis on verbal scores than campuses as a whole.
Other findings from this survey show that schools are allowing Duo Lingo exams as an alternative to the Test of English as a Foreign Language and are temporarily, or even permanently, waiving certain fees. In some respects, the survey results suggest that COVID-19 gave engineering schools the excuse they needed to address long-standing challenges and an opportunity to reassess how they identify potentially successful students, Roy said.
Q&A Discussion
Ned Thomas, Texas A&M University, asked how these surveys account for the relationship between computer science and computer engineering, which are often housed separately on campuses. Roy replied that they do track computer science numbers, but it is considered a separate discipline, although the increased interest in computer science can certainly impact overall engineering enrollment. ASEE also considers electrical engineering to be a distinct subject but relies on the institutions to classify their programs as they see fit. In response to another participant’s question, Roy also clarified that the surveys target institutions with at least one undergraduate program accredited by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, and they have lower participation for some smaller or emerging programs.
TRENDS IN THE MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING WORKFORCE: SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING INDICATORS 2020
Julia Phillips, National Science Board
Phillips shared several trends derived primarily from the 2020 edition of Science and Engineering Indicators,1 a series of reports offering policy-relevant data on science and engineering published biannually by the NSB. While the data in these reports are not specific to materials science and manufacturing, Phillips said it is reasonable to assume that the overall trends are similar. She noted that the data in the 2020 edition are mostly from 2017 and 2018 and thus do not factor in the impacts of COVID-19 or how recent visa and immigration policy changes have affected international students.
Global Research and Development Investment
Global research and development (R&D) investment since 2000 has nearly tripled, with increased competition in knowledge-intensive industries, health security, and environmental challenges. While the United States still spent the most as of 2017 (Figure 2.2), China recently surpassed the European Union to reach second place, and Phillips noted that it is likely that China has surpassed the United States since 2017. Overall, the U.S. global share of R&D expenditures dropped from 37 percent in 2000 to 25 percent in 2017.
In general, Phillips said China invests more heavily in materials R&D, while the United States and Europe focus more on biological and pharmaceutical R&D. The rest of the world is catching up to the United States, and this new non-dominance has serious implications for national security and continued prosperity.
Other Global Changes
In addition to R&D investment, other global changes have affected U.S. engineering. First, a rise in quality post-secondary, and especially post-baccalaureate, science and engineering education outside the United States means that students no longer have to come here to get a world-class education. Second, globalization gives engineering students the opportunity to have rewarding careers in their home countries, meaning those who choose to study in the United States are more likely to return home than they were in previous decades. This is especially true of students from China and India, the two countries aside from the United States with
___________________
1 B. Khan, C. Robbins, and A. Okrent, 2020, The State of U.S. Science and Engineering, National Science Foundation and National Science Board, January 15, https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20201.
the most science and engineering students at U.S. institutions. Given that the U.S. student population is a direct pipeline to U.S. industry, these changes have serious implications for the U.S. workforce, Phillips noted.
As Roy mentioned, the number of international students began decreasing slightly in recent years, a trend that is likely to be exacerbated by COVID-19. In addition, the United States is highly reliant on foreign-born science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workers, the percentage of which has grown dramatically since 1993, especially at advanced degree levels. In materials science, more than 50 percent of master’s and doctorate degrees are awarded to foreign-born students.
Underrepresentation
Looking at the domestic science and engineering student demographics, it is clear that women and minorities remain underrepresented, especially at advanced degree levels. This underrepresentation is even more pronounced in materials science and engineering than in science and engineering overall. Not only is materials
science not keeping pace with other sciences, it is also not gaining any ground to increase diversity, Phillips said.
Pandemic Impacts
While the data from Science and Engineering Indicators do not currently account for pandemic-related trends, Phillips pointed to several potential impacts that may be seen down the road. K-12 education, already weaker in the United States compared to the rest of the world, is likely to suffer further declines as a result of the switch to remote learning, combined with a lack of universal broadband in many parts of the country, Phillips said. Ultimately, she speculated that this will leave the United States with many students who lack the preparation necessary to study engineering at the college level.
In addition, Phillips noted that COVID-19 is having a disproportionate effect on groups that are already underrepresented. Those with childcare challenges or a lack of broadband access will face limited options, further decreasing workforce potential. Minority-serving, 2-year, and state institutions, all with modest endowments, are also likely to suffer due to the pandemic’s financial impacts on higher education, exacerbating the representation problem. In the short term, talented students have lost internship or mentoring opportunities, which are important early-career stepping stones.
Concluding, Phillips stressed that recent trends in science and engineering raise serious concerns with important economic and national security implications and suggest a serious call to action is needed to address these problems. The United States is no longer the undisputed leader in materials and manufacturing. Even before the pandemic, it was overly reliant on foreign-born talent and not preparing its own students to be successful. The challenge now, Phillips said, is to work together to find and implement solutions.
Q&A DISCUSSION
Sinnott and Wadley moderated a wide-ranging discussion of program enrollment, online learning, and minority underrepresentation in engineering, as well as considerations related to U.S. R&D investment.
Engineering Program Enrollment
All three presenters were asked if they had a sense of expected graduate enrollment for Fall 2021. Rockett answered that his sense is that engineering programs are more concerned about the availability of funding, which influences how many students they can accept, especially at the doctoral level. Roy
replied that he has heard that domestic applications are slightly up this year, but whether that will translate to more enrolled students remains to be seen. For international students, because the United States is now competing heavily with other countries, Roy speculated that the decrease seen in recent years is likely to continue.
Phillips suggested that the future “sticking rate” for undergraduate engineering students will be an important measure of the effectiveness of online learning in K-12 education. For international students, she expects to see a dramatic falloff, because students have more choices for obtaining a top education now, and they also want to be somewhere they would feel welcome and valued. Such a decrease would have severe financial repercussions for U.S. universities, she noted.
Jack Beuth, Carnegie Mellon University, asked if the pivot to online learning could radically change the higher education landscape by affecting the way schools compete for students. Rockett answered that in his view, there is still space at the table for smaller schools, and the market is not saturated yet. Roy added that the way students respond to university initiatives matters. There could very well be a backlash to online learning, especially in fields that are heavily reliant on laboratory work.
Phillips stated that multiple approaches are needed to address minority underrepresentation in engineering. She noted that minority-serving institutions are already under financial stress, making it challenging to expand engineering programs at these schools. Role models at all education levels can help, albeit at the small scale, and igniting overall STEM engagement at the K-12 level is critical. She suggested a nationwide push, akin to the reaction to the Sputnik launch in the 1950s, would help to bolster the visibility and importance of science and engineering at the national level and help to draw more students from diverse backgrounds.
U.S. R&D Investment
In response to a participant’s question, Phillips noted that the Science and Engineering Indicators data are shared with the legislative and executive branches across the U.S. government. Congress is usually very supportive of R&D, especially for medical research, where the United States leads China. However, she said there is a continuing need to encourage lawmakers to also support physical and material sciences, where China is spending more. It is also important to note that the R&D budget is decreasing as a portion of the national budget and should be protected from further declines given its important implications for national security and prosperity, she said.
Wadley added that there is concern about China’s new ability to create enticing high-tech jobs to draw talent away that used to come to the United States and its allies. Phillips agreed that any complacency is concerning but noted that the United
States has the benefit of decades more experience creating and translating innovations. Rockett expressed concern that the politicization of COVID-19 has created a negative attitude toward science generally, which could affect the R&D budget and impede student recruitment. Phillips echoed this concern and cautioned that respect, humility, and open communication will be essential to garner public support for science.
