The Mythical Scientist Shortage

Does the United States face a shortage of scientists and engineers? Are drooping science enrollments undermining America's strength? You might conclude so from the anxious warnings that perennially occupy a prominent place in scientific establishment pronouncements. An American Scientist editorial, in its July-August 2001 issue, asserts, "We are not training enough American scientists and engineers to retain our prosperity ...." Former NASA head Dan Goldin wrote in the September 2001 Atlantic Monthly, that he foresees "a serious deficit of scientists and engineers," leading to "an evaporating dominance." Despite the alarms, no current or impending shortage exists, and never did. Instead, we're glutted with scientists and engineers in many fields, as numerous job seekers with respectable credentials can attest. Here's the truth about science and engineering in America: This nation has never trained enough American-born scientists and engineers. We've prospered by luring the cream of foreign-trained scientists and foreign-born students, who train and remain here. Deploring the post-Sept. 11 restrictions on foreign students, Bruce Alberts, president of the National Academy of Sciences, candidly warned last year, "We can't fill our own schools with people from the US." When it comes to science and technology (S&T) prowess, the United States has historically cherry-picked the world. During the post-WWII period, foreign graduate students comprised as much as half, and sometimes more, of those enrolled in America's research universities. In 1997, according to the National Science Foundation, the foreign born accounted for 44% of US PhDs in engineering, 30% in mathematics, 29% in chemistry, and 25% in the biological sciences. Despite fears that foreign students will collect their sheepskins and return home, the NSF finds that more than half remain in the United States temporarily or permanently, while many who depart later return. We built the bomb with the indispensable genius of refugees from fascism, among them Enrico Fermi, Eugene Wigner, Hans Bethe, and Edward Teller. We went into space under the direction of Wernher von Braun, who pioneered rocketry in the service of Adolph Hitler. "American" dominance on the Nobel Prize rolls includes numerous immigrants. There is no puzzle about the migratory motives of the US-bound who arrive from India, China, the Philippines, Western Europe, Korea, Iran, and other nations. The United States is a welcoming land of opportunity for talent. The important question to ponder, and address honestly, is why very large numbers of young Americans with scientific aptitude shun advanced scientific training and careers in S&T--opening these opportunities to eager immigrants. Answer: They do so for the same reason that immigrant workers pick strawberries under the California sun: For an academically astute American, better ways abound to make a living. In fact, unless a student is alight with scientific passion, this potential career path is particularly unappealing relative to other opportunities--so distasteful that the barons of science lately have had to cope with rebellions among their graduate students and postdocs, a laboratory's stoop labor. Consider the economic fates of two bright college graduates, Jane and Jill, both 22. Jane excels at a top law school, and after graduation three years later, is wooed and hired by a top law firm at the going rate--$125,000 a year, with a year-end bonus of $25,000 to $50,000. Jill heads down the long trail to a PhD in physics, and after six Spartan years on graduate stipends rising to $20,000 a year, finally gets her degree. Tenure-track jobs appropriate to her rigorous training are scarce, but, more fortunate than her other classmates, she lands a good postdoc appointment--at $35,000 year, without health insurance or professional independence. Three years later, when attorney Jane is raking in $150,000 a year, plus bonuses, Jill is nail-biting over another postdoc appointment, with an unusually ample postdoc recompense of $45,000 per annum. Medicine and business management similarly trump science in earning power. The University of Washington conducted a study in 2002 entitled "The Best and Brightest for Science: Is There a Problem Here?" and found "a logjam in the numbers of recent PhDs caught sometimes for years in postdoctoral positions with very modest salaries that generally provide little autonomy in selecting research topics or applying for grants."1 A RAND study, "The PhD Factory," concluded that the volume of graduate-school admissions is heavily influenced by the need for teaching and lab assistants--not by the job market.2 To meet their needs for teaching and lab assistants, many departments lower their standards of admission. An Oct.4, 2002 Science article noted, "Many scientists must now work until midlife before they can obtain a stable income and clear benefits." In the same issue, an NSF official describes the postdoc plight as "deplorable." Delighted to have an abundance of expert cheap labor, as long as it isn't too uppity, the scientific establishment has responded to the glut with touching solicitude and hollow remedies. These include warmer mentoring and a proposed fellowship program that would put new PhDs into elementary schools and science museums at $35,000 a year--the going rate for a fast-food restaurant manager. America dotes on science, but skimps on properly treating and rewarding those who produce it. There's no need to treat them fairly when, fortunately for the Unites States, plenty of scientific talent is lined up for admission to American universities and laboratories. Daniel S. Greenberg, a Washington journalist, is author of Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion (University of Chicago Press, 2001). References 1. W. Zumeta, J.S. Raveling, "The best and brightest for science: Is there a problem here?" Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology, Washington, DC, 2002, available online at www.cpst.org/BBIssues.pdf. 2. C.A. Goldman, W.F. Massy, The PhD Factory--Training and Employment of Science and Engineering Doctorates in the United States, Bolton, Mass.: Anker Publishing, 2001.

The Mythical Scientist Shortage

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of