On the issue of kids not pursuing engineering/science/math these days

[EvilKermit]

If anyone has a problem with any of my statements below, I'll look for resources to back it up. But I really don't feel like taking the effort to find the resources to information I learned several years back, forgot where I heard it from, and don't feel like taking the effort to find it's location over an internet discussion.

The top two professions that teenagers aspire to be are: actors, professional athletes and musicians.

Why do you think this is? Do you this is completely due to intrinsic factor', that they enjoy it. That might be part of the reasons. But there are also external factors that play an important part as well. These people obtain respect, fame, money, but most importantly for males, access to virtually any women. It's no secret that these professionals are well known for 'getting the girls'.

However, male engineers, scientists, and mathematicians are not portrayed as having any 'game' by popular culture. Even though the characters in "The Big Bang Theory" are funny and likable, they are also portrayed as having terrible skills with the ladies. The only example of popular culture I can think of an engineering as 'cool' is Tony Stark from Iron Man. If mathematics, science, and engineering were seen as 'cool' then a lot more people would go into the field.

Even the financial reward of going into the field might not even be worth it. Engineers are compensated well, in fact the richest man in the world (Carlos Slim) is an engineer. The top salaries based on bachelor degrees are mostly engineering degrees. However perhaps being judged as a 'geek' or 'nerd' and the hard work that mathematicians, scientists, and engineers have to do isn't worth it. Honestly, sometimes I feel like changing my major to another degree because my parents constantly criticize my low grades.

I honestly do believe that there is varying skill in mathematical ability though. Yes, it does take effort. Nobody wakes up one day and suddenly knows how to do calculus or abstract algebra. However, there are various amounts of effort and time one needs to put into the subject to understand the concept. While it is possible for somebody who struggles with mathematics to understand the concepts with more effort, it can lead to frustration and one might give up on it if all your friends are going out and you are stuck studying.
There are more than just three classes of people: average, genius, and retard, and most people fall in the 'average' range, but a spectrum of potential ability in subjects. I don't think its a safe to assume that most people have relatively similar abilities and the amount of effort one devotes is the only variable.

There's a reason that most people drift away from fields they feel they are 'bad' at and enter fields they are 'good' at. There's a higher trade-off and a feeling of esteem learning a skill that one can progress quicker in, than waste energy for a lower trade off. This can be another reason why STEM fields are not pursued. It feels good to get all As in your class, and therefore people enter the fields where one obtains a higher gpa. I found it quite ironic that my parents were proud of me for doing well in my EMT-basic class while scolded me for doing poorly in my engineering class, despite the latter class being much more valuable.
It can be difficult to get As in STEM fields, and one might feel unintelligent for obtaining low grades. In fact, majors where there are more people then jobs in the field should have more rigorous standards, so he/she will not have a false sense of accomplishment.

 

[Galteeth]

If anyone has a problem with any of my statements below, I'll look for resources to back it up. But I really don't feel like taking the effort to find the resources to information I learned several years back, forgot where I heard it from, and don't feel like taking the effort to find it's location over an internet discussion.

The top two professions that teenagers aspire to be are: actors, professional athletes and musicians.

Why do you think this is? Do you this is completely due to intrinsic factor', that they enjoy it. That might be part of the reasons. But there are also external factors that play an important part as well. These people obtain respect, fame, money, but most importantly for males, access to virtually any women. It's no secret that these professionals are well known for 'getting the girls'.

However, male engineers, scientists, and mathematicians are not portrayed as having any 'game' by popular culture. Even though the characters in "The Big Bang Theory" are funny and likable, they are also portrayed as having terrible skills with the ladies. The only example of popular culture I can think of an engineering as 'cool' is Tony Stark from Iron Man. If mathematics, science, and engineering were seen as 'cool' then a lot more people would go into the field.

Even the financial reward of going into the field might not even be worth it. Engineers are compensated well, in fact the richest man in the world (Carlos Slim) is an engineer. The top salaries based on bachelor degrees are mostly engineering degrees. However perhaps being judged as a 'geek' or 'nerd' and the hard work that mathematicians, scientists, and engineers have to do isn't worth it. Honestly, sometimes I feel like changing my major to another degree because my parents constantly criticize my low grades.

I honestly do believe that there is varying skill in mathematical ability though. Yes, it does take effort. Nobody wakes up one day and suddenly knows how to do calculus or abstract algebra. However, there are various amounts of effort and time one needs to put into the subject to understand the concept. While it is possible for somebody who struggles with mathematics to understand the concepts with more effort, it can lead to frustration and one might give up on it if all your friends are going out and you are stuck studying.
There are more than just three classes of people: average, genius, and retard, and most people fall in the 'average' range, but a spectrum of potential ability in subjects. I don't think its a safe to assume that most people have relatively similar abilities and the amount of effort one devotes is the only variable.

There's a reason that most people drift away from fields they feel they are 'bad' at and enter fields they are 'good' at. There's a higher trade-off and a feeling of esteem learning a skill that one can progress quicker in, than waste energy for a lower trade off. This can be another reason why STEM fields are not pursued. It feels good to get all As in your class, and therefore people enter the fields where one obtains a higher gpa. I found it quite ironic that my parents were proud of me for doing well in my EMT-basic class while scolded me for doing poorly in my engineering class, despite the latter class being much more valuable.
It can be difficult to get As in STEM fields, and one might feel unintelligent for obtaining low grades. In fact, majors where there are more people then jobs in the field should have more rigorous standards, so he/she will not have a false sense of accomplishment.

With regards to the teenagers (or younger, really preteens and younger in my experience), this has more or less always been true (firemen, astronauts, whatever).

If anything, I think the "sexiness" of being a scientist, or an intellectual, has increased recently. Even the Big Bang Theory, which you mention, someone subverts the stereotypes of nerds from say, the 80's.
Honestly, I think it has much more to do with economics then anything else. Becoming a scientist or engineer is not only work intensive, it is also time intensive and capital intensive. There is college, grad scool, and internships. Even after all this, there is still a risk of failure. It is not surprising from an economic viepoint why not many people would choose this path.

 

[ViewsofMars]

I'm not a kid though I did do the woman thing today. I bought a purse and a new pair of shoes then painted my toes and fingernails. Worked on my tan too. After that I did some research as I normally must do and low and behold I found something that may be of interest to those discussing this topic:The National Science Board’s newly released SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING INDICTORS 2010. It's 566 pages. ( I love to read.) Here are excerpts from a few chapters.

Chapter 7. Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding
7-4
Information Sources, Interest, and Involvement

Television and the Internet are the primary sources

Americans use for science and technology (S&T) information.
The Internet is the main source of information for learning about specific scientific issues such as global climate change or biotechnology.

-More Americans select television as their primary source of S&T information than any other medium.
-The Internet ranks second among sources of S&T information, and its margin over other sources is large and has been growing.
-Internet users do not always assume that online S&T information is accurate. About four out of five have checked on the reliability of information at least once.

Continuing a long-standing pattern, Americans consistently express high levels of interest in S&T in surveys. However, other indicators, such as the types of news they follow closely, suggest a lower level of interest.
-High levels of interest in S&T are part of a long-standing trend, with more than 80% of Americans reporting they were “very” or “moderately” interested in new scientific
discoveries. But relative to other news topics, interest in S&T is not particularly high.
-As with many news topics, the percentage of Americans who say they follow “science and technology” news “closely” has declined over the last 10 years.
-Recent surveys in other countries, including South Korea, China, and much of Europe, indicate that the overall level of public interest in “new scientific discoveries” and “use
of new inventions and technologies” tends to be higher in the United States.
-Interest in “environmental pollution” or “the environment” is similarly high in the U.S., Europe, South Korea, and Brazil. About 9 in 10 respondents in each country expressed interest in this topic.

In 2008, a majority of Americans said they had visited an informal science institution such as a zoo or a natural history museum within the past year. This proportion is generally consistent with results from surveys conducted since 1979, but slightly lower than the proportion recorded in 2001.
-Americans with more formal education are much more likely to engage in informal science activities.
-Compared with the United States, visits to informal science institutions tend to be less common in Europe, Japan, China, Russia, and Brazil.

Public Knowledge About S&T

Many Americans do not give correct answers to questions about basic factual knowledge of science or the scientific inquiry process.
-Americans’ factual knowledge about science is positively related to their formal education level, income level, the number of science and math courses they have taken, and
their verbal ability.
-People who score well on long-standing knowledge measures that test for information typically learned in school also appear to know more about new science related topics
such as nanotechnology.

Levels of factual knowledge of science in the United States are comparable to those in Europe and appear to be higher than in Japan, China, or Russia.
-In the United States, levels of factual knowledge of science have been stable; Europe shows evidence of recent improvement in factual knowledge of science.
-In European countries, China, and Korea demographic variations in factual knowledge are similar to those in the United States.

Compared to the mid-1990s, Americans show a modest improvement in understanding the process of scientific inquiry in recent years.
-Americans’ understanding of scientific inquiry is strongly associated with their factual knowledge of science and level of education.
-Americans’ scores on questions measuring their understanding of the logic of experimentation and controlling variables do not differ by sex. In contrast, men tend to
score higher than women on factual knowledge questions in the physical sciences.

Public Attitudes About S&T in General

Americans in all demographic groups consistently endorse the past achievements and future promise of S&T.
-In 2008, 68% of Americans said that the benefits of scientific research have strongly outweighed the harmful results, and only 10% said harmful results slightly or strongly outweighed the benefits.
-Nearly 9 in 10 Americans agree with the statement “because of science and technology, there will be more opportunities for the next generation.”
-Americans also express some reservations about science. Nearly half of Americans agree that “science makes our way of life change too fast.”


7-15


International Comparisons
Using identical questions, recent surveys conducted in other countries indicate that the overall level of self-reported public interest in S&T is lower than in the United States. Between 75% and 80% of survey respondents in South Korea, China, and Europe said they were “very” or “moderately” interested in “new scientific discoveries” and “use of new
inventions and technologies” compared to 86% and 88% respectively of Americans in the 2008 GSS, respectively (appendix table 7-4) (KOFAC 2009; CRISP 2008; EC 2005).
Using slightly different questions, about three-quarters of Brazilians said they were “very interested” or “a little interested” in “science and technology” (MCT of Brazil 2006).
In Malaysia, 58% of the respondents said they were “interested” or “very interested” in the “latest inventions in new technology” and 51% in the “latest inventions in science”
(MASTIC 2004).

In the 2005 European survey (called the 2005 “Eurobarometer”), there was considerable variation among different countries in self-reported interest in S&T-related issues, and
the overall level of interest was down from the most recent survey in 1992. In both the United States and in Europe, men showed more interest in S&T than women. For more recent European data on interest in scientific research in general, see sidebar “Scientific Research in the Media in Europe.”5 Interest in environmental issues is similarly high in the
United States, Europe, South Korea, and Brazil—about 9 in 10 respondents in each country or region expressed interest in this topic, although slight variations in survey terminology should be taken into account.6 In Malaysia, interest in “environmental pollution” was lower (61% said they were “interested” or “very interested” in this issue).

Like Americans, Europeans and Brazilians are more interested in medicine than in S&T in general. In the United States, nearly everyone was interested in new medical discoveries
(94%); in Brazil, most people (91%) were interested in “medicine and health” issues. In Europe, South Korea, and China, interest in new medical discoveries seemed to
be lower—between 77% and 83% said they were “very” or “moderately” interested in this issue. In Malaysia, 59% indicated they were “interested” or “very interested” in the “latest
inventions in the field of medicine.”7
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind10/pdf/seind10.pdf

Be sure to read within that pdf the following topics:
Chapter 1. Elementary and Secondary Mathematics and Science Chapter 2. Higher Education in Science and Engineering
Chapter 3. Science and Engineering Labor
Chapter 4. Research and Development: National Trends and International Linkages
Chapter 5. Academic Research and Development
Chapter 6. Industry, Technology, and the Global Marketplace
Chapter 7. Science and Technology: Public Attitudes and Understanding

 

[brainstorm]

Math classes are used as filters to relegate all students but the elite to auxiliary professions. I think many students are aware of this and they don't want to strive for a goal and end up with a different one in its place because they didn't make the selection criteria.

Students want to aim for and work toward goals that are realizable. If science and technology are really values that are good for everyone, the technologies and other practical application of such fields needs to be more democratized.

Students want a vision for what they can expect from their lives and the economy they're going have to work with.

 

[Wellesley]

Math classes are used as filters to relegate all students but the elite to auxiliary professions. I think many students are aware of this and they don't want to strive for a goal and end up with a different one in its place because they didn't make the selection criteria.

Students want to aim for and work toward goals that are realizable.

Students want a vision for what they can expect from their lives and the economy they're going have to work with.

What do you mean by auxiliary professions? Is engineering an auxiliary profession?

If science and technology are really values that are good for everyone, the technologies and other practical application of such fields needs to be more democratized.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand this. Science and technology is the future.

 

[brainstorm]

What do you mean by auxiliary professions? Is engineering an auxiliary profession?

Professions that pay less and act as support services for scientists and technology designers. Engineering would be a support service in many cases, I think, although it's a pretty high paid one with a lot of creativity involved. The professions I really mean as auxiliary are things like insurance adjuster, accounts manager, payroll clerk, etc.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand this. Science and technology is the future.

It's the future for a relatively small elite of people as long as science and technology are relatively elite industries. If they became as common as, say, fast food restaurants - then everyone could be participating in constructing the future instead of serving fries to those that do during their lunch breaks.

 

[Wellesley]

Professions that pay less and act as support services for scientists and technology designers. Engineering would be a support service in many cases, I think, although it's a pretty high paid one with a lot of creativity involved. The professions I really mean as auxiliary are things like insurance adjuster, accounts manager, payroll clerk, etc.


It's the future for a relatively small elite of people as long as science and technology are relatively elite industries. If they became as common as, say, fast food restaurants - then everyone could be participating in constructing the future instead of serving fries to those that do during their lunch breaks.

Thanks for the clarification! I know see what you meant.