Science Science graduates 'lack skills needed by business'

Notebook

Addon Developer
Addon Developer
News Reporter
Donator
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
11,965
Reaction score
765
Points
188
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-18957712

This headline, or similar, seem to pop up every few years or so. Is it an intrinsic problem, or any chance of the education system getting it right?

Some good quotes though...

Report chairman Lord Willis said he was "gobsmacked" by figures which showed few who had studied maths beyond GCSE.

The sub-committee that produced the report said they were shocked that so many Stem undergraduates did not have A-level mathematics.
(Stem, science, technology, engineering and maths )
The figures showed that around 70% of biology undergraduates, 38% of chemistry and economics undergraduates and 10% of engineering students did not have A-level maths.
The report team even found evidence that even an A* in A-level mathematics was no guarantee that students would be able to cope with a university science course.

N.
 
This headline, or similar, seem to pop up every few years or so. Is it an intrinsic problem, or any chance of the education system getting it right?

Personally I think it's a mix of the education system and parents as well as the digital age we live in.

The digital age gives this perception that everything is available immediately which wasn't around when I was a kid, this means that many students don't seem to bother to find things out for themselves or delight in seeing a result first hand. A classic example of that is right here on the forum where people ask 'does it work in orbiter 2010' rather than trying out for themselves and taking the risk of breaking Orbiter 2010.

Similiar, in the UK, there has been a culture of 'no one can fail' with actual failure being called 'a deferred success' so I think that when you have that sort of environment going into business, be that science or anything else you won't know enough to go off and do things on your own initative because you've never suffered a failure and had the self determination to go off and find out where you went wrong yourself.

In short, there is far too much hand holding and not enough self-initative.
 
The main problem actually is different:

  • The business in general wants perfectly educated people, who want to work for free and they want them without cooperating with the education system and ideally without paying taxes.
  • The business thinks the education system only exists to produce employees.
  • Most universities think the edcuation systems exists to produce theoretical scientists. And that this requires more money from the tax payer or the students.
  • Many students think correctly that the education system exists only to offer them certification for higher jobs. Many of the more self-motivated actually think it exists for learning new knowledge and skills for their field of interest. For free of course.
  • Business still believes that education should also teach qualification for higher jobs, beyond the requirements of plain certification.

In short: Many different people have different concepts and requirements on the education system and fail to agree on any.

There are good reasons to be annoyed at the education system. But don't blame the teachers for the shortcomings of the students: When somebody went to school in Germany for 9 years, but fails still to write a proper application for a job in proper German written language, despite the availability of spelling corrections, it is 80% the fault of parents and student, not the teacher, who has only a few hours every week to correct what the parents did wrong in the mean time.

IMHO, the only way to make young people fit for business and ensure a good amount of suitable applicants for a job, you need to cooperate with schools and universities as company already as soon as possible and with reasonable effort. You need to show them your job, explain how careers look like, explain early what is demanded. And also talk about the good things early. Show them a reason why they should be good at school, and why not everybody can become Hip Hop star to earn his living. ;)
 
Last edited:
As the father of 3 kids, I came to a very similar conclusion to Urwumpe's:


  • If you ask the teachers, of course the lazy parents with their pampered kids are the problem, followed by the greedy government and the capitalistic economy.
  • If you ask the parents, of course the incompetent teachers are the problem, followed by the envious government and the greedy economy culture that drove the kids into zombie consumers.
  • If you ask the government, of course the parents and teachers are too lazy to properly educate the kids for the needs of the economy to pay the taxes.
  • If you ask economy experts, the overly bureaucratic government fails to dictate sufficient mechanisms to the teachers and parents to create skilled and cheap employees.
  • If you ask the kids, they want their X-Box and Wii. Now.
And as always, it was much better yesterday and will end in apocalypse tomorrow...


I really don't know how to solve these problems, but one thing is for certain: blaming each other in circles is not going to be the solution. Unfortunately it seems to be the low-energy approach for most, and as such it will go on for quite some time, I fear.


regards,
Face
 
As I am almost finished my degree, this is somewhat my latest hobby.

Here in Australia, all the Engineering courses are accredited by Engineers Australia. This means that the courses are all going to be about the same. One of the key requirements is that the students complete 12 weeks work experience in the field.

The biggest problem for us (engineering at my uni) is that the Uni wants more people to enrol and graduate. This means that they put pressure to dumb down the content.

Of course the business community doesn't help its self, it wants workers but doesn't want to train them...
 
I thought that most of the science degrees, at least here, needed A-level maths (or at least something like A-level physics) to get onto the course? The courses I've got on to needed both, and quite a lot of friends who aren't even going into STEM degrees needed at least AS-level maths to be confident in getting onto their course. Certainly, all the courses which contain maths content make sure you have a suitable background.
 
It seems this article wasn't well thought out. This like explains quite well:



The figures showed that around 70% of biology undergraduates, 38% of chemistry and economics undergraduates and 10% of engineering students did not have A-level maths.

Well... d0h! Biology students don't study math. They don't need it in their line of math. Chemistry students also need some basic math, but I've never seen anything as advanced as what I learned about studying Physics.

They also grouped chemistry and economics students together. I'd guess the figure is as high as 38% because chemistry students do a bit worse and economics students a bit better.

While the 10% figure for engineering students seems a bit high, it is lowest of the group and that's understandable: Engineering students are taught high level math.


The article and the study: :facepalm:
 
Must be some engineers left in the UK, the mains electric has been off for the last nine hours...they did tell me but I forgot. (B.A.(Calcutta:failed)).

N.
 
If students are accepted onto an engineering course without A Level Maths, then the surely the blame lies solely with the university admissions department. How can anyone get past the first few weeks of an engineering degree without a high level of maths?
 
I graduated with a degree in computer science three and a half years ago, from one of the top 10 CS schools in the country. The only math I took in college was matrices and vectors--I took care of the rest in high school via AP classes and dual enrollment, through Calc 3 and differential equations.

The only math skills I have used after the relevant class ended have been trigonometry and vector mathematics, and that was used for stuff like programming for Orbiter, not for my job. Everything else has been completely irrelevant to me.

Can someone from the UK (or the rest of Europe, if it's a common thing) elaborate on what the article means by "A-level mathematics" for those of us outside the area? I'd like a basis of comparison...
 
The only math skills I have used after the relevant class ended have been trigonometry and vector mathematics, and that was used for stuff like programming for Orbiter, not for my job. Everything else has been completely irrelevant to me.

Without the math my university thought me, I could give up working on the autopilots and AI for OBSP. Most code I write is deep in math and I'm not just talking vectors and trig. I have to make up elaborate models to make things work quite often.
 
Blame the clueless parents? Sure, they don't know how to raise their kids. The teachers? Yes, also, as it's their job to educate. Institutions? Bussissness? The government? They have so much in their hands that the average Joe is not even in their priority list. An uncaring community? Absolutely, even though it's an oxymoron.

In the end, who gets screwed the most is the student, and the worst thing he, or she could do, is enter this finger-pointing contest. As I see, the only blame one can safely assign is on the student itself.

Now, it's easy to shift the frame a bit to the side, and include an innocuous-looking, youth-destroyer: the internet. Or the newest Call of Duty, or cellphones, or porn. Or bad company, bad parenting, bad schooling, bad training, bad counseling, and bad acceptance. Violent games, alienating culture, mass media, brainwash, misguided brainwash. Conformism and rebellion. No faith, half-assed faith, normal faith, extreme faith, communism, capitalism, oppression, idealism. And, possibly on top, an "individualistic and egocentric society".

... and then, just at the end of this spiral, we're back to finger-pointing.

If someone enrolls in an engineering course with insufficient math knowledge, it only shows, in most cases, non-commitment, especially in areas with free or cheap access to the internet, libraries, and bookstores (which lets guests read books as long as they are inside the store). Which, I'm guessing, is the case in most of the UK.

An even more personal opinion: those who try to solve everything, end up worsening the situation*. To improve yourself and contribute to the world, act in that order.


* On a light-hearted note, this phrase is akin to this.
 
It really comes down to lack of critical thinking and too many distractions. The important things and real-life examples & values aren't being instilled and passed down.

Additionally, the human brain, is not evolved to deal effectively with all of the information available to it today. And especially information that is of dubious value to begin with. Just like we aren't evolved to handle processed food. Same deal.
 
Science doesn't even matter in the US anymore, if you look at the numbers almost all the current job growth is in jobs that barely require a high school education. Your mechanical engineering degree won't help you sell more iPads at the Apple store.
 
I flagged your post for accuracy. This is so true. I know many folks that hold advanced degrees doctorate degrees working at the likes of Denny's and Target and other $10/hr jobs. Some got lucky and are racking in $16/hr.

---------- Post added at 02:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:04 AM ----------

In the job market in the U.S. it seems that intelligence and capability is almost frowned upon. They want a do-good robot employee.
 
I flagged your post for accuracy. This is so true. I know many folks that hold advanced degrees doctorate degrees working at the likes of Denny's and Target and other $10/hr jobs. Some got lucky and are racking in $16/hr.

$16/h? I earned that much when I was still lab rat* at the university and my salary was defined by lower saxon university law.

In the job market in the U.S. it seems that intelligence and capability is almost frowned upon. They want a do-good robot employee.

Yes and that is why many companies fail eventually. Robots don't innovate, robots have to be innovated from above.


* Expendable contributor to scientific work.
 
Last edited:
To use th "do-good robot employee" analogy, many years ago during a job interview I'd mentioned to the HR rep that if they we're looking for a "yes-man" that they needed to keep looking, because I wasn't their guy, particularly when it comes to safety.

They hired me (the suckers...), since which time, the managers have learned that if they want to know the answer to their question they can ask me-with the understanding that they should not ask me a question in which they really don't want answered truthfully.

I would agree that there are many jobs locally here in east Tennessee that don't require any special skill-set. Tourism seems to bring in a majority of the revenue, and many jobs are in the service industry, which doesn't exactly require a whole lot of math skills (other than counting backwards to make change).

But, there are many tech jobs available too. Chattanooga has Volkswagon, my town has Wacker Chemie. This particular area has 6 nuclear plants within a short drive; soon to be 9 (of which I work at Watts Bar unit 1). And I make substantially higher than minimum wage (as a lberal arts major no less). I don't exactly need to use mathmatic beyond rudimentary trig for generator output (for power factor calulations) and reactor calometrics.

Put simply, we DO need intelligence and capability in the workplace. We're short-staffed here, and it pains me to find out that out of 100 or so people who've lined up to take the EEI test, only a handfull manage to pass the thing. And I'm only in the maintenance dept. Operations is even more short-staffed, almost to the point of losing the license to operrate due to not having enough qualified people to run the thing (that was a few years ago, but still).
 
They hired me (the suckers...), since which time, the managers have learned that if they want to know the answer to their question they can ask me-with the understanding that they should not ask me a question in which they really don't want answered truthfully.

Yeah, I've had a few instances like that. Often, when managers ask me for my opinion I have to ask them if they are sure because they may not like what they hear. To date, I've been surprised just how many have been receptive to what I've had to say. It's not always fixed things but at least it's gotten things acknowledged.

Put simply, we DO need intelligence and capability in the workplace.

And initiative. Just because a technical place has change control or other processes in place doesn't mean it's not going to be open to innovation, in fact it may be better because changes are listened to and debated - no bad thing.

I've worked in a lot of different companies - nine over 18 years and I've seen things that work and things that don't. I think that gives me a rather unique perspective to bring things to the table based on that experience. Someone starting work won't have that but what they will have is a mind unecumbered by processes and may well be best place to see where bottlenecks are. From that angle, the first 6 months of a new starters time can be invaluable.
 
Put simply, we DO need intelligence and capability in the workplace.

Disagree. I consider myself a reasonably intelligent and capable person (by the standards of southern Indiana, I guess), and I have always felt alienated and looked down on by my employers as a result. Nobody wants to hear ideas that they didn't think of, and they definitely don't want to hear honest and reasonable critiques of the ideas they DID think of. Employers want mindless zombies who will do what they're told without comment or question and ask for raises as seldom as possible.

Intelligence, creativity, and technical skill are meaningless, we're offshoring those jobs as fast as possible to countries that are better at it than we are. The only skills that count for anything are the ability to smile and make a scripted statement to people who might give you money, and the ability to manipulate your way into a better workplace situation. Nobody wants to deal with smart, independent people with any initiative that isn't given to them as written orders.

---------- Post added at 10:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:56 PM ----------

From that angle, the first 6 months of a new starters time can be invaluable.

Except nobody gives a crap what you have to say in the first 6 months, because you're the worthless new guy who doesn't know anything.
 
Back
Top