The Atlantic addressed this recent data trend based off NSA data regarding where the STEM field PhDs are going:
Here is part 1:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...charts/273339/
Here is part 2:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...ntists/273377/
The gist of the article is the STEM surplus that exists already and the trends are worrisome.
The author does well by indicating the lack of control and the pure susceptability to capitalism that the STEM fields are subject to:
"Unfortunately, I left a big question unanswered. Many of today's science Ph.D.'s aren't Americans. In 2011, 51.9 percent of engineering doctorates, 26.2 percent of life sciences doctorates, and 39.6 percent of physical sciences doctorates were awarded to foreign students living in the United States on temporary visas. Thanks to their immigration status, these graduates face obstacles that an aerospace engineer born in Iowa might not."
This lack of protectionism is not something we see in the medical field.
Regarding the Engineers and how they are faring:
"So let's start with the engineers, who include material sciences, aerospace, chemical, electrical and other sub-fields. As you can see on the left, 43.7 percent of the Americans+ category reported having a job offer, far better than temporary immigrants. But look to the right, and you'll see that more than a quarter either had no job offer, postdoctoral study appointment, or other firm post-graduation plans (a small sliver might be headed to yet another graduate education program, though the NSF isn't clear precisely how many). "
Then he addressed Comp Sci, which fares a little better but not by that much and he concedes the 2/3 hunting figure:
"For physical sciences grads -- including computer scientists, mathematicians, physicists, and chemists, among others -- members of the Americans+ club were more likely to have landed a job. Nonetheless, two-thirds were either still hunting, or stuck in a post-doc appointment, which often turns into a years-long ordeal as a lowly-paid research assistant. "
Couple this to Barkawi's recent glum assessments on American Academia and the coming crises:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opi...284530760.html
"Much of the coverage has focused on the sub-poverty wages of adjunct faculty, their lack of job security and the growing legions of unemployed and under-employed PhDs. Elsewhere, the focus has been on web-based learning and the massive open online courses (MOOCs), with some commentators celebrating and others lamenting their arrival.
The two developments are not unrelated. Harvard recently asked its alumni to volunteer their time as "online mentors" and "discussion group managers" for an online course. Fewer professors and fewer qualified - or even paid - teaching assistants will be required in higher education's New Order.
Lost amid the fetishisation of information technology and the pathos of the struggle over proper working conditions for adjunct faculty is the deeper crisis of the academic profession occasioned by neoliberalism. This crisis is connected to the economics of higher education but it is not primarily about that.
The neoliberal sacking of the universities runs much deeper than tuition fee hikes and budget cuts."
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opi...284530760.html
Conclusions:
What this boils down to is that the immigrant communities have been doing exactly the right thing in urging their children to enter into the medical field en masse because A) the protectionism gaurantees that these trends above dont touch clinicians and B) there are a plethora of opportunities that await folks on the other end.
What young Afghans should continue to do is to deluge the medical field or other professional degree fields since their population is still small enough to make their entrance an easier task.
Toramana, keep your atheist ikhwani commentary to yourself and please do not pollute this thread with your typical angry meanderings.
Here is part 1:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...charts/273339/
Here is part 2:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...ntists/273377/
The gist of the article is the STEM surplus that exists already and the trends are worrisome.
The author does well by indicating the lack of control and the pure susceptability to capitalism that the STEM fields are subject to:
"Unfortunately, I left a big question unanswered. Many of today's science Ph.D.'s aren't Americans. In 2011, 51.9 percent of engineering doctorates, 26.2 percent of life sciences doctorates, and 39.6 percent of physical sciences doctorates were awarded to foreign students living in the United States on temporary visas. Thanks to their immigration status, these graduates face obstacles that an aerospace engineer born in Iowa might not."
This lack of protectionism is not something we see in the medical field.
Regarding the Engineers and how they are faring:
"So let's start with the engineers, who include material sciences, aerospace, chemical, electrical and other sub-fields. As you can see on the left, 43.7 percent of the Americans+ category reported having a job offer, far better than temporary immigrants. But look to the right, and you'll see that more than a quarter either had no job offer, postdoctoral study appointment, or other firm post-graduation plans (a small sliver might be headed to yet another graduate education program, though the NSF isn't clear precisely how many). "
Then he addressed Comp Sci, which fares a little better but not by that much and he concedes the 2/3 hunting figure:
"For physical sciences grads -- including computer scientists, mathematicians, physicists, and chemists, among others -- members of the Americans+ club were more likely to have landed a job. Nonetheless, two-thirds were either still hunting, or stuck in a post-doc appointment, which often turns into a years-long ordeal as a lowly-paid research assistant. "
Couple this to Barkawi's recent glum assessments on American Academia and the coming crises:
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opi...284530760.html
"Much of the coverage has focused on the sub-poverty wages of adjunct faculty, their lack of job security and the growing legions of unemployed and under-employed PhDs. Elsewhere, the focus has been on web-based learning and the massive open online courses (MOOCs), with some commentators celebrating and others lamenting their arrival.
The two developments are not unrelated. Harvard recently asked its alumni to volunteer their time as "online mentors" and "discussion group managers" for an online course. Fewer professors and fewer qualified - or even paid - teaching assistants will be required in higher education's New Order.
Lost amid the fetishisation of information technology and the pathos of the struggle over proper working conditions for adjunct faculty is the deeper crisis of the academic profession occasioned by neoliberalism. This crisis is connected to the economics of higher education but it is not primarily about that.
The neoliberal sacking of the universities runs much deeper than tuition fee hikes and budget cuts."
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opi...284530760.html
Conclusions:
What this boils down to is that the immigrant communities have been doing exactly the right thing in urging their children to enter into the medical field en masse because A) the protectionism gaurantees that these trends above dont touch clinicians and B) there are a plethora of opportunities that await folks on the other end.
What young Afghans should continue to do is to deluge the medical field or other professional degree fields since their population is still small enough to make their entrance an easier task.
Toramana, keep your atheist ikhwani commentary to yourself and please do not pollute this thread with your typical angry meanderings.



Comment