APICS Pikes Peak Colorado Chapter

EDITORIAL

Improving American Competitiveness

By Ira Smolowitz, Ph.D.

__________________________________________________________________________
In the February ’06 issues of ONWARD!, I cited compelling evidence to merit concern about the underlying trend of America’s global competitive position. To re-emphasize the associated concerns, consider the following:

... The rapidity at which technology is changing is another challenge for the U.S. economy. Digital information systems are giving way to bio-and nanotechnologies. Unfortunately, America is not doing very well in recruiting young people to

. Bachelor’s degrees in science and engineering make up sixty percent of the total degrees earned in China.
. Five percent of the degrees earned in the United States last year were in science and engineering.
. This year, China alone will graduate 350,000 engineers.
. By 2010 it is predicted that 90 percent of all the world’s scientists and engineers will be in Asia. . Nearly one-half of U.S. enrollments in science, technology, engineering and mathematics are students who are non-U.S. citizens.
. In 1975, the United States ranked third in the world in the percentage of its students who received degrees in science and engineering. Today we are 17th in the world.

In a world in which science and engineering will become the cornerstone of what is needed to know and be able to do in the 21st century, the U.S. is being outpaced dramatically by India, China, and Eastern Europe. The decline of U.S. enrollment in science and engineering combined with the fact that scientists and engineers will be even more coveted in the work force in the coming years places the U.S. at a great disadvantage as a nation. Continuance of these trends will result in severe human and economic consequences to our country.1

... At the top U.S. engineering schools, more than half the students are foreign-born. This plus cost advantages drive businesses to pursue talent across borders. Intel just announced it would invest $1 billion in India over five years for research and development centers. And Microsoft said it would invest $1.7 billion that would add 3,000 jobs in India.

K-12 educators tend to scoff at business leaders who deliver tough speeches about inadequate education standards. Not only has the USA retained its world technology lead, they say, but those same complaining business leaders rarely roll up their sleeves to help out in classrooms. Further, a recent Duke University study says many engineering graduates in China and India are far less educated than their U.S. counterparts are. Regardless of how that debate is resolved, the science and technology deficiencies in the American education system are too blatant to ignore. They include:

. Persistent teacher quality problems. Only 41% of U.S. eighth-graders learn math from a teacher who majored in math or earned a math-teaching certificate. The international average if 71%.
. Shoddy science standards. More than two thirds of the states have science standards rated at a C-average or lower, according to the science professors’ review for the Fordham Foundation. . . . Popular culture. TV shows and movies reinforce a message that math and science are geeky.

What to do?

According to a National Academy of Sciences report released in October, potential solutions include attracting 10,000 new, well-educated K-12 math and science teachers with federal grants of up to $20,000 annually. Federal spending on basic research also needs to rise by 10% over the next seven years, the report says.

While critics continue to assert this is another false alarm, business leaders are adjusting to the reality of the new global economy. Now it’s up to schools to do likewise.2

All may not be lost in the quest to retain American competitiveness. Consider the provocative, insightful observations of Carnegie Mellon University Engineering School Dean Pradeep Khosla:

Carnegie Mellon University Engineering School Dean Pradeep Khosla told a room filled with engineers yesterday that all is not lost in the United States’ quest to remain a global “superpower.” Despite a recent study by the American Society for Engineering Education reporting that fewer than 5 percent of undergraduate degrees awarded in 2004 were in engineering. America can remain “at the top of the food chain” if it trains its engineers in management, finance, policy and entrepreneurship, Dr. Khosla said. “We need to train engineers...who will be managing, creating and deploying innovation,” he told the lunchtime crowed at a panel discussion titled, ”Is America Falling Behind?”3

Although I personally appreciate Dean Khosla’s interdisciplinary perspective, I am not sure that this will improve the U.S. engineering competitive position. Improving the quality of U.S. engineering graduates can not fully offset the pronounced decline in the number of U.S. engineering college graduates. I would argue that the seeds of academic success – the driving force of American competitiveness – must be planted early. Consider the backgrounds of the high school students selected to the ALL-USA High School Academic Team. As the contest enters its 20th year, USA Today “surveyed winners from the past 19 years to get their perspective on what made them successful.”

...The survey results, based on 72% of the 378 winners responding, are telling in terms

. 94% said they grew up in homes with both a mother and a father.
. 57% of their fathers had doctorates, and 58% of their mothers had a master’s degree or doctorate. More than 95% of the fathers and 91% of the mothers had at least a bachelor’s degree, and 100% of the parents had at least a high school diploma.

Those findings would support a body of educational scholarship showing that factors such as parental educational attainment and household structure have a major impact on academic performance.4

Restoring and maintaining America’s competitiveness is a dynamic, multi-faceted journey. I hope that this article, and the preceding article, will serve to indicate the requisite steps to successfully completing the journey.

References
1. Daggett, Willard R. “Preparing Students for Their Future” – Presented at June 2005 Model Schools Conference (Dr. Daggett is President, International Center).
2. “Educational Back Hole” (editorial debate) – USA Today, December 27, 2005. p. 11A.
3. “Bits & Bites: America need not cede engineering leadership, panel says” Post Gazette. December 3, 2005 – (downloaded 1/4/06 from http://www.post-.
4. Briggs, Tracey Wong “Seeds of Success Were Sown Early” USA Today, January 4, 2006. pp. 1D & 2D.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Articles printed with the permission of Dr. Ira Smolowitz, Professor of Finance and Dean, Bureau of Business Research and Program Development at American International College, Springfield, MA.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Page updated: May 21, 2007 8:33 AM

...................................................................................................................................................
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of APICS. Neither APICS nor the author(s) assume, and hereby disclaim, any liability for any loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions resulted from negligence, accident or other causes.
APICS Pikes Peak Chapter P.O. Box 486 Colorado Springs, CO 80901 Phone: 719-578-1225
APICS Logo is a Registered Trademark ®

Unique daily website visitors since June 1, 2005
Mission Statement Privacy Statement