Free Will and the Future Workforce © RW Millard 2012-2015 Free Will and the Future Workforce: What...

Free Will and the Future Workforce

© RW Millard 2012-2015

Free Will and the Future Workforce: What Career Paths Will My STEM Degree Open?" 3:35pm; 11/30/2012502 Rieveschl Hall, Chemistry-UC A&S

"Free Will and the Future Workforce: What Career Paths Will My STEM Degree Open?"

To What Careers Might A Graduate Degree in Life Sciences, Chemistry or Physics Lead?

Career Preferences Change Over TimeDemographics are Changing

Global Opportunities & Competition are ChangingOhio Opportunities are Expanding



Career preferencesFactors that shape careers

Future career opportunitiesUS demographic forecasts

Ohio workforce opportunitiesFuture workforce for economic competitiveness



Urgent need to return focus on5 Basic Pillars Sustaining US Economic Growth

• education• infrastructure• immigration of high-I.Q. innovators and

entrepreneurs• rules to incentivize risk-taking and start-ups• government-funded research to spur science

and technology

Source: Thomas L. Friedman (August 6, 2011) – NY Times/Op Ed© RW Millard 2012-2015

Changes in exports of commercial S&T knowledge-intensive services: USA lags EU

Since the 1990s a global wave of market liberalization has produced an interconnected world economy, accompanied by unprecedented levels of activity and growth.

Many parts of the developing world view science and technology as integral to growth and development.

The once global dominance of the US S&T has been eroded by the rapid increase in Asia’s S&T capability (outside Japan), and by EU efforts to boost its relative competiveness in R&D, innovation, and technology.

Sources: National Science Board’s Science & Engineering Indicators 2012; US Bureau of Labor Statistics STEM Workforce Projections to 2018


Topics

• Retrospective: A Decade Ago• Women in STEM Fields• US Demographic Projections to 2050• Recent STEM Career Trends• Ohio Academic Workforce Opportunities


Two Strategies or PhilosophiesOpen Market vs. Planned Workforce

• Cyranoski D, Gilbert N, Ledford H, Nayar A, Yahia M. “Education: The PhD Factory.” Nature. 2011;472:276-279

• Fiske P. “What is a PhD Really Worth?” Nature. 2011;472:381• BioOhio www.bioohio.com/pdfs/growthreport12.aspx

• The American Scientist (Sigma Xi): “When Scientists Choose Motherhood” http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.14801,y.2012,no.2,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx

• Georgetown University Center on Education -The 2010 Workforce Report: “What’s it worth: The economic value of college majors.” by Carnevale, Strohl and Melton

• Sauermann and Roach. “Science PhD Career Preferences: Levels, Changes, and Advisor Encouragement.” PLoS One, 7:1-9, 2012

• Moss-Racusin et al. “Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students.” www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1211286109

• Passel and Cohn, “U.S. Population Projections: 2005-2050” (Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, 2008) www.pewhispanic.org/files/reports/85.pdf

• Science and Engineering Indicators 2012 http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c0/c0i.htm

• myIDP: http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/about and http://myidp.sciencecareers.org/Home/About


http://www.bioohio.com/pdfs/growthreport12.aspx

http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.14801,y.2012,no.2,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx

http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/SIG=12v8fepa4/EXP=1322186127/**http:/www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/whatsitworth-complete.pdf

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1211286109

http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/reports/85.pdf

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c0/c0i.htm

http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/about

Where were we 10 years ago?

STEM PhDsChanges from 1993 to 2002

More women enter STEM fields


Next Career Steps for 2002 PhDs (all fields)


Stabile Number of US STEM Doctorates Awarded by Field of Study

* thousands, Biology up from 23 to 29%

*


Increasing Numbers of Women in SciencePercentage of PhDs


A Decade of Changing InterestsAmong Students Pursuing Life Sciences PhDs


Increasing Numbers of Minorities‡ in Science


Gender Disparities in STEM Fields


Women on STEM Faculty: When Scientists Choose MotherhoodA single factor goes a long way in explaining the dearth of women in math-

intensive fields. How can we address it?



Women Score Lower on Standardized Tests (SAT)



Men vs WomenThe Influence of Parenthood

Graduate Degree to Career Paths



The Biological Clock and Academic Career Advancement



Children and Available Employment TimeDivision of Labor



Women More Often AbandonResearch-Professor Focus After Children



+15 years : <40% of Women Employed Full-time



Creating Successful Research-FacultyCareer Reentry Pathways

for Women (with children)



Biology and Life Sciences: 3.5% of all majors

The racial makeup of these majors, on average, is 75 percent White, 11 percent Asian,7percent African-American, 6 percent Hispanic, and 1 percent Other Races.

There is a small gender imbalance in these majors (women are 55 percent; men are 45 percent).

Median earnings for those with a Bachelor’s degree who majored in Biology and Life Science is$50,000.

Women with these majors make a median wage of $45,000, about $12,000 less than men.

Earnings for African-Americans ($45,000) and Hispanics ($40,000) are less than the $51,000median wage earned by Whites, while Asians earn slightly more ($53,000).

Source: Georgetown University Center on Education and The Workforce report “What’s it worth: The economic value of college majors” by Anthony Carnevale, Jeff Strohl. and Michelle Melton from 2010 U.S. Census data


Contributors to Persistent Faculty Gender DisparityGender Disparities in Academic STEM Hiring

A broad nationwide sample of biology, chemistry and physics professors evaluated application materials of an undergraduate science student who had ostensibly applied for a science laboratory manager position.

The results illustrate significant disparities in perceived competence, hireability, and mentoring which translated to compensation disparities.

Source: Moss-Racusin et al. Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students.(www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1211286109)


Where are we today?

NSF Survey of STEM PhDsChanges from 2006 to 2010


2012 Update

• A large-scale survey conducted was among 4,000+ PhD students (59% in biological/life sciences) at 39 tier-one U.S. research universities in the spring of 2010.

• 36% of respondents indicated they were on the job market at the time of the survey or were planning to be on the job market within the next year.

• 26% of respondents had not yet completed their qualifying exam or similar milestones.

Source: Sauermann and Roach. Science PhD Career Preferences: Levels, Changes, and Advisor Encouragement. PLoS One, 7:1-9, 2012


Background2006 NSF Survey of Earned Doctorates

• 5–6 years after graduation.– 14% of PhDs held tenure-track faculty positions– 34% held non-tenure track academic positions

• Do career preferences change over the course of graduate training?

• Can advisors exacerbate labor market imbalances by encouraging students to pursue faculty careers?



2010 Survey Approach• Describe measures of career preferences and provide insights into

the levels of students’ preferences for careers in academia (faculty research and faculty teaching), industry (established firms and startups), as well as government R&D and ‘‘other’’ careers.

• Examine changes over time by comparing preferences across cohorts of PhD students and by comparing current and retrospective measures within a given student.

• Provide data on the degree to which students perceive that their advisors or departments encourage or discourage particular careers.

• Provide detailed insights into respondents’ interests in particular work activities such as basic research, applied research, or technology commercialization.



Instructions to Respondents(Biological/Life Sciences, Physics, and Chemistry)

• Respondents were asked to state their career preferences with respect to employment after graduation and any potential postdocs.

• Respondents were then asked to ignore job availability and rate how attractive they find each of the following careers:– (a) a faculty career with an emphasis on teaching;– (b) a faculty career with an emphasis on research or development;– (c) a government job with an emphasis on research or development;– (d) a job in an established firm with an emphasis on research or development;– (e) a job in a startup with an emphasis on research or development; and– (f) other career.

• Responses to each category were scored from 1 (‘‘extremely unattractive’’) to 5 (‘‘extremely attractive’’)



Levels of Career Preference

• A new set of variables was coded to assess which of the six career options received the highest attractiveness rating.

• Since respondents may judge multiple careers as similarly attractive, this measure also includes ties.

• Results:– a faculty position with focus on research is among the most attractive

careers for over 50% of life scientists

– In contrast, a research position in an established firm is among the most attractive options for over 50% of chemists

Credits: Sauermann H, Roach M (2012) Science PhD Career Preferences: Levels, Changes, and Advisor Encouragement. PLoS ONE 7(5): e36307. doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0036307


Career Path Attractiveness

Figure 2. Most attractive career path (full sample; ties possible). Respondents rated the attractiveness of each career path on a 5-point scale. Figure 2 shows the share of respondents who gave their highest rating to a particular career. For example, 53% of life sciences PhD students gave their highest attractiveness rating to the faculty research career. Since careers were rated independently, careers can be tied (i.e., receive the same attractiveness score).



Career Preferences Change Over Time

• The fraction of life sciences, chemistry and physics students finding a faculty research career extremely attractive is significantly lower in the late stage versus the early stage of the PhD program.

• Similarly, the fraction of life sciences , chemistry and physics students finding a faculty teaching career extremely attractive declines from early to late stage of the PhD degree program.

• Universally, the fraction of all students who rate a faculty research career as ‘‘unattractive’’ or ‘‘extremely unattractive’’ doubles during their PhD program.



Why Do Student’s Career PreferencesChange over Time?

Students may enter graduate school with overly positive views of the faculty career and may change their expectations upon experiencing academic life first-hand.

Students may learn about career paths outside of academia and may come to appreciate their advantages.

Responses of some later-stage students may reflect that they realized over time that they are not competitive for scarce academic jobs and thus cease to ‘‘want’’ them.



Career Field Preferences Change Over TimeInterest in Faculty Research and Faculty Teaching Declines During Graduate School

Figure 1. Students judging a career ‘‘extremely attractive’’ by field and stage in program. Respondents rated the attractiveness of eachcareer on a 5-point scale (and were instructed to ignore job availability). The scale anchors ranged from 1 (extremely unattractive) to 3 (neither attractive nor unattractive) to 5 (extremely attractive). Figure 1 shows the share of respondents who gave a rating of 5 (‘‘extremely attractive’’) to a particular career. Data are shown separately for respondents in the early stages of the PhD program (prior to completion of qualifying exams or similar milestones) and in the late stages of the PhD program (looking for a job at the time of the survey or planning to do so within the next year).



Career Preference Conclusions• Faculty research career remains extremely attractive to a large

share of graduating students in the life sciences.– However, academic research becomes relatively less attractive over time.

• An R&D career in government is the most attractive at the end of the PhD program.– Changes in the attractiveness of government jobs emerge only in the

within-individual analysis; no significant differences were found between early and late cohorts .

– Informal interviews with PhD students suggest that perceived high levels of job security and access to funding, as well as the recognition that government labs provide opportunities to do quite ‘‘academic’’ research may play an important role.

• The 2010 survey data on career preferences complement existing 2006 NSF data on available positions and provide empirical support for growing concerns about imbalances in the scientific labor market.



Role of Advisors in Career Preferences

• Despite the common belief that advisors have a strong interest in encouraging students to enter academic careers, systematic evidence is lacking.

• Respondents were asked to what extent they felt that PhD students in their lab/department are encouraged or discouraged to pursue the various careers, using a scale ranging from 1 (strongly discouraged) to 3 (neither discouraged nor encouraged) to 5 (strongly encouraged).

– faculty research career is indeed by far the most often ‘‘strongly encouraged’’ career

– encouragement for faculty careers and discouragement for industry careers are especially pronounced in the life sciences



Career Advice to Students

Figure 4. Share of students reporting that particular careers are encouraged/discouraged in their lab or department. Respondents rated on a 5-point scale the degree to which PhDs in their lab/department are encouraged or discouraged to pursue each career. Figure 4 shows the share of respondents choosing each response category.



Student Interest in Various Work Activities• Respondents were asked how interesting they would find each of 5 different types of

work in the future, including:– research that contributes fundamental insights or theories (basic research);– research that creates knowledge to solve practical problems (applied research);– using knowledge to develop materials, devices, or software (development);– commercializing research results into products or services (commercialization);– management/administration; and– teaching.

• In life sciences, chemistry and physics, the largest share (70 to 90%) of ‘‘interesting” and “extremely interesting’’ ratings was assigned to both basic and applied research.

– Perhaps fueled by a growing interest in translational research and academic entrepreneurship in both the scholarly and the policy communities

• Teaching was rated as ‘‘interesting” or “extremely interesting’’ by more than 50% of all respondents.

• More life sciences and physics, than chemistry respondents found commercialization uninteresting or even extremely uninteresting.

– Commercialization interest was the most “balanced” of the ratings with neither high or low interest holding the majority.



Work Activity Preferences

Figure 5. Share of students finding particular work activities interesting/uninteresting. Respondents indicated how interesting they would find each of six kinds of work when thinking about the future. Figure 5 shows the share of respondents choosing each response category.



Overall Survey Conclusions

• A faculty research career is the career path most often considered ‘‘extremely attractive’’ and ranks among the most desirable careers for over 50% of life scientists

• Academic administrators and advisors should consider such heterogeneity in career preferences when designing graduate curricula, ensuring that students have opportunities to acquire the skills and knowledge required to perform in non-academic careers that may not only be more readily available but are also quite attractive to students themselves.

• Advisors and departments strongly encourage academic research careers while being less encouraging of other career paths.• Richer information and a more neutral stance by advisors and departments will likely

improve career decision-making and has the potential to simultaneously improve labor market imbalances as well as future career satisfaction.

• Students’ interest in academic research declines over the course of the PhD training, while other careers become relatively more attractive.

• Stronger (self-)selection prior to enrollment may reduce the number of graduate students available to work in academic labs, potentially requiring changes to how scientific labor is organized in academic research.



Demographics Projections

US Census to 2050

US & Ohio Academic Workforce Projections


US (and Ohio) Demographics

2010 to 2050

http://www.census.gov/ © RW Millard 2012-2015

US Racial Demographics Forecast to 2050(trends in thousands of US residents)

White

Hispanic

Black

Asian

AI/AN

NH/PI


US Geriatric Population Forecast to 2050(as a percent of total US resident population)

Women >85 but <100yrs

Men >85 but <100yrs

Men >65 but <85yrs

Women >65 but <85yrs

Women & Men >100yrs


Demographic Changes: 2000 to 2010Ohio’s total population increased by <2%; almost entirely accounted for by the >60% increase In its Hispanic population.

The most rapidly growing broad age group is the 85+ population, doubling its current size by 2025, and increasing fivefold by 2050.


US Demographic Projections to 2050

Source: Jeffery S. Passel and D'Vera Cohn, U.S. Population Projections: 2005-2050 (Washington, DC: Pew Research Center, 2008) www.pewhispanic.org/files/reports/85.pdf


Learn a Second Language: Spanish (or English)

Every year from now to 2050, the race/ethnic group adding the largest number of people to the U.S. population will be the Hispanic-origin population.

In 2010, the Hispanic origin population became the second-largest race/ethnic group in the U.S.

By 2020 the Hispanic population is projected to add more people to the United States every year than would all other race/ethnic groups combined.

By 2030, the non-Hispanic White population would be less than half of the U.S. population under age 18. In that year, this group would still comprise three quarters of the 65 and over U.S. population.


US STEM Workforce Projections


STEM EmploymentUSA Retrospective: 1950-2000


Average Annual Growth Rate of Degree Production & Occupational Employment

STEM Fields: 1980-2000 (retrospective)


Who are Earning STEM PhDs? Sex, Race/Ethnicity, and Nationality


Where are the Opportunities?STEM Employment Expansion: 2008-2018

Science and Engineering Indicators 2012http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c0/c0i.htm


The Forecast: STEM Employment ExpansionUS STEM Job Openings 2008-2018

BLS also projects that job openings in NSF-identified S&E occupations over the 2008–18 period will represent a greater proportion of current employment than openings in all other occupations—41.7% versus 33.7%.

Note: Job openings include both growth in total employment and openings caused by attrition.

Science and Engineering Indicators 2012http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c0/c0i.htm


What About Ohio?

Bioscience Workforce Projections

www.bioohio.com/pdfs/growthreport12.aspx


Careers in Education, Health Services, Professional & Business Services Lead Ohio Employment Opportunities


Ohio Job Growth Rate Projectionsfor Various Levels of Education thru 2018


Ohio Bioscience 2011

www.bioohio.com/pdfs/growthreport12.aspx © RW Millard 2012-2015

Note overall growth in all sectors, but declines in most sectors since 2009.

CAUSES:

Education and leadership shortfalls?

Adverse Ohio economic climate or lack of incentives for entrepreneurs?

Ohio’s R&D Academic Innovation Engines



Bioscience Organizations in Ohio



Future Directions in STEM Education & Careers

• CONSTRAINED MODEL:– A Future Workforce Projections Model:– Educational institutions prepare to award STEM degrees in

sufficient numbers of qualified students to match projected US and Ohio workforce needs

• UNCONSTRAINED MODEL:– Open (Free) Market Innovation Model:– Educational institutions prepare award STEM degrees to all

interested and qualified students.


THE FUTURE OF THEOHIO ACADEMIC WORKFORCE

STEM EDUCATION

INNOVATION-RESEARCH-TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER-COMMERCIALIZATION

OBR REPORT 2012


Advancing Ohio’s Innovation EconomyHigher Education, Industry, Government June 27 2012

Ohio Board of Regents 2012Technology Transfer and Commercialization Taskforce


Ohio’s STEM & Economy Rankings 2010is in Lower 50 percentile overall


Enhanced PartnershipsEssential for Future Ohio Economic Competitiveness

Model for Sustainable Economic Growth HEI-Government-Industry Intersection


Ohio’s Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) Alignment

Educate the Future Workforce

Increase Invention, Innovation and Commercialization


Ohio Higher Education Institutions 2012Discovery -> Innovation -> Commercialization


OBR Taskforce Recommendations 2012

Change faculty tenure rules & expectations

All research must have practical applications

Educate future workforce with right skill set


US and Ohio STEM Employment 2011Compared to National Averages


Ohio Employment OpportunitiesLife Science-Biotech-Pharma Sectors


Ohio StrengthsLife Science-Biotech-Pharma Sectors

• CardiovascularOhio has the most top-ranked heart centers by U.S. News & World Report and Solucient. Nearly 17% of the nation’s clinical trials are done in Ohio and more than 150 companies have a cardio-related product or service.

Medical ImagingMore than 125 Ohio organizations focus on biomedical imaging. $482 million has been invested bio-imaging public-private partnerships.

Bio/Pharma ManufacturingSignificant company expansions – Amylin, Alkermes, Ben Venue, and Eurand, among others – indicate high-tech manufacturing is booming in Ohio.


Where Are the STEM Opportunities?

Ohio Faculty ForecastUS S&T Trends

Creating a Competitive Career Foundation


An Example Case First Steps after a Transdisciplinary Life Science PhD


Where should I seek S&T employment Follow the money? (NY, MD, CA)

SOURCE: The Scientist: Life Sciences Compensation Survey 2012


My Individual Development Plan (myIDP)Strategic Preparation for Careers in Science

You have (will) put a lot of time and effort into pursuing and earning your PhD degree.

Now it's time to focus on how to leverage your expertise into a satisfying and productive career.

An individual development plan (IDP) helps you explore career possibilities and set goals to follow the career path that fits you best. Your faculty adviser also has a role in the IDP.

myIDP provides: • Exercises to help you examine your skills, interests, and values • A list of 20 scientific career paths with a prediction of which ones best fit your skills and

interests • A tool for setting strategic goals for the coming year, with optional reminders to keep you on

track• Articles and resources to guide you through the process• There is no charge to use this site and we encourage you to return as often as you wish. • To learn more about the value of IDPs for scientists, read the first article in our myIDP series.

Sources:http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/abouthttp://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_magazine/previous_issues/articles/2012_09_07/caredit.a1200100 http://myidp.sciencecareers.org/Home/Abouthttp://www.faseb.org/portals/0/pdfs/opa/idp.pdf


THANK YOU!

Free Will and the Future Workforce © RW Millard 2012-2015 Free Will and the Future Workforce: What...

Documents

Transcript of Free Will and the Future Workforce © RW Millard 2012-2015 Free Will and the Future Workforce: What...