Weird and Wacky Engineering
Tell us What You Think
We want to know what you thought about this Discussion. Let us know by adding a comment.
Incredible Lego: great ball contraption
Sylvie Barak
10/29/2012 3:58 PM EDT
More reaction
Despite the California State University system having its funding slashed by 40 percent over the past three years, Anderson claims the school has committed over $8 million to engineering education, while NASA has invested $12 million for education and public outreach on the campus.
“I think we should get credit for the depth of our commitment, instead of derision,” he said.
And I agree. That is indeed commendable. And a fantastic example of how to fight the good fight, even in the face of economic hardship.
James A. Knighten emailed me to ask why we should rely on any government to fund anything. “It seems pure self-interest is the best motivation for any company to improve its prospects for existence,” he rationalized.
Self-interest may not be driving companies to put their efforts in the right places though. “There are many skilled individuals out there but companies no longer want to take the time to develop the skills required for some of the jobs or define the job in such a manner that the only individual capable of getting the job is someone who is already doing the job elsewhere,” said reader Earl Sanders.
“It’s hard to tell your kids that this is a good career choice,” wrote Romer Johnson, noting how he recalled the massive engineering layoffs of the mid 90s and early 2000s, when 20-40 percent of the workforce was pushed out. “This sent a huge message to all the ‘would-be’ engineers that this was not a career choice for job security or good income,” he said.
Add to that the fact that engineering is not even “respected” as a good option, according to Johnson, who claims in his children’s school kids aspire to becoming bankers, lawyers, real estate agents and doctors. “It’s a strange culture in our country unlike other countries I have visited where engineers have respect and the occupation has esteem,” he said.
Of course, one can’t forget about the teachers of those self-same children. The teachers who are paid a pittance and who often hold no technical backgrounds themselves. “I went to my kids ‘open house’ at the high school a few months back, and there was not a single teacher I met that looked to me like teaching engineering was even a possibility,” lamented Johnson.
Quite aside from teachers, job location and politics, there’s always economics 101, according to reader Jim Berry. “Supply will match demand at the correct price. Pay engineers more. For a start, pay engineers as much (or more than) lawyers. This would accomplish two important goals--increase the number of engineers and decrease the number of lawyers.”
Point well taken, sir.
Related stories:
Despite the California State University system having its funding slashed by 40 percent over the past three years, Anderson claims the school has committed over $8 million to engineering education, while NASA has invested $12 million for education and public outreach on the campus.
“I think we should get credit for the depth of our commitment, instead of derision,” he said.
And I agree. That is indeed commendable. And a fantastic example of how to fight the good fight, even in the face of economic hardship.
James A. Knighten emailed me to ask why we should rely on any government to fund anything. “It seems pure self-interest is the best motivation for any company to improve its prospects for existence,” he rationalized.
Self-interest may not be driving companies to put their efforts in the right places though. “There are many skilled individuals out there but companies no longer want to take the time to develop the skills required for some of the jobs or define the job in such a manner that the only individual capable of getting the job is someone who is already doing the job elsewhere,” said reader Earl Sanders.
“It’s hard to tell your kids that this is a good career choice,” wrote Romer Johnson, noting how he recalled the massive engineering layoffs of the mid 90s and early 2000s, when 20-40 percent of the workforce was pushed out. “This sent a huge message to all the ‘would-be’ engineers that this was not a career choice for job security or good income,” he said.
Add to that the fact that engineering is not even “respected” as a good option, according to Johnson, who claims in his children’s school kids aspire to becoming bankers, lawyers, real estate agents and doctors. “It’s a strange culture in our country unlike other countries I have visited where engineers have respect and the occupation has esteem,” he said.
Of course, one can’t forget about the teachers of those self-same children. The teachers who are paid a pittance and who often hold no technical backgrounds themselves. “I went to my kids ‘open house’ at the high school a few months back, and there was not a single teacher I met that looked to me like teaching engineering was even a possibility,” lamented Johnson.
Quite aside from teachers, job location and politics, there’s always economics 101, according to reader Jim Berry. “Supply will match demand at the correct price. Pay engineers more. For a start, pay engineers as much (or more than) lawyers. This would accomplish two important goals--increase the number of engineers and decrease the number of lawyers.”
Point well taken, sir.
Related stories:
- Engineering talent deficit: Are you the problem or solution?
- ARM, Mali and making it real
- Silicon Valley Nation: STEM, engineering and innovation
- Change drivers in high-tech supply chain
- Design your own keynote for DESIGN West
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information