What gets their goats

By Robert Bellinger

It wasn't Miss G.'s fault. She had majored in education intending to teach social studies to middle school students. But when she arrived at her first job the principal assigned her to teach science in an inner-city high school. Science! She clutched the textbook in front of her, fearing to stray from its lessons lest some child ask her a question she couldn't possibly answer.

Miss G. droned through the lessons, one after the other, leaving only five minutes for questions at the end of class. But one day Ronald, a bright-eyed young man to whom she would have loved to teach social studies, raised his hand.

"Miss G., what do they mean by Faraday's theory?"

She felt a chill, praying for the bell to rescue her. "Faraday. Class, does anyone want to help Ronald out?" A sea of dead eyes looked back. "No? Well then . . . " The bell bailed out 30 young people and a stranded instructor. Unsurprisingly, no engineers ever came out of Miss G.'s class.

Engineers, technical directors, software designers and technologists of all stripes and colors in the electronics industry shake their heads over the quality of math and science education in American secondary schools.

Here is how respondents to EE Times' "1999 Salary & Opinion Survey" grade math and science education today at various levels.

• Kindergarten through fifth grade: C
• Middle school (sixth through eighth grade): D+
• High school (ninth through 12th grade): D
• College: C+

And 11 percent gave high schools a failing grade.

Actually, earlier seems to be better. American fourth-graders have provided a bright spot, doing well in math and science compared with their counterparts in other countries. In science, only Korean fourth-graders outscored the Americans in the Third International Math and Science Study (TIMSS), while in math students in five countries fared better than Americans at that grade level.

In the latest TIMSS study, fourth-grade Japanese students beat the Americans in math and scored well in science. Koreans scored highest in science and did well in math, along with Hong Kong and Singapore fourth-graders. However, in earlier comparisons eighth-graders and high-schoolers lagged, indicating a decline in math and science education as Americans advance in their schooling. Although the international study of fourth-graders couldn't come up with a good reason for the disparity, by the time many Americans graduate from high school their math and science skills aren't sufficient for the jobs that U.S. employers offer.

Employers in the technology arena have adopted schools in their cities in an attempt to raise the standards of math and science classes. Companies such as Intel Corp. sponsor science fairs and international competitions in an effort to inspire students to look beyond the dry and spare texts and view the material in context. During National Engineering Week, backed by dozens of companies and engineering societies, dozens of students fly each year to Washington, D.C., to showcase their concepts of a city of tomorrow that must deal with real-world concerns of environment, traffic and crime.

The C and D marks generated by the survey were bad enough. But even an engineer who gives our educational institutions straight Bs offered backhanded praise. "Although our education is good, a declining moral system leads to lower expectations in the classroom. And the U.S. will continue to fall behind the rest of the world in education."

One reader lists education as the top national issue, complaining that educators "compromise educational standards to enable more students to pass through."

"My company has felt the shortcomings of low employment and low technical education," acknowledges a project engineer.

And that's felt not only at the engineering level. The Semi-conductor Industry Association backs a program started by the Sematech research consortium to educate high school graduates and community-college students in math and science principles necessary to work with chip-making equipment. The reason: Too many graduates lacked fundamental math skills to comprehend the consequences of statistical controls and variations.

A survey of corporations by the American Management Association earlier this year found that 36 percent of job applicants were deficient in math and reading skills. However, the AMA cautions that this shouldn't be interpreted as a "dumbing down" of American students. Rather, it's a sign that employers have raised their expectations. It's also a warning to school boards that they aren't adequately preparing their students for the real world outside the classroom. Even the assembly line requires knowledge of statistics, percentages, the metric system and reading comprehension. The number of jobs requiring simple physical labor is shrinking.

One reason for the drop in quality, according to industry and federal studies, is that too many middle and high school students have taken the easy way out of math and science classes. The moment it's no longer required, they flock to easier courses. NACME, the National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, has promoted programs to alert minority parents that letting their children drop math and science classes early effectively shuts them out of well-paying job options.

Education isn't just an American issue; the survey's 1,100 Japanese respondents rated their high school math and science programs as poor. More than half gave high school math and science a D or F. They may be overly critical, though they didn't rate elementary school math and science.

On an optimistic note, there is widespread recognition in the United States of the importance of math and science education. It will be less and less likely that unprepared teachers like the fictional Miss G. will be tossed into a math or science class and told, "Teach." Math teachers have set up standards and recommendations for school boards to follow around the country.

Moreover, in 1989 a series of goals was laid out for education in the United States. They include:

• All students will read independently by the end of the third grade.
• All students will master challenging mathematics including the foundations of algebra and geometry by the end of the eighth grade.
• By 18, all students will be prepared for and be able to afford college.
• Schools will be held to a set of standards and accountability.
• All classrooms will be connected to the Internet by 2000.
• Every school will be "strong, safe, drug-free and disciplined."

The corporate picture

"Can you believe that boss?" Mike groaned at the cafeteria table. Three comrades nodded sympathetically. A new, tighter deadline. Software glitches. A new corporate policy on expenses. "You'd think they have nothing better to do than make our lives more difficult," Mike continued. "You think this company is bad?" Rao interrupted. "Wait till you hear about my old boss."

U.S. engineers may moan and groan, but when you ask them, "Do you feel your company is a good company to work for," they answer emphatically, "Yes." Some 82 percent of those replying to the survey believe their employer treats its workers well. In fact, respondents in the computer and communications fields are even more enthusiastic, giving companies 88 percent and 87 percent approval ratings. The military/aerospace people are more lukewarm, with a 70 percent approval.

While not quite as enthusiastic as the Americans, both the Japanese (62 percent) and other Asians (70 percent) credit their employers as good to work for.

To some extent these high ratings depend on the state of the economy, so that when times are good, employees are happier. In 1993, at a time when downsizing was a buzzword in the technology industry, the same question received a 70 percent positive response from Americans, good but still 12 percentage points lower than during the prosperous year of 1999.

The technology industry is usually well represented on lists of good places to work. Benefits shine, two-thirds of Silicon Valley-based corporations offer stock options, and they're usually informal in structure and young. Yet some perennial visitors to these lists are Hewlett-Packard Co. and IBM Corp., two of the older corporations in the field.

Though corporations may get high marks for being good places to work, that doesn't mean they're stress-free. The corporate world, as observed by its managers and engineers, appears to be in a state of constant flux.

Here's a snapshot of what U.S. engineering employers are up to these days, as reported by the people in the field:

• 47 percent of respondents said their company downsized in the past 12 months;
• 39 percent said their company bought another one;
• 30 percent reported new divisions being added;
• 28 percent of respondents' companies sold divisions;
• 15 percent were part of mergers;
• 10 percent of the companies were sold;
• 5 percent of the companies are for sale;
• 1.6 percent were reorganized;
• 1 percent went public.

Firing, then hiring

George shook his head. "I don't understand it. They let me and 50 others go in a downsizing. And the next weekend, there's this full-page ad in the paper for new people. Fire then hire in the same week. What's going on here?"

Perhaps the most surprising development is that 47 percent of survey respondents saw downsizing at their companies. "Wait a minute," the fictional George might say, "I thought there was a shortage of engineers out there." Welcome to the work world on the edge of the millennium, where in-one-door, out-the-other occurs simultaneously.

In 1998, the American Management Association conducted a survey of corporations on their employment prospects and probability of downsizing. It found that most of the companies it studied that had downsized in 1997-98 also hired new employees concurrently. The downsizing wasn't a reflection of market weakness or losses; rather, it was a process of restructuring and bringing in new types of employees to fulfill new types of jobs.

"Broadly speaking, companies are hiring for the line and firing from the staff," said Eric Rolfe Greenberg, director of management studies at the AMA. "They are creating jobs where people design, make, sell and service their products." But simultaneously, these very same profitable and market-savvy companies are pruning support and administrative people-the only exception being in information technology.

On the surface, that sounds good for engineers, who are designing and making products. But as some have found out, corporations aren't shy about firing engineers from one segment of the company while hiring another set of engineers for another section, often in another state. This creates some bitter ex-employees, who say, "We're engineers. Teach us what we have to know for the new jobs." Throughout the 1990s, corporations and employees have been redefining the covenant that has tied worker and employer throughout the years.

The result is that lifetime loyalty is gone, replaced by dedication to the job at hand. Engineers have learned that retraining is the responsibility of the worker, not the company, and the job is seen as an opportunity to add to work skills, not as an end unto itself. So although this attitude seemed at first to be tilted in the employer's favor, today's reputed personnel shortage actually can put the worker in the driver's seat as he or she waves goodbye with little guilt to accept a better offer.

How bad is the turnover these days? Another AMA study revealed that companies are having more difficulty hold-ing onto workers under 30 years of age. To change this, companies are offering more flexible work schedules and chances to improve skills. According to the AMA, these younger workers would prefer flex over checks. However, the college-age respondents to the EE Times survey express preference for stock options over bonus checks or flex time.

What else is going on these days at engineering workplaces? Here's what American survey respondents see as going on:

• Increase in product-development programs: 31 percent.
• Fewer new hires: 29 percent. The AMA confirmed that its member companies intend to expand staffs by about 4.6 percent in 1999, down from 7.7 percent in 1998.
• Layoffs at immediate workplace: 29 percent. This is a slightly different question from the downsizing one, which could involve a division in the company where the respondent doesn't work.
• More new hires: 23 percent. It's uncertain that the people who responded to this question also saw the layoffs, thus confirming the concurrent hire/fire trend, but it indicates that a quarter of the respondents' employers are expanding.
• Mergers/acquisitions: 20 percent. Buy or be bought.
• Decrease in product development programs: 17 percent.
• Military cutbacks: 10 percent.

The national scene

Year after year, engineers respond to the question, "What is the top national issue" with replies focusing on economics, politics and the environment. This year, a new one has surfaced near the top: morality. The fallout from President Clinton's impeachment has left an indelible mark. "The President is a disgrace," one reader declares.

A California senior engineer calls for "honesty and integrity in our political leaders."

"Get that schmuck outta the White House and please don't send Hillary and Bill to New York State," pleads a Long Islander. "We got enough . . . to deal with."

One reader doesn't limit his criticism to the Clinton administration. He decries "poor leadership and ethics in publicly held offices."

Other related top concerns:

"Too much government bureaucracy and regulation. It affects our educational systems."

"Taxes and regulation. The government costs me more than housing and food combined," a Massachusetts vice president complains.

"Government spending," said a design engineer, "especially on reward programs to bail out people who have continually shown a complete and utter lack of responsibility for their own lives, corporate welfare programs and the continued decline of education in this country."

"Political priorities are way out of order," according to a technical analyst. "Overboard legal system where criminal charges and verdicts do not match the crimes."

A Texas senior engineer worries about a "lack of vision and lack of ability to make long-range plans and actually try to implement them. The short-term view is far too dominant."

A Missouri design engineer isn't enthused by "an economy that requires dual incomes, leaving children in the care of strangers or to fend for themselves. This is a major contributor to adolescent crime."

Being engineers, it's not odd that some who replied interpret the top national issue from a technical viewpoint, such as this department head's choice: "Slow adoption of new technology by local exchange carriers and cable TV companies."

Some focused on human resource issues.

"Corporate America's greed has eliminated job security entirely, forcing families to be dual earners for financial reasons," said one. "Similarly, they dump older workers because they can more readily exploit younger ones who lack the experience and are thus more readily exploited."

A software entrepreneur sees the biggest issue as "an over-reliance on foreign software engineers. Most that I've met were barely competent, held our way of life in contempt and were here primarily to improve their skills so they could return to their homelands and train their fellow countrymen in how to develop better applications."

Immigration once again is a hot political potato. One year after Congress raised the immigration limit, Republicans in Congress have proposed legislation to boost it to 200,000 professionals a year. As the software engineer quoted above indicates, a number of engineers get upset with the idea of their profession's being swamped with newcomers. There was no request for opinions on raising immigration limits on this year's survey, but a majority of EE Times readers have supported hikes in the limits the past two years. Staff-level engineers generally were more strongly opposed to loosening immigration restrictions than managers.

How are we doing?

The U.S. electronics industry is thriving, U.S. respondents said. Some 72 percent agree that the industry is progressing. Employment is high, salaries are up and the industry is making money. But 23 percent don't see it that way, describing it as flat. That's understandable, since not all segments of the electronics industry have done well in the past 12 months, especially those that had major Asian customers. Also, semiconductor vendors and their suppliers underwent some retrenchment in 1998-'99.

For instance, some 33 percent of respondents in controls and test see the industry as flat vs. only 16 percent of those in the generally upbeat communications equipment sector. Likewise, 30 percent of the military/aerospace engineers were lukewarm about the outlook. Two factors may be at play in that area. First, military/aerospace has undergone substantial consolidation, resulting in work-force reductions and combined product programs. And second, engineers in the commercial aerospace sector probably felt the cool-down as Asian buyers of planes canceled orders.

Similarly, Japanese respondents to the Nikkei Electronics Japan survey aren't exactly upbeat about their own industries. Some 44 percent described their industry as "flat," while 32 percent declared it to be outright "declining." Japan has been struggling to extract itself from several years of recession. On the other hand, two-thirds of the respondents gave a thumbs up to their chief rivals in the United States, perceiving the U.S. industry as "progressing." And 62 percent of Hong Kong, Singapore, Korean and Taiwanese respondents see their industries on the rise.

The U.S. survey asked readers to identify the top concerns in the electronics industry. Respondents provided some revealing answers.

• From Georgia: "Aggregation by Microsoft, Intel, etc. is a serious threat to innovation and the prosperity of individuals who create."
• From New York: "Component obsolescence at too rapid a rate. Barely get design to market before a change is required or a 'last-time buy' of component occurs."
• From the Midwest: "Poor quality of software and lack of accountability for it make us vulnerable to foreign competition."

The technologies to watch

The U.S. soldiers in the trenches have picked the three most important technologies that they'll employ. They are:

1. Digital signal processing, mentioned by 37 percent.
2. Wireless communications, mentioned by 36 percent.
3. Systems-on-chip, cited by 33 percent.

Japanese respondents selected the same technologies. U.S. university engineering students responding to our survey rated wireless technologies first, followed by DSP and networks.

Return to 1999 Salary & Opinion Survey