|
Promoting Electrotechnology Careers and Public Policy |
At Joint Hearings
before the
and the
By
Good Afternoon. I am John R Reinert, the 1988 President of the Electrical and Electronics Engineers – United States of America (IEEE-USA).
I am the Director of ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) programs at UTMC Microelectronics Systems Corporation in Colorado Springs, Colorado. I have extensive training and experience in the design and manufacture of integrated circuits and in total quality management. Before joining UTMC in 1985, I worked for Motorola, NCR and United Technologies Mostek. I hold bachelor's and master's degrees in electrical engineering and a Doctorate in Management from Colorado Technical University.
My testimony represents the views of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers – United States of America and not necessarily those of my employer.
The IEEE is a transnational technical professional society whose membership currently includes more than 320,000 individual electrical, electronics and computer engineers in 147 countries. IEEE-USA promotes the professional careers and technology policy interests of the 219,000 IEEE members who live and work in the United States.
On behalf of IEEE-USA, I want to thank the distinguished chairs and the members of the Technology and the Early Childhood, Youth and Families Subcommittees for holding these important hearings. In our opinion, improved education, training and lifelong learning – from grade school to graduate school and beyond – is absolutely imperative if the United States is to maintain its economic and technological competitiveness in the 21st Century.
Investments in people – developing an educated and technologically literate workforce and encouraging workers to continually acquire additional knowledge and skills – are at least as important as capital investments in today's increasingly competitive, information-based, global economy. People, after all, are the creators, builders, operators and repairers of the new technologies that are doing so much to increase productivity and raise living standards here and elsewhere in the world.
But before offering IEEE-USA's perspectives on the critical importance of education, training and lifelong learning, let me say a few words about labor market supply and demand surveys and current alarms about critical shortages of information technology workers.
Tight labor markets are currently being reported for providers of computer, telecommunications and data processing services in many parts of the country. Industry trade associations contend that imbalances between supply and demand have reached crisis proportions. Employers insist that shortages of skilled workers, including engineers and computer scientists, systems analysts, data base administrators and programmers, threaten to undermine the remarkable growth that is taking place in the information technology industry and in the entire U.S. economy. But for middle-aged and older engineers who were laid-off, downsized or displaced in the early 1990's, these alarms sound like deja-vu all over again.
In the mid 1980's, during a similar period of sustained economic growth, the National Science Foundation issued a series of reports projecting imminent shortages of engineers and scientists, based on declining enrollment and degree trends for technical professionals at America's colleges and universities. Partly in response to NSF claims and industry pleadings, Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1990, authorizing substantial increases in employment-based immigration, establishing new temporary visa categories for professionals and skilled workers and expediting admissions procedures for foreign nationals coming to study or work in the United States.
Then came the breakup of the Soviet Union, sharp cuts in defense spending and increased competition from overseas suppliers of goods and services. Major employers began downsizing with a vengeance and, rather than shortages, surpluses developed. Unemployment among engineers, scientists and other white collar workers rose to historically high levels in 1993 and 1994.
Since then the economy has turned up again. Demand for engineers and scientists – especially computer engineers, scientists, data base administrators and programmers – driven by the introduction of new information-based technologies, consumer demand for better and cheaper products and services and vigorous competition in domestic and overseas markets, is increasing all across the country. What are the dimensions and implications of today's tight labor markets? The answer depends on whom you talk to.
In 1996, the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) polled 2,000 large and mid-sized employers. On the basis of 280 responses, the ITAA estimated that there were at least 190,000 vacancies for IT workers and concluded that a shortage of crisis proportions threatens not only the IT industry, but the entire U.S. economy. (ITAA's 190,000 figure has since been revised upward to 346,000 vacancies, based on a more recent survey that included smaller employers.)
Last fall, the U. S. Department of Commerce issued a report entitled, "America's New Deficit: The Shortage of Information Technology Workers." Commerce compared educational degree awards in computer science between 1986 and 1994 with U.S. Department of Labor estimates of future demand for computer engineers and scientists, systems analysts and programmers. The Department rather tentatively concluded that "the United States could face a growing shortage of IT workers that would have severe consequences for U. S competitiveness, economic growth and job creation."
The U.S. Department of Labor, on the other hand, has observed that salary trends for broad classes of computer-related occupations between 1988 and 1997 do not show enough growth in wages to constitute evidence of widespread worker shortages. "Such data is consistent with a gradual tightening of labor markets for IT workers in 1996 and 1997 and possible spot shortages in some occupational specialties in some parts of the country," the Department said.
While demand for information technology workers is up sharply and can be expected to continue to expand in the future, IEEE-USA believes that the supply of workers with the knowledge, skills, aptitudes and interests needed to meet current and future demands is much broader and deeper than is generally assumed. Claims that the nation faces IT worker shortages of crisis proportions -- based primarily on enrollment and degree trends in narrow academic disciplines -- oversimplifies the nature and underestimates the flexibility of scientific, engineering and technical labor markets in the United States.
The supply of available talent includes, not only new graduates from formal educational programs in computer engineering, computer and information sciences and other closely related disciplines, but workers from at least four other sources. These include: 1) transfers into IT fields by persons with degrees in other technical and non-technical fields, 2) upgrading of non-degreed personnel based on their abilities, aptitudes and experience, 3) re-entry of degreed and non-degreed personnel with applicable skills and experience, including older workers who have retired, been fired or taken full or part-time positions in other fields, and 4) the continuing admission of immigrant and non-immigrant engineers, scientists and other technically trained people from other countries.
The size and complexity of the U.S. economy – with its many regional components and influences – make it difficult to measure, let alone predict, demand for engineers and scientists with very much confidence or reliability. In our experience, labor market supply and demand surveys are often subject to serious errors and misinterpretations due to the erroneous assumptions, flawed research methodologies and the simplistic analyses on which they are based. For this reason, we recommend that the Congress not place too much reliance on industry sponsored supply and demand surveys when making policies intended to meet America's need for better educated and more highly skilled workers.
Continuing advances in electronic and computer- based technologies are driving rapid changes in the production and delivery of goods and services as well as the organization of work. These advances will demand much more knowledge, skill, motivation and involvement at all levels of the workforce and a revolution in education, both for those entering the workforce and those who are displaced by the rapid pace of technological changes. These changes are creating global markets for a wide range of goods and services, with high-wage jobs and opportunities for advancement for individuals who can develop and deliver more, better quality products and services faster and at a lower cost than their competitors.
The degree to which America prospers in the next century will depend on our collective ability to instill scientific knowledge and develop technical skills in our youth; provide workers with incentives and access to opportunities for lifelong learning; and raise the level of technological literacy among all our citizens.
Underlying all of this is the need to develop the critical analytical, communications and problem solving skills that people need to succeed in a fast changing, technology driven workplace. (Office of Technology Policy, 1997)
Economic, industrial, occupational, social and technological change will continue to accelerate in the future and further increase demand for highly skilled workers. The largest increase in demand will be for professional specialty, technical, administrative and support occupations. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the fastest growing occupations over the next ten years will include computer engineers and scientists, data base administrators and support personnel, systems analysts, electrical and electronics engineers and computer programmers (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1997).
In terms of numbers, computer engineering jobs will more than double from 216,000 in 1996 to an estimated 472,000 new and replacement jobs in 2006. Jobs for data base administrators and support specialists will jump from 212,000 to 461,000; jobs for systems analysts will increase from 506,000 to more than 1 million; electrical and electronics engineering jobs will grow from 367,000 to 472,000; and programming jobs will rise from 568,000 to an estimated 697,000 jobs over the same 10 year period.
And although jobs in professional specialty occupations are expected to grow the fastest, about half of all the new jobs that will open up over the next decade are expected to be for blue collar and relatively low skilled white collar workers in personal service and health care occupations. (The Hudson Institute, 1997).
Whatever their classification, the fastest growing jobs will all require much better math, communications and problem solving capabilities and higher levels of technological literacy than ever before. Hence the critical importance of more and better education, training and lifelong learning opportunities for all Americans, including engineers and scientists.
Over the past decade, international comparisons of achievement in math and science have shown that a majority of American students are relatively poorly prepared for higher education and for work in an increasingly technology-based economy. These findings have spurred the federal government, states and local communities, labor unions, private businesses and professional societies to take concerted steps to improve math and science education at the elementary and secondary levels. As a result of these efforts, precollege curricula, teacher training, requirements for graduation and standards for the evaluation of student performance have all been extensively reviewed and revised.
In recent years elementary schools in the United States have begun to devote more classroom time than ever before to instruction in math and science. More high school students are undertaking advanced courses in math and science and a greater proportion of U.S. high school students, regardless of race or ethnic background, are now successfully completing courses in these critically important subjects.
Despite these improvements, U.S. eighth and twelfth graders continue to score below average in math and science on standardized tests compared to their counterparts in many European and Asian countries. And other research demonstrates that individual students' interest and performance in math and science also tends to decline after grade six, especially among girls.
IEEE-USA believes that a more scientifically and technologically literate workforce is necessary if the United States is to continue to advance technologically and retain its current leadership in scientific research and development. Further improvements in precollege math, science and technology education are absolutely essential if this goal is to be achieved. Because of the magnitude and complexity of the problem, we also believe that effective remedial action can best be taken in collaboration with businesses, educational institutions, government agencies and other professional societies. Since the mid 1980's, we have encouraged IEEE entities at the regional, state and local levels, as well as individual engineers, to become actively involved in cooperative efforts to improve elementary and secondary education. More specific recommendations are contained in the attached IEEE-USA policy statement entitled,Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology in the United States.
Today a living wage for most families requires two earners, each with a high school diploma and at least two years of post-secondary education or training. Almost seven out of every ten jobs require post-secondary degrees or certificates. These degrees and certificate also help individual workers to leverage access to the additional educational opportunities they need to keep up with changing technologies, upgrade their skills and increase earnings.
Administrative workers, precision production workers and machine operators currently make up more than 60 percent of America's manufacturing workforce. For most of these jobs and many jobs in the rapidly expanding services sector, two year colleges and technical or vocational schools are the primary source of workers who need skills to qualify for entry-level jobs or to develop the additional knowledge and skills needed to keep pace with fast changing job requirements. Two year educational institutions serve a dual role in today's economy; as traditional colleges and as providers of specialized training for public and private employers.
And because their tuition costs average around $1500 a year – less than the maximum Pell grant for the economically disadvantaged – two year programs are a good deal for students and employers. They are particularly cost effective for mid-sized and small employers, many of whom are unable to afford to train their employees themselves. (The Manufacturing Institute, 1997)
The primary purpose of four year programs at America's colleges and universities has traditionally been to provide educational credentials to individuals seeking entry-level positions in science and engineering. More recently this role has been expanded to include the preparation of future professional and managers to function effectively in a world of work that has been transformed by scientific and technological advances.
Despite decreases in the population of college age youths since the early 1980's, the absolute numbers of bachelor's degree awards as well as bachelor's degree awards in science and engineering have increased substantially. Compared with competitor nations – most notably Japan, South Korea and Germany – however, the United States still graduates significantly fewer persons with first professional degrees in science and engineering. And although there have been encouraging increases in the numbers of women, minority, handicapped and economically disadvantaged students studying science and engineering, these groups continue to be significantly underrepresented when compared with their presence in the total U.S. college age population.
IEEE-USA and IEEE's Educational Activities Board believe that the system for educating and training scientific, engineering and technical personnel requires the development of individual professionals with broad, "holistic" backgrounds and the ability to adapt to rapid technological change in an increasingly competitive global economy. To this end, we recommend that the current emphasis in engineering education on course content be modified to include a more comprehensive, interdisciplinary program of studies that will provide engineers with expertise in a variety of advanced technologies as well as a solid grounding in the fundamentals of engineering practice.
More specific recommendations for needed improvements in engineering education at the undergraduate and graduate levels are provided in the attached policy statement entitled Engineering Education in the United States which was approved by IEEE-USA and IEEE's Educational Activities Board in 1997.
Just as important as the need to improve precollege education in math and science and increase the quality and relevance of post-secondary vocational and professional education, is the need for investments by businesses, educational institutions, government agencies, labor unions, professional societies and individual professionals in lifelong learning opportunities for practicing scientists, engineers and technical personnel. The benefits to the nation and employers from enhanced programs of career-long education and training appear to be considerable. Such opportunities also enable the individual professional to perform more effectively in his or her current job; develop the knowledge and skills needed to take on additional responsibilities and prepare for a new job in the same or another field.
Employers play a dual role in the provision of lifelong learning. They are at once major providers of continuing professional education and skills training and major users of education and training provided by others. Like higher education, however, opportunities for continuing education – especially employer-provided continuing education – is not always widely accessible to employers and employees. Workers employed by small firms, for example, usually have less access to formal and informal instructional opportunities than do their counterparts at large firms. Nor is there usually any guarantee that individual employers will benefit directly from investments in training, since employees are free to change employers or may fail to take advantage of employer-sponsored programs.
Continuing changes in technology as well as the structure and locus of employment will make lifelong learning even more important in the future than it has been in the past. In 1988, the National Academy of Engineering observed that "no institution or group of individuals, no government agency or industrial association has assumed the critical role of advocacy and enhancement of career long education across all engineering fields or for interdisciplinary areas." As in other areas of education, no single organization is responsible for providing leadership, identifying effective instructional strategies and best practices, or for informing engineers about and motivating them to take advantage of available opportunities.
For its part, IEEE-USA has always recognized the need for continuing education to enhance individual engineers' careers and to ensure that all electrical, electronics and computer engineers are proficient in current practices and technologies as well as applicable legal requirements. IEEE's Technical and Educational Activities Boards as well as IEEE-USA encourages all IEEE members to take responsibility for the development of their professional careers and provides educational courses, conferences, programs publications and self-study courses to help them do it.
IEEE and IEEE-USA also actively encourages employers to actively support and assist employees to maintain their professional and technical competence.
Given the importance of lifelong learning, additional employer and employee subsidies or tax incentives should be provided by Federal and state governments. A permanent extension of Section 127 of the Internal Revenue Code, which provides an income tax exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance, would be an important step in the right direction. Subsidies to encourage and enable adults to take advantage of lifelong learning opportunities should also be expanded.
The tax code could be amended to make job-related educational expenses deductible for individuals both when they apply to a current job and when they provide education and training needed for a new job. Eligibility for federal financial assistance could be expanded to include workers who are enrolled in career- related courses and degree programs. Another approach would be to provide tax incentives to encourage mid-sized and smaller employers to provide job-related education and training for their employees as Congressman Jim Moran (D-VA) does in his new Worker Training Tax Credit proposal (H.R. 3274).
Current needs for improvements in the content, quality, availability and effectiveness of education and training at all levels are matched in exciting new ways by continuing improvements in information technologies. Now, as never before, these technologies are making it easier and less expensive to provide individualized instruction through increasingly varied assortments of interactive communications media to connect teachers and learners at remote locations using hardwire and satellite connections.
World Wide Web based asynchronous (distance) learning networks offer a particularly effective, convenient and affordable alternative to traditional classroom-based instructional programs, particularly for wage earners who have less an less time to spend commuting to and from local colleges and universities.
Conventional programs of educational and job search assistance for workers who are displaced by changes in technology, trade policies, economic conditions, business decisions or by plant closings have been evaluated and, on balance, been found to have marginal positive effects on program participants. (Hudson Institute, 1997)
IEEE-USA agrees with Anthony Carnevale -- the Vice President for Public Leadership at the Educational Testing Service and an internationally recognized expert on work and skills issues -- that there is an urgent need for a strong Federal presence in education and training in general, and in the provision of transitional assistance to dislocated workers, in particular. As Carnevale points out, "we need to do more than simply eliminate programs, we need to create a system of workforce development activities that will carry a growing economy – and a growing number of Americans – into the next century."
Disadvantaged and dislocated workers, as well as fully employed professional specialty, technical and administrative support personnel, need full access to a full range of employment and training services.
The development of national standards and a national network of locally based "one stop career centers" as proposed in the Consolidated and Reformed Education, Employment and Retraining Systems (CAREERS) Act of 1994 and in the Workforce Investment Partnership Act of 1997 would be an important step in the right direction. Such centers could play an instrumental role in transforming disparate programs and services that are currently scattered across many different Federal, State and local agencies into an accessible system of coordinated services for job seekers and employers.
Crucial to the success of such efforts, will be the use of state-of-the-art communications technologies to ensure the ready availability of accurate information about current labor market conditions; employment opportunities, training resources and sources of financial assistance to students and workers as well as to program managers and policy makers at the national, state and local levels.
Despite modest gains since 1988, women, minorities, handicapped and economically disadvantaged Americans continue to be underrepresented in most scientific and engineering fields. Although the proportion of women, Blacks, Hispanics and native Americans in high school graduating classes is increasing, such groups are traditionally less likely than white men to pursue careers in these fields.
To make matters worse, two thirds of the minority students who enroll in engineering education programs at America's colleges and universities do not graduate with degrees in engineering. At the top of the list of barriers to retention, according to the National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, is unmet financial need. Exacerbating this problem are shifting financial aid policies. Many institutions of higher learning are using financial aid to recruit more affluent students in order to maximize net tuition revenues.
The financial needs of poor students are increasingly being met through loans rather than scholarships thereby increasing future debt burdens and effectively discouraging minority participation in higher education.
Other impediments to greater participation by women and minorities include pervasive institutional and social factors, including a traditionally white male dominated culture, low expectations and unsupportive attitudes toward women and minorities on the part of engineering educators, lack of mentors and the absence of peer support. (National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, 1997)
Like many others in the workforce preparedness equation, issues affecting opportunities for women, minorities, the handicapped and the economically disadvantaged do not lend themselves to quick, easy or inexpensive solutions. Continuing leadership by legislative, executive and judicial policy makers at all levels of government will be required to mobilize the public support needed to solve these problems.
In this context, IEEE-USA is especially pleased join the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and the American Association of Engineering Societies in supporting enactment of The Advancement of Women in Science Engineering and Technology Act (H.R. 3007) as introduced last fall by the chair of the Technology Subcommittee of the House Science Committee, Representative Connie Morella of Maryland.
We also wish to commend Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas for her leadership in sponsoring the Information Technology Partnership Act. This innovative proposal is designed to promote cooperation between local education agencies and private sector organizations, train inner city teachers how to teach math and science and enable economically disadvantaged students in grades 10 through 12 to pursue careers in math, science, information technology and engineering.
Occupational Employment Projections to 2006, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1997.
Projecting Science and Engineering Personnel Requirements for the 1990's: How Good are the Numbers, Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on Science, Space and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, 1992
Education and Training for America's Future, The Manufacturing Institute, 1997.
Science and Technology Shaping the Twenty-First Century, Executive Office of the President, Office of Technology Policy, 1997.
Workforce 2020: Work and Workers in the 21st Century, The Hudson Institute, 1997. The Learning Curve: What We Are Discovering About U.S. Science and Mathematics Education, National Science Foundation, 1996.
Precollege Mathematics, Science and Technology Education: An Action Agenda for Engineers, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-United States Activities, 1997.
Engineering Education for a Changing World, American Society for Engineering Education, 1994.
Engineer's Guide to Lifelong Employability, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-United States Activities, 1997.
Focus on the Future: A National Action Plan for Career Long Education for Engineers, National Academy of Engineering, 1988.
Industry 2000: Technical Vitality Through Continuing Education, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers- Educational Activities Board, 1995.
Connecting Students to a Changing World: A Technology Strategy for Improving Mathematics and Science Education, Committee for Economic Development, 1995.
Engineering and Affirmative Action: A Crisis in the Making, National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, 1997.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers - United States of America
2001 L Street, N.W., Suite 700, Washington, DC 20036-5104
Office: (202) 785-0017 * Fax: (202) 785-0835 * E-mail: ieeeusa@ieee.org * Web: http://www.ieeeusa.org
| Top of Page | Policy Log | Public Policy Forum | IEEE-USA |
Last Update: March 24, 1998
Staff Info Contact: Vin O'Neill, v.oneill@ieee.org
Copyright © 1998, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Permission to copy IEEE-USA policy communications is granted for non-commercial uses with appropriate attribution, unless otherwise indicated.