STEM Careers Take Too Much Work, Students Say In New Survey

David Mielach, BusinessNewsDaily Staff Writer
First Published 01/30/2012 01:26 PM EST

While job opportunities in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) professions may be plentiful, many teenagers are unwilling to pursue a long-term career in these fields due to the challenges they present. According to a new study conducted by ASQ, students in sixth through twelfth grade felt that careers as doctors and engineers would offer the most job opportunities upon graduating from college, but 67 percent were unsure if they would pursue these careers, due to the numerous challenges they present. 

Chief among these challenges is the cost and time it takes to get a degree. According to the survey, 26 percent of respondents felt that the cost and difficulty of pursuing professionally qualifying education in these fields were too high compared with other fields. Additionally, 25 percent of students felt that these career paths were too challenging and involved too much studying.  

Careers as doctors and engineers were not the only places where students saw opportunities, though.  According to the survey, the career fields offering the greatest opportunity were:

• 
  Doctor - 34 percent


• 
  Engineer- 26 percent


• 
  Teacher- 19 percent


• 
  Lawyer- 17 percent


• 
  Entrepreneur- 16 percent


• 
  Sales and Marketing- 11 percent


• 
  Accountant- 11 percent

"It's encouraging to see that more students see the value of STEM careers like engineering, but clearly STEM professionals and educators can be doing more to support students along this career path," said Jim Rooney, ASQ chair and quality engineer with ABSG Consulting.

That is because, according to the survey, 25 percent of teenage respondents stated their grades in math and science aren't good enough to pursue a future career in those subjects. For once, parents agreed with their children, as 53 percent of parents who responded in a similar survey were worried about the challenges these fields presented to their children. Just over a quarter of parents, 26 percent, also felt that teachers were not preparing their children enough for future careers in STEM fields.

Another factor contributing to the nonpursuit of STEM jobs is the growing gender gap in education.  According to the research, 30 percent of girls stated that math was their most challenging subject, compared with 19 percent of boys. Additionally, 33 percent of girls admitted they felt teachers did not prepare them enough for future careers in STEM careers, compared with just 9 percent of boys. 

The information in this survey is based on the responses of 713 students and a complementary survey of 327 parents with children between the ages of 10 and 17. The survey was conducted for ASQ, a self-described "global community of people dedicated to quality who share the ideas and tools that make our world work better."

Reach BusinessNewsDaily staff writer David Mielach at [e-mail]. Follow him on Twitter @D_M89.

• Americans Willing to Pay for Laundry-Folding Robots
• The 10 Best Career Opportunities Right Now
• 17 Great Business Ideas for 2012

Copyright 2012 BusinessNewsDaily, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Comments

[Thiago DaLuz]

01:31 PM on 04/11/2013

Well kids, we're set on injury lawyers in Newfoundland if you thought that would be better. Don't think about the effort, consider the reward!

[bushitbrain]

10:54 AM on 02/01/2012

Kind of odd that back in the Sputnik days of the late `50s, the US govnt. could not do Enough to encourage & finance careers into science & engineering. Guess something(s) has changed ? Here is one rare area where the govnt. cannot be totally blamed.
After teaching college physics for 10 yrs in Calif., Colo, OR, & FL, its crystal clear that ~80% of kids have zero inclination to try & excel in anything involving Math, even when the luster & excitement of science is added to entice curiosity. Most view science & math as bad tasting cough medicine they have to swallow to obtain a sheepskin = job education. Almost no curiosity about the history of our world which has been utterly transformed for the better by science & math. Learning first-hand about that is what a college education has traditionally been about :
Culture.

[Steelheadangler]

11:38 AM on 02/01/2012

I couldn't agree more! I have teenagers, so I see this type of attitude all the time, fortunately not so much from my children, but from their friends. From my perspective the root cause is that many parents simply do not engage their children from and early age; if a subject is not important to the parents, then it is difficult or impossible for teachers to fill in that gap 100% of the time.
My suggestion to parents is to spend at least a couple of hours per week helping you child develop and interest in math and science.

[Shozen]

06:59 AM on 02/02/2012

A larger percent of high school students go to college today than did in the late 50's. Back in the 50's it was still possible to find high paying blue collar jobs that only required a High School Degree. So in college today there is a larger pool of students who don't have the skills or temperament to pursue a STEM degree. Why blame the current generation, their parents, or the government?

[Giantevilhead]

06:06 AM on 02/01/2012

The interesting thing is that there is so much research on child development and education but almost none of it is being applied. Heck, most teachers don't understand or even read new research on the subject. Not to mention how there's almost a complete ignorance of specialized education techniques, especially cultural-historical and behaviorist ones.

[Steelheadangler]

11:39 AM on 02/01/2012

You must not know very many teachers!

[SwiftJonathan]

03:47 PM on 02/01/2012

The problem is that what is known (even by teachers) can only be applied in classrooms where the teacher is in full control. But if keeping your job is the juggling act of finding a balance between parents, principals, school boards. state and federal legislators, then you are unlikely to do what the children need... which is, sometimes, a matter of FORCING them to learn.

In many European schools the teachers have the backing of the principals and the principals have the backing of the state authorities. If parents don't like it, they can take their kids somewhere else... oh, wait, they can't, because even that is regulated by law. And that makes sure that the kids get what they really need, not what some crazy helicopter parents think is good for their kids.

[fds]

11:39 PM on 01/31/2012

"Kids Too Lazy To Pursue Science Careers? What Poll Shows"

Another stupid headline. I guess no HP section is immune to idiotic headline.

[William1950]

11:29 PM on 01/31/2012

stop teaching to pass the tests... let educators educate with flexibility, like the real world... let them and the kids explore enough so that every one could find their path.. rather than focusing on the tests.. teaching by rote.. memorization instead of creative thinking and innovation.. fulfilling others expectations instead of finding their own..

[gmikejake]

06:09 AM on 02/01/2012

Yes, and how about teaching through problem-solving, critical thinking, group based exploration, etc.? I taught "social science statistics," at the collegiate level, for years, required for some majors, and, in every class, there were a good number of "math phobic" students. Some students chose majors just because they required no math .... communication in particular. A lot of it had to do with their experiences with math in our schools. So, I taught statistics as I had to learn them, as a person with learning disabilities, through "problem based" learning. I also used computers and group based exercises and a whole lot of "discovery." They all learned, many enjoyed it, and several went on to take other statistics courses. And, I'm happy to say, several also went on to graduate work in social science and "human services," even doctorates, that included demonstrated capability at much more difficult levels of statistics. The approach can make a tremendous difference. Yes, there are other alternatives.

[GhostOfFDR]

09:20 PM on 01/31/2012

That's the problem with the NSF approach. They're working on the supply side when the problem is on the demand side.

If asked right now, I would tell anyone thinking about entering my scientific field that there's only one reason to do so: You should become a scientist only if you can't possibly imagine doing anything else. And even then you're probably going to end up doing something else.

On average, in my field, you're going to spend 10 years in college. Six taking classes and four working on your thesis project. On the plus side, you'll get paid enough to cover rent and food for the 6 years of grad school. During large portions of your thesis project you probably won't need a place to live outside your office. Then you graduate and get a job as a postdoc where you'll make about the same as a public school teacher does.

After 3 years of that you'll be forced to find another job. You will of course apply for faculty positions at research universities where your application will be compared against 200 others submitted by some of the finest minds the field has known. Who am I kidding, they won't even look at yours unless someone on the committee knows you. And so you find another postdoc position. And the game continues. The story is too long to continue in 250 words, but every step is a struggle.

[HAlexandria]

09:36 PM on 01/31/2012

I'm currently in graduate school and I tell people what you have stated all the time. I happen to be very fortunate, I come from a family where both sides have done very well for themselves so I don't have to worry about student loans or making lots of money once I graduate, as a matter of fact I may have to go on to medical school as many biotechnology firms require an MD as well as a PhD.

Our so called leaders, it's not a problem limited to the US, talk a good game when it comes to STEM careers, but they never put their money where their mouths are.

[SwiftJonathan]

09:49 PM on 01/31/2012

"You should become a scientist only if you can't possibly imagine doing anything else. "

There was NEVER any other reason for becoming a scientist. Not sure what the fuss is about.

I NEVER perceived any of what you describe as a struggle, ever. It was pure fun, every minute of it.

Why else would I have done it? Why would anyone?

[GhostOfFDR]

10:35 PM on 01/31/2012

Every minute pure fun? You must be in a different field than me. Perhaps funding is easier to find. In my field the funding rate for proposals is about 12% and a proposal is lucky to cover one FTE for three years. Let's see, if I've got 4 FTEs that 11 proposals per year to write. But it's not that simple because NSF wants to fund grad students, not FTEs.

If NSF really wanted to encourage people to become scientists, funding projects at the amount required for the personnel required to accomplish them would be a start. And to me, a 12% funding rate says "We've got nine times as many scientists as we need."

Perhaps you don't have other people depending upon your ability to attract funding?

Back to fun. Perhaps you've never experienced the joy of the academic two body problem?

Perhaps you've never experienced the joy of a colleague publishing your work as his own?

Somehow you've avoided the life that's 33% trying to get enough money to keep your job, 33% making sure other people a doing the science you wanted to do correctly, 23% pushing paper and 11% doing science. If so, congratulations. I'm not saying I get no joy from my job, but it's beyond exhausting.

[GhostOfFDR]

10:37 PM on 01/31/2012

And as far as other reasons, the STEM buzzword people want you to be a scientist because the country supposedly needs a lot of scientists. They don't care whether it's a good career choice for anyone in particular. They just look at the numbers.

[ProudToBeVeryLiberal]

07:54 PM on 01/31/2012

Apparently this is what most American kids want to be today:

- rock star
- famous actor
- just a celebrity with lots of money
- NBA/NFL player
- MLB/NHL player
- dot.com billionaire (doesn't matter how...)

Then, as soon as they reach high school and understand the likelihood of any of the above happening is as improbable as getting s.t.r.u.c.k by a lightning, then they fold back to basically this category:

- anything that makes me the most money with the least effort (and that nicely explains why we have an overabundance of used car salespeople and personal injury lawyers... ;) )

[GhostOfFDR]

09:25 PM on 01/31/2012

Don't forget lottery winner.

[SwiftJonathan]

09:56 PM on 01/31/2012

I fully agree... however, knowing that getting your science education at one of the top schools will cost you a small fortune doesn't really help with the decision making process. Neither does the crappy state of high school science and math at all but the best schools.

[ProudToBeVeryLiberal]

11:23 PM on 01/31/2012

Well, I come from a family of immigrants who had no money for college at all. It's through NROTC that I was able to get into engineering school all the way to a Ph.D.
If you have the "right stuff", there are still ways to get the best STEM education for free in this country, but yeah, it's unfair that rich people don't need to compromise or make any effort (serving years in the Navy is not exactly a picnic, though I will never regret it, because I learned so much about missiIe systems that when I left I already had so many job offers by the top dogs...) Still, very few of them become mathematicians, physicists or engineers...

[LiberalLee]

07:06 PM on 01/31/2012

It seems pretty true. My husband's been scouring the entire globe looking for top-tier IT architects and offering BSM ( big stupid money), and only found 2 in the States out of the 8 he's been looking for.
The unemployment level for the area he's hiring in is about 2 %. And yet people whine about people like him hiring from off-shore. They don't have much choice!

[GhostOfFDR]

09:21 PM on 01/31/2012

Where's his ad?

[LiberalLee]

09:29 PM on 01/31/2012

At the level we're talking about, if you don't know where to look, you probably would be qualified.
The Ladders is a start though.

[Sister Bluebird]

03:53 PM on 01/31/2012

It is the way science is taught, which is much the same manner that history is taught. Without someone passionate and creative while conveying and instructing in this subject, kids will be very bored.

Either the classes are so basic, that you snooze because you already know the material, or if one never grasped the basics, one snoozes, because you can never catch up because you lack the foundational concepts.

Either way, failure is eminent.

[gmikejake]

06:18 AM on 02/01/2012

Based on my experiences teaching "education majors" basic social sciences, many were NOT all that enthused about either math or history ... but some took the courses, anyway. Particularly math as they knew that there is almost always a shortage of math teachers. Science, however, for many, was just not an option .... chemistry, physics, advanced math classes? Ewwwww!

[Soule23]

01:53 PM on 01/31/2012

The real news is that students view the greatest hurdle to their development into contributing members of society as the cost of a modern education, but you've mentioned to turn the study into yet another opportunity to chide gen Y for being "lazy."

Also, STEM careers are not particularly difficult once you finish school, but the classes are a Catch 22--if you aren't already fluent in math and science by the time you start freshman year, you're weeded out as "intellectually insufficient." My experience was that college doesn't actually bother to teach math and science until you hit grad school.

[SwiftJonathan]

03:10 PM on 01/31/2012

That's not true for European universities. You are expected to come in with solid skills in geometry, single variable calculus and some understanding of statistics and combinatorics, but they will teach you everything you need on the fly. And all high school students who took the required classes have the right level of knowledge to get started.

Of course, most American students are, at least, one year below the level of a first semester in European universities because of the failure of the US high school system... so you are basically playing catch-up because of a systemic problem.

In university they really don't care where YOU are. They only care where you HAVE TO BE to be competitive in science. If YOU need to fill that gap faster, then YOU need to work harder.

[Varys]

06:13 PM on 01/31/2012

I can believe that American students are behind, but the whole "year-level" gauge seems almost meaningless. I'm more interested in knowing the specific skills they lack (e.g. did they not take any pre-calc? or something else?)

[HAlexandria]

09:41 PM on 01/31/2012

I'm a graduate student in biology at a very prestigious British university, the A-Level exams scores have been lowered to the point where they no long reflect reality. About twice a month, some undergraduate in one of my discussion groups will amaze me with their lack of knowledge/understanding, which is why the university started offering remedial courses =/

[Varys]

06:12 PM on 01/31/2012

College doesn't bother to teach math and science? Which college did you go to? Every core class I was required to take for my degree taught either math or science.

[gmikejake]

06:21 AM on 02/01/2012

Good point. There are many colleges and majors that do not require either legitimate math or science classes ... and they tend to be rather popular for many students.

[jacki650]

01:29 PM on 01/31/2012

It's actually very sad to say that this is something true for me. I started out as a Chemistry major and switched my second year second semester to sociology. Rather than pushing through and working on it I kind of just gave up and blamed the "poor teaching" for it. But when I see programs and resources like the ones listed here it makes me happy to see that are these tools to keep kids interested and hopefully they stay interested beyond it all > http://www.skinnyscoop.com/list/eden/toys-tips-to-feed-a-girls-love-of-building-math-science

[SwiftJonathan]

03:03 PM on 01/31/2012

Why did you chose chemistry to begin with, if you weren't that much into it? Chemistry is VERY HARD and extremely high pressure. Maybe someone should have told you before you got into the classroom?

I talked to chemists a lot while I was at university... and you could find even some of the most gifted ones almost crying over the workload they were given in the practical classes. Unfortunately, that workload does not diminish even after you are on the job. Chemistry today is mostly about cranking out compounds and analysis on the clock...

[jacki650]

03:20 PM on 01/31/2012

Well I actually took general Chem and AP Chem in high school. Gen. chem. was actually very easy and AP chem of course was much more difficult but the teacher I had was amazing and so she made me want to continue it. Then Chem 1 in college was difficult but my professor was awesome and helped me out to bring my grade up and I did. Chem 2 professor however told me to quit...I didn't and I tried but my grades didn't improve so I kinda just gave up.

I definitely got lazy and could have tried it again but figure maybe I was only interested in chem (hoping to go into forensics) because I wanted too much CSI. I could have used a bit more encouragement or resources but those are also things I didn't help myself with to look into.

Needless to say I took a computer programming class by last year of college and really enjoyed it but definitely cried the most that semester.. and yet I would have taken more classes if my University wasn't so pricey..but I have been getting a lot of push to still pursue it so it's something I want to play around with.

[HAlexandria]

09:46 PM on 01/31/2012

While I wouldn't call it easy, and there is a lot of tedious work, Chemistry is not that hard. I was required to take 8 quarters of biochemistry in order to get my BSc w/honours degree in Biology.

Depends on the person I guess.

[Varys]

11:17 AM on 01/31/2012

You can spend 10+ years as a college student making subsistence wages and incurring debt, all so you can be paid marginally better than people who spent 2 years getting an associates degree and the other 8 building actual work experience.

I say this as someone who is actually a graduate student, but recognize that the "incentives" for science may not be as great as they need to be.

[Sister Bluebird]

03:55 PM on 01/31/2012

That is sadly true, and it will become a major problem for this country, as if it weren't already.

[Jarrod Putnam]

10:52 AM on 01/31/2012

Sad but true. Id have to hold someone of my generation hostage to even say a single topic related to science. It seems 90% of the people I went to school with are simply interested in getting drunk on the weekends, and getting laid. Thanks Jersey Shore...

[Sister Bluebird]

03:56 PM on 01/31/2012

Sadly it is cross generational.

[Jarrod Putnam]

04:03 PM on 01/31/2012

Oh, no doubt. But I fear my generation is consumed with this mindset. I sincerely am worried about the era when my generation "comes to power" in the country.

[LiberalLee]

07:11 PM on 01/31/2012

And don't forget the constant Tweeting and texting.
I've found it IMPOSSIBLE to keep a conversation alive with my 20 year old niece due to inane interruptions consisting of, " Hey. Nuttin', what are you doing? Uh huh.Ya. Bye". Over and over...
Yet she still tries to wheedle $$ for odd jobs out of Auntie Dearest since with no real education she can't find a job...

[Jarrod Putnam]

08:04 PM on 01/31/2012

Oh yeah, another gem. Hell, im 20 and I can't stand people like that. Its really creepy when I hang out with people, everyone will be on their phone for something all at the same time. The only time im on my phone is reading stuff on here, or other news & science apps. But I know when to lay off.

[Mailman]

09:28 PM on 01/30/2012

Problem with today's kids is they don't work after school, alot don't work summer jobs. They watch alot of television and play video games and they know that getting famous for doing nothing is right in front of them with Jersey Shore and the Kardashians. It's not like along time ago when your parents made you do things, today they ask you and most kids say NO! Science is a joke and it requires work.

[recless]

12:54 AM on 01/31/2012

I disagree. It isn't a lack of work. It is a lack of supervision. That be why something like 80% of teen pregnancies are apparently conceived between 3 and 5 in the afternoon on weekdays.

[HAlexandria]

10:26 PM on 01/31/2012

You pulled the last bit out of your arse. If anyone devised a fool-proof method that could determine time of conception to the hour, I could make them a multimillionaire.

[Tomaniac]

08:59 PM on 01/30/2012

You would think money would be a great incentive in encouraging consideration of a STEM path. I am retired and keep getting really lucrative job offers in the technical industry because employers can't find enough qualified candidates that can do the job and its getting harder every year with more people retiring. It takes a lot of dedication and hard work to get the education and do the work once hired, and the rewards are worth it, but a lot of our entitled youth don't want to have anything to do with that "hard work" stuff.

$100K a year will buy a lot of beer, the future's so bright, I got to wear shades.

[HAlexandria]

10:46 PM on 01/31/2012

The thing with technical careers is that they are *very* specific, and very few employers are willing to provide OJT. While your speciality may be in high demand, many others in the same general field may not be.

I don't know what your expertise is in, but in biotechnology, some newly minted PhDs go right into 80k positions, while others with 20 years experience have to take dead end jobs as they can not find anything in their field.