More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Tim Devane

GET UPDATES FROM Tim Devane

On Innovative Education

Posted: 06/26/11 08:06 PM ET

A few weeks ago, I was talking to one of my best friends, Newman, about the U.S. education system. I'd recently watched Peter Thiel, Michael Roth and others debated the merits and shortcomings of higher education on PBS and we were typing over Gchat about whether our system was broken, worth it, and what needed to be done.

At one point Newman said something really poignant that at first I didn't get. He said: we don't build things anymore. Being deeply rooted in NYC's tech start-up world, I was almost offended. But he's right and my vision is skewed. Outside of the recent tech surge in New York, California, and a few other states, innovative industries are few and far between in the U.S. Our universities tend to funnel our best and brightest towards traditional careers, in the John Adams' sense of traditional, where age-old concepts and rules are laid out before you to be learned and interpreted, but never broken or changed. To build something new from scratch requires entrepreneurial spirit, but in most cases it also requires a technical and/or scientific skill set that has slipped to the back Bunsen burner of the American curriculum.

A current law student himself, Newman went on to say we don't need more lawyers, we need people who can create and innovate and build. And he's right again. Neither of us are arguing that we don't need law schools, lawyers, or firms. We do and will continue to into perpetuity. The point is that the proportion of college undergrads pursuing law, corporate management, business, and political science degrees to those interested in applied science and math cannot be so lopsided.

So, do we do away with the four-year college campus experience that at times it might feel like an extended summer camp? Absolutely not. Do we need to shift some monetary and departmental focus and reward towards engaging and expanding the talented groups of young people who pursue engineering and computer science degrees? Absolutely. Grants and loans should be created in the vein of federal programs like the Stafford, Pell, and Perkins, available for the study of biochemistry and advanced mathematics. New departments should emphasize the entrepreneurial application of data science. Career fairs and alumni events should present the opportunities to immediately make a profound impact upon graduation in May.

The college education needs to innovate by pushing and promoting those next generation innovators that it has the power to create. In a global landscape where other countries far outpace the U.S. in graduation rates for advanced math and science degrees, our American universities should realize that their undergrads have not lost the ability to build, they've just forgotten the emphasis on the need to build. We built railroads, we built space ships, but in an old-fashioned education system, founded under the belief that being a judge was the ultimate career goal, universities must recommit to teaching skill sets around what we are capable of building now, before someone else does it first.

 

Follow Tim Devane on Twitter: www.twitter.com/tdevane

 
 
  • Comments
  • 7
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
04:43 PM on 06/30/2011
There are many problems that keep the best and the brightest from STEM fields, the first is that cost/benefit equations prohibits it.

Even those holding specialized medical degrees make an order of magnitude less than second-tier financial engineers, those with PhDs in the basic sciences or engineering make even less, often times substantially less.

So if you among the best and brightest, why would you ever go into a STEM field if you can get more money, prestige, and often much better working conditions in another field?

Secondly is the graduate/post doc trap,which as a doctoral candidate in molecular biology/genetics I live in mortal fear of. I hear lots of horror stories about bright young scientists who graduated from top tier universities ending up as Academia's serfs.

Finally, let me leave you with this scary tidbit, When I was in secondary school and was discussing post-graduation plans with my classmates, many people thought I was insane for choosing to go the technical route for a career in biotechnology. It was a private school, everybody came from money, 17 old boys were telling me "I'm going to get a business degree and hire a bunch of Indians!"... 17 and they already figured out how today's American society works.

If the elders and powers that be are serious about promoting STEM careers, I suggest they fix that problem, or they are not going to get the scientists and engineers they pay lip service to.
09:51 PM on 06/28/2011
Unfortunately, the problem IS the work. Math, science, engineering, and computer science are hard. As a current biomedical engineering student, I have to work exponentially harder to maintain a high GPA. Often times, that comes at a cost to my social life, sleep, and sanity. Many people who started in our starting class dropped out of the major because the intro classes (Calc 1&2, Physics, Gen Chem, 1000 level engineering classes) were so much more difficult and time consuming than say, a History or Accounting class. Many students find, that rather than getting shafted for four years studying engineering, they can study and party and sleep and get a liberal arts degree. This course of action led to the current glut of liberal arts degree holders, and the shortage of qualified STEM grads. Until there is a change in high school preparation to include more advanced math and science, the student perception of STEM will not change from what it is right now.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tim Devane
09:44 AM on 06/29/2011
Perhaps then its necessary for the 'preparation' portion of University life to be more emphasized than the in-college social life? If there was more of an underscore around the impact you can have as a STEM grad in comparison with Liberal Arts majors?

However, I do not think the argument or situation is as rigid as you describe. Partying/liberal arts degrees and STEM grads/no social life are not given, predicated pathways. Both require work. It may be easier to slack off in certain liberal arts pursuits and get by. However, to excel in any major takes dedication and sacrifice.

But you're going through what we need so many more people to go through, succeed, and appreciate afterwards! Continue on and wishes for your success! And pass the message on that its not impossible, its not boring, and has the potential to create in a way other degrees might not.
11:12 AM on 06/29/2011
Thanks for the encouragement. For more people to go into and succeed in science and engineering, there needs to be a profound change in culture and education. My dad had an advanced degree in Chemistry, so I was around science since I was born. My parents also stressed the importance of doing well in school, especially in math and science. Most Americans are not proficient even in basic algebra. How can we expect the next generation of scientists and engineers to arise when the basics of geometry, trigonometry, and calculus are next to impossible? The staple of any engineering background is Linear Algebra and Differential Equations, and other higher order mathematics. Without a solid foundation in math and an interest in science, children will not be equipped to even step into the STEM industry.
05:42 AM on 07/05/2011
hi just started to follow you.
i liked it once you meantion oh green is cool...
Yes i totally agree..green is not cool it is cold.
the world has serious problems.except European Unıon none of the goverment publishes well.
In Europe after 2020 all the housing and life style will be reversed to Green Buildings.
I know in US there is also a development but not soluted.
Because in EU the buildings will sake up to cost of gas etc %0 because the builging will bring its energy.
i personally made a lot of contact to eco technology product inventers but none of them were serious.However the recycle is in life style it self..

Köln Didem AYDOGAN

I love Ms Angela Merkel, she is a East German origion from Berlin and a daughter of a
03:25 PM on 06/28/2011
That portion has been lopsided for decades. Popular culture in the US emphasizes entertainment (sports, music, video. ...), not study and work. It is cool to work out and practice for the varsity team for hours a day. It is not to study, even though the average payout for studying is far higher. And to study math and the sciences, "You are a geek. Uncool. Study away, I'm partying.".

If students do not get an adequate math background by high school and learn the self discipline to work hard, the science and applied science fields are closed to them. When students get to college they rapidly realize that the science and engineering students have to study far harder than students of many other majors and may well get lower grades as well. Many change majors and enjoy their social life more.

Surprise, Americans are underrepresented in the sciences and engineering. It was that way 30 years ago in my Ph.D. program in Engineering as well.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Tim Devane
08:17 PM on 06/28/2011
While its true that the lopsided nature has been around for awhile, I have to disagree that it is due to jock culture - people decide to work hard or not, but I don't believe its societal peer pressure that's shying U.S. students away from 1). math/science 2). working hard. They are two separate issues. Further, its a different kind of skill set and knowledge, but hard work is required across the board.

Lastly, the study of the sciences or mathematics is certainly not closed at any point in one's developmental life. I know several individuals who went to undergrad studying philosophy and english and are currently prominent data scientists and engineers in their fields. Its never too late and never a closed field but certainly requires the hard work and dedication as you've said.