Understanding the
Educational and
Career Pathways
of Engineers
Committee on Understanding the Engineering Education-Workforce Continuum
A Consensus Study Report of the
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. (1344190). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-48560-9
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-48560-6
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25284
Additional copies of this publication are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2018 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academy of Engineering. 2018. Understanding the Educational and Career Pathways of Engineers. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/25284.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON UNDERSTANDING THE ENGINEERING EDUCATION-WORKFORCE CONTINUUM
Committee Members
JEAN-LOU CHAMEAU (NAE), chair, President Emeritus, California Institute of Technology
RODNEY C. ADKINS (NAE), vice chair, President, 3RAM Group, LLC
ERIC DUCHARME (NAE), General Manager, Advanced Technology Operation, GE Aviation
NADYA A. FOUAD, Distinguished Professor and Mary and Ted Kellner Endowed Chair of Educational Psychology, Counseling Psychology, and School and Community Counseling, School of Education, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee
RICHARD B. FREEMAN, Herbert Ascherman Professor of Economics, Harvard University
JENNIFER HUNT, James Cullen Chair in Economics and Professor of Economics, Rutgers University
AMY JAVERNICK-WILL, Nicholas R. and Nancy D. Petry Professor in Construction Engineering and Management, University of Colorado Boulder
JULIA LANE, Professor, Wagner School and Center for Urban Science and Progress, Provostial Fellow for Innovation Analytics, and Senior Fellow in the GovLab, New York University
GARY S. MAY (NAE), Chancellor, University of California, Davis
RICHARD K. MILLER (NAE), President and Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering
DAVID NAGEL, Executive Vice President (retired), BP America, Inc.
SHERI D. SHEPPARD, Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education, Richard Weiland Professor of Mechanical Engineering, and Associate Chair for Undergraduate Curriculum, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University
NICOLE SMITH, Research Professor and Chief Economist, Center on Education and the Workforce, Georgetown University
National Academy of Engineering Project Staff
PROCTOR P. REID, Study Director and Program Office Director (until June 2018)
FRAZIER BENYA, Program Officer (until October 2017)
ELIZABETH T. CADY, Program Officer
LANCE A. DAVIS, Executive Officer (retired) (until March 2016)
CATHERINE DIDION, Senior Program Officer (until January 2016)
CAMERON H. FLETCHER, Senior Editor
MICHAEL HOLZER, Senior Program Assistant (since May 2017)
JASON WILLIAMS, Senior Financial Associate (until May 2017)
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgments
This Consensus Study Report represents the work of many individuals, especially those who served on the committee and participated in the committee’s open sessions. The first thanks are to the committee members for their deep knowledge and contributions to the study.
The committee employed several consultants who collected and analyzed data and contributed commissioned papers that appear in the appendices. Thanks go to Donna K. Ginther (University of Kansas), Shulamit Kahn (Boston University), Debbie Hughes, Jason Owen-Smith (University of Michigan), Treva Stack, David Stevens, Isabel Cárdenas-Navia (Alta Vision Consulting), Sylvia Hurtado (University of California, Los Angeles), Bryce E. Hughes (Montana State University), M. Kevin Eagan (University of California, Los Angeles), and Robert Paul (University of Washington). Lynette Osborne evaluated the workshop and other elements of the project. Finally, Alexandra Lockwood provided invaluable support during the data-gathering and writing phases.
The committee benefited from presentations by several individuals who participated in our fact-finding workshop in November 2014. In addition to committee members and consultants, presenters were Samantha Brunhaver (Arizona State University), Jeri L. Buchholz (NASA), Dianne Chong (The Boeing Company), Constance J. Pritchard (The Pritchard Group), Darryll Pines (University of Maryland), Michael McKenzie (George Washington University), Steven Brown (Loyola University Chicago), Andrew Gillen (American Institutes for Research), Larry Bucciarelli (MIT), David Knight (Virginia Tech), and Hal Salzman (Rutgers University).
This report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Monitor:
Paul Gray (NAE)
University of California, Berkeley
Reviewers:
Diran Apelian
Alcoa-Howmet Professor of Mechanical Engineering
Founding Director of Metal Processing Institute
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Jeri L. Buchholz
Assistant Administrator, Office of Human Capital Management (retired)
NASA
Lisa Flores
Professor, Department of Educational, School and Counseling Psychology
University of Missouri–Columbia
Norman L. Fortenberry
Executive Director
American Society for Engineering Education
Joyce M. Gleason
Educational Consultant (retired)
Jill Hruby
Immediate Past Laboratory Director
Sandia National Laboratories
Edward Lazowska
Bill & Melinda Gates Chair in Computer Science and Engineering, Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Washington
Gary Lichtenstein
Founder and Principal
Quality Evaluation Designs
Susan Martinovich
National Technology Practice Director
CH2M/Jacobs
Jayathi Y. Murthy
Ronald and Valerie Sugar Dean, Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science
University of California, Los Angeles
Matthew Ohland
Professor, School of Engineering Education
Purdue University
J. Jerl Purcell, III
Executive Director, HD Growth Program
Cummins, Inc.
Hal Salzman
Professor, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy and
Senior Faculty Fellow, John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Fred B. Schneider
Samuel B. Eckert Professor of Computer Science and
Chairman, Department of Computer Science
Cornell University
John J. Tracy
Chief Technology Officer and Senior Vice President (retired)
The Boeing Company
Bruce A. Weinberg
Professor, Department of Economics
Ohio State University
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Paul R. Gray (NAE), professor, vice chancellor, and provost emeritus, University of California, Berkeley. He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Thanks are also due to the project staff: Proctor Reid, Frazier Benya, Elizabeth Cady, Catherine Didion, Lance Davis, Cameron Fletcher, Michael Holzer, and Jason Williams. Special thanks go to the late Proctor Reid, who died suddenly in June 2018. Proctor planned and oversaw the entire effort and was instrumental in helping build consensus on the most salient topics of the study. In the final phase of the project he worked tirelessly on the completion of the report, often on weekends, and ensured that diverse opinions were incorporated while preserving the essence and major conclusions of the report. We will always remember him as a thoughtful and kind human being and miss him as a valued colleague and friend.
Jean-Lou Chameau (Chair),
President Emeritus, California Institute of Technology
Rodney C. Adkins (Vice Chair),
President, 3RAM Group, LLC
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
1 CHARACTERISTICS OF ENGINEERS AND THE ENGINEERING WORKFORCE
Defining, Measuring, and Characterizing the Engineering Labor Force
Work Activities of Employed Engineers
Career Pathways of Engineering Graduates
The Economic Returns to an Engineering Degree
Dynamics of the Engineering Labor Market
Major Forces Shaping Demand for Engineering Labor and Skills
2 CHALLENGES FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION
New Skills and Knowledge for Engineers
Approaches to Develop New Skills for Engineers
Understanding the Implications of Growing Enrollment of Foreign-Born Students on Temporary Visas
3 FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE DECISION MAKING OF ENGINEERING STUDENTS AND GRADUATES
Social Cognitive Career Theory
Factors That Influence Initial Choice of an Engineering Major
Factors That Influence Postgraduate Decisions and Actions
Factors That Influence Retention in Engineering Occupations
Summary Observations, Implications, and Suggested Interventions
4 MAJOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Engineers Use Diverse Skills in a Variety of Occupations and Industries
Engineering Has a Persistent Diversity Challenge
Engineering Education Must Continuously Adapt
Data Gaps Hinder Understanding of Engineering Educational and Career Pathways
A The Engineering Education-Workforce Continuum
B Glossary of Engineering Fields
Boxes, Figures, and Tables
BOXES
I-1 The Greatest Engineering Achievements of the 20th Century
1-1 Engineering Technicians and Engineering Technologists
1-2 Growth in Engineering Degrees Awarded Annually
1-3 Entrepreneurship as a Career Option
1-4 The Promise of Administrative Data
1-5 Impact of Immigration of Engineers on US Economic Growth
2-1 Google’s Search Criteria for New Hires
3-1 Pool of High School Students Who Might Enroll in Engineering Bachelor’s Degree Programs
FIGURES
1-B1 Number of bachelor’s degrees awarded annually in engineering and related fields, 2000–2013
1-1 Primary pathways in engineering education
1-2 Percentage of bachelor’s degrees awarded in engineering disciplines in 2000, 2006, and 2013
1-3 Number of bachelor’s degrees awarded annually by engineering discipline, 2000–2013
1-5 Percentage of women by highest degree in engineering, 2000–2013
1-8 Engineering degree holders in the workforce by discipline and by highest degree
1-9 Cumulative completion rates of bachelor’s engineering degree aspirants, by sex
1-10 Cumulative completion rates of bachelor’s engineering degree aspirants, by race
1-15 Median annual earnings over career, by major
1-18 Median lifetime earnings for the top-paying 15 majors
3-1 Diagram of social cognitive career theory
3-2 Percent somewhat or very satisfied with their job by engineering degree and occupation
A-1 Bachelor’s (BSE), master’s (MSE) and PhD degrees in engineering, 2000–2013
A-2 Bachelor’s and master’s degrees in engineering by field, 2000–2013
A-3 Growth in bachelor’s, master’s and PhD degrees in engineering, 2000–2012
A-4 Bachelor’s degrees in engineering and related fields, 2000–2013
A-5 Percentage of degrees awarded to females in engineering, 2000–2013
A-6 Percentage of degrees awarded to underrepresented minorities in engineering, 2000–2013
A-7 Percentage of degrees awarded to foreign-born students in engineering, 2000–2013
A-8 Engineering as a percentage of total employment, 2013
A-9A Total employment in engineering occupations, 2000–2013
A-9B Stock of bachelor’s and master’s degrees in engineering, 1999–2013
A-10 To what extent do those with highest degree a BS or MS in engineering utilize their degree
A-11 How related work is to the field of highest degrees, by major degree field
A-15A Annual average earnings for bachelor’s degrees by field and years of experience
A-15B Annual average earnings for master’s degrees by field and years of experience
A1-1 Master’s and PhD degrees in engineering and related fields, 2000–2013
C-3 Comparisons by major in self-concept change over four years in college
C-4 Relationship between fourth-year retention in engineering and internship participation
C-7 Importance of teaching goals among faculty, by discipline
C-8 Importance of teaching goals among faculty, by discipline
C-10 Engineering completion rates of engineering degree aspirants, by race
C-11 STEM completion rates of engineering degree aspirants, by race
C-12 Engineering completion rates among engineering aspirants, by sex
C-13 Six-year completion outcomes by STEM field aspiration
C-14 Degree aspirations among engineering graduates, as of June 2011
C-15 Degree aspirations among engineering graduates, as of June 2011, by sex
C-16 Degree aspirations among engineering graduates, as of June 2011, by race
C-17 Post-college pathways of engineering degree holders
C-18 Immediate employment expectations of engineering degree holders who attended graduate school
C-19 Ultimate career goals of engineering degree holders who attended graduate school
C-20 Economic concerns among engineering degree holders, by race/ethnicity
C-21 Economic concerns among engineering degree holders, by sex
E-1 Sample connections for administrative data
E-5 Potential insight to be gained by linking administrative data from multiple institutions
TABLES
1-1 Number of college-educated people employed in NSF engineering occupations, 2015
1-3 Demographics of those working in engineering occupations in the United States, 2015
1-4 Share of women earning engineering bachelor’s degrees by field
1-5 Engineering bachelor’s degrees awarded by field and race, 2013
1-6 Employed engineering bachelor’s or master’s degree holders by occupation
1-9 Share of those in engineering occupations with a bachelor’s in engineering by race and gender
1-10 Connection of engineering degree to occupation for workers with a degree in engineering
A-1 A comparison between what people were doing in 2003 and 2008
C-1 Demographic composition, first-time, full-time freshmen, fall 2012
C-2 Academic preparation, first-time, full-time freshmen, fall 2012
C-3 Items included in academic and social self-concept constructs
C-4 Demographic comparison between engineering completers and “leavers”
E-1 Educational outcomes for students participating in undergraduate research experiences