About That Engineering Gap...

(page 2 of 2)

Chinese universities readily provided high-level data, but not enough detail. Some Indian registrars were helpful and shared comprehensive spreadsheets. Others claimed not to know how many engineering colleges were affiliated with their schools or they lacked detail on graduation rates by major.

We eventually found our way to knowledgeable employees of the Chinese Education Ministry, and the research head of NASSCOM, Sunil Mehta. After extensive discussions and reviews of more reports and data, we learned that no one was comparing apples to apples.

The word "engineer" didn't translate well into different Chinese dialects and had no standard definition. We were told that reports received by the ministry from Chinese provinces didn't count degrees in a consistent way. A motor mechanic or a technician could be considered an engineer, for example. Also, the numbers included all degrees related to information technology and specialized fields such as shipbuilding.

DATA BANK.

There were also "short-cycle" degrees, which were typically completed in 2 or 3 years. These are equivalent to associate degrees in the U.S. Nearly half of China's reported degrees fell into this category.

NASSCOM maintains extensive engineering graduation data. They gather data from diverse sources and create and validate projections and estimates. We couldn't get the data to perform accurate comparisons with China, so we matched the NASSCOM definition of engineer to U.S. numbers.

We found that the U.S. was graduating 222,335 engineers, vs. 215,000 from India. The closest comparable number reported by China is 644,106, but it includes additional majors. Looking strictly at four-year degrees and without considering accreditation or quality, the U.S. graduated 137,437 engineers, vs. 112,000 from India. China reported 351,537 under a broader category. All of these numbers include information technology and related majors (click here to read the full Duke report).

WORLD OF DOUBT.

What's the point? We hear repeatedly that America is in trouble and that the root cause lies with our education system. There's no doubt that K-12 science and math could be improved, and few will dispute that America needs to invest more in education and research.

However, our higher education system isn't in trouble -- in fact, it's still the world's best. We spend the most on research, produce the most patents, have the most innovative curriculum, and educate many of the world's leaders. Take Duke University. It spends $50 million a year just on engineering research, and members of its faculty are world renowned.

The message that our engineering graduates compete with 1 million graduates from India and China has created a sense of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Why would a smart student enter a field where their job might soon be outsourced? Rather than encouraging our children to study more math and science and become engineers, we're turning them into lawyers.

When the world hears that the U.S. education system is in decline, we scare away those who would otherwise come here to study. To keep America competitive, we must keep attracting the world's best and brightest. America needs to do all it can to fuel innovation and maintain its lead in science and technology. By repeatedly sending the message that we're weak, we in fact become weak.

Vivek Wadhwa is a visiting scholar at University of California-Berkeley, senior research associate at Harvard Law School, and director of research at the Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization at Duke University. You can follow him on Twitter (@wadhwa) and find his research at wadhwa.com.