Search News


Browse Archives

News

A Portrait of STEM Majors

July 30, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

From new federal grant programs to angst-ridden reports to Congressional scrutiny, concern has accelerated without pause in recent years about whether the United States is drawing enough young people to study science and technology fields in college. Policy makers have paid comparatively little attention, however, to how the students who enter those disciplines fare, and whether they stay in those fields once they enter them.

A new federal study aims to remedy that. The report, "Students Who Study Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) in Postsecondary Education," from the Education Department's National Center for Education Statistics, examines three federal databases to follow students who enter those high-demand fields through the higher education pipeline.

In addition to largely reaffirming the demographic profile of the 23 percent of students who chose to major in science and technology fields during their undergraduate careers -- disproportionately male, Asian and of foreign citizenship, and more likely to be of traditional age than older -- the study puts the outcomes of those students side by side with their peers who do not major in science fields, and finds that they compare favorably.

Students who entered college in 1995-96 and majored in a STEM field some time between then and 2001 earned a degree or certificate at a rate of 54.9 percent, compared to 50.6 percent for students who did not choose a science or technology major. Within science fields, the rates were highest for those in the physical sciences (68.4 percent), natural sciences (63.5), and mathematics (61.4 percent), and lowest for those in computer or information sciences (46.4). Fifty-three percent of engineering students earned a credential, but they were least likely among their STEM peers to earn a bachelor's degree (as opposed to an associate degree or certificate).

But while the general outcomes of science and technology students were stronger than their peers, the degrees they earned were not necessarily in STEM fields. Of the 1995-96 entering students who majored in a STEM field at some point during their undergraduate careers, 40.7 percent got a degree or certificate in a science, math or technology field and another 12 percent were still enrolled in one of those fields, but 20.6 percent had left STEM disciplines entirely and 26.7 percent had left postsecondary education.

White students in STEM majors were likelier than their peers of other races to have earned a degree (43.9 percent vs. 39.9 percent for Asian, 33.1 percent for Hispanic, and 31.7 percent for black), and those whose parents had at least a bachelor's degree were far likelier than STEM majors whose parents had less education to get a degree.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on A Portrait of STEM Majors

  • Not in life sciences
  • Posted by Steven S. Clark, PHD at University of Wisconsin on July 30, 2009 at 8:45am EDT
  • From my experience at the University of Wisconsin, female students outnumber male students in the life sciences. And this is true not only at the undergraduate level, but also at the graduate level and in the medical school. Where are the men going?

    Steven Clark
    University of Wisconsin

  • Where are the social scientists?
  • Posted by Roberta Spalter-Roth , Research Director at Aamerican Sociological Association on July 30, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • Many of the non-male scientists are found in the social sciences, that are increasingly being recognized as vital for studying the social processes by which natural and physical sciences. It is unclear why the social sciences are left out of this analysis.

  • More Slanted reporting
  • Posted by ACF on July 30, 2009 at 11:00am EDT
  • The report is mainly about the progression of STEM students as compared to non-STEM students.

    It is not primarily about race, class, and gender; yet, IHE continues to emphasize (and lede and tease) these issues in its stories. This biases the story and gives it a disingenuous "framing."

  • Disproportionately Male
  • Posted by PTB , Professor at CSU Long Beach on July 30, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • A quick check of the report supports the observation of many STEM faculty,including Steve Clark. Engineering and to a lessor extent Computer and Information Science are disproportionately male, but the other STEM disciplines are not that far out of line.

  • Posted by Male Ph.D. on July 30, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • The only problem I see with the demographics of STEM majors is related to U.S. citizenship. Why must we outsource STEM professions to foreigners? It doesn't make sense to me.

    I think that if we didn't have such vigorous affirmative action programs distorting admissions to the STEM majors we might have more home-grown students enrolling and graduating from them. Also, as another wrote, where's the diversity in biological science, social science, education, etc.? Why, if we are *truly* dedicated to diversity, then why do we only pay attention, let alone act, when women and minorities are under-represented?

  • Male PhD, I Hear You
  • Posted by JonS , Male PhD, I Hear You at Not At U on July 30, 2009 at 1:00pm EDT
  • Its a shame when we find something that males excel at, such as math and science, so it must be destroyed in its current form.

    It would have been great if some of the recovery grants went towards educating americans who want to learn math and science, and don't want to become lawyers or MBAs

  • non STEM degrees
  • Posted by Dave at ASU (Retired) on July 30, 2009 at 1:45pm EDT
  • When I started college back in the 60's, the initial required courses for potential STEM majors (usually calculus and physics) did a pretty good job of enhancing the attractiveness of Political Science and Psychology majors. There is no better way to attract students to your major than to confront them immediately with a barrier.

  • Um, Dave?
  • Posted by Rod Bell , Adjunct Professor - Political Science at College of DuPage on July 30, 2009 at 3:00pm EDT
  • Maybe you should take another turn through the logic of your comment? You seem to be saying that (1) a high requirements barrier to entry discourages many prospective STEM majors, and (2) a high requirements barrier to entry attracts many prospective STEM majors.

  • Posted by mkt on July 30, 2009 at 7:15pm EDT
  • Dave's last sentence was sarcastic. His comment is logically valid ... it is probably sound too, but I'll let others debate that.

    My main comment is that this report compares the wrong sets of numbers, when it compares STEM majors to everybody else. The proper comparison is between STEM majors and students who majored in non-STEM fields. I.e. leave out the undeclared students. Because the undeclared students are ones who almost by definition not only failed to graduate, but probably failed to complete more than half of their college program -- and will thus have very low (in fact zero) graduation rates.

    By mixing these undeclared students in with the non-STEM students, the graduation rates of the group will appear artificially low, compared to the graduation rates of STEM students.

    The report is reasonably careful to make this distinction (and the graduation rates of the STEM majors and non-STEM majors are not that different from each other, 54.9% to 53.3%, I'm not sure if that difference is even statistically significant). But the IHE article incorrectly lumps the undeclared students in with the non-STEM majors.

    The larger problem with trying to compare outcomes by major is that a student's major is itself an outcome, and not a proper predictor variable. Again the report does a reasonably decent job of trying to take this into account, by defining a STEM major as someone who declared a STEM major "at any time during his or her postsecondary enrollment". There's still an inherent asymmetry at work, because many of those students were also at some point non-STEM majors and indeed often ended up with a degere in a non-STEM field.. Whereas the report's comparison group, the non-STEM majors, will by definition NEVER have majored in a STEM field. But I can't offhand think of a better way of doing the comparison.