yesterday on the status of our educational system. This was more of a
rant than a speech. I’ve not seen Bill so worked up before. He might
even have been a bit over the top with this comment on our educational
system:
"The
guys at Enron never would have done this! I mean this is so blatant, so
extreme that, is anybody paying attention to what these guys do?"
I suppose it is a good thing when a guy like Gates gets involved in
matters of public policy. He’s spending his own money. He has no axe to
grind. But nothing is as clear as it appears. It’s not at all certain to
me that Big Bucks Bill is on the right track.
Central to Gates’ educational agenda is his belief that American schools
do not turn out enough scientists. That we will inevitably fall behind
places like China or India as they have more scientists than we do. Bill
believes that we should redouble our efforts to improve math and
science education. If we do that our future as the global leader in
science and technology is assured.
Actually that is not true at all. The acute problem we face is that there are too many scientists. This (long) article by Beryl Lieff Benderly tells a much different story than Mr. Gates. I few quotes from the piece:
It is not, as many believe, that the nation is producing too few scientists, but, paradoxically, just the opposite.
“There is no scientist shortage,” declares Harvard economics professor Richard Freeman.
Michael Teitelbaum of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, cites the “profound irony” of crying shortage — as have many business leaders, including Microsoft founder Bill Gates — while scores of thousands of young Ph.D.s labor in the nation’s university labs as low-paid, temporary workers, ostensibly training for permanent faculty positions that will never exist.
I loved these words by Susan Gerbi, Chair of molecular biology at Brown University. This lady is on the top of the heap of scientists in America:
"Obviously, the “pyramid paradigm can’t continue forever,” Like any Ponzi scheme, she fears, this one will collapse when it runs out of suckers
— a stage that appears to be approaching. There has been relatively
little attention given to possible solutions for the scientist glut — in
no small part because the scientific establishment has been busy
promoting the idea that the U.S. has a shortage of science students."
So are we creating a Ponzi scheme of scientists? Or are we critically
short of scientists? I don’t really know. The evidence is pretty clear
that there is a very big glut today. And there is every indication the
glut will get bigger. These folks better find something “Big” to do. I
see no new “cutting edge technology” that is going to suck up the supply
of the underemployed scientists. We’ve already invented all the “good”
stuff. Inventing more stuff that extends lives is really not all that
helpful at this point.
You have to differentiate between applied and pure research. The gov. tends to fund pure, which, is the proper course to pursue. In other words, it does not pick "winners". Obviously, military research is the exception. Also note that a lot of military research is application of basic research from years gone by...
It has been a while since I looked at the numbers closely, but around 2003 the research budget for high energy physics was about $600 million. The NIH budget was $18 billion. Compute the "overhead" costs for the two and you will find that ~20% in the HEP budge funds the bureaucracy, the rest is spent directly on the research. The corresponding NIH figure is significant higher, one clue is that a average research MD is pulling down $400,000 or so compared to $125,000 for a senior most researcher at a National Lab facility.
I want to reiterate a point I made elsewhere in the thread using WWW as an example. You will find that the research that gives the biggest bang for the buck is typically basic research.
"around 2003 the research budget for high energy physics was about $600 million. The NIH budget was $18 billion."
"...one clue is that a average research MD is pulling down $400,000 or so compared to $125,000 for a senior most researcher at a National Lab facility"
Bingo, there you have it. Either way (assuming both are funded with tax dollars), we taxpayers don't have much of a say as to what those tax dollars are spent on, am I right?
I have to claim ignorance, but it just seems like there are so many simple ways we could improve the overall method we use for scientific research.
I get sick inside when I realize that the best scientific minds our world has to offer are locked away in some darpa dungeon spending my tax dollars on finding out the best way to enslave me. I know that is a simplistic over exaggeration, but you catch my drift, no?
Well the NIH funds alot of medical research...I think some of it is bullshit, but that is my humble opinion...
Don't be narrow minded, basic research led to the transistor, the TV (originally the first particle accelerator), the internet as we know it and a host of other things that we take for granted.
To put it in perpective, the entire non-medical research budget of the US govt. is about $6 billion, this is the whole caboodle, this includes geo-physics (earthquake science etc..), NOAA (hurricane monitoring etc...) and host of others as well. Do you agree there is societal benefit?
Remember, a lot of small hi-tech companies directly benefit from this spending. Estimates of the multiplier effect for basic research money is 1.8, one of the highest of all government spending. A classic example of a company spun off from basic R&D is Varian in Palo Alto. There are many others, all having to do with the "infrastructure" you need for basic research.
I admit to having a bias as I was involved in basic research for many years, but it does give me an insight at how tight the ship is run, and it is tight.
At some point society has to make a value judgement: Is allocating a sum of money to be spent in a way decided upon by peer review in the national interest. I would must rather have trained scientists deciding how money is spent that scientifically illiterate congress-critters. The funding of science in this US has reached the level where the congress-critters are passing judgement on things that they do not understand. Science is not politics, though I have seen first hand the politicization of science.
Now 6 billion sounds like a lot of money, compare that to the ethanol subsidies and the level of corporate welfare. That is where you should be directing your anger....
You're not really trying to understand what he was actually saying.
Look at geo-engineering if you want an example of the way we bludgeon nature with technology in order to get it to conform. Science, in it's present form, often seeks to reshape nature in it's image, instead of working in concert with the natural universe to solve the problems we face.
It is true that most of our modern comforts and luxuries are owed to science. That does not preclude the existence of 'the dark side' of science.
Dude
Much easier for folks to "believe" what the mind can comprehend instead of what it can not, or what may, in fact, be a very unpleasant situation.
Our brains do it all day every day. In my view, that sort of lends credence to the idea that our brains may be more of a filter than a lens. I watched a documentary on a lady who suffered a head injury which rendered her incapable of perceiving motion. She could only see in still-frame snapshots. Something as simple as standing on a train station platform filled her with fear and anxeity. Sometimes you can't learn about a thing until it breaks.
I am a bit confused by your comment. I don't see how folks not believing in 'experts' has anything to do with our seeming lack of technological mastery (to the point where we achieve type 1 civilization).
I acknowledge that these scientists are probably orders of magnitude smarter and more experienced in their field than I, which is kind of the point. Where's the beef, fellas? We're supposed to be in the future now. I want my flying car and my 'beam me up, scotty'-brand teleporter.
" I want my flying car and my 'beam me up, scotty'-brand teleporter."
My point is simple, if you really want that, then keep investing in the right experts and basic research that will get you there. Don't be confused, think of it this way; The aging tea-baggers want a medication for everything but don't want to fund it, instead they give money to an accredited organization that will look into whether or not the ADD their grandchild has is due to vaccinations (Yes, this is a real example). Plenty of "junk science" and "faith-based" science being passed off as the real deal, hence we end up having to sort through this crap before we can even focus on those issues that lead to the big revolutions in tech.
Okay, i gotcha. I totally agree with you on that.
I knew we were screwed when W started to muddy the climate change waters with his politics. He said back in like '04 that 'the science isn't settled'. Like you say, there is so much utter bullshit out there that it is hard to know where to begin your search for actual knowledge. It seems that actual real-honest-to-goodness-bill-nye-style science has a political parasite hanging off of it; the image of the troll coming out of the guys chest in Total Recall comes to mind.
I'm currently working on an education (if you can call it that). I'm majoring in physics, but when I see things like this article, it gives me pause. I wonder if I am traveling down a dead end street.
I swear to god, I wish I could record a lecture from my electricity and magnetism class for everyone here. You could get a first hand sampling of what is being taught in the classroom. My professor is a blathering ignoramus; he lands somewhere between Uncle Leo (from Seinfeld) and a human in a vegetative coma. And thus, I watch my future crumble before me.
In addition to the fact that Indian disent graduates do not want to work in a factory inviroment for Mr. Gates and American industry wants a line of education that dovetails into the American Industrial conceptualization, one needs to consider the other companys are in the same promotianal rant.
American companies,(large), do not want competition as to big, is the American way or stage of society. This leads to, NOT, needing trulely new products beyond what the existing companys feel are to their best inerest. Microsoft aside, whom really wants compitition? The mantra has been "we need to be able to compete" and really, what's being said is we do best without having competeing products or methods. The latest Patent
regulations.. yesterday before the House floor shows this trend, also multiteiring the Patent application cost factor(last year).
To have a signifigant need in Engineering workforce manpower we need extreme expansion in existing industries or new industries. Just having what existing companies want, sweatshop styled mass amounts of preconfigured and trained persons will not engender a rush to American training of Engeeners.. or other qualifications.
So to say, where is the disruption that will drive this "Education need".
One thing would be a war, or dieoff, or change in the monetary system,,maybe a change in Financial systems in general, how about a a new "going to the moon/mars", Climate change? 2012 disasters? What's it gonna take!!!
It won't be Mr. Gates, or the other mega CEO's...
"Companies already dominant in a field rarely produce the breakthroughs that transform it"
-George Gilder
When they start applying basic physical laws to economics, then the economy might turn around. Wealth generated has to be productively employed and not just used as a stage prop in the production of enormous amounts of illusionary wealth.
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-20039222-239.html#ixzz1FeVfU08I
You think it was a metric to english unit conversion error like that Mars fantasy bubble thingy that slammed into the planet because they hadn't converted english to metric units?
Oy vey.
The clouds, we are lost in the clouds.
Yes, but did they test the actual physical systems or just computer simulate the crap out of them? For a half billion bucks I'd want to see the actual identical hardware work about a hundred cycles before putting it on the launch vehicle.
Hi Bruce ;
thanks, another great article.
Real problem here is not the scientists, every generation has super brains but all bright people are lured and employed by the wall Street, employed by Banking cartel, paid extremely well.. They don't need to deal with science..
how about they use some antimatter to produce an anti chairsatan so we all can be happy?
Leo has it right. All you have to do is visit a classroom to see the crap they are "teaching" young minds full of mush. The teachers are generally afraid of teaching science due to a lack of general understanding of the subject. "New" math has wiped out a feel for numbers, ask a kid what 7 X 6 is...if they get 44 they are close enough and get partial credit. They tried. Math is tough, to get a feel for numbers one has to spend time doing rote homework, god forbid. I occasionally go into classrooms to give talks on geology and volcanoes, the lack of basic scientific understanding is appalling.
Since standardized testing is the way to evaluate performance nowadays, teachers spend too much time pimping students to take these tests as they know their job might be on the line. Let's face it....we are throwing good money down a rat hole called education, been doing it for 50 years now and the kids are dumber than ever. Solutions do involve getting better qualified teachers (ever heard the saying...those that can't, teach), getting rid of the unions and standard testing....and lastly install "pay for performance". Giving teachers $70 k a year to be glorified baby sitters is sheer madness. Get the kids off their cell phones, teach them to hold a pencil with their fingers rather than tweeting on their phones, introduce them to a dictionary, give them homework so they are not playing animated computer games where drug dealers and pimps are respected and human life is not. Get the parents to give a damn.
The crap they are teaching is the deliberate dumbing down of America by it's "leaders". Read up on flouride and it's effect on IQ. The only kids with a chance are the ones whose parents have been protecting them from the toxic filth we call food and adding to their education at home.
The teachers are just tools. They do not write the curriculum. They just teach it- or else.
As long as we allow government to educate, we will have substandard education for our children.
I almost can't talk about education, it is just too depressing and I am prone to fits of apolexy.
I know what you mean, this is my toned down version...
I am appalled at what my kids bring home as math homework, given their grade level.
I did a minor in mathematics at university. Still don't know how I got a B+ in Stochastic Methods (lol). But there is no way these kids or their teachers will be able to pass a course in real analysis or even basic statistics. Scary shit that some people think they double their odds of winning the lotto if they buy 2 tickets (double your chance of winning; odds still stink)! A friend of mine teaches finance in a state university and he is absolutely appalled at the math skills of his students and the way they address him: ''yo sir, let me ax' you sometin''. Geez, this is the future of America?!?
My son who is soon to be 14 is at least 1 year behind what I was doing at the same grade level. The worrisome part, is that he is showing signs of boredom because he is not being challenged. I try to keep him on his toes pushing things on why math is important to damn well near everything. I like to give simple a pair linear equation and ask him to solve it for a "prize". He hasn't seen linear algebra yet, but I explained to him that you already know everything you need to solve it.
My gripe is not, "No child left behind", but "No child pushed ahead"
This is partly how we do lose kids, you know the ones that don't reach their potential.
The education system is horrid, but it's particularly heinous for boys. If they don't sit in their chairs and behave like good little girls, they get drugged for ADHD. Don't even get me started...
I'll bet that if you found some Real Life examples where your son could use that math, he'd pick it up in seconds.
FWIW, I took my 13 year old son out of school 2 years ago because he was bored to tears. The only classes that held his interest were things where he could create or build, investigate how things work and figure things out; and specifically, anything hands-on. There was little of that to be had in traditional school. Sitting in a chair listening to lectures all day was destroying him.
There are all sorts of resources on the internet--homeschool curricula, tutoring, free lessons, etc. Here's one of my favorites: khanacademy.org
If you are fortunate enough to live where homeschooling is allowed, I would urge you to try that route. To me, nothing is as rewarding as watching my daughter learn about things because she desires to. All I had to do was provide her with a computer and a broadband connection.
She was resistant at first due to the loss of social life, but 5 years later, she wouldn't go back into one of those prisons of the mind for any reason.
One reason why I pay for private school, despite one semester costing more than my entire undergraduate degree. Hey, it's only monopoly money anyway.
I gotta run soon, but one other little anecdote:
I try to explain to my son (mentioned above) that if you understand one equation and all the ways you can express it, you will be well on the track to success in almost anything you chose to do. The equation?
e^(i pi) + 1 = 0
I find it hilarious that this post got junked... Could the junker at least explain why?
I mean seriously,
e^(i pi) + 1 = 0
is junked?? What a fucking Boetian...
Nice one but start by teaching him The Rule of 72!
He already know that one... ;-)
Smart kid! Maybe you should just enroll him in university! ;)
What does the author classify as Science? Social biology? Many (90%+) of the Ph.D. Students in America are foreign students, where in the past many stayed in the US. Now, many of the same students upon degree go home. Unfortunately, the focus of the studies cited are towards academic careers, as opposed to industry careers. Scientists and Engineers for industry are in extremely short supply. Native born engineers and scientist are even in more short supply. Those people are important to work in various defense technologies or do you believe we live in a Kumbya World? As China, India, Russia and other countries advance there is little reason for the students in any of these fields of interest to both industry and academics to stay in America. You add in the gutting of patent protection and a strong anti-business environment, and people start losing interest to see America as it once was. The shortage Mr. Gates is speaking of are those areas of interest to industry, which may include - Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Bio-Chemistry, Chemistry, Bio-Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Mathematics, Chemical Engineering, Material Science and Civil Engineering. Engineering and Scince drive business tody, not moving pieces of paper back and forth and calling it, financial engineering.
Which author are you referring to? Me? If so, I can't answer your question. The lady who wrote the article I cited had this to say. Does it address your question?
When Gates says "scientists" he really means "trained software engineers who are willing to work on the next generation of our operating system at slave wages".
There is a shortage of those people.
no shortage.
my sister a phd
my 2 brothers phd
Gates wants PhD at 30 cents an hour...and rest for free, thats his idea of a free market
There is a glut of higher education.
It is really "Higher Affirmation" for the most part, and a thriving business of allowing 18-24 year olds a way to avoid the working world and party for 4-6 years.
They make fine grist for the mill as when they graduate, corporate (and government) Amerika can unload (fire) the above 35 year old career employees with 10-40 years of service to hire new accolytes.
Bring in the healthy 20-somethings with no-kids or spouse (or responsibility), pay them 40% less and fewer benefits (if any). The youngsters think they have struck gold, and more cash goes to the skimmers in upper level management and administration.
Higher Education is a business, and the more students and the more credit hours and the more requirements and semesters and years they spend in the classroom the more ca$h the university or college makes.
BTW - the taxpayer is now footing the bill for a great deal of tuition via loans and financial aid programs all run by Uncle Sammy Hammy.
Higher education is for brainwashing purpose only.
"Inventing more stuff that extends lives is really not all that helpful at this point." - But inventing stuff that extends lives for less money is! But it wouldn't make business sense, would it? Why work on a universal cure for cancer or diabetes that will take decades to create/invent/design and which will be forced-purchased at low prices by various governments or simply copied? Instead it's more profitable to work on the "restless leg syndrome" drug!
Having more scientists is better than not having enough of them. And while in most instances i'm in favor of a "small government", i think a lot of research needs to be funded by the government. Two areas come to mind: long-term health care cost reduction and cyber security (the cost of latter can be passed on to businesses later.)
the fundamental problem we have is a society that has been thoroughly conditioned to expect and demand entitlement.
Bankers are entitled to profits (& bail outs when their greedy, often fraudulent bets go bad) and obscene bonuses in either case.
Students are entitled to a college education and well-paying jobs even if they major in liberal arts, so that they can attempt to pay off exorbitant student loans, created by excessive tuition costs needed at least in part to offset the high costs of keeping tenured (i.e., often unproductive) professors.
everyone is entitled to health care and a secure retirement, and to find someone else to pay for it.
everyone is entitled to happiness - never mind the part about figuring out what that really means and then pursuing it with honor and dignity...
the US has too many takers and not enough givers - especially those who give a damn about doing the right thing no matter how difficult or unpleasant the initial consequences.
The country is addicted to the pursuit of ease and comfort without any foresight or forethought about the implications for the future...
There is no glut of scientists, as there is no shortage of problems that confront the globe eg. carbon energy & related environmental concerns, alternative energy, agriculture/biotech, medical research & bioinformatics, materials research, etc.
There is a glut of those with self-satisfied attitudes, who either lack the imagination to knowledgeably engage in the necessary public policy debates on the above subjects or lack the courage & conviction to do so.
Best post by far. Life and Nature make no promises regarding your survival. Believe the world is flat if you like, but do so at your own peril and don't expect anyone to bail you out when YOU get in trouble because of stupid decisions YOU made.
Look at that, people junking a concept known as "independent responsibility". We are in big trouble indeed.
BillG has been trying to blame it for the reasons behind armies of stinky H1B Indians/Chinks working at Microsoft's campuses. Fuck that! If India and China are so great and full of scientific geniuses, why doesn't Microsoft just move its ass there?
Agreed, we have plenty of scientists, given the funding that exists for basic research. I laugh about people bitching about basic research on the web. The web as a means of communicating has its roots at CERN, a place where basic research is done. The total budget of the EU and USA for funding high energy physics (CERN and others) over the past 30 years is about ~$50 billion. Add up the economic impact of the internet? Helluva return on investment?
What we do not have is a population that is scientifically literate. Therein lies the problem. As sean7k stated above, and I paraphrase, finance is the abuse of simple mathematics. In all fairness, anyone that can master the mathematics will figure out how the system works and in turn use that knowledge to reap the most personal benefit. So, it is the free market at its finest that has been reaped.
A little anecdote: Once upon a time, you typed www at the Unix command prompt and you fired up the web, there were 7 sites, all dealing with physics databases. How do I know? I was there.
Me too, and I thought that it was blissful. Life remains about the journey and the difference we make, not the endgame (as this website points out).
Nor would it be politically correct to ask for public education to be abolished... but if you're imorting your skilled labor and your unskilled labor... what are we paying for? I mean besides organized teachers?
Bruce, financial "engineers" are not scientists.
I haven't read all the comments, as I DO USUALLY, because this AM is moving hot and heavy, so it's probably already been mentioned, but I just want to add support to the side that claims Gates is actually pure NWO filth, and that he has literally stated that we need to be able to euthanize people much sooner and deny the ill (presumably even those who can recover) medical care and even nutritional support, because they are a burden on the ability of the earth to sustain the population.
IWO, Gates wants to play God.
Real Laws?? Yeah, right.
17th century "Science" was based on real Laws too?
Fool. 21st century earth mainstream science looks as absurd, idiotic, downright laughable to advanced alien civilizations as neanderthal science to today's layman.
Obviously, you were much happier as the neanderthal, good for you.
Great, isn't it? a monopolistic uber-billionaire along with his kindly uncle derivative Warren and the gang of fifty with no agenda whatsoever except for the well being of the planet and those who live on it of course the fewer the better, but that goes without saying.
+1