Science educators, business leaders, lawmakers, and others have recently engaged in discussions about the effect of engineering outsourcing on the global economy. The reporting of engineering graduation data has fueled fears that America is losing its technological edge. Media reports have stated that in 2004 the United States produced 70,000 engineering graduates while China graduated 600,000 and India 350,000. But a study by two Duke University faculty members suggests that the often-cited numbers are misleading.

In a report titled Framing the Engineering Outsourcing Debate: Placing the United States on a Level Playing Field with China and India, researchers Gary Gereffi, director of the Center on Globalization, Governance, and Competitiveness at Duke University, and Vivek Wadhwa, executive in residence at Duke’s Pratt School of Engineering, present a clearer analysis of the number of engineering and engineering-related degrees awarded annually by the United States, India, and China. They define the term “engineer” and the various degree options available. Gereffi and Wadhwa then offer what they view as a more accurate and balanced comparison among the numbers of engineering, computer science, and information technology degrees awarded in the United States, China, and India.

CLASSIFYING ENGINEERS

Gereffi and Wadhwa explain that the outsourcing debate has been complicated due to conflicting definitions of the engineering profession. Different statistical survey groups have adopted their own engineering classifications, and definitions vary internationally.

The researchers identified two main groups of engineering graduates: dynamic engineers and transactional engineers. Dynamic engineers are individuals capable of abstract thinking and high-level problem solving using scientific knowledge. The majority of dynamic engineers have, at minimum, a four-year engineering degree from nationally accredited or highly regarded institutions. Transactional engineers, on the other hand, may possess engineering fundamentals, but lack the experience or expertise to apply this knowledge to larger problems. Transactional engineers often receive associate, technician, or diploma awards instead of a bachelor’s degree. These subbaccalaureate degrees can be earned in less than four years, but more than one.

DATA SOURCES AND FINDINGS

For their report, Gereffi and Wadhwa gathered engineering education data from the Ministry of Education in China, the National Association of Software and Services Companies in India, and the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Educational Statistics.

The researchers corroborated this data by contacting top universities in India and China and analyzing their graduation data and areas of specialization. Gereffi and Wadhwa contacted various journalists, consultants, and other industry experts to gain a better understanding of the issues and to validate their methodology.

Gereffi and Wadhwa researched the annual production of engineers, computer scientists, and information technology specialists at the bachelor’s and subbaccalaureate levels in 2004 to create an accurate and representative comparison among the numbers of engineers produced annually in each of the three countries. They discovered that the United States awarded 222,335 degrees; India, 215,000; and China, 644,106.

The researchers found that more than 290,000 of the Chinese degrees and 103,000 of the Indian degrees were subbaccalaureate. In the United States, 84,898 of the engineering degrees awarded were associate degrees. In terms of degrees awarded per one million citizens, the United States awarded 758 degrees; China, 497 degrees; and India, 199.

The report indicates that the Chinese figures, which consist of data from different provinces that have no standard definition of engineering, likely include “the equivalent of motor mechanics and industrial technicians.”

IS AMERICA LOSING ITS TECHNOLOGICAL LEADERSHIP?

Gereffi and Wadhwa conclude that the United States is not in the desperate state that is routinely portrayed. “The fear is greatly exaggerated,” said Gereffi. “I think the United States is producing a reasonable number of engineers, but the demand varies a lot by specialty area.”

The researchers believe that the United States needs to maintain its focus on improving the quality of education. Gereffi explains that one of the nation’s biggest challenges is to encourage students to pursue careers in science and engineering: “If we can tap people’s interest early on, it can help universities.” Gereffi adds that universities should focus on improving the quality of their engineering education programs, noting that it’s important for the United States to have enough “home grown” as well as international engineers.

To access a copy of the report, refer to www.memp.pratt.duke.edu/downloads/duke_outsourcing_2005.pdf. For other articles on this subject, see the story on page 1 and the President’s Message on page 3 in the May 2006 issue of NSTA Reports.