|
Items in cart [4] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 162
7
What Actions Should America Take
in Science and Engineering Higher
Education to Remain Prosperous in
the 21st Century?
BEST AND BRIGHTEST
Recommendation C: Make the United States the most attractive
setting in which to study and perform research so that we can
develop, recruit, and retain the best and brightest students, scien-
tists, and engineers from within the United States and throughout
the world.
We live in a knowledge-intensive world. “The key strategic resource
necessary for prosperity has become knowledge itself in the form of edu-
cated people and their ideas,” as Jim Duderstadt and Farris Womack1 put
it. In this context, the focus of global competition is no longer only on
manufacturing and trade but also on the production of knowledge and the
development and recruitment of the “best and brightest” from around the
world. Developed and developing nations alike are investing in higher edu-
cation, often on the model of US colleges and universities. They are training
undergraduate and graduate scientists and engineers2 to provide the exper-
tise they need to compete in creating jobs for their populations in the 21st-
century economy. Numerous national public and private organizations3
1J. J. Duderstadt and F. W. Womack. Beyond the Crossroads: The Future of the Public
University in America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.
2Natural sciences and engineering is defined by the National Science Foundation as natural
(physical, biological, earth, atmospheric, and ocean sciences), agricultural, and computer sci-
ences; mathematics; and engineering.
3Some examples are National Science Board. The Science and Engineering Workforce: Re-
alizing America’s Potential. NSB 03-69. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, 2003.
Volume 1; Council on Competitiveness. Innovate America. Washington, DC: Council on
Competitveness, 2004.
162
OCR for page 163
163
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
have recommended a national effort to increase the numbers of both do-
mestic and international students pursuing science, technology, engineer-
ing, and mathematics degrees in the United States.4
There is concern that, in general, our undergraduates are not keeping
up with those in other nations. The United States has increased the propor-
tion of its college-age population earning first university degrees in the natu-
ral sciences and engineering over the last quarter-century, but it has still lost
ground, now ranking 20th globally on this indicator.5
There are even more concerns about graduate education. In the 1990s,
the enrollment of US citizens and permanent residents in graduate science
and engineering programs declined substantially. Although enrollments be-
gan to rise again in 2001, by 2003 they had not yet returned to the peak
numbers of the early 1990s.6 Meanwhile, the United States faces new chal-
lenges in the recruitment of international graduate students and postdoctoral
scholars. Over the past several decades, graduate students and postdoctoral
scholars from throughout the world have come to the United States to take
advantage of what has been the premier environment in which to learn and
conduct research. As a result, international students now constitute more
than a third of the students in US science and engineering graduate schools,
up from less than one-fourth in 1982. More than half the international
postdoctoral scholars are temporary residents, and half that group earned
doctorates outside the United States.
Many of the international students educated in the United States choose
to remain here after receiving their degrees, and they contribute much to
our ability to create knowledge, produce technological innovations, and
generate jobs throughout the economy. The proportion of international
doctorate recipients remaining in the United States after receiving their de-
grees increased from 49% in the 1989 cohort to 71% in 2001.7 But the
consequences of the events of September 11, 2001, included drastic changes
in visa processing, and the number of international students applying to
and enrolling in US graduate programs declined substantially. More re-
cently, there have been signs of recovery; however, we are still falling short
of earlier trends in attracting and retaining such students. As other nations
develop their own systems of graduate education to recruit and retain more
highly skilled students and professionals, often modeled after the US sys-
4Another point of view presented in Box 7-1.
5National Science Board. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004. NSB 04-01. Arlington,
VA: National Science Foundation, 2004.
6National Science Foundation. Graduate Enrollment in Science and Engineering Programs
Up in 2003, but Declines for First-Time Foreign Students: Info Brief. NSF 05-317. Arlington,
VA: National Science Foundation, 2005.
7The National Academies. Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and Post-
doctoral Scholars in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.
OCR for page 164
164 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
BOX 7-1
Another Point of View: Science and
Engineering Human Resources
Some believe that calls for increased numbers of science and engi-
neering students are based more on the fear of a looming crisis than on
a reaction to reality. Indeed, skeptics argue that there is no current docu-
mented shortage in the labor markets for scientists and engineers. In
fact, in some areas we have just the opposite.a For example, during the
last decade, there have been surpluses of life scientists at the doctoral
level, high unemployment of engineers, and layoffs in the information-
technology sector in the aftermath of the “dot-bomb.”
Although there have been concerns about declining enrollments of
US citizens in undergraduate engineering programs and in science and
engineering graduate education, and these concerns have been com-
pounded by recent declines in enrollments of international graduate stu-
dents, enrollments in undergraduate engineering and of US citizens in
graduate science and engineering have recently risen.
All of this suggests that the recommendations for additional support
for thousands of undergraduates and graduates could be setting those
students up for jobs that might not exist. Moreover, there are those who
argue that international students crowd out domestic students and that a
decline in international enrollments could encourage more US citizens,
including individuals from underrepresented groups, to pursue graduate
education.
Over the last decade, there has been similar debate over the number
of H-1B visas that should be issued, with fervent calls both for increasing
and for decreasing the cap. A recent report of the National Academies
argued that there was no scientific way to find the “right” number of
H-1Bs and that determining the appropriate level is and must be a politi-
cal process.b
aJ. Mervis. “Down for the Count.” Science 300(5622)(2003):1070-1074.
bNational Research Council. Building a Workforce for the Information Economy. Wash-
ington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001.
tem, we face even further uncertainty about our ability to attract those
students to our institutions and to encourage them to become US citizens.
We must also encourage and enable US students from all sectors of our
own society to participate in science, mathematics, and engineering pro-
grams, at least at the level of those who would be our competitors. But
given increased global competition and reduced access to the US higher
OCR for page 165
165
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
education system, our nation’s education and research enterprise must ad-
just so that it can continue to attract many of the best students from abroad.
The Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Cen-
tury proposes four actions to improve the talent pool in postsecondary edu-
cation in the sciences and engineering: stimulate the interest of US citizens
in undergraduate study by providing a new program of 4-year undergradu-
ate scholarships; facilitate graduate education by providing new, portable
fellowships; provide tax credits to companies and other organizations that
provide continuing education for their practicing scientists and engineers;
and recruit and retain the best and brightest students, scientists, and engi-
neers worldwide by making the United States the most attractive place to
study, conduct research, and commercialize technological innovations.
ACTION C-1: UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION
Increase the number and proportion of US citizens who earn bachelor’s
degrees in the physical sciences, the life sciences, engineering, and math-
ematics by providing 25,000 new 4-year competitive undergraduate schol-
arships each year to US citizens attending US institutions.
The Undergraduate Scholar Awards in Science, Technology, Engineer-
ing, and Mathematics (USA-STEM) program would help to increase the
percentage of 24-year-olds with first degrees in the natural sciences or engi-
neering from the current 6% to the 10% benchmark already met or
substatially surpassed by Finland, France, Taiwan, South Korea, and the
United Kingdom (see Figure 3-17).8 To achieve this result, the committee
recommends the following:
• The National Science Foundation should administer the program.
• The program should provide 25,000 new 4-year scholarships each
year to US citizens attending domestic institutions to pursue bachelor’s de-
grees in science, mathematics, engineering, or another field designated as a
national need. (Eventually, there would be 100,000 active students in the
program each year.)
• Eligibility for these awards and their allocation would be based on
the results of a competitive national examination.
• The scholarships would be distributed to states based on the size of
their congressional delegations and would be awarded by states.
• Recipients could use the scholarships at any accredited US institution.
8In 2000, there were 3,711,400 24-year-olds in the United States, of whom 5.67% held
bachelor’s degrees in the natural sciences and engineering.
OCR for page 166
166 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
• The scholarships would provide up to $20,000 per student to pay
tuition and fees.
• The program would also grant the recipients’ institutions $1,000
annually.
• The $1.1 billion program would phase in over 4 years beginning at
$275 million per year.
• The federal government would grant funds to states to defray rea-
sonable administrative expenses.
• Steps would be taken to ensure that the receipt of USA-STEM schol-
arships brought considerable prestige to the recipients and to the secondary
institutions from which they are graduating.
The undergraduate years have a profound influence on career direc-
tion, and they can provide a springboard for students who choose to major
and then pursue graduate work in science, mathematics, and engineering.
However, many more undergraduates express an interest in science, math-
ematics, and engineering than eventually complete bachelor’s degrees in
those fields. A focused and sizeable national effort to stimulate undergradu-
ate interest and commitment to these majors will increase the proportion of
24-year-olds achieving first degrees in the relevant disciplines.
The scholarship program’s motivation is twofold. First, in the long run,
the United States might not have enough scientists and engineers to meet its
national goals if the number of domestic students from all demographic
groups, including women and students from underrepresented groups, does
not increase in proportion to our nation’s need for them. It should be noted
that there is always concern about the availability of jobs if the supply of
scientists and engineers were to increase substantially. Although it is impos-
sible to fine-tune the system such that supply and demand balance precisely
in any given year, it is important to have sufficient numbers of graduates for
the long-term outlook. Furthermore, it has been found that, for example,
undergraduate training in engineering forms an excellent foundation for
graduate work in such fields as business, law, and medicine. Finally, it is
clear that an inadequate supply of scientists and engineers can be highly
detrimental to the nation’s well-being.
The second motivation for the program is to ensure that the fields of
science, engineering, and mathematics recruit and develop a large share of
the best and brightest US students. It should be considered a great achieve-
ment to participate in the USA-STEM program, and the honor of selection
should be accompanied by significant recognition. To retain eligibility, re-
cipients would be expected to maintain a specified standard of academic
excellence in their college coursework.
Increasing participation of underrepresented minorities is critical to
ensuring a high-quality supply of scientists and engineers in the United States
OCR for page 167
167
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
over the long term. As minority groups increase as a percentage of the US
population, increasing their participation rate in science and engineering is
critical if we are just to maintain the overall participation rate in science
among the US population.9 Perhaps even more important, if some groups
are underrepresented in science and engineering in our society, we are not
attracting as many of the most talented people to an important segment of
our knowledge economy.10
In postsecondary education, there are many principles that help
minority-group students succeed, regardless of field. The Building Engineer-
ing and Science Talent11 (BEST) committee outlined eight key principles to
expand representation:
• Institutional leadership: Committing to inclusiveness across the cam-
pus community.
• Targeted recruitment: Investing in and supporting a K–12 feeder system.
• Engaged faculty: Rewarding faculty for the development of student
talent.
• Personal attention: Addressing, through mentoring and tutoring, the
learning needs of each student.
• Peer support: Giving students opportunities for interaction that
builds support across cohorts and promotes allegiance to an institution,
discipline, and profession.
• Enriched research experience: Offering beyond-the-classroom hands-
on opportunities and summer internships that connect to the world of work.
• Bridge to the next level: Fostering institutional relationships to show
students and faculty the pathways to career development.
• Continuous evaluation: Monitoring results and making appropriate
program adjustments.
BEST goes on to note that even with all the design principles in place,
comprehensive financial assistance for low-income students is critical be-
9National Science and Technology Council. Ensuring a Strong US Scientific, Technical, and
Engineering Workforce in the 21st Century. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the Presi-
dent of the United States, 2000; Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women
and Minorities in Science, Engineering, and Technology Development. Land of Plenty: Diver-
sity as America’s Competitive Edge in Science, Engineering, and Technology. Arlington, VA:
National Science Foundation, 2000.
10Fechter and Teitelbaum have argued that “underrepresentation is an indicator of talent
that is not exploited to its fullest potential. Such underutilization, which can exist simulta-
neously with situations of abundance, represents a cost to society as well as to the individuals
in these groups.” A. Fechter and M. S. Teitelbaum. “A Fresh Approach to Immigration.”
Issues in Science and Technology 13(3)(1997):28-32.
11Building Engineering and Science Talent (BEST). 2004. A Bridge for All: Higher Educa-
tion Design Principles in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. San Diego, CA:
BEST. Available at: http://www.bestworkforce.com.
OCR for page 168
168 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
cause socioeconomic status also is an important determinant of success in
higher education.
ACTION C-2: GRADUATE EDUCATION
The federal government should fund Graduate Scholar Awards in Sci-
ence, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (GSA-STEM), a new
scholarship program that would provide 5,000 new portable 3-year com-
petitively awarded graduate fellowships each year for outstanding US citi-
zens in science, mathematics, and engineering programs pursuing degrees at
US universities. Portable fellowships would provide funds directly to stu-
dents, who would choose where they wish to pursue graduate studies in-
stead of having to follow faculty research grants.
Typically, college seniors and recent graduates consider several factors
in deciding whether to pursue graduate study. An abiding interest in a field
and the encouragement of a mentor often contribute to the positive side of
the balance sheet. The availability of financial support, the relative lack of
income while in school, and job prospects upon completing an advanced
degree also weigh on students’ minds, no matter how much society sup-
ports their choices. The National Defense Education Act was a tremendous
stimulus to graduate study in the 1960s, 1970s, and early 1980s, but has
been incrementally restricted to serve a broader set of goals (see Box 7-2). A
similar effort is now called for to meet the nation’s long-term need for
scientists and engineers in universities, government, nonprofit organizations,
the national laboratory system, and industry.
The committee makes the following recommendations:
• The National Science Foundation (NSF) should administer the
program.
• Recipients could use the grants at any US institution to which they
have been admitted.
• The program should be advised by a board of representatives from
federal agencies who identify areas of national need.
• Tuition and fee reimbursement would be up to $20,000 annually,
and each recipient would receive an annual stipend of $30,000. Those
amounts would be adjusted over time for inflation.
• The program would be phased in over 3 years.
• The federal government would provide appropriate funding to aca-
demic institutions to defray reasonable administrative expenses.
There has been much debate in recent years about whether the United
States is facing a looming shortage of scientists and engineers, including
OCR for page 169
169
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
BOX 7-2
National Defense Education Act
Adopted by Congress in response to the launch of Sputnik and the emerging
threat to the United States posed by the Soviet Union in 1958, the original National
Defense Education Act (NDEA) boosted education and training and was accom-
panied by simultaneous actions that created the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration and the Advanced Research Project Agency (now the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency) and substantially increased NSF funding. It
was funded with federal funds of about $400-500 million (adjusted to US$ 2004
value). NDEA provided funding to enhance research facilities; fellowships to thou-
sands of graduate students pursuing degrees in science, mathematics, engineer-
ing, and foreign languages; and low-interest loans for undergraduates in these
fields.
By the 1970s the act had been largely superseded by other programs, but its
legacy remains in the form of several federal student-loan programs.a The legisla-
tion ultimately benefited all higher education as the notion of defense was ex-
panded to include most disciplines and fields of study.b
Today, however, there are concerns about the Department of Defense (DOD)
workforce. This workforce has experienced a real attrition of more than 13,000
personnel over the last 10 years. At the same time, the DOD projects that its
workforce demands will increase by more than 10% over the next 5 years (by
2010). Indeed, several major studies since 1999 argue that the number of US
graduates in critical areas is not meeting national, homeland, and economic secu-
rity needs.c Science, engineering, and language skills continue to have very high
priority across governmental and industrial sectors.
Many positions in critical-skill areas require security clearances, meaning that
only US citizens may apply. Over 95% of undergraduates are US citizens, but in
many of the science and engineering fields fewer than 50% of those earning PhDs
are US citizens. Retirements also loom on the horizon: over 60% of the federal
science and engineering workforce is over 45 years old, and many of these people
are employed by DOD. Department of Defense and other federal agencies face
increased competition from domestic and global commercial interests for top-of-
their-class, security-clearance-eligible scientists and engineers.
In response to those concerns, DOD has proposed in its budget submission a
new NDEA. The new NDEA includes a number of new initiatives that some believe
should be accomplished by 2008—the 50th anniversary of the original NDEA.d
aAssociation of American Universities. A National Defense Education and Innovation Ini-
tiative: Meeting America’s Economic and Security Challenges in the 21st Century. Washing-
ton DC: AAU, 2006. Available at: http://www.aau.edu.
bM. Parsons. “Higher Education Is Just Another Special Interest.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education 51(22)(2005):B20. Available at: http://chronicle.com/prm/weekly/v51/i22/22b02001.
htm.
cNational Security Workforce. Challenges and Solutions Web page. Available at: http://
www.defenselink.mil/ddre/doc/NDEA_BRIEFING.pdf.
dSee http://www.defenselink.mil/ddre/nde2.htm and H.R. 1815, National Defense Au-
thorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, Sec. 1105. Science, Mathematics, and Research Trans-
portation (SMART) Defense Education Program—National Defense Education Act (NDEA),
Phase I.
OCR for page 170
170 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
those at the doctoral level. Although there is not a crisis at the moment and
there are differences in labor markets by field that could lead to surpluses in
some areas and shortages in others, the trends in enrollments and degrees
are nonetheless cause for concern in a global environment wherein science
and technology play an increasing role. The rationale for the fellowship is
that the number of people with doctorates in the sciences, mathematics, and
engineering awarded by US institutions each year has not kept pace
with the increasing importance of science and technology to the nation’s
prosperity.
Currently, the federal government supports 7,000 full-time graduate
fellows and trainees. Most of these grants are provided either to institutions
or directly to students by the NSF’s Graduate Research Fellowship program
and Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship Program
(IGERT) or by the National Institutes of Health Ruth L. Kirschstein Na-
tional Research Service Award program. The US Department of Education,
through its Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need program, also
provides traineeships and has a mechanism for identifying areas for grant-
making to academic programs. Those are important sources of support, but
they meet only a fraction of the need. The proposed 5,000 new fellowships
each year eventually will increase to 22,000 the number of graduate stu-
dents supported at any one time, thus helping to increase the number of US
citizens and permanent residents earning doctorates in nationally important
fields.
Portable graduate fellowships should attract high-quality students and
offer them access to the best education possible. Students who have unen-
cumbered financial support could select the US academic institutions that
best meet their interests and that offer the best opportunities to broaden
their experience before they begin focusing on specific research. The fellow-
ships would offer substantial and steady financial support during the early
years of graduate study, with the assumption that the recipients would find
support from other means, such as research assistantships, once research
subjects and mentors were identified.
An alternative point of view is that the support provided under this
recommendation should be provided not—or not only—to individuals but
also to programs that would use the funds both to develop a comprehen-
sive approach to doctoral education and to support students through
traineeships. Such institutional grants could be used by federal funders to
directly require specific programmatic changes as well. They would also
allow institutions to recruit promising students who might not apply for
portable fellowships.
But, in the view of the committee, providing fellowships directly to
students creates a greater stimulus to enroll and offers an additional posi-
tive effect: improvement of educational quality. The fellowships create com-
OCR for page 171
171
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
petition among institutions that would lead to enhanced graduate programs
(mentoring, course offerings, research opportunities, and facilities) and pro-
cesses (time to degree, career guidance, placement assistance). To be sure,
institutions can and should undertake many of those improvements in
graduate programs even without this stimulus, and many have already
implemented reforms to make graduate school more enticing. Institutional
efforts to prepare graduate students for the jobs they will obtain in industry
or academe and to improve the benefits and work conditions for post-
doctoral scholars also could make career prospects more attractive.
The new program proposed here and led by NSF should draw advice
from representatives of federal research agencies to determine its areas of
focus. On the basis of that advice, NSF would make competitive awards
either as part of its existing Graduate Research Fellowship program or
through a separate program established specifically to administer the fel-
lowships. The focus on areas of national need is important to ensure an
adequate supply of suitably trained doctoral scientists, engineers, and math-
ematicians and appropriate employment opportunities for these students
upon receipt of their degrees.
As discussed in Box 7-1, one question is whether these programs will
simply produce science and engineering students who are unable to find
jobs. There are also questions that the goal of increasing the number of
domestic students is contrary to the committee’s other concern about the
potential for declining numbers of outstanding international students. As
past National Academies reports have indicated, projecting supply and de-
mand in science and engineering employment is prone to methodological
difficulties. For example, the report Forecasting Demand and Supply of
Doctoral Scientists and Engineers: Report of a Workshop on Methodology
(2000) observed:
The NSF should not produce or sponsor “official” forecasts of supply and
demand of scientists and engineers, but should support scholarship to improve
the quality of underlying data and methodology.
Those who have tried to forecast demand in the past have often failed
abysmally. The same would probably be true today.
Other factors also influence the decisions of US students. As the recent
COSEPUP study, Policy Implications of International Graduate Students
and Postdoctoral Scholars in the United States, says:
Recruiting domestic science and engineering (S&E) talent depends heavily on
students’ perception of the S&E careers that await them. Those perceptions
can be solidified early in the educational process, before students graduate from
high school. The desirability of a career in S&E is determined largely by the
OCR for page 172
172 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
prospect of attractive employment opportunities in the field, and to a lesser
extent by potential remuneration. Some aspects of the graduate education and
training process can also influence students’ decisions to enter S&E fields. The
“pull factors” include time to degree, availability of fellowships, research assis-
tantships, or teaching assistantships, and whether a long post doctoral appoint-
ment is required after completion of the PhD.
Taking those factors into account, the committee decided to focus its
scholarships for domestic students on areas of national need as deter-
mined by federal agencies, with input from the corporate and business
community.
In the end, the employment market will dictate the decisions students
make. From a national perspective, global competition in higher education
and research and in the recruitment of students and scholars means that the
United States must invest in the development and recruitment of the best
and brightest from here and abroad to ensure that we have the talent, ex-
pertise, and ideas that will continue to spur innovation and keep our nation
at the leading edge of science and technology.
ACTION C-3: CONTINUING EDUCATION
To keep practicing scientists and engineers productive in an environ-
ment of rapidly changing science and technology, the federal government
should provide tax credits to employers who help their eligible employees
pursue continuing education.
The committee’s recommendations are as follows:
• The federal government should authorize a tax credit of up to $500
million each year to encourage companies to sustain the knowledge and
skills of their scientific and engineering workforce by offering opportunities
for professional development.
• The courses to be pursued would allow employees to maintain and
upgrade knowledge in the specific fields of science and engineering.
• The courses would be required to meet reasonable standards and
could be offered internally or by colleges and universities.
Too often, business does not invest adequately in continuing education
and training for employees, partly from the belief that investments could be
lost if the training makes employees more marketable, and partly from the
belief that maintaining skills is the personal responsibility of a professional.
Tax credits would allow businesses to encourage continuing professional
development—a benefit to employees, companies, and the economy.
Tax credits can also help industries adapt to technological change. The
OCR for page 173
173
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
information-technology industry, for example, has continuing difficulty in
matching worker skills and employer demand. The consequence is that
employers cite worker shortages even when there is relatively high unem-
ployment. That mismatch can be remedied by encouraging companies to
invest in retraining capable employees whose skills have become obsolete as
the technology landscape changes.
ACTION C-4: IMPROVE VISA PROCESSING
The federal government should continue to improve visa processing for
international students and scholars to provide less complex procedures, and
continue to make improvements on such issues as visa categories and dura-
tion, travel for scientific meetings, the technology alert list, reciprocity agree-
ments, and changes in status.
Since 9/11, the nation has struggled to improve security by more closely
screening international visitors, students, and workers. The federal govern-
ment is now also considering tightening controls on the access that interna-
tional students and researchers have to technical information and equip-
ment. One consequence is that fewer of the best international scientists and
engineers are able to come to the United States, and if they do enter the
United States, their intellectual and geographic mobility is curtailed.
The post-9/11 approach fosters an image of the United States as a less
than welcoming place for foreign scholars. At the same time, the home
nations of many potential immigrants—such as China, India, Taiwan, and
South Korea—are strengthening their own technology industries and uni-
versities and offering jobs and incentives to lure scientists and engineers to
return to their nations of birth. Other countries have taken advantage of
our tightened restrictions to open their doors more widely, and they recruit
many who might otherwise have come to the United States to study or
conduct research.
A growing challenge for policy-makers is to reconcile security needs
with the flow of people and information from abroad. Restrictions on ac-
cess to information and technology—much of it already freely available—
could undermine the fundamental research that benefits so greatly from
international participation. One must be particularly vigilant to ensure that
thoughtful, high-level directives concerning homeland security are not un-
necessarily amplified by administrators who focus on short-term safety
while unintentionally weakening long-term overall national security. Any
marginal benefits in the security arena have to be weighed against the abil-
ity of national research facilities to carry out unclassified, basic research
and the ability of private companies with federal contracts to remain inter-
nationally competitive. An unbalanced increase in security will erode the
OCR for page 174
174 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
nation’s scientific and engineering productivity and economic strength and
will destroy the welcoming atmosphere of our scientific and engineering
institutions. Such restrictions would also add to the incentives for US com-
panies to move operations overseas.
Many recent changes in visa processing and in the duration of Visas
Mantis clearances have already made immigration easier. Visas Mantis is a
program intended to provide additional security checks for visitors who
may pose a security risk. The process, established in 1998 and applicable to
all nonimmigrant visa categories, is triggered when a student or exchange-
visitor applicant intends to study a subject on the technology alert list.
The committee endorses the recommendations made by the National
Academies in Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and
Postdoctoral Scholars in the United States,12 particularly Recommendation
4-2, which states the following:
If the United States is to maintain leadership in S&E, visa and immigration
policies should provide clear procedures that do not unnecessarily hinder the
inflow of international graduate students and postdoctoral scholars. New regu-
lations should be carefully considered in light of national-security consider-
ations and potential unintended consequences.
a. Visa Duration: Implementation of the Student and Exchange Visitor In-
formation System (SEVIS), by which consular officials can verify student and
postdoctoral status, and of the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indi-
cator Technology (US-VISIT), by which student and scholar status can be moni-
tored at the point of entry to the United States, should make it possible for
graduate students’ and postdoctoral scholars’ visas to be more commensurate
with their programs, with a duration of 4-5 years.
b. Travel for Scientific Meetings: Means should be found to allow interna-
tional graduate students and postdoctoral scholars who are attending or ap-
pointed at US institutions to attend scientific meetings that are outside the
United States without being seriously delayed in re-entering the United States
to complete their studies and training.
c. Technology Alert List: This list, which is used to manage the Visas Man-
tis program, should be reviewed regularly by scientists and engineers. Scientifi-
cally trained personnel should be involved in the security-review process.
d. Visa Categories: New nonimmigrant-visa categories should be created
for doctoral-level graduate students and postdoctoral scholars. The categories
should be exempted from the 214b (see Box 7-3) provision whereby applicants
must show that they have a residence in a foreign country that they have no
intention of abandoning. In addition to providing a better mechanism for em-
12The National Academies. Policy Implications of International Graduate Students and Post-
doctoral Scholars in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.
OCR for page 175
175
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
BOX 7-3
The 214b Provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act:
Establishing the Intent to Return Home
The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) has served as the primary
body of law governing immigration and visa operations since 1952. A
potential barrier to visits by foreign graduate students is Section 214(b)
of the INA, in accordance with which an applicant for student of exchange
visa must provide convincing evidence that he or she plans to return to
the home country, including proof of a permanent domicile in the home
country. Legitimate applicants may find it hard to prove that they have no
intention to immigrate, especially if they have relatives in the United
States. In addition, both students and immigration officials are well aware
that an F or J visa often provides entrée to permanent-resident status. It
is not surprising that application and enforcement of the standard can
depend on pending immigration legislation or economic conditions.a
aG. Chelleraj, K. E. Maskus, and A. Mattoo. The Contributions of Skilled Immigration and
International Graduate Students to US Innovation. Working Paper N04-10. Boulder, CO: Cen-
ter for Economic Analysis, University of Colorado at Boulder, September 2004. P. 18 and
Table 1.
bassy and consular officials to track student and scholar visa applicants, these
categories would provide a means for collecting clear data on numbers and
trends of graduate-student and postdoctoral-scholar visa applications.
e. Reciprocity Agreements: Multiple-entry and multiple-year student visas
should have high priority in reciprocity negotiations.
f. Change of Status: If the United States wants to keep the best students
once they graduate, procedures for change of status should be clarified and
streamlined.
ACTION C-5: EXTEND VISAS AND EXPEDITE
RESIDENCE STATUS OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING PHDS
The federal government should provide a 1-year automatic visa exten-
sion to international students who receive doctorates or the equivalent in
science, technology, engineering, mathematics, or other fields of national
need at qualified US institutions to remain in the United States to seek
employment. If these students are offered jobs by US-based employers and
pass a security screening test, they should be provided automatic work per-
mits and expedited residence status. If students are unable to obtain em-
ployment within 1 year, their visas would expire.
OCR for page 176
176 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
To create the most attractive setting for study, research and commer-
cialization—and to attract international students, scholars, scientists, engi-
neers, and mathematicians—the United States government needs to take
steps to encourage international students and scholars to remain in the
United States. These steps should be taken because of the contributions
these people make to the United States and their home country.
As discussed in COSEPUP’s international students report, a knowledge-
driven economy is more productive if it has access to the best talent regard-
less of national origin. International graduate students and postdoctoral
scholars are integral to the quality and effectiveness of the US science and
engineering (S&E) enterprise. If the flow of these students and scholars
were sharply reduced, research and academic work would suffer until an
alternative source of talent were found. There would be a fairly immediate
effect in university graduate departments and laboratories and a later cu-
mulative effect on hiring in universities, industry, and government. There is
no evidence that modest, gradual changes in the flow like those experienced
in the recent past would have an adverse effect.
High-end innovation is a crucial factor for the success of the US
economy. To maintain excellence in S&E research, which fuels high-end
innovation, the United States must be able to recruit talented people. A
substantial proportion of those talented people—students, postdoctoral
scholars, and researchers—currently come from other countries.
The shift to staffing research and teaching positions at universities with
nontenured staff, which depends in large part on a supply of international
graduate students and postdoctoral scholars, should be the subject of a
major study.
Multinational corporations (MNCs) hire international PhDs in similar
proportion to the output of university graduate and postdoctoral programs.
The proportion of international researchers in several large MNCs is around
30-50%. MNCs appreciate international diversity in their research staff.
They pay foreign-born and domestic researchers the same salaries, which
are based on degree, school, and benchmarks in the industry.
It is neither possible nor desirable to restrict US S&E positions to US
citizens; this could reduce industries’ and universities’ access to much of the
world’s talent and remove a substantial element of diversity from our society.
One study of Silicon Valley illustrates the importance of international
scientists and engineers to the US economy. It found that
By the end of the 1990s, Chinese and Indian engineers were running 29 percent
of Silicon Valley’s technology businesses. By 2000, these companies collectively
accounted for more than $19.5 billion in sales and 72,839 jobs. And the pace of
immigrant entrepreneurship has accelerated dramatically in the last decade. . . .
OCR for page 177
177
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
Far beyond their role in Silicon Valley, the professional and social networks
that link new immigrant entrepreneurs with each other have become global
institutions that connect new immigrants with their counterparts at home.
These new transnational communities provide the shared information, con-
tacts, and trust that allow local producers to participate in an increasingly
global economy.
Silicon Valley’s Taiwanese engineers, for example, have built a vibrant two-
way bridge connecting them with Taiwan’s technology community. Their In-
dian counterparts have become key middlemen linking U.S. businesses to low-
cost software expertise in India. These cross-Pacific networks give skilled
immigrants a big edge over mainstream competitors who often lack the lan-
guage skills, cultural know-how, and contacts to build business relationships in
Asia. The long-distance networks are accelerating the globalization of labor
markets and enhancing opportunities for entrepreneurship, investment, and
trade both in the United States and in newly emerging regions in Asia.13
In response to those findings, the committee, in this proposed action, is
endorsing a recommendation made by the Council on Competitiveness in
its report Innovate America14 to extend a 1-year automatic visa extension
to international students who receive doctorates or the equivalent in sci-
ence, technology, engineering, mathematics, or other fields of national need
at qualified US institutions to remain in the United States to seek employ-
ment. If these students are offered jobs by US-based employers and pass a
security screening test, they should be provided automatic work permits
and expedited residence status. If students are unable to obtain employment
within 1 year, their visas would expire.
ACTION C-6: SKILLS-BASED IMMIGRATION
The federal government should institute a new skills-based, preferential
immigration option. Doctoral-level education and science and engineering skills
would substantially raise an applicant’s chances and priority in obtaining US
citizenship. In the interim, the number of H-1B visas should be increased by
10,000, and the additional visas should be available for industry to hire science
and engineering applicants with doctorates from US universities.15
13A. Saxenian. “Brain Circulation: How High-Skill Immigration Makes Everyone Better
Off.” The Brookings Review 20(1)(Winter 2002). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute,
2002.
14Council on Competitiveness. Innovate America. Washington, DC: Council on Competi-
tiveness, 2004.
15Since the report was released, the committee has learned that the Consolidated Appropria-
tions Act of 2005, signed into law on December 8, 2004, exempts individuals that have re-
ceived a master’s or higher education degree from a US university from the statutory cap (up to
OCR for page 178
178 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
As discussed in the previous section, highly skilled immigrants make a
major contribution to US education, research, entrepreneurship, and soci-
ety. Therefore, it is important to encourage not only students and scholars
to stay, but also other people with science, engineering, and mathematics
PhDs regardless of where they receive their PhDs.
For the United States to remain competitive with Europe, Canada, and
Australia in attracting these international highly skilled workers, the United
States should implement a points-based immigration system. As discussed
in a recent Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development re-
port,16 skill-based immigration points systems, although not widespread,
are starting to develop. Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK use
such systems to recruit highly skilled workers. The Czech Republic set up a
pilot project that started in 2004.
In 2004, the European Union Justice and International Affairs council
adopted a recommendation to facilitate researchers from non-EU countries,
which asks member states to waive requirements for residence permits or to
issue them automatically or through a fast-track procedure and to set no
quotas that would restrict their admission. Permits should be renewable
and family reunification facilitated. The European Commission has adopted
a directive for a special admissions procedure for third-world nationals com-
ing to the EU to perform research. This procedure will be in force in 2006.
• Canada has put into place a points-based program aimed at fulfilling its
policy objectives for migration, particularly in relation to the labor-market
situation. The admission of skilled workers depends more on human capital
(language skills and diplomas, professional skills, and adaptability) than on
specific abilities.17 Canada has also instituted a business-immigrant selection
program to attract investors, entrepreneurs, and self-employed workers.
20,000). The bill also raised the H-1B fee and allocated funds to train American workers. The
committee believes that this provision is sufficient to respond to its recommendation—even
though the 10,000 additional visas recommended is specifically for science and engineering
doctoral candidates from US universities, which is a narrower subgroup.
16Unless otherwise noted, policies listed are from an overview presented in Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development. Trends in International Migration: 2004 Annual
Report. Paris: OECD, 2005. OECD members countries include Australia, Austria, Belgium,
Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland,
Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United King-
dom, and the United States.
17Applicants can check online their chances to qualify for migration to Canada as skilled
workers. A points score is automatically calculated to determine entry to Canada under the
Skilled Worker category. See Canadian Immigration Points Calculator Web site at: http://
www.workpermit.com/canada/points_calculator.htm.
OCR for page 179
179
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
• Germany instituted a new immigration law on July 9, 2004. Among its
provisions, in the realm of migration for employment, it encourages settle-
ment by high-skilled workers, who are eligible immediately for permanent
residence permits. Family members who accompany them or subsequently
join them have access to the labor market. Like Canada, Germany encour-
ages the immigration of self-employed persons, who are granted temporary
residence permits if they invest a minimum of 1 million euros and create at
least 10 jobs. Issuance of work permits and residence permits has been con-
solidated. The Office for Foreigners will issue both permits concurrently, and
the Labor Administration subsequently approves the work permit.
• UK18 The UK Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP) is an im-
migration category for entry to the UK for successful people with sought-
after skills. It is in some ways similar to the skilled migration programs for
entry to Australia and Canada. The UK has added an MBA provision to the
HSMP. Eligibility for HSMP visas is assessed on a points system with more
points awarded in the following situations:
– Preference for applicants under 28 years old.
– Skilled migrants with tertiary qualifications.
– High-level work experience.
– Past earnings.
– In a few rare cases, HSMP points are also awarded if one has an
achievement in one’s chosen field.
– One may also score bonus points if one is a skilled migrant seeking to
bring a spouse or partner who also has high-level skills and work experience.
• Australia encourages immigration of skilled migrants, who are as-
sessed on a points system with points awarded for work experience, quali-
fications, and language proficiency.19 Applicants must demonstrate skills in
specific job categories.
18The UK Highly Skilled Migrant Programme Web page also has a points calculator. Avail-
able at: http://www.workpermit.com/uk/highly_skilled_migrant_program.htm.
19See points calculator at: http://www.workpermit.com/australia/point_calculator.htm.
OCR for page 180
180 RISING ABOVE THE GATHERING STORM
ACTION C-7:
REFORM THE CURRENT SYSTEM OF “DEEMED EXPORTS”20
The current system of “deemed export” should be reformed. The new
system should provide international students and researchers engaged in
fundamental research in the United States with access to information and
research equipment in US industrial, academic, and national laboratories
comparable with the access provided to US citizens and permanent resi-
dents in a similar status. It would, of course, exclude information and facili-
ties restricted under national security regulations. In addition, the effect of
deemed-exports regulations on the education and fundamental research
work of international students and scholars should be limited by removing
from the deemed-exports technology list all technology items (information
and equipment) that are available for purchase on the overseas open market
from foreign or US companies or that have manuals that are available in the
public domain, in libraries, over the Internet, or from manufacturers.
The controls governed by the Export Administration Act and its imple-
menting regulations extend to the transfer of “technology.” Technology is
considered “specific information necessary for the ‘development,’ ‘produc-
tion,’ or ‘use’ of a product,” and providing such information to a foreign
national within the United States may be considered a “deemed export”
whose transfer requires an export license21 (italics added). The primary re-
sponsibility for administering deemed exports lies with the Department of
Commerce (DOC), but other agencies may have regulations to address the
issue. Deemed exports are currently the subject of significant controversy.
20The controls governed by the Export Administration Act and its implementing regulations
extend to the transfer of technology. Technology includes “specific information necessary for
the ‘development,’ ‘production,’ or ‘use’ of a product” [emphasis added]. Providing informa-
tion that is subject to export controls—for example, about some kinds of computer hard-
ware—to a foreign national within the United States may be “deemed” an export, and that
transfer requires an export license. The primary responsibility for administering controls on
deemed exports lies with the Department of Commerce, but other agencies have regulatory
authority as well.
21“Generally, technologies subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) are those
which are in the United States or of US origin, in whole or in part. Most are proprietary.
Technologies which tend to require licensing for transfer to foreign nationals are also dual-use
(i.e., have both civil and military applications) and are subject to one or more control regimes,
such as National Security, Nuclear Proliferation, Missile Technology, or Chemical and Bio-
logical Warfare.” (“Deemed Exports” Questions and Answers, Bureau of Industry and Secu-
rity, Department of Commerce.) The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), ad-
ministered by the Department of State, control the export of technology, including technical
information, related to items on the US Munitions List. Unlike the EAR, however, “publicly
available scientific and technical information and academic exchanges and information pre-
sented at scientific meetings are not treated as controlled technical data.”
OCR for page 181
181
WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD AMERICA TAKE IN HIGHER EDUCATION?
In 2000, Congress mandated annual reports by agency offices of in-
spector general (IG) on the transfer of militarily sensitive technology to
countries and entities of concern; the 2004 reports focused on deemed ex-
ports. The individual agency IG reports and a joint interagency report con-
cluded that enforcement of deemed-export regulations had been ineffective;
most of the agency reports recommended particular regulatory remedies.22
DOC sought comments from the public about the recommendations
from its IG before proposing any changes. The department earned praise
for this effort to reach out to potentially affected groups and is currently
reviewing the 300 plus comments it received, including those from the lead-
ers of the National Academies.23
On July 12, 2005, the Department of Defense (DOD) issued a notice in
the Federal Register seeking comments on a proposal to amend the Defense
Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to address require-
ments for preventing unauthorized disclosure of export-controlled informa-
tion and technology under DOD contracts that follow the recommenda-
tions in its IG report. The proposed regulation includes a requirement for
access-control plans covering unique badging requirements for foreign
workers and segregated work areas for export-controlled information and
technology, and it does not mention the fundamental-research exemption.24
Comments were due by September 12, 2005.
Many of the comments in response to DOC expressed concern that the
proposed changes were not based on systematic data or analysis and could
have a significant negative effect on the conduct of research in both univer-
sities and the private sector, especially in companies with a substantial num-
ber of employees who are not US citizens.
CONCLUSION
The knowledge-driven global economy compels America to develop and
recruit the finest experts available. Our students and our society prospered
under a system of higher education and research that was the global leader
in the second half of the 20th century. For a half-century at least, the United
States has attracted graduate students and scholars from around the world.
The system worked to our benefit, and it cannot now be taken for granted.
22Reports were produced by DOC, DOD, the Department of Energy (DOE), the Depart-
ment of State, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Central Intelligence Agency.
Only the interagency report and the reports from DOC, DOD, and DOE are publicly
available.
23The letter from the presidents of the National Academies may be found at: http://
www7.nationalacademies.org/rscans/Academy_Presidents_Comments_to_DOC.PDF.
24Federal Register 70(132)(July 2005):39976-39978. Available at: http://a257.g.akamai
tech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/05-13305.htm.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
version february
