[comp.edu] U.S. Mathematicians dying breed

elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (12/08/87)

[excerpted from an AP news article in the local newspaper:]

An annual survey found that nationwide only 362 U.S. citizens got doctorates
in math during the 1986-1987 school year. The decline in graduate researchers
is blamed in large part on a decades-old shortage of qualified teachers at the
elementary and secondary level.
  "There's always been a finite pool of people with mathematical and if they
aren't interested before they enter high school they are not going to take
enough math to have the option of exploring the field by the time they get to
college. Somepeople will go into mathematics whatever the odds and obstacles.
But they don't tend to be the kind of people who become good teachers. And we
are losing anyone who can do anything else."
  It goes on to mention that the total number of math doctorates has been
steadily declining for the past 15 years.

Commentary: As a field that derives much of its substance from the
mathematical arts, CS education is in big trouble if, 20 years from now, we
cannot find people with the knowledge to teach CS students the discrete
mathematics etc. that are so important for CS students to know.

--
Eric Lee Green   elg@killer.UUCP     Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191       
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg            Lafayette, LA 70509             
"There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PF

reggie@pdnbah.UUCP (George Leach) (12/09/87)

In article <2376@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
>[excerpted from an AP news article in the local newspaper:]

>An annual survey found that nationwide only 362 U.S. citizens got doctorates
>in math during the 1986-1987 school year. 

     Has anyone taken a look at trends in Math and EE doctorates relative to
CS doctorates?  About twenty years ago there were no CS departments and
therefore no CS PhD's.  Over the years there has been an increase in the
number of departments granting PhD's in Computer Science.  This fact alone
would account for declines in other fields that are related to CS.


George W. Leach					Paradyne Corporation
{gatech,rutgers,attmail}!codas!pdn!reggie	Mail stop LF-207
Phone: (813) 530-2376				P.O. Box 2826
						Largo, FL  34649-2826

lamaster@ames.arpa (Hugh LaMaster) (12/10/87)

In article <2376@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
>[excerpted from an AP news article in the local newspaper:]
>

>An annual survey found that nationwide only 362 U.S. citizens got doctorates
>in math during the 1986-1987 school year. The decline in graduate researchers
>is blamed in large part on a decades-old shortage of qualified teachers at the
>elementary and secondary level.

Far be it from me to discourage anyone from getting a PhD in Mathematics.
However, these surveys never tell you how many openings per year
there really are.  We have been hearing about doctor shortages, Mathematician
shortages, Engineer shortages, programmer shortages, etc. for a long time.  
However, I have never seen a long term shortage in any technical field, despite
what the papers say.  The best advice I could give would be to study what you
love, but be prepared to work for money when you get through, and be prepared
to change careers if necessary.  There is always a shortage of the "right people"
in any field, but for the rest of us, flexibility is a requirement..

elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (12/11/87)

in article <1878@pdn.UUCP>, reggie@pdnbah.UUCP (George Leach) says:
> In article <2376@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
>>[excerpted from an AP news article in the local newspaper:]
> 
>>An annual survey found that nationwide only 362 U.S. citizens got doctorates
>>in math during the 1986-1987 school year. 
> 
>      Has anyone taken a look at trends in Math and EE doctorates relative to
> CS doctorates?  About twenty years ago there were no CS departments and
> therefore no CS PhD's.  Over the years there has been an increase in the
> number of departments granting PhD's in Computer Science.  This fact alone
> would account for declines in other fields that are related to CS.

Have you looked at the reports on production of CS majors lately? I don't
recall the exact numbers (which I saw in an issue of IEEE Computer while
searching for the article on the AMD29000), but they were quite disappointing
for the MS and, especially, the PhD level. Apparently all us folks get a BS
and then ride out upon the winds to gain our fame and fortune :-). Maybe some
of these underpaid underemployed BS's will come back for an advanced degree,
but it looks pretty doubtful right now. For one thing, someone capable of
gaining a MS or PhD isn't very likely to be either underpaid or 
underemployed. 

--
Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET        Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191       
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg            Lafayette, LA 70509             
"There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PF

elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) (12/14/87)

Here's a couple of other tidbits, dredged from education journals:

"Recently, I had the opportunity to take a long, careful look at the basal
texts in elementary school mathematics. The books, save for graphics and
phtos, could easily have been published a century ago. Mathematically and
psychologically barren, such books prepare children for a world that has long
ceased to be."  -- Thomas C. O'Brien, "Five Essays on Computers in Education" 
                   Phi Delta Kappan, Oct 1983, pp 110-112

"At some point we may be forced to reject the 'filling station' concept of
learning." -- Robert C. Snider, "Terminal Time in the Classroom", PDK OCT 1983

 "...researchers.. conclude that many mathematics programs focus too much on
the development of routine computation skills and too little on understanding
mathematical concepts." 
  "There is increasing evidence that precollege work in mathematics and
science fails to integrate low-level skills and high-level understanding, so
that much of the material that is studied is neither remembered nor
understood." 
      Thomas L. Good, "Increasing Teachers' Understanding
            of Mathematical Ideas", PDK June 1987, p778

--
Eric Lee Green  elg@usl.CSNET        Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191       
{cbosgd,ihnp4}!killer!elg            Lafayette, LA 70509             
"There's someone in my head, but it's not me...." -PF

steve@hubcap.UUCP ("Steve" Stevenson) (12/15/87)

Take heart.  NSF has finally concluded the same thing, at least
as far as calculus is concerned.

Being a computationalist (read finitist) I still see a drastic need
to give the math curricula a boost in discrete and computational
math as well.

Comments?
-- 
Steve (really "D. E.") Stevenson           steve@hubcap.clemson.edu
Department of Computer Science,            (803)656-5880.mabell
Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1906

varol@cwi.nl (Varol Akman) (12/16/87)

In article <2424@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
>
>Have you looked at the reports on production of CS majors lately? I don't
>recall the exact numbers (which I saw in an issue of IEEE Computer while
>searching for the article on the AMD29000), but they were quite disappointing
>for the MS and, especially, the PhD level. Apparently all us folks get a BS
>and then ride out upon the winds to gain our fame and fortune :-). Maybe some
>of these underpaid underemployed BS's will come back for an advanced degree,
>but it looks pretty doubtful right now. For one thing, someone capable of
>gaining a MS or PhD isn't very likely to be either underpaid or 
>underemployed. 
>
I've come to believe that degrees aren't that important.  True, a PhD
has more research potential than an BSc but then again this is more or
less a rule of thumb.  A lot researchers without advanced degrees
come up with important, even revolutionary, results.  I explain their
success with an appeal to their intelligence, hard work, experience, etc.
For example, various advanced products are created in companies which
employ many more BSc's than PhDs.  Although it is true that research
divisions of these companies have many PhDs, it is probably not true
to assert that these solely are the people who do the major inventions or
innovations.

I believe that one cannot expect to have a huge number of PhD's
without really proving that they are the ones (and the only ones)
who are creating our ``knowledge.''  Even if this turns out to be
the case, so what?  Should all industrialists be as successful as
Ford?  Should all physicists be as good as Weinberg?  The examples
can be multiplied.  Basically, I'm trying to say that a lot of
useful work can be done without being perfect.

One last thing ...  A capitalist society is based on the great law
of economic supply & demand.  When there is enough demand, there'll be a lot
of people who would like to study for an advanced degree.  Demand
in the sense that the employers will be willing to give e.g. a lot
of money, respect, responsibility, what have you.  Until then only people who are
really motivated, idealistic, etc. will go for an advanced degree
but I don't see anything wrong with that.

-Varol Akman
CWI, Amsterdam

g-mccann@gumby.cs.wisc.edu (Lester I. McCann) (12/17/87)

In article <147@piring.cwi.nl>, varol@cwi.nl (Varol Akman) writes:
> I've come to believe that degrees aren't that important.  True, a PhD
> has more research potential than an BSc but then again this is more or
> less a rule of thumb.  A lot researchers without advanced degrees
> come up with important, even revolutionary, results.  I explain their
> success with an appeal to their intelligence, hard work, experience, etc.
> For example, various advanced products are created in companies which
> employ many more BSc's than PhDs.  Although it is true that research
> divisions of these companies have many PhDs, it is probably not true
> to assert that these solely are the people who do the major inventions or
> innovations.
> 
> -Varol Akman
> CWI, Amsterdam

Rats!  I sent a reply to Varol, intending it to be a follow-up.  I *hate* it
when that happens!

I can't say that I agree with this argument in all cases.  If you wish to
teach at the college level, you will have a hard time getting hired at all
and have an even harder time getting tenure if you "only" have a Master's.
I can understand needing to have an all-PhD faculty at a research school,
but I don't see that it makes that much difference at a "teaching" school,
where the emphasis is supposedly on teaching and not research.  In that
environment, it seems to me they'd be better off hiring good instructors,
rather than higher degrees.  (I think we all agree that many PhDs are not
good instructors.)

I speak from a small amount of experience.  I got my BS at a small university
that hired MSs as temporary faculty until they could hire people with PhDs.
One instructor in particular was a great lecturer, but he wasn't granted
tenure simply because he didn't have an interest in getting a PhD.  That
didn't make any sense to me then, and it still doesn't today.  It make me
wonder what their priorities really are.

Lester McCann
mccann@primost.cs.wisc.edu

lamaster@ames.arpa (Hugh LaMaster) (12/17/87)

In article <1245@gumby.cs.wisc.edu> g-mccann@gumby.cs.wisc.edu (Lester I. McCann) writes:
>
>I can't say that I agree with this argument in all cases.  If you wish to
>teach at the college level, you will have a hard time getting hired at all
>and have an even harder time getting tenure if you "only" have a Master's.
>I can understand needing to have an all-PhD faculty at a research school,
>but I don't see that it makes that much difference at a "teaching" school,

The reason that most universities demand all PhD faculty is that they can - there are still
many more PhD's in most fields that want to teach and do research than there are positions
available.  Computer Science would appear to be a (temporary) exception to this rule - an
opportunity for those who want to teach CS at a university.  Historically, it has rarely 
been the case that there have been persistent PhD shortages in any University teaching/
research field.  It is simply a question of supply and demand.  There are a lot more people
capable of, and desiring to do, teaching and research out there than there are positions
out there.  For the same reasons, it is likely that salaries in universities will persist
in lagging behind industry, as historically they usually have.
 

jpdres10@usl-pc.UUCP (Green Eric Lee) (12/20/87)

Keywords:

Expires:

Sender:

Reply-To:

Followup-To:


In message <147@piring.cwi.nl>, varol@cwi.nl (Varol Akman) says:
>In article <2424@killer.UUCP> elg@killer.UUCP (Eric Green) writes:
>>for the MS and, especially, the PhD level. Apparently all us folks get a BS
>>and then ride out upon the winds to gain our fame and fortune :-). Maybe some
>>of these underpaid underemployed BS's will come back for an advanced degree,
>>but it looks pretty doubtful right now. For one thing, someone capable of
>>gaining a MS or PhD isn't very likely to be either underpaid or 
>>underemployed. 
>>
>One last thing ...  A capitalist society is based on the great law
>of economic supply & demand.  When there is enough demand, there'll be a lot
>of people who would like to study for an advanced degree.  Demand
>in the sense that the employers will be willing to give e.g. a lot
>of money, respect, responsibility, what have you.  Until then only people who are

Well, considering that a person with a PhD/CS can get over $50K/year
quite easily, while the numbers for BS/CS hover around 35K/year, it
would seem that there would be more people going for PhDs than there
is. The problem is that pure capitalism does not exist. A little fly
in the ointment called "human nature" intervenes. Most folks who've
just finished 4 years of college feel like they're on top of the
world, that they can do everything, the whole world's out there to
conquer, and why wait for a lousy PhD? 

As for the value of a PhD: Basically, it signifies that the person is
an expert in his particular area. Where that is most significant is in
teaching... I really wouldn't want be at a school with a BS/CS program
where the classes are mostly taught by grad students and other people
who are at the BS level. Yet, because of a variety of factors,
including the limited number of people recieving PhD's, it's becoming
rarer and rarer for a typical BS student at a lower-tier college or
university to see a true-to-life PhD. Especially considering that a
college or university must spend $50k-70k to get top-notch people
(unless they're in a major computer-industry area, where the professor
is expected to supplement his/her salary by consulting).

--
Eric Green  elg@usl.CSNET       P.O. Box 92191, Lafayette, LA 70509
{ihnp4,cbosgd}!killer!elg,      {ut-sally,killer}!usl!elg
  "what exactly is a dream... and what exactly is a joke?"  -- Syd Barrett

reggie@pdn.UUCP (George W. Leach) (12/22/87)

In article <516@usl-pc.UUCP>  writes:

>Well, considering that a person with a PhD/CS can get over $50K/year
>quite easily, while the numbers for BS/CS hover around 35K/year, it
>would seem that there would be more people going for PhDs than there
>is. The problem is that pure capitalism does not exist. A little fly
>in the ointment called "human nature" intervenes. Most folks who've
>just finished 4 years of college feel like they're on top of the
>world, that they can do everything, the whole world's out there to
>conquer, and why wait for a lousy PhD? 

     First, thinking along the lines of pure capitalism:  How long will
it take the holder of a BS/CS to attain a salary of $50K/year after
starting at an entry level of $35K/year?  Now compair that with how many
years it will take to earn a PhD.  Well now, of course you can say that
by the time you get a PhD the starting salary for one will have risen
as well.  But the person with the BS/CS will be pulling in $35K/year
and then some as s/he get raises each year (assuming of course that the
company is successful and engages in such practices).  And the person
who is earning a PhD will be skimping along until graduation day comes.

     The reasons that one pursues a PhD are not economic.  You have to have
deeper motives than that or you would not be able to endure the stress and
economic hardship it takes to do so!  In fact, economics is what keeps me
from attempting to earn one!  With a family to support I just can not
afford to go back to school full time.  And going part time, from what I
have been told, is next to impossible.


>As for the value of a PhD: Basically, it signifies that the person is
>an expert in his particular area. Where that is most significant is in
>teaching... I really wouldn't want be at a school with a BS/CS program
>where the classes are mostly taught by grad students and other people
>who are at the BS level. Yet, because of a variety of factors,
>including the limited number of people recieving PhD's, it's becoming
>rarer and rarer for a typical BS student at a lower-tier college or
>university to see a true-to-life PhD. 


      Isn't that the truth!  When I was an undergraduate, every single 
full time faculty member held a PhD.  Virtually *NO* TA's taught.  When
I was working on my MS (part time) I go involved by teaching in the
evenings.  The reason was that the CS department had become so large
that they were useing *20* TA's to teach undergraduate courses!!!!


      I know that the "Good Olde Days" were not really all that good and
that we can not change the sudden popularity of a CS education.  However,
something must be done to ensure that the quality of the students being
produced does not fall below certain standards due to an overburdened
teaching staff!


-- 
George W. Leach					Paradyne Corporation
{gatech,rutgers,attmail}!codas!pdn!reggie	Mail stop LF-207
Phone: (813) 530-2376				P.O. Box 2826
						Largo, FL  34649-2826