This book explains much of the low enrollment problem

I just finished reading Thomas L. Friedman's book The World is Flat. It has been on the best seller list for quite a while and you may have heard of it. I can strongly recommend it to those of you trying to understand why enrollments are low and things are as they are in technology education today. It explains alot.

Friedman is a New York Times editor. I have been reading him for a while and don't always agree with his positions but he is astute. He has put together an excellent balanced account of what is going on in the world and how it is affecting us. We all know things are changing, and faster than we want, but we sit around in our comfort zones thinking that the changes will have limited impact on us. The changes have been gradual up to now, but we are finally beginning to feel the affect these changes are having. And they are devistating in some cases. And we are not doing much to improve matters. The terms complacent and "living in denial" come to mind.

Essentially what he is saying is that because of PCs, the Internet and other technologies, the world is flatter, meaning more countries have become or are becoming more competitive with the US. Offshore manufacturing and outsourcing are only some of the changes that have hurt technology education in general It is too complex to cover in this note, but I urge you to get a copy of this book and read it. It took me several weeks to plow through it, but you will be rewarded with a better understanding of things in general. Friedman points out that a major part of the solution to the impact of globalization on the US is more and better science, math, technology and engineering education. Yet, the trends in all those areas are down in the US.

Now, how can we take this knowledge and use it to save electronic technology education?

Help is on the way, I hope.

I wonder just how much is being done to solve the declining enrollment problem in electronics. I suspect there are individual efforts in schools to do something, but I have never heard of any national effort. I have spent the last few years and not a small amount of my own money to get the word out, but nothing big has happened. Maybe it never will and besides, who really cares except for a handful of us.

Yet, I kept feeling some action was required. Last year with the cooperation of Austin CC, I helped write and submit a proposal for an NSF grant to study and help solve this problem. It was not awarded. Despite the favorable feedback we got from the reviewers, no funding was available. I was astonished. Is it just me that thinks this is a critical problem?

The NSF is a great organization providing funding for all sorts of advanced technical and educational research. Their Advanced Technology Education (ATE) group does a great job funding various projects for CC level technology education. I have worked on such grant projects before and I work on one now. It is terrific work. Over the years, the competition for the limited NSF funding has gotten greater. I don't know what the ratio of submitted proposals to funded proposals is but it must be huge, 10 to 1 or more I bet. Unless you have a great idea and a superior proposal, your chances are slim.

What I have to wonder is why declining enrollments was not a critical topic worth funding. Are the NSF reviewers even aware of the problems and potential stakes of losing this kind of education? Or do they think we already know why enrollments are going down hill but we are just not doing anything about it? Who knows. I have met and worked with some NSF reviewers and they are a very smart, astute bunch. They do a good job of picking the best ideas. But they may be one step removed from industry and academia where the real problems exist. Hopefully they will realize at some point that the projects they are actually funding are those designed to assist programs that are fast disappearing. What good is that?

Anyway, we rewrote the proposal and submitted it again for a prelimenary review this past April. We are hoping that we will be invited or encouraged to submit a full proposal in October for funding in 2006. That is already too late for many of you who have already lost your department or are being downsized. Yet, if it is funded, at least we can do some more formal research about the problem and develop some practical solutions that can be implemented quickly in schools that are hurting.

Just so you know, some one is trying to do something. Wish us luck.

Is industry training replacing formal education?

Last night while I was watching some TV, I saw an ad by Time Warner Cable, my local cable company. It was promoting jobs and training for the cable TV techs they need. I have never seen a community college program that ever taught anything about cable TV. Yet that is one place where the jobs actually are. Since the cable companies cannot get the techs they need with the right education, they advertise not only for the job but also for the training they will give you to do the job.

I think this is one of the trends the CCs are fighting as I am seeing this process over and over again. It is happening with the cell phone industry, consumer electronics and elsewhere. Wake up people. The stubborn CCs insist that they know what to teach, but today I am almost convinced that the current curricula is not what is needed any more. More and more, industry is taking it upon themselves to provide their own training. If they cannot get what they want or need from the colleges, why not? The result is less industry support for the colleges. This certainly makes the case for greater awareness in the colleges of what local industry needs are? No one at the college ever thought to contact Time Warner Cable and ask what can we do for you. Isn't that the mission of local CCs? To serve the local community? Looks like the CCs are not fulfilling their missions to industry or the individuals who need the jobs. The result, lost income, fewer students, diminished relevance and ultimately the demise of the department.

If you are sitting around saying, "it is not my job to contact industry", then you are truly a part of the problem. Hopefully you will be able to retire before they shut the doors of your department.

Correction

I gave an incorrect URL in my posting of yesterday. For those of you who tried to access my ASEE paper "The Disappearing Two-Year Associate Degree Program in Electronics Technology", the correct URL is:
www.asee.org/acPapers/2003-287_Final.pdf
I hope I got it right this time.

A good example of what is happening.

I received this email in response to my message about this blog. Jack did not post this as a comment so I asked him if I could. He said OK so here it is. Depressing to say the least, but it is exactly what is going on across the country. What are we doing about it?

Lou:
I'll take a look at the blog. Makes sense, but too late here at MHCC (Gresham, OR -- where we 'did' use one of your texts). Too late because the electronics program has been killed due to: 1. Low enrollment 2. NO local industry support 3. College admin that wants to reduce professional-technical programs and increase transfer concentrations even though the program on paper is ABET-TAC --
Jack

It could happen to any of us.

One more reason why enrollments may be declining

In the Monday, June 20th issue of USA Today on the first page of the Money section, is an article that may give all of you some concern. The title of the piece is Perplexed consumers dial up tech 'geeks'. It talks about the great growth in consumer electronics and how Best Buy just hired 1500 more employees to its Geek Squad. Their total Geek Squad is 8000 strong and they expect as many as 12000 by next year. These are the guys who install, service and support consumer electronic installations with big screen HDTV, DVD players, TiVo, surround sound, stellite radios and other sophisticated gear. It has gotten tougher and tougher for the average consumer to handle the complexity. What I wonder is where are these new employees coming from? Where did they learn this or how did they acquire the necessary background?

One thing for sure, they didn't learn consumer electronics in a community college. It is just not taught.

I suspect that these employees are really a type of electronic technician. They are not called that, but what they do is clearly electronic. They probably do not have to know how to bias a bipolar transistor or solve mesh equations which is what we are teaching our students now. You have to wonder why. Today everything is at the systems level rather than the component level. Something CCs do not teach. Again, why?

The good news here is that there are jobs for technical types that are in fact electronic techs even though they are not called that. The bad news is that the CCs are not part of the education solution.

In an earlier Wall Street Journal article, both Best Buy and Circuit City indicated a shortage of persons who knew this stuff. I can't help but think that CCs should have a consumer electronic curriculum or at least some courses on these subjects. I bet that would help enrollments not only because the jobs are there but also because the subject is so interesting.

Some background on the enrollment decline

I first got worried about the enrollment decline in community colleges after I left teaching in 2000. While I was at Austin CC, the semiconductor manufacturing technnology program I headed was amazingly successful. During the 1997-98 period enrollments peaked at about 500 not including the 250 in other electronic programs. We eventally graduated hundreds into jobs in industry. Following 9/11, everything seemed to crash including enrollments.

I reported on this phenomenon in my ASEE paper " The Rise and Fall of a 2-Year Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry-Education Program". I presented this at the CIEC conference in Tucson in 2003. You can see that paper at fie.engrng.pitt.edu/ciec2003.

I also did an informal survey in 2002 on the ETD Listserv to find out if anyone else was having enrollment problems. Wow, what a response I got. It seems to be hurting all but a few colleges. That was my wake up call.

I also did a paper for the ASEE national conference in Nashville in 2003. This paper titled, " The Disappearing Associate Degree Program in Electronics Technology", really sums up the problem. Take a look if you are interested at www.asee.org/acPapers2003-287_Final.pdf.

In January 2005, I presented a paper on this subject at the CIEC in Savannah. The title was "Does Industry Still Really Need Electronic Technicians? Where have all the jobs for AAS degrees technology granduates?" I also presented a paper at the Texas Community College Teacher's Association (TCCTA) in February with a similar theme but focusing on the textbook problem.

Anyway, I am worried that we are not doing enough to address this problem. Most faculty are aware of the problem but few are doing anything about it. In my networking at the various conferences, I get the same response: "we have the problem but do not know what to do." I have always felt we needed a national forum to discuss this and find solutions but there is not one for this segment of education. Hopefully this blog will serve that purpose.

In any case, I am on a crusade I guess to get out the word and to get everyone talking about the problem and sharing information and success stories. Let me know what is happening out at your school and what you are doing if anything. Most of all, tell us what works.

First Thoughts and Comments

Over the past years, there has been a steady decline in the enrollments in most community colleges offering 2-year AAS degrees in electronics technology. The same for private technical colleges. In some cases, the enrollment declines have been so great as to cause colleges to close their departments or merge them into other departments. Mostly, electronic departments have survived although with fewer students and in some cases fewer faculty.

The big question is: What is going on here? Why is this happening and what can we do about it?

Already most faculty are aware of this problem and in some cases steps have been taken to improve the situation. But as I have gleaned from speaking with many of you, little or no improvements have been noted. The downward trend continues and unless something is done it may ultimately lead to the closing of your own department.

As the old saying goes, "If you keep doing the same old thing, you get the same old result." As a result, you are going to have to get out of your comfort zone and do something. We are already at that point where it is change or die.

In this blog, I will offer my own findings, ideas, suggested solutions, and related information. And I also want to hear from you. What have you experienced? What have you done? What is working and not working? What are your suggestions? Together, I believe we can find a way. Email me with your thoughts.