Recent Posts
- 05/13 Manufacturing Innovation
- 05/06 Making the Grade
- 05/03 Privacy paranoia at NSF?
- 04/23 PE for grad students, part 2
- 04/22 PE for grad students?
- 04/19 "How Scientific Gains Abroad Pay Off in the U.S."
- 04/15 Graduate Education at Stanford
- 02/05 Graduate School Guidance
- 01/24 Pardon the dust
- 12/07 Fixing the NIH grant-making process
- 11/27 White House Round Table Views
- 11/15 White House Roundtable
- 10/14 Breaking radio silence
- 09/24 Universities and the money fix
- 09/19 Bring Back the Office of Technology Assessment
Categories
Funding
Fiscal Sponsor
This is an excellent summary of the roundtable -- thank you!
On my blog, at http://csdiary.org, I've also posted an article about this. I chose to focus very specifically on the concept of supply-and-demand that was such a big part of the roundtable discussions. In a nutshell: I don't believe that supply/demand framework is a good one when thinking about graduate STEM education (or, at least not at the Ph.D. level). Yes, it is almost certainly a good idea of Ph.D. programs to do a better job with industry experience/internships, more formal exposure to career options, etc. But I don't believe that workforce arguments are all that informative at the Ph.D. level.
You can jump directly to the article on my blog at http://csdiary.org/2007/11/08/graduate-stem-education-roundtable/.
Thanks again for posting your summary. Very useful.