Since I currently live in the State of Michigan, I often think about the local economy here (it’s interesting to watch an implosion). Metro Detroit is frequently analyzed, ridiculed, discussed, or used as an example by newspapers and magazines, which constitute most of my daily reading. I couldn’t help but thing about the effect of economic history within Michigan when reading the following article in the Freep:
Graduating, but with right skills?
I was first intrigued by the article title, which has obviously been shortened to save space in the newsprint edition. After reading the article, I was not disheartened or feeling “sad” for the new college graduates or the industries/businesses who can’t find enough talent to increase production capacity (however you view it, that’s what people with talent do).
Instead, I thought of the economic history in Michigan that possibly created this situation. For the better part of the 20th Century, Michigan was an economic leader in the USA and world. This is based on my extensive knowledge (I grew up here), non-scientific research (i.e. none), and biased view that the automotive industry provided a significant boost to the nation’s economy during that time. As an economic leader with the automotive industrial windstorm at it’s back, a well-paying and very secure labor market was created within the state.
What happens when an economy is created that has a very large number of well-paid individuals who are secure in their job? Among many other things, you create a lack of interest in ensuring economic relevance. Many children are born into this situation and as a result have the same lack of interest in economic relevance. Obviously, there are exceptions, and I’m sure everyone reading this thinks they are one of the exceptions. That may be true, but I believe the situation discussed in the article was at least partially caused by the economy that is suffering from it.
When these new college grads were younger, they were constantly fed affirmations of their amazing talent and ability to do “whatever they want” by parents, educators, and communities. These groups had “made it” in the automotive-based economy, so why shouldn’t their children be made to feel good about themselves and pursue whatever made them happy? Not only did this set their minds to pursue “happy” careers, it brought about a sense of ease into the lives of these children (especially as they grew up). Why try hard to learn a difficult skill when everyone is telling you to be happy and you can do whatever you want?
Cue the young college students choice of major. All their lives, they have been told to pursue what makes them happy. They’ve been spoon-fed affirmations of greatness and amazing abilities. They have a dislike for difficult tasks and actual thought. What degree would you say a majority pick? It certainly won’t be a hard discipline such as engineering, science, or mathematics. Going further, to individual study areas, information technology, accounting, and economics would likely not rank high on many of these students lists.
That leaves softer disciplines such as education, communications, and the fine arts. Now, don’t accuse me portraying these majors as useless or mentally inferior, because they are not. I have many friends who are teachers or graduated from a softer discipline. I know they worked hard to obtain a college degree, and I’m not taking anything away from them. My issue is with the number of people that are pursuing these degrees.
The economy created a situation where the vast majority of it’s future workforce wanted nothing to do with the skills that created that economy in the first place. Hard science, engineering, and other difficult career pursuits are required to keep the economic engine going, be that an industry based in automotive, biotechnology, or finance. Because of the lack of interest in economic relevance by the parents, the children had similar disinterests, which are only compounded by the lack of desire to pursue difficult opportunities.
As a result, you wind up with the situation described in the article: Many college graduates with degrees that are not relevant to the local economy and business in the local economy clamoring for degrees that no one has pursued.
What are the solutions? The article has them sprinkled throughout. Subsidies for students to pursue certain degrees and stay in-state after graduation (or be forced to repay some of the subsidy), better alignment of university curriculum to the economy, and better communication regarding the job market while students are in high school.
These are all great ideas. The state government has a very key role to play in remedying the situation. However, I propose another idea: As concerned individuals, parents, and communities, reinforce the concept of economic relevance to students in high school and encourage them to push their abilities by pursuing degrees in difficult study areas.
1 Comment
