Study: U.S. needs fewer, not more, science students

[ATannahill]

First thoughts before reading the thread:
I'm not leaving now.
Over my dead body.
They can drag me out kicking and screaming.

Some interesting information in the article.

[Chris Hibner]

If we could predict which students would be the next great scientists and mathematicians, we would all be billionaires from the stock market. The whole point of having so many more students studying these fields is because you never know who is going to "get it" until they get it.

Just think of why the Soviets were so great at goofy things like rowing and gymnastics. It's because they required EVERY kid to participate until they could determine whether the students had the talent and desire to be the best. Then they weeded out the rest and they had the best gymnasts around. While I'm not saying that we should become the Soviet Union (far from it), but my point is that if you start with a talent pool 10 times larger, than you're 10 times more likely to find good talent. We don't increase the STEM training because we think everyone can go into that area, it's because by giving more people exposure, you're more likely to find the talent and the desire in a place where you may not have expected it.

[EricH]

And, to add something (OK, probably about a penny) to what Chris is saying, not only do we find the best students in the pool, but the ones that don't go into STEM fields will have some appreciation for what the ones that do have to deal with. It's never a bad thing to have a general understanding of a subject; you may not be able to do it, but you'll have a much better chance of understanding what that [insert favorite STEM-type major/career here] working for you is always talking about! Or at least, he won't have to spend as much time explaining it to you...