Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Why Is US Grad School Mainly Non-US Students?

Journal written by phil_ps (1164071) and posted by kdawson on Sat Sep 29, 2007 05:09 PM
from the damn-it-jim-i'm-a-doctor-not-an-engineer dept.
I am a new graduate student in Computer Engineering. I would like to get my MS and possibly my Ph.D. I have learned that 90% of my department is from India and many others are from China. All the students come here to study and there are only 7 US citizens in the engineering program this year. Why is that? I have heard that many of the smarter Americans go into medicine or the law and that is why there are so few Americans in engineering. Is this true?
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • and? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Colin Smith (2679) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:11PM (#20796339)
    The problem is?

    The world always needs more lawyers.
     
    • Re:and? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by delong (125205) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:37PM (#20796563)
      This actually is true. Advanced societies that are governed by the rule of law and that require complex rules will naturally require more lawyers. Most people think of Law and Order when someone says "lawyer", but that ignores the far larger practice area of corporate and commercial law that governs extremely complex commercial behavior that makes a modern capitalism economy hum. Nobody thinks about the Uniform Commercial Code as a vital piece of maintaining civilization, but it is.

      Besides that, medicine and law are recession proof. Hell, they are nuclear-war proof.
      • Re:and? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by aurispector (530273) on Saturday September 29 2007, @06:12PM (#20796831)
        As a practicing dentist I can positively say that health care is NOT recession proof. I have seen lots of folks with untreated or undertreated medical conditions when they lack insurance or the resources for treatment. Health care is less and less of a good deal for Doctors of all types because of decreasing insurance payments and increasing hassle.

        Elsewhere in this discussion it is being said that the purpose of higher education is to earn more money. This may be true for some, but it's also true that education allows you to do something more interesting or fulfilling.

        Regarding the original topic, my graduating class was about 1/3 were asian immigrants with a sprinkling of middle easterners, africans and caribbean types. Of the asians the majority were Vietnamese (incidentally these folks were the most patriotic Americans you might find - they love it here) I don't know of anyone that went back to their country of origin.
        • Re:and? (Score:5, Funny)

          by A nonymous Coward (7548) * on Saturday September 29 2007, @07:03PM (#20797201)
          Your sig says I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.

          The mod points seem kind of unnecessary:

          As a practicing dentist...
        • Re:and? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by budgenator (254554) on Saturday September 29 2007, @08:40PM (#20797839) Journal
          Your problem is most people don't see dental care as health care, it's seen as an elective cosmetic and vainity thing. We know the the kind of havok periodontal or endodontic infections can have on the patients health, but tell the average person on the street that a gum infection can cause inflamation that can and does lead to heart attacks and kills people and they'll look at you like your stupid. The other problem is your dental school glossed over something and that's removeables, removeables are booming right now, monday I'm going to have to order more articulators. I've got so many dentures in the lab that I've run out of articulators friday, and the complete and partials are expected to just keep growing until 2025, yet most dentists just blow off denture patients, yet they refer out almost all of their extractions to OS and the majority endo all without get a referal fee from the specialists. If you want to make money, learn removeables inside and out, start doing your own extractions and endo except the really difficult cases, and do Medical billing whjen ever possible. Medical billing gives you bigger fees, less writeoffs and saves the dental maximums for dental care.
          • Re:and? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by aurispector (530273) on Sunday September 30 2007, @08:23AM (#20800807)
            Wow. I can't get over the number of incorrect assumptions you are making.

            First, I have lots of un- or underinsured patients that can't afford perio or endo treatment; this problem gets worse during recessions.

            Second, the study proving that periodontal disease CAUSES heart disease has yet to be completed AFAIK it's due in '08. (Either that or the guys at U. Penn don't know what they're talking about) Yes, there are studies showing a CORRELATION between the two, but as we all know, correlation is NOT causation.

            Third, who says I wasn't taught about dentures? I do a TON of dentures but if you think about it, dentures indicate a failure of previous dental treatment. My practice suffers because I could earn a lot more money providing perio, endo, implant and crown & bridge services to a given patient. How much do you earn doing extractions and dentures? How much would you earn doing more complex treatments that would preserve natural dentition?
        • Re:and? (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Lumpy (12016) on Saturday September 29 2007, @09:49PM (#20798201) Homepage
          Problem is dental care is horribly overpriced. And insurance companies and other treat it as if it is a "cosmetic" service instead of a real health issue. Bad teeth = bad health yet dential insurance is the crappiest on the planet and outside of the rich you are hard pressed to find someone with good healthy teeth. I had to spend well over $10,000 on my daughters orthodontics, that is insane for a bunch of wires and superglued on blocks for the wires. at the time I was very much lower middle class ($60,000 a year) and could not even think of affording invisiline or the other upscale stuff.

          I deal with construction people daily and 7 out of 10 of them you can easily tell they have a bad infection going on in their mouth as you can smell it in their breath. (yes you can smell it, some are so bad that a mouth full of tictacs cant mask it) That is insanely high, yet the dentists and dental associations really don't seem to care about afford ability to dental care. when a patient is told, $3500.00 to save that tooth and put a crown on it or $490.00 to yank it out. Guess what the poor person ($35,000 or less) is going to do?
          • Re:and? (Score:5, Informative)

            by Fulcrum of Evil (560260) on Saturday September 29 2007, @10:41PM (#20798507)
            In what part of the country is $60k/yr lower middle class? Maybe in SF, but you can pull down that sort of money hauling trash there.
                  • Re:and? (Score:5, Informative)

                    by Glock27 (446276) on Sunday September 30 2007, @08:24AM (#20800813)
                    only a MORON would pay $1000 a year for a 200K home. you know the idiots that buy those creative loans. a TRADITIONAL loan thatyou do not get screwed on your $200,000 home will cost you about $2100.00 a month even at 7%

                    k...looking at Quicken Loans, if you have good credit you can get a $190,000, 30 year fixed loan (you need at least a 5% down payment these days, $10,000) at 6.25% interest, which is $1,169 a month. That's with good credit of course, but that's a whole 'nother discussion. If you really want to get ahead of the curve, pay an extra $100 to $200 a month against the principle.

                    You can play around with the extra payments (prepayments) at Karl's Mortgage Calculator [jeacle.ie] if you want. In the example above, an extra $100 from the start shortens the loan from 30 years to 24 years, 3 months. $200 a month would shorten the loan to 20 years 7 months.

                    So, in short, you're way off base. :-)

                    $200k will get you a nice house in a lot of the country...and it'll get you more in a few more months. ;-)

      • Re:and? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Saturday September 29 2007, @11:08PM (#20798675)
        > Advanced societies that are governed by the rule of law and that require complex rules will naturally require more lawyers.

        What a load of nonsense. You're making 2 assumptions:

        1) That advanced socities have complex law.
        2) Lawyers are needed.

        An "advanced" society will have people who have internalized the law -- they don't need others to interpret it for them. Do YOU need a law against killing? Of course not -- you know better. A civilization where people are blind to the consequences of their actions is not advanced. Advanced socities have LESS laws, because in reality there is only a few Laws: The Law of Karma, and the Law of Love, everything else springs from ignorance, greed, or power.

        Western civilization is by no means advanced. When you still have people arguing over Intellectual Property Rights which are neither Property nor Rights, you have an IMMATURE society.

        Lawyers are a necessary evil, because people don't know any better.

        --
        The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government
          -- Tacit, 56-117 AD
  • They accept those who apply. Most Americans are probably happy with just an undergrad degree and don't want to go to grad school.

    Being an American graduate student myself, there are a lot of foreigners where I am as well. I don't have a problem with it. Why are you ranting here and not in some blog?
    • by j35ter (895427) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:22PM (#20796437)

      Why are you ranting here and not in some blog?

      'cause he's wondering how the next gen of american CS's will cope with the un-american competition. Imagine a future where most U.S. tech-companies outsource R&D and production to India and china...oh...never mind
    • I don't see where he had a problem with it, either. The difference between you and him isn't that you don't have a problem with it--it's that you aren't curious about why it is. As an academic, it's rather odd for you to assume that curiosity implies anything more sinister.
      • by sayfawa (1099071) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:51PM (#20796679)
        Yeah but, to be fair, this is slashdot. Everything has an element of complaining. If I were just curious about grad school stats I'd ask in a grad forum. I'd only ask here if I wanted a bunch of cynical worst-case-scenario answers, some complaints about the American school system, and a side dish of thinly veiled racism/xenophobia.
    • by r00t (33219) on Saturday September 29 2007, @07:41PM (#20797483) Journal
      We make it hard for them to become citizens. These are the people we should want most.

      Having them leave, then compete with us, is not good.
    • by XopherMV (575514) * on Saturday September 29 2007, @08:08PM (#20797677) Journal
      Most Americans are probably happy with just an undergrad degree and don't want to go to grad school.

      Exactly. Americans find perfectly good engineering jobs with "just" a bachelor's degree. There aren't enough jobs which require advanced degrees in engineering to make it worth the time to give up 2-3 years of engineering paychecks, pay for college, pay for books, pay for living expenses, and earn those advanced degrees. More than likely, you'd graduate with a master's or a PhD and work at the same job you could get with a bachelor's degree.

      On the other hand, foreigners looking to immigrate to the United States work under the assumption that if they go to school here and earn one of our advanced degrees, then we'd be more likely to allow them to stay once their studies are complete. THAT is why foreigners outnumber Americans in these topics. It's not because they're smarter, not because they love engineering more, and not because education is better in their country. It's because they want to immigrate here.
      • by Foobar of Borg (690622) on Saturday September 29 2007, @09:16PM (#20798017)

        Exactly. Americans find perfectly good engineering jobs with "just" a bachelor's degree. There aren't enough jobs which require advanced degrees in engineering to make it worth the time to give up 2-3 years of engineering paychecks, pay for college, pay for books, pay for living expenses, and earn those advanced degrees. More than likely, you'd graduate with a master's or a PhD and work at the same job you could get with a bachelor's degree.
        Actually, a Master's degree in an engineering field does generally correlate to an increase in pay and position. It's the Ph.D. that's not really useful unless you are going into academia or into some very specialized sort of field. In Chemistry, it's actually one step above that. You usually need a master's degree to get a decent job (though you can get by with just a bachelors), and a Ph.D. does really help since you can be a senior scientist in a lab. Although, from what I have heard, there are actually not enough BS/MS chemists to fill the bench work positions at a lot of chemical and pharmaceutical companies.


        Plus, in a lot of jobs, especially with bigger companies, you can get a job with a BS or MS degree and then go on to study later with the company's help. That's probably the best way to go about getting an advanced degree and getting decently paid at the same time. Unless you study physics. Then, you absolutely need a Ph.D. and you should get used to poverty :-p

      • by aaarrrgggh (9205) on Saturday September 29 2007, @09:40PM (#20798151)
        More importantly, 90% of American engineering students realize that the only reason for getting an MS in engineering is to teach. I'm yet to find someone who thinks he learned something worthwhile in post-grad engineering school.

        Getting an MBA has actual value. Working and gaining real-world experience has actual value. Meaningful research is a noble task, but... there isn't that much of it going on in most programs from what I can tell.

        Contrast that with India or Germany, where you basically need a PhD to get a job flipping burgers (yes, sarcasm), and it is easy to understand why Americans are a minority.

        Also, it isn't a recent change; it's been true for the past 20 years.
  • by slashdotmsiriv (922939) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:13PM (#20796355)
    "I have heard that many of the smarter Americans go into medicine or the law and that is why there are so few Americans in engineering. Is this true?"

    Yes!

    I would give the long answer, but I have to get back to preparing a computer networking paper with my chinese advisor and my 3 chinese colleagues :)
  • by The One and Only (691315) * <phil@philwelch.net> on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:18PM (#20796385) Homepage
    India has a billion people. China has a billion people. America has 300,000 people, which is almost an order of magnitude less than India and China combined. Consider that many of the best grad schools are in America--plenty of Indians and Chinese come to America for grad school, but you don't see as many Americans going to India or China. All in all, Americans are fortunate that we can get the same education next door that other people travel around the world for.
    • by dal20402 (895630) * <dal20402@ma[ ]om ['c.c' in gap]> on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:20PM (#20796405) Journal

      America has 300,000 people

      The Rapture happened? I'm still here? Wow, that's strange. I insult God all the time.

      • by Panoptes (1041206) on Saturday September 29 2007, @06:46PM (#20797089)
        Don't blame the poor chap - he was obviously using Excel 2007 for the calculations.
        • by Firethorn (177587) on Saturday September 29 2007, @09:24PM (#20798077) Homepage Journal
          Probably has something to do with that only a fraction of our population goes to a university for a four year program, much less longer. I think that if you look at US Citizens who go into these programs that you'll see a noticeable skew in which schools they come from.

          Remember, while our schools might be below average compared with other first world nations, it's also an extremely fragmented system - unlike how some school systems are nationally administered, you have to remember that every state has it's own school system - indeed you can frequently substitute counties and cities in there as well. This means in that while the USA has some of the worst schools in the world - we also have some of the best in the world. There are regions where public schools would be considered excellent, and areas where anybody who's anybody send their children to private institutions.

          Finally, we've been concentrating too much on mediocrity - spending too much effort on making sure everybody we can meets minimum standards, rather than trying to push students as far as they'll go.
      • by The One and Only (691315) * <phil@philwelch.net> on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:26PM (#20796485) Homepage
        You're like the sixth person to call me out on a typo. Who could have ever guessed that Slashdotters were pedantic nerds with nothing better to do on a Saturday night than correct a minor error? (Strangely enough, I did, correctly, say that the US population was about an order of magnitude less than 2 billion. 300,000 is about four orders of magnitude less.)
        • by mikael (484) on Saturday September 29 2007, @08:17PM (#20797721)
          Ya! This is the spelling nazi weekly meeting. Please make sure that your /. armbands are facing outward on your left arm, that your pocket protector is neatly folded and that your sneaker laces are tied properly. Our supreme leader Cowboy Neal (may his servers always be online) will address you all shortly.

        • by ScrewMaster (602015) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:34PM (#20796549)
          Actually, it is. China reached the point of significant industrialization in an incredibly short time by instituting an organized knowledge transfer program (and not just the U.S., but we were the most concentrated stockpile of information around, with the fewest restrictions on foreign students.) Call it what you want, but China's people came here, educated themselves as to what a high-technology culture needs to build and maintain the required industry ... and then went home and did just that. India is now doing the same thing. Right or wrong, conspiracy or not ... that's what's going on.
        • by Codifex Maximus (639) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:49PM (#20796655) Homepage
          Do these foreign students pay taxes in the US? If so, how long did they or do they pay? Is it a net gain for the US or a loss? If a loss then why is it done?

          Ah questions...
          • by j1m+5n0w (749199) on Saturday September 29 2007, @06:54PM (#20797139) Homepage Journal

            I don't know about taxes, but given an average grad student stipend, that's insignificant compared to both the cost of the education and the value of their research. In a grad school I attended, our stipend was about $20,000 a year, and I was told the cost per grad student per year to the institution was about $60,000 a year. (Where does that other $40,000 go? Advisor's salaries, class tuition, IT costs, buildings maintenance, etc...)

            PhD programs are not like undergrad, where you learn a bunch of stuff and work on mostly contrived problems and you aren't expected to contribute anything new to the field. It's more like a job where you solve hard problems for the people funding your education in exchange for grant money. Typical funding sources are NSF, DARPA, NIH, and sometimes corporations (IBM, Microsoft, and Intel all fund quite a bit of research).

            What the US government gets out of the grant money it spends is better solutions to hard research problems, some of which have significant economic value. In that respect, individual students are a bit of a gamble, but overall I'd say it's a net gain. If it's a Chinese or Indian that does the actual work, who cares? The real idiocy of the program though is that we often don't allow them to stay once they've completed their degree. Oh no, we can't have highly educated foreigners in our country competing for valuable US jobs! Never mind that there really aren't enough PhDs in the world to make any significant difference to the employment statistics.

          • by enbody (472304) on Saturday September 29 2007, @07:11PM (#20797269) Homepage
            It is a net gain. Look at it this way. The US takes some of the top students from some very large countries, e.g. India and China. They get educated here and most want to stay. If we keep them here, we are taking the cream of the crop from other countries and they add to our GDP. Over their lifetimes they add more to or GDP than we have provided in educating them. Why? Because they are smart and driven to work hard.

            This is from personal observation of this field over the last twenty years. The stupidest thing we can do is pay for their education and then not allow them to stay. The second most stupid thing we can do is make it harder for them to come here. We are currently doing both of those stupid things more than we used to.
          • by DavidShor (928926) * <supergeek717@@@gmail...com> on Saturday September 29 2007, @08:03PM (#20797647) Homepage
            Oh, get off it. The US supplies more dictatorships with weapons than China ever has.

            We sold weapons to Iran before and after the Shah. We just concluded a massive weapons deal with Saudi Arabia. To be honest, I don't think Saudi Arabia or 90's era Liberia are any more democratic than North Korea. Don't claim the moral high-ground unless you can justify giving 20 billion USD in advanced weaponry to a tyrannical theocracy known for sponsoring terrorism.

            And as for China's willingness to invade democracies when it suits their self interest, see what the US did in 1956 to Iran(Check out Operation Ajax on Wikipeida), and what the US did to Guatemala during the Cold war; Or what the CIA did in Chile, or the Congo, I could go on.

            Of course, every country with power and influence has black marks. See France's activities in West Africa and Rwanda, their current activities in Niger, to say nothing of their history in Indochina and Algeria; Or see the UK's actions in Uganda, Former Rhodesia, Iran, and Suez. Don't even get me started on Russia or Israel.

            The truth is, governments are rather soulless entities, which by design act in their own self-interest. To ascribe personal qualities to them like evil is idiotic and counter-productive. Instead, we have to understand the pressures a nation's leaders face.

            China is an ethnic powder keg teeming with religious and ethnic strife, Jingoism, and hyper-Nationalism. They have massive inequalities of wealth, and a population schooled in Marxism. In the meantime, rapid economic, political, and demographic trends have made most government and societal institutions irrelevant.

            Faced with this, what do you think the Chinese leaders want the most? Stability. Every single action they take, from supporting dictatorships in Burma and North Korea, to propping up the US economy with bond purchases, to refusing to float their currency. China has no urge to pick a fight with America, not now and not ever. They have their own problems to worry about, and the last thing they want to do is add another.

  • by MMC Monster (602931) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:19PM (#20796393)
    ...there sure aren't as many "americans" here as there used to be. Of course, I mean white anglo-saxon protestant males. A lot more minorities. A lot more first and second generation americans.
  • by The-Pheon (65392) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:19PM (#20796395) Homepage
    The best students in the world go to the best Universities in the world. The Universities in the United States consistently dominate the top universities in the world.[1] Thus, it isn't surprising that many people from other countries come here to study.

    [1] http://www.arwu.org/rank/2007/ARWU2007_Top100.htm [arwu.org]
  • Easy answer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Osty (16825) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:21PM (#20796421) Homepage

    Very few Americans require anything more than a BS to get a job with a Computer Engineering or Computer Science degree. On the other hand, it's easier for a non-citizen to get a job if they have a MS from a domestic school. As well, it's generally easier for them to get into shool than get into a job (the job comes after being here a few years and getting that MS), and gives a nice ~2 year jump on the whole green card process. If they somehow fail to find a job after getting the MS, there's always the option to continue on with a PhD while looking for something that will actually pay the bills.

    The goal of college for 90% of Americans is to get a better job. Therefore 90% of Americans aren't going to spend any more time than necessary in school, and if they do go for higher degrees it's usually for something that will increase their pay. A BS in CE doesn't get paid much less than a MS in CE, but a BS in CE with an MBA who's promoted into management does get paid quite a bit more.

      • Re:Easy answer (Score:5, Insightful)

        by servognome (738846) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:42PM (#20796603)

        But what about interest in knowledge and the subject matter? Is that a fringe aspect for americans?
        No, those things can be accomplished while working in industry. Work & study are not mutually exclusive.
        From personal experience, I appreciate learning in an applied engineering environment rather than the theory of academia.
      • Re:Easy answer (Score:5, Interesting)

        by PCM2 (4486) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:51PM (#20796673) Homepage

        You are talking about money, pay and jobs. But what about interest in knowledge and the subject matter? Is that a fringe aspect for americans?

        In my experience, yes. Most Americans go to college to "get a better job" or because they want to enter a certain field. They are, to coin a phrase, "goal oriented" -- school is a funnel into which they jump and once they get out the other end they can go back to living their lives, only now they will have been granted permission to enter into the career of their choice. So-called elite schools are desirable, not because they offer a better learning experience, but because they will "look better" to potential employers.

  • You have fundamentally asked and answered your own question and don't even realize it. The fundamental reason is very simple, grad students are coming from the countries that will be able to provide meaningful employment to those grads. In other words, outsourcing, or at the very least the prospect of outsourcing has scared away your potential fellow American students.

    It's a matter of economics, are you going to invest that much money and time in something when significant portions of the grad level work is being exported out of the country? With major corporations from the likes of Microsoft to IBM hiring principally outside the US in China and India, this is where the jobs will be and thus, where the grad students are coming from.

    The real slap in the face of the whole thing is that said companies than have the audacity to complain that we don't have enough educated workers to provide a workforce here in America.

  • Quite simple (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Rinikusu (28164) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:24PM (#20796459)
    A lot of foreign students are here on a foreign student visa. If they fuck up in school, they get sent back. So, by accepting a foreign student, the department has a very good idea that that student will be putting in 110% into the degree program, doing shit work for no money, whatever, when a domestic student is more likely to just tell an abusive department to fuck off and die and move to another school. It may also be that the student is less likely to be partying on the weekends (social stigma), and so grades won't be much of an issue if they made it that far.

    I thought about going to grad school for Biology as I have a keen interest in various fish and some local rivers & streams ecology that I picked up on my own. I had a sit down with the Dean of the Biology department where we basically shot the shit for an hour or two, talking about various subjects, including programs at other schools. He seemed surprised that not only did I know who the "big names" in my relatively obscure interests, but that I was also reading their papers and applying them. He looked at me and asked me point blank: Why the hell aren't you in my department? And I didn't have a good answer. He went on to explain that there's a ton of people in Biology grad school, but none of them were actually biologists. Instead, they were padding grades and trying to get into med school. While he was most certainly happy that they were going on with their lives, he said finding people actually interested in Biology was like pulling teeth. Basically: he'd pick someone like me, regardless of my GRE scores for the most part, over a mountain of med school hopefuls because it was his job, as far as he was concerned, to educate biologists. It was an interesting conversation. "Man, you could get your doctorate just doing what you're doing now at home on your own dime..." :P

    And no, I didn't go to grad school. Not yet, anyway. :)
  • by gbutler69 (910166) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:25PM (#20796469) Homepage
    Mostly I think it is because we're all too busy working for a living. Those who can afford college without having to work, do go into medicine and law as you said. Especially law. If you control the law you can control the money.

    Most Americans, even if they are really smart and work hard in high-school, still have to work while attending college and have little time for serious study. By the time they've finished four years of University, they have between $60,000.00 and $100,000.00 in debt. They look around and realize that if they go to graduate school, they will probably double that debt.

    Now, they've worked for most of the time they've been at University, and haven't truly been able to get all the benefits of dedicated study, and they are faced with more of the same. More debt, etc.

    Because they have work experience and because they can take jobs that pay reasonably well, they do so, figuring it is best to cut their losses.

    This is somewhat short-sighted, but, it is inevitable.

    A foreign student in the U.S. usually (from my experience) attended non-graduate school in their home country and it was a free-ride one way or another (I'm not saying they aren't smart and didn't have to work really hard). They are now in the U.S. attending graduate school, usually on some sort of scholarship (not saying they didn't earn it).

    They don't need to work to pay for school. They are not accruing massive debt. They can't just take a reasonable paying job in the U.S. because their student visa doesn't allow it. In their home country, reasonable paying jobs (without an advanced degree) aren't as plentiful. Their choices are, continue in graduate school while not accruing massive debts and yet being able to dedicate 100% of their efforts to learning and mastering the material, or return to their home nation and compete for jobs without and advanced degree. It's a pretty easy choice.

  • by SuperBanana (662181) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:33PM (#20796545)

    I have heard that many of the smarter Americans go into medicine or the law

    Medicine is not the place to go - there is an insane glut of grad students and postdocs. Competition is extremely fierce. If you're thinking of going for any sort of specialty practice- forget it. Everyone wants to be a *insert narrow specialty* doctor; nobody wants to be a general practitioner or go into pediatrics where we really need doctors. So, we have 50 zillion hand surgeons, and a line a mile out the doors of all the family docs.

    As for medical research - our lab is chock full of foreign students. The lab director prefers them because they're basically slaves- they want desperately to be in the US, and the lab holds their visa. They'll put up with shit pay, no/little credit for their work, insane hours, and unreasonable demands. They're just happy to be on US soil.

    Someone told me once that the lab couldn't attract US candidates because said candidates were going for higher profile, better paying positions.

    If you want to be successful coming out of grad school- go for engineering, either mechanical or electrical. Big shortages predicted in both fields, from what I've heard.

    Whatever you do, skip research - unless you look forward to flushing several years of your life down the drain to help some professor reel in a research grant, who'll barely care to list your name on the paper. And that's *if* the research isn't scooped by another lab...

  • TV for one. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by xigxag (167441) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:52PM (#20796683)
    It's very rare to see a fictional TV show revolving around an engineer, mathematician, physicist or hard science major of any kind. The only counterexample I can think of offhand is Ross from Friends, but to the extent that his job was mentioned at all it was usually in some ridiculous context. Contrast that with the hundreds of shows there have been about doctors, lawyers, judges, financiers and reporters. Hence, those professions are considered sexy and lucrative, even when they aren't particularly so (public defenders and beat reporters), whereas scientists are considered obscure and arcane at best, geeky and borderline irresponsible at worst. The one looming exception is the astronaut/astrophysicist type on sci-fi shows, but what they tend to do, blast through galaxies and meet aliens, is something so unrealistic that it doesn't lend itself to employment aspirations.

    Of course, it's not just Americans who watch TV but the problem particular to Americans is that their real-life experience seems to parallel what they see on TV, they deal with plenty of brokers, doctors and lawyers in real life and have little contact with engineers and scientists. Americans also pay their doctors and lawyers extremely highly. In other countries doctors and lawyers are not quite so highly compensated and engineers have higher social status overall.
  • That tag... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by afabbro (33948) on Saturday September 29 2007, @06:37PM (#20797023)
    If someone used a tag called "becauseindiansaredumb" or "becausemexicansaredumb", everyone here would be up in arms.
  • Economics. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Viv (54519) on Sunday September 30 2007, @04:42AM (#20799993)
    This question keeps coming up on Slashdot, in one form or another, and my answer is always the same: Economics.

    For most students who intend to enter the commercial sector, getting the "one up" degree just doesn't pay that well. Speaking about engineering specifically:

    1. Graduate with a BS/BA. Get a job, work for two years, and you'll be on just about even ground (salary-wise) with the guy who got his MS/MA. And you won't have picked up the debt/costs associated with getting the MS/MA. I ran the numbers for me, and the payback on this is about 6-7 years.

    2. Graduate with an MS/MA. Get a job, work for three years, and you'll be on even ground -- or often better -- with the guy who got his PhD. And you won't have picked up the debt/costs associated with the MS/MA. I ran the numbers for me, and the payback on this is about 15-20 years.

    And the kicker: Anyone smart enough to get a graduate degree can run those numbers. This doesn't even include the opportunity cost of delaying starting a family while you pursue the degree.

    However, foreign students have an added sweetener in the pot: it's easier to stay in America to make the big bucks if you have a graduate degree. And this tips the equation significantly.

    I just want to puke whenever I hear US firms bitching and moaning about how there aren't enough American graduate scientists/engineers. It's simple economics, you bunch of whining douche bags. You understand them, because when demand for your products goes up, you're quite happy to raise the price. But when the shoe is on the other foot? You whine, bitch and moan about how employment costs are out of hand.

    Again, it's simple economics, supply and demand. Supply short? Pay more. If it doesn't, don't be surprised when supply stays low.
    • Re:$$chool. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Duhavid (677874) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:21PM (#20796417)
      That is a factor.

      But as long as "success" is defined by earnings, and
      lawyers and doctors are paid more than engineers,
      the smart ones will pick this way.
    • Re:$$chool. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Metasquares (555685) <<slashdot> <at> <metasquared.com>> on Saturday September 29 2007, @06:29PM (#20796971) Homepage
      In academic America, graduate schools pay YOU :)

      Seriously, graduate school (at least on the doctoral level) in science and engineering is usually very well funded. Not only is it common to get free tuition, but it is also common to receive a stipend. It's less than you'd get working, but it's still something.

      Not so in medicine or law, AFAIK.
    • by delong (125205) on Saturday September 29 2007, @05:31PM (#20796527)
      Really this is just silly. If 9.8% of US families is considered "the majority", then you'd be right. But you're wrong. Besides that fact, US GDP per capita is several times that of India or China, so by your logic there should be no Indian or Chinese grad students because not only are a majority of Indians and Chinese truly poor, they are much poorer than the average American.

      Most Americans don't go to grad school because there is little economic incentive to do so. The US economy only supports so many technocrats. The presence of so many Indian and Chinese students in US science and technical grad programs is a natural function of those nations' evolving manufacturing and services sectors. They simply need to train more technocrats because their sectors are growing compared to those sectors in the US, which are economically mature.

      As to India or China "surpassing" the US, what does that mean? Surpassing the US in what? Manufacturing? Good! That's economic specialization that creates efficiencies for everyone. Not only is talk of "surpassing" mere economic scare-mongering (did we learn nothing from such silliness when the Japanese were supposed to "surpass us" in the 1980s? Where are the Japanese today? Economic stagnation), it makes erroneous straight-line projections that ignore very important long term considerations of demographics and other factors. The US economy will be a large and important factor in the global economy for the foreseeable future. But the global economy continues to grow and evolve and the US economy continues to change from its post-WWII dominance (unsurprising since it was the only intact industrial economy on the planet) to an important player in a dynamic specialized global economy.
      • by Pollardito (781263) on Saturday September 29 2007, @10:00PM (#20798271)

        Most Americans don't go to grad school because there is little economic incentive to do so. The US economy only supports so many technocrats. The presence of so many Indian and Chinese students in US science and technical grad programs is a natural function of those nations' evolving manufacturing and services sectors. They simply need to train more technocrats because their sectors are growing compared to those sectors in the US, which are economically mature.
        if most students are like i was, a part of the problem is that there isn't a lot of discussion in undergraduate classes about why those students should stay for grad school, what money is available to fund those studies, and what sort of jobs one can expect to get with a graduate degree. i was lucky and made my own closer contacts with a couple of faculty who did tell me all this independently, but i bet most people probably never hear the "sales pitch". and this is coming from someone who did really well in undergrad studies, if no one at the university thought to approach me then there's no way they're approaching people that are more toward the border of graduate qualification but still might succeed there.

        two other factors that i haven't seen mentioned are the steady increase in student loan burdens and the fact that a foreign student dominated graduate culture tends to attact more of the same. students are coming out of undergrad programs with more and more debt, and it's hard for those students to think about anything but getting into the workforce and paying that off now. the fact that they can delay repayment and earn enough money in graduate assistantships to keep the debt from increasing isn't as well advertised as it could be.

        the OP stated that he's one of 7 american students in a 90% foreign class which is pretty similar to what i encountered in a CS graduate program. graduate classes are really very much harder than undergraduate classes, and i don't care who you are you're probably going to get stuck on parts of the curriculum and have to work through it with other people to fully grasp the concepts (and, no, i'm not talking about cheating on your homework). in my experience the american and non-american graduate students are two pretty disparate groups, and being a part of the larger of those two orbits has to be a huge advantage when you need to tap those resources. that's setting aside the fact that graduate students effectively live on campus in their study areas and labs, so having a large support group in that environment is huge.
      • by Sj0 (472011) on Saturday September 29 2007, @11:26PM (#20798791) Homepage Journal
        US GDP is pretty badly skewed by the massive amounts of debt created by the US government.

        Take into consideration that when a bank has a dollar in savings, it can lend someone some ridiculous amount like 250, and you'll realise that the 500 billion dollars a year Americans borrow leads to some serious green moving around the economy in a very bad way.

        I wouldn't be surprised if some country out there, especially one like China, who holds tonnes of US debt, could get some amazing growth very quickly. After all, the US gained it's power by industrialization in the world wars. They became the largest arms dealer in the world, and while countries like Britain became debt ridden, the US became the largest debtor.

        Personally, given the circumstances, I'd say the US is entering the perfect storm leading to it's own demise.