http://serc.carleton.edu/earthandmind/posts/buddy_c.support.html#discussion http://serc.carleton.edu/earthandmind/posts/buddy_c.support.html#post21752
I think you have opened up discussion of a really important problem, for the field and for the country, and I appreciate your bringing up basic assumptions for examination. Two thoughts:

First, what do we know about how many MS and PhD geoscience graduates the economy needs or can absorb? The implication of your post is that more are needed than the current funding model is supporting. Do we actually know this? How would we measure this? I suppose one indicator would be whether MS and PhD geo graduates been having an easy time finding appropriate jobs after graduation in recent years.

It is arguable that if the nation produced more geoscience graduates than are needed in traditional jobs, they would find ways to use their systems thinking ability, problem solving ability, and collaborative skills to accomplish important and rewards things in non-traditional career paths. But if we go this route, we should be clear to ourselves as the gatekeepers to the profession and to students that that's what we have in mind, and that collectively there are more geo-grads being produced than will fit into the traditional jobs in academia and industry. This has been happening in journalism education--more talented and excellently-trained graduates are being produced than the traditional job market can absorb--and the results are patchy. Some are indeed using their talents and education to accomplish amazing things in new media and other invented-from-scratch ventures, but others are marginally employed and struggling to pay back student loans for an education that didn't noticeably move them towards where they wanted to be.

Secondly, about the necessity/utility of a research project in masters' programs: In thinking through the value of such a research experience, an important relatively new factor in the mix is that so many students are now having an excellent research experience during their undergraduate years, through REU's and/or senior theses. For students who aren't aiming towards a primarily research career, maybe this is enough to give them a feel for what geoscience research is all about, especially if it is accompanied by some purposefully-fostered metacognitive reflection on the nature of the science. Then graduates could be considered employable with a BS rather than an MS, or the MS time could be used to foster a broader range of skills, as you describe in your post above. I taught for a semester at Monash University in Australia in the late 1980's, and that was the system there at the time: students did 3 years of undergrad coursework in geology to get the basic degree, and then could stay on for a optional 4th year, a research year, to get an honors degree. The honors undergrad degree, with substantial research project no masters degree, was welcomed in industry. There were other problems with that model (no liberal arts courses), but it was a more economical model for the student and the nation than expecting everyone who wants to work in geo to get at least a masters degree. ]]> Kim Kastens 1349864760 http://serc.carleton.edu/earthandmind/posts/buddy_c.support.html#post21752 http://serc.carleton.edu/earthandmind/posts/buddy_c.support.html#post21756
In my own advising of undergraduate students, I do alert them to the reality that the professional degree in the Geosciences is really at the Master's level, and to expect to go to graduate school as part of their life plan. I do note that taking a year or two off is commonly a good thing, as is getting ground level job experience to see if a career in that sector is to their liking. But, I also encourage them to think broadly about possible career paths that may take them into "non traditional" careers such as planning, law, education, business, journalism, public health. A solid base in the knowledge, skills and ways of thinking developed in an Earth Science degree, coupled with training in another discipline, may well be a pathway to success. We know we need ~10,000 Earth Science teachers in our public schools right now. Combining a knowlege of resources (oil, metals) or climate (and impacts on agriculture) coupled with a business degree may lead to a very lucrative career in dealing with commodities. But my main interest in having students consider alternate career pathways is we really need workers who are knowledgeable about Earth to reach out to sectors of the society that either are ignorant or ignore what we have to offer. These students/workers can be our best ambassadors to help elevate the relevance and importance of the Earth sciences as we address the grand challenges of then next century.

Finally, the recent PCAST Report to the President ENGAGE TO EXCEL: PRODUCING ONE MILLION ADDITIONAL COLLEGE GRADUATES WITH DEGREES IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY,ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS [see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/pcast/docsreports] does indeed recommend direct research experiences in the undergraduate curriculum. And, yes, there are many programs out there that promote research experiences for undergraduates, and perhaps this is being done in some programs,departments, classes (see the module we did as a collaboration between the On the Cutting Edge program and the Council for Undergraduate Research on [see: http://NAGTWorkshops/undergraduate_research/index.html 'Undergraduate Research as Teaching Practice']. But this is not a universal condition for geo-students. Not yet. An alternate proposal for the MS degree, applied already at some institutions, is to have students complete a 5 year MS program, largely by doing a significant research project starting at the undergraduate level.

Please don't get me wrong: I'm not advocating to not have students participate in authentic research (hopefully early and often). But the current funding model is simply not sustainable.]]> Dave Mogk 1350186360 http://serc.carleton.edu/earthandmind/posts/buddy_c.support.html#post21756