Wednesday, March 18, 2009

NPR and Thesis Writing

For years now, I have started the work day by tuning the radio to NPR.  It is soothing background noise, and serves to remind me that intelligent people are out in the world doing important things, not playing solitaire.  This is sometimes a necessary reminder.

Anyhoo, that's all fine and good, and I usually ignore 95% of the sound, unless something momentous is happening.  Today though, is different.  Aretha Franklin is being interviewed about her Inauguration Day performance, and snippets of the song have been played every hour.  "My Count.......try 'tis of thee..."  Without fail, I stop whatever I'm doing (writing about finite element analysis for helicopter blades, which is even more boring than you might think) and snigger.  Except now, I'm not only sniggering, but I'm ready to stuff a sock down Aretha's throat.  

Truly a banner day.  I might even have to put actual music on, just to escape.*



*Don't suggest I just turn the radio off.  I can't work in the quiet- I have to have some noise.  In the absence of anything else, I start singing or humming, but since I can't sing, I don't know any songs except those I was forced to learn as a kid or picked up from musicals.  Thus my repertoire is limited to : the anthem, Oklahoma, and Do-Re-Mi.  Not soothing.

Monday, March 09, 2009

Is there another side to the story of immigrant dominance in STEM grad programs?

A number of recently published articles have explored the large impact foreign nationals have on our economy and the number of start-ups in high tech industries they foster. Many of these articles seize upon the disproportionate representation of foreign nationals in the engineering and science programs at the graduate level at US colleges and universities. In light of current economic depths these arguments have been used to emphasize the importance of expanding immigrant H1-B working visas and streamlining US immigration procedures so that the US can "retain" these gifted scientists, engineers and scholars.

I do think that we need to reassess our legal immigration policies to address the short comings. If a student has done exceptionally well at our universities and upon graduation wants to remain in the US and contribute to our economy then we should encourage it by all means. I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that the "knowledge" gap between American students and their foreign national counterparts is as wide as it has been made out to be. If it is then Reid Hoffman's suggestion of adding a 10% payroll tax to H1-B visa holders with that money funneled to subsidize continued education of American talent would certainly go toward addressing this gap.

My experience in engineering graduate school and as the spouse of a current engineering PHD student is that the story is more complicated than these discussions let on.

While it is true our high school math and science education are [as evidenced by standard testing] not comparing well on an international basis on average, placement in graduate studies especially at the most prestigious universities is not for the average student from the US or abroad. I think there are some other factors at play that need to be considered:

1) Is it possible that many of our best and brightest students are choosing other fields [finance?] in place of science and engineering? If so recent events may have an impact on that and we may see more American students pursuing post graduate work in Science and Engineering.

2) One observation I have is that many of the professors, often US educated, are foreign nationals and many still retain substantial links to their home countries. Students that come from their home regions or countries may be driven to perform not only because the professor holds their immigration status in their hands but also because of some personal connection. In these cases the deck is stacked against the American student.

3) In many cases it seems easier for a foreign national to get funded research or teaching assistanceships than it is for American students. I am currently still paying for 1 semester of graduate school completed at MIT 12 years ago and am well aware of the difficulty in finding a professor with funding willing to cover the expenses of your tuition. If funding is unavailable except for international students then how can we expect more representation of American students in these areas even if they are academically qualified?

I say lift the H1B cap and look at ways to devote more funding to Science and Engineering. We have always been an inclusive society and present an incredible infrastructure to promote start-ups and hi tech industries. However, please don't believe that American's are too uneducated,too unqualified or simply too unable to perform at the highest levels with foreign counterparts. There are other factors at play.


Reid Hoffman - Let Start-Ups Bail Us Out - washingtonpost.com
Reid Hoffman - Let Start-Ups Bail Us Out - washingtonpost.com

Vivek Wadhwa - They're Taking Their Brains and Going Home
Vivek Wadhwa - They're Taking Their Brains and Going Home

Vivek Wadhwa - Education, Entrepreneurship and Immigration: America's New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II
Vivek Wadhwa - Education, Entrepreneurship and Immigration: America's New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II

Thursday, March 05, 2009

SWAT Teams in MD & Beyond

This is a link to a radio show which discusses the use of SWAT teams for regular law enforcement.  One of the guests is the mayor of Berwyn Heights, whose home was raided and whose dogs were killed, by a SWAT team with no warrant.  The raid on his house was conducted because a box of marijuana was delivered to his wife as part of a drug scheme that used random addresses for drug shipments; the conspirators would try to retrieve the boxes before the homeowners came home, or before actual delivery (with the help of deliverymen).  The mayor asked if he would have been justified in shooting the invaders, and if anyone would have protested if he had been killed while trying to protect his home with a firearm.

SWAT Teams in MD & Beyond

Posted using ShareThis

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Contradictory Public Policy

There are two public policies or attitudes that are in the news right now, and they seem to be incompatible.  
1. Individual Gun Rights: This is a big deal in DC right now, because Congress and the courts are very involved in overturning DC's longtime handgun ban.  I'm not invested in this issue, since I don't live in DC, but I am not anti-gun.  Crime is not noticeably low in the District, even with a handgun ban.  Anyway, the theory as presented by many conservative politicians and the NRA is that every adult should have the right to protect himself and his family with a handgun.  Fine, whatever.  Seems a little fear oriented and unreasonably optimistic, but fine.  (Optimistic: your regular Joe Schlub will keep his wits and react with cool precision as his home is invaded and stop the bad guys with kill shots to the the body or head, with no collateral damage inside or outside the home.)(Plus, Joe Schlub's gun is loaded and ready to stop aforementioned bad guys when they break in, and he doesn't have to run around the house looking for the key to the gun safe.)

2. The Government Doesn't Need a Warrant for Terrorism Cases:  The idea here being that when apprehending terrorism suspects, the Fed can knock down the door without a by your leave, so the bad guys don't have time to arm themselves, run away or destroy evidence.  All fine and good until... they get the wrong house.  Or the wrong guy.  This is not beyond the realm of possibility.  (Also please remember that many people maintain that the govt can't do anything right.  These seem to be the same people who want to enable the govt to break into anyone's house on suspicion, because they'll always be correct about the targets.)

If you are innocent Joe Schlub, sitting in your house enjoying a little Keith Olbermann and a cold craft beer, and a pack of jack-booted thugs burst into your house with guns and yelling and associated nonsense, do you not reach for your gun?  Isn't this when you are empowered by the 2nd amendment to protect your home and family?  In fact, the fiercest supporters of the 2nd have always said that personal arms are necessary to protect against tyrannical govt, which is well represented by thugs knocking down your door without warning or warrant.  So when Joe Schlub gets his gun, the Feds either a) shoot him or b) get shot.  If they get shot, is Joe in trouble because he assaulted (unidentified, yelling, home-invading) law officers?  Are all the people in favor of guns going to defend Joe for shooting some cops, when he didn't know they were cops?  Or are they going to call for his head?  After all, he's obviously guilty of something, or else his home wouldn't have been invaded.

This question is causing me some anxiety.