Humanity’s growing access to information is changing how we interact with the world and ultimately the type of decisions we make. I believe it’s an increasingly vital new development that will dictate a lot about the direction society heads moving forward. In the 2018-2019 school year, higher-ed institutions in the United States gave out more degrees in Visual and Performing Arts than Computer Science. Engineering degrees were one of the least most popular degrees that year, barely beating Biology and other Natural Sciences. Some people suggest that this data indicates Americans are getting dumber, or perhaps lazier; however, I’d argue that this is a direct result of the tremendous access to information and the exponential growth in opportunity – or more frankly choice – brought about by the 21st century. I have three contentions as to why this is happening, some of which are unique to the US, but not all. I believe the information and knowledge base human beings cultivated over the last two decades has created an information-sharing environment that analogously allows individual human beings with devices connected to the internet to act like synapses in the brain, constantly sending information back and forth to one another to promote the health of overall cognitive functionality (society). I believe this accounts for most of the cultural shifts we’re seeing today. Because of this, young people aren’t as interested in STEM these days because they are prioritizing things like socio-economic issues – which arguably have been neglected in the US to the bolstering gain of technological development and innovation. They are also more concerned with how they spend the most precious asset human beings have on this earth besides our health, which is time, and this reason is ever increasing in relevancy. Lastly, and this one is really interesting and very much me speculating, I think young generations are trying to get as far away as possible from the 9-5 lifestyle their parents had, and that drive to differentiate, in concoction with many other things, has given rise to something very interesting, the creator economy. I talk about all three of these things in this post and why I believe they answer the question of why young people in the US appear to be less STEM inclined. Also, this is a blog post, not an article for the New York Times. For the most part, I’m just talking ****.
If you put yourself in the position of a young person today with access to multiple channels for receiving and sharing information, you’d soon realize how so many things about your life and the way you interact with the world change constantly, especially as technology continues to evolve at an accelerated pace. A new video or audio sharing app is launching every other month it feels like. Currently reading a book called, Thank You for Being Late, and I stumbled upon this quote that I thought was compelling:
“The principal factor promoting historically significant social change is contact with strangers possessing new and unfamiliar skills.”
Now, in my opinion, this is an excellent summation of what we are witnessing here and leads me to my first conclusion as to the root cause of the education data we’re seeing, which is the massive, constant dispersal of and exposure to new ideas, or the hyper-dissemination of ideas.
Before technology and advances in telecommunication made ceaseless and sustainable communication a reality, people, for the most part, were left to engage only with their immediate community. More often than not there was little to no diversity in thinking, as it becomes harder to identify problems and implement change in large groups at scale. However, today most people can pick up a phone, gain connectivity access, type 140 characters and engage with anyone in the world, as long as they also have an internet connection and the hardware to access it. When you can share an idea with someone completely unknown to you outside of the digital platform you’re using to engage, it changes how you see the world. It also changes how you view the impact your ideas can have on that world. Social media has allowed us to understand just how many people believe what we believe and resonate with our story, and it also helps us consider the ideas of others in shaping our own perspective. The ability to share and distribute information is the best it’s ever been and is only getting better. Ideas can be challenged and evolve at a rapid pace, and young people can see in real-time just how much change a single idea can have. I can’t say categorically that this is a good or bad thing, but it certainly has consequences. A good consequence I think is that people who felt like they never had a voice or like their opinion wasn’t shared by the majority, now understand just how powerful one individual voice can be, and they want to learn how to be the best advocates of their own ideas. In my humble opinion, I believe the way to do that is through subjects like Political Science, English, History, Philosophy, etc.
When pinpointed to America, the current trepid culture and political climate show that this dissemination of ideas also brings the desire for change in ideology and social structure from young people. Engineers and technologists have an impact on our society in profound ways, but it’s typically the people using their devices and intellectual property to spout and promote ideas that are in the spotlight, ultimately influencing culture. And these days, the spotlight matters quite a bit. Young Americans look around and they see the social injustices happening in their communities and they want to change those systems of oppression. They are not choosing Social Sciences and Humanities as their desired fields because Computer Science and Engineering intimidate them, but they are choosing these fields because they want to learn how to develop and implement their ideas, while also gaining the credibility and skill set to challenge the ideas of old. For the upcoming generation in America, social issues are a higher priority than technological innovations, and I can’t say I disagree with them too much. Any advances in technology manifested in a corrupted society will be corrupt by nature. Young people are more concerned with changes in public policy than with updates to their phone’s operating system or seeing if we can somehow get information to move faster than the speed of light.
The lack of interest in STEM-related fields also got me thinking, “Do people not want to be doctors anymore?”. No, I don’t believe this is really the issue. I think what people are prioritizing here is time. A 2018 Pew research survey provides very interesting insights on why people do or don’t choose pursuing STEM as a career, some of which I challenge; for example, the survey claims that majority of adults believe more than half of all young people don’t want to study STEM because they think it’s too hard, to which I have already provided my retort in the previous paragraphs. What I think is even more interesting from the survey is that 27% of people said they didn’t pursue STEM because of “time and costs barriers,” and this statistic is even higher among certain demographics. Engineering and Natural Science undergraduate degrees are typically done in 4 years, however, for most people, there’s this implied assumption that after you graduate with one of these degrees you, “have to go back to school to get your Master’s or MD/PhD.” I’m using quotations here to express sarcasm.
Most people in the United States have zero interest in pursuing postgraduate degrees in these fields because of one thing, time, which is directly influenced by two other really important things, money and social freedom. Thinking back to even two decades ago, generations currently existing right now are fortunate to be experiencing an abundance of social freedom never seen before in history. With this abundance in social freedom comes even more opportunity for individuals to bifurcate in their decision-making. Meaning, it’s really easy to do whatever the hell you want. Most people don’t want to spend their early-late 20s – what would be the most amazing years of their lives – in a classroom being assessed and told they are or are not good enough. They don’t see the stress and hardships that come with pursuing further education worth the return on investment they might get after matriculating through a program. They’d rather not incur that debt, protect their mental health, travel, and create experiences. They want to squeeze as much social freedom as they can from life and further education only guarantees you work for the next 10-20 years, if not more. Young people don’t want to work, they want to create, and become successful off their creativity.
I would say creativity has taken on new meaning in the 21st century. I find content and digital media to be utterly fascinating, and I think it is going to play a larger and larger role in how we live and what we think. Content creators are an interesting bunch. I’ve given it a lot of thought, and I don’t know if I’d consider all content to be thought of as art. I think some digital content can be qualified as art, but I think most content on the internet would not fall within that category. I’ll discuss this more eventually in a later post, but I think art implies a touch of introspection and emotional essence. A lot of the videos that go viral on the internet show no signs of introspection or emotion. There are some cool dance moves and animals doing people things, but I believe we’d have to think a bit harder before we consider these forms of media under one artistic umbrella. Don’t get me wrong, I have respect for what people are doing with these tools of engagement. Not all content is art, but all content is a form of creativity manifested for the consumption of others. Content is a creative display using media to invoke engagement from people. I’m not specifying good engagement or bad engagement, just engagement.
Once content creators get to a certain level with their work, they can engage with millions of people across multiple platforms, sometimes multiple times a day. When you have that level of reach and many people following your activity, your influence on ideas and culture comes without fuss. Thanks to technology, we can see whose ideas are changing the world and how they are doing it. People see this and they want in on the action. Not necessarily to influence the masses, but to create, have their creativity acknowledged, and also get paid for it. The recognition an individual receives for being a creator comes in many different forms – i.e. endorsement deals, sponsorships, brands, clothing lines, awards, TV appearances, multimillion-dollar media deals, adoring fans who hang on your every word, just to name a few. The engineers who build these devices and platforms become rich and successful, and some do gain a sort of cult following, but they are stuck building and innovating for the rest of their careers or even lives. But if we look at the creator economy, absolutely nothing about that screams 9-5. Creators use the platforms and devices developed by these engineers and technologists to “influence” or promote themselves, their brand, or whatever party chooses to sponsor them. There’s no clocking in or out, no meetings with shareholders, no regulatory or fiduciary pressure. You just need to make sure your video is no longer than a minute, you incorporate a catchy tagline and nutty dance routine that is impossible for any 22+ adult to perform, or provide a form of engagement that grabs the attention of people. That’s what pays today, attention. Being an accountant is fine and dandy, and shout out to my guy Steve for holding it down every season, but that job seems boring unless you love numbers, spreadsheets, and filing forms. Also, as an accountant, unless you’re working for a large bank or firm, you’re probably not getting “rich”, but sure you’re secure. Individuals today are less worried about security and more concerned with their experiences. Our generation, the younger generation, has the opportunity to choose what we do with our time on this planet. That decision wasn’t always easy for previous generations to make. But thanks to innovations in communication and data sharing, you can compare yourself to someone you knew five years ago who’s currently a YouTuber creating makeup content online while living in a New York City apartment. Comparison is the thief of joy, but this is where we are now as a society. Which sounds like a cooler gig? Being an accountant, or creating content that pays you?
I am in no way saying that jobs in STEM are not interesting or important for society. These are arguably the most essential roles in the world right now. We would fall apart without these folks supporting us with digital and physical infrastructure, medicine and health professionals, pathologists, etc. Also, a lot of these folks really love their jobs – the research, hypothesizing and experimenting sounds quite compelling to those who are naturally curious. The compulsion that befalls our STEM inclined friends of pushing the boundaries everyday and seeing if we can “up the ante” in the realms of physics, medicine, and engineering is exactly why you and I can enjoy the social freedom we often take for granted.
The point I’m trying to make, is that people don’t want to spend most of their lives working to serve the agenda of someone else. Young people don’t want to owe thousands in debt, work long hours, and not be able to do the things they love – their “luxuries”. It might just be how culture works, but young people have seen their parents and grandparents dedicate the majority of their adult life to supporting a corrupt system trying to achieve the “American Dream,” and we are convinced that it is a facade. Now, realizing that it’s a facade, we see people trying to create what they believe to be the American Dream for themselves, prioritizing themselves and their time, not the mission or profit objectives of large corporations. Like a pendulum, it seems like the culture is shifting from one extreme to another, and I am very curious to see where the ball stops.
OA
OA 