Between 1940 and 2016, employment in manufacturing shifted across America from the Northeast to the Midwest and the Southeast. The industry lost ground in many places and is now the largest employer in only two states—Indiana and Wisconsin. In 1940, 23% of workers were employed in the manufacturing industry, and they were concentrated in 15 northeastern, mid-Atlantic, and Great Lakes states. As the economy shifted toward services at the beginning of the new millennium, the share of employment in manufacturing declined to less than 15%.
Now in its 12th edition, the GII is a global benchmark that helps policy makers better understand how to stimulate and measure innovative activity, a main driver of economic and social development. The GII 2019 ranks 129 economies based on 80 indicators, from traditional measurements like research and development investments and international patent and trademark applications to newer indicators including mobile-phone app creation and high-tech exports.
We are excited to share our fiscal 2019 annual report. The Economic Growth Institute is expanding its research, company engagement, and education initiatives, which are shared in this year's report. The Institute has provided innovative economic development programming and applied research for over 35 years. - Economic Growth Institute
Careers in engineering encompass a variety of occupations that spur the creation of new ideas, advance technology, and are essential to a globally competitive economy and national defense. Increasing the number of Americans studying and pursuing careers in engineering is essential to the preceding points. Shortages in meeting employment demands exist in the number of U.S.
The U.S. must continue to develop and support an innovation economy that, “collaborates with allies and partners, improves STEM education, draws on an advanced technical workforce, and invests in early-stage research and development,” according to the latest U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS).4 Further, the NSS asserts that the nation must continue to be the destination of choice for the “innovative and the inventive, the brilliant and the bold.”
The 2019 expert panel agreed on two long-term trends: rethinking how institutions work, and modularized and disaggregated degrees. These long-term trends indicate an expected evolution in the way higher education approaches its mission, as well as a trend toward increased student control over individual learning pathways.
The Global Challenges are transnational in nature and transinstitutional in solution. They cannot be addressed by any government or institution acting alone. They require collaborative action among governments, international organizations, corporations, universities, NGOs, and creative individuals. Although listed in sequence, Challenge 1 on sustainable development and climate change is no more or less important than Challenge 15 on global ethics.
Overall, the study finds that many fields that support a significant number of U.S. jobs see little CTE course-taking in high school, suggesting the potential for greater alignment in these areas.
Students are also more likely to take courses in fields that support more local jobs, but less likely to do so when those jobs are high-paying, suggesting that today’s CTE is connecting kids with jobs that are plentiful but low-paying by industry standards.
This digest highlights key statistics drawn from a variety of data sources. Data and figures in this digest are organized into the following topical areas: enrollment, field of degree, employment status, and occupation, including academic careers. Surveys conducted by the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) within the National Science Foundation provided a large portion of the data used in this report. NCSES has a central role in the collection, interpretation, analysis, and dissemination of objective data on the science and engineering enterprise.
The Panel recognizes that the Department of Defense (DoD) and industry have different business models, which at times may be in conflict. In exploring common ground, the Panel members received the testimony of many defense and industry officials, reviewed the history of relevant legislation and identified “tension points” of disagreement between the Government and industry. Following extensive deliberations, Panel members (listed in Appendix B) prepared white papers to address the tension points and to make recommendations for legislative, regulatory, and policy changes that recognize and