Industry Must Do its Part to Educate the Workforce of the Future

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

Howard D. Elias is President and Chief Operating Officer, EMC Information Infrastructure and Cloud Services. 

Innovation and productivity are the two key enablers of every successful economy, both of which rely on skilled people working in jobs that fuel a nation's long term health and wealth. America has always been blessed with innovative and productive people, but today uncertainty is dampening that spirit. That is because the issue of jobs is very real for the more than nine percent of unemployed, for the underemployed, for recent or soon-to-be college graduates looking for their first starting role-–anyone for whom the promise of a good-paying, personally satisfying job seems much less certain than it did just five years ago. 

But from another perspective, jobs are also an issue for U.S. employers that have a need for talented employees but find an insufficient supply of candidates with the requisite skills in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to help them compete in the digital world. Though it is a global economy, one requiring a globally talented workforce, America plays a critical role as a primary innovator and engine of growth in the 21st Century, and STEM education is at the core of what it will take to fuel America's innovation engine. 

Recognizing this situation, government, private enterprises and leading civic organizations and foundations are calling for graduating more engineers from American colleges and universities, and with good reason: STEM competency is critical to improving American employment and income. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports unemployment in the technology sector at only 3.8 percent, with 7 percent to 13 percent job growth for engineers. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Commerce's Economics and Statistics Administration reports that STEM jobs increased at a pace three times faster than other jobs over the last three years. In an August 31 interview with New America Media, Dr. Alicia Abella, executive director of the Innovative Services Research Department at AT&T Labs summed up the issue stating, "The highest growing number of jobs is in the technology field, and there is more demand for those jobs than there is supply. We're going to need 800,000 more [U.S.] jobs by 2018 in computer technology alone. In the last three years we've only graduated 24,000 in those sectors and that's not nearly enough." 

As a technologist and employer, I understand well the challenge described by Dr. Abella. Paradoxically, with unemployment levels at their highest in 30 years, I and my peers have positions we are challenged to fill. Why? Because the skills we need are highly specialized; they are new skills that didn't exist just a few years ago, with titles like cloud architect and data scientist, reflective of the pace of innovation in today's digital economy. 

There is a long and rich history of industrialists investing in the creation of new schools and innovative curricula with the specific purpose of training students able to meet the needs of growing industries. Some of our country's most renowned educational institutions, such as Carnegie Mellon University, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Purdue University, and many others exist today because of such foresighted investments. Successful companies in today's STEM-focused industries like high technology, biotechnology, environmental technology, and energy must once again foster close working relationships with educational institutions, sharing vision and collaborating to create programs designed and equipped to train the workforce of the future, for the future. 

To help satisfy our thirst for talented people in the short term, we can and do spend a great deal of time and money training technology professionals to master the specialized skills that are needed to provide the technologies and services our customers expect of us. At EMC I have overseen the development of a growing worldwide academic alliance that works with more than 600 colleges and universities in more than 40 countries across the globe to train people interested in acquiring specialized and sought after competencies. Such approaches may help a single organization, but they are not nearly enough to make a difference on a national scale. 

To ensure a steadily growing pipeline of students to fill our colleges and universities, successful companies and industries must do a better job investing in our local communities at the K-12 level designing, equipping, and staffing innovative programs like VEX Robotics and Citizen Schools that create a passion for STEM by giving our children hands-on experience with STEM-based problem solving. Industry must also work with civic-minded organizations, like Change the Equation, the National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, the National Urban League and others to encourage broader participation in STEM education programs within under-represented communities such as African Americans, Latinos, and women. 

Home, Architecture and Furniture

Traveling Info

Read More

10 Years after 9 / 11 NATO future remains uncertain

Meeting in Brussels only a few hours after levels taken, Nick Burns, then US Ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, headquarters of the Alliance thought he had to do the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, some to convince the rest of the NATO member countries of America's defense to get. But rather than hesitate to show, he, America's allies immediately voluntarily says their support even before the accident had ROWCOUNT is clear. "It was a great moment of Alliance solidarity in a very tragic day," Burns, recalls the now an international relations Professor at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.

[Read more about NATO.]

All at once, was the original purpose of NATO both revived and overhauled shown. In fact, a renewed relevance in a cold war world was the attacks on America the Alliance on the basis of the values in the short term. But in the intervening ten years with the global fight against terrorism issues have also added new levels of complexity and new questions about the future of the Alliance.

12, September 2001 as an act of solidarity with Americans after the previous disaster, the allies article 5 - the binding promise of mutual defence of group - called for the first time in history. Originally developed in terms of Russia, article 5 says that all Member States "an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America are an attack against them all." The countries of the United States with the urgency and the energy State. "The expectation was for 50 years, it would be to overthrow that to defend Europe in a war against the Soviet Union the United States, and the irony was that the only time we had invoked per article 5, that the next day, and it for the Europeans was to overthrow, to defend the United States" said Burns.

The reality in the Middle, soon became clear there that the gesture had opened NATO up to a completely different set of challenges than previously had. On the one hand, the enemy was not a country but a group of non-State actors, al-Qaeda. The threat of terror were also allies, United caused by had is based on the term of protection of a geographical location, a new feature. She could not only defend their own territory; to fight the terrorists, they would have to go far above and beyond. "This was NATO's natural evolution after 9 / 11", said Burns. "It became very clear that Europe largely peaceful and safe was in the interests of allies of terrorism directly [and affected were] what was the wars in Afghanistan and the Iraq." "So, quickly became clear that NATO had to go natural geographic area, because the interests of our members were threatened by his outside."

[Read you like 9 / 11 U.S. immigration policy transformed.]

The threat of terrorism at this moment, more than per a global problem was when that could not successfully be fought by one country alone. Cooperation was importance it through NATO, the United Nations or ad-hoc partnerships. "We live in this age, when all that are really interesting security problems for a State to deal with, too big", says Jeff Lewis, Director of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterrey Institute of international studies program East Asia non-proliferation. "So, you have to have cooperation and alliances are an important aspect of cooperation."

Only a month after the World Trade Center and the Pentagon attack, news reports reflected hopeful mood that the tragedy could be an opportunity for rejuvenating the NATO, had been the decline of a common global topic through the last ten years. But as the United States began in October 2001, his campaign against terrorists in Afghanistan Americans, under the leadership of President George W. Bush at first seemed rejection of NATO efforts and take things into their own hands, says Stewart Patrick, Director of international institutions and global governance program at the Council on foreign relations. That changed in 2003, he says, according to the United States decided to invade the Iraq. "It was only partly, because the United States felt pretty thin after the invasion of Iraq, which really open was the United States to the concept of NATO, taking over the ISAF or the international security force in Afghanistan" Patrick says.

View the original article here

Peliculas Online

Read More