Posted: Monday, July 2, 2007 12:00 am
We should be taking seriously and we should be taking to heart the words of Intel communications manager Bill MacKenzie. The former newsman, speaking at a Chamber of Commerce luncheon Wednesday in Albany, said that Intel no longer can find enough qualified employees in Oregon. To quote him directly:
"From 2001 to 2005, we hired 347 employees with master's degrees. Only 38 were from Oregon."
That's a pity and a waste. Intel is a great employer. In fact, 16,000 employees earn a $1.5 billion payroll at the company's seven locations. Their average annual salary: $102,000. Anywhere you care to look, that's a good wage.
So why aren't more Oregonians interested in getting a piece of that rich employment pie? That's a good question.
Frankly, we'd heard the MacKenzie address about the tech lag between Oregon graduates and the needs of a global job market before.
Ever since the book, "The World is Flat" came out, corporate heads have seized on it to explain why so many technology jobs are going to enterprising (and much cheaper) high-tech employees from India, Taiwan and the like.
Gov. Ted Kulongoski said pretty much the same thing on his last two visits to our editorial board. It is, he explained, the impetus behind his personal interest in boosting Oregon State University's status as an engineering school, a cutting-edge energy technology innovator and a nanotechnology center, to name a few areas where OSU is blazing a trail.
The 118-year old OSU College of Engineering is growing. Its eight departments include mechanical, computer, chemical, industrial, civil, construction, environmental and industrial engineering with about 500 graduates a year, with the goal of 590 grads in three years.
However, the 500 graduates are what's left of the 3,100 engineering students who enroll each year.
The continuing challenge is on attracting and keeping high schools students interested in math and science through graduation and into high-tech programs at OSU, Oregon's premiere engineering school.
How do we make these hard disciplines attractive to students? Well, we could mention the money: Anything in the vicinity of $100,000 a year is fancy cash. We could mention what an exciting opportunity it is for these kids; life on technology's cutting edge. (Why just buy an iPhone when you could be developing one that also takes pictures.)
We need to fire up students with the truth: We need bold new energy, transportation and sustainability technology. We need a statewide initiative to recruit teachers who have a knack for unlocking the science-and- math mastery of the students who shy away from these subjects as incomprehensible.
Your suggestions are welcome. This is a problem in our back yard. Let's dig in to solve it.