Working Together to Build the Aerospace Workforce of Tomorrow May

Working Together to Build the Aerospace Workforce of Tomorrow 13–14 May 2008 Doubletree Hotel Crystal City ngton, Virginia Arlington, Virgin Report and Recommendations www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace Organized by Co-Sponsored by Official Media Sponsor Media Sponsor Aerospace Department Chairs Association Executive Summary This Report and Recommendations is the result of the sessions and discussions held at Inside Aerospace— An International Forum for Aviation and Space Leaders, held 13–14 May 2008 at the Doubletree Hotel Crystal City in Arlington, Virginia. The forum was organized by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), and co-sponsored by the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) and the Aerospace Department Chairs Association (ADCA). The regeneration of our professional workforce is the leading challenge confronting the aerospace community. The aerospace workforce is aging, and too few young people are choosing engineering and science careers. The “silver tsunami” of retirements, a potential shortfall of engineering graduates, and an inability to retain and inspire top new talent combine to define this challenge. Key elements of the problem are an inadequate number of engineering graduates, a lack of diversity in the aerospace fields, and past industry hire-and-layoff practices. Aerospace has not been able to capitalize on two-thirds of the nation’s future workforce, specifically women and minorities. Our cyclical business, coupled with a lack of inspirational activities and role models, have created a nationwide image that fails to attract and retain the desired workforce. Unless this trend is reversed, the aerospace industry cannot survive and flourish. We must begin now, working throughout the entire educational and social value system. Our efforts must be coordinated among all aerospace employers and the broader communityat-large that will eventually be the main beneficiary of these efforts. Teachers need to gain better understanding of what’s involved in engineering. All stakeholders in K–12 education need to be included—parents, teachers, and employers—as well as the students themselves. We need to rebuild the image of aerospace to what it once was: a guiding light for our nation. To do that in the 21st century environment means a very different and substantially stronger focus on the societal issues that now concern the younger generation: saving the ecosystem, seeking better energy sources, and other contributions to society. A passion for aerospace needs to be regenerated throughout the workforce, its employers, and the nation itself. One proven path to do this is to emphasize hands-on programs that allow budding engineers and scientists to experience the joy of creating solutions. But this emphasis requires planned programs and facilities, apprenticeship and mentoring opportunities, recognition of personal and team accomplishments, and work focused on current challenges and environments. These activities must also be balanced with an appealing lifestyle and compensation that properly recognizes the value of these contributions. Specific actions should be taken now, by policymakers, employers, and all stakeholders involved in aerospace careers and their value to the nation. It can be done—but it requires a long-term focus, and it is essential that all stakeholders work together to reach this worthy goal. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary Table of Contents I. Introduction: Workforce Development is the Aerospace Community’s Top Challenge! II. The Issues: Attracting, Encouraging, and Inspiring Top Talent A. Atrophy of the U.S. aerospace workforce is a system-wide problem. B. Educational and social values do not encourage a STEM workforce. C. The best potential sources of workforce inspiration are lacking. III. Solutions: Coordinated Efforts by Employers and the Community to Rebuild Our “Passion for Aerospace” A. Educational and social environments need the most attention. B. Internal focus by aerospace employers helps to recruit and retain the best. C. Stimulate and nurture a “Passion for Aerospace.” IV. Recommendations Encompass the Local Community, Aerospace Employers, and Policymakers A. Implement policies and practices addressing educational and social challenges. B. Develop systems solutions for aerospace employment. C. Engage and coordinate all aerospace stakeholders to rebuild the passion for aerospace. Appendix A: Program Appendix B: Attendee List 1 2 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 9 10 11 11 12 12 13 17 3 I. Introduction: Workforce Development is the Aerospace Community’s Top Challenge! Inside Aerospace—An International Forum for Aviation and Space Leaders brought together leaders from the United States and the international community for a candid discussion of all aspects of aerospace workforce development, from government, industry, and academic perspectives. Attendance was by invitation, with participation by 249 decisionmakers from across the engineering, human relations, and policy-making communities. The forum’s theme of “working together” encompassed all segments of the process of developing an aerospace professional. It also brought in international viewpoints and those of young professionals, educators, and the executive and legislative arms of the government. Built on the reports of the Interagency Aerospace Revitalization Task Force led by the U.S. Department of Labor, the keynote addresses and panels focused on every stage of aerospace workforce development, as follows: Session 1: The Challenge: Working Together to Build the Aerospace Workforce of Tomorrow Understanding the Problem Pre-College Education Session 4: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Innovations University-Level Education Attracting Technical Professionals into Aerospace Careers Workforce Issues on the National Stage Political Party Perspectives on Economic Competitiveness Workforce Issues from an International Perspective Association (AIA) and the Aerospace Department Chairs Organization (ADCA). Aviation Week and Space Technology was the official media sponsor; Aerospace America was also a media sponsor. Special events during the forum were sponsored by Lockheed Martin Corporation, Rolls-Royce, and BAE Systems. The General Chair of the event was George Muellner, AIAA President, 2008-2009; the Steering Committee Chair was Philip Hattis, AIAA Vice President, Public Policy, from Draper Laboratory. The session chairs were Heidi Davidz, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne; Merri Sanchez, NASA Johnson Space Center; Helen Reed, Texas A&M University; Annalisa Weigel, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Philip Smith, Space Grant Education and Enterprise Institute; Karl Doetsch, Athena Global Canada; and Dave Newill, Rolls-Royce. The complete program of the forum appears in Appendix A; a list of those attending the conference is in Appendix B. This report contains a summary of the major issues and concerns, a compilation of potential solutions that could address those issues and concerns, and a set of specific recommendations for actions that should be taken. Session 5: Session 6: Session 7: Session 8: Session 9: Session 10: Corporate Leadership on Workforce Issues Session 11: Career Development and Workforce Maintenance Issues Beyond University Level Session 12: Recommendations. This final panel combined the views, suggestions, and observations of each panel and summarized their recommendations. The 2008 Inside Aerospace forum was organized by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) and co-sponsored by the Aerospace Industries Session 2: Session 3: II. The Issues: Attracting, Encouraging, and Inspiring Top Talent The primary workforce issues facing the aerospace industry and profession center on three subject areas: recruiting and retaining engineering and technical employees; creating an educational, public policy, and social environment that encourages young people to seek and then pursue careers in engineering and technology; and developing and deploying a cadre of knowledgeable, enthusiastic teachers, advisers, and mentors able to communicate their knowledge and enthusiasm to young people, and especially to inspire in them a passion for the contributions that the aerospace community can make to the nation, the world, and humanity at large. The following sections present a more detailed breakdown of those issues: A. Atrophy of the U.S. aerospace workforce is a system-wide problem. 1. We are not replenishing the coming retirement tsunami. There are an insufficient number of students emerging from our educational system with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) training to replenish the retirement of skilled people from the aerospace profession and meet the other national needs for engineers. To address this concern, Congress created the Interagency Aerospace Revitalization Task Force, led by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), whose goals are to maximize cooperation among U.S. agencies to stimulate aerospace workforce development, and to develop integrated policies in cooperation with industry to encourage STEM education. Task force strategies to achieve these goals include measures to recruit and retain talent, rather than waiting for talent to come of its own volition; policies to address the challenges of enhancing STEM education and development of relevant skills; and improving the image of aerospace to young people, who often have serious misperceptions of the industry. While the interagency task force deals with the aerospace industry as a whole, the focus of the AIAA Inside Aerospace forum (and this report) is primarily on the professional aerospace workforce. Twenty-six percent of aerospace professionals will be eligible to retire this year, and potential additional retirements of “baby-boom” personnel will create a virtual “silver tsunami” of skilled workforce reduction. The industry had 40,000 job openings in 2007, and the number of retirees is expected to grow in the next three to five years. It is expected that required replacements over the next decade will be 120,000 to 190,000 people. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that many aerospace personnel do not 4 recommend aerospace careers to their children; the industry gets low ratings for job satisfaction; it faces severe constraints due to the frequent need for security clearances; and it suffers from a lack of diversity (see below). Metrics to date indicate little progress on STEM enhancement. The “silver tsunami” is still at sea, since many professionals do not retire when eligible but keep on working. That phenomenon defers the effect, but also intensifies it. In any event, the tsunami is still approaching. Actions to date either have not been effective or have not taken effect as quickly as had been expected. 2. By lacking diversity, we ignore a large part of the nation’s future workforce. Only 10% of aerospace engineers and 5% of program managers are women; only 2% of aerospace engineers are Hispanic and only 1% are African-American. Hence major segments of the potential workforce are under-represented, and are often discouraged by their highschool guidance counselors from seeking aerospace careers. This lack of diversity persists despite a major recent change in the demographics of college attendance: there are now more women than men in college. Nevertheless, 80% of engineering degrees still go to men. Those women who do enroll in engineering focus disproportionately on bioengineering, possibly due to the large number of women in biological science and premedical career fields. 3. Legacy practices and image won’t retain the current workforce. Aerospace personnel, especially younger employees, seek opportunities for more rapid advancement, more job stability, higher compensation, better opportunities to “make a contribution to society,” and more flexible work environments than they believe is possible in aerospace careers. They believe they will find these characteristics in other industries, especially in emerging informationtechnology fields. They also frequently express a desire to work for smaller enterprises than the large aerospace conglomerates. More focus is needed on creating and enhancing the image of the aerospace community and its contributions to society and the economy. In all areas throughout our economy, the day of longterm employment by a single company is disappearing. Today, employees have an average of three careers and will work for nine different companies. Therefore a continuing focus on the image of the aerospace community will be required to succeed in creating and sustaining the desired appeal. B. Educational and social values do not encourage a STEM workforce. Primary and secondary education is where students are first exposed to science and mathematics, where they begin to develop problem solving and communication skills, and most importantly, where the sense of inquiry and excitement for learning is nurtured. Throughout the educational system, the discipline, work ethic, and technical focus that are the foundation of STEM-based careers are not valued appropriately to provide meaningful encouragement. 1. STEM challenges span the spectrum of our educational system. Less than 5% of primary-school and high-school students score well on STEM examinations. The highest high-school graduation rate in the U.S. is 78%; in some central-city schools it is as low as 25%. The percentage of U.S. college students receiving STEM degrees has dropped by over 25% in the past five years. The effect of this decrease on the replenishment of the U.S. aerospace workforce is exacerbated by the increasing number of foreign students who are unable to obtain the often-required security clearances, and who then generally return to their native countries. Detailed and scripted STEM curricula and standards are different for each state and do not easily allow teachers the flexibility to incorporate non-test topics or engineering-related material. This effect is exacerbated by the No Child Left Behind regulations, which often prompt “teaching to the test” and focusing only on the subjects that will be tested. 2. All aspects of engineering education programs must be enhanced. Undergraduate education is where engineering fundamentals and engineering practice are established, and where problem solving and communication skills mature. Basic professional skills and an appreciation of the engineer’s role in society are developed, along with a sense of satisfaction associated with discovery and creativity. Graduate education is the source of the engineering professionals who provide the technical leadership in the aerospace profession. It provides exposure to cutting-edge technologies, using world-class equipment and facilities, and addresses research in areas that enable technical advances vital to the future of the profession. Along with these skills, a graduate student also develops the intellectual independence and ability to address the most sophisticated technical challenges, and the confidence to address the unknown. Research is an especially important area for collegiate preparation of future aerospace engineers, and is crucial in attracting and preparing our future technical leadership: those students obtaining Masters and PhD degrees. Students are drawn to undergraduate research experiences that allow them to quickly engage in exciting projects that address national needs. Involvement in research projects has been demonstrated to be an important “best practice” to encourage our top domestic students to pursue graduate school and to develop the analytical and problem-solving skills needed throughout a productive aerospace career. Research is vital to the professional growth and intellectual development of faculty members, bringing currency and experience to the classroom. Fundamental research sustains the “seed corn” for future innovation necessary for U.S. leadership in aerospace. This is not a luxury; it is imperative for future U.S. leadership. Although R&D expenditures in universities nationwide exceed $50 billion annually, aerospace research funding has declined. The reality is as follows: (a) School administrators focus on other areas with better support, such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, or information technology. Many aerospace 5 programs have been downsized or eliminated, with others in danger of similar consequences. (b) Aerospace programs that attempt to address national needs are expensive to operate, with their capital-intensive wind tunnels and other unique facilities. (c) State and local governments that support educational institutions usually have only limited operating and maintenance funds and access to other resources, including faculty, staff, space, etc. Education budgets in most states are under severe pressure. The number of undergraduate applicants often exceeds the capacity of our colleges and universities. Many aerospace undergraduate programs have ceilings imposed due to limited resources and then fill up early. While there is a need to increase significantly the number of students in the pipeline, without a corresponding increase in resources, the pipeline will not be able to handle the significantly larger number of students required to sustain the aerospace workforce. The aerospace industry has an image problem. Students look for exciting disciplines where they can make positive societal contributions. However, they have the perception that aerospace engineering is a mature field, that it has a narrow focus, or that it is not solving pressing societal issues, which discourages potential students. Curricula must be able to provide a strong and balanced foundation in the basics— mathematics and engineering science—as well as expose students to systems engineering, design and manufacturing, and multidisciplinary interactions. Couple these needs with the frequent requirement for remedial courses in math or science and the number of credit hours exceeds desired limits. Encouraging highschool preparation in STEM disciplines is critical. Related to this, students who select aerospace education for its “hands-on” character (e.g., flying model airplanes or rockets) get turned off if they must wait until their junior and senior level classes for the design and development opportunities that motivated them to study aerospace. As a recognized best practice, students must be engaged from the freshman year in aerospace activities – design projects, research experiences, or other professional activities. It is imperative that we change the paradigm for attraction and retention of women and minorities. Data from the Aerospace Department Chairs Association show that despite all of the national programs and efforts in STEM education, the percentages of women and minorities pursuing technical degrees in U.S. colleges and universities have not risen for the past 20 years at the undergraduate level. National Science Foundation data shows that the percentages of such degrees awarded at all levels have not risen for the past 10 years. Recent international events have resulted in increased focus on the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and Export Administration Regulations (EAR). This makes it more important than ever that we ensure that security concerns do not unnecessarily hamper our ability to develop university research programs and to attract and keep the world’s greatest minds and talent. We must also work to ensure that other government regulations do not hinder our ability to deliver solid education and research programs. C. The best potential sources of workforce inspiration are lacking. 1. Aerospace oriented professions have lost status in our society. The profession must be attractive to the best and brightest from all segments of our society. The aerospace community used to be the employer of choice. That image has now changed for the worse. Compensation has surged in other fields and surpassed aerospace compensation; STEM education is perceived as being much tougher than other training; and the characteristic “boom and bust” of aerospace employment has discouraged people seeking more stability in their careers. There is also a persistent misconception that while science is “good,” engineering is “bad.” Much good work done by engineers is often attributed to scientists; e.g., medical instrumentation, renewable energy system development, environmental monitoring, and even “rocket science.” Young people want to see that what they do makes a difference, so they tend to favor fields seen as helping society, such as those involving the environment, biology, and medicine. They want careers that use their skills to “make something happen,” and they want quick results. They do not want to wait ten years or more for their airplane or spacecraft to fly. 2. Teachers can’t inspire what they don’t understand. Inadequacy of STEM teaching in primary and secondary schools is a major factor: very few teachers have both the knowledge and the required enthusiasm to impart that knowledge effectively. Many teachers are actually afraid to broach STEM subjects, and therefore inadvertently communicate that fear to their students. Moreover, few have the depth of understanding needed to link STEM subjects to real-life applications. In the face of limited classroom time (180 days/year), they don’t have time to teach everything, so they give most of their attention to “comfortable” non-STEM subject areas. A problem of direct concern to aerospace is the lack of emphasis on engineering and technology in STEM teaching. Math and science are core subjects in all K-12 curricula, but technology and engineering are not. Many teachers, and even more students, do not understand the role of engineering and technology in our society. 6 III. Solutions: Coordinated Efforts by Employers and the Community to Rebuild Our “Passion for Aerospace” A. Educational and social environments need the most attention. Our educational system is far the most important single element in attracting the “best and brightest” young people to aerospace careers. However, the educational system is also the area that requires the most attention. Substantial and sustained national support must be established to enable many of the suggestions here. Emphasis on STEM subjects, and the values that can be derived from that emphasis, should pervade all aspects of the environment to which young people are exposed, and that emphasis should begin when they are very young. 1. Engage with future generations in K-12: touch early and touch often. It is necessary to be in contact with young people who might become prospective employees at the earliest possible time, and to maintain a close association with them throughout their education and transition to the ranks of employees. By analogy: “We need to pay attention to the mining of bauxite if we want to make high-quality aluminum rivets.” Motivation to study STEM curricula and to perceive the multi-faceted benefits of engagement in the aerospace enterprise (see below; Paragraph 2) must be provided at every stage in career preparation by knowledgeable, articulate mentors from the aerospace profession, using materials available from NASA, the Department of Defense, industry, and the universities. Emphasis should focus on development of K-12 school curricula, exciting “hands-on” classroom activities, extracurricular activities (e.g., clubs, contests, field trips), classroom “ambassadors” (i.e., knowledgeable, personable young engineers as role models, and possibly mid-level or senior-level retirees), and bridge-to-college programs. Company outreach programs are usually limited to local or regional schools and colleges near the companies’ home bases. The consolidation in the industry leaves large areas of the nation untapped. A mechanism for dealing with this issue should be explored. Companies also need to expand their branded recruiting activities to also address the workforce and education problem more fully. Other tools to supplement the workforceencouragement “pipeline” include use of web-based contact and other new media communication methods (e.g., YouTube, Facebook, blogs, wikis); brochures and public advertising techniques (such as those used by professional advertising and public relations firms); high-school and college internships; career coaching by engineer mentors (there is a large pool of retirees who are generally willing and eager to serve as mentors); hands-on communication programs that enable students to participate “live” in projects such as Mars rover exploration and to work along with astronauts in solving problems of space-station deployment and repairs; expansion of exciting competitions such as the Team America Rocket Challenge, the Great Moon-Buggy Race, etc.; and expansion of successful industry and government programs that encourage STEM education, such as AIA’s FIRST (For Inspiration in Research, Science, and Technology), AIAA’s “Design/Build/ Fly” competitions, student satellite and sounding rocket programs with sufficient opportunities provided for launch, precollege and college apprenticeships, and undergraduate and graduate research opportunities in nationally important subjects. For example, in their local areas of influence FIRST has been credited with motivating 35%–50% of high-school graduates to go on to college, many from disadvantaged communities. However, these efforts are not effective in reaching small, rural, and blue-collar communities, whose residents rarely even consider the prospects for engineering training. An outreach communications program tailored to these audiences is needed; AIAA could spearhead this. Note that astronaut Karen Nyberg on the June 2008 STS-124 mission to the International Space Station comes from exactly this background. Perhaps she and others like her, when they surface into the public eye, should be sought as “ambassadors” to address this issue. The Australian National Defense Education Program starts with grade school and carries students through postgraduate study. It includes a “gap year” between high school and college, at military pay (~$30,000/year), to give students direct experience and generate interest in relevant subjects before going on to college. This could be a model for similar U.S. programs. Engineering should be taught as a scholarly discipline beginning in first grade and using the rationale that the future is closely tied to innovation, and innovation is the hallmark of good engineering practice. There is direct evidence supporting this: engineering is included in all Massachusetts school curricula, and a higher percentage of Massachusetts students complete college engineering degrees than students from other states. Challenges are good; many students listen to and remember the teachers and mentors who push them the hardest with interesting challenges, and then pursue further studies in these subjects. 2. Rebuild the nation’s image of aerospace contributions to society. Organized efforts are needed to make the public aware of the benefits of aerospace engineering to all areas of our lives, such as: • Natural disaster prediction, monitoring, and rescue operations; • Commerce and the U.S. economy; • Renewable energy technology; • National and global travel; • Communications, including the Internet; • Credit and debit card transaction authorizations; • Tele-education and tele-medicine; • Environmental monitoring and climate modeling; • Weather prediction and monitoring; • Aircraft navigation and traffic control; • Position location of cars, boats, hikers, etc.; 7 • Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries; • Wildlife monitoring and protection; • Interplanetary exploration and astronomy; and • National and global security. Similar organized efforts are needed to counteract and correct common misperceptions, such as the erroneous belief that to participate in the space program it is necessary to live in Houston or Cape Canaveral and be an astronaut. It must be made clear that engineers do not lag behind scientists, and indeed that engineering has generally led science in many areas such as aircraft development (the Wright brothers were not scientists, but engineers), jet engine development, the steam engine, and space development (since even space science missions begin with engineers creating the instruments and the spacecraft to carry them, so that scientists can devise appropriate experiments and research tasks). Engineers imagine, invent, and innovate. U.S. industry spends $400 million annually promoting the various aspects of “engineering image,” but does not effectively address what young people are looking for: that is, creating state-of-theart advances, making a difference in a positive societal way, working with teams of capable people, and associating with seasoned, personable mentors, besides the usual job concerns of salary, stability, family life, and working conditions. Testing should be exciting and inspiring, and should not focus on dry facts or what might be perceived as “trivia” in science or math. 3. Engage all those contributing to career decisions. Contact must be made not only with students, but also with all those who impact their decision-making, such as parents, teachers, student advisers, career guidance counselors, and school administrations. Of the 2 million minutes available to each student during his/her K-12 educational period, only 300,000 are spent in school; the other 1.7 million fall into other categories of responsibility (parents, associations and play with peers, extracurricular activities, volunteer work, vacation activities, entertainment, television watching, reading, news media, sports, etc.). Hence it is necessary to encourage all the abovementioned stakeholders with operational decision authority to become advocates for a wellsupported aerospace profession. 4. Focus on diversity expands the workforce pool, bringing in new resources. Greater emphasis is needed on engaging the large, as yet virtually untapped pool of engineering workforce minorities: especially women, Hispanics, and African-Americans. Mechanisms include early contacts and subsequent mentoring by line managers with daily operational decision authority; massive improvements in generating an aerospace image that appeals to these communities, to counter the discouraging influence that results from their small current numbers in the industry; scholarships, fellowships, and low-interest student loan programs; and industry and government internships and apprenticeships. As mentioned earlier, minority enrollment and graduation percentages have been flat for years and new ideas have to be generated. 5. Emphasize hands-on programs from the beginning. College engineering curricula need to provide a strong and balanced foundation in the basics—mathematics and engineering science—but must also offer earlier access (ideally to freshmen) to hands-on courses, laboratory classes, design activities, research opportunities, and active student professional societies. Waiting until the senior year to offer design courses (capstone) is not a practice that generates engineers. Hands-on involvement is particularly important to maintain the interest and motivation of those students who arrive with advanced high-school course work in math, science, and engineering under their belts, those who have experience from jobs or precollege internships relevant to aerospace engineering, and those who have participated in model rocketry or similar competitions. Indeed, hands-on design activities and shop or lab courses should be offered to all engineering students during their early college years, and can be used to complement the teaching of science and engineering fundamentals through doing. The emphasis should be on the applications of engineering, thereby providing the opportunity for hard-core engineering training and education early in a student’s college program. Through this process, the students can directly experience early in their college education the value of the knowledge they acquire in their more theory-oriented courses. This could be a major factor in reducing engineering-student dropout rates. Experience with this practice has demonstrated an increase of 50% in subsequent employee retention rates following graduation. Moreover, if properly communicated to pre-college advisers and teachers, the prospect of early hands-on college engineering activities, courses and labs can motivate the selection of aerospace careers by pre-college students. Being able to offer research experiences has been demonstrated a best practice to increase the number of graduates who sign up for advanced degrees. The percentage of such sign-ups is currently far lower in engineering than in law or medicine. Typical university hands-on programs include building and testing model aircraft and nano-satellites, modeling and computer simulations of actual flight and space missions, capstone design projects, independent research studies, and team design, development, and testing competitions. These activities should be made available to all undergraduates. 6. Tailor course offerings and delivery systems to today’s markets of interest. Aerospace engineering college deans and faculties should continuously review their curricula to provide the fundamentals as well as create opportunities for students to take non-engineering electives and to experience other professional topics (such as systems engineering). Subject matter and methodologies should be up to date, so as to make them more attractive to the new viewpoints of today’s younger generation and to accommodate the new tools now available via modern developments in information technology. Students still need to learn fundamentals. However, more attention should be devoted to “back-of-the-envelope” type of analysis to guide critical thinking and to develop quick, responsive intuitions and insights. 8 Strengthening of research opportunities and ability is essential, especially at the undergraduate level. These actions could also reduce college dropout rates, and have been demonstrated to increase the number of graduates who go on to advanced degrees. One promising approach that has been used successfully is the 2-1/2-year undergraduate engineering plan, not ABET-accredited, but with guaranteed refresher courses for the student’s entire lifetime. Aerospace curricula need to recognize two new developments that are totally changing the way things are done in aerospace: the ubiquitous introduction of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) systems and the importance of considering the impact on the environment. (a) UAVs are creating a whole new industry, which offers both strong motivation and great opportunities for students. However, current government regulations present a challenge to operating UAVs in hands-on projects. (b) The role of engineering in improving the environment is generally not well understood. For example, engineers are driving significant reductions in emissions and continually improving the fuel efficiency of aerospace systems. Environmentalists may talk about it, but engineers make it a reality. One potential approach would be to rearrange the engineering curriculum so that the abovementioned projectoriented courses and activities are offered concurrently with more formal classes in the basics, so that students can learn the basics by applying them to real-life design problems. For example, calculus should be taught in the early semesters concurrently with Strength of Materials, Statics, and Dynamics. Using this approach, students learn calculus by applying it to engineering tasks. 7. Partner with interested stakeholders to gain breadth and relevance. Partnerships among professional engineering associations, colleges and industry, federal, state, and local government agencies, and secondaryschool systems can be the most significant factor in enhancing the development of a suitable aerospace work force. Integrated support of the global community is essential to the motivation, education, training, and transition of young people into the aerospace profession. One important area for partnerships is in the sponsoring of university aerospace research by industry and government agencies. More and broader grants are needed, and more programs like the NASA space grant consortia. Students need access to launch vehicles for their space research projects. Citing a decades-long decline of small space missions that allow hands-on training, the U.S. Universities Space Research Association (USRA) has adopted a resolution urging that at least 1% of NASA’s total budget be devoted to funding competitive opportunities for universityled, hands-on training provided by university missions on sounding rockets, high altitude balloons, remotely piloted vehicles, emerging commercial suborbital flights, and university-class space flight missions to Earth orbit. Most launch vehicles today have excess mass capacity that could be utilized for student projects. A process is needed to identify and coordinate this capacity. Better understanding is needed of the constraints imposed by the government’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) on research conducted by noncitizen students, who could be a source of U.S. workforce recruits if they can work without violating these constraints. Better understanding is needed of the actual vice perceived constraints imposed by government regulated activities such as UAV operations, which could provide a hands-on platform for education and research. The federal government should not seek to usurp the states’ role in establishing K-12 educational policy. However, there is a clear benefit to increasing funding support for research and scholarships. Europe’s Lisbon Strategy calls for a 3% increase in their gross domestic product (GDP) for research funding, which is expected to produce a 17% growth in STEM students. Government, industry, and professional engineering associations should support student design projects, provide scholarships and internships, set up programs for personnel exchanges, arrange for campus seminars, make it possible for students to attend professional conferences (or even take them there), and set up student visits to test facilities, research centers, and operations centers. Non-aerospace industries outperform the aerospace companies in providing scholarships and interacting with students, such as through student visits to plant facilities. At a minimum, the aerospace industry should act to reach parity with these other industries. Much research requires close teaming of engineers and scientists, especially in space science, where science mission goals and desired measurements are dictated by the technology of the spacecraft’s systems and instruments, and, for example, sounding rocket experiments, where the scientific findings are totally dependent on the achievement of engineering success. It would be of value to bring in other communities besides engineers to form teams for competitions; e.g., accountants, lawyers, marketing specialists, and manufacturing experts. This process would begin an early two way interaction and understanding: those in other professions would gain appreciation for the contributions of engineering and science while the engineers and scientists would learn to communicate and integrate their ideas with those who must sell them, make them financially viable, and regulate them. UNESCO’s World Heritage program, which surveys 851 sites from space, has excited archaeologists and thereby has stimulated a whole new category of potential research opportunities. It is necessary to coordinate the workforce replenishment activity of all aerospace stakeholder organizations – AIAA, AIA, ADCA, Space Foundation, National Space Society, industry, and government agencies. Resources should be combined and a single network-accessible database of data and activities should be formed. This database should include ongoing workforce replenishment and retention activities, identified goals, best practices, and unifying messages to the media, parents, and the general public. This portal should allow collecting feedback 9 from students, teachers, engineers, and employers on the results of all these efforts. AIAA and AIA could spearhead and lead this activity. One requirement is to formulate common measures of success in aerospace workforce replenishment and retention: e.g., reductions in dropout rate; percentage of STEM students; number of STEM job openings, number of STEM teachers; number of organizations working on STEM improvements; and positive or negative media coverage of aerospace, engineering, and STEM issues. B. Internal focus by aerospace employers helps to recruit and retain the best. Attracting young people to the pursuit of careers in the aerospace profession, no matter how effective the process, is only the beginning. It is still necessary to make sure that once attracted, they continue to be interested in and excited by the prospects of working toward clearly perceived goals offered by their employment, and continuing until they eventually retire from the workforce. The following factors are essential both to recruit new aerospace employees and to retain them once they have begun their employment. These factors should be communicated not only to recruiting personnel and company managers, but also to all the students and contact people identified above to motivate the “best and brightest” to pursue aerospace careers. 1. Emphasize exciting work that “makes a contribution to society.” Make available exciting opportunities to “make a contribution to society” and perform work that is both rewarding and fascinating. Work must also have meaningful results in relatively short times. Decades-long projects do not attract young people as readily. One attractive job feature might be to adopt a policy similar to Google’s “sandbox” policy. This policy allows employees up to 20% of their time to create and pursue their own pet projects. Note that government agencies can use discretionary funds for this type of activity. Another approach would be to actively publicize the availability of company funds and time to get an advanced degree. New-hire courses are well-received and are encouraged by aerospace employers. Other industries put a cap on the funds available for this; aerospace companies generally do not. Active participation in professional societies should continue to be encouraged by the aerospace industry. Membership on an AIAA committee, for example, is valuable to everyone involved: the employee, the employer, AIAA, and the profession as a whole. Of course, once the employees are involved with these societies, the societies must provide meaningful activities to engage and retain their involvement, i.e., to build and then nurture their passion! Many young engineers want to attend professional conferences. Typically, however, conscientious mid-level managers are concerned that such attendance is not cost-effective. Professional organizations should advocate young engineers’ attendance at professional conferences by educating employers on the benefits to the company of encouraging young employee attendance, reducing costs of attending, making it easier to do so, and reducing or eliminating registration fees. Many young employees need and want to learn and develop project-management skills that encompass design-to-flight activity, and do less detailed engineering and analysis, which comprise the bulk of current engineering jobs. They like to move around to different divisions, learning and doing a broad spectrum of jobs rather than focusing on a single type of task. They have high expectations of moving up to more responsible positions. Note, however, that because it takes 10 to 15 years to become a good systems engineer (this is one area in which there is no substitute for experience), mentoring is essential. Also note that detailed engineering and analysis tasks are still required by the industry, so employers need to find a way to make the acquisition of the necessary depth in technical expertise more attractive to young employees. Perhaps more can be done to restructure how aerospace jobs are designed, so more roles are exciting and rewarding throughout the engineer’s lifetime. For example, if someone is working in acoustics, instead of just analyzing models all day every day, the job could be redesigned to be a combination of model analysis, trips to take field measurements, and opportunities to interact with leaders in the international acoustics field. Encouraging more employee involvement in program and workplace decisions has been shown to have a very positive impact on job satisfaction. To address the new paradigm in length of employment (people changing jobs more often than in the past), the industry must adjust to a quicker flow of people into and out of the aerospace community. One approach to this is Lockheed Martin’s Seamless Transition Program, which is targeted at training and retraining both military veterans as well as other experienced workers to help them transition into high demand needs within the company’s workforce. Study how partner and competitor nations are addressing the workforce recruitment issue and, where appropriate, adapt and adopt their processes and procedures. 2. Recognize both professional abilities and team accomplishments. Young engineers seek recognition of both their ability and their contributions to society and the profession. Professional societies’ award programs for young people and students do accomplish this, but need to be expanded and supplemented by industry and government programs. Employers should seek to obtain recognition of their employees’ accomplishments and contributions by local governments, local news media, customers, etc. Employers should also implement promotion policies which draw more frequently on core engineers for promotion to managerial positions rather than on business-major graduates. This will require a commitment from employers to ensure that these engineers receive appropriate management training and experience. Young employees want to communicate their views to their senior managers before decisions are made; organizational policies should recognize and accommodate this wish to be heard. Unfortunately, senior managers are not listening on the right “wavelengths”; they must recognize that young people 10 want to communicate via their favorite media, such as instant messaging, e-mail, YouTube, Facebook, blogs, and wikis. Perhaps a conference could be convened by AIAA to explore means of linking them together. 3. Establish a work environment conducive to a balanced life. The job must offer a rewarding life style that makes coming to work an occasion to look forward to rather than to just “get through the day” and go home. Wherever possible, employers should seek employees’ guidance on their work environment – e.g., desk arrangements, partitions, grouping, lounge and relaxation areas, and availability of refreshments. Older employees may prefer isolation; younger employees often prefer open space to foster communication and interaction with their peers. With young people, flexibility is often of prime importance: i.e., in dress, working hours, work locations (such as a “virtual” workplace), reasonable personal use of company equipment (e.g., computers), and access to senior employees and managers for advice and guidance. They also need current tools such as laptop computers with up-to-date design, analysis, and CAD/CAM software; and Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs). 4. Encourage early apprenticeship and mentoring programs. Apprenticeships on hands-on projects by new graduates entering the profession, under the guidance of skilled mentors, can ensure long and effective employment. Earlier apprenticeships for both high-school and college students during pre-employment internships will have a similar favorable effect on retention, and also serve as a highly effective recruiting aid for bright, hardworking students. Consider opening the workforce pipeline for fresh graduates in the U.S. aerospace sector by encouraging and supporting existing staff near retirement age to mentor such graduates on a full time basis, or to accept assignment to a developing country to mentor those graduates whose enhanced skills would expand market and future cooperation opportunities. 5. Replace rigid pay-grade structures with flexible ones. In the current competitive climate for both new graduates and young employees, retention rates have been shown to improve significantly by restructuring pay-grade policy from a fixed, restricted structure to one which allows new employees to be brought in at the market rate and progress at their own pace as determined by performance and responsibility, not by seniority or time-ingrade. This policy has been implemented by the Department of Defense with good results. Other government agencies are considering it. C. Stimulate and nurture a “Passion for Aerospace.” The critical element underlying all efforts to improve the educational system, and to “torque” it towards interest in STEM subjects and careers in aerospace, is to inspire the passion that these subjects and those careers can generate. That passion is also essential to the industry’s recruitment practices and the retention of aerospace engineers following their recruitment. Here are some of the ways to create and stimulate that passion: Young people get excited by high-visibility endeavors such as Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic, Elon Musk’s SpaceX, Boeing’s Dreamliner, and the Orion crew exploration vehicle, and by the prospects for achieving their own dreams: e.g., point-topoint suborbital transport, satellite-based air traffic control, a supersonic transport or business jet, or colonizing the Solar System. This excitement should be recognized in all image-building efforts. Motivate the recruiting process by partnering with national and international users of aerospace capabilities, to show decision makers, opinion leaders, and the public how aerospace activity can address and help solve several of the major problems facing the world: e.g., the environment, disaster management, the digital divide, and national and international security. To help address the abovementioned issue of limited teacher training in STEM subjects and ineffective teaching methods, more projects like “Project Lead the Way” are needed. Using industry-designed curricula, and being offered in over 1,300 schools in 45 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, it shows teachers how to apply math and science principles to hands-on teaching of integrated engineering and technology subjects. Specific training in hands-on science and engineering projects can improve the teachers’ comfort levels in STEM subjects, especially in the sorely lacking “TE” subjects (technology and engineering). A focus on hands-on projects can help teachers answer the key student question: “Why do I need to learn this?” (e.g., fractions or equations), and also shows how math and science apply to real life, in contrast to desk-top testoriented programs. The greatest successes in motivating STEM students at all levels come from contacts with people who are passionate about the technologies and the industry, not those who are undecided or lukewarm. The legacy of retirees should be to transmit that passion. They can help focus new generations of students on lifelong learning. Bring in other communities besides engineers; e.g., accountants, lawyers, marketing specialists, and manufacturing experts. Interest in space capabilities, for example, can also stimulate whole new categories of potential research opportunities. Replicate certain United Nations programs: their Basic Space Technology and Space Applications efforts have used the “glamour” of space to stimulate education in developing countries. The Basic Space Technology Initiative has sponsored small-satellite workshops, which highlight potential opportunities for student space experiments in Africa, South America, and Asia. There is no “X Prize” equivalent for such important endeavors as conducting Earth science from space; it would be valuable to create one or more of these. Earth-sciencerelated activities of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for example, are estimated to affect a third of the U.S. GDP. Foreign countries, most notably China, India, Argentina, and Brazil, have been successful in using the glamour of space and subsidized tuition to attract students and young people to STEM education and related careers, especially engineering. 11 The annual young-people’s event of the UK’s Royal Aeronautical Society in March 2008 was “A World Without Aerospace,” to help these individuals realize how much of their daily lives is affected by aerospace technologies and programs. The event used student workshops to highlight their ideas on potential education and career initiatives. Another similar idea would be to hold a dedicated day called “A Day Without Aerospace.” Relevant initiatives in Japan include young astronaut programs, a Web site for space observatories, and conferences for teachers on hands-on opportunities and exchanges of views on the value of space. In Europe, students get the chance to work on satellites and write theses on space projects. Malaysian audiences were turned off by talk of practical applications such as communication and remote sensing by satellite, but millions were galvanized when a Malaysian astronaut flew to the space station. That event stimulated a national interest in space and related educational subjects. It would be beneficial to the engineering image to celebrate STEM professionals: i.e., to create “heroes” as role models in STEM subject areas, comparable to sports heroes, astronauts, pilots like Charles Lindbergh and Amelia Earhart, and explorers. Methods should be sought to support, expand, and “clone” programs like the Challenger Learning Centers, which have used space as the “spark plug” to motivate STEM education interest in over 5 million children. This new generation, unlike most of their teachers, are comfortable with modern information and related technologies. Challenger Center participants apply for jobs in missions, e.g., medical, life support, or mission control. They celebrate good teachers as “heroes” like astronauts, guest lecturers, and explorers. The Centers can expand via industry support for games, simulators, webcasts, and a source of role models if such support were forthcoming. Regional support is needed for emerging sites and to motivate student applications. Challenger Center graduates could serve as “missionaries” via YouTube or other new media communication avenues to create enthusiasm for space development in the rest of the youth world. Museums focusing on science, technology, and engineering also stimulate STEM interest and excitement, especially interactive exhibits that help connect the dots between STEM education and doing real things; i.e: “What do I have to learn to do this?” The entire community needs to stop using negative terms in discussing STEM, for example, by viewing ourselves as “geeks” or “nerds” and saying that “science and math are hard.” Instead, we should emphasize the use of terms like “challenging and rewarding,” “make a difference,” “talent pool” instead of “workforce,” etc. A concern to the engineering profession is that most students, teachers, and guidance counselors don’t really know what engineering is. They think it’s just solving problems, as in math class. More “hands-on” examples are needed (see above). Major efforts are especially required to impart to teachers both the enthusiasm for and an understanding of STEM, especially engineering and aerospace subject matter, to provide them with appropriate classroomoriented materials, and to train them in proven teaching methods specific to these subjects. To do this, resources should be leveraged by using modern information technologies. One suggestion is to increase the pay of quality STEM teachers and give them the tools they need to be successful. IV. Recommendations Encompass the Local Community, Aerospace Employers, and Policymakers These recommendations will be reviewed and discussed during a session on this subject to be held at the AIAA SPACE 2008 Conference & Exposition in San Diego. It is anticipated that a further action plan will be developed, with various groups and individuals taking responsibility for key actions. A. Implement policies and practices addressing educational and social challenges. 1. Implement the following strategies proposed by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Interagency Aerospace Revitalization Task Force: (i) devise measures to recruit and retain talent, rather than waiting for talent to come of its own volition; (ii) establish policies to address the challenges of enhancing STEM education and development of relevant skills; and (iii) improve the image of aerospace to young people. 2. Establish and maintain contact with young people throughout their education and transition to the ranks of employees. 3. Address all aspects of young people’s activity: • K-12 school curricula; • Extra-curricular activities; • Field trips and company visits; • Passionate engineers as classroom “ambassadors”; • Company outreach programs; • Web-based contact and communication methods; • Brochures and public advertising techniques; • High-school and college internships; • Career coaching by engineers; • “Hands-on” communication programs that enable students to participate “live” in aerospace projects; • Expansion of relevant exciting and enjoyable competitions; • Expansion of successful industry and government programs that encourage STEM education (e.g., AIA’s FIRST); and • Pre-college and postgraduate apprenticeships. 12 4. Teach engineering as a scholarly discipline from first grade on, using the rationale that the future is closely tied to innovation, and innovation is the hallmark of good engineering practice. 5. Make contact not solely with students, but with all those who impact their decisionmaking: parents, teachers, student advisers, career guidance counselors, and school administrations, among others. 6. Emphasize “hands-on” courses and activities, research experiences, active student professional societies, and laboratory classes early in college curricula. Also continuously review college curricula to provide the fundamentals as well as to create opportunities for students to take nonengineering electives and experience other professional topics (such as systems engineering). Subject matter and delivery systems should be up to date, and should incorporate hot new subject areas such as UAVs and “green aerospace” for environmental protection. 7. Establish and encourage partnerships among professional engineering associations, colleges, industry, and federal, state, and local government agencies, to enhance the motivation, education, and training of young people, to sponsor university aerospace research, to support wind tunnels and other unique laboratories and facilities, to support scholarships and internships, and to provide hands-on student research opportunities such as access to government space launch vehicles. B. Develop systems solutions for aerospace employment. 1. To enhance workforce retention, aerospace employers should make available exciting opportunities to “make a contribution,” focus on nearterm results, allow employees time to pursue their own ideas, emphasize the “no-ceiling” implications of companies’ funding advanced degrees for employees, and encourage active participation in professional societies. 2. Employees should be encouraged to develop project-management skills, to emphasize additional skills besides detailed engineering and analysis, and to learn a broad spectrum of jobs rather than focusing on a single one. They should receive recognition of their demonstrated ability and their contributions to society and the profession. 3. Employers should encourage young employees to communicate their views to their seniors (both coworkers and management) before decisions are made, and should recognize that young people often communicate in part via new media. Increased employee involvement has been demonstrated to increase productivity and employee satisfaction. 4. The job must offer a rewarding life style. Employers should seek employees’ guidance on their work environment and recognize that especially with young people, flexibility and use of the most current electronic tools are of prime importance. 5. Apprenticeships on hands-on projects, under the guidance of skilled mentors, can be used to recruit high-school and college students and to enhance youngemployee retention. 6. Pay-grade policy should change from a fixed, restricted structure to one which allows new employees to be brought in at the market rate and progress at their own pace, as determined by performance and responsibility rather than seniority in pay grade. C. Engage and coordinate all aerospace stakeholders to rebuild the passion for aerospace. 1. Provide media focus on high-visibility aerospace endeavors and prospects for making a difference and achieving a dream. 2. Address the issue of poor STEM teacher training and lack of STEM understanding and enthusiasm by more projects like NASA’s “Lead the Way” and by hands-on science and engineering projects that increase the teachers’ comfort levels in STEM subjects. 3. Celebrate STEM professionals; i.e., create “heroes” as role models in STEM subject areas, comparable to sports heroes, astronauts, pilots like Charles Lindbergh and Amelia Earhart, and other pioneers, trendsetters, and explorers. 4. Support, expand, and “clone” successful programs like the Challenger Learning Centers and museums focusing on science, technology, and engineering. 5. Create “X Prize” contests for achievements in Earth science research and similar “making a difference” subject areas. 6. AIAA, AIA, and ADCA should work with the Department of Labor to coordinate all aerospace stakeholder organizations in combining their resources through a common network that assembles all the relevant data addressing the workforce issue and sets up standard criteria for success. 13 Appendix A: Program Working Together to Build the Aerospace Workforce of Tomorrow 13–14 May 2008 Doubletree Hotel Crystal City • Arlington, Virginia Organized by Co-Sponsored by Official Media Sponsor Aerospace Department Chairs Association Media Sponsor Tuesday Luncheon Sponsored by Tuesday Networking Breaks Sponsored by Wednesday Continental Breakfast Sponsored by Supported by AIAA Public Policy Committee AIAA International Activities Committee AIAA Education Activities Committee AIAA Corporate Member Committee AIAA Technical Activities Committee 14 General Chair George K. Muellner AIAA President, 2008–2009 Steering Committee Chair Philip Hattis Draper Laboratory Session Chairs Heidi Davidz UTC Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Karl Doetsch Athena Global Dave Newill Rolls-Royce Helen Reed Texas A&M University Merri Sanchez NASA Johnson Space Center Phil Smith Space Grant Education and Enterprise Institute Annalisa Weigel Massachusetts Institute of Technology Steering Committee John Blanton GE Aviation Ron Bengelink International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences Dorothy Buckanin Federal Aviation Administration Carol Cash Ohio Aerospace Institute Daphne Dador Aerospace Industries Association Wilson Felder Federal Aviation Administration Jeremiah Gertler Aerospace Industries Association Jerry Grey American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics David Riley The Boeing Company Charles Saff The Boeing Company Robert Schafrik GE Aviation David Shaw Global Business Analysis, Inc. Roger Simpson Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Mary Snitch Lockheed Martin Corporation Program Tuesday, 13 May 2008 0700–0800 hrs Registration and Continental Breakfast Sponsored by This session will present all the elements of lifelong learning in context and show how the rest of the forum is structured around these elements. Panelists will discuss the evolving solutions, the current research on educational and vocational development trends and the workforce deficits that this research highlights. The moderator will brief the overall Continuum of Education (pre-college through professional development). The panelists will comment on the challenges faced by their part of the aerospace workforce, and any issues unique to their sector. Moderator: A. Thomas Young Retired Executive Vice President, Lockheed Martin Corporation Panelists: Pamela Hansen-Hargan Vice President, Human Resources, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Gaithersburg, MD Daniel Hastings Professor of Engineering Systems and Aeronautics and Astronautics, and Dean, Undergraduate Education, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA Jon Ogg Director, Engineering and Technical Management, U.S. Air Force Materiel Command, WrightPatterson AFB, OH Joyce Leavitt Winterton Associate Administrator for Education, NASA, Washington, DC Speaker Introduction: Marion C. Blakey President and Chief Executive Officer, Aerospace Industries Association (AIA), Arlington, VA Keynote Speaker: Walter P. Havenstein President and CEO, BAE Systems, Inc. 1005–1025 hrs Networking Break Sponsored by 0800–0830 hrs Session 1: The Challenge: Working Together to Build the Aerospace Workforce of Tomorrow This opening session will give an overview of the national trends in aerospace employment and the anticipated impact of the decline in the aerospace workforce, setting the stage for the rest of the forum. Welcome Remarks and Speaker Introduction: George Muellner AIAA President, 2008-2009, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace Keynote Address: Thomas M. Dowd Administrator, Office of Policy Development and Research (OPDR), U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC 1025–1155 hrs Session 3: Pre-College Education Chaired by: Merri Sanchez NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, and Vice President, Education, AIAA This session will identify what motivates precollege students (and their parents) to choose Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) tracks at an early stage of their education, and what steps industry, government, and other groups can consistently and affordably take to enable and encourage such choices. The panel will identify any unique aspects to focus on to bring people into aerospace (i.e., ways to increase exposure to technology and engineering training), beyond simply supporting STEM education in general. Moderator: Merri Sanchez NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX, and Vice President, Education, AIAA 0830–0945 hrs Session 2: Understanding the Problem Chaired by: Heidi Davidz UTC Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Stennis Space Center, MS 0945–1005 hrs Aerospace Industry Viewpoint 15 Panelists: Julie A. Albertson Senior Instructor and Affiliate Director, Project Lead the Way, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO Ellen B. Holmes Distinguished Educator, Maine Education Association, Palermo, ME Robert E. Lindberg President and Executive Director, National Institute of Aerospace, Hampton, VA Matthew McCann Electronics Engineer, William J. Hughes Technical Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Atlantic City, NJ June Scobee Rodgers Founding Chairman of the Board and Founding Director, Challenger Center, Arlington, VA Panelists: M. J. "Mike" Benzakein Wright Brothers Institute Professor and Chair, Department of Aerospace Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH Awatef Hamed Head, Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH Ian Poll Professor of Aerospace Engineering, Cranfield University, Bedford, United Kingdom Remarks by: Philip Hattis Draper Laboratory, and Steering Committee Chair, Inside Aerospace 1730–1900 hrs Welcome Reception Wednesday, 14 May 2008 0700–0800 hrs Registration and Continental Breakfast Sponsored by 1500–1530 Networking Break Sponsored by 1200–1330 hrs Session 4: STEM Innovations Sponsored by 1530–1645 Session 6: Attracting Technical Professionals into Aerospace Careers Chaired by: Annalisa Weigel Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA This session will identify what motivations lead engineers and scientists to pursue careers in aerospace versus other technically-oriented careers, such as careers in the automotive industry, biotechnology, IT, the computer industry, and the petroleum industry. The panel will also address what leads people to leave aerospace for other industries. Panelists will discuss what can be done by industry, government, academia, and others to make aerospace a more appealing and enduring career choice. Moderator: Wilson N. Felder Director, Williams J. Hughes Technical Center, Federal Aviation Administration, Atlantic City, NJ Panelists: Robert H. Chalker Director of Global Sales and Marketing, SAE International L. S. Skip Fletcher Past President, ASME, and past Director of Aeronautics, NASA Ames Research Center Russell J. Lefevre Director and President, IEEE-USA Roger Simpson Past President, AIAA 0800–0830 hrs Session 7: Workforce Issues on the National Stage This session will delineate the true political status of workforce and education issues on the national stage. The speaker will discuss the current political dynamics and constraints, including conflicts and synergies between local and national policies. Welcome Remarks and Speaker Introduction: George Muellner AIAA President, 2008-2009, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace Keynote Address: The Honorable Dave Weldon (FL-15) U.S. House of Representatives This networking luncheon with keynote will present ideas regarding innovative strategies to reach pre-college students and inspire them to pursue STEM tracks. Speaker Introduction: William B. Inglee Vice President, Plans and Policy, Lockheed Martin Corporation Keynote Speaker: Bonnie J. Dunbar President and CEO, Museum of Flight, Seattle, WA 0830–0945 hrs Session 8: Political Party Perspectives on Economic Competitiveness Chaired by: Phil Smith Space Grant Education and Enterprise Institute This session will provide each of the two major national political parties the opportunity to delineate—in advance of the 2008 elections—its education and workforce policies as they relate to U.S. economic competitiveness in general and the aerospace industry in particular. Moderator: Terence T. “Tom” Henricks President, AVIATION WEEK, New York, NY Panelists: Mark Albrecht Principal Space Advisor to President George H. W. Bush, and former President, Lockheed Martin International Launch Services Lee F. Arnold General Counsel to Rep. Tom Feeney (FL-24), U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC Lori Garver President, Capital Space, McLean, VA 1330–1500 hrs Session 5: University-Level Education Chaired by: Helen Reed Chair, Aerospace Department Chairs Association, and Department Head, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX Aerospace department chairs will identify what motivates students to choose aerospace curriculum tracks in college and to choose aerospace industries as career choices after graduation. Panelists will identify good practices in preparing students for aerospace careers, address the challenges faced by colleges and universities, and address what industry, government, and other groups (such as associations) can do to support higher education. Moderator: Helen Reed Chair, Aerospace Department Chairs Association, and Department Head, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 1645–1715 hrs Special Session: Sneak Peek at AVIATION WEEK’s 2008 Workforce Survey Speaker: Carole Rickard Hedden President, The Write Stuff, and Project Leader, AVIATION WEEK Work Force Study 1715–1730 hrs Remarks and Adjournment 16 Steven Robinson, Ph.D. Legislative Assistant (on leave) This networking luncheon with keynote will present ideas on how corporations can raise their visibility in the development of solutions to workforce issues, and what steps they can take to effect positive changes in the evolving workforce. Speaker Introduction: George Muellner AIAA President, 2008-2009, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace Keynote Speaker: Richard "Rick" Stephens Senior Vice President, Human Resources and Administration, The Boeing Company, Chicago, IL Aerospace Department Chairs Association 0945–1015 hrs Networking Break Sponsored by Thomas D. Woodrow Manager, Engineering Resource Strategy and Development, GE Aviation, Cincinnati, OH 1500–1530 hrs Networking Break Sponsored by Aerospace Department Chairs Association 1015–1145 hrs Session 9: Aerospace Workforce Issues from an International Perspective Chaired by: Karl Doetsch Chairman of the Board, Athena Global, Knowlton, Lac Brome (QC), Canada This panel will discuss the international dimension of currently projected aerospace workforces, both in terms of capabilities and availability. It will address the role of international cooperation and competition in meeting national and regional interests and assess whether current training and education programs meet the workforce needs of the future at the national and international levels. The interactive panel will present and discuss the situation in selected individual countries and in groups of countries. Moderator: Karl Doetsch Chairman of the Board, Athena Global, Knowlton, Lac Brome (QC), Canada Panelists: Francesco Emma Head, ESA Education Office, European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands Mario Hernandez Chief, Remote Sensing, UNESCO VADM Conrad C. Lautenbacher Jr. USN (Ret), Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, and Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, DC Mazlan Othman Director, United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, Vienna, Austria Yoshinori Yoshimura Director, Washington, DC Office, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) 1530–1700 hrs Session 12: Recommendations Chaired by: George Muellner AIAA President, 2008-2009, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace This session will integrate the results of earlier panel discussions into overall recommendations concerning actions that can be taken by government, industry, academia, and others to develop, sustain, and strengthen the aerospace workforce of the future, as well as a plan of action to help bring those recommendations to fruition. Moderator: George Muellner AIAA President, 2008-2009 Panelists: Julie A. Albertson Senior Instructor and Affiliate Director, Project Lead the Way, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, Colorado Springs, CO Heidi Davidz UTC Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne, Stennis Space Center, MS Karl Doetsch Chairman of the Board, Athena Global, Knowlton, Lac Brome (QC), Canada Dave Newill Rolls-Royce, Indianapolis, IN, and Chair, AIAA Corporate Member Committee Helen Reed Chair, Aerospace Department Chairs Association, and Department Head, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX Annalisa Weigel Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 1330–1500 hrs Session 11: Career Development and Workforce Maintenance Issues Beyond University Level: What’s Needed in Career Growth, Professional Development, and Continuing Education Chaired by: Dave Newill Rolls-Royce, Indianapolis, IN, and Chair, AIAA Corporate Member Committee This panel will compare and contrast today’s entry-level aerospace professional with those who entered the workforce 15, 20, or 25 years ago, in terms of their skill sets, tools, and expectations of the industry. This session will focus on the methods and programs currently used by industry, and the challenges faced by aerospace companies and government science centers in hiring and retaining employees through advanced training or stimulating task opportunities. The panel will include a discussion of international diversity, the “Game Boy” generation, and ethical issues. Moderator: Dave Newill Rolls-Royce, Indianapolis, IN, and Chair, AIAA Corporate Member Committee Panelists: Peter L. Boland Vice President, Corporate Engineering, Raytheon, Waltham, MA Col Stephen Cook Group Captain (O6), National Security Space Office, Washington, DC Dean A. Hawkinson 787 Major Test Focal, Wing, Empennage, and Gear, The Boeing Company, Seattle, WA Edward J. Hoffman Director, Academy of Program, Project, and Engineering Leadership (APPEL), NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC Michael Trusty Director, Talent Management, Rolls-Royce North America, Chantilly, VA 1200–1330 hrs Session 10: Corporate Leadership on Workforce Issues Sponsored by 1700 hrs Final Remarks and Adjournment Closing Remarks by: George Muellner AIAA President, 2008-2009, and General Chair, Inside Aerospace 17 Appendix B: Attendee List Fred Abbink National Aerospace Laboratory/NLR Amsterdam THE NETHERLANDS Julie Albertson University of Colorado Colorado Springs, CO Mark Albrecht International Launch Services Reston, VA Alexis Allen Aerospace Industries Association Arlington, VA Brett Anderson The Boeing Company St Louis, MO Grant Anderson Paragon Space Development Corporation Tucson, AZ Linda Andruske NASA Kennedy Space Center Kennedy Space Center, FL Lee Arnold Congressman Tom Feeney’s Office Washington, DC Penina Axelrad University of Colorado Boulder, CO Douglas Baldwin National Air & Space Museum Chantilly, VA Andrew Barber Aerospace Industries Association Arlington, VA Karen Barker AIAA Reston, VA Neal Barlow U.S. Air Force Academy United States Air Force Academy, CO Robert Behler The MITRE Corporation Bedford, MA Emily Bender Orbital Sciences Corporation Dulles, VA Ronald Bengelink International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences Auburn, WA Mike Benzakein The Ohio State University Columbus, OH Edgar Bering University of Houston Houston, TX Pierre Betin SNECMA Villenave d’Ornon FRANCE Cees Bil RMIT University Melbourne, VIC AUSTRALIA Marion Blakey Aerospace Industries Association Arlington, VA Cristal Boisseau Peter Boland Raytheon Company Waltham, MA Vince Boles The Aerospace Corporation Chantilly, VA Bonnie Bracey Thornburg Center for Space Exploration Washington, DC Richard Bradley Fort Worth, TX Michael Bragg University of Illinois Urbana, IL Steve Brody International Space University Arlington, VA Joan Brown Federal Aviation Administration Jamaica, NY Dot Buckanin Federal Aviation Administration Atlantic City, NJ Basilyn Bunting Federal Aviation Administration Atlantic City International Airport, NJ Patricia Carrier NASA Headquarters Washington, DC Cynthia Carter U.S. Air Force Chantilly, VA Robert Chalker SAE International Warrendale, PA Pete Chamberlin Hitachi Consulting Bethesda, MD Rebecca Chapman Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Daytona Beach, FL Bettina Chavanne AVIATION WEEK’s Aerospace Daily and Defense Report Washington, DC Alejandro Chavarri University of Southampton MEXICO Cheryl Chew Organization of Black Airline Pilots Silver Spring, MD Colin Clark Military.com Washington, DC Sharon Clark Aerojet Sacramento, CA Don Coates Challenger Center for Space Science Education Alexandria, VA John Cochran Auburn University Auburn, AL Doug Coffee BAE Systems Arlington, VA Martha Cogdell Rockwell Collins Arlington, VA Mike Conners Booz Allen Hamilton McLean, VA Steve Cook National Security Space Office Washington, DC Bill Copenhaver Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson AFB, OH Mel Cossette Edmonds Community College Lynnwood, WA Francois Courtot SAFRAN Paris FRANCE Keith Cowing SpaceRef Interactive Incorporated Reston, VA Robert Crippen Palm Beach Gardens, FL Frank Culbertson SAIC McLean, VA Warren Cummings Universities Space Research Association Columbia, MD Daphne Dador Aerospace Industries Association Arlington, VA Klaus Dannenberg AIAA Reston, VA Heidi Davidz UTC, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Stennis Space Center, MS Dean Davis The Boeing Company Manhattan Beach, CA Sam Davis Lockheed Martin Corporation King of Prussia, PA Carson Dickie Ignite Fredericksburg, TX Bob Dickman AIAA Executive Director Reston, VA Charles Divine Divine Software Services Lanham, MD Karl Doetsch Athena Global Knowlton, Loc Brome CANADA David Dolling University of Texas Austin, TX Thomas Dowd U.S. Department of Labor Washington, DC 18 John Dowdle Draper Laboratory Cambridge, MA John Doyle AVIATION WEEK Washington, DC Donna Duerk San Luis Obispo, CA Bonnie Dunbar Museum of Flight Seattle, WA Claudine Edelblute National Air & Space Musuem Chantilly, VA Norman Egbert Rolls-Royce Indianapolis, IN Parker David Elrod Aerospace Testing Alliance Arnold AFB, TN Ingrid Embree Hispanic College Fund Washington, DC Francesco Emma ESA-European Space Agency Noordwijk THE NETHERLANDS Dave Evans The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles, CA Wilson Felder Federal Aviation Administration Atlantic City, NJ Edward Ferguson The Boeing Company Arlington, VA Idalia Fernandez Hispanic College Fund Washington, DC Ryan Fierst Congressman Dave Weldon’s Office Washington, DC Jerry Fisher The Aerospace Corporation Chantilly, VA Robert Fitch BAE Systems Incorporated Arlington, VA Skip Fletcher Texas A&M University College Station, TX Jeff Forbes University of Colorado Boulder, CO Christina Frederick-Recascino Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Daytona Beach, FL Lyn Freeman Build A Plane Malibu, CA Matthew Fridley Haas TCM/Avchem St. Louis, MO Datta Gaitonde Air Force Research Laboratory Wright-Patterson AFB, OH Bill Garrard University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN Lori Garver Capitol Space McLean, VA J. J. Gertler Aerospace Industries Association Arlington, VA Sivaram Gogineni Spectral Energies, LLC Beavercreek, OH Ben Goldberg ATK - Alliant Techsystems Incorporated Brigham City, UT Jeff Goodman Raytheon Company Dallas, TX Norm Gookins United Space Alliance Houston, TX Sharon Grace AIAA Reston, VA Jack Gregg California Space Education & Workforce Institute Pasadena, CA Jerry Grey Energy and Aerospace Consultant Key Biscayne, FL Bernie Grossman National Institute of Aerospace Hampton, VA Anders Gustaffson ICAS Secretariat Hässelby SWEDEN Fred Hadaegh NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA Raimo Hakkinen St. Louis, MO Bethany Hale NOAA Washington, DC Christopher Hall Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA Linda Halle The Aerospace Corporation Chantilly, VA Wayne Hallgren Hallgren Associates Incorporated Winter Park, CO Jacqueline Halligan Hexcel Corporation Stamford, CT Richard Hallion National Air & Space Museum Alexandria, VA Awatef Hamed University of Cincinnati Cincinnati, OH L. Jane Hansen HRP Systems Incorporated Rolling Hills Estates, CA Pamela Hansen Hargan Lockheed Martin Corporation Gaithersburg, MD Robin Hardy BAE Systems Incorporated Rockville, MD Gregory Harris Infotech Enterprises America Houston, TX Daniel Hastings Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA Phil Hattis Draper Laboratory Cambridge, MA Walter Havenstein BAE Systems Incorporated Rockville, MD Dean Hawkinson The Boeing Company Seattle, WA Carole Hedden The Write Stuff Carefree, AZ Jerry Hefner Newport News, VA Mike Heil Ohio Aerospace Institute Cleveland, OH Tom Henricks AVIATION WEEK New York, NY Diane Hensley Northrop Grumman Corporation El Segundo, CA Mario Hernandez UN Educational, Scientific & Cultural Organization Paris FRANCE Richard Hoeferkamp Systems & Software Engineering Washington, DC Ed Hoffman NASA Headquarters Washington, DC Ellen Holmes Maine Education Association Augusta, ME James Horkovich Raytheon Missile Systems Tucson, AZ Steve Howell AIAA Reston, VA Janis Hunt Tessada & Associates Incorporated Hampton, VA Becky Iannotta Space News Springfield, VA Maryann Ihrig SAE International Warrendale, PA William Inglee Lockheed Martin Corporation Arlington, VA Thomas Irvine NASA Headquarters Washington, DC Dan Jensen Rolls-Royce Indianapolis, IN Jesse Johnson The Aerospace Corporation Chantilly, VA Rita Karl Challenger Center for Space Science Education Alexandria, VA 19 Gabriel Karpouzian U.S. Naval Academy Annapolis, MD Ehsan Khan U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC Shinya Kobayakawa Zushi JAPAN John Koletty Subsystem Technologies Incorporated Rosslyn, VA Pete Larson The Boeing Company Seal Beach, CA Conrad Lautenbacher Jr. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Washington, DC Susan Lavrakas BAE Systems Incorporated Arlington, VA Vicky Lea Metro Denver Wired Initiative Denver, CO Renee Leduc Clarke National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Washington, DC Russell Lefevre IEEE-USA Washington, DC Mordechai ‘Mark’ Levin Masterflight Foundation Richmond, IL Robert Liebeck The Boeing Company Huntington Beach, CA Robert Lindberg National Institute of Aerospace Hampton, VA Bob Loewy Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA Percy Luney Space Florida Cape Canaveral, FL Don Majcher Ohio Aerospace Institute Cleveland, OH Takaaki Matsuzawa Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency Washington, DC Lisa Mayer AVIATION WEEK Washington, DC Barbara McGrath NGA Bethesda, MD Matthew McCann Federal Aviation Administration Atlantic City, NJ Henry McDonald University of Tennessee Chattanooga, TN Achille Messac Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, NY Matthew Miller SAE International Warrendale, PA Karl Minter Organization of Black Airline Pilots Silver Spring, MD Maj Mirmirani Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Daytona Beach, FL Bettye Moody Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, CA Dana Moore Hitachi Consulting Los Angeles, CA Joe Morgan Annapolis, MD Michael Morris Stellar Solutions Incorporated Warrenton, VA Bob Motion Raytheon Company Dallas, TX George Muellner AIAA President Long Beach, CA Earll Murman Port Townsend, WA Randy Nelson Hawker Beechcraft Corporation Wichita, KS David Newill Rolls-Royce Indianapolis, IN Robert Newkirk The Aerospace Corporation Chantilly, VA Lee Nicolai Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Palmdale, CA Paul Nielsen Software Engineering Institute Pittsburgh, PA Rob Niewoehner U.S. Naval Academy Annapolis, MD Sidney Nogueira EMBRAER São José dos Campos SP BRAZIL Crystal Oakes Civil Air Patrol Loxahatchee, FL Karen Oates National Science Foundation Arlington, VA June Ogawa Technical Excellence Seattle, WA Jon Ogg HQ, AFMC/EN Wright-Patterson AFB, OH Yaakov Oshman Technion – Israel Institute of Technology Haifa ISRAEL Mazlan Othman United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs Vienna AUSTRIA James Parry Arlington Career Center Arlington, VA Daryl Pelc The Boeing Company Long Beach, CA Larry Pinson David Poll Cranfield University Bedford GREAT BRITAIN Dale Ramezani The Boeing Company Seal Beach, CA Pramud Rawat Columbia, MD Helen Reed Texas A&M University College Station, TX Ken Reightler Lockheed Martin Space Systems Greenbelt, MD Jim Rendleman BTAS/National Security Space Institute Colorado Springs, CO Steven Robinson Washington, DC Aviv Rosen Technion – Israel Institute of Technology Haifa ISRAEL Stephen Rottler Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, NM Robie Samanta Roy Office of Science and Technology Policy Washington, DC Lee Sampson Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company Fort Worth, TX Merri Sanchez NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, TX Robert Schafrik GE Aviation Cincinnati, OH Chris Schons AIAA Reston, VA Wayne Schroeder Lockheed Martin Corporation Arlington, VA June Scobee Rodgers Challenger Center for Space Science Education Alexandria, VA Michael Silah NOAA Washington, DC Roger Simpson Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA Karen Sklencar AIAA Reston, VA Phil Smith Space Grant Education & Enterprise Institute San Diego, CA Reg Smith Alexandria, VA 20 Mary Snitch Lockheed Martin Corporation Bethesda, MD Kyle Snyder EII/Georgia SBIR Assistance Program Atlanta, GA Anthony Springer NASA Headquarters Washington, DC Robert Steindler Aurora Flight Sciences Corporation Manassas, VA Rick Stephens The Boeing Company Chicago, IL George Sterner Civil Air Patrol West Palm Beach, FL Tony Strazisar NASA Aeronautics Mission Directorate Washington, DC Vic Sutton Thornburg Center for Space Exploration Washington, DC Ed Swallow Northrop Grumman IT McLean, VA Peter Swan Teaching Science & Technology Incorporated Paradise Valley, AZ Roger Tadajewski Business Educational Partnership Group Oklahoma City, OK Katie Taplett AVIATION WEEK Washington, DC Troy Thrash Alphaport, Inc. Alpharetta, GA Carolyn Tobin Bell Helicopter Textron Incorporated Hurst, TX Kathy Trimble Lockheed Martin Corporation Washington, DC Michael Trusty Rolls-Royce Chantilly, VA Derek Tweedy Kousei Gakuen Joshi Tokyo JAPAN Erin Uy LRP Publications Arlington, VA Jessica van Son Cascade Middle School Longview, WA Elaine Vaught Textron Incorporated Fort Worth, TX Lisa Velte Analytical Graphics Incorporated Exton, PA John Vian The Boeing Company Seattle, WA Joyce Walters The Boeing Company Seattle, WA Robert Ward SPACETEC Cocoa, FL Annalisa Weigel MIT Cambridge, MA Tom Welch CCSSO Washington, DC Dave Weldon U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC Anne Wenger Wichita Area Technical College Wichita, KS Loretta Whitesides Space Generation Washington, DC Brad Wiggins U.S. Department of Labor Washington, DC Brett Williams Ignite Fredericksburg, TX John Williams Booz Allen Hamilton McLean, VA Joyce Winterton NASA Headquarters Washington, DC Thomas Woodrow GE Aviation Cincinnati, OH Diane Wright Wichita Area Technical College Wichita, KS Yoshinori Yoshimura Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency Washington, DC A. Thomas Young Office of the Secretary of Defense Washington, DC Rudolph Yurkovich Fenton, MO 21 Save the Date for Continued Discussion on How We Can Work Together to Build the Aerospace Workforce of Tomorrow 12–13 May 2009 Doubletree Hotel Crystal City Arlington, Virginia www.aiaa.org/events/insideaerospace AIAA is the world’s largest technical society devoted to the global aerospace profession. With more than 30,000 individual members and 80 corporate members, AIAA brings together industry, academia, and government to advance engineering and science in aviation, space, and defense. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Suite 500 Reston, VA 20191–4344 Phone: 703.264.7500 or 800.639.AIAA Fax: 703.264.7657 E-mail: custserv@aiaa.org Web: www.aiaa.org 08-0503