Todas aquellas que por su trascendencia deban considerarse así

Thus, it seems from the research findings that there is not one clear or simple main reason why many STEM graduates are not in STEM jobs. While there is partial support for some of the hypotheses proposed by BIS (section 2.1.1) as possible reasons, we found little or no evidence for others. It is important to note, though, that in detail the situation is often more complex and career decision-making more individualised and multi-factorial than could be accounted for by any single hypothesis. In relation to the hypotheses and evidence presented at the start of the research (in section 1.1):

 Significant numbers of working STEM graduates are not in STEM occupations. We

found evidence to support this in the graduate and employer strands of the research. STEM graduates are working across all sectors of the economy and in a wide variety of occupational roles. The graduates we interviewed, admittedly mostly ‘strong’ graduates in ‘good’ jobs, were almost all satisfied with their jobs and career progress, and used their degree-related broader skills widely, some of which were highly valued by non- STEM employers. Employers are recruiting STEM graduates into a range of job roles, many of which are also open to non-STEM graduates but where those with STEM degrees may have an advantage.

 Four main career tracks after graduation are evident: (1) obtaining employment related to a long-term career plan; (2) enrolling on a full-time postgraduate course (seen as an essential route to a STEM career in some subject areas); (3) taking a gap year or two, to travel or time out; and (4) taking temporary or non-career related employment. Higher proportions of students on tracks (1) and (2) are found in some subjects than others. What is important here is that many of the graduates on tracks (3) and (4), where numbers can be fairly substantial (especially in some subjects), are still undecided about career directions, and many of them end up, in the long term, in work outside STEM.

 If a wage premium exists, pay does not seem to be a major motivating factor in most decisions about taking up STEM or other work, although it is not unimportant to most graduates. There seem to be divergent views from students about whether STEM

see students’ higher salary expectations (especially in early careers) outside STEM sectors as a major reason for STEM graduates to enter non-STEM jobs.

About a quarter of students mentioned better pay as a reason to enter degree-related occupations, but a similar proportion seeking non degree-related work reckoned that pay would be better elsewhere. Pay seems a stronger motivating factor for men than women. Isolating particular factors like pay is made more complex by students’ different views of which sectors and occupations are degree-related, especially students in different STEM subjects, as we have mentioned. Equally, BIS (2009a) reported an earnings premium for STEM graduates only in scientific and financial occupations, rather than for all STEM occupations. To complicate this further, the employers we interviewed thought that the high levels of starting salary available to a small number of recruits in some City firms (particularly investment banks) were a very strong pull factor away from STEM, but in reality this only applies to very small proportions of STEM graduates overall. Furthermore, most large STEM firms ensure that their initial graduate salaries are competitive with most other graduate schemes. Meanwhile, students and graduates in our surveys and interviews probably based earnings perceptions on starting salaries, so prospective earnings over a longer period may not have been considered.

 There was some evidence from employers, but little or none from the students or

graduates, to support the suggestion of a mismatch between employer requirements for skills and those offered by graduates as a cause of ‘losses’ from STEM Specialist/Core jobs. Very few graduates said that they had been rejected by

STEM employers, and none that such a rejection had changed their intended career direction. Instead, they might then have applied to less prestigious employers in the same sector. This could partly be a reflection of the nature of the graduate sample, i.e. those who were relatively successful in obtaining employment. On the other hand, the employers interviewed did report insufficient skills in many applicants, although they tended to highlight weaknesses in STEM graduates’ core discipline knowledge and understanding, or their mathematical capability, as much as or more than weaknesses in more generic (‘employability’) skills like communication (although some highlighted both).

 Our research was not designed to obtain direct evidence on levels of unemployment of STEM graduates or how long they took to find work, but there was no evidence that the graduates interviewed had been quicker or slower into work in different sectors. In fact as the majority of students are not making applications for career-related jobs prior to graduation, and many are deliberately taking time out for a break, which appears to be an increasing trend in the graduate market generally, this measure may be of decreasing value in terms of assessing the long-term employment of graduates.

 Of the graduates interviewed, although never intended to be a representative sample, we did find some variety of academic attainment in different employment sectors. Roughly equivalent proportions of those with 1st and 2.1 degrees seemed to have entered STEM Specialist and STEM Generalist employment, but fewer went into non- STEM jobs. On the other hand, a higher proportion of those with ‘lower’ degree classes

had entered STEM Specialist work than STEM Generalist sectors (in which the major graduate schemes tended to be found). The evidence does not provide strong or simple support for higher attainment or over-education within STEM Specialist jobs; certainly there was no evidence that students believed, or graduates had believed, that higher academic attainment was a requirement of STEM Specialist employers and which had put them off applying. If anything the graduates reported that the hardest employers to satisfy were STEM Generalists, such as consultancies, where there was very strong competition. The instances recorded where graduates felt their limited academic performance affected their career decisions were those who chose not to attempt to research jobs while within higher education, and some who gained insufficient grades to pursue Medicine in the first place, and entered other STEM fields for degree study instead. On the other hand, some specifically targeted less prestigious employers within a particular sector, tactically, where they felt they were not strong enough to succeed with the top employers.

 A number of employers expressed the view that certain STEM Specialist firms or sectors were less attractive environments in which to work than some others outside STEM. They thought this could be a significant factor turning STEM students or graduates away. However, there was varying evidence from students or graduates about this. Certainly, amongst those interviewed, many STEM graduates viewed some non-

STEM and STEM-related employers as the most prestigious and desirable places to work, and were motivated by issues like company reputation and the training

environment they offered. However, amongst students there was little or no overt evidence that perception of working environment was a significant reason behind choice of career direction. A small number of students were put off applying to some STEM employers, having been influenced by their own work experience, but this was only a minority and the experience in a work placement was positive for most in terms of confirming a STEM career direction.

 Although some graduates felt that the most prestigious employers were not STEM Specialists, it was clear that neither students nor graduates had a conscious construct of a ‘STEM career’ that might be ‘better’ or ‘worse’ than that in another sector. We came across only one exception to this (a graduate whose path was determined by her perception that a STEM-focused career would be less respected in her cultural community than a traditional profession like law).

Although detailed work is required to distil the influence of each of these factors independently, in Table 2.3 a series of factors are summarised which appear to have a significant impact on the number of STEM graduates that definitely intend to pursue a STEM career.

Table 2.3 Percentage intending definitely to pursue a degree related career with certain factors/attributes (UK final year undergraduates)

If Yes %

Factor

(i.e. Did undergraduate…)r

If No %

68 Choose undergraduate course with career motivation 37 65 Have a definite career in mind at entry to university 49 60 Study an enhanced/M level course (selected subjects) 49

64 Undertake degree-related work experience 41

72 Have definite careers in mind at time of survey 43 63 Not change career plans during university 48 63 Have aim for next year either full-time higher degree or

employment related to longer term career plans

32