:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for inviting me and NSERC, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, to talk about our efforts to fill the skills gap. We certainly welcome the opportunity to outline our progress in supplying highly qualified personnel to address labour shortages in high-demand occupations.
Developing Canadian talent in natural sciences and engineering, NSE, is a key part of our mandate. NSERC has an impressive track record in making Canada a country of discoverers and innovators. Over the past decade, there has been an 88% increase in the number of students and fellows receiving support, either directly or indirectly, from NSERC.
[Translation]
NSERC's $1-billion investment enables 41,000 students and experienced researchers at universities and colleges across the country to study promising ideas and innovations that will give Canada a competitive edge in the 21st century.
While these figures may seem encouraging, the fact remains that Canada does not train enough scientists or engineers. Whether at the undergraduate or Ph.D. level, Canada ranks among the lowest in the world when it comes to producing university graduates in natural sciences and engineering.
[English]
Most worrisome, we are seeing a decline in enrolment rates at the undergraduate and master's levels in our fields compared with a decade ago. Increasingly, Canada is relying on foreign graduate students to carry out the research that happens in our universities, research that will result in discovery and innovation.
[Translation]
We cannot, however, rely on the contribution of foreign students and researchers to bring Canada up in the rankings, not now or in the future. Why, then, do we hear about shortfalls when university enrolment is hitting an all-time high? The challenge nowadays is encouraging young people, especially more young women, to pursue studies and a career in natural sciences and engineering.
[English]
Even though boys and girls are about equally represented in K-12, at university there's a major gender divide in natural sciences and engineering. Anything we can do to steer more women into these fields will go a long way in helping to fill the gaps in high-value, high-paying occupations.
NSERC understands this and is taking action. For example, we have increased the focus of our PromoScience program on under-represented groups so that they can continue studying in math, science, and technology throughout secondary school to broaden their career opportunities.
[Translation]
NSERC also strengthened its policies to help students and researchers achieve a work-life balance. These policies help women in science and engineering realize their full potential.
NSERC also monitors the peer review process to ensure that decision making is not gender-biased.
In addition to highlighting the importance of attracting more students to the natural sciences and engineering field, NSERC is developing new methods to help those seeking a career in the field hone their skills and prepare for the workforce.
[English]
We were told during consultations across Canada that while our graduates have outstanding knowledge and abilities, they often lack the soft or professional skills, so we now provide greater opportunities to students to work in interdisciplinary teams and hone their communications, project management, and business skills through on-the-job training.
For instance, budget 2009 and budget 2010 provided additional funding to the industrial research and development internship program, the IRDI program. It funds internships that match students and post-doctoral fellows with industry needs.
We've also launched CREATE, the collaborative research and training experience program. These grants enable qualified trainees to acquire professional skills. In doing so, they facilitate the transition of new researchers from trainees to productive employees in the workforce.
[Translation]
Of course, I am not claiming that these initiatives alone are going to solve the problem. There is still a long way to go before Canada catches up to the 20 or so higher-ranking countries that produce more science and engineering graduates, proportionally speaking.
[English]
Our progress over the past decade should give us all hope that Canada can and will produce the skilled workforce it needs to keep our country at the cutting edge of innovation.
Thank you. I'm looking forward to questions from the committee.
Thanks for your presentation.
I have two questions, and they're completely different.
The first question concerns the jobs that have been created in the country. The government will say that they've created 600,000 jobs. Now, one thing we know is that 80% of those jobs have been created in three provinces in the country—Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland and Labrador—and they've been created around the resources.
Having been in Fort McMurray back in the 1970s, I know that NSERC has considerably developed the extraction, the processing, the refining, and all those processes over the years, and it's much more environmentally friendly, much more efficient, and much more cost-effective. All those aspects have evolved over the last number of years. NSERC has had a big part to play in that. They've worked closely with the University of Alberta, and so there's cutting-edge technology that's been developed over there.
It seems in those areas that it's industry and academia, and then NSERC comes in and plays its role. How does that evolve? Do you think you've been as successful in sustainable energy sectors—in wind, in tidal energy, those types of sectors? Have you been as successful, just anecdotally? My thought is that maybe you're not as successful, so why would that be? Is there not yet an industry advocating certain research, and what might it be? Could you just share with me your views on that?
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the invitation to appear before you today.
CCTT, as it's known, is a national association that was formed in 1972 and represents the interests of over 512,000 applied science and technology workers in this country. We don't represent just one profession, but 14 different sectors, ranging from architectural, building, bioscience, civil engineering technology, chemical, electrical, electronics, forestry, and the last one is this thing called IT. However, of that number, only 18.3% of our workforce are women.
Applied science and engineering technology workers represent the backbone of Canadian employers competing in the global economy. Since 1980, fewer than one in 20 young people has attended university. Canada has done a great job with the promotion of the skilled trades and apprenticeship programs; for that, we say kudos. Maybe it's time to look at the middle group.
We are pleased that our work on National Technology Week, and more specifically GoTECHgirl, has attracted your interest. We are very aware of the skills gap and existing labour shortages in high-demand occupations in Canada.
For me to address this properly, allow me to define the role of technicians and technologists. Architects, engineers, and scientists represent the researchers, innovators, and conceptors. Technologists, on the other hand, co-design, build, plan, manage, and integrate systems. Technicians draw, assemble, troubleshoot, and operate those systems. We need all three groups for Canada to succeed. Simply put, we do not have enough of them today.
We promote a number of different technology professions as rewarding careers, and we do that through post-secondary education at colleges, CEGEPs, and polytechnical institutes through a number of different programs. Some people argue we have made it too complicated for the young folks of today. There are too many choices. That will be a question for another day.
Consider that after two or three years of practical learning, a graduate can be job-ready; that's really what separates the community colleges from the universities. The average starting salary last year was $54,560 for a college graduate in this country. That's not a bad wage.
Over the next few years the number of young people entering post-secondary schools is going to continue to decline. Based on our numbers and a joint research project we did with Engineers Canada, the 15- to 19-year-old cohort peaked in 2009. That was three years ago. We're already on the downslide. The decline is going to continue. The latest forecast, according to some economists, is that it's going to continue until 2020. It's a serious problem in terms of not having enough people to enter the workforce.
The strength of the Canadian economy requires gender balance within Canada's skilled workforce. Our message is clear: how can Julie or Sally or Francine think about a career as a water quality technician or biomedical engineering technologist if she doesn't know these jobs exist?
The CCWESTT is a great example. From May 3 to May 5 this year, the Canadian Coalition of Women in Engineering, Science, Trades, and Technology—hence the long acronym—is hosting their biannual conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Our GoTECHgirl program would like to take part in this event yet again, but the lack of funding is holding us back from sponsoring students and mentors, people we think should be allowed to go.
The timing of the event is also questionable. It precludes young women who are in their first year or second year of college from attending because on May 1 they're entering the summer job market. The conference is the first week of May. We see a disconnect.
We did a high school survey last year, carried out in four cities—Toronto, Vancouver, Ottawa, and Halifax—involving young women in grades 9 through 11. Our findings were that, number one, the majority of young women do not have a good understanding of what applied science or engineering technology careers are all about. Therefore, how can they possibly aspire to make a career selection?
Number two, fewer than 42% reported hearing anything about our National Technology Week. More than half expressed negative perceptions of engineering and technology occupations. Young women do not have a large pool of role models to choose from.
Lastly, parents don't encourage their daughters to study math and science in high school, therefore limiting future career choices.
So what are we going to do about it?
Our National Technology Week and our GoTECHgirl campaign are registered trademarks. We have a national outreach program to educate and inform, and a special one that's called “Influence the Influencers.” That would be mom, dad, grandma, grandpa, teachers, guidance counsellors, social workers—anybody who could possibly assist someone to be able to make that choice.
Just to show you a small example of that, a few years ago we approached the Bank of Montreal to provide us with some limited funding. On the back of an RESP contribution envelope, the Bank of Montreal kindly, ten years ago, put “This is for your university”. After a lot of lobbying, we convinced the Bank of Montreal to change it to say “This is for your post-secondary education”, knowing that young kids today have to make a choice. It's a small point, but it's an effective one.
We make extensive use of social media. Coming from the age of “if you can't beat them, join them”, that's where the kids are, so we have to be there. We sponsor day camps, technical day camps, on Saturday mornings at colleges throughout this country. For Sally to get in to go from 9:00 a.m. to noon to try something, get her hands dirty, take a computer box apart, solder an electronic circuit board, anything at all—we do a number of things—and get a bagel and an orange juice, the only ticket required for admission is they must have mom or dad there. Why? We need to convince mom or dad to at least let them experience it.
Those camps are working, and the program is expanding. Do we need it to grow? Absolutely. Do we need more resources? You betcha. That's why we're here.
I have five points for you.
First, we must do more to educate and inform Canada's youth, especially those of visible minorities and the aboriginal workers, of the many different career choices available.
Second, on January 19 we launched our international qualifications assessment program, without one cent of government money. That is a new foreign academic credential recognition service for newcomers to this country. We want to fast-track them. We know they have skill sets. We're providing them with an e-certificate—an electronic certificate—that's stored on our server and that every employer can validate, so no one is going to be copying in fraud. We host it, we keep it. It's an approach.
Employers are our biggest direct targeting campaign. They are demanding a national approach to the skilled workforce, so we're responding. CCTT, on April 1, is creating a national co-op registry for applied science and engineering technology programs. Think of it as a speed-dating site for job applications; if an employer in Calgary has openings, and if somebody from Nova Scotia would like a three- or four-month co-op application, we're going to match them up. We're going to host it. It doesn't yet exist; colleges have been phoning to tell me we have to do it, so we're going to do it.
We welcome the opportunity to work with the Canada Science and Technology Museum, the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association, and the Forest Products Association of Canada. We have partnered with Skills/Compétences Canada and others to address the skills shortage. We have to be working in sync, because we're all competing for the same Sally and Francine.
Last but not least, there's the paradigm shift. Over the next 25 years, the number of Canadians older than 65, myself included, will more than double to 10.4 million. Employers will need to be more flexible and creative in how they look into bringing senior workers—and I'll qualify “senior” by saying 60 and over—into an organization. Like it or not, people will be required to work longer.
Success stories happen when the public and private sectors collaborate to attain a common good. Our current situation in Canada is not unique, compared to other countries. However, how we deal with it will be the ultimate test.
Thank you. Merci.
I truly appreciate the opportunity to come and talk with you today. I'm going to come at it slightly differently. I'm not going to spend a lot of time talking about the programs of Let's Talk Science, but I'm thrilled to take questions on them a little later.
I'm going to come at it from the perspective of my experiences over the last 20 years as a social entrepreneur who's been playing in the pre-kindergarten to grade 12 space, and I have to say that when I was listening earlier, I wanted to say something then.
I'll go through this so you'll have a little perspective of where I'm coming from, and I do look forward to questions later.
I've spent the last 20 years of my career working to help ensure that Canadian youth are able to thrive in this country, enjoy a high quality of life, and contribute as engaged citizens.
I was trained as a research scientist. I have a Ph.D. in physiology, but I didn't stay at the bench. During my science training, however, I gained the skills and the attributes that I needed to found an organization and continue to run it to this day.
My journey started about 20 years ago when I started Let's Talk Science as a small volunteer outreach program out of the University of Western Ontario, now Western University, during the economic recession of the early nineties. If you recall, back at that point the granting councils were made quite vulnerable by financial decisions that cut back science and technology research funding quite a bit.
I was a graduate student at the time. I was serving on a number of committees at the university when the sheer panic came through the research community that people didn't understand what research was about and didn't understand the value of science and technology. At that point, it was basic science versus applied, and now it's termed foundational and translational.
As a grad student I thought there was an opportunity to do something about it, because I believed very deeply that research was a cornerstone of Canada's economy and Canada's future. I started a little project with about six grad students back in 1991 and I stayed with it. We now have partnerships with 36 universities and colleges, work with about 3,000 volunteers across the country, reach hundreds of thousands of young people every year, have trained teachers, have done a considerable amount of research into the impact of what we do, and we began to start very early with a program that we offer called Wings of Discovery that's used in child care centres.
Since the launch, we've reached well over 2.5 million young people with our programs, most of which are delivered by volunteers. I think we've mobilized at least 10,000 unique individuals; the majority of them are university and college students, principal investigators, and industry professionals. I'd be happy to come back to talk to you about that later.
We've trained about 30,000 teachers and early childhood educators. We've created quite a lot of learning materials that are used from coast to coast; despite the fact that it's all jurisdictional domains here, with fifteen education systems, we've been able to create programs and materials that fit right across the country. We've also done quite a lot of research.
I'm here today to talk about four lessons and learnings that I've reflected on. I like to wonder a lot when I do my work. I hope it will help you with your report.
I'll start by saying that when I talk about science, I'm using the word really broadly. It's life and physical sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics, sometimes called STEM. I like to say science, because a lot of people think I talk about trees when I talk about STEM.
The first thing is that I really do believe that science learning underpins the talent development needed for the 21st century, and if your report can build a connection with the creative economy, I think you can go a long way in helping to dispel the myths that science is not necessarily underpinning much of the talent that is needed; in fact, it's a creative human activity that leads to our understanding of the world and it underpins all the critical global issues that we face today, but many people don't see it. They don't see the horizontal integrator role that science, technology, engineering, and math play.
It's also used by the person who fixes your cellphone, by your doctor, by your orthopedic surgeon, by electricians, farmers, and hairstylists.
Science shouldn't be equated with research laboratories, but it should be equated with jobs when you're working on this report. That will go a long way to helping perceptions. Science learning prepares people for high-demand occupations, but it also prepares people for the lower-skill jobs, which don't look the same as they did a generation ago.
Unfortunately, most young people don't realize how many doors science can open or close, and they drop it quite early, especially chemistry and physics, yet the number of jobs that require college training or skilled trades training with a science component outstrip those that you get in a university pathway. We need to do more to promote the value of science learning for all jobs, because too many young people are simply closing the doors very early because they don't complete the programs they need.
It's that particular fact that inspired FedDev Ontario last year to launch its youth STEM initiative. With an investment from that agency, Let's Talk Science has been able to transform how we work. We've been tackling the issue in new ways across southern Ontario. We're working with kids, teachers, post-secondary universities and colleges, industry, aboriginal communities, other not-for-profits, and both levels of government to offer programs focused on building the talent pipeline.
My second message is that talent development starts in the sandbox. It demands a long-term vision that's implemented with patience and with consistency. Too many discussions on talent focus of the generation of Ph.D.s, and we're starting to see that recent investments are resulting in more people pursuing graduate studies. However, for every 143 students who graduate from high school, only one is going to end up with a Ph.D. in a science discipline.
Just imagine what we can do if we bring that same focused thinking to the issue a lot earlier in the system. We can fill the skills gap. We can't let up at the post-secondary level, but we need to get a bigger pool from which to draw. In fact, Let's Talk Science has been working with NSERC, CIHR, and CFI, because they also understand that we have to have a bigger talent pool in order to even get to the Ph.D. level.
We need to scale the effort to ensure that we're not leaving anybody behind. Let's Talk Science starts in a sandbox with programs for child care centres. We've had some really interesting stories coming out of the aboriginal head start sites on reserve. We've been shocked at the uptake by that community with some of our early science programs for young children.
Once that interest is sparked early on, we have to nurture it throughout kindergarten right through to grade 12. We need to make better connections to jobs all along the way. The effort won't be wasted, because jobs in every field benefit from analytical, curious, and critical thinkers.
My third point is that what gets measured gets attention. Never have I realized that so much as this year, when we've undertaken a benchmarking study that will be released in May. It's looking at the progression of science learners in elementary, high school, and post-secondary, both university and college, and connecting it to the job forecast, working with HRSDC and the sector council to see where those job forecasts are.
What we've learned is that because there is a lack of consistent reporting and tracking across the country, it's very difficult to gather the data and give you a good picture of what's happening. Without easy access to the data, we can't have a good grasp of what's actually happening.
My last point is that Canada is the only developed country that doesn't have a national education ministry or a secretary of state for learning or for education. There is no formal vehicle that regularly convenes all the stakeholders or is even positioned to drive a national vision on learning or education.
I spoke a little bit earlier about the attempts of Let's Talk Science to fill that void as it relates to science learning. We work formally with seven ministries of education and seven teachers' associations on our newest program, called CurioCity, which is a blended web-based program for grades 8 to 12. It has been the first vehicle that has allowed us to convene a larger stakeholder group, with many ministries wanting to be at the same table to talk.
For large-scale success and to not leave anyone behind, we really can't just keep taking a regional focus; we have to get to the point where we're talking a national vision. In fact, in countries that can implement a national vision, we see spectacular growth. In Canada, the proportion of undergrad students who pursue science and engineering degrees has been sitting pretty stagnant at around 20%-25% for decades, whereas China has more than 50% of its undergraduates in science and engineering disciplines. I'm working on a paper looking at science learning in Canada versus China, and we're seeing this with pretty reliable numbers. It's interesting; it's different in China, because the engineering degree is almost the de facto bachelor-level degree.
In conclusion, I want to leave you with the fact that science learning really does matter for 21st century skills. We need to start early, and we need to make a strong national effort that can be measured. If we don't, we will just continue to slip behind.
The highest-demand jobs in a creative economy require people with the skills and knowledge that are developed by science learning. Many jobs that are perceived to require low skills have really been transformed and require science. All jobs benefit from people who are analytical and curious. They're the very qualities that drive innovation.
I want to leave with you the idea that Let's Talk Science is here to help. We've been doing this for 20 years and would love to bring the success to bear that we have learned at many of the regional levels to get to the next level for Canada's future.
Thank you.