The US allotted more than $3 billion in 2012 to programs to encourage students to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, but Colin Macilwain argues at Nature that that is not money well spent. Macilwain, a science policy writer from Edinburgh, says that such programs are not good policy and that they "ultimately [damage] science and engineering, by inflating supply and depressing demand for scientists and engineers in the employment market."
He says that calls for increased government expenditures in STEM education typically come from the business sector, which bemoans workers' skills.
"I have always struggled to recognize the picture these detractors paint. I find most recent science graduates to be positively bursting with both technical knowledge and enthusiasm," Macilwain writes, adding that "if business people want to harness that enthusiasm, all they have to do is put their hands in their pockets and pay and train newly graduated scientists and engineers properly."