Questions Raised Concerning Study of supply and Demand For Mining Engineers

THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, 101 MINERAL SCIENCES BUILDING UNIVERSITY PARK. PENNSYLVANIA 16803 To the Editor: With respect to the Fenvessy and Schwab article, I offer the following: As thorough as the study may be, it still has a glaring weakness. The presumption of constant supply in face of falling demand - their "low growth" case - is just wrong. It does not allow for the rapid migration, by transfer and change of major, from former high-demand programs, such as mining, to programs that have more recently obtained the cachet of job security. The figures that are shown for rapid growth in mining engineering enrollments in the period 1970-1981 are, no doubt, correct and reflect a rapid inmigration of students into mining. A similar out-migration, which began in 1982, from mining to other engineering and science disciplines is not factored into their study. Given 1983-84 enrollments, which can already be documented, it is clear that the low-growth case will, by 1985, be 50% or less of 1981. I wish students would pick their majors on the basis of their own individual abilities and interests rather than rushing lemming-like to programs that are reputed to have jobs. In the end, students will have better jobs and careers if their college majors match their talents and we, in the academic side of things, will have a livelier and more dedicated student. Lee W. Saperstein Professor and Chairman of Mining Engineering UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-ROLLA To the Editor: I write concerning the recent article on future demand for graduates in the mining industry. The article is, unfortunately, inaccurate because of the erroneous assumptions it makes in its basic premises. To cite but two of these, class sizes will not continue at their current level, but will, in fact, alter dramatically as a function of the perceived immediate job market rather than the future trend, so that enrollments are already below those predicted. Secondly, it is patently wrong to assume that everyone who gets a degree in the mining field will continue until retirement to work in that field. People who do not have a job in the industry will get work elsewhere and often do not come back. Others will later move to different areas. My major argument, however, deals with the underlying assumptions and methodology of the survey itself, with the concomitant challenge to the subsequent conclusions. It is no great secret that the technological world is undergoing a dramatic revolution. Computer use is rapidly spreading to the point where the microcomputer will be an integral part of every mine engineer's desk. Such a tool, which for optimal benefit must be operated by knowledgeable mining engineers, will make mining much more of a science than the current level. To remain competitive, mines will increasingly rely on higher level deci-