account arrow-down-linearrow-down-small arrow-downarrow-download arrow-left-small arrow-leftarrow-link arrow-rightarrow-upaudio-less-volume audio-not-playing audio-plus-volume audio awarded books calendar close-modal closedate document education emailevent Facebookhamburger impact instagramjustice linkedin location-outline location opinion page phonepinterestplay pluspost preview project reports search-bigsearch-old search share startime twitterwelfare youtube zoom-in zoom-out

Only a minority of science graduates work in STEM jobs

By Nuffield Foundation

A new study from Leicester and Warwick universities, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, has debunked the argument that there is a shortage of science graduates.

Instead, the study finds that the majority of science graduates choose not to – or are unable to – work in highly skilled science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) occupations at any time in their careers.

The researchers behind the study, Professor Emma Smith of the University of Warwick and Dr Patrick White of the University of Leicester, said: “Evidence produced by this study suggests that simply increasing the number of students studying STEM subjects at university – something that has proven very difficult – will be an ineffective way of addressing any labour shortages that may exist.”

Concerns about shortfalls of suitably qualified STEM graduates have been regularly raised for at least the last 70 years and have resulted in numerous, often expensive, national initiatives to encourage more young people to study the sciences at school and at university.

The findings of our new research suggests that, despite frequent and regular reports of a shortage of science graduates, there is little evidence to support these claims. We found STEM graduates were more likely to work in teaching and management than in key ‘shortage areas’ such as science, engineering and ICT. Unlike in areas such as education and health, many workers in the science sector moved out of highly skilled STEM jobs as their careers progressed and there was no evidence of older workers moving into STEM careers later in life.” Dr Patrick White, University of Leicester
We identified large differences in the proportion of different groups of STEM graduates entering highly skilled STEM jobs. While the majority of engineering graduates worked in these kinds of occupations, a relatively small number of biological science graduates were employed in these roles. Female graduates were also less likely to work in these types of jobs than their male counterparts. And graduates from post-1992 institutions were much less likely to work in highly skilled STEM jobs compared to those graduating from high status, research-intensive universities.” Professor Emma Smith, University of Warwick

The study also found that:

  • In the medium to long term, STEM graduates did not have a better chance of entering graduate-level employment than those studying non-science subjects.
  • Although higher proportions of STEM students entered graduate jobs shortly after graduating, students with degrees in other subjects had caught up by their late twenties.
  • In fact, computer science and engineering graduates had above average rates of unemployment six months after graduating.

The study used administrative and survey data from the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS), the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA), the Annual Population Survey (APS), the 1970 British Cohort Study (BCS70) and National Child Development Study (NCDS) to examine the career destinations of thousands of graduates shortly after they graduate and later in their lives.

The authors are available for interview, contact:

Peter Thorley
University of Leicester Press Office

Explore our projects

Search projects

We improve people’s lives by funding research that informs social policy, primarily in EducationWelfare and Justice. We also fund student programmes that give young people skills and confidence in science and research.

We offer our grant-holders the freedom to frame questions and enable new thinking. Our research must stand up to rigorous academic scrutiny, but we understand that to be successful in effecting change, it also needs to be relevant to people’s experience.