Brain drain is a longstanding, widespread problem both in the USA and throughout the world. The problem affects developing as well as highly industrialized economies, with the term ‘brain drain’ being coined in the 1950s by the Royal Society of London to describe the loss of scientists to the USA and Canada (Chu, 2004).
Nearly every American state, including states whose net student migration is much higher than Ohio’s, complains about the affects of ‘brain drain’. For example, Boston, a city renowned for its educational offerings, complains that over half if its recent college graduates have left for Atlanta, Georgia, Austin, Texas, California and other hubs for high-technology industries (Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, 2003). These complaints illustrate the diffi culty in defi ning brain drain. In 1998, Massachusetts lost 12 474 students to four-year colleges in other states. However they imported 21 302 students, realizing a net gain of 8828 students, the highest net gain of any state (US Department of Education, 1998). Boston likely absorbs much of this gain so the signifi cance of their problem is questionable given that they start with a net infl ow.
In addition to US states, both industrialized and developing foreign countries worry about brain drain, particularly the loss of educated young people to the USA. Developing countries, such as India, primarily worry about brain drain as students leave undergraduate institutions for careers in the United States. Students educated in India’s top colleges and universi- ties, especially those in technical fi elds, migrate to the USA in search of higher paying jobs. India Institute of Technology (IIT) professors have estimated that 25 to 30 per cent of graduates leave India immediately after graduation for more lucrative opportunities in the USA (Hariharan, 2004).
An important implication of this brain drain is that investments in education will not lead to faster economic growth for India if the highly educated workforce continues to leave the country.
The loss of return on investment is an issue for developed countries to contend with as well. Amongst industrialized countries, Canada is especially
concerned with this growing problem. De Voretz and Laryea (1998) estimated that 4.8 billion dollars were invested in managers and professionals who migrated to the USA between 1982 and 1996. This investment included 2.71 billion dollars of publicly funded post-secondary education.
While countries around the world are addressing brain drain as under- graduates leave for the higher paying jobs abroad, brain drain in the USA is a re-sorting of individuals to different markets rather than an exodus abroad. State policy makers are competing for their top students in several areas, not just wages or job opportunities, as some students take climate and amenities into account. However students migrate for different reasons at different times in their education or career. Students and their families face different pressures at each of the four major ‘exit points’ at which brain drain occurs: entry into college, entry into graduate school, entry into the workforce, and return migration later in life.
Undergraduate Attendance
The fi rst point at which brain drain may occur is when students decide where to attend college between ages 17 and 20. Ohio has nearly 200 colleges and universities, including 52 public institutions, where students can receive undergraduate training. Many of these options, particularly the publicly funded institutions, are affordable. Thanks to aggressive building in the late 1960s, every student in the state lives within 30 miles of a public higher educational institution (OBR, 2001).
Yet, despite the large number of offerings in the state of Ohio in 1998, 10 424 students left Ohio and initially enrolled in colleges outside the state (US Department of Education, 1998). While this may appear small relative to the 57 843 Ohio residents who remain in the state for higher education, there are potential problems. First, most of the students who leave Ohio attend four-year colleges. Looking only at students initially enrolling in four-year colleges, Ohio loses almost 19 per cent. Second, many of these exiting students have high test scores and grade point averages (GPAs).
Secondary schools and parents often encourage these students to attend the most prestigious institutions available. Shaker Heights School District, for example, was recently recognized as a top feeder school for the nation’s elite colleges (Shaker 2004). Unfortunately Ohio lacks top-tier public higher educational institutions. The state’s most prestigious public institutions, Ohio State University and Miami University, rank 60th and 64th in the US News and World Report rankings. Oberlin College, one of Ohio’s top private undergraduate institutions, is small, enrolling only 750 fi rst-year students, of which 92 per cent come from outside the state of Ohio (US News & World Report, 2004).
Shane 02 chap05 105
Shane 02 chap05 105 19/9/05 09:28:0719/9/05 09:28:07
Ohio, however, may not experience signifi cant brain drain in this period.
Certainly Ohio loses a signifi cant number of residents to other states, but, Oberlin and other colleges attract students from other states as well. In 1998, Ohio attracted slightly more students than left the state (U.S. Department of Education, 1998). The correct means of comparison should be to evaluate whether the net infl ux of students lowered the average college entrance exam scores of college freshmen in Ohio relative to Ohio’s graduating high school seniors. Unfortunately we were unsuccessful in acquiring data to facilitate such a comparison.
Despite the fact that Ohio imports more students than it exports, there are still concerns about brain drain. Students who attend high school and college in the same state are more likely to remain in that state (Sumell et al., 2003). It is likely that those students who migrate to Ohio for college will be harder to retain after graduation as they might not have the same ties to the region or state that in-state students have after graduation.
Over time, and barring changes in policy, the trend of students attending college outside Ohio will likely continue to rise. Since the late 1960s, trans- portation and communication costs have steadily dropped, increasing the likelihood that students, particularly top students, can easily attend colleges further from their home (Hoxby, 1997). As these costs continue to fall, Ohio students may continue to move elsewhere.
Graduate School Attendance
The next exit point for students to migrate out of their home state is graduate school. The pressures at this time are similar to those involved in choosing an undergraduate institution. A student may feel pressures for personal reasons as a result of life experiences (that is, relationships or family responsibilities) to remain close to home. However, while the student may have formed an attachment to the area, graduate school decisions may be largely affected by the cost of attendance and the prestige of the program.
The US News and World Report does not disaggregate the rankings for undergraduate, masters and doctoral degrees. Therefore the rankings reported above also refl ect the quality of Ohio’s postgraduate offerings.
However a recent ranking of America’s most successful ‘feeder’ colleges (Bernstein, 2003) suggests that Ohio may be exporting top students again.
The rankings are based on a sample of 5000 students at the nation’s top ranked business, law and medical schools and demonstrate which under- graduate institutions are most successful in placing students in top graduate schools. In Ohio, Case ranked 49th on the list of top 50 feeder schools in the country, while Miami University was ranked 22nd out of the top 30 feeder state schools. While it is not clear if this is due to institutional pressures or
individual choice, it is clear that Ohio’s best students may be exiting at the point of graduate school attendance.
Transition from School to Work
The next major group of exiting students includes those leaving their undergraduate and graduate programs to gain employment. There is a large literature focusing on how brain drain may be the result of shifting industries and the demand for workers. For example, Gottlieb (2001) argues that workers leave after either undergraduate or graduate education because they cannot fi nd employment. Other factors, such as amenities or scholar- ship programs designed to attract or retain educated students, are only marginally effective, if at all. There are also suggestions that amenities such as transportation, entertainment and schools may also play an important role (Greenwood, 1985).
The academic literature also looks at brain drain as a response to educa- tional milestones rather than a response to shifts in labor demand. Sumell et al. (2003) describe factors affecting students’ migration after postgraduate degree studies. In general, students move to the state or region in which they will maximize their income, but other factors infl uence the decision.
For example, marriage, children and work experience tend to increase the likelihood that students will remain in a given area. Students who are ‘home grown’, having received their PhD in the same state as their undergraduate degree and high school diploma, are more likely to stay as well. By contrast, younger students and those with higher debt burdens are more willing to leave the geographic area where they attended college.
Sumell et al. (2003) also describe how college quality interacts with brain drain. A graduate from a top ten program in a private school is far more likely to leave their immediate surroundings than a graduate from a lower- ranked public school.
Return Migration
The fi nal group affected by brain drain includes people who may return to their home state later in life: ‘round-trippers’, as we refer to them in this chapter. Round-trippers are a group often ignored in the debate over brain drain, but are an important component for policy makers to consider. For instance, policy makers need to consider whether they are facing a loss if a student leaves the state to be educated at a top institution but later returns to their home market with additional human capital. Furthermore round trippers may return home with work experience, connections or venture capital that would only enhance their contribution to the local economy.
Shane 02 chap05 107
Shane 02 chap05 107 19/9/05 09:28:0719/9/05 09:28:07