lessons learned from programs for urm scientists
Post on 04-Jan-2016
23 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Lessons learned from programs for URM scientists
What is the problem? What do we need to know to develop and implement better programs?
Anthony L. DePass PhDAssociate Dean for Research Long Island University-Brooklyn
The ProblemTenured/Tenure track faculty at top 50 departments (The Nelson Diversity
Surveys)White Black Hispanic Native Am.
Chemistry 1497 (91.2%)
18 (1.1%) 22 (1.3%) 3 (0.2%)
Physics 1715 (86.3%)
12 (0.6%) 38 (1.9%) 1 (0.05%)
Math 1764 (84.7%)
19 (0.9%) 55 (2.6) 3 (0.1%)
Comp Sci. 1032 (77.5%)
4 (0.3%) 17 (1.3%) 0
Psychology 1481 (90.2%)
44 (2.7%) 54 (3.3%) 5 (0.3%)
Biology 3232 (88.9%)
37 (1.0%) 69 (1.9%) 4 (0.1%)
S&E doctorates awarded to U.S. citizens and permanent residents, by field and race/ethnicity: 1997–2004
Field and race/ethnicity 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
All S&E 18,393 18,257 17,567 17,114 16,346 15,512 15,715 15,721
White 13,828 14,004 13,719 13,443 12,760 11,913 12,024 12,018
Asian a 2,529 2,135 1,932 1,706 1,617 1,616 1,511 1,491
Black 615 644 715 710 703 685 664 746
Hispanic 658 754 722 729 674 724 741 715
American Indian/Alaska Native
79 96 114 88 73 70 73 61
Other/unknown race/ethnicity b 684 624 365 438 519 504 702 690
NSF- http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/graddeg.htm
Implications
• Diversity of the scientific workforce
• Underutilization of domestic potential for highly skilled/educated segment of the workforce
• Resource allocation
• Disparities in health and quality of life
Proposed Solutions
• Increase representation at the highest levels (PhD)
• Fund interventions at various levels in the pipeline
Approach• Intuitive but not investigative• Goal focused on predetermined outcome without much
credit given to “productive diversions”• Little consideration of broader context of factors involved
in career choices• Little research evidence that link activities to objectives• Non standard evaluation measures and techniques with
no organized means for dissemination • No systematic identification of best practices and training
of program directors• Lack of employment of scholarship in the development of
programs
Considerations• Are goals and objectives appropriate and/or realistic?• Training model?• Definition of professional success• Factors outside of academic accomplishments that
determine “success”• Inherent “hostility” of the “successful working
environment” and its impact on retention• Pedigree system and its impact based on where
minorities are trained• Allocation of resources (based on predictors) that miss
the mark on broadening participant pool (grades vs access)
• The growing sex divide
S&E doctorates awarded to U.S. citizens and permanent residents, by field and race/ethnicity: 1997–2004
Field and race/ethnicity 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
All S&E 18,393 18,257 17,567 17,114 16,346 15,512 15,715 15,721
White 13,828 14,004 13,719 13,443 12,760 11,913 12,024 12,018
Asian a 2,529 2,135 1,932 1,706 1,617 1,616 1,511 1,491
Black 615 644 715 710 703 685 664 746
Hispanic 658 754 722 729 674 724 741 715
American Indian/Alaska Native
79 96 114 88 73 70 73 61
Other/unknown race/ethnicity b 684 624 365 438 519 504 702 690
NSF- http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/graddeg.htm
Racial/ethnic distribution of S&E bachelor's degrees awarded to U.S. citizens and permanent residents, by field: 1995–2004
(Percent)
Field and race/ethnicity 1995 1996 1997 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
White
All fields 78.5 77.4 76.5 75.6 73.7 72.9 72.2 71.4 70.7
S&E 75.9 74.8 73.5 72.5 70.5 69.7 69.2 68.5 67.8
Black
S&E 7.4 7.7 8.0 8.2 8.6 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.8
Hispanic
All fields 5.9 6.2 6.5 6.7 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7
S&E 5.9 6.2 6.5 6.8 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.6
American Indian/Alaskan Native
All fields 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
S&E 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7
NSF- http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/graddeg.htm
Paradigm Shift• Move towards hypothesis based investigative
approach – Funding mechanism– Incorporation of relevant expertise (economics and
the social, behavioral and computational sciences)– Developing and sustaining a relevant community of
scholars
• Greater interaction between programs at the administrative level
• Emphasis on measurable outcomes and institutional impact
End
top related