I'm a PI on a funded grant, and co-PI on another grant currently under review both of which are designed to encourage members of populations "underrepresented" in the physical and biological sciences to come into science and math degree programs and to pursue PhD degrees. Between writing the grants and administering them I tend to think a lot about pipeline filling and efforts to change the demographics of populations.
Connecting to the population demographics issue (at least in my mind) is the analysis of political demographics of college faculty, or as some call it, "Faculty Liberalism" (insert ominous soundtrack here). In this case, some complain that academia is filled with liberals who are out to destroy our way of life. I wonder if in loudly decrying the perceived problem such pundits do little more than make the problem worse. By constantly shouting that academia is the bastion of liberalism don't we suggest to moderates and conservatives alike that academia is not the place for them, that they will have to fight every day for their place on the field.
Likewise, when we shout about certain populations being "underrepresented" in the sciences, don't we tell the average young member of those demographics that they will be standing alone should they enter the field. Sure, the strong willed and confident will enter in spite of the "underrepresentation". The average student, however, does not want to to stand out either in their school/work environment or in their community, where we have told them they will become an outsider by becoming a scientist. How many people in the population want to carry the mantel of role model for our entire community.
I believe that in these arguments we would be better served to make non-demographic based cases for people with suitable interests and abilities to enter the field. Focus on what attributes make a good faculty member or good scientist and invite all interested parties to join the community. By this I and not talking about young potential scientists who have memorized the periodic table, which is somewhat a measure of the depth of the prior education. I am talking about possessing an inquiring mind and an ability to recognize patterns and interpret their significance. Basically, I am suggesting that the content of ones intellectually ability and character should be considered, and those with the potential to succeed should be encouraged and supported to pursue science degrees. We should place more emphasis on providing resources to those for whom resources would mean a difference in completing and succeeding in the discipline based on financial need and/or a need to help overcome weak background training than we do in pigeonholing everyone into "represented" and "underrepresented" camps.
T.S. Hall
Prostate Cancer, Round 2
2 days ago
Wow Tom, you really hit some nerves on this blog when you write.
ReplyDeleteI'm definitely in the double minority category. I'm Hispanic and I have a libertarian viewpoint on many matters. According to what you wrote, I should have ran away from a state school.
I realize the intentions of the grants toward the "underrepresented", but I see many of their programs as a government band aid, put on top of another government band aid, on top of a government gash. However, I respect the fact they realize there is a problem with social mobility among certain groups more than their intentions toward them.
Their solution, like you said, is to throw money at it and point out these disparities loudly. Which does make higher ed look lonely. And more so than it should! I like your approach, since it makes the career path more human and does not reduce minorities to a commodity.
I won't crowd this comment with any libertarian solutions. The education system in the U.S. is pretty big, so it's not changing anytime soon. :)
Felix,
ReplyDeleteIn the time I have written this blog I have come to see you as someone who is strong willed and confident enough to become a role model, and I salute you for being the exception that proves (or at least supports) the rule.
T.S. Hall
Thanks Tom!
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately college instructors have been forced to deal with minority representation. The lower representation of these groups in science is indicative of something that occurred BEFORE college. The badly organized K-12 education takes a large part of the blame.
Minority groups such as African-Americans are the canary in the coal mine when it comes to bad policies. They are affected first and have limited resources to cope with them. (Think Drug War, Public Education, Welfare, Sharecropping, etc.) However, if the coal miners are to mine another day, they must address the dead canaries.
Finding the REAL reasons for that lower representation will not only help minorities, but it will also help the rest of society who has to deal with those same bad policies.
"They have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone." Martin Luther King, Jr