THE IMPACT OF COVID-19
ON THE CAREERS OF WOMEN IN ACADEMIC
SCIENCES, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE
Eve Higginbotham and Maria Lund Dahlberg, Editors
Committee on Investigating the Potential Impacts of COVID-19 on the
Careers of Women in Academic Science, Engineering, and Medicine
Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine
Policy and Global Affairs
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by contracts between the National Institutes of Health (IDIQ contract HHSN263201800029I, TO #75N98020F00008), the National Science Foundation (Award #OIA-1762395), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (Contract #SB134117CQ0017, TO #1333ND20FNB100250), the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (Award #G-2020-13993), and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (Award #2020136). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26837-0
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26837-0
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26061
Library of Congress Control Number: 2021937008
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2021 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. The Impact of COVID-19 on the Careers of Women in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26061.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON THE INVESTIGATING THE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF COVID-19 ON THE CAREERS OF WOMEN IN ACADEMIC SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE
EVE J. HIGGINBOTHAM (NAM) (Chair), Vice Dean of Inclusion and Diversity, Senior Fellow in the Leonard Davis Institute of Health, and Professor of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania
ELENA FUENTES-AFFLICK (NAM), Professor and Vice Chair of Pediatrics, Chief of Pediatrics at the Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, and Vice Dean for Academic Affairs in the School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
LESLIE D. GONZALES, Associate Professor in the Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Learning Unit in the College of Education, Michigan State University
JENI HART, Dean of the Graduate School and Vice Provost for Graduate Studies and Professor of Higher Education in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis, University of Missouri
RESHMA JAGSI, Newman Family Professor and Deputy Chair in the Department of Radiation Oncology and Director of the Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan
LEAH JAMIESON (NAE), Ransburg Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, John A. Edwardson Dean Emerita of the College of Engineering, and Professor by courtesy in the School of Engineering Education, Purdue University
ERICK C. JONES, George and Elizabeth Pickett Endowed Professor and Associate Dean for Graduate Studies in the College of Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington
BERONDA MONTGOMERY, Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology and of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics in the Department of Energy Plant Research Laboratory, and Interim Assistant Vice President of Research and Innovation, Michigan State University
KYLE MYERS, Assistant Professor of Business Administration in the Technology and Operations Management Unit, Harvard Business School
RENETTA TULL, Vice Chancellor of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, University of California, Davis
MARIA LUND DAHLBERG, Study Director
ARIELLE BAKER, Program Officer
IMANI BRAXTON-ALLEN, Senior Program Assistant
JEENA M. THOMAS, Program Officer
THOMAS RUDIN, Director, Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine (until November 2020)
BARDIA MASSOUDKHAN, Senior Finance Business Partner
JOE ALPER, Consulting Editor
COMMITTEE ON WOMEN IN SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE
GILDA BARABINO (NAE/NAM) (Current Chair), President, Olin College of Engineering
JOAN WENNSTROM BENNETT (NAS) (Previous Chair), Distinguished Professor of Plant Biology and Pathology and Associate Vice President in the Office for Promotion of Women in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics, Rutgers University (Chair until December 2020)
NANCY ANDREWS, (NAS/NAM) Dean of the Duke University School of Medicine and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Nanaline H. Duke Professor of Pediatrics, and Professor of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University
MAY BERENBAUM, (NAS) Professor and Head of Entomology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
ANA MARI CAUCE, President, University of Washington (until December 2020)
VALERIE CONN, President, Science Philanthropy Alliance
MACHI DILWORTH, Vice President (Retired), Gender Equality and Human Resource Development, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (until December 2020)
EVELYNN M. HAMMONDS, (NAM) Barbara Gutmann Rosenkrantz Professor of the History of Science, Professor of African and African American Studies, and Chair of the Department of the History of Science, Harvard University
HILARY LAPPIN-SCOTT, Professor, Cardiff University, United Kingdom
ED LAZOWSKA, (NAE) Bill & Melinda Gates Chair, Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Washington
VALERIE TAYLOR, Director, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory
ELENA FUENTES-AFFLICK, (NAM) Home Secretary of the National Academy of Medicine, Professor and Vice Chair of Pediatrics, Chief of Pediatrics at the Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, and Vice Dean for Academic Affairs in the School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
CAROL K. HALL, (NAE) Home Secretary of the National Academy of Engineering, Camille Dreyfus Distinguished University Professor in the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, North Carolina State University
SUSAN R. WESSLER, (NAS) Home Secretary of the National Academy of Sciences, Neil A. and Rochelle A. Campbell Presidential Chair for Innovation in Science Education, University of California, Riverside
AUSTEN APPLEGATE, Research Associate
ARIELLE BAKER, Program Officer
ASHLEY BEAR, Senior Program Officer
FRAZIER BENYA, Senior Program Officer
IMANI BRAXTON-ALLEN, Senior Program Assistant
MARIA LUND DAHLBERG, Senior Program Officer
MARIE HARTON, Program Officer
ALEX HELMAN, Program Officer
REBEKAH HUTTON, Program Officer
THOMAS RUDIN, Board Director (until November 2020)
JEENA M. THOMAS, Program Officer
JOHN VERAS, Senior Program Assistant
MARQUITA WHITING, Senior Program Assistant
“A year like no other”1 is an often-repeated phrase, given our collective experiences during 2020. The day before the start of the New Year, a mysterious illness was reported in China after dozens of people visited a live animal market in Wuhan. The first death was reported in mid-January. By the end of January, the World Health Organization declared a global health emergency, and the first suspected case was reported in the United States at the end of February. It was not until March 2020 that a federal emergency was declared, and since then we have been on what feels like a collective roller coaster, punctuated by fear, sadness, and hope.2
As I write this Preface during the close of 2020, the Food and Drug Administration provided emergency approval of a COVID-19 vaccine, the United States once again experienced its highest daily reported number of COVID-19–related deaths, the Supreme Court recently dismissed a lawsuit intended to overturn the outcome of last month’s presidential race, and institutions and organizations across the nation are shifting to more intentional strategies to address structural racism. Added to the backdrop of this theater of disruption, there have been record-breaking fires on the West Coast and hurricanes and tornados elsewhere. Once again, the significant rise in COVID-19 cases across the country has translated into school districts, restaurants, and brick-and-mortar businesses closing down. To complete the image of this moment, the passage of a much-needed federal relief bill remains uncertain. Even as I reflect on the ongoing effects of
1 Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain. COVID-19: Twelve key milestones in a year like no other. November 26, 2020. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-11-covid-twelve-key-milestones-year.html.
2 E. Schumaker. Timeline: How coronavirus got started. ABCNews. September 22, 2020, 11:55 a.m. Available at https://abcnews.go.com/Health/timeline-coronavirus-started/story?id=69435165.
climate change, protests calling for social justice, and the impact of economic volatility, it is clear that this year is only a preview of similar confluences of disruptors to come.
It is incredible to believe that less than 1 year ago, the report Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine3 (the Promising Practices report) was released by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. As a reviewer of that consensus study report, I appreciated the summary of the current state of the representation of women across disciplines, the focus on intersectionality, particularly Women of Color, and the impressive list of evidence-based interventions that was advanced as promising practices. It provided a platform for launching, with renewed vigor, initiatives that may enable us to turn the corner and accelerate the advancement of women in academia. Considering that more than half of the population in the United States identifies as women, if we do not address our underrepresentation in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM), the country is leaving an enormous magnitude of intellectual capital on the table. Innovation, enhanced decision-making, and profitability of corporations have been attributed to greater diversity.4 Indeed, given the enormous value of diversity, the subtitle of the Promising Practices report, “Opening Doors,” inspires an element of optimism and hope that continued progress is within our grasp.
It is fortunate that the sponsors of this current report, the National Institutes of Health, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, partnered with the National Academies to stand up this committee to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the academic careers of women in STEMM. After all, in these unprecedented times, the interventions enumerated in the Promising Practices report were no longer grounded in an environment that was encased in certainty. The questions that were embedded in our Statement of Task for this report were relevant and critically important to the future representation and viability of academic women in STEMM. Was there harm imposed on women when specific interventions were undertaken? Are women and men affected differently when these interventions are implemented? What are the unique challenges that women are facing during this COVID-19 pandemic? What are the early indicators of impacts to the career trajectories of women in STEMM? These are critical questions to better understand how we as an academic community can emerge from this pandemic with continued advancement of women rather than a
3 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2020. Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25585.
4 U.S. Glass Ceiling Commission. 1995. Good for Business: Making Full Use of the Nation’s Human Capital. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/key_workplace/116/.
reduction in the engagement of women in our scientific workforce and a deflation in the expanse of dreams of durable professional careers. An appropriate subtitle for this report, building on the work of the Promising Practices report, may have been “Keeping the Doors Open—Key Questions Unanswered.”
Predictably, there was not a massive body of peer-reviewed literature upon which the committee could determine its list of findings and proposed research questions. However, five commissioned papers in key topical areas provided a rich resource for the committee’s deliberations. Career trajectories, work-life integration, collaboration and networking, leadership and decision-making, and mental health and well-being made up our foci. We also addressed important cross-cutting issues such as the impact of the pandemic on Women of Color. From a range of literature sources, including reviews of relevant material from before the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors of the commissioned papers provided the committee with evidence to support a set of key findings and develop research questions for further investigation. Given how much is at stake, understanding the impact of COVID-19 on the careers of women in STEMM is of utmost importance.
On a personal level, I relate to many of the challenges described in this report and admit that the intensification of them during the current pandemic is nearly unimaginable. My caregiving responsibilities and the difficulties of integrating my personal and professional responsibilities were heightened in the middle of my career, following Hurricane Katrina. My parents, who were in their 90s at the time, came to live with my husband and me in Maryland. Although our family home in New Orleans was fine, I did not believe the health-care system and social services infrastructure in my hometown had recovered enough to effectively care for my parents living alone. My husband and I quickly shifted to preparing regular meals at home, hurriedly sought out caregivers to come in periodically to assist us, and ensured that we made all of their necessary doctors’ appointments between our professional commitments. Taking up caregiving responsibilities after work, preparing the pill boxes late at night, and canceling visiting professorships at the last minute because of periodic emergencies and hospital admissions were new challenges that I had not previously experienced in my adult working life. Indeed, I wrote fewer papers and accepted fewer speaking invitations, deepening my personal concern that my profession would perceive these absences more harshly, considering that I am a woman, and particularly as a Woman of Color.
I recognize that if I had experienced these challenges earlier in my career, I would never have made it to positions of department chair or dean. With the added constraints and circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, I acknowledge that mothers today have taken on the roles of teacher and caregiver, often without the possibility of external assistance that was available to me. Moreover, I was fortunate to have a supportive spouse; however, in the absence of a partner, there is rarely time for self-care, scholarship, or other professional responsibilities. Our
gendered roles in society take on added emphasis during periods of stress, the timing of which can make or break careers. It is time for institutions to consider new strategies to support the careers of women across their entire career timeline and embrace professional norms to alternative constructs other than a “hustle” culture.
It is my hope that this report will not only advance the discussion about how best to enhance the representation and vitality of academic women in STEMM, but create an awareness about the adverse impact that these unprecedented times will have on women going forward. It is also my hope that the research questions posed by this committee will translate into enduring solutions that will strengthen institutional interventions to weather future disruptions.
I appreciate the wisdom of the National Academies and our sponsors to take on this topic, the trusted guidance of the staff of the National Academies, the authors of our commissioned papers who sought the evidence that was needed, and the generosity of valuable time and energy of my fellow committee members who were so willing to expertly share their wisdom on prolonged Zoom calls. At our last meeting, I closed our session with the following quote, which has been attributed to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.: “The arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.”5 It is my dream that the promise of the research that evolves from the questions that have been posed will not only shed a light on the opportunities to listen, learn, strategize, and implement, but will effectively facilitate our shared journey toward gender equity in academia.
Eve Higginbotham, Chair
Committee on Investigating the Potential the Impacts of COVID-19 on the Careers of Women in Academic Science, Engineering, and Medicine
5 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., quoted by the National Museum of African American History and Culture. https://www.si.edu/spotlight/mlk?page=4&iframe=true.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Huda Akil, University of Michigan; Robin Bell, Columbia University; Michelle Cardel, University of Florida; Reginald DesRoches, Rice University; Kathryn Holland, University of Nebraska; Monica Johnson, Washington State University; Karen Kafadar, University of Virginia; Christy Lemak, University of Alabama; Eleni Linos, Stanford University; Tony Liss, The City College of New York; Nancy Rigotti, Massachusetts General Hospital; and Sonia Zárate, Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Katherine Freeman, Pennsylvania State University, and Bryna Kra, Northwestern University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
This page intentionally left blank.
2 OCTOBER 2020 WOMEN IN STEMM FACULTY SURVEY ON WORK-LIFE EFFECTS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
Preferences and Changes in Number of Days Working at Home
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Work Productivity, Well-being, Childcare and Household Labor, and Eldercare
Coping Strategies for Blurred Boundaries and Domestic Labor
Actual versus Desired University Accommodations Post-COVID-19 Pandemic
Highlights from Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Responses
3 ACADEMIC PRODUCTIVITY AND INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSES
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Academic Productivity in 2020
Effects of Institutional Responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic on Academic Careers and Productivity
4 WORK-LIFE BOUNDARIES AND GENDERED DIVISIONS OF LABOR
Pre-COVID-19 Pandemic Work-Life Literature Overview
Post-COVID-19 Pandemic Literature: Changes to Boundaries, Boundary Control, and Well-being
5 COLLABORATION, NETWORKS, AND ROLE OF PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Historical Events and the Impacts on Collaborations and Networking
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Collaborations and Networking
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Professional Organizations and Networks
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Conferencing
The Role of Mentorship and Sponsorship During the COVID-19 Pandemic
6 ACADEMIC LEADERSHIP AND DECISION-MAKING
Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Women in Academic Leadership Positions
COVID-19 Pandemic Decision-Making and Effects on Gender Inequalities
Decision-Making During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Leadership and Decision-Making to Address Crises and Inequities
Data Gaps on Academic Leadership and Decision-Making
7 MENTAL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING
Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic-Related Stress on Women in STEMM
The COVID-19 Pandemic and the Mental and Physical Health of Women in STEMM
8 MAJOR FINDINGS AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Appendix A: Literature Review Terms and Survey Methodology for “Boundaryless Work: The Impact of COVID-19 on Work-Life Boundary Management, Integration, and Gendered Divisions of Labor for Academic Women in STEMM,” by Ellen Ernst Kossek, Tammy D. Allen, and Tracy L. Dumas
Appendix B: Methodology and Data Sources for the “Academic STEMM Labor Market, Productivity, and Institutional Responses,” by Felicia A. Jefferson, Matthew T. Hora, Sabrina L. Pickens, and Hal Salzman
Appendix C: Material Selection Process for “The Impact of COVID-19 on Collaboration, Mentorship and Sponsorship, and Role of Networks and Professional Organizations,” by Misty Heggeness and Rochelle Williams
This page intentionally left blank.
Boxes, Figures, and Tables
Box 5-1Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on International and Distanced Collaborations
Box 6-1Changing Nature of Decision-Making Under Academic Capitalism and the Gig Academy
Figure 2-1 Summary of effects of COVID-19 on the work effectiveness and productivity of women in academic STEMM from the October 2020 survey.
Figure 2-2 Challenges and coping strategies related to childcare demands reported in the October 2020 survey.
Figure 2-3 Challenges and coping strategies related to eldercare demands reported in the October 2020 survey.
Figure 2-4 Boundary management tactics and other coping strategies reported in the October 2020 survey.
Figure 4-1 Types of work-nonwork boundary management interruption styles.
Table 7-1Validated Measurements of Mental Well-being
Table 7-2Risk and Resilience Factors: Documentation from Health-Care Workers Extrapolated to Academic Women in STEMM
Table A-1Listservs that Posted the Anonymous Survey Link for the Work-Life Boundaries Paper
Table A-2Sample Description for October 2020 Survey of Women in Academic STEMM Faculty
Table A-3Topics for the October 2020 Survey
Table A-4Search Terms and Numbers of Results for the Literature Review Conducted by Kossek, Dumas, and Allen
Table C-1Professional Associations Reviewed by Misty Heggeness and Rochelle Williams