Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
,OaLYNTYR,Y_T]LNT^X/TaP]^T_d 0\`T_dLYO4YNW`^TZYTY>?088 :]RLYTeL_TZY^ #FZPOE#SPBEFOJOH1BSUJDJQBUJPO 2TWOL,-L]LMTYZ>`^LY?1T^VP7LdYP,>NSP]P] LYO0XTWd,AL]RL^0OT_Z]^ .ZXXT__PPZY,OaLYNTYR,Y_TrLNT^X/TaP]^T_d0\`T_d LYO4YNW`^TZYTY>?08:]RLYTeL_TZY^ -ZL]OZY-PSLaTZ]LW.ZRYT_TaPLYO>PY^Z]d>NTPYNP^ /TaT^TZYZQ-PSLaTZ]LWLYO>ZNTLW>NTPYNP0O`NL_TZY Consensus Study Report ;]P;`MWTNL_TZY.Z[d@YNZ]]PN_PO;]ZZQ^
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (# G-2021-16755), Fred Kavli Endowment Fund, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (# 10483), Heising-Simons Foundation (# 2021-3112), National Institutes of Health (# HHSN263201800029I/75N98021F00012), National Science Foundation (# OIA-2050485), Ralph J. Cicerone and Carol M. Cicerone Endowment for NAS Missions, Rita Allen Foundation (unnumbered), and The Shanahan Family Charitable Foundation (W911NF-CODE). 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-XXXXX-X International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-XXXXX-X Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26803 This publication is 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 2023 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Advancing Antiracism, Diversity, and Equity Inclusion in STEMM Organizations: Beyond Broadening Participation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26803. Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
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. Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the studyâs 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 committeeâs 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. Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release. For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo. Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
COMMITTEE ON ADVANCING ANTIRACISM, DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION IN STEM ORGANIZATIONS GILDA A. BARABINO 1, 2 (Co-Chair), Olin College of Engineering SUSAN T. FISKE 3 (Co-Chair), Princeton University DAVID J. ASAI, Howard Hughes Medical Institute FAY COBB PAYTON, North Carolina State University NILANJANA DASGUPTA, The University of Massachusetts at Amherst MICA ESTRADA, University of California at San Francisco MIRIAN M. GRADDICK-WEIR, AT&T Corporation, Bedminster, NJ GIOVANNA GUERRERO-MEDINA, Yale University CAMARA P. JONES, Morehouse School of Medicine SAMUEL R. LUCAS, The University of California, Berkeley JULIE POSSELT, University of Southern California VICTOR E. RAY, The University of Iowa JOAN Y REEDE, Harvard Medical School KARL W. REID, National Society of Black Engineers CYNTHIA N. SPENCE, Spelman College KECIA M. THOMAS, The University of Georgia M. ROY WILSON, Wayne State University SWEENEY WINDCHIEF, Montana State University Study Staff LAYNE SCHERER, Study Director EMILY VARGAS, Program Officer JACQUELINE L. COLE, Senior Program Assistant KENNE A. DIBNER, Senior Program Officer ANDRÃ PORTER, Senior Program Officer Consultant JOSEPH ALPER, Consultant 1 Member, National Academy of Medicine 2 Member, National Academy of Engineering 3 Member, National Academy of Science v Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
BOARD ON BEHAVIORAL, COGNITIVE, AND SENSORY SCIENCES TERRIE E. MOFFITT 4 (Chair), Duke University RICHARD N. ASLIN 5, Haskins Laboratories JOHN BAUGH, Washington University, St. Louis WILSON S. GEISLER, The University of Texas at Austin MICHELE J. GELFAND, Stanford Graduate School of Business ULRICH MAYR, University of Oregon KATHERINE L. MILKMAN, The University of Pennsylvania ELIZABETH A. PHELPS, Harvard University DAVID E. POEPPEL, New York University STACEY SINCLAIR, Princeton University TIMOTHY J. STRAUMAN, Duke University DANIEL J. WEISS, Director 4 Member, National Academy of Medicine 5 Member, National Academy of Science vi Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
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: APRILLE J. ERICSSON, Instrument Systems and Technology Division, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center ELENA FUENTES-AFFLICK, Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco ELSA GONZALEZ, College of Education, University of Houston CHAITAN KHOSLA, Departments of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Stanford University HARMIT S. MALIK, Division of Basic Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center MARK L. MCKELVIN, School of Engineering, University of Southern California MARIA ONG, Project SEED, TERC Communications BILLY M. WILLIAMS, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, America Geophysical Union CYNTHIA WINSTON-PROCTOR, Department of Psychology, Howard University 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 WESLEY L. HARRIS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and ELLEN WRIGHT CLAYTON, Vanderbilt University Medical Center. 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. vii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Acknowledgments This report reflects contributions from a number of individuals and groups. The committee takes this opportunity to recognize those who so generously gave their time and expertise to inform its deliberations. To begin, the committee would like to thank the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Fred Kavli Endowment Fund, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Heising-Simons Foundation, National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, Ralph J. Cicerone and Carol M. Cicerone Endowment for NAS Missions, Rita Allen Foundation, and The Shanahan Family Charitable Foundation for their sponsorship, guidance, and support of this study. The committee greatly benefited from the opportunity for discussion with individuals who attended and presented at the open session meetings. The committee thanks these individuals for their time and the candid perspectives they provided. The committee could not have done its work without the support and guidance provided by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine project staff: Layne Scherer, study director; Emily Vargas, program officer; Jacqueline L. Cole, senior program assistant; Kenne Dibner, senior program officer; and André Porter, senior program officer. We appreciate Patrick Burke for his financial assistance on this project and gratefully acknowledge Daniel J. Weiss of the National Academiesâ Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences for his guidance. Many other staff within the National Academies provided support to this project in various ways. The committee would like to thank Laura Castillo-Page, Heidi Schweingruber, Vaughan Turekian, Michael Hout, Margarita Alegria, Rebecca Morgan, Terrie Moffitt, Patty Morison, and Bea Porter for their expertise and support throughout the life cycle of this research study and report. This committee is grateful to the research assistants and commissioned paper authors that generously contributed to this body of work, Ogechi Adele (Princeton University); Yolore Airewele (Princeton University); Jessica Brice (University of Washington); Dana Harris (Yale University); Leezet Matos (University of California, Los Angeles); Alison Hall Birch (University of Texas-Arlington); Krystle P. Cobian (University of California, Los Angeles); Jennifer S. Fang (University of California, Irvine); OiYan Poon (Colorado State University); Tiffany Smith (AISES); and Gloria Trujillo (Stanford University). viii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
In addition to the contributions above, a great number of stakeholders offered resources, expertise, and insight to support the committeeâs work. These include the Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine; James Jones (University of Delaware); Lincoln Quillian (Northwestern University); Dawn Bennet-Alexander (Practical Diversity); Fidan Kurtulus (University of Massachusetts); Roman Liera (Montclair State University); Alex Cortez (Bellwether Education Partners); Jennifer Martineau (Leap and Inspire Global), Aaron Thomas (University of Montana); Charles Bridges (CorVista); Lisa Leslie (New York University); Sanaz Mobasseri (Boston University); Kenneth Ridgway (Purdue University); and Alicia Nicki Washington (Duke University). ix Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Contents Preface, xviii Acronyms, xix Summary, xxi 1. Introduction STUDY ORIGIN AND STATEMENT OF TASK, 1-2 STUDY APPROACH AND SCOPE, 1-5 ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT, 1-11 REFERENCES, 1-15 PART I 2. The Historical and Current Context for Structural, Systemic, and Institutional Racism in the United States DEFINING STRUCTURAL, SYSTEMIC, AND INSTITUTIONAL RACISM, 2-2 THE ORIGINS OF RACE AND RACISM IN THE UNITED STATES, 2-3 THE CODIFICATION OF RACISM: AN EXAMINATION OF MULTIPLE SECTORS IN U.S. SOCIETY, 2-5 UNEQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES, 2-8 HOUSING: THE LEGACY OF REDLINING, 2-12 REDLINING AND UNEQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES, 2-13 RACISM AND EMPLOYMENT, 2-16 MINORITY SERVING INSTITUTIONS, 2-19 STEMM: A REFLECTION AND REPRODUCTION OF BROADER BIASED STRUCTURES, 2-24 REFERENCES, 2-26 3. Population Data and Demographics in the United States DEMOGRAPHIC DATA, RACIAL CATEGORIES, AND LIMITATIONS, 3-2 U.S. DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS, 3-10 REPRESENTATION BY RACE IN ETHNICITY IN U.S. STEMM HIGHER EDUCATION, 3-13 THE U.S. STEMM WORKFORCE, 3-22 CONCLUSION, 3-29 REFERENCES, 3-31 PART II 4. Lived Experiences and Other Ways of Knowing in STEMM INTERVIEWS: LIVED EXPERIENCES OF BLACK STEMM PROFESSIONALS, 4-2 xi Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
NATURE OF EVIDENCE: MULTIPLE METHODS OF GATHERING KNOWLEDGE, 4-11 REFERENCES, 4-14 PART III 5. Minoritized Individuals in STEMM: Consequences and Responses to Racial Bias and How STEMM Professionals Can Help SOCIAL COGNITIVE PROCESSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF RACIAL BIAS, 5-2 SOCIAL CATEGORIZATION AND SOCIAL IDENTITY, 5-3 PHYSICAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF BEING THE TARGET OF RACISM, 5-9 RACE-BASED REJECTION SENSITIVITY, 5-10 STRATEGIES FOR EXITING: DISIDENTIFICATION AND PASSING, 5-12 STRATEGIES FOR FITTING IN AND SURVIVING: GRIT, RESILIENCE AND CODESWITCHING, 5-15 COLLECTIVELY MOBILIZING TO TRANSFORM THE DOMINANT STEMM CULTURE, 5-17 HOW STEMM PROFESSIONALS CAN HELP, 5-21 SIGNAL INCLUSION THROUGH NUMERIC REPRESENTATION AND SPATIAL DESIGN OF LOCAL ENVIORNEMNTS, 5-21 BUILD PEER RELATIONSHIP AND COMMUNITY FOR MINORITIZED GROUPS, 5-25 CREATE ACCESS TO HIGH STATUS RELATINOSHIPS, 5-30 ORGANIZATION OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, 5-33 REFERENCE, 5-37 6. The Gatekeepers Of STEMM: How Individual Bias and Inequality Persist and How STEM Professionals Can Help DEFINING AND EXAMINING GATEKEEPERS, 6-3 EXAMINING RACISM PERPETUATED BY GATE KEEPERS, 6-6 GATEKEEPERSâ SOCIAL MOTIVES TO PRESERVE THE STATUS QUO, 6- 19 THREATS TO GATEKEEPERS FROM DEMOGRAPHIC SHIFTS IN THE UNITED STATES: THREAT, ANXIETY, AND SYSTEM REINFORCING BEHAVIORS, 6-25 CONCLUSIONS, 6-27 ORGANIZATION OF THE RECOMMENDATION, 6-27 REFERENCES, 6-29 7. Diverse Work Teams: Understanding the Challenges and How STEMM Professionals Can Leverage Strengths TEAMS WITHIN STEMM, 7-2 RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY WITHIN TEAMS: IMPACT ON TEAM PERFORMANCE, 7-3 THE CONTACT HYPOTHESIS: REDUCING PREJUDICE THROUGH xii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
INTERRACIAL INTERGROUP CONTACTS, 7-6 INGROUP FAVORITISM AS A BARRIER TO THE DIVERSIFICATION OF STEMM TEAMS, 7-13 MYTHS ABOUT RACIAL PROGRESS, 7-15 REFERENCES, 7-18 8. Understanding Organizations and The Role of Leadership in Developing a Culture of Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion AN OVERVIEW OF ORGANIZATIONS, CULTURE, AND CLIMATE, 8-3 THE RACIALIZATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES, 8-7 CHANGING ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND CLIMATE TO CENTER ADEI, 8-24 BARRIERS TO AND CHALLENGES OF CULTURE CHANGE, 8-27 INTERROGATING STEMM VALUES AND BARRIERS TO CHANGE, 8-34 FRAMEWORKS FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE, 8-36 REFERENCES, 8-43 9. Research Agenda HISTORY AND CONTEMPORARY STRUCTURES, 9-3 ORGANIZATIONS, 9-5 TEAMS, 9-10 INTERPERSONAL AND INDIVIDUAL DYNAMICS, 9-10 RESEARCH PROCESS: ITEMS FOR ALL LEVELS, 9-14 CONCLUSION, 9-19 REFERENCES, 9-20 Appendix A Increasing Participation of Underrepresented Groups in STEM: Themes from Four Recent National Academies Reports THEME I: DEVELOP AND INSTITUTE INCLUSIVE LEADERSHIP PRACTICES IN STEMM INSTITUTIONS, A-2 THEME II: FOSTER AN ENVIRONMENT THAT PROVIDES SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SUPPORT FOR UNDERREPRESENTED/UNDER- RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS ACROSS STEM EDUCATION AND CAREERS, A-3 THEME III: SUPPORT AND INCREASE PATHWAY PROGRAMS THAT TARGET UNDERREPRESENTED/UNDER-RESOURCED INDIVIDUALS, A-4 THEME IV: FORTIFY DATA COLLECTION, EVALUATION, AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF DIVERSITY, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION PROGRAMS, A-6 REFERENCES, A-8 Appendix B Comparison Tables of Science and Engineering Degrees Earned by Race and Ethnicity and Gender in 2011 and 2019 REFERENCE, B-3 Appendix C Process for Panelâs Interviews INTERVIEW APPROACH AND INTERVIEWERS, B-1 xiii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
INTERVIEW SCRIPT, B-2 RECRUITMENT AND DEMOGRAPHICS, B-4 Appendix D Glossary Appendix D Committee Biosketches xiv Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
BOXES, FIGURES, and TABLES BOXES 1-1 Statement of Task: Committee on Addressing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Antiracism in 21st Century STEMM Organizations, 1-6 1-2 Race Categories from the U.S. Census Bureau, 1-8 3-1 What is Race? What is Ethnicity? 3-3 8-1 Key Terms and Definitions, 8-4 8-2 Black Women, Natural Hair, and Discrimination, 8-19 FIGURES 1-1 Diagram illustrating the nested relationship between history and society, STEMM organizations, groups and teams, and individuals, 1-12 3-1 U.S. Census categories used over history, 3-6 3-2 U.S. population trends by race and ethnicity, 1997â2017, 3-12 3-3 U.S. annual population changes by race and ethnicity per year, 2010â2020, 3-12 3-4 Racial and ethnic compositions of U.S. population by age, 3-13 3-5 Total Fall enrollment in degree-granting postsecondary institutions by race/ethnicity, 3-14 3-6 Representation of racial and ethnic groups in S&E degree recipients, 2018, 3-16 3-7 Science and engineering associateâs degree attainment by race and ethnicity from 2011 and 2019, 3-17 3-8 Science and engineering bachelorâs degree attainment by race and ethnicity from 2011 and 2019, 3-18 3-9 Science and engineering masterâs degree attainment by race and ethnicity from 2011 and 2019, 3-21 3-10 Science and engineering doctoral degree attainment by race and ethnicity from 2011 and 2019, 3-23 3-11 Proportion of U.S. population and S&E doctorates who identify as Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Latine or Hispanic American, 3-25 3-12 Degree attainment by persons from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in different STEMM disciplines, 3-26 3-13 Individuals employed in S&E occupations in the United States, 1960â2019, 3-27 3-14 Employed adults, by workforce, educational attainment, and race or ethnicity, 2019, 3-27 3-15 Health and social assistance workers by detailed industry, 2019, 3-28 5-1 Minoritized individualsâ responses to facing racial bias, 5-12 6-1 Trends in Whiteâs attitudes about racial intermarriage. Oppose Laws: Do you think there should be laws against marriages between Blacks and Whites? Favor Intermarriage: Do you approve or disapprove of marriage between Whites and Non-Whites? (Adapted from Shuman et al., 1997), 6-9 xv Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
6-2 Change and predicted change in implicit and explicit attitudes from 2007 to 2020: observed monthly weighted averages (2007â2016) of implicit association test (IAT) D scores (implicit attitudes; top two rows) and explicit-preference scores (explicit attitudes; bottom two rows), as well as forecasts of the autoregressive-integrated-moving-average (ARIMA) model (2017â 2020). Solid black lines indicate decomposed trends of observed data (removing seasonality and noise), solid light-gray lines indicate the weighted monthly means from observed data, dotted black lines within the light-gray areas indicate the means of the ARIMA forecasts, light-gray areas indicate 80 percent confidence intervals (CIs), and dark-gray areas indicate 95% CIs of the ARIMA forecasts. 6-3 Panel A represents stereotypes of 10 racial/ethnic/national groups reported by Princeton undergraduates in 1933 (Katz & Braly, 1933). Panel B represents those in 2003 Bergsieker at al., 2012), 6-16 8-1 Model of organizational culture, 8-5 9-1 A summarized model of the levels of the research agenda This includes the various levels of analysis (I-IV) and the inclusion of the research process from start to finish., 9-2 TABLES S-1 Examples of Culture Change Frameworks for Organizations, xxxv 3-1 Persons Employed in Different Science and Engineering Professions by Race and Ethnicity and Discipline, 3-24 8-1 Summaries of Culture Change Frameworks for Organizations, 8-38 B-1 Comparison of Science and Engineering Associateâs Degrees Earned by Race and Ethnicity and Gender in 2011 and 2019 B-2 Comparison of Science and Engineering Bachelorâs Degrees Earned by Race and Ethnicity and Gender in 2011 and 2019 B-3 Comparison of Science and Engineering Masterâs Degrees Earned by Race and Ethnicity and Gender in 2011 and 2019 B-4 Comparison of Science and Engineering Doctoral Degrees Earned by Race and Ethnicity and Gender in 2011 and 2019 xvi Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Preface This report provides no simple answers to racial obstacles that date back beyond the origins of American history. The authorsâa consensus committee of experts appointed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicineâwere selected for their deep engagement on issues of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion in Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine (STEMM); as such, we are well aware of the challenge in using evidence-based action to remedy unfair systems, structures, and institutions that advantage some and disadvantage others on the basis of race and ethnicity. Undaunted, we tackled our charge to identify racist and biased conditions that create systemic barriers and impede the full talent pool of our nation from pursuing and advancing in STEMM careers. This report recommends actionable strategies, based on the scientific evidence reviewed herein and based on the lived experiences of practicing STEMM scientists, engineers, and medical professionals. Readers of this report may wonder why the National Academies was asked to focus on structural racism, as opposed to racism at individual and intrapersonal levels. As this report shows, based on decades of research and analysis, racial disparities in STEMM careers do not rest on individual deficiency in candidates or even primarily on the individual racism of institutional and organizational gatekeepers. Racism is embedded in our society. For example, wealth disparities across generations contribute to and result from segregated neighborhoods; segregated neighborhoods contribute to unequal school quality, which deprives whole student cohorts of the opportunity to consider, prepare, and enter a career in STEMM. Further, racial wealth gaps affect familiesâ ability to pay for STEMM college (prep, extracurricular experiences, tuition, and living expenses). Thus, creating conducive contexts will require structural changes, as recommended in this report. Another example of structural racism addressed in this report rests in organizationsâ arrangements to monitor, incentivize, and value diversity, equity, and inclusion. It is incumbent on organizations and institutions to address racial biases that individual decisionmakers are unlikely to notice, identify, or prioritize because, as the evidence shows, they may not recognize how their own, xvii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
perhaps inadvertent, individual decisions contribute to overall patterns. The report reviews the diversity science that demonstrates and the lived experiences that exemplify how structural racism requires active antiracist change at a system level. This reportâs formal conclusions and recommendations are bold, actionable, and we believe, necessary. This report was many years in the making, with many voices demanding its necessity. In July of 2015, members of the Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences (chaired by Susan Fiske) sought funding to examine and understand police split-second choices to shoot unarmed Black men. Unfortunately, these efforts did not raise sufficient interest. However, in the summer of 2020, following the murder of George Floyd and the Black Lives Matter protests, federal agencies and private foundations prioritized sponsoring an Academies report on antiracism and diversity, equity, and inclusion, focused on STEMM. With Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnsonâs call for the Academies to act on this topic, it was an idea whose time had finally come. Independently, the Academiesâ Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine, founded and chaired by Cato Laurencin (and on which Gilda Barabino serves as a member), sponsored dozens of events on this and related topics. Among other priorities, members of the Roundtable underscored the need to include lived experience as well as social and behavioral science in an examination of antiracism and diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEMM organizations. As co-chairs, we bring different qualifications and experiences but a shared drive to work together to guide the study process. We offer our extended bios in Appendix D to illustrate with our respective lived experiences the reportâs major themes: how the history of race impinges on the present- day disparities; the lived experience of race from both majority and minoritized groups, starting with school and going through careers, with increases in gatekeeping power; discovering how systems affect individuals, small groups and teams, and organizations. The systems in place disadvantage some, to the advantage of others. Thus, we both seek to make the systems more equitable. Each of the committee members has a distinctive biography and path to this report (see Appendix D). Just as no single path leads to a STEMM career, each committee memberâs unique experiences, scholarship, leadership, and service led them to this important work and added immeasurably to the report. So, too, the talented and dedicated National Academies staff, led by Layne Scherer and supported by Emily Vargas, kept us alert, organized, and on track for the high-speed journey from start to finish. We are grateful for the opportunity to offer evidence-based and experience- xviii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
sensitive recommendations at this crucial juncture in our nationâs route to antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEMM. On the way, we have encountered some who wonder about our approach. Our work began with a thorough review of the literature to illuminate how historical policies, practices, and laws can have lasting effects. At the direction of our Statement of Task, the committee included lived experiences as an essential component of the evidence base. We reviewed the scientific evidence of how the roles of managers, decisionmakers, and gatekeepers contribute to and perpetuate patterns and practices that inhibit STEMM diversity, with intent or unconsciously. Finally, we examined rigorous studies of racial discrimination and the diversity science literatures, including the bases for inaccurate assumptions about interest in STEMM among marginalized racial and ethnic groups. Thus, the report shows that patterns exist in the data and are not matters of opinion or moral judgements. We recognize that term racism may challenge some readers. The committee uses this term because it is scientifically accurate (as demonstrated in this report) and included in the committeeâs charge, even if it makes readers uncomfortable. Despite the discomfort that accompanies complex and enduring social, cultural problems, we encourage readers to engage the evidence in this report and view the committeeâs evidence-based recommendations to make STEMM settings more diverse, inclusive, and equitableâand more antiracist. This report is written for those who aim for STEMM but encounter systemic obstaclesâand for those in a position to remove the barriers and pave the way forward. Gilda A. Barabino, Co-Chair Susan T. Fiske, Co-Chair Committee on Advancing Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Stem Organizations xix Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Acronyms AAMC- American Association of Medical Colleges AANAPISI- Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions AAPI- Asian American and Pacific Islander ACE- American Council on Education ADEI- Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion HBCU- Historically Black Colleges and Universities HBLGU- Historically Black Land-Grant Institutions HSI- Hispanic Serving Institutions HWLGU- Historically White Land-Grant Institutions MSI- Minority Serving Institutions NCES- National Center for Education Statistics NCSES- National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics NDB- National Institutes of Healthâs Data Book NIH- National Institutes of Health NSF- National Science Foundation PI- Principal Investigator PWI- Predominantly White Institution SDR- The Survey of Doctoral Recipients SEH- Science, Engineering, and Health STEM- Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics STEMM- Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine xx Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
TCU-Tribal Colleges and Universities xxi Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Summary Science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medical (STEMM) 6 organizations 7 in the United States, like all organizations, operate within the broader context of the nationâs history, policies, and contemporary societal norms. While the connections between STEMM organizations and the national context may not seem obvious in day-to-day activities, they are foundational to the culture and climate of educational and professional environments. Recently, the murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and Rayshard Brooks led to a critical reckoning in the United States with its history and the impact of racialized policies. In the wake of racial justice protests, there has been a groundswell of pledges from individuals, organizations, and associations to dismantle systemic racism. However, even as countless organizations have made public statements in support of these efforts, U.S. society as a whole still lacks a concerted approach to bring about needed sustainable, structural change. To address the questions raised by STEMM organizations seeking such change, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine appointed the Committee on Advancing Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in STEM Organizations. 8 The committee was asked to: ⢠review the research and evidence from lived experience on the ways in which racism (at the individual and group level, and through conditions that create systemic barriers) impedes STEMM careers for historically minoritized racial and ethnic groups; ⢠identify principles for sustainable change of organizational culture to address racism and promote diversity, equity, and inclusion; these might entail discussion of the role of training, ways to motivate buy-in at all levels of the STEMM organization, and ways to 6 The committee and the sponsors agreed to include medicine in the fields to be studied, so STEM became STEMM. There are instances in this report for which there is only evidence or data related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and in those instances âSTEMâ is used. 7 For the purposes of this report, STEMM organizations include universities, nonprofit organizations, hospitals, and private industry. 8 The study was supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Fred Kavli Endowment Fund, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Heising-Simons Foundation, National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Ralph J. Cicerone and Carol M. Cicerone Endowment for NAS Missions, the Rita Allen Foundation, and the Shanahan Family Charitable Foundation. xxii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
stay the course in adopting a strategy and goals aimed at addressing racism and its role as a barrier to a STEMM career; ⢠review and synthesize the existing research on methods to improve the recruitment, retention, and advancement of members of historically minoritized racial and ethnic groups pursuing STEMM careers; and identify promising policies and practices for changing existing systems and structures; ⢠identify examples of effective strategies to advance antiracism in STEMM organizations, including roles for members within organizations; and ⢠define a research agenda to address gaps in knowledge in the evidence base to advance antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. To address the statement of task, the National Academies appointed the committeeâincluding experts in the science of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion 9; social and cognitive psychology; industrial and organizational psychology; sociology; and individuals with experience implementing programs in STEMM organizations. COMMITTEE APPROACH The challenges experienced by minoritized people in STEMM are deeply rooted in history, law, cultural and institutional practices, and interpersonal biases and assumptionsâall factors that must be understood in depth to discern ways forward. At the same time, it is important to recognize that while there may be some shared experiences, these sociocultural factors differ for different minoritized groups and individuals, precluding a one-size-fits-all solution. Thus, the committee elected to focus on the challenges facing Black Americans in STEMM to demonstrate the inquiry that is required, noting the prominence of work on this topic both within the Academies and in the broader research community. This focus is in no way intended to diminish the importance of addressing challenges facing other minoritized groups, but rather meant to provide guidance for future work to address their concerns, including a call for additional research that investigates the unique racialized issues facing these groups in the research agenda. To the extent that information about Indigenous, Latine, 10 Asian-American, and 9 See page xxiii definitions of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. 10 In this report, the committee elected to use gender-neutral âLatineâ rather than âLatino/sâ or âLatinx.â Latine is a term âcreated by gender non-binary and feminist communities in Spanish-speaking countries. The objective of the term is also to remove gender from Spanish, by replacing it with the gender-neutral Spanish letter E, which can already be found in words like estudianteâ (âWhy/Latinx/E?,â n.d.). xxiii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
people from other minoritized groups exists in the scientific literature, it is included as a part of the evidence-base of this report. To address its charge to review evidence from lived experience on the ways in which racism impedes STEMM careers for historically minoritized racial and ethnic groups, the committee leveraged the expertise from the National Academiesâ Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in STEMM, a panel of leaders focused on increasing the representation, retention, and inclusion of Black men and Black women in science, engineering, and medicine. Structured interviews with members of the Roundtable and other members of the National Academies who identify as Black or African American critically contribute to and complement the body of published and peer-reviewed research evidence on antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEMM facing Black Americans and are intended to provide important accounts that illustrate not only the challenges these professionals faced, but also the support they found helpful in their education and career. To carry out its work systematically, the committee agreed upon definitions that reflect the disciplinary research and committee deliberations: ⢠Antiracism is an active, intentional, and dynamic set of actions that dismantle and disrupt racism, which is the combination of policies, practices, attitudes, cultures, and systems that affect individuals, institutions, and structures unequally and that confer power and privilege to certain groups over others, defined according to the social constructions of race and ethnicity (see glossary in Appendix D for additional definitions). ⢠Diversity is the fair representation of different aspects of human characteristics, identities, and perspectives in the composition of a group. Diversity is contextual and benefits from specific definitions for the areas to which it applies. It can be a product of antiracist actions as well as a measure against racism. ⢠Equity is an outcome from fair conditions (policies, practices, structures, cultures, and norms) in which all individuals and groups have the opportunities and resources they need for general well-being or success in specific metrics (such as pay or advancement). Equity is aligned with justice and may require the systemic redistribution of power, access, and resources. Equity should not be confused with equality, which is the treatment of all individuals in the same manner regardless of their starting point. xxiv Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
⢠Inclusion is the feeling or sense of belonging in an environment, where all individuals, regardless of and with respect to their backgrounds, feel that they have a voice and the support for full participation in that environment. An inclusive culture is reinforced with equitable policies, practices, programs, and structures. In an inclusive environment, leaders take an active role in reflecting, learning, and listening to all members of the community to sustain a culture of dignity, respect, and trust. Although the committee used these definitions to conduct its work, it recognizes that there are other ways to interpret and define these constructs and concepts and that they are fluid and likely to change over time. THE CONTEXT, CULTURE, AND CONSEQUENCES Today, people from minoritized groups comprise a growing part of the U.S. population, but that growth has not been reflected in increases in STEMM education and careers. The evidence shows that minoritized individuals face numerous systemic barriers, including macro-level policies and practices that have negatively impacted their accessibility, representation, and ability to thrive in STEMM careers. Racial biases at the individual and interpersonal levels also impede STEMM careers for people from minoritized groups. These biases lead to minoritized people experiencing a range of adverse consequences in STEMM environments, which generally spur one of three responses: exiting the field, implementing strategies to fit in, and/or collectively mobilizing to transform the STEMM environment. Further barriers can come in the form of gatekeepersâindividuals in institutions or organizations who are in a position to permit or prevent access to resourcesâwho play an important role in determining who is and who is not included in STEMM by defining the skills, identities, and values necessary for individuals to persevere in these fields (see Chapter 6). Gatekeepersâ conscious and unconscious biases, cognitive mechanisms, and social motives may act to keep the status quo intact and inhibit efforts to promote antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. While gatekeepers may seem like unlikely change agents, the committee recognizes them as a key part of a multi-tiered strategy for change. Finally, even when diversity is increased in STEMM organizations, there can be challenges that hinder the success of minoritized individuals. Scientific research increasingly relies on individual scientists training or working together in small teams, sometimes referred to as âteam science.â As calls to increase team science continue, many STEMM organizations and professionals may be motivated to provide support xxv Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
for diverse teams. In such circumstances, careful consideration should be given to the evidence on the dynamics of diverse teams and common challenges that can arise. Recent research on the ways that unexamined bias or racism affect and operate in STEMM environments offers promising directions. As this report describes, the evidence calls for leadership and decision makers to interrogate the values that guide organizational operations and interrogate, too, how these values manifest in norms, policies, and practices, and, consequently, to make cultural and operational changes that reflect antiracist values. Values take tangible form in the ways that leaders allocate resources, such as funding, personnel, and professional development opportunities across the organization. Interrogating the underlying values in candidate selection criteria, for example, can identify where bias appears and provide opportunities for leaders, human resource directors, and other decision makers to implement more equitable processes. Finally, this report emphasizes that the concepts of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion are not goals for which a simple checklist will indicate success. Rather, they are goals that reflect culture change, accomplished by the creation of environments that focus on inclusive excellence, where all participants have access to educational and professional opportunities, feel included, and have the resources to actualize their full potential. In order to do this, STEMM organizations will require ongoing leadership, resources, and commitment to ensure that these values become part of an intentionally maintained organizational culture. Leadership and managers of STEMM organizations should anticipate resistance to changes in the allocations of resources, as shifts to behavioral norms and expectations on campus and in the workplace can result in confusion and other emotional reactions. Since there is no single way to approach culture change, this report provides nine frameworks that outline different perspectives to the process (see Box S-1). To build and sustain antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion, STEMM organizations need to review, evaluate, and revise their policies and practices to create educational and working environments that increase access for people from minoritized groups. While many interventions have focused on âfixing the person,â the committee and this report encourage a multi-tiered strategy that calls for change at the institutional and team levels. The combination of removing barriers for entry and for participation, while implementing practices that convey belonging, will allow a STEMM organization to move from broadening participation by the numbers to fostering a culture of inclusion, thriving, and success. xxvi Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The committeeâs conclusions and recommendations are presented in the order that they appear in the report. Readers are encouraged to refer to the individual chapters for additional context and supporting evidence. While addressing each recommendation in isolation may produce some change, the committee believes that the multi-tiered, multi-faceted approach to implementing the recommendations concurrently, as discussed throughout the report, will achieve the greatest possible impact. Addressing Structural Racism and Institutional Racism in STEMM CONCLUSION 2-1: The history of systemic racism in the United States, including both written laws and policies and a culture of practices and beliefs, has harmed Black people, Indigenous people, Latine, Asian-American, and other people from minoritized racial and ethnic groups that continue to this day. This history provides critical context for understanding the unequal representation of minoritized populations in STEMM higher education and workplaces. CONCLUSION 2-2: The policies, programs, and practices of Historically Black College and Universities (HBCUs) and Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) are examples of providing intentional and culturally responsive student and faculty support. Predominantly White institutions of higher education and other STEMM organizations can look to these institutions as guides and adopt these systems to increase support for people from minoritized racial and ethnic groups. RECOMMENDATION 2-1: Federal funding agencies, private philanthropies, and other grantmaking organizations should provide increased opportunities for grants, awards, and other forms of support to increase understanding of how the policies, programs, and practices of HBCUs and TCUs support students and faculty. Notably, one issue for further investigation should be understanding the core principles of historically-based minority- serving institution (MSI)-based programs and how to translate them to predominantly White institutions of higher education and other STEMM organizations. In addition, predominately white institutions should seek sustainable partnerships with all MSIs (HBCUs, TCUs, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and Asian-American, Native American, and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions). xxvii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Improving Population and Demographic Data CONCLUSION 3-1: Although the representation of minoritized persons in STEM higher education is increasing, the collective attainment of science and engineering degrees for Black people, Indigenous people, and Latine people does not reflect their corresponding growth in the U.S. population. CONCLUSION 3-2: Currently-available data on students who intend to study STEM in their undergraduate degrees leave out important information on educational outcomes including persistence, completion, and transfer to other degree programs. RECOMMENDATION 3-1: To understand the relative persistence of students in STEM higher education, data collection organizations, such as the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics, should collect and share online with the public information on the demographics of students entering college planning to study STEM and their subsequent educational outcomes, disaggregated by race and ethnicity, gender, and field of study, including: ⢠how many complete a STEM degree, ⢠how many switch to and complete a non-STEM degree, and ⢠how many leave college without a degree. Understanding the Lived Experience and Other âWays of Knowingâ CONCLUSION 4-1: Oral history and other means of exploring the lived experiences of scholars from historically and systemically minoritized groups in STEMM offer valuable insights that supplement findings from other kinds of research. These methods should be continued and expanded. Leveraging STEMM Professionals and Organizations CONCLUSION 5-1: There are a few noteworthy ways to describe how people from historically and systemically minoritized groups respond to racism in STEMM educational and professional environments. These responses can be loosely grouped as follows: exiting the field, implementing strategies to fit in, and collectively mobilizing to transform the STEMM environment. xxviii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
RECOMMENDATION 5-1: Leaders and gatekeepers of STEMM organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized peopleâs individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices: 1. Improve numerical diversity through the admission, hiring, and inclusion of minoritized individuals at all levels of an organization: a. Establish information systems across institutions using common metrics for comparison purposes to collect data, track success, and identify areas of numeric disparities. Results should be transparent, up-to-date, and accurate. b. Hiring more minoritized individuals, especially in positions where minoritized role models are often missing (e.g., leadership, mentorship), with the aim of building a critical mass. c. Determine if the institutional diversity statement reflects the reality of the institutional environment, and directly address discrepancies. d. Adapt curriculum, physical environment, media stories, and other content to incorporate more examples of minoritized role models. RECOMMENDATION 5-2: Leaders and gatekeepers of STEMM organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized peopleâs individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices: 1. Create and provide continued investment in evidence-based programs that connect minoritized individuals to ingroup peers, institutional resources, and professional networks. These investments require significant expertise in their designs and execution, and they may not yield immediate results; however, they can increase a sense of welcome and belonging through the ability to connect with individuals from similar racial and ethnic backgrounds. Types of programs may include the following types of resources: a. Summer bridge programs. b. Living-learning communities. xxix Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
c. Peer and near-peer mentorship programs. d. Actively work to form relationships with national-level affinity societies (e.g., Society for the Advancement of Chicanos and Native Americans in STEM, National Society for Black Engineers, American Indian Science and Engineering Society, etc.,), create local chapters, and provide opportunities for minoritized individuals to connect with them. RECOMMENDATION 5-3: Leaders and gatekeepers of STEMM organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized peopleâs individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices: 1. Create and provide continued investment in programs that facilitate working relationships between minoritized individuals and high-status professionals: a. Create and invest in mentorship programs, while also hiring more minoritized faculty. b. Conduct additional research examining the roles of other high-status individuals such as champions and sponsors on fostering STEMM careers for minoritized individuals. RECOMMENDATION 5-4: Leaders and gatekeepers of STEMM organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized peopleâs individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices: 1. Develop interpersonal environments and institutional norms that promote inclusion, dignity, belonging, and affirmations of kindness: a. Actively recognize minoritized individualsâ contributions to STEMM across multiple mediums such as portraits, media stories, awards, etc. b. De-center White professional norms in culture, dress, and appearance. c. Conduct additional research examining which features of the physical environment are most likely to promote sustainable ADEI in STEMM. xxx Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
d. Emphasize and recognize the importance of communal values in STEMM work. e. Redesign STEMM curriculum to incorporate Indigenous ways of knowing, and actively involve Indigenous communities in the development of this process. f. Create cultural norms that communicate the strengths and struggles of minoritized groups. g. Provide access to culturally responsive mental health providers or resources with experience in addressing racial stress, trauma, and aggressions for minoritized individuals who have experienced distress and would like to pursue these options. h. Conduct biannual âcultural auditsâ to determine if the institution is fostering an environment of inclusion. RECOMMENDATION 5-5: Leaders and gatekeepers of STEMM organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized peopleâs individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices: a. Use evidence-based design and implementation practices to build curriculum initiatives that increase access to discovery, including, for example, course-based research experiences (CRE). Addressing Individual Bias and Persistent Inequality CONCLUSION 6-1: Like other people, gatekeepers often have attitudinal biases, cognitive mechanisms, and social motives that keep the White status quo intact. Racial bias is not only more automatic, but also more ambivalent and ambiguous than most people think. That means that individuals, including gatekeepers, may not be able to monitor their own bias impartially, and may unwittingly perpetuate it. xxxi Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
RECOMMENDATION 6-1: Leaders of STEMM organizations and directors of human resource offices can improve minoritized peopleâs individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices: ⢠Create organizational-level or unit-level information systems to collect data on the decisions of gatekeepers. Data collected may include, but not be limited to hiring, admissions, promotion, tenure, advancement, and awards. Data should be examined in the aggregate to identify patterns of bias exhibited by gatekeepers based on race and ethnicity. ⢠Include responsibilities related to advancing antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion in leadership role descriptions and requirements for advancement into management. ⢠Develop systems with more widely shared, inclusive decision-making processes and shared authority over the allocation of resources, which should limit the negative consequences that occur when gatekeeping is concentrated in a select few individuals. CONCLUSION 6-2: Additional research is needed to examine the psychological impacts of perpetuating racism from the perspective of the gatekeeper in STEMM. Understanding the Challenges and Leveraging the Strengths of Diverse Work Teams CONCLUSION 7-1: For teams in STEMM organizations, increased numeric representation of minoritized individuals is critical; however, numeric diversity alone is an insufficient condition to yield positive team performance. Conditions that foster inclusion are also essential. RECOMMENDATION 7-1: Gatekeepers who manage teams, including but not limited to principal investigators, heads of laboratories and research groups, should be intentional about creating the following conditions. These can support positive team performance outcomes, and help reduce instances of interpersonal bias. ⢠Increase the numeric representation of minoritized individuals on teams, by working toward building a critical mass, a necessary but not sufficient attribute of building an inclusive environment. xxxii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
⢠Create team norms that centralize a positive climate, in which it is known that all team members, including minoritized individuals, are supported, heard, and respected. ⢠Develop interdependent teams in which everyone is cooperating and working toward an established common goal. ⢠Ensure that team members feel psychologically safe on the team, and if not, identify the specific factors that are preventing psychological safety and work to address them. ⢠Work to promote equal status among team members. Remove asymmetric power differentials among team members, especially between White team members and minoritized team members. ⢠Incorporate greater diversity in developing team roles, and make sure all team members have clear roles and expectations, including access to professional development and pathways to advancement. Understanding Organizations and the Role of Leadership in Developing a Culture of Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion CONCLUSION 8-1: Although standardized tests, such as the SAT, GRE, and MCAT, may not be biased as instruments, they often replicate the educational inequities endured by students from historically minoritized racial and ethnic groups, and they are not consistent predictors of academic and professional success. Reliance on standardized test scores can exacerbate racial inequities in admissions, and financial aid decisions for undergraduate, graduate, and medical programs. CONCLUSION 8-2: Racial discrimination continues to be a significant factor in hiring processes and wages. In terms of hiring, Black people are less likely to receive callbacks than less- credentialed White people. In terms of wages, across occupations Black people and Latine people have lower median weekly earnings than their White and Asian counterparts. Analyses of salary levels and start-up packages by race/ethnicity for STEMM faculty are lacking but recent data suggest that White men receive higher salaries and larger start-up packages than scientists who are women or who are not White. xxxiii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
CONCLUSION 8-3: People from minoritized racial and ethnic groups encounter significant race- related barriers in academia that affect their career advancement and retention, including but not limited to bias in tenure and promotion, challenges to align with the dominant culture, and everyday discrimination from colleagues and students including microaggressions and tokenism. CONCLUSION 8-4: Lack of diversity within organizations can limit access to career resources for people from minoritized racial and ethnic groups, such as mentorship, sponsorship, and professional networks, that could support their development. RECOMMENDATION 8-1: Organizational leaders should take action to redress both individual bias and discrimination as well as organizational processes that reproduce harm and negative outcomes for people from minoritized racial and ethnic groups at critical points of access and advancement. This action should include a review of evaluation criteria and decision-making practices (i.e., in admissions, hiring and wage-setting, promotion and advancement) to understand if and to what degree existing standards perpetuate underlying racial and ethnic inequities. ⢠Admissions offices at colleges and universities, as well as admissions decision makers in graduate programs, should assess the alignment or divergence of their current admissions policies and criteria with values of ADEI, and develop holistic admissions strategies that offer a systematic, contextualized evaluation of applicants on multiple dimensions. ⢠Hiring managers, directors of human resources, and supervisors should measure and review the application, offer, and acceptance rates in their organization, as well as the salaries, resource packages, and academic tracks and titles of new hires, for instances of racial and ethnic discrimination in the hiring process. As a result, these leaders should, as appropriate, implement proactive outreach and recruitment to increase applications from people from minoritized racial and ethnic groups, trainings and resources to eliminate bias in the hiring process for managers, and updated policies to reduce bias and discrimination in setting wages. ⢠Directors of human resources and supervisors should measure, evaluate, and address the presence of bias and discrimination in rewards, key assignments and promotion, the proportion of people from historically minoritized backgrounds leaving their xxxiv Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
positions and their reasons for doing so, and the access to culturally relevant mentorship for students and employees. CONCLUSION 8-5: The process of cultural change toward antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEMM organizations can be complex, multi-layered, and uneven in its progress due to the significant demands from leadership and participants. Cultural change around ADEI can involve personal reflection and challenges to individual beliefs, all of which cause discomfort. RECOMMENDATION 8-2: Leaders, managers, and human resource departments in STEMM organizations should anticipate resistance to antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts and investigate with rigorous empirical tools, the impacts of training on different types of ADEI outcomes (hiring, climate, promotion, retention, leadership roles, resource allocation). RECOMMENDATION 8-3: Presidents, CEOs, and leaders of STEMM organizations, including those in higher education and the private sector, should use a framework (such as those listed below) to evaluate the institutionâs values and norms and identify specific ways to address norms that impede diversity and promote a culture that is genuinely accessible and supportive to all. These top-level leaders should work with managers, supervisors, and other mid-level leaders who influence the local culture within organizations and can be a critical part of implementation. The evaluation should include review of: ⢠Institutional policies and practices for instances of bias with regard to race and ethnicity; ⢠Policies and practices for entrance into the organization (admissions, hiring, or nomination), advancement (promotion and tenure), and other rewards; ⢠Analysis of resource allocation by race and ethnicity such as wages and bonuses, mentorship, professional development opportunities, physical materials or assets, and other items or forms of support; ⢠Mentorship, training, and professional development opportunities to build skills specific to supporting Black students, Indigenous students, and students and trainees from historically minoritized racial and ethnic groups; xxxv Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
⢠Culturally-aware mentorship and management training for supervisors, administrators, and other leaders; and ⢠The results of regular climate surveys to evaluate the working conditions and environment. TABLE S-1 Examples of Culture Change Frameworks for Organizations The Antiracist Organization: Dismantling Systemic Racisms in the Workplace Daniels, S. (2022) Four-Factor RACE Model: 1. Recognize the Problem: Do you understand the people most impacted by racism? 2. Analyze the Impact: Organizational analyses should include both quantitative and qualitative data 3. Commit to Action: Address leaders who are resistant to change 4. Empower for Change: Assist people in feeling a part of the change xxxvi Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
How to Promote Racial Equity in the Workplace Livingston, R. (2020) Five-Step Plan: 1. Problem Awareness: Do I understand what the problem is? 2. Root-Cause Analysis: Where does the problem come from? 3. Empathy: Do I care about the problem and the people who are impacted? 4. Strategy: Do I know how to correct the problem? 5. Sacrifice: Am I willing to do so? Elevating Equity: The Real Story of Diversity and Inclusion Bersin, J. (2020) Five Essential Strategies for DEI Excellence: 1. Listen, hear and act (listening to employees is a top driver of excellence) 2. Strengthen HR Capabilities in all roles (DEI must permeate the talent supply chain from hiring, to promoting and helping people grow) 3. Engage senior leader commitment (diversity training has limited value, but leadership commitment can make a big difference) 4. Set goals and measure success 5. Create accountability for results (drive DE&I across the entire ecosystem) Advancing Black Leaders Roberts, LM., et al. (2019) ⢠Move away from the business case and towards a moral one ⢠Encourage open conversations about race ⢠Revamp DEI programsâpromote sustained focus on racial equity ⢠Manage career development across all life stages (from early in oneâs career and throughout) Getting Serious About Diversity: Enough Already with the Business Case Ely, RJ and Thomas, DA. (2020) ⢠Promote the Learning and Effectiveness Paradigm xxxvii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
⢠Build talent ⢠Actively work against discrimination and subordination ⢠Embrace a wide range of styles and voices ⢠Make culture differences a resource for learning Organizational Transformation Is an Emotional Journey White, A, Smets, M, Canwell, A. (2022) ⢠Address the unsustainable status quo ⢠Detach from the status quo ⢠Develop a purposeful vision ⢠Lead emotional transformation ⢠Include both the rational and emotional ⢠Align KPIs, funding, resources and people ⢠Make transformation the new normal AAC&Uâs Committing to Equity and Inclusive Excellence: Campus Guide for Self-Study and Planning AAC&U (2015) Action steps: 1. Know who your students are and will be 2. Commit to frank, hard dialogues about the climate for minoritized students on your campus, with the goal of affecting a paradigm shift in language and actions 3. Invest in culturally responsive practices that lead to the success of minoritized students 4. Set and monitor equity goals and devote aligned resources to achieve them 5. Develop and actively pursue a clear vision and goals for achieving high-quality learning 6. Expect and prepare all students to produce culminating or signature work 7. Provide support to help students develop guided plans to achieve essential learning outcomes, prepare for and complete signature work, and connect college with careers xxxviii Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
8. Identify high-impact practices best suited to your students and your institutionâs quality framework 9. Ensure that essential learning outcomes are addressed and high-impact practices are incorporated across all programs. 10. Make student achievementâspecifically, minoritized student achievementâvisible and valued From Equity Talk to Equity Walk: Expanding Practitioner Knowledge for Racial Justice in Higher Education McNair, TB., et al. (2020) ⢠Start asking about why these inequities exist ⢠Start to question privilege and biases in the systems and structures that perpetuate inequities, specifically racial inequities ⢠Stop using language that masks who the students really are. ⢠Stop believing that the accepted norm should be from the dominant cultureâs viewpoint Equity in Science: Representation, Culture, and the Dynamics of Change in Graduate Education Posselt, JR. (2020) Moving Scientific Institutions Toward Equity: ⢠Acknowledging the racialized and gendered beliefs, standard practices, and power dynamics that are root causes of inequities ⢠Coordinating systemic actions in the multiple contexts and levels at which equity is created or impeded ⢠Leveraging bottom-up, top-down, and inside-out forces for change ⢠Equity-minded learning and retooling for individuals and organizations, facilitated by cultural translators who span social, professional, and/or disciplinary boundaries ⢠Cultivating, expecting, and rewarding knowledge, skills, and labor that support equity as new generations are trained and enter the labor market How Colleges Change: Understanding, Leading, and Enacting Change xxxix Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
Adriana Kezar (2013) Systemic institutional change is best achieved by converging bottom-up (âgrass rootsâ initiatives) and top-down (individuals in positions of power) efforts. Three phases of culture change: ⢠Mobilize: Develop initial awareness of the need for change (data); create vision; galvanize support for change through discussion; mobilize leadership and collective action ⢠Implement: Choose strategies; pilot; change policies; process and structures; professional development; evaluate results and reorient; celebrate successes; scale-up or down ⢠Institutionalize: Disseminate results; review; commit; persist CONCLUSION The release of this report coincides with a growing awareness of the persistent challenges of racism, diversity, equity, and inclusion and with an increased interest in addressing these issues in STEMM. The scientific evidence and lived experiences presented in this report offer critical insights and provide the strong foundation for the committeeâs conclusions and recommendations. Taken together, this information provides a clear pathway for STEMM organizations, institutions, and professionals to engage in sustainable and structural changes required to advance antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion. xl Pre-Publication Copy, Uncorrected Proofs
