This article continues a series on anti-racism in STEM co-authored by Northeastern alum Claire Williams. A fully collaborative effort, see the list of authors, contributors, as well as the series in its entirety at the following website: https://antiracisminstem.wordpress.com/
See other installments in this series: [ 1 // 2 // 3 // 4 // 5 // 6 ]
4. “I only hire/award/cite based on merit; I do not need to consider race.”
Arguments that support the objective consideration of merit without the overarching context of external factors are often weaponized against diversity efforts. One recent example is an opinion piece by Tomas Hudlicky that was published (and quickly retracted) in the scientific journal Angewandte Chemie [1], [2]. Hudlicky argued that the consideration of factors besides “merit” will result in candidates from underrepresented groups being chosen over more qualified candidates, thereby compromising scientific progress. (He also felt that such initiatives place non-minority candidates at an unfair disadvantage; this topic is discussed in response #6.)
Hudlicky’s argument and others like it rely on the assumption that academia is a meritocracy, wherein factors such as grades, awards, and publications depend solely on talent and effort, and therefore we can use these metrics to objectively select the best candidate. In reality, success in academia is highly influenced by factors outside of one’s control, including race, ethnicity, class, and gender (among many other things) [3]. Students of color are subject to both explicit and implicit acts of racial discrimination, which add an extra barrier to their success. The stress of everyday racism contributes to a heavier cognitive load for BIPOC, which is associated with both mental and physical illnesses, as well as reduced academic productivity [4], [5].
In addition, the wage gap (and even more so, the wealth gap) between white people and BIPOC in the U.S. means that students of color are less likely to have financial support from their families during college [6]. The median net worth of white households is 10 times that of Black households and 8 times that of Hispanic households [7]. Even among households with the same annual income, the wealth of white households greatly exceeds that of Black and Hispanic households (Fig. 2) [7]. This is because wealth takes into account the sum of a household’s total assets, including investments and real estate. Wealth accumulates over generations via gifts and inheritances. The racial wealth gap represents the legacy of slavery in the U.S. and subsequent racist practices such as Jim Crow laws, redlining, and mass incarceration. These forces have prevented Black Americans from accumulating generational wealth while offering white Americans a 400-year head start [8].
The wealth gap contributes to unequal access to STEM education during K-12 education (discussed in response #7). It can also limit the ability of students of color to pursue undergraduate research, internships, and other unpaid opportunities in STEM, or to accept low-paying positions as graduate students or postdocs. The wealth gap is also closely linked to why BIPOC tend to score lower on standardized tests, including the GRE and SAT: individuals who identify as BIPOC may have fewer opportunities to enroll in expensive preparatory classes or to take required entrance exams multiple times [9]. In these ways, the racial wealth gap prevents a truly meritocratic system in STEM from existing by placing disproportionate barriers on BIPOC [3].
More broadly, the criteria that define “merit” possess inherent bias. For instance, research that focuses on systemic healthcare disparities (which is more commonly pursued by Black than white researchers) is rated as less impactful by NIH grant reviewers, despite its critical importance for biomedical research [10]. Furthermore, the publications of Black scientists tend to have fewer coauthors and receive fewer citations, suggesting that Black scientists may face barriers to establishing professional networks [11]. Judging applicants on “soft skills” can also perpetuate racial bias. BIPOC at Big Tech companies are frequently perceived by their employers as not fitting in with the “workplace culture.” In many cases, BIPOC report that this perception arose from coworkers excluding them from social interactions [12].
Race-conscious decision-making does not compromise our ability to select the best candidate for a position – in fact, it is quite the opposite. If our goal is to select the most talented and hard-working candidate, then we must account for the external factors that could impair an individual’s efforts from translating into standardized measures of success. Individuals who claim they are “color-blind” or “don’t see race” for the sake of upholding a nonexistent meritocracy are perpetuating the discriminatory status quo by failing to acknowledge the systemic inequities facing BIPOC [13]. We do not live in a post-racial era that is free from racial inequity and prejudice. While race itself is a social construct, the racially-centered policies and organizational structures that frame our world are real. To quote Ibram X Kendi, “To be anti-racist is to focus on ending the racism that shapes the mirages, not to ignore the mirages that shape people’s lives” [14].
Sources:
[1] From scientists to scientists–Moving Angewandte into the future (Angewandte Chemie, 2020)
[2] Confronting racism in chemistry journals: An opinion on the Angewandte Chemie scandal from a female, POC, doctoral student (blog post, 2020)
[3] Academia is not a meritocracy (Nature Human Behavior, 2019)
[4] Stress and the mental health of populations of color: Advancing our understanding of race-related stressors (Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 2018)
[5] Stressing out: Connecting race, gender, and stress with faculty productivity (The Journal of Higher Education, 2016)
[6] Examining the Black-white wealth gap (Brookings Institute, 2020)
[7] How wealth inequality has changed in the U.S. since the Great Recession, by race, ethnicity, and income (Pew Research Center, 2017)
[8] America’s racial wealth gap was aided by a 400-year head start (MLK50 Memphis, 2019)
[9] New GRE data illustrate trends on future grad students (Inside Higher Ed, 2013)
[10] Topic choice contributes to the lower rates of NIH awards to African-America/black scientists (Science Advances, 2019)
[11] Publications are predictors of racial and ethnic differences in NIH research awards (PLoS One, 2018)
[12] Is Silicon Valley using culture fit to disguise discrimination?
[13] Racism without racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America (2013)
[14] How to Be an Antiracist, by Ibram X. Kendi (NYT Bestseller)
5. “There just aren’t as many BIPOC who want to work in STEM.”
Only 14% of Black scientists and 18% of Hispanic scientists believe that a lack of interest is a major reason for the underrepresentation of Black and Hispanic individuals in STEM [1]. However, the majority of Black and Hispanic scientists believe that a lack of educational access, discrimination in recruitment and promotions, and/or not being encouraged to pursue STEM from an early age are the main reasons for the disparity [1]. The data backs up these opinions. While it is true that a STEM interest gap exists between white and BIPOC youth, the magnitude of this discrepancy is fairly small. A survey of U.S. high school seniors found that 45% of white students are interested in a career related to science, compared to 40% of Hispanic students and 39% of Black students [2]. Some studies even report greater STEM interest among BIPOC. One survey reported that Black girls in high school were more likely than white girls to say that math or computer science was their favorite subject [3].
Despite similar levels of interest, students of color face numerous barriers to achieving a career in STEM. As discussed in response #7, public schools that primarily serve Black students are greatly under-funded compared to primarily-white schools. In addition, 39% of Black children and 35% of Hispanic children in the U.S. are living below the poverty line (compared to 12% of white children) [4]. Black and Hispanic children are also more likely than white and Asian children to have lived through traumatic experiences [5], [6]. Exposure to poverty and emotional or physical trauma during childhood are associated with an increased risk of academic, behavioral, and health problems [6]. These factors, in combination with the racial wealth gap (discussed in response #4), contribute to the “achievement gap”: the observation that Black and Hispanic children consistently score lower on standardized academic tests than white and Asian children [7], [8].
On top of all this, the school-to-prison pipeline stymies the educational and career aspirations of many students of color. The school-to-prison pipeline is the practice by schools of removing “problem children” from classrooms as a form of punishment, which impairs their ability to keep up in school and often exacerbates behavioral problems [9], [10], [11]. Schools are also increasingly likely to involve the police in minor disciplinary incidents as part of their “zero tolerance policy.” This creates a vicious cycle that places these students on a fast track to juvenile detention, and eventually the criminal justice system [9], [10]. The school-to-prison pipeline disproportionately affects students of color, who are more likely than white students to be suspended or expelled from school or to be arrested as children [9], [10]. This is due to multiple factors, including racial bias among educators and school administrators, the increased risk of behavioral issues arising from childhood poverty and trauma, and schools’ emphasis on rigid obedience, which clashes with the value many BIPOC families place on questioning authority and speaking freely [12], [13]. School disciplinary systems, paralleling the criminal justice system, emphasize punishment over treatment, thereby exacerbating the youth achievement gap [14].
The barriers to a STEM career do not end once students have made it to college. Large national datasets have documented no differences between the proportions of white, Black, and Latinx students who enter college with a declared STEM major [15]. However, Black and Latinx STEM majors are much more likely to switch majors or drop out, demonstrating a clear issue of retention [15], [16]. This pattern is not observed in the social sciences and humanities [15]. Furthermore, Black individuals are more likely than other racial groups to pursue careers unrelated to STEM after earning their Ph.D. [17]. This “leaky pipeline” of BIPOC student disengagement is partially attributable to the scarcity of BIPOC role models among STEM faculty; mentorship from individuals of a common racial identity has been shown to promote feelings of belonging while providing advice for navigating the unique problems that scientists of color face [18], [19].
This pattern continues at the faculty level. A survey of academic search committees found that most members believed the diversity of their applicant pool was outside of their control, and made no attempt to engage applicants from diverse backgrounds [20]. Despite this widely held belief, numerous strategies have been demonstrated for enhancing the applicant pool diversity of faculty candidates, which should also be combined with more equitable hiring and retention practices [21]. Research shows that the true issue is not a lack of qualified BIPOC candidates, but a lack of active effort from academia to seek out and support these candidates.
There has been considerable research focused on the lack of supply of Black scientists as a result of the leaky pipeline in STEM, but there is also a continued lack of demand for Black scientists within academia. Only 14% of Black scientists work in academia, as opposed to nearly 30% of white scientists [22]. Hypotheses to explain this disparity center around the normalized whiteness of institutions and the (often unconscious) attempts by white academics to maintain institutional whiteness and associated privilege [23]. For BIPOC, this may result in social exclusion, which would prevent access to resources and opportunities as those in power often seek newcomers who are socially similar to themselves [23]. Research suggests that this sense of social connectedness plays a key role in success, in contrast to dominant beliefs emphasizing only the role of hard work and personal motivation [24]. BIPOC are often concerned about their connectedness and perceived belonging, and feeling isolated and unsupported contributes to their increased likelihood of leaving STEM [24].
The reasons for underrepresentation of BIPOC in STEM are far more complex than a lack of interest. From K-12 education up through faculty hiring, BIPOC face systemic barriers at every stage of their career which place them at a disadvantage compared to white colleagues. Furthermore, a lack of institutional support for BIPOC results in poor retention rates at the student and faculty levels. To address these issues, we must move beyond the passive view of a leaky pipeline and actively dismantle the structures that limit BIPOC participation in STEM.
[1] Blacks in STEM jobs are especially concerned about diversity and discrimination in the workplace (Pew Research Center, 2018)
[2] Among high school seniors, interest in science varies by race, ethnicity (Pew Research Center, 2017)
[3] How to get more African American girls into tech (Forbes, 2016)
[4] Childhood poverty among Hispanics sets record, leads nation (Pew Research Center, 2011)
[5] The prevalence of adverse childhood experiences, nationally, by state, and by race of ethnicity (Child Trends, 2018)
[6] Toxic stress and children’s outcomes (Economic Policy Institute, 2019)
[7] Racial and ethnic achievement gaps (Stanford Center for Education Policy Analysis)
[8] Addressing the African American achievement gap: Three leading educators issue a call to action (National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2018)
[9] School-to-prison pipeline (The African American Policy Forum)
[10] Dismantling the school-to-prison pipeline (NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund)
[11] Call to action: A critical need for designing alternatives to suspension and expulsion (Journal of School Violence, 2012)
[12] Teachers are people too: Examining the racial bias of teachers compared to other American adults (Educational Researcher, 2020)
[13] What’s lost when Black children are socialized into a white world (The Atlantic, 2019)
[14] Examining the achievement gap and school-to-prison pipeline: Tier 2 behavior interventions for African American and Hispanic students in secondary schools (dissertation, 2014)
[15] Does STEM stand out? Examining racial/ethnic gaps in persistence across postsecondary fields (Educational Researcher, 2019)
[16] What matters in college for retaining aspiring scientists and engineers from underrepresented racial groups (Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2014)
[17] Leaving STEM: STEM Ph.D. holders in non-STEM careers (American Institutes for Research, 2014)
[18] Exploring identity-safety cues and allyship among Black women students in STEM environments (Psychology of Women Quarterly, 2019)
[19] “Don’t leave us behind”: The importance of mentoring for underrepresented minority faculty (American Educational Research Journal, 2015)
[20] Effectively recruiting faculty of color at highly selective institutions: A school of education case study (Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2011)
[21] Institutional barriers, strategies, and benefits to increasing the representation of women and men of color in the professoriate (Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, 2020)
[22] Black Scientists: a history of exclusion (Diverse Issues in Higher Education, 1998)
[23] Discriminatory organizational contexts and Black scientists on postsecondary faculty (Research in Higher Education, 1999).
[24] A question of belonging: race, social fit, and achievement (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2007).
Image source: Pixabay
