diversity in science and biomedicine: taking names and keeping score shirley m. malcom, ph.d
TRANSCRIPT
Diversity in Science and Biomedicine:Taking Names and Keeping Score
Shirley M. Malcom, Ph.D.
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Benchmarking ProgressWhat Do We Measure
How Many? What Proportion?
What Level?
Climate?
Power? Trajectory? As Compared to What? As Compared to Whom?
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Sources of Data
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
How Well Are You Doing?Georgetown University: Sciences
Women Faculty vs. Women’s Pool
Biology > 48% vs. 44.7%
Chemistry < 25% vs. 31.3%
Computer Science < 14% vs. 20.5%
Mathematics < 17% vs. 27.2%
Physics > 27% vs. 13.3%
Psychology < 47% vs. 66.1%
Women in U.S. Academic Medicine, 2004-2005
50% of applicants to medical school
49% of first year students
49% of medical students
47% of graduates
42% of residents and fellows
32% of medical faculty
38% of assistant professors
27% of associate professors
15% of full professors
http://www.aamc.org/members/wim/statistics/stats05/
Women in U.S. Academic Medicine, 2004-2005
18% of division/ section chiefs
11% of department chairs
45% of assistant deans
29% of associate and senior associate deans
10% of medical school deans
U.S. Medical Faculty by Gender and RankAAMC Faculty Roster, May 2005
U.S. Women and Men Medical Faculty AAMC Faculty Roster, May 2005
Women Full-time Faculty
Men Full-time Faculty
Percentages of Men and Women Medical Faculty (113,930)AAMC Faculty Roster,2005
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Professor Assoc iate Assistant Instructor
Men
Women
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
Representation of Medical Women inAcademic Medicine, 1977-2004
30%
48%M.D. Graduates
M.D. Faculty
Reference: Analysis in Brief, July 2005The Changing Representation of Men and Women in Academic Medicine
MD Graduates on Faculty in 2004, by Year of Medical School
Graduation
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Men MD
Women MD
Reference: Analysis in Brief, July 2005The Changing Representation of Men and Women in Academic Medicine
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Measuring Progress:Looking Beyond the Numbers
MIT Study
ADVANCE
Field Differences
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
The Double Bind
When both female and……
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Barriers to Advancement
Lack of Clear Policies
Lack of Transparency
Persistence of Attitudes (Men & Women)
Inadequate Career Information
Culture of Science
Legal Challenges
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Post-Adarand — Pre-Michigan Decision
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Post-Michigan
Admissions policies and holistic review
Everything else?Financial aid, outreach, targeted recruitment?
Challenges by anti-affirmative action groups
Failure of Administration to provide guidance except “race-neutral alternatives”
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Legal Primer
Federal Equal Opportunity Standards
Titles VI, VII, IX, & ADA
Equal Protection & Due Process Clauses
Significant Federal Legal Opinions
Grutter & Gratz, Bakke, & Adarand
State-Based Equal Opportunity Standards
CA, WA, FL, TX, MI
Ongoing Federal Efforts
SEEOA, NSF Criterion II, EEO Standards
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Design Principles
Mission
Intent
Target Population
Program Character
Context
Evaluation & Research
Faculty Recruitment & Retention
Leadership
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
Structural Approaches
Lessons learned from AGEP, ADVANCE, Packard Scholars
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
AAAS Capacity CenterAt a Glance
Established August 2004 with 3-year, $400K grant from Sloan Foundation to AAAS
STEM human resource development consulting service
Provide institutions of higher education with nationally-calibrated research & technical assistance in examining programs & outcomes
Foster institutional capacity to:
recruit, enroll, & support students
diversify the faculty
DIVERSITY IN SCIENCE AND BIOMEDICINE
A Menu of Services
Data on impact of “percentage plans” (access) & interventions (aimed at degree completion)
How to conduct searches to diversify the faculty & administration
Developing “cultural competence” among current faculty, staff, & students
How to mainstream & institutionalize “special” (soft-money) programs
Nurturing US student talent in the face of globalization