Patt Colette, Eppig Andrew, Richards Mark A
Division of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, College of Letters and Science, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Office of Equity and Inclusion, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Front Psychol. 2022 Apr 25;12:759263. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.759263. eCollection 2021.
Over the past 50 years the diversity of higher education faculty in the mathematical, physical, computer, and engineering sciences (MPCES) has advanced very little at 4-year universities in the United States. This is despite laws and policies such as affirmative action, interventions by universities, and enormous financial investment by federal agencies to diversify science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) career pathways into academia. Data comparing the fraction of underrepresented minority (URM) postdoctoral scholars to the fraction of faculty at these institutions offer a straightforward empirical explanation for this state of affairs. URM postdoc appointments lag significantly behind progress in terms of both undergraduate and Ph.D.-level STEM student populations. Indeed, URM postdoc appointments lag well-behind faculty diversity itself in the MPCES fields, most of which draw their faculty heavily from the postdoctoral ranks, particularly at research-intensive (R1) universities. Thus, a sea-change in how postdocs are recruited, how their careers are developed, and how they are identified as potential faculty is required in order to diversify the nation's faculty, and particularly the R1 MPCES professoriate. Our research shows that both Ph.D. students and postdocs benefit from intentional structure at various levels of their respective "apprentice" experiences, a factor that we believe has been neglected. Several key structural approaches are highly effective in these regards: (1) A collaborative approach in which leading research universities collectively identify outstanding URM candidates; (2) Faculty engagement in recruiting and supporting these postdocs; (3) Inter-institutional exchange programs to heighten the visibility and broaden the professional experiences of these postdocs; (4) Community-building activities that create a sense of belonging and encourage continuing in academia for each cohort; and (5) Continuing research based on outcomes and new experimental approaches. The California Alliance, consisting of UC Berkeley, UCLA, Caltech, and Stanford, has been engaged in such a program for almost a decade now, with most of the California Alliance URM postdocs now in tenure track positions or on the path toward careers as faculty at research intensive (R1) institutions. If this approach was brought to scale by involving the top 25 or so URM Ph.D.-producing R1 institutions in the MPCES fields, about 40% of the national URM postdoctoral population in these fields could be affected. Although this impact would fall short of bringing URM MPCES faculty ranks up to full representation of the United States population as a whole, it would vastly improve the outlook for URM students and their aspirations to take on leadership roles as scientists and engineers.
在过去50年里,美国四年制大学数学、物理、计算机和工程科学(MPCES)领域的高等教育教师多样性进展甚微。尽管有平权行动等法律和政策、大学的干预措施以及联邦机构为使科学、技术、数学和工程(STEM)职业道路向学术界多元化而进行的巨额财政投资,但情况依然如此。比较这些机构中未被充分代表的少数族裔(URM)博士后学者比例与教师比例的数据,为这种情况提供了一个直接的实证解释。URM博士后职位的任命在本科生和博士水平的STEM学生群体方面都明显落后于进展。事实上,在MPCES领域,URM博士后职位的任命远远落后于教师多样性本身,这些领域的大多数教师很大程度上来自博士后队伍,尤其是在研究密集型(R1)大学。因此,为了使国家的教师队伍,特别是R1 MPCES教授队伍多样化,需要在博士后的招聘方式、职业发展方式以及如何将他们识别为潜在教师方面进行彻底变革。我们的研究表明,博士生和博士后在各自“学徒”经历的不同层面都受益于有目的的结构安排,我们认为这一因素一直被忽视。在这些方面,有几种关键的结构性方法非常有效:(1)一种合作方法,即顶尖研究型大学共同识别优秀的URM候选人;(2)教师参与招聘和支持这些博士后;(3)机构间交流项目,以提高这些博士后的知名度并拓宽他们的专业经验;(4)社区建设活动,为每个群体营造归属感并鼓励他们继续留在学术界;(5)基于成果和新实验方法的持续研究。由加州大学伯克利分校、加州大学洛杉矶分校、加州理工学院和斯坦福大学组成的加州联盟已经参与这样一个项目近十年了,现在大多数加州联盟的URM博士后都处于终身教职轨道职位或正朝着在研究密集型(R1)机构担任教师的职业道路发展。如果通过让MPCES领域约25所左右培养URM博士最多的R1机构参与来扩大这种方法的规模,这些领域约40%的全国URM博士后群体可能会受到影响。尽管这一影响无法使URM MPCES教师队伍达到完全代表美国总人口的水平,但它将极大地改善URM学生的前景以及他们成为科学家和工程师并担任领导角色的抱负。