powered graduate research enterprise, can then be—and you talk about culture shock—pretty hard. There is good anecdotal evidence for this, and it is something that maybe bears some proper study.

But I also want to correct an oversight that I made in my last outburst. I talked about how we used to call up Dr. McBay. The fact is, there are still people you can call up, and some of them are sitting right here—Dr. Gillyard and Dr. Bozeman, and I’m sure Dr. Foster, and anybody at the City University of New York, anyone who teaches in a place where there are large numbers of underrepresented minority students. People know where their students are.

I will say it again: There is absolutely no excuse for anyone who wants to hire faculty members who are not white males to be unable to find them.

Sylvia Bozeman, Spelman College: I have been waiting and I have not heard anyone bring up this one subject that we wrestle with in the mathematics community. I have not heard you worry about it in the chemistry community. You can see I am an infiltrator.

We talked about recruiting young faculty from underrepresented groups into the majority institutions, but I have not heard anybody worrying about those faculty members staying there and getting tenure there. Is that not a problem, is that not an issue?

We often worry about what happens to those faculty members, what kind of experience they have, if they progress toward tenure at the same rate and get tenure at the same rate, or maybe at a higher rate than other faculty, given that they are under more scrutiny when they are brought in. What kinds of special issues and challenges do they face in those departments?

We hear stories about students coming to them at all times of the day, even after hours, and worrying if their teaching is good because it is so visible, and then doing research after hours. So maybe you do not have those kinds of issues with young faculty who are at majority institutions, but I just thought I would raise that to see if it is an issue.

D. Ronald Webb: I just have a short comment for the record. We have heard about diversity of thought. We have heard about how diversity helps us solve problems. Isiah Warner in his wisdom and other organizers have done something very good. They have brought industry, government, and academia together on a common theme. I think we have all learned we have the same interests and issues, but we have different ways of approaching problems.

I mentioned OGSM. I have heard it mentioned here three or four times. So in the future, as we continue to work this, I am sure all my industry colleagues, as well as the government sector, would agree that we would love to be part of the thinking process to help find a solution and not put the burden only on one sector to the exclusion of the others. I offer that as an invitation to include us.

Michael P. Doyle: Thank you very much. This session and its length and its intensity is a tribute to the topics that we are involved with and to the people who have spoken up. I would like to take special recognition of those who gave personal insights to their feelings, their histories, and their involvements, because we are all enriched by what you have said.

So with that, I am going to turn over this microphone to the organizers of the conference, to whom we owe a great deal of gratitude, Isiah Warner and Joseph Francisco, whose time and effort were unmistakably important in making this an unmitigated success. Thank you very much.

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement