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.
UNDERSTANDING INTERVENTIONS THAT ENCOURAGE MINORITIES TO PURSUE RESEARCH CAREERS SUMMARY OF A WORKSHOP Steven Olson and Adam P. Fagen Board on Life Sciences Division on Earth and Life Studies
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS â 500 Fifth Street, N.W.â Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Gov- erning Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engi- neering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract No. N01-OD-4-2139 (Task Order #172) between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. International Standard Book Number-13:â 978-0-309-11226-0 International Standard Book Number-10:â 0-309-11226-5 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2007 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal govern- ment on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the char- ter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstand- ing engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in pro- viding services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org
PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR THE WORKSHOP ON UNDERSTANDING INTERVENTIONS THAT ENCOURAGE MINORITIES TO PURSUE RESEARCH CAREERS ANTHONY L. DePASS (Co-Chair), Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York LARRY V. HEDGES (Co-Chair), Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois DARYL E. CHUBIN, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C. HOWARD H. GARRISON, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Bethesda, Maryland CAROL B. MULLER, MentorNet, San JosÃ©, California KAREN KASHMANIAN OATES, Harrisburg University of Science and Technology, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Staff ADAM P. FAGEN, Study Director TOVA G. JACOBOVITS, Senior Program Assistant (through June 2007) REBECCA L. WALTER, Program Assistant (since June 2007) JAY B. LABOV, Senior Advisor for Education and Communications Consultants STEVEN OLSON, Science Writer PAULA TARNAPOL WHITACRE, Editor â Dr. Oates retired from Harrisburg University of Science and Technology in summer 2007. In August 2007, she joined the National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia.
BOARD ON LIFE SCIENCES KEITH YAMAMOTO (Chair), University of California, San Francisco ANN M. ARVIN, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California RUTH BERKELMAN, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia DEBORAH BLUM, University of Wisconsin, Madison VICKI L. CHANDLER, University of Arizona, Tucson JEFFREY L. DANGL, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill PAUL R. EHRLICH, Stanford University, Stanford, California MARK D. FITZSIMMONS, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Chicago, Illinois JO HANDELSMAN, University of Wisconsin, Madison KENNETH H. KELLER, Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced and International Studies, Bologna, Italy JONATHAN D. MORENO, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia RANDALL MURCH, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Alexandria MURIEL E. POSTON, Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, New York BRUCE W. STILLMAN, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, New York JAMES REICHMAN, University of California, Santa Barbara MARC T. TESSIER-LAVIGNE, Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, California JAMES TIEDJE, Michigan State University, East Lansing CYNTHIA WOLBERGER, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland TERRY L. YATES, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque Staff FRANCES E. SHARPLES, Director KERRY A. BRENNER, Senior Program Officer ANN H. REID, Senior Program Officer MARILEE K. SHELTON-DAVENPORT, Senior Program Officer EVONNE P.Y. TANG, Senior Program Officer ROBERT T. YUAN, Senior Program Officer ADAM P. FAGEN, Program Officer ANNA FARRAR, Financial Associate MERCURY FOX, Program Assistant REBECCA L. WALTER, Program Assistant vi
Acknowledgments S uccess of the workshop was dependent upon the willing par- ticipation of the many speakers and panelists, whose names are listed in the agenda in Appendix B, as well as the approxi- mately 200 workshop attendees who shared their experiences and expertise. Speakers were also generous in making their presenta- tions available for posting on the project website: <http://www. nationalacademies.org/moreworkshop>. The planning committee benefited greatly from conversations with representatives from the Division of Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) at the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), one of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and, in particular, MORE division director Clifton A. Poodry, MORE program director Shiva P. Singh, and Rutgers Universityâs Barry Komisaruk. In addition, representatives from those awarded grants in the first two rounds of the NIGMS Efficacy of Interventions to Promote Research Careers program met with the committee at a planning meeting held in August 2006. In addition to its NIH sponsors, the committee and staff thank the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, for its sponsorship of an eve- ning reception and other refreshments during the workshop, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, for hosting the workshop and providing logistical support to the project staff. This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals cho- sen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accor- vii
viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS dance with procedures approved by the National Research Councilâs Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the insti- tution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectiv- ity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Ella Booth, Oregon Health & Science University Daryl E. Chubin, American Association for the Advancement of Science Anthony L. DePass, Long Island UniversityâBrooklyn Kyle Frantz, Georgia State University Howard H. Garrison, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology Larry V. Hedges, Northwestern University Jennie S. Hwang, H-Technologies Group and Asahi America, Inc. Lyle V. Jones, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (retired) Shirley M. McBay, Quality Education for Minorities (QEM) Network Richard McGee, Northwestern University Carol B. Muller, MentorNet Karen Kashmanian Oates, Harrisburg University of Science and Technology Georgine M. Pion, Vanderbilt University Although the reviewers listed above have provided many con- structive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was over- seen by Willie Pearson, Jr., Georgia Institute of Technology, and Enriqueta C. Bond, Burroughs Wellcome Fund. Appointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review com- ments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authors and the institution. viii
Preface E ven as currently underrepresented minority groups come to represent an increasingly large fraction of the U.S. population, their proportion of biomedical and behavioral researchers has remained stubbornly low. In the biomedical and behavioral sciences, those historically underrepresented include, but are not limited to, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, American Indians (includ- ing Alaska Natives), and natives of the U.S. Pacific Islands. Of the 4,396 doctorates awarded in the biological sciences in 2005, just 158 went to African Americans, 227 to Hispanics, and 12 to American Indians. African Americans account for 5 percent, His- panics for 3 percent, and American Indians for less than 1 percent of the more than 600,000 full-time instructional faculty in higher educa- â According to the latest U.S. census figures, African Americans made up 13.4 percent of the U.S. population as of 2006, Hispanics 14.8 percent, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders 5.3 percent, and American Indians and Alaska Natives 1.5 per- cent. U.S. Census Bureau. Table 1. National Characteristics. Released May 17, 2007. <http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/cb07-70tbl1.xls> âNational Institutes of Health. 21st Century Scientists: Research Training Opportunities for Underrepresented Minorities (brochure from the Division of Minority Opportunities in Research). <http://publications.nigms.nih.gov/more/more_info.htm> âNational Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. 2006. Sci- ence and Engineering Doctorate Awards: 2005. NSF 07-305. Susan T. Hill, project officer, Arlington, VA. <http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf07305/> ix
PREFACE tion as of 2001. These percentages are even lower at the institutions that conduct the majority of the biomedical research in the United States. In 2005, barely 4 percent of the 3,951 faculty members in biological sciences departments at the 50 universities that received the most federal research funds in 2002 were African American, Hispanic, or American Indianâeven though these groups currently make up more than a quarter of the U.S. population. For several decades, academic institutions, government agen- cies, and private organizations have implemented and supported a wide variety of programs designed to increase the number of under- represented minorities who receive doctoral degrees in the biological sciences and become biomedical and behavioral science researchers. These programs have met with some success, and many minorities who are biomedical researchers today received critical support and encouragement from these programs earlier in their careers. Despite these past efforts to recruit and retain underrepresented minorities in the biological sciences, there remains a disparity between the representation of these groups in the general population and in the scientific workforce. Among the programs designed to encourage underrepresented minorities to pursue scientific careers are those supported by the Division of Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) at the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), which is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Early in this decade, NIGMS decided to seek a better understanding of which aspects of individual intervention programs influence the progression of stu- dents toward research careers. It issued a Request for Applications (RFA) on the âEfficacy of Interventions to Promote Research Careersâ that was designed to âsupport research that will test assumptions regarding the effectiveness of interventions that are intended to increase interest, motivation, and preparedness for careers in bio- medical research, with a particular interest in those interventions specifically designed to increase the number of underrepresented minority students entering careers in biomedical and behavioral research.â â U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Inte- grated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Winter 2001â2002. Data from 2003â2004 show similar patterns. â D.J. Nelson. 2005. âThe Nelson Diversity Surveys.â Norman, OK <http://cheminfo. chem.ou.edu/faculty/djn/diversity/top50.html>. â âEfficacy of Interventions to Promote Research Careersâ (RFA-GM-05-009), re- leased August 24, 2004. This RFA was reissued as RFA-GM-07-005 on June 9, 2006. RFA-GM-08-005 was posted on June 5, 2007.
PREFACE xi In response to the RFA, NIGMS received 30 applications in 2003â 2004; after thorough review, 6 of these applications were funded. In a second round of funding in 2004â2005, 26 applications led to 4 funded projects. In 2006â2007, 19 applications were received with reviews ongoing at the time of the workshop. A new RFA was issued in the summer of 2007, with applications due in October and new awards to be made in the summer of 2008. The programs funded under the RFAs are seeking to under- stand the efficacy of educational interventions, some of which are described in this report. However, the reviewers of the applications found deficiencies in many of the unsuccessful proposals; these applications shared problems such as a lack of appropriate com- parison or control groups, insufficient or inappropriate application of statistical techniques, or inadequate incorporation of pre-existing research and theories. Recognition of these deficiencies was one of the factors that prompted NIGMS to ask the National Academies to organize a work- shop to examine the current state of research related to interventions that influence the participation of underrepresented minorities in biomedical and behavioral sciences and other science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines. In addition, the workshop was designed to examine and generate research questions related to the topic, explore technical issues involved in carrying out this research, and encourage the development of an interdisciplinary community of scholars who are interested in understanding how to study what makes for effective programs to increase minority representation in the sciences. (The complete statement of task is included as Appendix A.) To be sure, a 1.5-day workshop could only just begin to introduce some of the issues that are part of this research. For example, although the brief technical assistance session addressed some of the most important methodological consider- ations for research in this area, there are many other challenges to conducting such research that were not discussed at the meeting and, therefore, are not included in this summary. An ad hoc committee was appointed by the chair of the National Research Council to plan the workshop. (See Appendix B for the workshop agenda; biographical sketches for all planning committee members and staff may be found in Appendix C.) This workshop summary was developed by the designated rapporteur (S.O.) with assistance from National Academies staff (A.P.F.); the committee did not participate in the development of this workshop summary, although they had the ability to submit comments as reviewers. The organizers of the workshop focused on research to under-
xii PREFACE stand interventionsâwhat works and whyâas opposed to the evaluation of intervention programs themselves. Research and evaluation studies can use quite similar designs, but they focus on somewhat different questions and, as a result, have somewhat different structures and different interpretations. Research seeks to identify the factors and practices that contribute to the effective- ness of an intervention, not whether the intervention succeeded. As planning committee co-chair Larry V. Hedges, Board of Trustees Professor of Statistics and Social Policy at Northwestern Univer- sity, described the distinction, âprogram evaluations typically focus on the functioning and effects of particular intervention programs, while research on social processes focuses on understanding the mechanisms that bring about the effects of particular programs.â The success of this research is critical, said Anthony L. DePass, planning committee co-chair and associate dean of research and associate professor of biology at Long Island UniversityâBrooklyn, because âone really wonders how much longer we have to get it right.â In the 2003 Grutter v. Bollinger case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the affirmative action admissions policies of the University of Michigan Law School, Justice OâConnor wrote that ârace-conscious admissions policies must be limited in time. . . . The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial prefer- ences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.â This statement could be seen as motivating a paradigm shift, said DePass, âfor us to look at other programs that are aimed at accomplishing greater diversity within higher educationâ and inves- tigating them in a scholarly fashion. âThere are political and other pressures for us to really get it right,â DePass continued, â[to] create a body of scholarship that really demonstrates, based on empirical studies, what works, how to do it, and how not to do it.â The workshop planning committee, co-chaired by DePass and Hedges, was appointed under the auspices of the Board on Life Sci- ences of the National Research Council. The project was supported under a contract between the National Academy of Sciences and the MORE Division of NIH/NIGMS. The workshop was held May 3â4, 2007, at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C., with approximately 200 participants; more than 100 other individuals had expressed interest in attending but could not be accommodated (even after moving to a larger space than was available at the National Academy of Sciences). The Howard â 539 U.S. 306, 341-343 (2003).
PREFACE xiii Hughes Medical Institute provided additional sponsorship of an evening reception and other aspects of the workshop. Although the focus of the workshop was on biomedical and behavioral sciences, very little of the discussion was specific to those fieldsâand much of the research presented was broadly applicable to other disciplines. In addition, several presenters mentioned that what is learned about underrepresented minorities may also be applicable to other populations or, in fact, all students. This sum- mary, like the workshop, is addressed to a number of different stake- holders, including researchers and prospective researchers on the efficacy of interventions from a variety of disciplines; program direc- tors and others involved with undergraduate research and mentor- ing programs; funders and other program supporters; individuals and institutions committed to recruiting and fostering the success of diverse student populations; professional societies; and others with an interest in these issues. This workshop summary is based on a transcript of the meeting, and quotations are from the transcript. This document is written as a narrative rather than a strict chronology to highlight the major themes that emerged from the presentations and from the rich dis- cussions that occurred throughout the 1.5-day meeting. Any viewpoints expressed in this summary are those of the indi- vidual participants and do not necessarily represent the views of the planning committee, the National Academies, or the project sponsor. Speaker presentations, a complete list of registered participants, and other information about the workshop are available at http://www. nationalacademies.org/moreworkshop.
Contents 1 The Nature of the Problem 1 2 Examples of Previous Research 7 Social Cognitive Career Theory, 7 Human Capital Theory, 11 Social Identity and Stereotype Threat, 13 Survey Research, 18 Research on Existing Interventions, 20 Other Research Initiatives, 22 3 The Elements of Effective Research 24 Formulating a Research Question, 28 Designing Research Procedures, 30 Analyzing the Data, 34 4 Developing a Research Agenda 38 Pre-college Education, 41 Undergraduate Education, 43 Graduate Education and Postdoctoral Training, 46 Funders, 50 Building the Research Community, 51 xv
xvi CONTENTS Appendixes A Statement of Task 55 B Workshop Information 57 C Biographical Sketches of Planning Committee and Staff 77