National Academies Press: OpenBook

Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative (2021)

Chapter: 2 Efforts to Increase the Participation of Women, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Underrepresented and Minority Participants in ULI

« Previous: 1 Assessing ULI's Progress Toward Meeting Its Goals
Suggested Citation:"2 Efforts to Increase the Participation of Women, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Underrepresented and Minority Participants in ULI." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25996.
×
Page 12
Suggested Citation:"2 Efforts to Increase the Participation of Women, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Underrepresented and Minority Participants in ULI." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25996.
×
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"2 Efforts to Increase the Participation of Women, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Underrepresented and Minority Participants in ULI." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25996.
×
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"2 Efforts to Increase the Participation of Women, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Underrepresented and Minority Participants in ULI." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25996.
×
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"2 Efforts to Increase the Participation of Women, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Underrepresented and Minority Participants in ULI." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2021. Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25996.
×
Page 16

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.

2 Efforts to Increase the Participation of Women, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and Underrepresented and Minority Participants in ULI Developing the nation’s capacity for innovation and excellence through outstanding academic endeavors and the improvement of higher education as a national investment is essential to the wellbeing of the country and the global economy. It is a vital step in workforce development and job production, and in enhancing the lives of students and professionals and their careers, and the resulting impact on industry. The U.S. science and engineering workforce has grown in size and sophistication, and yet, projections describe a shortfall in students prepared for the demand.1 The aerospace and defense industry is facing unique challenges and changes in the industry due to mergers and acquisitions that have dramatically affected activities while the demand for skilled workers has reached highs reminiscent of the 1960s. Aviation Week Network reports a 70 percent increase in hiring between 2017 and 2018; a projection of 55,000 industrial hires in 2019, and critical occupational needs in software systems, electrical, mechanical, and model-based design engineering, as well as computer numerical control and manufacturing automation specialists.2 Aviation Week reported that the industry plans to hire 70,000 people in the coming year, of which 16 percent (about 11,200) will be new hires from college campuses. Additionally, Aviation Week workforce studies have indicated that there are robust numbers of engineers produced by U.S. colleges and universities. The committee reviewed the most recent Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System data via NSF’s data portal and found that between 2015 and 2017, there were more than 290,000 bachelor’s degrees awarded, of which about 67,700 were awarded to women, 12,300 to African Americans, 33,600 to Hispanics, and 900 to American Indians and Alaska Natives. Aviation Week also reported on the top universities from which new-hire engineers are recruited, which can be cross-referenced with lists of top producers of African American, Hispanic, and women engineers in the annual “Engineering by the Numbers” reports of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) survey. For example, ASEE found in its 2019 report that top producers of African 1 National Research Council, 2010, Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Revisited: Rapidly Approaching Category 5, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. 2 C.R. Hedden, 2019, “Need for Tailored Recruiting as Job Requirements Boom,” Aviation Week Network, https://www.aeronauticglobal.com/news/items/need_for_tailored_recrui-2019-09-10. 12

EFFORTS TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION 13 American engineers include Georgia Tech, University of Central Florida (UCF), and University of Maryland, College Park, and top producers of Hispanic engineers included UCF, which were all cited as top recruitment campuses by Aviation Week. However, many Hispanic engineers graduate from universities that were not cited as top recruitment destinations by Aviation Week, such as Florida International University, several California State University campuses (e.g., Polytechnic at both Pomona and San Luis Obispo, Los Angeles, and Northridge), and universities in Texas, such as Texas A&M University and the University of Texas, El Paso.3 Challenges and complications in addressing the workforce needs arise because, while many students from underrepresented groups express interest in science and engineering, many do not persist, a phenomenon often described as the “leaky pipeline.” To achieve the nation’s workforce needs in a growing, complex, and sophisticated environment requires new approaches to higher education and a national strategy for sustaining U.S. research and innovation capacity. Central to this strategy are the following three factors: (1) sources for the future workforce are uncertain due to a variety of reasons, including the growth in international investment in higher education; (2) the demographics of the U.S. domestic population are shifting dramatically; and (3) diversity is a valuable asset that can provide increased innovation through diversity of thought and approach, but the “leaking” of talent from the pipeline—for example, students dropping out of engineering programs—is a problem for U.S. industry in general and aerospace in particular.4,5 NASA ULI provides an important venue to address workforce challenges and has established guidelines to inform the initiative accordingly. The lack of diversity in science and engineering, and ways to improve recruitment and retention, have been studied for decades and are well documented in the literature. Considerable effort by policy makers, researchers, and practitioners has resulted in steady but slow progress. Common sources for attrition include lack of role models and mentoring, bias, feelings of isolation, and low self-efficacy. Progress has been accomplished through intervention models that describe a variety of activities aimed at helping members from underrepresented groups combat attrition. Successful intervention models emphasize cooperative learning, role models, academic support, career exploration, professional development, community building, and strengthening self-efficacy. Further progress requires new approaches, including a focus on the broader community and increasing inclusion.6 The study committee’s tasks include evaluation of efforts to increase the participation of women, HBCUs, and underrepresented and minority ULI participants. The ULI goals and solicitations reflect an interest in meaningful participation by these groups. Detailed quantitative proposer and awardee participation data was not available for the study, which limited the committee’s ability to make a comprehensive analysis. The committee therefore assessed the requirements NASA established for each of the four rounds and the outcomes for Rounds 1-3. ULI Round 1 and Round 2 awardees included one co-PI from a Hispanic Serving Institution each. The ULI Round 3 solicitation changed in the following ways: (1) addition of a Step B proposal requirement to discuss plans to mentor faculty and students from HBCUs and/or other MSIs and (2) new 3 Aviation Week Network, 2020, “Where A&D Hires New Grads and More,” September 11, https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/z/where-ad-hires-new-grads-more; Aviation Week Network, 2020, “2020 Universities Identified as Preferred Suppliers to A&D Hiring Managers,” September 15, https://aviationweek.com/special-topics/workforce/2020-universities-identified-preferred-suppliers-ad-hiring- managers; American Society for Engineering Education, 2020, “By the Numbers: 2019,” https://ira.asee.org/wp- content/uploads/2020/09/E-ET-by-the-Numbers-2019.pdf; National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, “Data Explorer,” https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/explorer/surveys?superTopic=Fields%20of%20Study, accessed October 4, 2020. 4 National Research Council, 2011, Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation: America’s Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. 5 P. Gompers and S. Kovvali, 2018, “The Other Diversity Dividend,” Harvard Business Review, July-August. 6 M.A. Leung, 2018, Developing sustainable methods for broadening participation: Transforming mainstream science and technology communities through normalization of inclusion, American Behavioral Scientist 62:683– 691.

14 ASSESSING NASA’S UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE language in the evaluation criteria for the Step B innovative teaming section (20 percent) mentioning promotion of diversity and mentoring of faculty from HBCUs and/or other MSIs. Round 3 awardees included one HBCU PI and four HBCU co-PIs. The Round 4 solicitation added language to (1) encourage participation of female and minority PIs in the eligibility and teaming section and (2) require that proposals include appropriate involvement of HBCUs or MSIs in the Step A and Step B evaluation criteria. Awardees for Round 4 have not been selected by NASA. The only way to fully understand diversity progress is by a disaggregated longitudinal analysis by demographic group of relevant data such as past and existing workforce and available talent and representation in applicant pools, awardees, and team activities. Materials available on the ULI website and provided by NASA informed the evaluation; however, no detailed demographic information was available, presenting a challenge for the evaluation. NASA was able to point to North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University as an HBCU that was participating in a later round as a PI. NASA indicated that it did not know which institutions were of different types because it did not ask this as part of the application process. NASA has adjusted the most recent solicitation to place greater emphasis on the need to include an HBCU or MSI. The Round 4 solicitation states, “Proposals without an appropriate involvement of HBCU or MSI will be rejected.” FINDING: NASA has established the importance of meaningful participation of women and minority PIs and HBCU and MSI participation; however, specific participation goals, documentation, or guidelines were not available. FINDING: Participation of HBCUs and MSIs increased with Round 3 after changes to the solicitation. However, this can be improved. FINDING: Participation of minorities appears to vary significantly between ULI projects and whether the PI is from an HBCU or MSI. RECOMMENDATION: NASA should establish specific diversity participation goals for ULI based on national data of the available workforce and determine the demographic diversity of applicants, awardees, students (graduate and undergraduate), and researchers involved in ULI projects. In addition to demographic data about individuals, NASA should analyze the demography of the university applicants and participants (as leads, principal investigators [PIs], co-PIs, and other partners) in the ULI program, making use of publicly available data from the Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, about these institutions. Based on an analysis of the demographic data, NASA should adjust and document goals, revise solicitation language, and review committee guidelines accordingly. NASA should perform ongoing tracking of the data and readjustment. According to a recent study about aerospace and defense sector workforce issues, minority students are more likely than non-minority students enrolled in relevant engineering programs to suffer from different problems that prevent them from completing undergraduate and graduate programs. A presentation to the committee based on this study showed “Student Matriculation by Ethnicity.” The presentation included a graphic concerning minority students in categories labeled “Freshmen,” “Sophomore,” “Junior,” “Senior,” and “Graduate student.” This graphic showed the following:  While Hispanic students’ representation across the 4 years of undergraduate students is consistent, it falls among graduate students; and

EFFORTS TO INCREASE PARTICIPATION 15  African American students’ representation in the pipeline diminishes with each subsequent year.7 What the study indicates is that any solutions to these different situations will have to be focused on specific outcomes. For example, one of the major problems for African American students is that they often have to work during their undergraduate years, and this makes it difficult for them to complete undergraduate degrees. Thus, paying them to work on ULI projects may be one possible solution to retain them. There may be others, but it is up to NASA to determine how to adjust its approach based on the demographic data that the committee recommends that NASA collect. It will also be up to NASA to determine what its goals should be based upon this data. NASA has received responses to ULI solicitations from female applicants suggesting an interest and some workforce availability by this group. An analysis of the available talent in the workforce and the ULI response would provide important information for further understanding of the potential for ULI impact and progress. FINDING: Solicitation material mentions women-owned businesses as eligible, and Round 4 solicitation encourages the participation of female PIs in the eligibility and teaming section. FINDING: As of the first three rounds, there have been no female PIs, although 14 percent of proposals included female PIs. RECOMMENDATION: NASA should perform detailed analysis of why no women at the time of this report have been funded as principal investigators. Based on these findings, NASA should make relevant adjustments to goals, solicitations, and reviewer guidelines, as appropriate. This should be conducted on an ongoing basis. NASA should consider double- blind reviews by at least a portion of the reviewers. Implicit bias refers to the attitudes or stereotypes that affect understanding and decisions in unconscious ways; it is a common source for attrition in science and engineering. Bias can be influenced by known and unknown stereotypes. Some amount of implicit bias exists in everyone. Small amounts of implicit bias can result in large collective biases and damaging impacts. Implicit bias may discourage participation or cause attrition. For example, while language may encourage diversity, if applicants do not see evidence in awardees, they may become discouraged and fail to respond. Progress on diversity goals and specific diversity efforts articulated in solicitation language are important. Singling out the special needs of underrepresented groups, such as mentoring, signals that they are inferior. All students or team members can benefit from mentoring. A plethora of implicit bias literature and training is available.8 FINDING: Proposers are instructed to provide a mentoring plan for faculty and students from HBCUs or MSIs, implying that only faculty and students from these institutions require mentoring. RECOMMENDATION: NASA should remove the language requiring a mentoring plan only for faculty from Historically Black Colleges and Universities or other Minority-Serving Institutions. NASA should also ensure that materials do not include implicit bias. NASA should ensure that its decision processes associated with ULI are transparent to encourage participation and avoid a reduction in proposals due to low numbers of awards or even lack of awardees to specific groups. 7 Aviation Week Network, “Retaining Talent,” https://aviationweek.com/workforce/retaining-talent, accessed September 22, 2020. 8 A. Greenwald, B. Mahzarin, and B. Nosek, “Project Implicit,” https://www.projectimplicit.net/index.html, accessed January 15, 2021.  

16 ASSESSING NASA’S UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE RECOMMENDATION: NASA should assess its proposal review process to ensure that it does not contain implicit bias and that the feedback that it provides is consistent and coherent. ADDITIONAL SOURCES Kalev, A., F. Dobbin, and E. Kelly. 2006. Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. American Sociological Review 71(4): 589-617. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240607100404. NASA. 2015. Promising Practices for Equal Opportunity, Diversity, and Inclusion. NASA Office of Equal Opportunity, Diversity, and Inclusion, Washington, DC. July. https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/prompract_8-20-15_tagged.pdf.

Next: 3 Options to Increase Awareness of ULI Among Universities, Departments, and Faculty »
Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative Get This Book
×
Buy Ebook | $9.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

NASA created the University Leadership Initiative (ULI) to engage creative and innovative minds in the academic arena to identify significant aeronautics and aviation research challenges and define their unique approach to their solution. The ULI was started in 2015 as part of the larger University Innovation Project, with the goal of seeking new, innovative ideas that can support the U.S. aviation community and NASA's long-term aeronautics research goals, as established by its Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate.

Assessing NASA's University Leadership Initiative reviews the ULI and makes recommendations to enhance program's impact to benefit students, faculty, industry, and the U.S. public.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!