National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Support Systems
Suggested Citation:"ISSUE 7 MINORITIES IN RESEARCH." National Research Council. 1994. Meeting the Nation's Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists: Summary of the 1993 Public Hearings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/4958.
×
Page 8

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.

SUMMARY OF ISSUES AND SUGGESTIONS FROM SPEAKERS 8 the dual role of recruiter and mentor of young scientists. • Establish support groups that are visible and integral parts of the training environment. Organizational Linkages • Link training with the private sector, e.g., private sector intern programs, at various stages in the educational process including predoctoral NRSA training. ISSUE 7 MINORITIES IN RESEARCH7 African-Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans account for no more than a couple of percent of all Ph.D.s in the life sciences. These numbers have been constant for two decades, and show little sign of improvement. Most under-represented minorities with a desire to work in the life sciences are not entering Ph.D. programs. Instead, they are going to medical school. The Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) reported that in 1991, 918 black Americans, 46 Native Americans, and 362 Hispanic Americans graduated from medical school. By comparison, according to the National Science Foundation, only 6 black Americans received Ph.D.s in biochemistry in 1991, and only 44 Ph.D.s were awarded to black Americans in all the biological sciences combined. Likewise, 10 Native Americans and 78 Hispanic Americans received a Ph.D. in the life sciences. Thus, there were 10 M.D.s for every Ph.D. earned by members of these groups. Much has been done to try to improve minority recruitment. Predoctoral training grants require a proactive stance on the part of the schools they fund; the Minority Access to Research Careers Program (MARC) tries to support the pool from which minority applicants will come; recent policy changes permit supplements for minority students supported by research grants; and there is a new program of individual minority predoctoral fellowships. Despite these efforts, many of the same forces drive both minority and majority students: the best students often choose an M.D. over a Ph.D. because it offers a more secure job at a better salary. Many universities have used the MARC program to identify promising undergraduates and provide them with summer research internships and related activities to interest them in and prepare them for graduate study. The quality of the research program and the extent of faculty mentoring are major determinants in the success of institutional programs, and these attributes should continue to play a determining role in awarding grants in any expanded program. Some problems identified by speakers that affect minorities making careers of research in health fields include: • Recruiting underrepresented minorities into science is a problem. It is a symptom and reflection of our society and the way we approach science (See Issue 2: Attracting Young People to Science Careers ). Some feel that the pool of available applicants is so small that recruitment efforts are simply “reshuffling the deck.” • The number of trainees funded on the individual minority predoctoral fellowship program is declining due to the lack of special budget appropriations. • In some fields, such as microbiology and anesthesiology, minority representation is very poor. • The structure of the NRSA predoctoral awards is restrictive, underfunded, and fails to recognize the diversity of highly qualified minority applicants (Report of American Society for Microbiology Committee on the Status of Minority Microbiologists). • The NRSA award criteria are heavily weighted toward student performance on standardized examinations. 7 Material in this section drawn from testimony by: D. Brautigan, G. Cassell, S. Gerbi, L. Goldman, R. Grand, J. Jones, A. Jacox, H. Kazemi, T. Krulwich, V. LiCata, D. Linzer, C. Lumeng, T. Malone, B. Marshall, P. McCloskey, T. Meyer, S. Persons, C. Pings, D. Purpura, P. Shank, J. Sheridan and J. McCormick, H. Silber, H. Slavkin, and O. Weisz. See Appendix D .

Next: Administration »
Meeting the Nation's Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists: Summary of the 1993 Public Hearings Get This Book
×
 Meeting the Nation's Needs for Biomedical and Behavioral Scientists: Summary of the 1993 Public Hearings
Buy Paperback | $40.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

READ FREE ONLINE

  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!