In response to a recent article in The Chronicle on the Council of Graduate Schools’ report on “The Doctoral Initiative on Minority Attrition and Completion,” a number of readers commented that universities do minority students no favors by encouraging them to obtain doctorates in STEM fields — science, technology, engineering, and math — where they are unlikely to find employment. In fact, this apparently widespread view is wrong.
First of all, it is important to understand that, according to recent data from the National Science Foundation, only 7.25 percent of doctorate degrees in those fields are awarded to underrepresented minorities, far below their 30 percent representation in the general population. Furthermore, over 70 percent of science and engineering jobs are held by white men and women, while only 11 percent are held by underrepresented minorities.
Why does this disparity matter? The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that recipients of Ph.D.s and professional degrees have the lowest unemployment rate and highest full-time earnings in the country. So the dearth of underrepresented minorities with Ph.D.’s in STEM not only represents a substantial financial inequity but also reduces their potential impact on the nation’s economic strength.
Given these findings, it seems clear that universities should make a substantial effort to support underrepresented minority students in STEM graduate education. Challenges abound, however.
My institution, the University of California at Irvine, like most across the nation, has much greater diversity in its undergraduate population than in its graduate programs. Although UC-Irvine will soon be designated a Hispanic Serving Institution, with more than 25 percent of undergraduates identifying as Chicano/Latino, we have much lower representation of minority students at the graduate level. There are many possible reasons for this, including economic factors. However, with minority faculty members holding less than 5 percent of tenure and tenure-track positions in science, engineering, and health at research intensive institutions such as mine, we have to ask whether this discourages minority students from seeing themselves in that role. Or does the GRE, which is known to under-predict the success of minority students, serve as a barrier to admission? Or do faculty members, who are more involved in admissions of graduate students than of undergraduates, subscribe to the view that diversity reduces excellence?
Beyond the challenge of admitting a diverse graduate-student population, universities must also ensure that all students thrive during their graduate education, regardless of their background. Low-income and minority graduate students often feel like the “other” and that they do not belong. Coming from different cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, they may not only be misunderstood but may also experience stigma and daily indignities for being different and thinking differently. As the report on attrition and completion shows, graduate school for minority students can be an isolating and disheartening experience that can lead to problems with retention.
So, how do we strengthen inclusive excellence at the graduate level? In keeping with the principles of the Association of American Colleges and Universities, UC-Irvine has established “a welcoming community that engages all of its diversity in the service of student and organizational learning.” With initial assistance from a Department of Education grant, we have established the Decade program (Diverse Educational Community and Doctoral Experience) with a mission to make graduate education more inclusive and equitable, and to eliminate demographic disparities between graduate and undergraduate populations within 10 years. Decade is open to all graduate students but is particularly valuable to underrepresented minorities.
The program fosters collaboration among faculty, staff and students. Faculty mentors work with graduate admissions committees to ensure that students from diverse backgrounds are considered, and to educate their colleagues about implicit biases that may inhibit favorable judgments.
Once admitted, those students are invited to participate in a summer pre-entry program, which allows them to settle on the campus, undertake research, and establish peer-support groups before beginning their doctoral studies. Given an early opportunity to prepare applications for the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program, many participants also successfully obtain their own fellowship support.
During the academic year, numerous events are aimed at creating a community of equity and inclusion, including social mixers, a speaker series, and journal clubs in which faculty and students read and discuss papers that are important to a diverse student population.
Additionally, Decade faculty mentors are invited to apply for competitive funding for projects that enhance equity and inclusion in their programs. Completed projects in the STEM fields have included an assessment of the predictive value of GREs for graduate success in biomedical engineering, and creation of a summer program to improve the fabrication skills of female engineering students.
And, contrary to what many people seem to think, all minority doctoral graduates in STEM fields at UC-Irvine are employed one year after graduation. Three years after graduation, the career profile of STEM minority alumni is very similar to that of all alumni: 13 percent as tenure-track faculty, 26 percent as postdoctoral fellows, 26 percent doing research in industry, and 35 percent in “other” areas, including the government and nonprofit sectors. Recent surveys of doctoral alumni have indicated that they are considerably satisfied with their education and employment, and many former students are giving back by mentoring current ones.
Over all, doctoral programs produce employees with sharp analytical skills and high creativity who are attractive to employers. Shouldn’t we make that opportunity available to all?