setting-the-uc-context-for-issues-of-the-double-bind

Setting the UC Context for Issues of the Double Bind Yolanda Moses Associate Vice Chancellor for Diversity, Excellence, and Equity & Professor of Anthropology UC Riverside ADVANCE PAID Program Two Key Documents in the Double Bind Literature 1) (1976) Malcolm, Hall, and Brown “The Double Bind: The Price of Being a Minority Woman in Science.” American Association for the Advancement of Science 2) (2011) Ong, Wright, Espinosa, and Orfield “Inside the Double Bind: A Synthesis of Empirical Research on Undergraduate and Graduate Women of Color in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.” Harvard Educational Review ADVANCE PAID Program “The Double Bind” (1976) • There is little information and no data on the status of women of color in science • Women of color in science were excluded from programs for underrepresented populations or programs for women because of biases related to both their race or ethnicity and gender, constituting a double bind • Programs for underrepresented populations were dominated by male scientists or majority women: “minority women were, in fact, falling somewhere in between the funded efforts to improve science opportunities for minorities and efforts to advance women in science.” ADVANCE PAID Program “The Double Bind” (1976) • Conference attendees recommended that the educational system offer “only what the system already offers male students”: access to financial aid information, supportive student services, faculty role models, research training, counseling, and job placement services • Conference attendees recommended that employers institute flexible work schedules, financial and policy support for child care, grant writing education, career workshops, communication networks, mentoring, appointment to advisory councils, data collection by race and by gender ADVANCE PAID Program “Inside the Double Bind” (2011) • The “Double Bind” continues: “URM women remain proportionally underrepresented [in STEM] relative to their representation in the U S Population.” • Inadequacy of programs: “history has borne out the reality that programs intended to serve women disproportionately benefit White women, and programs intended to serve minorities mainly benefit minority males.” • The double bind remains as “the way in which race/ethnicity and gender function simultaneously to produce distinct experiences for women of color in STEM.” ADVANCE PAID Program “Inside the Double Bind” (2011) • “The pernicious myth that women of color are underrepresented in STEM fields because they are simply not interested in pursuing scientific careers continues to circulate.” • Authors review research on undergraduate and graduate students; little research on the double bind for faculty in STEM • Support from peers and faculty are inadequate: “Young women of color in science have to carry out a tremendous amount of extra, and indeed, invisible work in order to gain acceptance from their male peers and faculty.” ADVANCE PAID Program “Inside the Double Bind” (2011) Research shows several common characteristics across the undergraduate, graduate, and faculty experience: • Difficulties of transition and points of loss between the academic stages • Critical role that climate plays in women’s retention in STEM, including issues of isolation, identity, invisibility, negotiating/navigation, microaggressions on a daily basis, sense of belonging, and tokenism • “ Creating more women of color STEM PhDs and getting them into faculty positions could help foster cultural changes that would improve overall faculty support for and increase the enrollment and retention of minority women.” ADVANCE PAID Program What Do We Need to Know About UC? • Some of the infrastructure problems found in the educational system have been addressed, i.e access to financial aid information, research training, and career counseling • Family friendly policies for faculty are in place • Each campus has in place a diversity/equity structure to support women of color • Data collection is underway to help us define successes, challenges, and next steps ADVANCE PAID Program 100% From Students to Scholars: Female Headcount by Ethnicity High School Graduates and UC Enrollees 2009-10 Degrees Conferred 2010-11 90% 80% 25% 33% 43% 70% 60% 75% 14% 43% 50% 40% 30% 37% Asian 20% 27% 10% 0% White/Other 45% 7% 16% 1% California HS Graduates White/Other Hispanic 14% 4% 1% 3% American Indian 1% 3% 7% 1% UC Enrollees UC Bachelor's conferred UC Doctorate's conferred 66,112 3,823 10,887 1,312 Asian 27,966 6,580 9,493 245 Hispanic 90,627 4,004 4,099 130 American Indian 1,706 129 144 African American 14,547 657 827 57 Sources: UC ADVANCE PAID Data Portfolio from the following tables: Pipeline Analysis of California Public High School Students to UC Enrollees, 2009-10 Number and Percent of Total UC Bachelor Degrees Conferred by Gender, Ethnicity, and Discipline - 2010-11 Number and Percent of Total UC Doctoral Degrees Conferred by Gender, Ethnicity, and Discipline - 2010-11 African American UC tenure-line and equivalent Faculty, UC SBS Faculty, and UC STEM Faculty: Female Headcount by Ethnicity, Fall 2011 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 73% 71% 74% 50% 40% White/Other 30% Asian 20% 16% 10% 6% 4% UC Faculty 0% White/Other 12% 1% 7% 2% 5% UC SBS Faculty American Indian 1% 5% UC STEM Faculty 2,043 414 397 Asian 444 72 124 Hispanic 177 40 26 American Indian 31 African American 106 27 Source: UC ADVANCE PAID Data Portfolio from the following tables: Ladder and Equivalent Rank Faculty with Tenure by Discipline by Gender by Ethnicity with percentages UC Systemwide Female STEM Faculty by Ethnicity by Year UC Systemwide Female SBS Faculty by Ethnicity by Year Hispanic 22% 1% African American Ethnicity of Applicants, Interviewees and Hires for UC Faculty and UC STEM Faculty Positions, 2011-12 All Disciplines STEM Disciplines Only 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% White/Oth 40% Hispanic 30% African-Amer Amer.-Indian 20% Asian 10% 0% Applicants Interviewees Hires STEM Applicants STEM Interviewees STEM Hires White/Oth 72.3% 72.0% 70.0% 66.4% 69.1% 66.0% Hispanic 4.9% 6.1% 7.8% 4.4% 5.4% 7.5% African-Amer 2.1% 2.4% 3.8% 2.0% 2.4% 4.4% Amer.-Indian 0.3% 0.5% 0.7% 0.1% 0.5% 0.0% Asian 20.4% 18.9% 17.7% 27.0% 22.7% 22.0% Source: UC Systemwide Faculty Search Data Report for 2011-12 Comparison Gender and Ethnicity Report Headcount and Percent of Total of Faculty, Women, URM* & Women URM Fall 2009** Institution Harvard University Massachusetts Institute of Technology Stanford University SUNY College at Buffalo University of California University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign University of Michigan-Ann Arbor University of Virginia-Main Campus Yale University Total Faculty 1,541 965 1,286 383 9,281 1,815 2,530 1,425 1,419 Total Total Women URM Faculty Faculty 382 72 198 50 294 70 168 40 2,768 778 528 751 358 468 Total Women % URM Women Faculty of Total 27 24.8% 11 20.5% 20 22.9% 21 43.9% 293 29.8% 177 210 86 86 72 82 28 42 Notes: Source: IPEDS http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/Data.aspx Data includes Hastings College of Law *URM = Under represented minority which includes African American, American Indian and Hispanic **Fall 2009 most recent available as of 8/1/2012 Privates report every odd year Fall 2011 data will be available in late Fall 2012 Faculty defined as tenure track faculty who perform instruction, research and public service and include general campus and health sciences 29.1% 29.7% 25.1% 33.0% % URM of Total 4.7% 5.2% 5.4% 10.4% 8.4% % Women URM of Total 1.8% 1.1% 1.6% 5.5% 3.2% 9.8% 8.3% 6.0% 6.1% 4.0% 3.2% 2.0% 3.0%