ADVANCE PAID Program

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 under-represented 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.

California HS Graduates

UC Enrollees UC Bachelor's

conferred UC Doctorate's

conferred

White/Other 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 9

African American 14,547 657 827 57

7% 4% 3% 3%

1% 1% 1% 1%

45%

27%

16% 7%

14%

43%

37%

14%

33% 25%

43%

75%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

From Students to Scholars: Female Headcount by Ethnicity

High School Graduates and UC Enrollees 2009-10 Degrees Conferred 2010-11

White/Other

Asian

Hispanic

American Indian

African American

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

UC Faculty UC SBS Faculty UC STEM Faculty

White/Other 2,043 414 397

Asian 444 72 124

Hispanic 177 40 26

American Indian 31 9 3

African American 106 27 5

4% 5% 1% 1% 2% 1%

6% 7% 5%

16% 12% 22%

73% 74% 71%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

UC tenure-line and equivalent Faculty, UC SBS Faculty, and UC STEM Faculty: Female Headcount by Ethnicity, Fall 2011

White/Other

Asian

Hispanic

American Indian

African American

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

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%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Ethnicity of Applicants, Interviewees and Hires for UC Faculty and UC STEM Faculty Positions, 2011-12

White/Oth

Hispanic

African-Amer.

Amer.-Indian

Asian

Source: UC Systemwide Faculty Search Data Report for 2011-12

All Disciplines STEM Disciplines Only

Comparison 8 Gender and Ethnicity Report Headcount and Percent of Total of Faculty, Women, URM* & Women URM

Fall 2009**

Institution Total

Faculty

Total Women Faculty

Total URM

Faculty

Total Women

URM Faculty

% Women of Total

% URM of Total

% Women URM of

Total

Harvard University 1,541 382 72 27 24.8% 4.7% 1.8%

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 965 198 50 11 20.5% 5.2% 1.1%

Stanford University 1,286 294 70 20 22.9% 5.4% 1.6%

SUNY College at Buffalo 383 168 40 21 43.9% 10.4% 5.5%

University of California 9,281 2,768 778 293 29.8% 8.4% 3.2%

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1,815 528 177 72 29.1% 9.8% 4.0%

University of Michigan-Ann Arbor 2,530 751 210 82 29.7% 8.3% 3.2%

University of Virginia-Main Campus 1,425 358 86 28 25.1% 6.0% 2.0%

Yale University 1,419 468 86 42 33.0% 6.1% 3.0%

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.