1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Systemic racism in higher education

      1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 10,234 signatories

      1

      Science

      American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Inside the Double Bind: A Synthesis of Empirical Research on Undergraduate and Graduate Women of Color in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Topic choice contributes to the lower rate of NIH awards to African-American/black scientists

            Topic choice is a previously unappreciated contributor to the lower rate of NIH awards to AA/B scientists.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Diversity–Innovation Paradox in Science

              Prior work finds a diversity paradox: Diversity breeds innovation, yet underrepresented groups that diversify organizations have less successful careers within them. Does the diversity paradox hold for scientists as well? We study this by utilizing a near-complete population of ∼1.2 million US doctoral recipients from 1977 to 2015 and following their careers into publishing and faculty positions. We use text analysis and machine learning to answer a series of questions: How do we detect scientific innovations? Are underrepresented groups more likely to generate scientific innovations? And are the innovations of underrepresented groups adopted and rewarded? Our analyses show that underrepresented groups produce higher rates of scientific novelty. However, their novel contributions are devalued and discounted: For example, novel contributions by gender and racial minorities are taken up by other scholars at lower rates than novel contributions by gender and racial majorities, and equally impactful contributions of gender and racial minorities are less likely to result in successful scientific careers than for majority groups. These results suggest there may be unwarranted reproduction of stratification in academic careers that discounts diversity’s role in innovation and partly explains the underrepresentation of some groups in academia.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Science
                Science
                American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
                0036-8075
                1095-9203
                September 17 2020
                September 18 2020
                September 17 2020
                September 18 2020
                : 369
                : 6510
                : 1440.2-1441
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
                [2 ] Department of Integrative Biology, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Group in Endocrinology, Molecular Toxicology, and Energy and Resources Group, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
                [3 ] Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
                [4 ] Department of Biology, Health and Equity Research Laboratory, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA 94132, USA.
                Article
                10.1126/science.abd7140
                © 2020

                Comments

                Comment on this article