1
Introduction
Racism is a system of power that unfairly disadvantages some individuals and communities while unfairly advantaging other individuals and communities (Jones, 2003; Jones et al., 2008). Racism has historic roots and affects the opportunities and outcomes for Black people in education, housing, health care, criminal justice, and other sectors. While fighting to end racism has gone on for centuries and will need to continue into the future, current anti-Black racism efforts carry a sense of urgency. Acknowledging its existence across society has heightened in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the publicly visible murders of George Floyd and other Black men and women.
The Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was launched several months before the multiple crises or, as some have described it, the dual pandemics of COVID-19 and systemic racism (e.g., Jones, 2021). The mission of the Roundtable is to advance discussions on the barriers and opportunities encountered by Black students and professionals as they navigate the pathways from K–12 and postsecondary education to careers in science, engineering, and medicine (SEM) and highlight promising practices for increasing the representation, retention, and inclusiveness of Black men and Black women in SEM.
The Roundtable’s first public workshop in April 2020 was on the impacts of racism and bias on Black people pursuing careers in science, engineering, and medicine (NASEM, 2020b). Subsequent workshops
focused on identifying challenges and solutions within the Roundtable’s mission, specifically related to COVID-19 and Black communities, K–12 educational pathways for Black students in SEM, mentoring and advising for Black students in SEM, financial barriers for Black students in SEM, and psychological well-being of Black students and professionals.
This proceedings serves as a summary of the presentations and discussions from a capstone workshop, held virtually on December 6 and 7, 2021. The Roundtable hosted the capstone workshop to review how anti-Black racism had permeated across the topics it covered over the previous 2 years. The workshop’s objectives were to
- understand how racism continues to be a barrier to increasing the number of Blacks in SEM;
- discuss how systemic, anti-Black racism affects the educational pathways and mentoring and advising relationships of Black students in SEM;
- focus on how anti-Black racism contributes to the financial barriers and psychological factors that affect Black students in SEM; and
- examine the role of anti-Black racism in the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Black communities.
The Statement of Task for the Workshop is provided in Box 1-1.
Reflecting both the discussions held in the previous workshops of the Roundtable and the Roundtable’s current membership, several of the speakers highlighted anti-Black racism in medical education and medical careers. While rich discussions were held over the 2-day workshop, several topics—such as solutions and challenges in SEM fields for faculty retention, graduate and undergraduate medical education, or peer review—were not discussed during the workshop and remain for the Roundtable to explore further.
CONTEXT FROM THE ROUNDTABLE CHAIR
Roundtable chair Cato Laurencin, M.D., Ph.D. (University of Connecticut), welcomed participants and shared the goals of the Roundtable: to understand issues affecting Black men and Black women in science, engineering, and medicine, and to create ideas for solutions, especially solutions utilizing the strengths in having Black men and Black women in these fields. Creation of the Roundtable in late 2018 stemmed from growing concern
about the dearth in particular of Black men in medical schools and the medical profession (NASEM, 2018).
As Dr. Laurencin highlighted, each Roundtable meeting in 2020 and 2021 has included data gathering, ideas generation, a business meeting, and a public workshop planned by one of the Roundtable’s seven action groups.1 The action groups are organized around the following areas: (1) racism and bias in SEM; (2) financing for students pursuing health and other SEM-related careers; (3) stakeholder engagement and public policy in support
___________________
1 For more information on the members and sponsors of the Roundtable on Black Men and Black Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine, see https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/roundtable-on-black-men-and-black-women-in-science-engineering-and-medicine.
of Black students and professionals in SEM; (4) mentoring and advising primarily along SEM pathways; (5) preK–graduate education, especially in SEM disciplines; (6) the impacts of and responses to the COVID-19 pandemic; and (7) systemic change to overcome psychological barriers to the success of Black students and professionals in medicine. Each action group has conducted at least one public session.2
Dr. Laurencin noted that Roundtable sponsors include foundations, government agencies, private corporations, and universities, and he underscored the significance of support across multiple segments of society. He thanked National Academies staff, and particularly Reginald Hayes, for their work in the first “whirlwind” year of the Roundtable.
“We have officially entered our third year,” Dr. Laurencin commented. Thus, members organized the current workshop as a capstone in which each action group provided a central perspective about their issues and anti-Black racism.
IMPERATIVES OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCES, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE
National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt, Ph.D., expressed strong support for the Roundtable and, more broadly, for the National Academies to combat racism internally and externally. She underscored that the Roundtable was founded in recognition of the need for a singular focus at the National Academies on the experiences of Black men and Black women in science, engineering, and medicine (SEM). Over the past 18 months, the importance of supporting Black scientists, engineers, and health professionals has come to the fore, she said, pointing to the need for this type of forum. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Black communities have been disproportionately affected. They have witnessed the murder of George Floyd, and greater attention to many more Black men and women “struck down” by police violence, Dr. McNutt said. As people of all backgrounds began to hold public and open conversations about the roles of race, racism, and particularly of anti-Black racism in society, the fields of science, engineering, and medicine were not excluded from the conversations. Black faculty, students, physicians, and others shared their experiences, forcing critical self-reflection by many in academia and across
___________________
2 See the Roundtable’s Events page for a list of previous workshops, published proceedings, and works in progress.
SEM, she said. Within the National Academies, the past several months have involved self-reflection and change. Dr. McNutt continued:
We always strive to elevate the best science, and we recognize that a more diverse, inclusive scientific workforce and culture, together with a more inclusive approach to how research is conducted, would result in greater overall creativity, innovation, and excellence in research. To that end, we are expanding how issues of equity and inclusion can or should be addressed in all of our activities, including our consensus studies, our workshops, and our roundtables.
More than 4,000 people attended a National Academies summit on diversity, equity, inclusion, and antiracism in SEM in July 2021, Dr. McNutt reported (NASEM, 2021a). She pointed out that scientific activities that have not previously had a major focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are now elevating this concern within their disciplines. For example, the recently released Decadal Study on Astronomy and Astrophysics 2020 centers DEI as one of the core foundations for the vitality of the profession (NASEM, 2021b). Similarly, a consensus study on earth sciences supported by the National Science Foundation highlighted the need for DEI in education, workforce development, setting of research priorities, and other areas (NASEM, 2020a). In health and medicine, she continued, research has shown that more diverse and inclusive workforces and approaches can lead to more attention to address poor health outcomes for racial and ethnic minority populations and other underserved communities.
In November 2021, the National Academies held a meeting of experts to review and examine its portfolio of work on DEI and STEM. Two advisory committees, one of external volunteers and the other of internal staff, considered how DEI and antiracism are currently incorporated in the National Academies work and policies, and how to move forward. The National Academies established its first Office of Diversity and Inclusion charged with leading efforts to embed DEI in projects, processes, and policies. Dr. McNutt explained the office has four priorities: (1) diversify the National Academies’ membership; (2) diversify the pool of volunteers; (3) build a more inclusive workplace environment, including promotion pathways for members of underrepresented groups; and (4) ensure that each convening activity considers representation and important equity dimensions.
Dr. McNutt and National Academies Chief Diversity Officer Laura Castillo-Page, Ph.D. (2021), published an article in Nature Medicine. Previously, they wrote, the naïve argument may have been that the onus for change to bring more people of color into STEM rests in elementary and secondary schools. However, Dr. McNutt stated:
In 2021, it is simply not acceptable to wait for a bottom-up solution. As the leader of one of the nation’s preeminent science organizations, I have a personal obligation to enact change within the research community and within our own walls, and to ensure that excellence, innovation, and DEI are pervasive in science. We can no longer simply say we cannot find diverse talent or that the problem lies elsewhere. We must build our capacity here at the top of the scientific enterprise to lead DEI efforts and actively promote new approaches, practices, and policies that bring about real results.
Dr. McNutt also called for more role models to encourage students to pursue STEM careers. She concluded with the hope that the National Academies will continue to examine past practices and explore how to build lasting change to learn, build, and grow into a more inclusive, diverse, and antiracist institution that will lead STEM forward.
INTRODUCTION FROM THE WORKSHOP CO-CHAIRS AND ORGANIZATION OF THIS PROCEEDINGS
As workshop co-chair Lynne M. Holden, M.D. (Mentoring in Medicine, Inc.; Albert Einstein College of Medicine), pointed out, racism has been shown to be an underlying theme across topic areas throughout the Roundtable’s 2 years of information and data gathering. The planning committee for the current workshop organized eight sessions to highlight issues that the previous topic-specific workshops have surfaced. She thanked Dr. McNutt and Dr. Laurencin for their leadership, as well as staff, Roundtable members, and workshop participants.
Cedric Bright, M.D. (East Carolina University), added his excitement about the work of the Roundtable and expectation that the discussions will affect the future. He reviewed the workshop agenda and presenters (see Appendix A and Appendix B, respectively).
Dr. Bright concluded with two vignettes among many he has heard from medical students. In the first, a Black student related their feelings after reading a social media post by another student who wrote if “these people receive health care for free” (Medicaid patients of color), they should be required to change their diets. Another Black medical student recounted that he has participated in numerous rotations in which white physicians explain concepts to white students while not or barely acknowledging his questions; he has reached the point where he asks white students to ask his questions so he receives a full response. “I present those two vignettes to help you understand what our medical students see as they come through medical school,” Dr. Bright said. “And I can tell you, they are not alone. These are not isolated to medical school, this is throughout STEM. And this is why the Roundtable is here today.”
This proceedings reflects the structure of the agenda, as highlighted by Dr. Bright. Chapter 2 summarizes the first panel on anti-Black racism’s plans in academic medicine. Chapter 3 covers financing of primarily medical education. Chapter 4 reviews stakeholder engagement in anti-Black racism work, while Chapter 5 captures a facilitated discussion on mentoring and advising in SEM contexts. Subsequent sessions look at how anti-Black racism affects students at all educational levels in SEM (Chapter 6), the social determinants of health (Chapter 7), and mental health in particular of Black medical students and professionals (Chapter 8). A keynote and final thoughts, summarized in Chapter 9, ended the workshop.
In accordance with the policies of the National Academies, workshop participants did not attempt to establish any conclusions or recommendations about needs and future directions, focusing instead on issues discussed by the speakers and workshop participants. In addition, the planning committee’s role was limited to planning the workshop. This proceedings was prepared by the rapporteurs as a factual summary of what occurred at the workshop.
REFERENCES
Jones, C. P. 2003. Confronting institutionalized racism. Phylon 50(1–2): 7–22. https://doi.org/10.2307/4149999.
Jones, C. P., B. I. Truman, L. D. Elam-Evans, C. A. Jones, C. Y. Jones, R. Jiles, S. F. Rumisha, and G. S. Perry. 2008. Using “socially assigned race” to probe white advantages in health status. Ethnicity and Disease 18(4): 496–504.
Jones, J. 2021. The dual pandemics of COVID-19 and systemic racism. School Psychology 36(5): 427–431. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000472.
McNutt, M., and L. Castillo-Page. 2021. Promoting diversity and inclusion in STEMM starts at the top. Nature Medicine 27: 1864–1865. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01496-2.
NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2018. An American Crisis: The Growing Absence of Black Men in Medicine and Science: Proceedings of a Joint Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25130/an-american-crisis-the-growing-absence-of-black-men-in.
NASEM. 2020a. A Vision for NSF Earth Sciences, 2020–2030. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org10.17226/25761.
NASEM. 2020b. The Impacts of Racism and Bias on Black People Pursuing Careers in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://www.nap.edu/read/25849/chapter/1.
NASEM. 2021a. Addressing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Anti-Racism in 21st Century STEMM Organizations: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26294.
NASEM. 2021b. Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/decadal-survey-on-astronomy-and-astrophysics-2020-astro2020.
