lohud.com (Lower Hudson Valley, NY)
12:39 AM, Apr. 25, 2011
With a brand-new law degree in 1978, Elizabeth Moore followed her peers, knocking on the doors of New York City law firms, ready to prove herself.
But her reception was different.
"Being an African-American woman, there wasn't a lot of receptivity to my joining a law firm," recalled Moore, 56, who lives in Sleepy Hollow.
The ambitious attorney persevered, securing a job in Consolidated Edison's law department. Moore left the utility a few years later — practicing privately and serving as counsel for Gov. Mario Cuomo — but returned two years ago with a different title: general counsel — the first black to fill the executive post at Con Edison.
Full Story: http://www.lohud.com/article/20110425/NEWS02/104250323/Minorities-gain-corporate-world?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CNews
Showing posts with label minorities. Show all posts
Showing posts with label minorities. Show all posts
Monday, April 25, 2011
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Minority Hires a Priority On Capitol Hill
Diverse Issues in Higher Education
by Charles Dervarics , December 23, 2009
With the economy still reeling, Hampton University didn't get its usual contingent of 100 employers at its fall 2009 career fair for students and alumni. But one sector was there in force - federal government agencies looking for candidates for career positions.
"Government agencies come every time," says Vivian David, director of the university's career center. Agencies such as the FBI, Census Bureau, State Department and Patent and Trademark Office are among those that frequently send recruiters to Hampton for such events. "They actively recruit," David says, and students seem to respond positively. "It's a brand that's popular on campus."
Recruitment of African-Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans and Asian-Americans is a priority across the federal government. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) must report annually on minority employment, and its findings show some gains. Overall, minorities were 33 percent of the federal work force in 2008, meaning they were over-represented in government compared with the rest of the U.S. work force. Together, these groups represented 29 percent of the civilian labor force last year.
But a more in-depth look at the data yields mixed results. On the positive side, African-Americans represent 18 percent of all federal workers, compared with 10 percent of the civilian labor force. But Hispanics account for 13 percent of U.S. workers and only 7.9 percent of federal employees.
Full Story: http://diverseeducation.com/article/13286/minority-hires-a-priority-on-capitol-hill.html
by Charles Dervarics , December 23, 2009
With the economy still reeling, Hampton University didn't get its usual contingent of 100 employers at its fall 2009 career fair for students and alumni. But one sector was there in force - federal government agencies looking for candidates for career positions.
"Government agencies come every time," says Vivian David, director of the university's career center. Agencies such as the FBI, Census Bureau, State Department and Patent and Trademark Office are among those that frequently send recruiters to Hampton for such events. "They actively recruit," David says, and students seem to respond positively. "It's a brand that's popular on campus."
Recruitment of African-Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans and Asian-Americans is a priority across the federal government. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) must report annually on minority employment, and its findings show some gains. Overall, minorities were 33 percent of the federal work force in 2008, meaning they were over-represented in government compared with the rest of the U.S. work force. Together, these groups represented 29 percent of the civilian labor force last year.
But a more in-depth look at the data yields mixed results. On the positive side, African-Americans represent 18 percent of all federal workers, compared with 10 percent of the civilian labor force. But Hispanics account for 13 percent of U.S. workers and only 7.9 percent of federal employees.
Full Story: http://diverseeducation.com/article/13286/minority-hires-a-priority-on-capitol-hill.html
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Blacks and Mexican Americans Disproportionately Denied Law School Admittance
Diverse Issues in Higher Education
by Ronald Roach
Apr 15, 2009, 08:36
Despite an increase in capacity, law schools have been admitting fewer African-American and Mexican American students over the last 15 years.
As director of the Lawyering in the Digital Age Clinic at the Columbia University Law School, law professor Conrad Johnson knows that digital technology has the power to highlight and amplify social justice concerns and to enable people to take direct action. Under Johnson’s leadership, the clinic has developed and maintained the Columbia-hosted Web site titled “A Disturbing Trend in Law School Diversity,” which highlights more than a decade of declining to stagnant African-American and Mexican American enrollment at U.S. law schools.
“What we tried to do in this study is something we haven’t seen done very often (and that) is to measure the trends of inclusiveness in the context of the capacity of law schools to take in students, which has increased by 10 percent over the last 15 years,” Johnson says.
The Web site features 12 graphs taken from Law School Admission Council (LSAC) data showing how first-year African-American and Mexican American enrollment has declined 8.6 percent, from a total of 3,937 in 1992 to 3,595 in 2005. The Web site notes that in 1992 there were 176 accredited U.S. law schools and by 2006 that total had increased to 195 accredited schools, offering a gain of nearly 4,000 first-year seats for law school students. It’s also shown that, while African-American and Mexican American applicants have endured falling admissions rates, their undergraduate grade point averages and Law School Admission Test scores have improved during the same period.
“Instead of measuring this year against last year, we decided to say ‘let’s look at 15 years and let’s look at LSAT scores, GPAs and capacities of law schools to take in new students,’ and I think that’s going to be particularly important to continue to monitor the fuller picture as opposed to a small slice of the picture,” Johnson notes.
More recently, the American Bar Association reported that first-year African-American law school enrollment went from 3,107 in 2005-2006 to 3,516 in 2006-2007 and fell to 3,486 in 2007-2008. First-year Mexican American law school enrollment went from 851 in 2005-2006 to 915 in 2006-2007 and fell to 888 in 2007-2008.
Full Story: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_12481.shtml
by Ronald Roach
Apr 15, 2009, 08:36
Despite an increase in capacity, law schools have been admitting fewer African-American and Mexican American students over the last 15 years.
As director of the Lawyering in the Digital Age Clinic at the Columbia University Law School, law professor Conrad Johnson knows that digital technology has the power to highlight and amplify social justice concerns and to enable people to take direct action. Under Johnson’s leadership, the clinic has developed and maintained the Columbia-hosted Web site titled “A Disturbing Trend in Law School Diversity,” which highlights more than a decade of declining to stagnant African-American and Mexican American enrollment at U.S. law schools.
“What we tried to do in this study is something we haven’t seen done very often (and that) is to measure the trends of inclusiveness in the context of the capacity of law schools to take in students, which has increased by 10 percent over the last 15 years,” Johnson says.
The Web site features 12 graphs taken from Law School Admission Council (LSAC) data showing how first-year African-American and Mexican American enrollment has declined 8.6 percent, from a total of 3,937 in 1992 to 3,595 in 2005. The Web site notes that in 1992 there were 176 accredited U.S. law schools and by 2006 that total had increased to 195 accredited schools, offering a gain of nearly 4,000 first-year seats for law school students. It’s also shown that, while African-American and Mexican American applicants have endured falling admissions rates, their undergraduate grade point averages and Law School Admission Test scores have improved during the same period.
“Instead of measuring this year against last year, we decided to say ‘let’s look at 15 years and let’s look at LSAT scores, GPAs and capacities of law schools to take in new students,’ and I think that’s going to be particularly important to continue to monitor the fuller picture as opposed to a small slice of the picture,” Johnson notes.
More recently, the American Bar Association reported that first-year African-American law school enrollment went from 3,107 in 2005-2006 to 3,516 in 2006-2007 and fell to 3,486 in 2007-2008. First-year Mexican American law school enrollment went from 851 in 2005-2006 to 915 in 2006-2007 and fell to 888 in 2007-2008.
Full Story: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_12481.shtml
Monday, December 8, 2008
What Universities Can Do to Graduate More Minority Ph.D.'s
The Chronicle of Higher Education
Thursday, December 4, 2008
By DAVID GLENN
Washington
Universities have long rued the stark disparity between minority students' share of the population and their share of Ph.D.'s, especially in engineering and the sciences. And three decades' worth of efforts by private foundations and federal agencies seem to have had only sporadic positive effects. But in a session here Wednesday at the annual meeting of the Council of Graduate Schools, three scholars said there is no legitimate reason for universities to give up on diversifying doctoral education. Successful models are out there, the scholars said, and ought to be imitated.
In a nutshell, the panelists' advice was: Think broadly.
If universities want to diversify their doctoral programs, the scholars said, they should improve the academic climate for all of their students, not just for minorities. Universities should consolidate and coordinate the support that is offered by foundations and federal agencies, rather than relying on a hodgepodge of small diversity-related grants and programs. And universities should work together with their regional peers—and even with local school districts—rather than trying to solve the problem on their own.
"Diversity programs can only be successful if the climate for all students is a good one," said Janet C. Rutledge, interim vice provost for graduate education at the University of Maryland-Baltimore County.
Ms. Rutledge's campus is among the 29 institutions participating in the Council of Graduate Schools' Ph.D. Completion Project, a seven-year effort to reduce attrition among doctoral students (The Chronicle, September 19). She said that the mere act of carefully measuring their attrition rates had caused many programs on her campus to be more thoughtful about recruiting, training, and overseeing their students. And students from underrepresented minority groups, she added, have disproportionately benefited from those changes.
Daryl E. Chubin, director of the Center for Advancing Science & Engineering Capacity, a project of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, agreed that paying even modest attention to attrition patterns could pay huge dividends.
Full Story: http://chronicle.com/daily/2008/12/8011n.htm?utm_source=at&utm_medium=en (Subscription)
Thursday, December 4, 2008
By DAVID GLENN
Washington
Universities have long rued the stark disparity between minority students' share of the population and their share of Ph.D.'s, especially in engineering and the sciences. And three decades' worth of efforts by private foundations and federal agencies seem to have had only sporadic positive effects. But in a session here Wednesday at the annual meeting of the Council of Graduate Schools, three scholars said there is no legitimate reason for universities to give up on diversifying doctoral education. Successful models are out there, the scholars said, and ought to be imitated.
In a nutshell, the panelists' advice was: Think broadly.
If universities want to diversify their doctoral programs, the scholars said, they should improve the academic climate for all of their students, not just for minorities. Universities should consolidate and coordinate the support that is offered by foundations and federal agencies, rather than relying on a hodgepodge of small diversity-related grants and programs. And universities should work together with their regional peers—and even with local school districts—rather than trying to solve the problem on their own.
"Diversity programs can only be successful if the climate for all students is a good one," said Janet C. Rutledge, interim vice provost for graduate education at the University of Maryland-Baltimore County.
Ms. Rutledge's campus is among the 29 institutions participating in the Council of Graduate Schools' Ph.D. Completion Project, a seven-year effort to reduce attrition among doctoral students (The Chronicle, September 19). She said that the mere act of carefully measuring their attrition rates had caused many programs on her campus to be more thoughtful about recruiting, training, and overseeing their students. And students from underrepresented minority groups, she added, have disproportionately benefited from those changes.
Daryl E. Chubin, director of the Center for Advancing Science & Engineering Capacity, a project of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, agreed that paying even modest attention to attrition patterns could pay huge dividends.
Full Story: http://chronicle.com/daily/2008/12/8011n.htm?utm_source=at&utm_medium=en (Subscription)
Monday, November 17, 2008
Need Help Getting a Job in the Obama Administration? Talent Bank May Be the Answer
Diverse Issues in Higher Education
by Karen Branch-Brioso
Nov 17, 2008, 11:03
The Warren Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law is teaming up with a group of liberal philanthropists to help minorities and women win jobs in President-elect Barack Obama’s administration.
The Diversity in Democracy Project, also dubbed the Talent Bank Project, has already collected about 1,000 resumes as of Friday, according to Steve Phillips, a San Francisco employment lawyer and donor to progressive causes.
“The enthusiasm is off the charts,” says Phillips, who also presides over PowerPAC, a nonprofit advocacy and political organization that has also chipped in with Phillips and others to pay for the $100,000 project.
Organizers will accept rèsumès through Nov. 21, from minorities of all types who are often underrepresented in presidential administrations: Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, gays and lesbians, the disabled and women.
Interested applicants should send rèsumès to warreninstitute@berkeley.edu.
The project will use assessment tools provided by the Korn/Ferry International executive recruiting firm to help match applicants’ resumes with jobs. And then a bi-partisan board, led by Phillips, will winnow down the list and offer a pool of candidates matched up to administration jobs.
The list of final candidates will be presented to the transition team in early December, Phillips said. [Full story: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_11968.shtml ]
by Karen Branch-Brioso
Nov 17, 2008, 11:03
The Warren Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law is teaming up with a group of liberal philanthropists to help minorities and women win jobs in President-elect Barack Obama’s administration.
The Diversity in Democracy Project, also dubbed the Talent Bank Project, has already collected about 1,000 resumes as of Friday, according to Steve Phillips, a San Francisco employment lawyer and donor to progressive causes.
“The enthusiasm is off the charts,” says Phillips, who also presides over PowerPAC, a nonprofit advocacy and political organization that has also chipped in with Phillips and others to pay for the $100,000 project.
Organizers will accept rèsumès through Nov. 21, from minorities of all types who are often underrepresented in presidential administrations: Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, gays and lesbians, the disabled and women.
Interested applicants should send rèsumès to warreninstitute@berkeley.edu.
The project will use assessment tools provided by the Korn/Ferry International executive recruiting firm to help match applicants’ resumes with jobs. And then a bi-partisan board, led by Phillips, will winnow down the list and offer a pool of candidates matched up to administration jobs.
The list of final candidates will be presented to the transition team in early December, Phillips said. [Full story: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_11968.shtml ]
Monday, October 20, 2008
U-M African-American enrollment increases in wake of Prop. 2
BY ROBIN ERB
FREE PRESS EDUCATION WRITER
October 20, 2008
Nearly two years after Michigan voters banned the use of affirmative action in college admissions, University of Michigan’s incoming class shows a marked increase of African-Americans — even at a time it has also shrunk the size of its freshman class.
The reason?
Targeted recruitment of underrepresented minorities, said senior vice provost Lester Monts.
“Proposal 2 doesn’t prohibit targeted outreach,” Monts said. “You can target high schools, you can target neighborhoods, and you can even target minority groups,” he said.
Meanwhile, other minority groups lost ground and the portion of white freshman from the United States increased slightly from 65.2 % of the freshman class of 5,783 to 68.5 %.
According to numbers released today, the numbers of African-American students grew from 334 to 374, an increase of 12% at the same time the university, fearing its freshman class had grown too much over the years, thinned its class this year from 5,992 to 5,783.
U-M was ground zero for the debate over Proposal 2 in 2006 because it openly considered race in its admissions process. The measure, passed in 2006, went into effect in January 2007 and — halfway through the admissions process for the fall 2007 class — admissions officers had to stop considering race or gender as a factor.
Opponents of Proposal 2 feared sharp declines in enrollment of underrepresented minorities, but proponents had called the use of affirmative action considerations unfair, saying universities can find other ways to diversity their student bodies.
University officials have said they have been in good position to search for diverse applicants because its admissions process had become increasingly sophisticated over the years, asking candidates things like: Do you work to support your family? Are you a first-generation college student? Do you have dependent children?
They also target specific areas of Michigan.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://www.freep.com/article/20081020/NEWS06/81020072/-1/rss07 ]
FREE PRESS EDUCATION WRITER
October 20, 2008
Nearly two years after Michigan voters banned the use of affirmative action in college admissions, University of Michigan’s incoming class shows a marked increase of African-Americans — even at a time it has also shrunk the size of its freshman class.
The reason?
Targeted recruitment of underrepresented minorities, said senior vice provost Lester Monts.
“Proposal 2 doesn’t prohibit targeted outreach,” Monts said. “You can target high schools, you can target neighborhoods, and you can even target minority groups,” he said.
Meanwhile, other minority groups lost ground and the portion of white freshman from the United States increased slightly from 65.2 % of the freshman class of 5,783 to 68.5 %.
According to numbers released today, the numbers of African-American students grew from 334 to 374, an increase of 12% at the same time the university, fearing its freshman class had grown too much over the years, thinned its class this year from 5,992 to 5,783.
U-M was ground zero for the debate over Proposal 2 in 2006 because it openly considered race in its admissions process. The measure, passed in 2006, went into effect in January 2007 and — halfway through the admissions process for the fall 2007 class — admissions officers had to stop considering race or gender as a factor.
Opponents of Proposal 2 feared sharp declines in enrollment of underrepresented minorities, but proponents had called the use of affirmative action considerations unfair, saying universities can find other ways to diversity their student bodies.
University officials have said they have been in good position to search for diverse applicants because its admissions process had become increasingly sophisticated over the years, asking candidates things like: Do you work to support your family? Are you a first-generation college student? Do you have dependent children?
They also target specific areas of Michigan.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://www.freep.com/article/20081020/NEWS06/81020072/-1/rss07 ]
Friday, October 10, 2008
Falling Behind
Inside Higher Ed
October 9, 2008
The latest generation of adults in the United States may be the first since World War II, and possibly before that, not to attain higher levels of education than the previous generations. While white and Asian American young people are outpacing previous generations, the gaps for other minority groups are large enough that the current generation is, on average, heading toward being less educated than its predecessor.
These data are among the most dramatic in “Minorities in Higher Education 2008,” which is being released today by the American Council on Education as the 23rd annual status report on the diversification of American colleges and universities.
Most of the data in the report are not themselves new, and come from the various reports issued over the year by the U.S. Education Department and other government and private sources. The educational attainment data, for example, are from census figures. But the report groups various statistics together in ways that are designed to promote a fuller understanding of the way demographics are changing — or not.
“We are at a tipping point in our nation’s history,” said Molly Corbett Broad, president of the ACE, in reference to these findings. She said that “the alarm bells should be going off” all over the country over this analysis, given the historic pattern of successive generations outperforming one another.
Educational Attainment: Percentage of Adults With Associate Degree or Higher, 2006
Group
Ages 25-29
Ages 30 and Up
Total
34.9%
34.3%
White
41.2%
37.3%
Black
23.8%
24.1%
Latino
16.0%
17.8%
Asian American
66.2%
54.1%
American Indians
17.7%
21.2%
Broad noted that the data also point to a growing gender gap in educational attainment, which is consistent with all of the reports about gender gaps in enrollments. For black and Latino women, for example, the most recent generation outperformed the prior ones, but the opposite is true for men. And across racial and ethnic groups, women are achieving a higher level of education than men.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/09/minority ]
October 9, 2008
The latest generation of adults in the United States may be the first since World War II, and possibly before that, not to attain higher levels of education than the previous generations. While white and Asian American young people are outpacing previous generations, the gaps for other minority groups are large enough that the current generation is, on average, heading toward being less educated than its predecessor.
These data are among the most dramatic in “Minorities in Higher Education 2008,” which is being released today by the American Council on Education as the 23rd annual status report on the diversification of American colleges and universities.
Most of the data in the report are not themselves new, and come from the various reports issued over the year by the U.S. Education Department and other government and private sources. The educational attainment data, for example, are from census figures. But the report groups various statistics together in ways that are designed to promote a fuller understanding of the way demographics are changing — or not.
“We are at a tipping point in our nation’s history,” said Molly Corbett Broad, president of the ACE, in reference to these findings. She said that “the alarm bells should be going off” all over the country over this analysis, given the historic pattern of successive generations outperforming one another.
Educational Attainment: Percentage of Adults With Associate Degree or Higher, 2006
Group
Ages 25-29
Ages 30 and Up
Total
34.9%
34.3%
White
41.2%
37.3%
Black
23.8%
24.1%
Latino
16.0%
17.8%
Asian American
66.2%
54.1%
American Indians
17.7%
21.2%
Broad noted that the data also point to a growing gender gap in educational attainment, which is consistent with all of the reports about gender gaps in enrollments. For black and Latino women, for example, the most recent generation outperformed the prior ones, but the opposite is true for men. And across racial and ethnic groups, women are achieving a higher level of education than men.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/09/minority ]
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Diversity's Bottom Line
AMLAWDaily
September 30, 2008 11:21 PM
Posted by Dimitra Kessenides
By Susan Hansen
Excerpted from the Fall 2008 issue of Minority Law Journal
Even in an era of $160,000 salaries for first-year associates--plus bonuses--not every young lawyer is feeling equally flush. Law school debt and the uncertainty of today's tumultuous markets have left many associates feeling squeezed--and a lot of them are minority lawyers.
This year our Minority Experience Study focused on the economic life of big-firm midlevels. Comparing responses from young attorneys of different racial groups, we found that African American associates, in particular, generally appeared to be in a less secure financial position. They, together with Hispanic lawyers, reported higher levels of debt and lower bonus compensation compared to their white and Asian American counterparts. More black attorneys said that their workloads were too light, and overall they reported lower billable hours, even though they took less of the vacation that they're entitled to than other groups.
As in previous years, the Minority Experience Study drew on data collected by our sibling publication The American Lawyer for its Midlevel Associates Survey. The survey, conducted in spring 2008, includes 7,259 third-, fourth-, and fifth-year associates at 180 large law firms who identified their racial background, including 5,390 whites, 539 Asian Americans, 241 Hispanics, and 212 African Americans. (The 877 survey respondents who did not specify their race were not included in the Minority Experience Study.)
The economic disparities among different groups of associates begin early. More than 90 percent of Hispanic and African American lawyers reported that they borrowed money for law school, while just over 80 percent of whites did. Only about three-quarters of Asian American attorneys took out law school loans. Black and Hispanic attorneys were also more likely to have taken out loans of more than $100,000.
To several diversity professionals, those numbers aren't surprising. Since minorities are more likely to have lower incomes, they note, fewer African American and Hispanic families can help their children foot the bill for law school. Furthermore, our survey found, lawyers of color were often more likely to have chosen to work at law firms because of that debt. More than half of African American and Hispanic lawyers said that law school loans were a major factor in their decision to join a firm, compared to just under 40 percent of white and Asian American midlevels.
One financial gap that shows up on our survey is in the area of compensation. Both African American and Hispanic respondents report an average base salary of about $178,000. White associates say they make $184,000, on average, and Asian American associates say they make $195,000. [To read the entire story, go to: http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/09/post-5.html ]
September 30, 2008 11:21 PM
Posted by Dimitra Kessenides
By Susan Hansen
Excerpted from the Fall 2008 issue of Minority Law Journal
Even in an era of $160,000 salaries for first-year associates--plus bonuses--not every young lawyer is feeling equally flush. Law school debt and the uncertainty of today's tumultuous markets have left many associates feeling squeezed--and a lot of them are minority lawyers.
This year our Minority Experience Study focused on the economic life of big-firm midlevels. Comparing responses from young attorneys of different racial groups, we found that African American associates, in particular, generally appeared to be in a less secure financial position. They, together with Hispanic lawyers, reported higher levels of debt and lower bonus compensation compared to their white and Asian American counterparts. More black attorneys said that their workloads were too light, and overall they reported lower billable hours, even though they took less of the vacation that they're entitled to than other groups.
As in previous years, the Minority Experience Study drew on data collected by our sibling publication The American Lawyer for its Midlevel Associates Survey. The survey, conducted in spring 2008, includes 7,259 third-, fourth-, and fifth-year associates at 180 large law firms who identified their racial background, including 5,390 whites, 539 Asian Americans, 241 Hispanics, and 212 African Americans. (The 877 survey respondents who did not specify their race were not included in the Minority Experience Study.)
The economic disparities among different groups of associates begin early. More than 90 percent of Hispanic and African American lawyers reported that they borrowed money for law school, while just over 80 percent of whites did. Only about three-quarters of Asian American attorneys took out law school loans. Black and Hispanic attorneys were also more likely to have taken out loans of more than $100,000.
To several diversity professionals, those numbers aren't surprising. Since minorities are more likely to have lower incomes, they note, fewer African American and Hispanic families can help their children foot the bill for law school. Furthermore, our survey found, lawyers of color were often more likely to have chosen to work at law firms because of that debt. More than half of African American and Hispanic lawyers said that law school loans were a major factor in their decision to join a firm, compared to just under 40 percent of white and Asian American midlevels.
One financial gap that shows up on our survey is in the area of compensation. Both African American and Hispanic respondents report an average base salary of about $178,000. White associates say they make $184,000, on average, and Asian American associates say they make $195,000. [To read the entire story, go to: http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/09/post-5.html ]
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Advising Students to the Ph.D.: Are We Equitable in Our Support?
Diverse Issues in Higher Education
September 15, 2008
A recent report published in Diverse: Issues In Higher Education states that Ph.D. completion varies by gender and race. Specifically, the 10-year completion rate for Whites was 55 percent, for Hispanics it was 51 percent, for Asian Americans it was 50 percent and for African Americans the rate was only 47 percent. Of course there are many factors that play a part in the lower completion rates for racial and ethnic minorities compared to their White counterparts. However, I’d like to focus on one of these factors: attention and support of one’s faculty advisor.
As a faculty member, every so often, I write down the name of all my doctoral advisees, noting the collaborations that I have with them or the introductions to opportunities that I have made for them. I do this to see if I am being equitable in my support of students. Sometimes as faculty, we tend to send all of the opportunities for scholarship, teaching, and professional service to one or two students. These students often “think like us” and are eager to do whatever we ask. But what about our other advisees? I think that as faculty we need to ask ourselves periodically if we are making connections with and for all of our students.
Are we passing on opportunities to teach and write to students of color? Are we collaborating on research projects with students of color? [To read the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/advising-students-to-the-phd-are-we-equitable-in-our-support/ ]
September 15, 2008
A recent report published in Diverse: Issues In Higher Education states that Ph.D. completion varies by gender and race. Specifically, the 10-year completion rate for Whites was 55 percent, for Hispanics it was 51 percent, for Asian Americans it was 50 percent and for African Americans the rate was only 47 percent. Of course there are many factors that play a part in the lower completion rates for racial and ethnic minorities compared to their White counterparts. However, I’d like to focus on one of these factors: attention and support of one’s faculty advisor.
As a faculty member, every so often, I write down the name of all my doctoral advisees, noting the collaborations that I have with them or the introductions to opportunities that I have made for them. I do this to see if I am being equitable in my support of students. Sometimes as faculty, we tend to send all of the opportunities for scholarship, teaching, and professional service to one or two students. These students often “think like us” and are eager to do whatever we ask. But what about our other advisees? I think that as faculty we need to ask ourselves periodically if we are making connections with and for all of our students.
Are we passing on opportunities to teach and write to students of color? Are we collaborating on research projects with students of color? [To read the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.wordpress.com/2008/09/15/advising-students-to-the-phd-are-we-equitable-in-our-support/ ]
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
U. of Michigan Says It Has Avoided a Big Drop in Diversity From Proposal 2
The Chronicle of Higher Education
June 17, 2008
The University of Michigan at Ann Arbor’s preliminary admissions figures for this fall’s entering freshmen suggest that it has a avoided a substantial drop in black, Hispanic, and Native American enrollment despite being barred from considering race and ethnicity in admissions.
The number of applications from students in one of those three minority groups fell by just 2 percent in the first full admissions cycle conducted under Proposal 2, a ban on the use of affirmative-action preferences by public colleges and other state and local agencies. Such students account for 10.47 percent of the projected entering freshman class, down from 10.85 percent a year ago.
“The results are not as dire as the opponents of Proposal 2 had predicted,” Ward Connerly, a leader of the campaign on behalf of the measure, said today.
A statement issued by the university described several steps it had taken to try to maintain racial and ethnic diversity. Its undergraduate-admissions office hired additional employees, expanded its hours of operation, and used Descriptor PLUS, a geodemographic search tool developed by the College Board, to identify high schools and neighborhoods that are underrepresented on its campus. The university also stepped up its outreach in communities such as Detroit. [To see the entire article, go to:
http://chronicle.com/news/article/4694/u-of-michigan-says-it-has-avoided-a-big-drop-in-diversity-from-proposal-2?utm_source=at&utm_medium=en ]
To see the University of Michigan's press release, go to: http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=6609 ]
June 17, 2008
The University of Michigan at Ann Arbor’s preliminary admissions figures for this fall’s entering freshmen suggest that it has a avoided a substantial drop in black, Hispanic, and Native American enrollment despite being barred from considering race and ethnicity in admissions.
The number of applications from students in one of those three minority groups fell by just 2 percent in the first full admissions cycle conducted under Proposal 2, a ban on the use of affirmative-action preferences by public colleges and other state and local agencies. Such students account for 10.47 percent of the projected entering freshman class, down from 10.85 percent a year ago.
“The results are not as dire as the opponents of Proposal 2 had predicted,” Ward Connerly, a leader of the campaign on behalf of the measure, said today.
A statement issued by the university described several steps it had taken to try to maintain racial and ethnic diversity. Its undergraduate-admissions office hired additional employees, expanded its hours of operation, and used Descriptor PLUS, a geodemographic search tool developed by the College Board, to identify high schools and neighborhoods that are underrepresented on its campus. The university also stepped up its outreach in communities such as Detroit. [To see the entire article, go to:
http://chronicle.com/news/article/4694/u-of-michigan-says-it-has-avoided-a-big-drop-in-diversity-from-proposal-2?utm_source=at&utm_medium=en ]
To see the University of Michigan's press release, go to: http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=6609 ]
Friday, June 13, 2008
Applications to U-M Ann Arbor reach historic high
ANN ARBOR, Mich.—The University of Michigan received 29,794 applications from prospective freshmen for 2008, an 8.5 percent increase over last year and the highest number in University history. At the same time, applications from underrepresented minorities dropped slightly in what U-M officials predict is a temporary decline.
As of June 5, 12,533 students were offered admission to the University's Ann Arbor campus.
The preliminary admission number for the freshman class represents a decrease of approximately 9 percent from the same time last year and reflects University efforts to manage the size of the 2008 entering class.
In recent years, the number of entering freshmen exceeded U-M's ideal class size by several hundred. This year's incoming class will be at or near the preferred size of 5,710. This allows the university to maintain a relatively constant undergraduate student body population, an important component of quality instruction.
"The application pool was extremely strong again this year," said Theodore L. Spencer, associate vice provost and executive director of the Office of Undergraduate Admissions. "We're delighted that so many bright and talented students are interested in attending the University of Michigan."
Of the 12,533 students who received admission offers, 6,045 have paid enrollment deposits. Enrollment deposits do not necessarily correspond to the number of students who attend class in the fall because some students choose not to officially enroll. The figure is used to track trends. Last year at this time, 46 percent of admitted students had paid a deposit; this year the number is 48.2 percent. U-M's final enrollment figures for the class of 2012 will be available in October.
U-M continues its longstanding policy of meeting the full demonstrated financial need of all Michigan resident undergraduate students. "The University is a bargain for Michigan residents," said Pamela Fowler, executive financial aid director. "We offer one of the largest pools of financial aid resources available at any public institution in the country."
The 2007-2008 admissions cycle was the first full recruitment season since Michigan voters passed Proposal 2—an initiative prohibiting the consideration of race and gender in admissions decisions. When similar laws were passed in California and Washington, public universities experienced substantial drops in underrepresented minority student applications and admissions. [To read the entire news release, go to: http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=6609 ]
As of June 5, 12,533 students were offered admission to the University's Ann Arbor campus.
The preliminary admission number for the freshman class represents a decrease of approximately 9 percent from the same time last year and reflects University efforts to manage the size of the 2008 entering class.
In recent years, the number of entering freshmen exceeded U-M's ideal class size by several hundred. This year's incoming class will be at or near the preferred size of 5,710. This allows the university to maintain a relatively constant undergraduate student body population, an important component of quality instruction.
"The application pool was extremely strong again this year," said Theodore L. Spencer, associate vice provost and executive director of the Office of Undergraduate Admissions. "We're delighted that so many bright and talented students are interested in attending the University of Michigan."
Of the 12,533 students who received admission offers, 6,045 have paid enrollment deposits. Enrollment deposits do not necessarily correspond to the number of students who attend class in the fall because some students choose not to officially enroll. The figure is used to track trends. Last year at this time, 46 percent of admitted students had paid a deposit; this year the number is 48.2 percent. U-M's final enrollment figures for the class of 2012 will be available in October.
U-M continues its longstanding policy of meeting the full demonstrated financial need of all Michigan resident undergraduate students. "The University is a bargain for Michigan residents," said Pamela Fowler, executive financial aid director. "We offer one of the largest pools of financial aid resources available at any public institution in the country."
The 2007-2008 admissions cycle was the first full recruitment season since Michigan voters passed Proposal 2—an initiative prohibiting the consideration of race and gender in admissions decisions. When similar laws were passed in California and Washington, public universities experienced substantial drops in underrepresented minority student applications and admissions. [To read the entire news release, go to: http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=6609 ]
Friday, May 30, 2008
Higher Education Is in Flux as Demographics Change, Federal Report Shows
Chronicle of Higher Education
By PETER SCHMIDT
Friday, May 30, 2008
For-profit colleges are serving a bigger a share of a market that includes an increasing number of women and minority students, according to report released on Thursday by the U.S. Education Department.
The report, a compendium of data published annually by the National Center for Education Statistics, confirms several significant changes in higher education over recent years. It found that women and minority students accounted for a large proportion of enrollment growth at colleges and universities in the decade leading up to the 2005-6 academic year.
Despite the growing diversity at colleges, however, the nation's minority populations continue to face major educational obstacles, cautions the report, titled "The Condition of Education 2008." Compared with other minority groups, Hispanic students remain underrepresented in colleges and universities, largely because many of them are immigrants who have poor English skills and attend schools in low-income areas.
In a statement released with the report, Mark S. Schneider, commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, said the document shows that the nation had made some gains, such as increased college enrollment and higher reading and mathematics scores among fourth and eighth graders. "But," he said, "persistent challenges remain in educating a growing and increasingly diverse population."
The Girls Are All Right
The report's findings show that women made great strides relative to men over the 10 years leading up to 2005-6. Women account for nearly two-thirds of the increase in the number of bachelor's and master's degrees and 85 percent of the increase in the number of doctorates awarded by higher-education institutions.
Women's share of total undergraduate enrollment has risen to 57 percent and will most likely remain at that level for the next decade, according to the report.
Men continue to outnumber women among recipients of bachelor's degrees in mathematics, the physical sciences, and engineering, but women earn a larger share of degrees in nearly every major field of study than they did in the mid-1990s. The glaring exceptions are in math, statistics, and computer and information sciences, which men dominate even more than they did before.
Since the 1980s, women have earned more bachelor's degrees than men in the biological and biomedical sciences, and women have nearly caught up in the social sciences, business, and history. And women have increased their lead over men in bachelor's degrees awarded in fields such as education, psychology, and journalism.
Women were still earning fewer doctorates than men as of 2005-6, but just barely, having increased their share of all doctorates received to 49 percent from 40 percent over the past decade. [To read the entire article, go to: http://chronicle.com/daily/2008/05/3045n.htm?utm_source=at&utm_medium=en ] Subscription required
By PETER SCHMIDT
Friday, May 30, 2008
For-profit colleges are serving a bigger a share of a market that includes an increasing number of women and minority students, according to report released on Thursday by the U.S. Education Department.
The report, a compendium of data published annually by the National Center for Education Statistics, confirms several significant changes in higher education over recent years. It found that women and minority students accounted for a large proportion of enrollment growth at colleges and universities in the decade leading up to the 2005-6 academic year.
Despite the growing diversity at colleges, however, the nation's minority populations continue to face major educational obstacles, cautions the report, titled "The Condition of Education 2008." Compared with other minority groups, Hispanic students remain underrepresented in colleges and universities, largely because many of them are immigrants who have poor English skills and attend schools in low-income areas.
In a statement released with the report, Mark S. Schneider, commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, said the document shows that the nation had made some gains, such as increased college enrollment and higher reading and mathematics scores among fourth and eighth graders. "But," he said, "persistent challenges remain in educating a growing and increasingly diverse population."
The Girls Are All Right
The report's findings show that women made great strides relative to men over the 10 years leading up to 2005-6. Women account for nearly two-thirds of the increase in the number of bachelor's and master's degrees and 85 percent of the increase in the number of doctorates awarded by higher-education institutions.
Women's share of total undergraduate enrollment has risen to 57 percent and will most likely remain at that level for the next decade, according to the report.
Men continue to outnumber women among recipients of bachelor's degrees in mathematics, the physical sciences, and engineering, but women earn a larger share of degrees in nearly every major field of study than they did in the mid-1990s. The glaring exceptions are in math, statistics, and computer and information sciences, which men dominate even more than they did before.
Since the 1980s, women have earned more bachelor's degrees than men in the biological and biomedical sciences, and women have nearly caught up in the social sciences, business, and history. And women have increased their lead over men in bachelor's degrees awarded in fields such as education, psychology, and journalism.
Women were still earning fewer doctorates than men as of 2005-6, but just barely, having increased their share of all doctorates received to 49 percent from 40 percent over the past decade. [To read the entire article, go to: http://chronicle.com/daily/2008/05/3045n.htm?utm_source=at&utm_medium=en ] Subscription required
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
When All Efforts Fail to Retain Them, Unintentional Biases May Be at Work
New York Law Journal
By Ellen Ostrow
May 05, 2008
Rates of associate attrition from the largest law firms in the United States are higher than ever, in spite of years of efforts to reduce them. As associate compensation has soared, the tenure of these well-paid young attorneys at their firms has become ever shorter. According to research conducted by the NALP Foundation, almost 80 percent of attorneys at large firms leave within five years of being hired. Minorities and women depart their firms at much higher rates than do non-minority attorneys. Trying to find a woman attorney of color still at her original large law firm employer eight years after being hired would prove more challenging than finding the proverbial needle in a haystack.If affinity groups, mentoring programs, reduced-hours policies, on-site child care, opportunities to trade money for hours and diversity training fail to stem the exodus of associates from large firms, why aren't these efforts producing their desired effects?Women and attorneys of color share with white male lawyers many reasons for leaving, including the assumption that work and life are a zero-sum game; mind-numbing assignments that have little to do with their reasons for pursuing a legal career; and the slim odds of making partner, along with a lack of perceived control over the factors ultimately influencing that decision. Large firm culture continues to cling to norms established by the white men who created and continue to dominate private practice. Current billable-hours requirements require male and female attorneys to choose law over life. As a result, many associates entering firms begin their tenure with a plan to leave after paying down their law-school debt. When, in my capacity as a consultant, I conduct focus groups of associates, it is now rare to hear any aspirations to partnership. Wealthy, burned out partners paying multiple alimonies do not inspire longevity among most junior attorneys.However, diverse attorneys, more than their white male counterparts, bump up against other cultural norms that have been part of law firm mores for so long that they appear to be professional requirements rather than preferences or the way things have always been done.What Are Unintentional BiasesIndeed, I strongly suspect that cultural assumptions - normative in law firms and in the larger social structure in which they are embedded - and the self-fulfilling prophecies to which they lead, play a significant role in many failed efforts to retain diverse attorneys.In particular, unintentional biases may lead many women and attorneys of color to leave their firms. Psychological research indicates that unintentional biases arise from the normal human tendencies to categorize things and people into groups, to prefer familiar things and similar people and to cognitively simplify our complex world. These mental processes evolved no doubt due to their survival value (e.g., it's essential to differentiate dangerous enemies from our kin.) When we engage in social categorization we accentuate the differences between groups. We also attribute greater differentiation between the individuals in the groups to which we belong than to out-groups. We tend to homogenize the behavior of groups with which we do not identify; we underestimate differences within these groups. To read the entire article, go to: http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?&id=1209632731835 ]
By Ellen Ostrow
May 05, 2008
Rates of associate attrition from the largest law firms in the United States are higher than ever, in spite of years of efforts to reduce them. As associate compensation has soared, the tenure of these well-paid young attorneys at their firms has become ever shorter. According to research conducted by the NALP Foundation, almost 80 percent of attorneys at large firms leave within five years of being hired. Minorities and women depart their firms at much higher rates than do non-minority attorneys. Trying to find a woman attorney of color still at her original large law firm employer eight years after being hired would prove more challenging than finding the proverbial needle in a haystack.If affinity groups, mentoring programs, reduced-hours policies, on-site child care, opportunities to trade money for hours and diversity training fail to stem the exodus of associates from large firms, why aren't these efforts producing their desired effects?Women and attorneys of color share with white male lawyers many reasons for leaving, including the assumption that work and life are a zero-sum game; mind-numbing assignments that have little to do with their reasons for pursuing a legal career; and the slim odds of making partner, along with a lack of perceived control over the factors ultimately influencing that decision. Large firm culture continues to cling to norms established by the white men who created and continue to dominate private practice. Current billable-hours requirements require male and female attorneys to choose law over life. As a result, many associates entering firms begin their tenure with a plan to leave after paying down their law-school debt. When, in my capacity as a consultant, I conduct focus groups of associates, it is now rare to hear any aspirations to partnership. Wealthy, burned out partners paying multiple alimonies do not inspire longevity among most junior attorneys.However, diverse attorneys, more than their white male counterparts, bump up against other cultural norms that have been part of law firm mores for so long that they appear to be professional requirements rather than preferences or the way things have always been done.What Are Unintentional BiasesIndeed, I strongly suspect that cultural assumptions - normative in law firms and in the larger social structure in which they are embedded - and the self-fulfilling prophecies to which they lead, play a significant role in many failed efforts to retain diverse attorneys.In particular, unintentional biases may lead many women and attorneys of color to leave their firms. Psychological research indicates that unintentional biases arise from the normal human tendencies to categorize things and people into groups, to prefer familiar things and similar people and to cognitively simplify our complex world. These mental processes evolved no doubt due to their survival value (e.g., it's essential to differentiate dangerous enemies from our kin.) When we engage in social categorization we accentuate the differences between groups. We also attribute greater differentiation between the individuals in the groups to which we belong than to out-groups. We tend to homogenize the behavior of groups with which we do not identify; we underestimate differences within these groups. To read the entire article, go to: http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?&id=1209632731835 ]
Monday, February 11, 2008
New Policy In Effect to Increase Number of Minority Head College Football Coaches
Diverse Issues in Higher Education
by Sarah Lake
Feb 11, 2008, 22:51
A new minority-interviewing rule, similar to the “Rooney Rule” currently used in the National Football League, is being implemented at all Division I-A football programs, in hopes of boosting the number of minority head coaches.
The policy states that any team with a head coaching vacancy must interview at least one minority candidate for the position. It also instructs each program to have a list of possible minority candidates at all times, even when there is no vacancy within the organization. Athletic directors at the 120 Division I-A schools were sent the new policy by the Division I-A Athletic Directors’ Association last month.
The new policy, however, does not specify penalties for programs that don’t meet the terms of the new guideline. The lack of penalties for noncompliance differs from the NFL’s minority-hiring rule known as the “Rooney Rule,” which was named after the chairman of the league’s workplace diversity committee and Pittsburgh Steelers owner, Dan Rooney. Although there is no penalty for noncompliance, advocates consider the rule to be a step forward in gaining equity on NCAA sidelines. [To read the entire story, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_10634.shtml]
by Sarah Lake
Feb 11, 2008, 22:51
A new minority-interviewing rule, similar to the “Rooney Rule” currently used in the National Football League, is being implemented at all Division I-A football programs, in hopes of boosting the number of minority head coaches.
The policy states that any team with a head coaching vacancy must interview at least one minority candidate for the position. It also instructs each program to have a list of possible minority candidates at all times, even when there is no vacancy within the organization. Athletic directors at the 120 Division I-A schools were sent the new policy by the Division I-A Athletic Directors’ Association last month.
The new policy, however, does not specify penalties for programs that don’t meet the terms of the new guideline. The lack of penalties for noncompliance differs from the NFL’s minority-hiring rule known as the “Rooney Rule,” which was named after the chairman of the league’s workplace diversity committee and Pittsburgh Steelers owner, Dan Rooney. Although there is no penalty for noncompliance, advocates consider the rule to be a step forward in gaining equity on NCAA sidelines. [To read the entire story, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_10634.shtml]
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
Perspectives: The Use of Outside Voices in Increasing Faculty Diversity
From Diverse Online
Current NewsPerspectives: The Use of Outside Voices in Increasing Faculty Diversity
Jan 8, 2008, 04:55
For all of our difficulties in achieving student diversity on our nation’s college campuses, it is commonly acknowledged that faculty diversity is an even more elusive goal. Underrepresented minority faculty in 2005 composed only 16.5 percent of all full-time faculty in degree-granting institutions.
Explanations for the lack of progress in diversifying the professoriate usually center on some version of the “shallow pool” or “narrow pipeline” argument, which holds that there is simply an insufficient supply of qualified minority candidates, particularly in key academic areas like the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics). The faculty search process is also recognized as part of the problem, as incumbent faculty routinely hire others like themselves and thereby reproduce historic patterns of homogeneity.
To improve the identification and recruitment of minority faculty, several strategies have been adopted by search committees in recent times, including greater use of personal networks, placing position announcements in nontraditional academic media, coding job descriptions in ways that appeal directly to underrepresented faculty candidates and engaging in “target of opportunity” hiring; that is, hiring a person felt to be in the strategic interests of the unit, particularly when a national search would impede the hiring process. Perhaps these practices will produce substantive change over time. In the meantime, however, we are neglecting a potentially powerful source of support for our efforts — trusted external allies who share our values.
The enlistment of non academics may seem anathema to a culture where the faculty clearly maintains exclusive control over hiring (as it properly should). But influential supporters have figured prominently in our diversity-related ambitions before, most recently in the U.S. Supreme Court cases of 2003, when legions of groups filed amicus briefs to protect the use of race as a factor in student admissions. Once student diversity was framed as a societal interest, as having measurable benefit beyond the self-interest of minorities or of the institutions wishing to recruit them, a remarkable cross-section of individuals and organizations signed on to advocate for race-conscious admissions. More importantly, it allowed a very broad swath of society to take shared responsibility for student diversity.
How might we continue to harness that collective goodwill in the service of faculty diversity? A willingness to consider the positive role of external involvement in promoting faculty diversity would be a good place to start. Those of us with strong convictions about recruiting, retaining and developing faculty of color might think about how to mobilize or leverage our partnerships with business and other stakeholders in an effort to collaboratively build a case for faculty diversity that is every bit as compelling as the one for student diversity. This time, instead of appealing to the Supreme Court, our target audience would be the reluctant or sluggish among our colleagues who may need to be persuaded and prompted to action by the legitimating power of a new narrative. ...
Dr. David J. Siegel is an associate professor in the department of Educational Leadership at East Carolina University in Greenville, N.C.
[To view the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_10457.shtml]
Current NewsPerspectives: The Use of Outside Voices in Increasing Faculty Diversity
Jan 8, 2008, 04:55
For all of our difficulties in achieving student diversity on our nation’s college campuses, it is commonly acknowledged that faculty diversity is an even more elusive goal. Underrepresented minority faculty in 2005 composed only 16.5 percent of all full-time faculty in degree-granting institutions.
Explanations for the lack of progress in diversifying the professoriate usually center on some version of the “shallow pool” or “narrow pipeline” argument, which holds that there is simply an insufficient supply of qualified minority candidates, particularly in key academic areas like the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics). The faculty search process is also recognized as part of the problem, as incumbent faculty routinely hire others like themselves and thereby reproduce historic patterns of homogeneity.
To improve the identification and recruitment of minority faculty, several strategies have been adopted by search committees in recent times, including greater use of personal networks, placing position announcements in nontraditional academic media, coding job descriptions in ways that appeal directly to underrepresented faculty candidates and engaging in “target of opportunity” hiring; that is, hiring a person felt to be in the strategic interests of the unit, particularly when a national search would impede the hiring process. Perhaps these practices will produce substantive change over time. In the meantime, however, we are neglecting a potentially powerful source of support for our efforts — trusted external allies who share our values.
The enlistment of non academics may seem anathema to a culture where the faculty clearly maintains exclusive control over hiring (as it properly should). But influential supporters have figured prominently in our diversity-related ambitions before, most recently in the U.S. Supreme Court cases of 2003, when legions of groups filed amicus briefs to protect the use of race as a factor in student admissions. Once student diversity was framed as a societal interest, as having measurable benefit beyond the self-interest of minorities or of the institutions wishing to recruit them, a remarkable cross-section of individuals and organizations signed on to advocate for race-conscious admissions. More importantly, it allowed a very broad swath of society to take shared responsibility for student diversity.
How might we continue to harness that collective goodwill in the service of faculty diversity? A willingness to consider the positive role of external involvement in promoting faculty diversity would be a good place to start. Those of us with strong convictions about recruiting, retaining and developing faculty of color might think about how to mobilize or leverage our partnerships with business and other stakeholders in an effort to collaboratively build a case for faculty diversity that is every bit as compelling as the one for student diversity. This time, instead of appealing to the Supreme Court, our target audience would be the reluctant or sluggish among our colleagues who may need to be persuaded and prompted to action by the legitimating power of a new narrative. ...
Dr. David J. Siegel is an associate professor in the department of Educational Leadership at East Carolina University in Greenville, N.C.
[To view the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_10457.shtml]
Monday, December 31, 2007
A Disturbing Trend in Law School Diversity
A new website dedicated to improving minority representation at US law schools has been launched. "Lawyering in a Digital Age" is a product of a collaboration between the Society of American Law Schools (SALT) and the Lawyering in the Digital Age Clinic at the Columbia University School of Law. The website's statistics show that:
*Over the past 15 years, African Americans and Mexican Americans have been applying to law schools in relatively constant numbers.
* These African American and Mexican American applicants are doing better than ever on the leading indicators used by Law Schools to determine admissibility: undergraduate grade point average and LSAT scores.
*The size of law school classes and law schools has increased.
*The percentage representation of both groups has actually trended downward since 1992. In real numbers, there were fewer African American and Mexican American first year law students in the Fall, 2005 class (3595 combined) than existed in Fall, 1992 (3937).
To see the related statistics and charts supporting these conclusions, go to: http://www2.law.columbia.edu/civilrights/
*Over the past 15 years, African Americans and Mexican Americans have been applying to law schools in relatively constant numbers.
* These African American and Mexican American applicants are doing better than ever on the leading indicators used by Law Schools to determine admissibility: undergraduate grade point average and LSAT scores.
*The size of law school classes and law schools has increased.
*The percentage representation of both groups has actually trended downward since 1992. In real numbers, there were fewer African American and Mexican American first year law students in the Fall, 2005 class (3595 combined) than existed in Fall, 1992 (3937).
To see the related statistics and charts supporting these conclusions, go to: http://www2.law.columbia.edu/civilrights/
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Black and Hispanic Firefighter Applicants Have Doubled
The New York Times
By JOHN ELIGON and DIANE CARDWELL
Published: November 28, 2007
The Fire Department’s pool of black and Hispanic job candidates has more than doubled since 2002, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said yesterday, raising hopes that efforts to hire more minority firefighters might be yielding results.
The announcement came six months after the United States Justice Department sued the city, charging that the written firefighter entrance exam screened out a disproportionate number of blacks and Hispanics.
Slightly more than 30 percent of the 4,000 applicants scoring highest on this year’s exam were black or Hispanic, compared with just under 14 percent in 2002, the last time the test was given. There were also three times as many women in this year’s top 4,000.
The results are significant, city officials said, because the top 4,000 applicants are the most likely to be hired. The cutoff score to make that list this year was 96.77 percent.
Mayor Bloomberg called the results “a promising new sign” for the Fire Department, which has faced intense scrutiny over its lack of diversity.
“Making the world’s greatest fire department more reflective of the city that it serves has been one of our toughest and most long-standing challenges,” Mr. Bloomberg said at a news conference with Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta and Martha K. Hirst, the commissioner of the Department of Citywide Administrative Services, which creates and administers the exam.
“The bigger the pool of people that you can pick from, the better the people that you pick are going to be, on average,” Mr. Bloomberg said.
But John Coombs, a Brooklyn firefighter who is the president of the Vulcan Society, an organization of black firefighters, called the results all “smoke screen and mirrors.”
“When we start looking at minimal efforts, when we accept them, that becomes the standards,” he said. “We don’t accept that standard.”
There are 11,621 firefighters, but just 666 of them are Hispanic, 337 are black and 75 Asian-American, for a total of 9.3 percent, city officials said. Thirty-one are women.
The Justice Department declined to comment yesterday about how, or if, the test results would have any affect on the lawsuit.
The entrance exam is offered about once every four years. This year, it focused on a broader array of skills than in years past, Ms. Hirst said. She said that the changes to the exam, administered in January, had nothing to do with the Justice Department lawsuit, which was filed in May.
“The test does not require specialized knowledge,” Ms. Hirst said. “It is a test of basic aptitude and ability to become a firefighter.”
More than 22,000 people took this year’s exam. Of the more than 21,000 who passed — meaning they scored at least 70 percent — 38 percent were black, Hispanic, Asian-American or American Indian.
City officials also said that their attempts to bring more women into the ranks were bearing fruit. This year, 1,401 women applied to the department, up from 878 in 2002, with 770 of them passing, a 50 percent increase from 2002. Of those, 109 made it to the top 4,000, up from 33.
Last year, the Fire Department expanded its recruitment and diversity unit, and in May, it began a $1.4 million recruitment campaign to highlight aspects of the job other than fighting fires, like salaries, benefits and flexible schedules. [To read the entire article, go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/nyregion/28fire.html?ex=1353906000&en=e22773af5eded4dc&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss ]
By JOHN ELIGON and DIANE CARDWELL
Published: November 28, 2007
The Fire Department’s pool of black and Hispanic job candidates has more than doubled since 2002, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said yesterday, raising hopes that efforts to hire more minority firefighters might be yielding results.
The announcement came six months after the United States Justice Department sued the city, charging that the written firefighter entrance exam screened out a disproportionate number of blacks and Hispanics.
Slightly more than 30 percent of the 4,000 applicants scoring highest on this year’s exam were black or Hispanic, compared with just under 14 percent in 2002, the last time the test was given. There were also three times as many women in this year’s top 4,000.
The results are significant, city officials said, because the top 4,000 applicants are the most likely to be hired. The cutoff score to make that list this year was 96.77 percent.
Mayor Bloomberg called the results “a promising new sign” for the Fire Department, which has faced intense scrutiny over its lack of diversity.
“Making the world’s greatest fire department more reflective of the city that it serves has been one of our toughest and most long-standing challenges,” Mr. Bloomberg said at a news conference with Fire Commissioner Nicholas Scoppetta and Martha K. Hirst, the commissioner of the Department of Citywide Administrative Services, which creates and administers the exam.
“The bigger the pool of people that you can pick from, the better the people that you pick are going to be, on average,” Mr. Bloomberg said.
But John Coombs, a Brooklyn firefighter who is the president of the Vulcan Society, an organization of black firefighters, called the results all “smoke screen and mirrors.”
“When we start looking at minimal efforts, when we accept them, that becomes the standards,” he said. “We don’t accept that standard.”
There are 11,621 firefighters, but just 666 of them are Hispanic, 337 are black and 75 Asian-American, for a total of 9.3 percent, city officials said. Thirty-one are women.
The Justice Department declined to comment yesterday about how, or if, the test results would have any affect on the lawsuit.
The entrance exam is offered about once every four years. This year, it focused on a broader array of skills than in years past, Ms. Hirst said. She said that the changes to the exam, administered in January, had nothing to do with the Justice Department lawsuit, which was filed in May.
“The test does not require specialized knowledge,” Ms. Hirst said. “It is a test of basic aptitude and ability to become a firefighter.”
More than 22,000 people took this year’s exam. Of the more than 21,000 who passed — meaning they scored at least 70 percent — 38 percent were black, Hispanic, Asian-American or American Indian.
City officials also said that their attempts to bring more women into the ranks were bearing fruit. This year, 1,401 women applied to the department, up from 878 in 2002, with 770 of them passing, a 50 percent increase from 2002. Of those, 109 made it to the top 4,000, up from 33.
Last year, the Fire Department expanded its recruitment and diversity unit, and in May, it began a $1.4 million recruitment campaign to highlight aspects of the job other than fighting fires, like salaries, benefits and flexible schedules. [To read the entire article, go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/nyregion/28fire.html?ex=1353906000&en=e22773af5eded4dc&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss ]
Friday, November 2, 2007
Study: Minority Faculty Severely Underrepresented in Top 100 STEM Departments
From Diverse Online
Current News
Study: Minority Faculty Severely Underrepresented in Top 100 STEM Departments
By Michelle J. Nealy
Oct 31, 2007, 21:26
U.S. policymakers need to step in with policies that help boost the number of tenured and tenure-track minority faculty members in science and engineering fields, if the United States is to remain competitive on global scale in these areas, argued a group of minority scholars at a press conference on Capital Hill.
According to a recent survey conducted by Dr. Donna J. Nelson, associate professor of chemistry at Oklahoma University, minorities and women faculty are significantly underrepresented in the fields of science and technology among the top 100 departments of science and engineering.
Between the years of 2002 and 2007, the number of underrepresented minorty faculty at the top 100 departments for science and engineering increased by only .5 percent rising to 5 percent, the survey revealed. Female faculty members fared better, making a 3 percent gain over the five-year period increasing 17 percent.
Researchers along with members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science are urging Congress to develop policies that help to increase participation among underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Failure by the U.S. government to move quickly to remedy the situation could prove injurious for American to innovation, scholars suggest.
“The U.S. science and engineering work force is aging; “baby boomer” scientists and engineers are leaving the U.S. work force, increasing the need for scientists of color who will make up the largest proportion of the population,” Nelson says.
Scholars argue that minority faculty in STEM fields should reflect the growing minority student body. “Underrepresented minorities are projected to constitute almost 32 percent of the American population by 2020, therefore proactive steps should be taken now in order to insure that the proportionate inclusion of such a large part of the population in science and engineering, throughout all levels of academia,” Nelson says.
One solution being considered to meet U.S. needs for scientists and engineers is to import them. However, Nelson recommends an investment in U.S. citizens to replace “baby boomer” retirees. “If people from overseas become a majority of U.S. scientist and engineers, then U.S. women and minorities will continue to be underrepresented,” Nelson says.
The study suggests the current lack of minority faculty at top-tier institutions may “influence” self-esteem among minority students. In most, disciplines, minority faculty are so few that minority student can get a B.S. or Ph.D without being taught by or having access to a minority professor in that discipline.
“Most of us old-timers were mentored by White males so we know that it can be done and be done well. But it is hard to become something that you have never seen. Having minority faculty members to intervene and to support is very important,” says Dr. Shirley Malcolm, head of the directorate for education and human resources programs at the Association for the Advancement of Science.
[To read the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_9971.shtml ]
Current News
Study: Minority Faculty Severely Underrepresented in Top 100 STEM Departments
By Michelle J. Nealy
Oct 31, 2007, 21:26
U.S. policymakers need to step in with policies that help boost the number of tenured and tenure-track minority faculty members in science and engineering fields, if the United States is to remain competitive on global scale in these areas, argued a group of minority scholars at a press conference on Capital Hill.
According to a recent survey conducted by Dr. Donna J. Nelson, associate professor of chemistry at Oklahoma University, minorities and women faculty are significantly underrepresented in the fields of science and technology among the top 100 departments of science and engineering.
Between the years of 2002 and 2007, the number of underrepresented minorty faculty at the top 100 departments for science and engineering increased by only .5 percent rising to 5 percent, the survey revealed. Female faculty members fared better, making a 3 percent gain over the five-year period increasing 17 percent.
Researchers along with members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science are urging Congress to develop policies that help to increase participation among underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Failure by the U.S. government to move quickly to remedy the situation could prove injurious for American to innovation, scholars suggest.
“The U.S. science and engineering work force is aging; “baby boomer” scientists and engineers are leaving the U.S. work force, increasing the need for scientists of color who will make up the largest proportion of the population,” Nelson says.
Scholars argue that minority faculty in STEM fields should reflect the growing minority student body. “Underrepresented minorities are projected to constitute almost 32 percent of the American population by 2020, therefore proactive steps should be taken now in order to insure that the proportionate inclusion of such a large part of the population in science and engineering, throughout all levels of academia,” Nelson says.
One solution being considered to meet U.S. needs for scientists and engineers is to import them. However, Nelson recommends an investment in U.S. citizens to replace “baby boomer” retirees. “If people from overseas become a majority of U.S. scientist and engineers, then U.S. women and minorities will continue to be underrepresented,” Nelson says.
The study suggests the current lack of minority faculty at top-tier institutions may “influence” self-esteem among minority students. In most, disciplines, minority faculty are so few that minority student can get a B.S. or Ph.D without being taught by or having access to a minority professor in that discipline.
“Most of us old-timers were mentored by White males so we know that it can be done and be done well. But it is hard to become something that you have never seen. Having minority faculty members to intervene and to support is very important,” says Dr. Shirley Malcolm, head of the directorate for education and human resources programs at the Association for the Advancement of Science.
[To read the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_9971.shtml ]
Minority Enrollment at Michigan Holds Steady Following Affirmative Action Ban
Diverse Issues in Higher Education
by Kenneth J. Cooper
Nov 2, 2007, 07:54
The number of minority freshmen at the University of Michigan this fall remains about the same as in 2006, a notable departure from the steep drops that other flagship public universities have experienced immediately after affirmative action was banned in Michigan a year ago.
For every minority group except Asians, the percentage of freshmen declined slightly because Ann Arbor campus enrolled a bigger class than it did last year. The 11 percent increase, including international students, may have made it possible for the university to admit more students of color than it would have been able to otherwise.
“We have worked hard to inform prospective students about U-M’s ongoing commitment to diversity and will continue to reach out to as many students as possible to ensure the most highly qualified and diverse applicant pool,” said Senior Vice Provost Lester Monts.
University of Michigan Freshman Enrollment, Before and After Affirmative Action Ban
Black
Hispanic
American Indian
Asian
Fall 2007 enrollment
334
267
50
757
Fall 2006 enrollment
330
274
52
622
In 2003, the Supreme Court struck down Michigan’s undergraduate admissions because the formula used at the time awarded extra points to minorities, but the justices upheld a different procedure at its law school. Last November, the state’s voters approved a constitutional amendment that prohibits public colleges from considering race or ethnicity, but a legal challenge allowed the practice to continue through the end of last December.“I think a lot of this is pretty inconclusive at Michigan. We’re probably going to need another admissions cycle without preferential treatment to find out what’s really going on,” said Ward Connerly, president of the American Civil Rights Institute, who led the campaign for the constitutional amendment. “If they kick in their outreach efforts soon enough, there won't be a significant effect at all, which is what anyone would want,” Connerly added.Theodore M. Shaw, director-counsel and president of the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund, said: “I’m pleased to see they’ve found ways to continue the enrollment of people from underrepresented groups without the explicit consideration of race. It’s good news.”A racial-ethnic breakdown of its freshman class that the University of Michigan released Thursday shows, compared to last year, Blacks slipped from 6.3 percent to 5.8 percent, despite an increase of four to 334; Hispanics declined from 5.3 percent to 4.7 percent, with their numbers falling by seven to 267; and American Indians dipped from 1 percent to 9 percent after 50, two fewer than last year, enrolled.The total number of underrepresented minorities — Blacks, Hispanics and American Indians — remained about the same at 651, five fewer than last year. With the larger class, the new total represents a decrease from 12.7 percent to 11.3 percent.The percentage of Asians increased to 13.2 percent, up from 12 percent, as their numbers rose by 135 to 757. The number of non-Hispanic Whites jumped by 333 to 3,741, though their percentage in the class slipped from 66 percent to 65.2 percent. Freshmen who did not declare a race or ethnicity, or identified themselves as other, increased to 10.3 percent from 9.2 percent.
[To read the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_10007.shtml ]
by Kenneth J. Cooper
Nov 2, 2007, 07:54
The number of minority freshmen at the University of Michigan this fall remains about the same as in 2006, a notable departure from the steep drops that other flagship public universities have experienced immediately after affirmative action was banned in Michigan a year ago.
For every minority group except Asians, the percentage of freshmen declined slightly because Ann Arbor campus enrolled a bigger class than it did last year. The 11 percent increase, including international students, may have made it possible for the university to admit more students of color than it would have been able to otherwise.
“We have worked hard to inform prospective students about U-M’s ongoing commitment to diversity and will continue to reach out to as many students as possible to ensure the most highly qualified and diverse applicant pool,” said Senior Vice Provost Lester Monts.
University of Michigan Freshman Enrollment, Before and After Affirmative Action Ban
Black
Hispanic
American Indian
Asian
Fall 2007 enrollment
334
267
50
757
Fall 2006 enrollment
330
274
52
622
In 2003, the Supreme Court struck down Michigan’s undergraduate admissions because the formula used at the time awarded extra points to minorities, but the justices upheld a different procedure at its law school. Last November, the state’s voters approved a constitutional amendment that prohibits public colleges from considering race or ethnicity, but a legal challenge allowed the practice to continue through the end of last December.“I think a lot of this is pretty inconclusive at Michigan. We’re probably going to need another admissions cycle without preferential treatment to find out what’s really going on,” said Ward Connerly, president of the American Civil Rights Institute, who led the campaign for the constitutional amendment. “If they kick in their outreach efforts soon enough, there won't be a significant effect at all, which is what anyone would want,” Connerly added.Theodore M. Shaw, director-counsel and president of the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund, said: “I’m pleased to see they’ve found ways to continue the enrollment of people from underrepresented groups without the explicit consideration of race. It’s good news.”A racial-ethnic breakdown of its freshman class that the University of Michigan released Thursday shows, compared to last year, Blacks slipped from 6.3 percent to 5.8 percent, despite an increase of four to 334; Hispanics declined from 5.3 percent to 4.7 percent, with their numbers falling by seven to 267; and American Indians dipped from 1 percent to 9 percent after 50, two fewer than last year, enrolled.The total number of underrepresented minorities — Blacks, Hispanics and American Indians — remained about the same at 651, five fewer than last year. With the larger class, the new total represents a decrease from 12.7 percent to 11.3 percent.The percentage of Asians increased to 13.2 percent, up from 12 percent, as their numbers rose by 135 to 757. The number of non-Hispanic Whites jumped by 333 to 3,741, though their percentage in the class slipped from 66 percent to 65.2 percent. Freshmen who did not declare a race or ethnicity, or identified themselves as other, increased to 10.3 percent from 9.2 percent.
[To read the entire article, go to: http://diverseeducation.com/artman/publish/article_10007.shtml ]
Thursday, September 13, 2007
The Postsecondary Picture for Minority Students (and Men)
Inside Higher Education
Sept. 13
The newest report from the National Center for Education Statistics is, as its title (”Status and Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities“) suggests, designed to provide a comprehensive look at how members of minority groups are faring in the American educational system, from top to bottom. But while the data it offers on that subject are decidedly mixed — showing significant progress over time for all groups, but wide gaps remaining in access to and success in college — the report’s most provocative (and potentially troubling) numbers may be about gender, not race.
Most of the data in the report from the Education Department’s statistical arm have been released in earlier or narrower reports. But by bringing together reams of statistics over 30 years on the full gamut of educational measures, from pre-primary enrollment of 3- to 5-year-olds to median incomes for adults over 25, the study aims to provide a broad-based look at “the educational progress and challenges that racial and ethnic minorities face in the United States.”
Progress and challenges are both evident; virtually every category contains good news and bad news. In the higher education realm, for instance, the report shows that where black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander and American Indian/Alaska Native students made up 17 percent of college undergraduates in 1976, their share of that total had risen to 32 percent by 2004. And each of those groups saw their raw numbers at least double over that time, with some groups showing significantly greater proportional increases, as seen in the table below:
1976
2004
% Change
Black
943,355
1,918,465
103%
Hispanic
352,893
1,666,859
372%
Asian/Pacific Islander
169,291
949,882
461%
American Indian/Alaska Native
69,729
160,318
130%
Representation in graduate education changed along roughly the same lines, the study finds, with minority group members making up 25 percent of the graduate school population in 2004, up from 11 percent in 1976.
In addition, the proportion of all 18- to 24-year-old Americans who were enrolled in college rose sharply for all racial groups between 1980 and 2004, in most cases increasing by at least 50 percent.
But those positive developments aside, the research shows that members of underrepresented minority groups badly lag their white and Asian peers in college going. By 2004, 60.3 percent of Asian/Pacific Islander 18- to 24-year-olds were enrolled in college, as were 41.7 of white Americans in that age group. The numbers were lower for other groups: 31.8 for black Americans, 24.7 for Hispanics, and 24.4 percent for American Indian/Alaska Natives.
Similarly, the proportion of degrees awarded to most racial minority groups fell well short of their representation in the population. Slightly less than 10 percent of all college degrees awarded by U.S. degree-granting institutions in 2003-4 — and 9.3 percent of bachelor’s degrees, and 6 percent of doctorates — went to African-Americans, who make up 12 percent of the population. Hispanics fared worse, earning 7.3 of all degrees, 6.8 percent of baccalaureate degrees, and 3.4 percent of doctorates, despite making up 14 percent of the U.S. populace.
Concerning as those numbers might be to advocates for minority education, the most striking data in the report are probably those related to the educational outcomes of men, of all races and ethnicities.
By virtually every measure used in the report, male students have fallen far behind their female counterparts. That development isn’t new, but the federal report lays out the situation starkly. For instance, the study finds that the gender gap in undergraduate enrollments expanded generally and for all races between 1976 and 2004, as seen in the table below:
The Gender Gap in Undergraduate Enrollments, 1976 to 2004
Proportion of undergraduates who were male, 1976
Proportion of UndergraduatesWho Were Male, 2004
% Difference Between Female and Male Enrollment, 2004
All
52.0%
42.9%
14.2%
White
52.4%
44.1%
11.8%
Black
45.7%
35.7%
28.6%
Hispanic
54.3%
41.4%
17.1%
Asian/Pacific Islander
53.8%
46.2%
7.5%
American Indian/Alaska Native
49.9%
39.1%
21.8%
Similarly, the proportion of male 18- to 24-year-olds enrolled in college in 2004 had fallen to 34.7 percent, compared to 41.2 percent for women. Six to 10 percent gaps existed for all racial groups, too, with the exception of Asian/Pacific Islanders; for them, men were more likely to be enrolled in college by a 63 to 58 percent margin.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://insidehighered.com/news/2007/09/13/minority
To read the NCES report, go to: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/#1
Sept. 13
The newest report from the National Center for Education Statistics is, as its title (”Status and Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities“) suggests, designed to provide a comprehensive look at how members of minority groups are faring in the American educational system, from top to bottom. But while the data it offers on that subject are decidedly mixed — showing significant progress over time for all groups, but wide gaps remaining in access to and success in college — the report’s most provocative (and potentially troubling) numbers may be about gender, not race.
Most of the data in the report from the Education Department’s statistical arm have been released in earlier or narrower reports. But by bringing together reams of statistics over 30 years on the full gamut of educational measures, from pre-primary enrollment of 3- to 5-year-olds to median incomes for adults over 25, the study aims to provide a broad-based look at “the educational progress and challenges that racial and ethnic minorities face in the United States.”
Progress and challenges are both evident; virtually every category contains good news and bad news. In the higher education realm, for instance, the report shows that where black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander and American Indian/Alaska Native students made up 17 percent of college undergraduates in 1976, their share of that total had risen to 32 percent by 2004. And each of those groups saw their raw numbers at least double over that time, with some groups showing significantly greater proportional increases, as seen in the table below:
1976
2004
% Change
Black
943,355
1,918,465
103%
Hispanic
352,893
1,666,859
372%
Asian/Pacific Islander
169,291
949,882
461%
American Indian/Alaska Native
69,729
160,318
130%
Representation in graduate education changed along roughly the same lines, the study finds, with minority group members making up 25 percent of the graduate school population in 2004, up from 11 percent in 1976.
In addition, the proportion of all 18- to 24-year-old Americans who were enrolled in college rose sharply for all racial groups between 1980 and 2004, in most cases increasing by at least 50 percent.
But those positive developments aside, the research shows that members of underrepresented minority groups badly lag their white and Asian peers in college going. By 2004, 60.3 percent of Asian/Pacific Islander 18- to 24-year-olds were enrolled in college, as were 41.7 of white Americans in that age group. The numbers were lower for other groups: 31.8 for black Americans, 24.7 for Hispanics, and 24.4 percent for American Indian/Alaska Natives.
Similarly, the proportion of degrees awarded to most racial minority groups fell well short of their representation in the population. Slightly less than 10 percent of all college degrees awarded by U.S. degree-granting institutions in 2003-4 — and 9.3 percent of bachelor’s degrees, and 6 percent of doctorates — went to African-Americans, who make up 12 percent of the population. Hispanics fared worse, earning 7.3 of all degrees, 6.8 percent of baccalaureate degrees, and 3.4 percent of doctorates, despite making up 14 percent of the U.S. populace.
Concerning as those numbers might be to advocates for minority education, the most striking data in the report are probably those related to the educational outcomes of men, of all races and ethnicities.
By virtually every measure used in the report, male students have fallen far behind their female counterparts. That development isn’t new, but the federal report lays out the situation starkly. For instance, the study finds that the gender gap in undergraduate enrollments expanded generally and for all races between 1976 and 2004, as seen in the table below:
The Gender Gap in Undergraduate Enrollments, 1976 to 2004
Proportion of undergraduates who were male, 1976
Proportion of UndergraduatesWho Were Male, 2004
% Difference Between Female and Male Enrollment, 2004
All
52.0%
42.9%
14.2%
White
52.4%
44.1%
11.8%
Black
45.7%
35.7%
28.6%
Hispanic
54.3%
41.4%
17.1%
Asian/Pacific Islander
53.8%
46.2%
7.5%
American Indian/Alaska Native
49.9%
39.1%
21.8%
Similarly, the proportion of male 18- to 24-year-olds enrolled in college in 2004 had fallen to 34.7 percent, compared to 41.2 percent for women. Six to 10 percent gaps existed for all racial groups, too, with the exception of Asian/Pacific Islanders; for them, men were more likely to be enrolled in college by a 63 to 58 percent margin.
[To read the entire story, go to: http://insidehighered.com/news/2007/09/13/minority
To read the NCES report, go to: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/#1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)