SITE MAP
 » Home
» Biography
» Curriculum Vitae
» Articles
» Presentations/Lectures
» Contact
|
 
|
Where Is The Equity In Education And Can ASBMB Help?
By Thomas Landefeld
It has been decades since Brown v. Board of Education and the Civil Rights movement. Where are we now relative to those efforts made to achieve equality in education and elsewhere so many years ago? Unfortunately, not very far.
Historically, W.E.B.Dubois stated: "The problem of the 20th century is the problem of the color line." We are now almost a decade into the 21st century and the color line is still a major problem, illustrated by the changing demographics of our country and the not-so-changing demographics of education. For example, Black and Hispanic faculty have continued to hover around 4-5 % for the past few decades. Similarly, the number of under represented minority students receiving graduate and professional degrees has increased ever so slowly. For example, in 2006, the total number of Black, Hispanic and Native American students who obtained a PhD in the sciences represented only 10% of the total PhD's awarded. Similarly, under represented minorities comprise less than 10% of health professionals (MD's, nurses, pharmacists, dentists, etc.), a distressing number when one considers that this group comprises almost 30% of the population!. The significance of these low numbers is exacerbated by the impact that minority health disparities is having and will continue to have on our country. As examples, diabetes is 1½ times greater in Hispanics than Whites and 2 times greater in Blacks than Whites, while the prevalence of diabetes in Pima Indians has been reported to be as high as 80%. In addition to diabetes, a plethora of other disorders affect minority populations disproportionately, e.g. obesity, hypertension, prostate cancer, glaucoma, and, cardiovascular disease just to name a few. Considering these disparities, in combination with the leaky pipeline of minorities to the graduate and professional levels and the lack of attention that these areas have received in the past, the health status of our future society is at great risk. Professional scientific societies such as ASBMB can help make a difference; however, things must change for this to happen.
So what needs to change? While there are many problems, I will focus on just a couple. First, the "anti-affirmative action movement", as demonstrated by Prop 209 in California and Prop 2 in Michigan, has been devastating. Ever since Prop 209 passed in California in 1996, minority enrollment in professional schools, particularly in the health professions, has fallen and never recovered. As a result, fewer minorities are attaining professional degrees, severely thwarting efforts to address health disparities. It is expected that similar declines will soon be seen in Michigan and other states considering such propositions. The efforts by groups that support these propositions, like the Center for Equal Opportunity and Center for Individual Rights, have also had deleterious effects on programs targeting under-served individuals in the educational system, e.g. summer research programs for minorities. The playing field when these groups started their attack was far from level and since then it has become even more unequal. A major obstacle in fighting these groups has been the fact that they have received government support all the way to the top levels, including the Department of Justice and the Office of Civil Rights. For this to change, government priorities have to change. This certainly could begin with a new administration that is responsive to these needs, much like the Clinton administration and the then Office of the Surgeon General under David Satcher. Change also requires legislature, at both the local and national level, with similar commitments. Certainly, we, as scientists, ASBMB members and citizens can assist by supporting candidates that stress equality in their platform. Also, as a professional society of some 10000 scientists, we can work to inform and educate legislators about the importance of this issue not only to science but to society. This can be done also as individuals but, more importantly, through ASBMB groups such as Public Affairs Committee.
Are we doing that? Well, if one examines the important issues that have been "taken to Congress" by the ASBMB Public Affairs group (referenced in President Hamm's column in the latest ASBMB Today) one does not see the issue of under represented minorities in science. Why is that? One only has to look at graduate programs across the country (read the article by MAC member Jerome Nwachukwu in the May ASBMB Today), at national scientific conferences, and at committee and board meetings everywhere to see that this should be high on the list of issues to be addressed by societies like ASBMB. Along these same lines, the May issue of ASBMB Today also reported a meeting on Diversity cosponsored by FASEB. In fact, the retreat focused specifically on the Role of Professional Societies in Enhancing Diversity and included "society executives and representatives with an interest in diversity." As such, who represented ASBMB at this retreat? Were any members of the MAC involved? If not, why not? To make strides in this area we need to do it as a well informed and committed group. If not, how can we expect the message to be relayed with the compassion and experience necessary?
Another major problem, in fact the one I consider most significant, is White Privilege, defined as the social inheritance of rights, advantages, power and opportunities by those who are White. Interestingly, despite this being the source of most of these problems, this issue is talked about least, because those who have it do not want to acknowledge it and those that do not have it are extremely vulnerable in talking about it. Moreover, those that "have it" seem constantly threatened by the fact that they may lose it while those that do not have it can never really "obtain it." The presence of White Privilege is seen in essentially every poll regarding color, i.e. whites see no problem, people of color do. Does this mean the problem doesn't exist? To the contrary, it exists but individuals who are in positions to address it simply choose not to because of their privilege. An excellent example in academia is the approval of legacy admissions, which are almost always for those white and privileged versus affirmative action programs which almost always target people of color. This problem is harder to address because folks who are part of the White Privilege group have to be willing to speak out and take actions against it, which means sacrificing some of that privilege. Few are willing to do that, and that is exactly why so much of the talk about diversifying an organization or an institution is just talk. It is stated or written because that is the "right thing to do," but those in the power positions see the possibility of losing some of that power, and subsequently, many diversity programs never "leave the paper they are written on." So, will these programs only materialize if the person in charge is not someone who enjoys White Privilege and therefore not at risk for losing it? Not necessarily; however, that person in charge has to be willing to make sacrifices that many in those positions are not prepared to make.
Some may even question whether someone who is not of color can truly be effective in making progress for those of color. To answer that, one simply has to read Carter G. Woodson's The Mis-education of the Negro, first published back in 1933, where he states "It is alright to have a White man as a head of a Negro college or a red man at the head of a yellow one, if in each case the incumbent has taken out his naturalization papers and has identified himself as one of the group which he is trying to serve. It seems that the white educators of this day are unwilling to do this, and for that reason, they can never contribute to the actual development of the Negro from within. You cannot serve people by giving them orders as to what to do. The real servant of the people must live among them, think with them, feel for them and die for them."
And how does this relate to ASBMB? Simple- how many white scientists within ASBMB are willing to do what Woodson states? Very few, I would guess. So, until such a time when more individuals are willing to make this sacrifice, we will continue to "piece meal" efforts that cannot ultimately make a difference at an organizational, institutional, or society level. And this should not be surprising, since as Frederick Douglass stated, "there is no progress without struggle". Why would one expect changes of this magnitude to occur without a major struggle or significant sacrifices, especially if status quo is really not that bad, at least from the "privileged" perspective?
So- what's the bottom line? Can ASBMB make a real difference in this area? Certainly, applying pressure and providing information to governmental representatives, whether State or National Congresspersons, Governors, Mayors, etc. is critical. And, although this can be done by individuals, doing it as a 10000+ member society is even more effective. But, when will ASBMB choose to make this such an issue?
As for actually choosing to give up some of the White Privilege to "embrace the cause", this has to be an individual decision. But, if the person making such a decision is an ASBMB President or a Council member, then who knows, ASBMB could truly make a difference in "changing the face of science and academia" so as to parallel the face of the society in the second half of this century and, in doing so, help to not make the color line the problem of the 22nd century!
|
