Visualize diverse scientists
By Stefanie A. Kroll, Ph.D., Environmental Biologist
January 31, 2021
In conversations over the past few years, colleagues and I have discussed ways to make our work and organizations more inclusive and diverse. Most of us are white, and for a while I attended talks, joined panels and mentored, and still kept thinking, “This doesn’t seem to be enough.” We convened a group this year to consider different aspects of making the STEM fields more diverse and inclusive, and we are tackling different questions. The posts will be coming up on this blog series.
With the Movement for Black Lives adding further energy to Black Lives Matter and a strong national shift to consider diversity, equity and inclusiveness and justice (DEIJ), it seems like the right time to reflect on what we think of when we imagine scientists: who are the ones we know, why and how do we know them, and what’s keeping us from knowing a more diverse set of scientists? It is a great time to reflect on unconscious bias (take this assessment), what we see when we look at different people, and the assumptions we make. Lastly, I started thinking about the ways scientists are represented these days in the media, and how this plays a part in the way they are perceived. Just this fall my friend’s son did an activity in middle school to draw a scientist — and nearly everyone drew a man in a lab coat with glasses. This provides a clear example of why doing the work to widen people’s perspectives of who scientists are and can be is so important and necessary.
In WHYY The Pulse podcast “The Hidden Cost of Science” as well as the recent documentary “Picture a Scientist,” women from different backgrounds note that science is supposed to be based on impartial observation. However, it is performed by humans, and historically, mainly white men. And this culture of white maleness means that a specific kind of norm has been put into place. Certain assumptions are made about our actions because of how we fit this norm, or don’t fit it. Therefore, there is an implicit push for Black, Brown, Indigenous and People of Color (BBIPOC), women, LGBTQIA+ and other identity folks in the sciences to act differently than their authentic selves, to “code switch” to a special kind of professionalism, described very clearly by Shahamat Uddine. In the “The Hidden Cost of Science,” Jasmine Chodras noted that scientists are expected to leave behind certain aspects of our personality. This is not new information for many of us. Black colleagues have discussed a need to straighten their hair, dress and speak differently, to code switch into a different persona in professional settings, scientific or not. I myself strive to have a wardrobe that is undoubtedly unsexual so that my gender is somewhat less “present” at work. Recent conversations with Drexel University’s Office of Research and Innovation’s Diversity Dialogues highlighted that “professionalism” is completely built on white patriarchal supremacy. Aysa Gray defines these standards as
“white and Western standards of dress and hairstyle (straightened hair, suits but not saris, and burqa and beard bans in some countries); in speech, accent, word choice, and communication (never show emotion, must sound “American,” and must speak white standard English); in scrutiny (black employees are monitored more closely and face more penalties as a result); and in attitudes toward timeliness and work style (Aysa Gray, 2019).”
By establishing such a narrow definition of professionalism, organizations support deeply racist and sexist cultures and subliminal biases that deliver a message of not belonging to many folks who are talented and passionate about their studies and work.
In the workplace, biases and concepts of professionalism do more damage than just leading us to change our wardrobes and speaking styles. In the “Hidden Cost” podcast, Nicole Cabrera Salazar noted that she was accused of cheating when in fact it was her white female colleague who was the cheater. Acts of injustice and discrimination are prevalent against BBIPOC groups and women, and the intersections of LGBTQIA-BBIPOC-ability identities.
The white, patriarchal foundation of science has been so widely accepted that it has even been a challenge to show that it exists and is problematic. For example, the meritocracy ideology (“pulling yourself up by your bootstraps”) supports it with the idea that if you just worked hard enough, you would be successful. Many of us know from experience that this is not true. Selective network building, strategic interactions, pleasantness and other facets of navigating academic and scientific culture are heavily influenced by the white patriarchy. In “Picture a Scientist,” Nancy Hopkins, Ph.D. describes how she and other female science faculty at MIT needed to prove to the university that discrimination against women was occurring. She said she didn’t want to have to fight this fight at the university, she just wanted to do science. But in order to get the resources she needed, she felt she had to step in and lead this initiative with her colleagues. Many sources have noted that on top of being Black, Brown, LGBTQIA+, and other non-dominant identities, these groups of people are also expected (usually unintentionally) to drive the conversations and initiatives in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (Hunt et al. 2018, a McKinsey report).
The environmental sciences are still predominantly white (83.4%) despite greater interest in environmental issues by African-American communities than whites. While many might think that BBIPOC folks are not as interested in the outdoors, this has been shown to be untrue. In her book “Black Faces White Spaces,” Carolyn Finlay discusses several reasons we may perceive Black folks as less interested in the outdoors. Principal among them are the way in which Black folks were driven by whites from rural to urban areas, and the discrimination and sometimes danger for BBIPOC folks to be present in remote natural spaces. In addition, the founders of the environmentalist movement were extremely racist and subscribed to eugenics. Consciously or not, are these sentiments still part of the bias involved when recruiting students and staff? Finlay also addresses the general biases against BBIPOC folks in society as a whole, not just the sciences.
Intersectionality of identities further complicates the way women of color, LGBTQIA+ and other multiple identities may be perceived in the sciences. In the question as to whether women and men are equally able to perform science, Handelsman et al.’s article “More Women in Science” notes that there is not a consensus in terms of whether specific aspects of cognitive ability differ between the sexes. The authors then state
“there is no ideal constellation of cognitive abilities required to be a scientist. To be successful, scientists need deductive reasoning abilities, verbal skills, quantitative reasoning, intuition, and social skills. Men and women may differ, on average, in some of these abilities, but that is not a basis on which we can predict success because different mixtures lead to diverse, yet successful, approaches and styles in science (Handelsman et al. 2005).”
This sentence struck me hard because when we think about a scientist’s personality, we often have a short list of items. Many people I meet assume certain things about me because I am a scientist: that I am Type A and thus very organized, that my understanding of things is very rigid, and that I spend most of my time doing science and little time on hobbies or other interests, among other assumptions. But I do not represent every aspect they assume, while my creativity, personability (“oh, you’re not very socially awkward!”) and other attributes are unexpected. I am also not from a family of academics or scientists or a wealthy family, and there are assumptions of my history that I often, awkwardly or not, have to debunk. But I am white, so there are many assumptions that I can pass for having, or that I haven’t needed to identify or defend.
So what can we do to reduce the effects of bias among scientists and as we perceive them?
- Watch the documentary Picture a Scientist. Some of these examples are extreme cases of the discrimination and harassment that are present in our fields. These experiences are true and more widespread than you may realize. The microaggressions and smaller biased actions are therefore much more prevalent than you may realize as well. Consider what your biases may be and how they affect your treatment of people and fellow scientists. (The film is available for rent in several forms on their webpage)
- Publish and post pictures of scientists who look different from Einstein! Read their work, like Christian Cooper’s comic about birding! And 1,000 Inspiring Scientists in America, LatinX scientists, National Hispanic Science Network, scientists with disabilities, 500 Queer Scientists, 500 Women Scientists, Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, and show pictures of diverse scientists when you can. Of course, hiring diverse scientists is the best way to show your commitment to making diverse scientists more visible!
- Encourage young scientists — keep mentoring. It’s not the cure-all, but is one of the most important factors for success in science — having a good mentor. You can participate through One Million Mentors and many other programs, which will be highlighted in the next article.
- Donate to scholarship programs, programs for Black and Brown students, Indigenous people and folks with disabilities to obtain higher education degrees. United Negro College Fund, Black College Fund, Thurgood Marshall College Fund,American Indian College Fund, American Indian Education Fund, Latin American Education Foundation, Hispanic Scholarship Fund, the TRIO program, and others can be found at Collegescholarships.org. I did not find a foundation that provides funds dedicated for persons with disabilities as a general category, but instead several associated with specific disabilities such as The National Federation for the Blind, and a long list by the University of Washington.
- Read our next article on programs around the country for training young scientists and places you can mentor or donate.
- The World Economic Forum published an article on 6 ways to support diversity and inclusion in STEM.
The next article will address why “the pipeline” is not the main barrier to people from diverse groups and backgrounds to enter STEM fields, and we will provide a list of programs and projects dedicated to increasing DEI in STEM. If you have questions, comments, suggestions, want to write an article in our series, or would like us to feature your project or program, please email DiverSeTEM@gmail.com.
While I am learning and sharing the information I learn, I am a white woman and know that my work comes from that perspective and may not cover every aspect perfectly. If you have comments about any wording or ideas I share, please give me compassionate feedback so that I can improve my communication and advocacy.
Stef Kroll is a researcher at the Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University. She studies stream restoration, coordinates community science, and works to make data accessible to all audiences (stefaniekroll.weebly.com, ansp.org/drwi). She mentors and volunteers with the Academy of Natural Sciences’ Women In Natural Sciences program, Tookany-Tacony-Frankford watershed Partnership, and other regional programs and non-profits.
