Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility
I serve as Chair of the Graduate Medical Sciences Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Steering Committee. Here is a statement that I developed on the need for BUSM to address the diversity deficit in its basic biomedical science departments.
BUSM needs to address the deficit of URM faculty in the basic biomedical sciences in order to meet its mission
The lack of faculty diversity in basic biomedical sciences harms these fields. There is compelling evidence that the fear of deviating from current faculty recruitment practices that fail to value diverse experiences and perspectives inhibits progress in basic biomedical research. One study of 1.2 million PhD students describes the Diversity-Innovation Paradox (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915378117) whereby higher rates of scientific novelty and impact are generated by PhD students from historically underrepresented groups, yet these same students are less likely to succeed in academic careers.
This reinforces stratification in academic careers that discounts the roles of diversity in innovation and helps explain the underrepresentation of some groups in academia. In order to remain competitive, BUSM must focus its faculty recruiting efforts to achieve inclusive excellence to insure diverse leadership in the coming decades.
Moving BUSM basic biomedical sciences towards the goal of inclusive excellence. According to the AAMC (https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/faculty-institutions/interactive-data/us-medical-school-faculty-trends-percentages), it will take centuries, at the present rate, to reach parity in basic biomedical sciences at the full professor level. This representation gap results from institutional cultures that lack transparent commitments to diversity, inclusion and equity during faculty recruitment.
BUSM must cultivate institutional culture change and enhance its biomedical research workforce diversity at the faculty level. Low diversity of faculty from underrepresented groups, compared with the available talent pool, results in part from the high attrition of academic researchers from these groups (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5153246/). However, reports (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5153246/) on faculty cluster hires in academia indicate that the cohort model is an effective strategy for improving faculty diversity. As a result, there is a compelling argument that BUSM will most effectively diversify its biomedical sciences faculty through the cohort hiring model. The idea is for BUSM to build a self-reinforcing community of basic biomedical scientist who are committed to diversity and inclusive excellence. The cohort model is supported by evidence (https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691176888/the-diversity-bonus) that diversity strengthens scientific discovery through improved innovation, problem-solving, evaluation, prediction, evaluation, and verification. The faculty cohort model aligns with the NIH UNITE (https://www.nih.gov/ending-structural-racism/unite) initiative goals to establish a diverse and equitable culture in biomedicine and reduce barriers to racial equity in the biomedical research workforce.
BUSM must build a culture of inclusive excellence in basic biomedical sciences to remain competitive with other major biomedical research institutions. Diversity does not come at the expense of excellence; rather, diversity drives excellence. Looking ahead, the business as usual approach whereby faculty are recruited solely based on publications in high profile journals and K99 funding as evidence of potential for success in winning funding as independent investigator fails to address the emerging importance of diverse viewpoints in addressing the heath needs in the coming decades. To address persistent health disparities and issues related to minority health inequities, NIH funding initiatives will increasingly require diverse academic research teams.