Recruiting, Retaining, and Maintaining Racial and Ethnic Minority Investigators: Why We Should Bother, Why We Should Care

This supplement of the Journal captures a series of conversations transformed into analytical essays by racial and ethnic minority academic researchers at every level. From junior faculty to senior investigator, these individuals have provided a unique vantage point into the challenges and opportunities that face those who seek to achieve the ultimate badge of honor in academic work, to become the respected “triple threat”: to teach, to conduct research, and to publish peer-reviewed papers on the outcomes of this research. These candid insights into the life of a minority faculty member striving to become an academic investigator demonstrate that to achieve this end requires determination, discipline, and mentorship, as well as academic, emotional, and financial support.

As the number of diseases that are categorized as health disparities grows, and as the gap in life expectancy between White and other populations widens, we must, as academicians, teachers, investigators, and mentors, confront some difficult questions: (1) Where are the academic investigators from these embattled populations? (2) Despite increasing focus upon “community-based” research, why isn't the community more broadly represented among those who study the very problems affecting them? (3) Is it possible that, despite our best intentions, we in academics (including those in primary and secondary education) may be creating or maintaining barriers to the development of minority investigators? (4) What will it take to reverse these barriers and increase the number of productive academic minority investigators? This means more than just warm bodies to teach large classes, but bona fide investigators who can and will explore those questions about community- and institutional-level interactions that facilitate and ultimately fuel health disparities.

Students participate in RISE (Research in Science and Engineering), a program at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, where 20 to 25 outstanding undergraduates participate in cutting-edge research in the sciences, math, and engineering under the guidance of prominent faculty mentors. Printed with permission of Corbis.

LIMITED DIVERSITY, SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES

A recent report from the American Council of Education, titled Reflections on 20 Years of Minorities in Higher Education and the ACE Annual Status Report,¹ documents that: (1) the increase in minority student representation in colleges has not affected the pronounced gap between Hispanic and White students who hold bachelor's degrees; (2) trends away from need-based financial aid are denying low-income minority students access to a college or university education, a problem only further compounded by an increase in public institution tuitions; (3) there continues to be a paucity of African American and Hispanic faculty; and (4) while the number of minority college and university administrators has increased, it is concentrated in student services and minority affairs divisions.¹ Two further clear barriers to minority development as academic investigators remain, as there has been little improvement in degree completion and unchanged participation of minority groups in doctoral education.² As Bernal notes in this supplement, there has been no significant increase in racial and ethnic minority PhDs for over a decade. Without degree completion and doctoral education, further career advancement in biomedical research is virtually impossible.

Racial and ethnic diversity in medical schools is no better. In 2004, a breakdown of US physicians by race and ethnicity demonstrated that racial and ethnic minorities make up less than 15% of the physician workforce. Native Americans were the least represented, at 0.3%, and Asians, the largest minority group, at 5.7%. African Americans represented 3.3%, and Hispanics 2.8% of the workforce, respectively, in 2004.³ The American Association of Medical Colleges has made a commitment to diversity, as evidenced by the many programs targeting racial and ethnic minority students, and initiatives to reach out into minority communities. However, as the American Association of Medical Colleges has documented, the average medical school student carries $130 000 in debt.⁴

Thus, racial and ethnic minorities face barriers at the formative stages of their education, in college and universities, as well as in graduate education programs, such as medical schools. Even if these advanced programs are completed, there remain additional disincentives to pursue a doctoral education, significant among these being the financial obstacle. Initiatives such as the Gates Millennium Scholars Program attempt to lessen the financial barriers to higher education for minorities, but the rising cost of public institutions and the decreased availability of need-based financial aid ensures that financial barriers remain a significant hurdle for many minority students to overcome.

MENTORING

Mentoring is an essential part of any faculty member development program. The critical role of mentoring is reflected by the joint statement of the American Association of University Professors and the National Education Association in June 1990. The challenge of minority faculty is well summarized: “minority colleagues in particular tend to be more isolated, more burdened with the service activities we advise other junior faculty colleagues to defer. …”⁵ Minority faculty, as seen in this supplement, face a number of challenges, from the chronic time drain of serving as the “representative” minority on a number of university committees, to teaching loads incompatible with personal and academic development.

Twenty-five years ago, an African American assistant professor of medicine was recruited to a Midwestern university. After a year on the faculty, she became aware of the profound and disproportionate impact of an infectious disease upon African Americans, and the need for novel interventions to prevent further transmission. Despite having no formal training in behavioral interventions, this young woman developed an intervention targeted to adolescents and young adults of color. Although successful in competing for a faculty development award, she was unable to find a mentor at her own institution—a requirement for retaining the award. A well-published senior investigator from another university over 300 miles away offered to help. That offer blossomed into a partnership that has spanned two decades and produced several federally funded grants, scientific publications, a senior minority investigator who ultimately became a full professor, a member of a National Institutes of Health (NIH) study section, and a strong collegial relationship.

Sadly, my experience is not the norm. Although mentoring alone will not convert a junior investigator into an established senior investigator, it is the missing link: the critical coordination of academic experience, knowledge, role modeling, and life lessons passed on from the seasoned senior investigator to the less-experienced junior investigator. Yet how can this be achieved in our current environment? NIH funding constraints are such that three out of every four research applications are not funded.⁶ The success rate for first-time junior investigator NIH Research Project Grants (independent investigator–initiated research) has declined to 18%. Given the time, effort, and economic costs in developing a junior investigator to the point that he or she is ready to compete for such a grant, the question that should be asked is simply this: how long will junior investigators wait until they can be successfully funded? In addition, how many during that wait will be consumed by education debt, frustration, and disappointment, and turn to other career opportunities? How many of these junior investigators with fresh energy, creative minds, and new ideas can we afford to lose?

The answer is a resounding “none.” We in academic institutions are the bearers of the torch of knowledge, and have a unique responsibility to ensure that it is passed on to all without regard to race, color, creed, nationality, or sexual orientation. The true democratization of education, and the benefits it brings, will only occur when those who are underrepresented can be recruited, retained, mentored, and developed into a senior regiment ready to develop the next wave of scholars—through educating, modeling, and mentoring. We in academia need to look to ourselves to increase the number of the underrepresented in our ranks, incorporate more junior investigators into our projects, and push—repeatedly, vocally, and unwaveringly—for a greater share of the funding pie for them. Whether this is through new mechanisms, revitalization of old ones, or enhancing training and mentoring opportunities, we can ill afford to allow the pipeline to slow further, hoping for a brighter day, while the engine of scientific advancement slows to a crawl.

No, we must renew our investment and our commitment to the development of all junior investigators, but especially those who reflect the communities we pledge to serve, whose diseases are particularly disabling, and whose members are dying in disproportionate numbers. In fulfilling that commitment, attracting, recruiting, and retaining minority investigators will have come full circle. Let the cycle begin.