Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
So is this a problem, and if so what do you propose as a solution? What is the percentage of NBA players who are Caucasian? Is there proportional representation of Caucasians in the NBA that equals the proportion of Caucasians in the US population? Could it be simply that black students just aren’t interested in chemistry rather than some bias against them? Aren’t all students in public schools learning the same curriculum?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I think you missed the section on implicit bias in med school, and that the first step to fixing the problem is to acknowledge it's there.

As for what caused it, it could also be a glass ceiling, active discouragement from moving forward, or the same implicit bias that is present in medicine.


Small and imperfect example, med school admissions:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27680316/

All groups (men, women, students, faculty) displayed significant levels of implicit white preference; men (d = 0.697) and faculty (d = 0.820) had the largest bias measures (P < .001)

I guess you could say they went to the same schools, maybe are not even playing the same game, but if they are, theyre at least playing it on extra-extra-difficult mode while everyone has it set on difficult mode.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
So is this a problem, and if so what do you propose as a solution?

Yes, I believe it is. And I find the false equivalency argument rediculous.

The solution starts with outreach and encouragement. I've done chemistry experiments for Cub Scout troops, talked at schools, and at one point donated a significant amount of equipment to a charter school (but that was because my company folded). I've mostly stayed within my community for those things (other than the donation), which is mostly white, and could certainly expand that circle. Widespread corporate outreach would be even more effective.

Aren’t all students in public schools learning the same curriculum?

Curriculum, generally yes. Education & experience, no.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I applaud you for your efforts to Hell the disadvantaged. Do you have any feedback if you have been successful?

How much effort would be needed to bring your example into line as you would have it? Is your ideal even achievable? Suppose the interest in pursuing your career choice (chemistry) just isn’t there amongst your audience? Do you even give your audience credit for choosing what it’s members want to do rather than what you want them to do? Maybe they don’t want to do chemistry. My point is, people are allowed to choose their own paths in our country. At what point is demanding a certain “make up” of an industry too much governmental oversight? You cannot force someone into a career in which he or she does not find fulfillment.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
...Should be to help the disadvantaged...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The specifics brought up here are just one manifestation of broader problem. No, broader understates it too much. Pervasive is closer.

I don’t see passing laws as the key to dealing with the problem. Laws are a lousy way to change minds, and the change needed has to begin in people’s minds. Until enough of society appreciates the reality of the broader problems there isn’t much hope for things to change.

I don’t believe anyone can change someone else’s mind. At best one can help someone change their own mind. The OP has done that, and is sharing what nudged him to do so.

Which seems like a good idea to me.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
First, 'my ideal' is what exactly, and what made you assume it? What is 'into line'? I don't much care for being presumed. These are your statements, so why don't you explain them. Also, who brought up 'government oversight'. I think it was just you -- is leaping to assumptions your thing? I don't care to engage straw man fallacies either. You seem to want to introduce your biases in the form of questions, is that right? If you must reply to this, see if you can do it with just statement of you own opinions, no question marks.

And of course you can not force someone into a career, but you can make them aware of one they might not have otherwise considered.

I will say that I don't expect alignment of all professions with population. Of course there is choice and preference. But I also would not assume the 'maybe they don't want to do chemistry' either, just from a data point, or even suggest it without reason to believe it. I think the we can see from the data we have on undergraduate degrees, there are the a significant number did want to pursue chemistry. We also don't know if there is a trend over time any direction. FWIW, I expect 'white Americans' are also under represented as one moves down this graphical pipeline. We do use our university system, particularly post graduate eduction, to bring in international students. Encouraging the best and brightest from around the world to come to and stay in America has always been a part of what made America great IMO. So there is no 'into line' for this graphic nor should there be. And still the reductions are dramatic enough to be concerning, and as I noted shameful.

What is your ethnicity, and if you saw this data with yours in place of 'black' would you comment similarly?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I understand and agree that we need to offer opportunities to everyone in our country. To preserve our economy and quality of life, we need our citizens to realize their talents to the fullest so that everyone can make a meaningful contribution.

What I find offensive is that someone feels the need to explore the cultural makeup of our industries. We cannot force every industry to have exact representation of our society at large. If we get to that point, we risk losing free will to the forces of governmental control. When does the government or any agency get to decide what type of person must work in one type of industry? If our society does not find concern in that concept, we are in trouble.

To avoid any insults I ask that we conclude this thread. I expressed my opinion and you have expressed yours. Clearly this topic is not “biotechnology investing” so let’s please leave it. I will not provide any further comments on this topic.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
What I find offensive is that someone feels the need to explore the cultural makeup of our industries.

I do not find this offensive in the slightest. Nor do I think it necessarily leads to where you suggest, i.e. forceful government intervention. I don't fear data and information, and do find intentionally turning a blind eye to it can be destructive. We disagree.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Helical

Fair enough. I do appreciate and value your coverage though and will continue to read your analysis.
Print the post Back To Top