Why are there so few black people in STEM?(labroots.com)
labroots.com
Why are there so few black people in STEM?
https://www.labroots.com/trending/chemistry-and-physics/17877/black-people-stem
210 comments
If I can provide an interesting data point, I had access to a survey given to students at one college that asked a few questions to cross it with the student's results.
Guess which was the undeniably most common issue among people failing two classes or more? Financial insecurity.
It's hard figuring out a solution there as that was in a country with cheap (not free but still) education.
Guess which was the undeniably most common issue among people failing two classes or more? Financial insecurity.
It's hard figuring out a solution there as that was in a country with cheap (not free but still) education.
Anecdotally, of my friend group in college (at a large state school in the US) everyone who was financially stable eventually graduated with a bachelors degree. 3 out of 4 of my friends who were paying themselves through college dropped out. Having a part time job and trying to go to school full time took a huge toll on them.
Not just that.
I've noticed a difference in success from my associates who worked in college and did not.
Those who worked no jobs, or worked jobs that were close to their career were able to either network in school or network through those jobs, helping them in their careers.
Those who had to work retail or similar jobs had a much more difficult time getting their career paths started.
I've noticed a difference in success from my associates who worked in college and did not.
Those who worked no jobs, or worked jobs that were close to their career were able to either network in school or network through those jobs, helping them in their careers.
Those who had to work retail or similar jobs had a much more difficult time getting their career paths started.
> Having a part time job and trying to go to school full time took a huge toll on them.
Would it have been better to part time both job and college? Instead of 3-4 yrs for a degree, it takes 6-8 years, but you also work part time during.
This route exists for many colleges - why not do this?
Would it have been better to part time both job and college? Instead of 3-4 yrs for a degree, it takes 6-8 years, but you also work part time during.
This route exists for many colleges - why not do this?
My wife and I personally did this. I took 6 years, she took 8 (we had a baby and she got a teaching credential, which is why hers took longer).
Graduated without any debt, but it was rediculously hard, especially in years 4-5.5 when I lost my job (2008 recession) and survived solely off rice, turkey hotdogs, and whitebread (leaving barely enough to cover diapers/medical.
Graduated without any debt, but it was rediculously hard, especially in years 4-5.5 when I lost my job (2008 recession) and survived solely off rice, turkey hotdogs, and whitebread (leaving barely enough to cover diapers/medical.
I don't remember the specifics of 2 of my friends who dropped out, but one of my friends transitioned from working part time and going to school full time, to working part time and going to school part time, to working full time and going to school part time, to only working full time. The process took about 3 years.
Some financial aid plans only provides up to a limited amount of semesters.
Like all things you want to buy, sometimes you need to borrow or save beforehand.
Really great food for thought.
[deleted]
I've never gotten to that point but definitely had a great moments when it wasn't entirely clear how I'd find the finances to continue without the support of family financially and otherwise and much else in terms of a social safety net. The absolute lowest point was after a particularly bad first semester in second year that required much higher average in the second to retain good standing I received a letter in informing me not only that no longer qualified for the loans for academic performance but also that repayments wer soon to start. I think it eventually turned out to be a clerical error but I definitely had a few episodes wandering aimlessly from twilight to dawn questioning my ability to complete the degree, who I'd be able go to for support, how I'd live with myself if I took support and still failed, how I'd afford to pay it off or support myself if I dropped out right now, the embarrassment of doing so, rationality of choosing to double down on sunk costs vs potentially losing a once in a lifetime opportunity I'd already sunk so much into, and if I had really made the right decision in choosing to attend in the first place.
Looking back though, the experiences and situations were so formative I sometimes wonder if to change them would be to dilute and erase oneself.
Looking back though, the experiences and situations were so formative I sometimes wonder if to change them would be to dilute and erase oneself.
The US definitely has a lot of untapped potential. And they're not even worst in class. According to the OECD, other countries (e.g. Germany, France) are much worse when it comes to social mobility [1].
[1] http://www.oecd.org/els/soc/1-5%20generations.png
[1] http://www.oecd.org/els/soc/1-5%20generations.png
Interesting. One thing to keep in mind that being in the bottom 10% might be a lot better in one country over another though. I'm trying to think of what kind of statistic would show this. Something concerning "Quality of Life"? Any ideas?
For the same reason there are so few poor whites in STEM. America's dysfunctional education funding.
Make education funding federal, and have a nationwide push to have small classes and well funded schools for everybody, and this would be fixed in 10 years. As it is, rich districts pay more taxes and get better schools. Funny that.
Make education funding federal, and have a nationwide push to have small classes and well funded schools for everybody, and this would be fixed in 10 years. As it is, rich districts pay more taxes and get better schools. Funny that.
The system you’re talking about already exists! Half of all K-12 funding comes from state and federal sources, and is directed to the neediest kids. Here is the district by district breakdown in Maryland: https://i2.wp.com/conduitstreet.mdcounties.org/wp-content/up...
Baltimore City has less than half the local education funding of Anne Arundel (a predominantly white, upper middle class county containing Annapolis and the Naval Academy). But state and federal funding more than makes up for it. Baltimore gets $12,200 per student from the state, versus $5,300 for Anne Arundel. And it gets an extra almost $1,000 from the federal government. In all, Baltimore getting about $3,000 more per student than Anne Arundel. Allegheny County, a mostly white but lower income county, also gets significantly more funding. Note that cost of living is also higher in Anne Arundel than the other two places.
In most states, poorer districts actually get slightly more funding than richer districts: https://apps.urban.org/features/school-funding-do-poor-kids-....
Baltimore City has less than half the local education funding of Anne Arundel (a predominantly white, upper middle class county containing Annapolis and the Naval Academy). But state and federal funding more than makes up for it. Baltimore gets $12,200 per student from the state, versus $5,300 for Anne Arundel. And it gets an extra almost $1,000 from the federal government. In all, Baltimore getting about $3,000 more per student than Anne Arundel. Allegheny County, a mostly white but lower income county, also gets significantly more funding. Note that cost of living is also higher in Anne Arundel than the other two places.
In most states, poorer districts actually get slightly more funding than richer districts: https://apps.urban.org/features/school-funding-do-poor-kids-....
No amount of funding towards schools can make up for a home life or general environment that's not conducive towards education. I wish we in the US looked at solutions beyond throwing money at it (or at least, in a different way) because it obviously doesn't work.
End the drug war, legalise marijuana and decriminalise everything else, send Black men to get married and raise their kids instead of sitting in Jail.
Only 36% of Black kids live with married parents: https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/FT_18...
Stop giving additional welfare to single-parent households.
Only 36% of Black kids live with married parents: https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/FT_18...
Stop giving additional welfare to single-parent households.
Yeah, it depends where the money is thrown.
Experiments in Brazil and India suggest that the really simple, dumb solution works best: give poor people money, no strings attached.
Sure, they'll waste some of it. But not all that much, maybe a third. To economists, that's very effective targeting.
(If you demand perfect targeting and use of funds here, why not with private-sector investments (67%-90% loss rate) or 'normal' government investments (50% - 75% losses)? )
Experiments in Brazil and India suggest that the really simple, dumb solution works best: give poor people money, no strings attached.
Sure, they'll waste some of it. But not all that much, maybe a third. To economists, that's very effective targeting.
(If you demand perfect targeting and use of funds here, why not with private-sector investments (67%-90% loss rate) or 'normal' government investments (50% - 75% losses)? )
But India and Brazil still don't have great social mobility. Most studies in that area are still pretty young and it's too early to say if that can increase social mobility in the long term.
Seems like there are 2 problems with this.
First is that the federal government doesn't have the legal standing to take over the education system. I believe it would require a constitutional amendment to allow it and I don't think they'd get that passed.
Secondly, I'm not sure it is such a great idea. Currently federal level education direction comes from the teachers union and you can see the fruits of its labors in our current schools. Also I think this will make the current broken system harder to fix as it will institutionalize many of the current practices and make local experimentation much harder.
IMO what we need to do is move away from the industrial revolution era school system. We aren't training a bunch of factory workers anymore and that needs to be reflected in how we teach. We really need to do a lot more trials with alternative educational styles in public school. My understanding is that one of the biggest hurdles to this is the teachers union and their adherence to the current model.
I do think funding is an issue, but even if you could magically fix that you'd still have bad schools. There would just be less disparity between them.
First is that the federal government doesn't have the legal standing to take over the education system. I believe it would require a constitutional amendment to allow it and I don't think they'd get that passed.
Secondly, I'm not sure it is such a great idea. Currently federal level education direction comes from the teachers union and you can see the fruits of its labors in our current schools. Also I think this will make the current broken system harder to fix as it will institutionalize many of the current practices and make local experimentation much harder.
IMO what we need to do is move away from the industrial revolution era school system. We aren't training a bunch of factory workers anymore and that needs to be reflected in how we teach. We really need to do a lot more trials with alternative educational styles in public school. My understanding is that one of the biggest hurdles to this is the teachers union and their adherence to the current model.
I do think funding is an issue, but even if you could magically fix that you'd still have bad schools. There would just be less disparity between them.
There's not really a lot of debate about what makes for good schools. Small class sizes, and well qualified(paid) teachers. It is that simple. You can try whatever alternative educational styles you want, and it will not work in a class size of 50.
Nor does the federal government have to take over the education system to achieve this, it just has to guarantee equal funding for all students. Or the US can continue to set poor whites against poor blacks as it has now for centuries, and watch itself become increasingly uncompetitive with any country that makes a commitment to equal educational standards for all. "This used to be the greatest country in the world", etc.
Nor does the federal government have to take over the education system to achieve this, it just has to guarantee equal funding for all students. Or the US can continue to set poor whites against poor blacks as it has now for centuries, and watch itself become increasingly uncompetitive with any country that makes a commitment to equal educational standards for all. "This used to be the greatest country in the world", etc.
There's not really a lot of debate about what makes for good schools
There is plenty of debate about what makes for good schools. Many school districts are large enough to include neighborhoods on "both sides of the tracks". It is the same school district with the same pay, same class sizes, same teacher demographics, but different student body demographics. Result is often a large disparity in outcomes for students. In one school, a student who wants to succeed has to compete with his classmates who want the same thing. In another, the same student would be abused by classmates for trying to succeed. Parents in these latter districts will often make huge efforts to pretend to be living a few miles away to give their children not smaller classes or different teachers but different classmates.
There is plenty of debate about what makes for good schools. Many school districts are large enough to include neighborhoods on "both sides of the tracks". It is the same school district with the same pay, same class sizes, same teacher demographics, but different student body demographics. Result is often a large disparity in outcomes for students. In one school, a student who wants to succeed has to compete with his classmates who want the same thing. In another, the same student would be abused by classmates for trying to succeed. Parents in these latter districts will often make huge efforts to pretend to be living a few miles away to give their children not smaller classes or different teachers but different classmates.
This example feels anecdotal, small classes taught by well paid teachers seems like a hugely impactful improvement. Dismissing that because sometimes students don’t fit in with the environment feels like a straw man.
In many low income black areas, the culture among students is that if you’re trying in school, you’re an “uncool nerd” or along those lines.
And saying "if only you give the disadvantaged students this they'll perform the same as the rich kids" feels like wishful thinking to me.
"Sometimes students don't fit in"? Is that really your description of what a kid who wants to be a good student in a bad neighborhood often suffers at the hands of his classmates?
The claim that good schools are good because of small class sizes and higher teacher pay, that it is as simple as that and that there is "really no debate" is false. Pointing out that A and B are not the only factors, it's not as simple as that, that there is plenty of debate, and describing an additional factor beyond just A & B is not "dismissing" A and B.
Consider the scenario I described: a large school district with multiple neighborhoods where the admin, funding, class sizes, teacher pay, etc., are the same but the student bodies differ. You might be able to equalize outcomes by giving the lower-performing school smaller classes and better-paid teachers, or you might not, but even if you did, you would then have to explain why a school with smaller classes and better-paid teachers wasn't doing any better than one without those features. The answer would remain the same: because there are other factors that matter, too. It's not as simple as just smaller classes and better pay for teachers, and there is plenty of debate about what factors matter and how much.
The claim that good schools are good because of small class sizes and higher teacher pay, that it is as simple as that and that there is "really no debate" is false. Pointing out that A and B are not the only factors, it's not as simple as that, that there is plenty of debate, and describing an additional factor beyond just A & B is not "dismissing" A and B.
Consider the scenario I described: a large school district with multiple neighborhoods where the admin, funding, class sizes, teacher pay, etc., are the same but the student bodies differ. You might be able to equalize outcomes by giving the lower-performing school smaller classes and better-paid teachers, or you might not, but even if you did, you would then have to explain why a school with smaller classes and better-paid teachers wasn't doing any better than one without those features. The answer would remain the same: because there are other factors that matter, too. It's not as simple as just smaller classes and better pay for teachers, and there is plenty of debate about what factors matter and how much.
The actions of parents are also a huge factor in the success of a school. If your parents make your students do their homework you can move forward with material in class quicker. They also will send children to after-school programs, which has a similar effect.
Parents are also somewhat a defense against bad teachers. There’s nothing quite like a parent hounding you and your principal about their child’s academic performance.
Parents are also somewhat a defense against bad teachers. There’s nothing quite like a parent hounding you and your principal about their child’s academic performance.
You need teachers who are passionate and regard it as a vocation rather than just another job. Pay and qualifications don't necessarily imply this.
Poor discipline in a school can demoralise a teacher.
You also need to get rid of teachers who are badly underperforming. This can be very difficult, which is also demoralising.
I've gleaned the above from having many family and extended family members in teaching.
Poor discipline in a school can demoralise a teacher.
You also need to get rid of teachers who are badly underperforming. This can be very difficult, which is also demoralising.
I've gleaned the above from having many family and extended family members in teaching.
Pay and qualification go a long way to achieve quality in teaching. To get excellent people to become teachers, you need to pay them at least similar amounts as they could get elsewhere and give them some guarantees that their job is safe. Changing back from being a teacher to the industry can be hard so the easiest way to get bright people to become excellent teachers is by educating them as teachers and promising them a secure job with good pay. That makes getting rid of bad teachers harder but that's subjective anyway. Sure, some teachers might be awful but most way to test this focus purely on academic outcomes which don't incentivize teachers to help poor students with little prospects.
I had crappy teachers for the most part.
I knew what I wanted though. Every class had 1-2 students that were hungry to learn, rest were there because easy money or such. Eventually dropped out and had a successful start to a career. Far outpacing those that stayed in.
That was a awhile ago.
I know some school have way better curriculums these days.
Still, I refuse to hire jr develops unless I see that same hunger to get better.
I knew what I wanted though. Every class had 1-2 students that were hungry to learn, rest were there because easy money or such. Eventually dropped out and had a successful start to a career. Far outpacing those that stayed in.
That was a awhile ago.
I know some school have way better curriculums these days.
Still, I refuse to hire jr develops unless I see that same hunger to get better.
They didn't say anything about federal direction, only about evening out the funding between schools.
What makes you think that "more funding" would improve outcomes?
As far as I'm aware, states that spend more per pupil don't significantly outperform those that spend less...
As far as I'm aware, states that spend more per pupil don't significantly outperform those that spend less...
It's not about "more" funding as it is much about "targeted" funding. Ones who are deprived and poor should get more opportunities for free and quality education.
Can you provide any information that shows that per pupil spending and/or small class size correlates to better outcomes?
Since the US Dept of Ed was created by Jimmy Carter, can you show positive results and benefits of this approach?
Since the US Dept of Ed was created by Jimmy Carter, can you show positive results and benefits of this approach?
> Since the US Dept of Ed was created by Jimmy Carter, can you show positive results and benefits of this approach?
The Dept of Ed is pretty far removed from what the grandfather comment is advocating for, so I'm not sure why they would advocate for it.
It doesn't establish curricula, it doesn't run schools, it doesn't even run accreditations. 92% of current funding for primary and secondary education is state or local-level.
The Dept of Ed is pretty far removed from what the grandfather comment is advocating for, so I'm not sure why they would advocate for it.
It doesn't establish curricula, it doesn't run schools, it doesn't even run accreditations. 92% of current funding for primary and secondary education is state or local-level.
My understanding is that most good suburban schools actually spend less per pupil than the worse city schools. Do you happen to have numbers offhand?
> rich districts pay more taxes and get better schools
I struggle to see how this is wrong. It's not any different than rich people buying private education, though it makes it easier for non-rich folks to try and find the cheapest place in that district so they can benefit from the well-funded schools.
It seems popular to think that people should have equal opportunity, independent of any other factors. But from the perspective of a parent, why should I be disallowed from providing my own kids every possible advantage I can afford?
I struggle to see how this is wrong. It's not any different than rich people buying private education, though it makes it easier for non-rich folks to try and find the cheapest place in that district so they can benefit from the well-funded schools.
It seems popular to think that people should have equal opportunity, independent of any other factors. But from the perspective of a parent, why should I be disallowed from providing my own kids every possible advantage I can afford?
> But from the perspective of a parent, why should I be disallowed from providing my own kids every possible advantage I can afford?
Because it's bad for society, and because there's a long since established moral precedent in favor of things that may make life slightly worse for any given individual but better for a large majority of everyone.
It's also worth keeping in mind that there's a massive difference between "rich" and "ultra-rich". "Rich" and "poor" are, if anything, closer to each other than either is to "ultra-rich", and spreading out the spending of that last category would dramatically benefit an overwhelming majority of people without hurting the schools of ultra-rich areas in a way that, frankly, anyone should actually care about.
Because it's bad for society, and because there's a long since established moral precedent in favor of things that may make life slightly worse for any given individual but better for a large majority of everyone.
It's also worth keeping in mind that there's a massive difference between "rich" and "ultra-rich". "Rich" and "poor" are, if anything, closer to each other than either is to "ultra-rich", and spreading out the spending of that last category would dramatically benefit an overwhelming majority of people without hurting the schools of ultra-rich areas in a way that, frankly, anyone should actually care about.
Disallowing discretionary funding and efforts for education would be what could charitably be called deeply misguided approach to try to make it fair for everyone. (Allowing every possible advantage taken literally would get into no shit answers like cheating or bribery not being okay.)
I recall hearing from New Jersey and judges taking strict stances of equal outcome in education that found locality funding discriminatory, was that the poorer districts needed to be funded more per student to start to reach parity. Which makes some sense on some levels given knowledge and habits from parents transferring and would need more effort and funding to catch up because they are already providing more teaching just in a remotely middle-class concept.
That sort of equality is clear folly, like trying to force every kid into creches and separate them from parents. It might work with some hypothetical aliens but in practice for humans prepare for massive psychic trauma, inevitable abuse from caretakers, and frankly a well deserved outright insurrection and rebellion.
Don't get me wrong, working to raise the floor is a noble goal and makes sense just from rational selfishness alone. Throwing more money at the high end is 'dimminshed returns' but the money has already been allocated for better or worse. And well the obvious caveats of how the money is spent matters, there is no fixed true universal value per of any unit or commodity.
I recall hearing from New Jersey and judges taking strict stances of equal outcome in education that found locality funding discriminatory, was that the poorer districts needed to be funded more per student to start to reach parity. Which makes some sense on some levels given knowledge and habits from parents transferring and would need more effort and funding to catch up because they are already providing more teaching just in a remotely middle-class concept.
That sort of equality is clear folly, like trying to force every kid into creches and separate them from parents. It might work with some hypothetical aliens but in practice for humans prepare for massive psychic trauma, inevitable abuse from caretakers, and frankly a well deserved outright insurrection and rebellion.
Don't get me wrong, working to raise the floor is a noble goal and makes sense just from rational selfishness alone. Throwing more money at the high end is 'dimminshed returns' but the money has already been allocated for better or worse. And well the obvious caveats of how the money is spent matters, there is no fixed true universal value per of any unit or commodity.
> Because it's bad for society
That is a very big claim. It seems just as plausible to suggest that society will in fact be collectively better off if every parent gives their kid the best possible start in life, even if some kids will miss out due to circumstance.
That is a very big claim. It seems just as plausible to suggest that society will in fact be collectively better off if every parent gives their kid the best possible start in life, even if some kids will miss out due to circumstance.
We are at a point in human history where at least the developed countries can easily afford to not let even a single child miss out.
[deleted]
It's a local minima in A.I. terms. If you want the global optima you have to fund everybody's education. And from the perspective of a parent, think of the consequences. If your kid is ill, do you want it treated by the best doctor on merit, or the one that could afford the biggest bribes to pass their exams? How about the nuclear reactor inspector? The CDC.
Even something as simple as having state-level funding go into a single pool that then gets divided out per student among the state's public schools would do a lot, by removing the baseline feedback loop of low local tax income with low local school funding.
Why is that the first thing people think of when it comes to explaining black behavior is that they must be poor? Not all black people are poor. Stop it with the stereotypes.
It’s not about stereotypes. I am sure that everyone on HN knows that not all Black people are poor. I am Black by the way.
But, we also have to look at statistics and think longitudinally instead of anecdotally.
I came from a middle class family in a small town in the south. But my mom being a well connected high school math teacher did give me some advantages.
When I graduated from college, I had a choice between taking a job in a slightly larger city where I could have afforded to take care of myself or move to Atlanta where I could get a job as a computer operator based on a previous internship. But the pay was crap.
I wanted to move to Atlanta because I knew I would have more opportunities. My parents had already bought me car, they subsidized me for the first year, and the rest is history - I was able to network my way into getting a software development position. This was in the late 90s.
My classmate couldn’t afford to make those choices. He was stuck taking a COBOL programming job in the 90s - the same job I turned down and still is doing that to this day in the same city.
But, we also have to look at statistics and think longitudinally instead of anecdotally.
I came from a middle class family in a small town in the south. But my mom being a well connected high school math teacher did give me some advantages.
When I graduated from college, I had a choice between taking a job in a slightly larger city where I could have afforded to take care of myself or move to Atlanta where I could get a job as a computer operator based on a previous internship. But the pay was crap.
I wanted to move to Atlanta because I knew I would have more opportunities. My parents had already bought me car, they subsidized me for the first year, and the rest is history - I was able to network my way into getting a software development position. This was in the late 90s.
My classmate couldn’t afford to make those choices. He was stuck taking a COBOL programming job in the 90s - the same job I turned down and still is doing that to this day in the same city.
Nice story. COBOL programmers started making some serious money with Y2K. At least, the contractors started billing advanced hourly rates. And were making more than they ever did.
And from what I’ve been seeing, COBOL just isn’t going anywhere. Those mainframes really are built to last. So he should probably have a job for the rest of his life. I hope he’s got a nice pension.
And from what I’ve been seeing, COBOL just isn’t going anywhere. Those mainframes really are built to last. So he should probably have a job for the rest of his life. I hope he’s got a nice pension.
I hope so. I posted on Facebook that I found my old FORTRAN, Pascal and COBOL textbooks from college when I went home to visit my parents and tagged him and few other classmates.
We graduated in the mid 90s. The book was last updated in 1985. He told me he was still programming in COBOL. I just got quiet. I didn’t know. I didn’t mean to insult him.
We graduated in the mid 90s. The book was last updated in 1985. He told me he was still programming in COBOL. I just got quiet. I didn’t know. I didn’t mean to insult him.
"A close examination of wealth in the U.S. finds evidence of staggering racial disparities. At $171,000, the net worth of a typical white family is nearly ten times greater than that of a Black family ($17,150) in 2016."
Source: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/02/27/examining...
Of course not all black people are poor, but that's a very poor understanding of statistics. Just because a black man became President or there are millionaire black men, doesn't mean that institutional racism is suddenly over or economic equality has been established.
Source: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/02/27/examining...
Of course not all black people are poor, but that's a very poor understanding of statistics. Just because a black man became President or there are millionaire black men, doesn't mean that institutional racism is suddenly over or economic equality has been established.
So that means there are less poor people in STEM, no?
Poor blacks are a subset of poor people regardless of race.
If the average black family were wealthier than the average white family AND we would keep seeing such difference, it would be interesting to wonder why. But there is nothing new in poor people not being able to access to long studies.
The problem is poverty, not race.
If the average black family were wealthier than the average white family AND we would keep seeing such difference, it would be interesting to wonder why. But there is nothing new in poor people not being able to access to long studies.
The problem is poverty, not race.
> Not all black people are poor.
Of course not, but what's your point? The stereotype is accurate. Go read the very article this discussion is about, and it says black families average about 2/3 the income of non-black families. That is reality, and wishing it away won't make it less true. If we want to figure out a long term solution, we can't deny uncomfortable truth.
Of course not, but what's your point? The stereotype is accurate. Go read the very article this discussion is about, and it says black families average about 2/3 the income of non-black families. That is reality, and wishing it away won't make it less true. If we want to figure out a long term solution, we can't deny uncomfortable truth.
Not all black people are absent from STEM. If we're only going to talk about what all black people are or are not, we're not going to find anything useful.
I feel like I have to mention that I'm a black person here.
I feel like I have to mention that I'm a black person here.
We just want more of you in STEM is all - no scientist left behind...
I don't know why behavior like yours exists. Nobody knows why X is happening but people notice that a potential solution Y is only possible if Z is true. Then someone says Z is wrong and therefore we lost all our agency and ability to solve X.
If this was too difficult to understand then I'll explain it differently. If there are environmental differences between races such as socioeconomic background then you can fix things like educational attainment by improving the socioeconomic background of black people. If there is no environmental difference or solving the environmental difference gives no improved outcomes then this basically means black people are somehow inferior to white people simply based on their race. I don't think that is true. Poor white people suffer from the same things poor black people suffer from so an explanation that is purely based on race is completely insufficient. However you want to deny the socioeconomic differences and blame the differences in ability entirely on race.
If this was too difficult to understand then I'll explain it differently. If there are environmental differences between races such as socioeconomic background then you can fix things like educational attainment by improving the socioeconomic background of black people. If there is no environmental difference or solving the environmental difference gives no improved outcomes then this basically means black people are somehow inferior to white people simply based on their race. I don't think that is true. Poor white people suffer from the same things poor black people suffer from so an explanation that is purely based on race is completely insufficient. However you want to deny the socioeconomic differences and blame the differences in ability entirely on race.
> If there is no environmental difference or solving the environmental difference gives no improved outcomes then this basically means black people are somehow inferior to white people simply based on their race.
Or it means perfectly competent black people are excluded simply because they are black; because the white people who gate-keep academic institutions are racist.
Or it means perfectly competent black people are excluded simply because they are black; because the white people who gate-keep academic institutions are racist.
Most poor families don't value education, so it's very hard to get children interested in school when their family actively discourages the involvement.
Drugs and crime have destroyed the family structure in all poor neighborhoods.
Frankly there is a strong anti-education bent moving through the entire Republican party, educated people hare harder to control.
Drugs and crime have destroyed the family structure in all poor neighborhoods.
Frankly there is a strong anti-education bent moving through the entire Republican party, educated people hare harder to control.
I was with you until the republicans are anti-education. Can you elaborate?
I wonder how many people on HN have experienced being the only person of their race in the room. In my case I was put into a French public school where I was the only Asian student. It took me a bit to realize why I found that experience so shitty. The language and culture barrier was definitely a factor. But also it just sucks standing out. Sometimes this difference manifests as racism. Sometimes it manifests as simpering. Either way the manifestation reinforces your otherness, your difference.
There are certainly people who can surmount these obstacles and fit in. Who have the charm and charisma to ingratiate themselves into any group in any place. I'm not one of those people. I'm not obligated to be one of those people. Those people are quite rare.
Another point: Perhaps there are fewer Black people in STEM because Black people have more pressing issues. If I were Black and intelligent, I'd probably be interesting in combating larger social issues and not biochemistry. But that's just me.
There are certainly people who can surmount these obstacles and fit in. Who have the charm and charisma to ingratiate themselves into any group in any place. I'm not one of those people. I'm not obligated to be one of those people. Those people are quite rare.
Another point: Perhaps there are fewer Black people in STEM because Black people have more pressing issues. If I were Black and intelligent, I'd probably be interesting in combating larger social issues and not biochemistry. But that's just me.
Another point: Perhaps there are fewer Black people in STEM because Black people have more pressing issues. If I were Black and intelligent, I'd probably be interesting in combating larger social issues and not biochemistry. But that's just me.
No. Most Black people don’t feel any more of a calling to “combat larger social issues” than anyone else.
Yes, I worked at one company where I was the only Black person out of maybe 200 people until another one of my friends got hired based on my referral. They constantly mixed up our names when talking to us.
We were on a conference call once and my friend “John” was talking and one of our coworkers in another state mixed us up and said we “sound a like”. My friend was from up north and had a Boston accent. I have a southern accent. We sound nothing a like.
I am not saying that the company didn’t have any Black peoples because it was racist. The company was based in another state that was about a two hour drive. I would go there and not see any other Black people. We worked in a satellite office.
I was also in the awkward position of being in the city of the main office during Election Day 2016. As the only minority it seemed like in the entire city where people were driving around in their pickup trucks with their confederate flags and MAGA bumper stickers.
No. Most Black people don’t feel any more of a calling to “combat larger social issues” than anyone else.
Yes, I worked at one company where I was the only Black person out of maybe 200 people until another one of my friends got hired based on my referral. They constantly mixed up our names when talking to us.
We were on a conference call once and my friend “John” was talking and one of our coworkers in another state mixed us up and said we “sound a like”. My friend was from up north and had a Boston accent. I have a southern accent. We sound nothing a like.
I am not saying that the company didn’t have any Black peoples because it was racist. The company was based in another state that was about a two hour drive. I would go there and not see any other Black people. We worked in a satellite office.
I was also in the awkward position of being in the city of the main office during Election Day 2016. As the only minority it seemed like in the entire city where people were driving around in their pickup trucks with their confederate flags and MAGA bumper stickers.
> I wonder how many people on HN have experienced being the only person of their race in the room
I have that experience. In my 6th and 7th grade I attended a school in rural Tanzania. It was in the years following Tanzania's independence from colonial rule and there was a certain resentment towards us Europeans harbored by (many) teachers and students, and I was many times harassed and/or ridiculed, and subjected to corporal punishment for the slightest offense (in my own view at least). I have plenty of "charm and charisma" (again in my own view!) but could never get accustomed to the treatment. And indeed felt I shouldn't have to and so was eventually taken out and home schooled instead.
Now, did this break me, make me despondent or not believe in myself? It id not, and the reason is context. Because even if (many) young Tanzanians resented us Europeans, many if not most of the elderly did not. As a 12 year old it was not uncommon for me to be greeted with "shikamoo"(roughly meaning "I kiss the dust off your feet"), a greeting normally reserved for really old people - and people within the colonial administration. I was also treated as someone potentially very rich (not that I was, except relatively only). I still did not come away from the experience completely unscathed but that is another story.
I could go on but in short; being singled out or even maltreated on basis of skin color because people see you as privileged is something quite different than being disrespected because your skin color signals relative under-privilege. Which should give pause I believe. It may take a long while yet until our ethnically related appearances no longer play any role in our relationships.
I have that experience. In my 6th and 7th grade I attended a school in rural Tanzania. It was in the years following Tanzania's independence from colonial rule and there was a certain resentment towards us Europeans harbored by (many) teachers and students, and I was many times harassed and/or ridiculed, and subjected to corporal punishment for the slightest offense (in my own view at least). I have plenty of "charm and charisma" (again in my own view!) but could never get accustomed to the treatment. And indeed felt I shouldn't have to and so was eventually taken out and home schooled instead.
Now, did this break me, make me despondent or not believe in myself? It id not, and the reason is context. Because even if (many) young Tanzanians resented us Europeans, many if not most of the elderly did not. As a 12 year old it was not uncommon for me to be greeted with "shikamoo"(roughly meaning "I kiss the dust off your feet"), a greeting normally reserved for really old people - and people within the colonial administration. I was also treated as someone potentially very rich (not that I was, except relatively only). I still did not come away from the experience completely unscathed but that is another story.
I could go on but in short; being singled out or even maltreated on basis of skin color because people see you as privileged is something quite different than being disrespected because your skin color signals relative under-privilege. Which should give pause I believe. It may take a long while yet until our ethnically related appearances no longer play any role in our relationships.
I've been there, I think a lot depends on the specific situation and what you make of it, I ended up with a bunch of eastern european and middle eastern friends, all refugees/immigrants and few of us much above the peoverty line.
I've noticed of them have become pretty alt right in recent years though, a lot of it arising out of resentment on being accused of having benefited from white privilege when they get they were afforded neither the opportunites of wealth or acceptance/fitting-in growing up because they weren't the right kind of white growing up all the societal support, sympathy and recognition of their hardships now because they're too white.
I've noticed of them have become pretty alt right in recent years though, a lot of it arising out of resentment on being accused of having benefited from white privilege when they get they were afforded neither the opportunites of wealth or acceptance/fitting-in growing up because they weren't the right kind of white growing up all the societal support, sympathy and recognition of their hardships now because they're too white.
Not race, but I was sent to a French public school at six.
When I started, I could only say my name. Within a year, I was fluent. After 3 years, I was made to skip a grade. I stood out, but knowing I was better than all those kids at their own native language was quite the ego boost.
Later on, the same race, combined with the language fluency, allowed me to blend in, so I was spared from most negative experiences that immigrants face.
When I started, I could only say my name. Within a year, I was fluent. After 3 years, I was made to skip a grade. I stood out, but knowing I was better than all those kids at their own native language was quite the ego boost.
Later on, the same race, combined with the language fluency, allowed me to blend in, so I was spared from most negative experiences that immigrants face.
[deleted]
I’ve been in the industry since the late 90’s, right before the H1B volumes really spiked. I worked with a number of black people, and my hiring class consisted of a number of black engineers from historically black colleges. Fast forward 10 years, and cost savings forced a deep round of layoffs and offshoring. The black engineers were hit disproportionately. The current team’s makeup consists heavily of H1Bs. Those black engineers haven’t all returned to STEM.
I’ve transitioned through many roles in my careers, and remained very interested in this topic, so I notice the black makeup of each company. In St Louis, a city with about 50% black population, I consulted on a few projects. These companies employed a few African Americans, as security guards, but the engineers were about 50% white and 50% Indian.
In Florida, I consulted on another project. Every black engineer had the accent of a Caribbean native or African native. Judging by the accents, there were no American born black engineers.
I keep wondering if the H1Bs have out competed the black new college graduates, or if they’re simply not being given a chance at the jobs being filled by H1Bs.
Other companies have huge Infosys, TCS consulting presence, and those new engineering roles are filled without true competition from American workers, but doled out to new H1Bs.
I continue to think that an additional yearly salary tax should be levied on any H1B. This forces the employers to be financially aligned with employing US citizens. Ideally those taxes should for for STEM scholarships for the poor, increasing the US pool of these supposedly in demand engineers.
I’ve transitioned through many roles in my careers, and remained very interested in this topic, so I notice the black makeup of each company. In St Louis, a city with about 50% black population, I consulted on a few projects. These companies employed a few African Americans, as security guards, but the engineers were about 50% white and 50% Indian.
In Florida, I consulted on another project. Every black engineer had the accent of a Caribbean native or African native. Judging by the accents, there were no American born black engineers.
I keep wondering if the H1Bs have out competed the black new college graduates, or if they’re simply not being given a chance at the jobs being filled by H1Bs.
Other companies have huge Infosys, TCS consulting presence, and those new engineering roles are filled without true competition from American workers, but doled out to new H1Bs.
I continue to think that an additional yearly salary tax should be levied on any H1B. This forces the employers to be financially aligned with employing US citizens. Ideally those taxes should for for STEM scholarships for the poor, increasing the US pool of these supposedly in demand engineers.
Infosys is in court again for racist discrimination against non-Indian applicants:
https://www.deccanherald.com/business/business-news/another-...
Black unemployment hit an all-time low this year:
https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/irUjPx0BNBh...
Which is partly thanks to tougher enforcement action against illegal immigrants:
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/410/cpsprodpb/A67A/production/...
If you want to help Americans, particularly Black Americans, the H1B visa needs to be ended, the refugee intake reduced to <10,000/year, the wall built, birth citizenship ended, and mass deportations of illegal immigrants to take place across the USA.
https://www.deccanherald.com/business/business-news/another-...
Black unemployment hit an all-time low this year:
https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/irUjPx0BNBh...
Which is partly thanks to tougher enforcement action against illegal immigrants:
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/410/cpsprodpb/A67A/production/...
If you want to help Americans, particularly Black Americans, the H1B visa needs to be ended, the refugee intake reduced to <10,000/year, the wall built, birth citizenship ended, and mass deportations of illegal immigrants to take place across the USA.
Thank you very much for providing an actual and IMHO the most important reason.
This video from Neil deGrasse Tyson comes to mind. He describes his experience growing up wanting to be a scientist and all of the resistance he received. https://rewire.news/videos/2014/05/01/neil-degrasse-tyson-ra...
At least 3 reasons: stereotype threat (related to race), financial aid and socio-economic pragmatics.
Stereotype threat makes people less likely to engage in psychologically risky feedback loops (bad grades, seeking feedback,...), and many higher STEM courses are riskier in this regard.
Many students are forced to engage in work-study programs or work part-time to get through college. STEM curricula (especially engineering) require dedication and ample time.
Pragmatics, higher education is the most expedient path to escaping poverty for the underserved. So pursuing more vocational fields like nursing, professional stuff over a risky long career in academia seems more fruitful.
If my anecdote adds any value: I went to a somewhat rigorous college where most of my STEM classes were mostly Asian or White and I was the usually the only black student. I experienced the stressors mentioned above, the financial one was especially painful.
12 years later, I wish I had chosen a less time consuming field like liberal arts instead of CS/Eng and had a somewhat enjoyable experience.
One of my close Asian friends (with comparable ability) is now a Math professor. His upper middle class background enabled him to pay for his college, and living expenses in grad school. It’s inconceivable that I could have taken a similar track given the reality constraints of my particular situation.
Stereotype threat makes people less likely to engage in psychologically risky feedback loops (bad grades, seeking feedback,...), and many higher STEM courses are riskier in this regard.
Many students are forced to engage in work-study programs or work part-time to get through college. STEM curricula (especially engineering) require dedication and ample time.
Pragmatics, higher education is the most expedient path to escaping poverty for the underserved. So pursuing more vocational fields like nursing, professional stuff over a risky long career in academia seems more fruitful.
If my anecdote adds any value: I went to a somewhat rigorous college where most of my STEM classes were mostly Asian or White and I was the usually the only black student. I experienced the stressors mentioned above, the financial one was especially painful.
12 years later, I wish I had chosen a less time consuming field like liberal arts instead of CS/Eng and had a somewhat enjoyable experience.
One of my close Asian friends (with comparable ability) is now a Math professor. His upper middle class background enabled him to pay for his college, and living expenses in grad school. It’s inconceivable that I could have taken a similar track given the reality constraints of my particular situation.
They sure love that 13% figure. Why are so many nigerians in america so well educated [1] ? Not doubting any other assertions but my theory is that historically, STEM has not been a well reputed path to success,recognition and respect for black americans both in their communities and nationally. Segregation is only half a century ago,but even these days being STEM educated and black is associated with negative stereotypes (although that is changing). Another factor: STEM just isn't well famed/influential enough in american society to where holding a STEM job would help the black community solve significant social problems.
I hope you forgive me for the candor,but, at the home parenting level even in early life, kids have to be raised to pursue such fields or at least see others like them do well and succeed so they can draw inspiration. In other words, an asian american(or nigerian!) person pursuing STEM would not feel like they're swimming upstream and against the flow while america born black americans and many rural european americans would feel that way.
I don't presume that's all there is to it, but plenty of immigrants with terrible education spending in their 3rd world countries get full ride scholarships in STEM in the US. I am certain, it's not something solvable by throwing money at lower education. uni's in america are a cash grab scheme, so you are asking people to get into a lifetime of debt right now. Instead of depending on foreign workers, the US government on it's part should conditionally subsidize higher education for americans with the condition being they pursue in demand acadameic goals.
[1] https://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-m...
I hope you forgive me for the candor,but, at the home parenting level even in early life, kids have to be raised to pursue such fields or at least see others like them do well and succeed so they can draw inspiration. In other words, an asian american(or nigerian!) person pursuing STEM would not feel like they're swimming upstream and against the flow while america born black americans and many rural european americans would feel that way.
I don't presume that's all there is to it, but plenty of immigrants with terrible education spending in their 3rd world countries get full ride scholarships in STEM in the US. I am certain, it's not something solvable by throwing money at lower education. uni's in america are a cash grab scheme, so you are asking people to get into a lifetime of debt right now. Instead of depending on foreign workers, the US government on it's part should conditionally subsidize higher education for americans with the condition being they pursue in demand acadameic goals.
[1] https://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-m...
Do Nigerian have such high levels in the USA because they need these degrees to immigrate?
https://africacheck.org/reports/nigerian-immigrants-top-clas...
https://africacheck.org/reports/nigerian-immigrants-top-clas...
It's childrens of Nigerians mostly.
> Research has pointed out that students are more likely to regard teachers of the same race and ethnicity as role models, and due to proximity to them, put more effort into education and have higher college ambitions.
Is this claiming that students in homogeneous societies are at an advantage, because they are more likely to share their teacher's ethnicity?
Is this claiming that students in homogeneous societies are at an advantage, because they are more likely to share their teacher's ethnicity?
There is some evidence for that being an important factor in the performance of the highest ranked education systems.
Another perspective is that in a country with an ethnically homogeneous population, it becomes politically easier to push through reforms.
Another perspective is that in a country with an ethnically homogeneous population, it becomes politically easier to push through reforms.
Presumably for the same reason no one else is interested: https://www.govtech.com/education/k-12/New-Research-Shows-De...
People insinuate this is some sort of racism, but it actually has more to do with the incentive.
People tend to be heavily influenced by their environment as they grow up. And if the majority of your peers see X as being "cool", that's what a lot of people will try to achieve.
For example, during high school years, the "popular kids" are the jocks who play sports, not a geek who plays with code all day (although this has shifted a lot lately). If you look at it this way, the guys who go on to play an the NBA do it not because they are "underprivileged" and racially profiled to be kicked out of studying, but because that IS the valuable route they want to choose. Likewise, the current state of the music industry is heavily influenced by black culture. You could say pretty much everything is black culture influenced, from rap to r&b to Jazz to dance music. So a lot of black kids look up to those artists and creative people, and they strive to excel in those areas. I think that's great.
There's a reason why fighting arcade games and strategy games like Starcraft, WoW, etc. are dominated by Korean pro gamers. Nobody said blacks shouldn't play Starcraft or Tekken, nobody told white guys to stop playing. Koreans were simply heavily socially incentivized to be good at it.
Same goes for football (soccer). Nobody said Brazilians are the only privileged race on earth who are allowed to play football. They were just heavily socially incentivized to do so because that's what's considered of value.
Once you stop thinking as a victim and start thinking more positively, there are many explanations to the "mystery" you just can't seem to figure out.
p.s.
Just to be clear, I am not denying that racism exists. I would however like to point out that the people who keep blaming everything to racism are the ones who are actually subliminally racists.
People tend to be heavily influenced by their environment as they grow up. And if the majority of your peers see X as being "cool", that's what a lot of people will try to achieve.
For example, during high school years, the "popular kids" are the jocks who play sports, not a geek who plays with code all day (although this has shifted a lot lately). If you look at it this way, the guys who go on to play an the NBA do it not because they are "underprivileged" and racially profiled to be kicked out of studying, but because that IS the valuable route they want to choose. Likewise, the current state of the music industry is heavily influenced by black culture. You could say pretty much everything is black culture influenced, from rap to r&b to Jazz to dance music. So a lot of black kids look up to those artists and creative people, and they strive to excel in those areas. I think that's great.
There's a reason why fighting arcade games and strategy games like Starcraft, WoW, etc. are dominated by Korean pro gamers. Nobody said blacks shouldn't play Starcraft or Tekken, nobody told white guys to stop playing. Koreans were simply heavily socially incentivized to be good at it.
Same goes for football (soccer). Nobody said Brazilians are the only privileged race on earth who are allowed to play football. They were just heavily socially incentivized to do so because that's what's considered of value.
Once you stop thinking as a victim and start thinking more positively, there are many explanations to the "mystery" you just can't seem to figure out.
p.s.
Just to be clear, I am not denying that racism exists. I would however like to point out that the people who keep blaming everything to racism are the ones who are actually subliminally racists.
In computer science, access to computers and being able to freely use, modify and program them is critical. Many Black adults had no or limited computer access as children. Even kids that did need to know that's it's possible to create software , which might require an adult that knows it also, and importantly be allowed to actually do so. Computers are expensive enough that many Black families would keep kids from using them for fear of breaking them. People do overcome this and go onto become software engineers or take other jobs in tech, but common stories of Black people in tech include early computer access, many had parents that are software engineers even. I fear that the popularity of mobile means many more kids have a computing device, but it's not readily available for programming. This is probably offset by a bigger educational emphasis on learning how to code.
I disagree - many inner-city youths are into super-expensive sneakers ($300 and up), golden chains and other status symbols dictated by the social environment they grow up in. Computers are just not cool enough. Yes, there are exceptions, but the stereotype - unfortunately - mostly holds..
More money helps to a point, but what these young people need more than anything is appropriate role models (engineers, scientists, etc). Yes, I know, easier said than done...
More money helps to a point, but what these young people need more than anything is appropriate role models (engineers, scientists, etc). Yes, I know, easier said than done...
How many "inner-city youths" do you actually know? Or are you playing into a convenient stereotype? I grew up with "inner-city youths" that loved computers, and kids now have significantly more access. You're just wrong here. Also I knew many well off urban and suburban white and Asian kids that did not think computers were cool, so your stereotypes are unfounded
This seems like a stereotype from movies and TV rather than a generalization of real systemic information. Do you have numbers to back this up?
Michael Harriot from the Root has an answer for you (and Pete Buttigieg) - https://www.theroot.com/pete-buttigieg-called-me-heres-what-... in response to https://www.theroot.com/pete-buttigieg-is-a-lying-mf-1840038...
Obviously, kids are all going to want to emulate their role models. Whether the role models are Lance Armstrong or Lebron James, they will be influenced in one direction or another because of that.
But there is a very real fact that certain peoples don't have access to computers. My wife grew up in a poor area, and they did not have a computer in their home until she was 16 when got a laptop as a gift.
I grew up poor, but as a foreigner with no real contact with others so I stayed mostly at home. My father used to love buying old cheap computers at garage sales, so I would mix and match hardware from the old computers and I managed to learn a lot.
Both of us grew up poor, but I grew up to be a programmer because I had plenty of access to computers while growing up. It was always natural to me, and it was hard for her.
Neither of us idolized gold chains or expensive shoes. I think what you're saying is a harmful and frankly, racist stereotype. Just because a family buys a $200 pair of shoes for their child on Christmas, doesn't mean that means the child shouldn't have access to computers. Rich families will give their kids expensive things as well as give access to computers.
But there is a very real fact that certain peoples don't have access to computers. My wife grew up in a poor area, and they did not have a computer in their home until she was 16 when got a laptop as a gift.
I grew up poor, but as a foreigner with no real contact with others so I stayed mostly at home. My father used to love buying old cheap computers at garage sales, so I would mix and match hardware from the old computers and I managed to learn a lot.
Both of us grew up poor, but I grew up to be a programmer because I had plenty of access to computers while growing up. It was always natural to me, and it was hard for her.
Neither of us idolized gold chains or expensive shoes. I think what you're saying is a harmful and frankly, racist stereotype. Just because a family buys a $200 pair of shoes for their child on Christmas, doesn't mean that means the child shouldn't have access to computers. Rich families will give their kids expensive things as well as give access to computers.
This is the largest crock of BS one could plausibly spin up to calm their minds from exploring the harsh reality.
I worked for a bit with a Cuban immigrant who studied CS to a high level (post bachelors) without a computer. As in the university and the whole of society didn't have access to computers because you know....communism. He correctly retorted at my shock of "how can you do CS without a computer" question to say the least.
I worked for a bit with a Cuban immigrant who studied CS to a high level (post bachelors) without a computer. As in the university and the whole of society didn't have access to computers because you know....communism. He correctly retorted at my shock of "how can you do CS without a computer" question to say the least.
He did not have access to a computer in Cuba because of the embargo, not communism.
lol there is a trade embargo between the U.S and Cuba, there isn't a naval enforced embargo from all nations to Cuba. Please check your facts. Cuban citizens trade with other nations in the surrounding areas openly.
source: Cuban family and emigres. Please don't talk to me about communism without reliable data.
source: Cuban family and emigres. Please don't talk to me about communism without reliable data.
Glad to see someone adhering to simple moral philosophy like the presumtion of innocence. These days I see people proclaiming racism and sexism before even considering it could all be coincidental rather than harmfull intent to a specific sex or race.
So it's not racism, it's a lack of positive thinking?
As they said, racism is still an issue, but lack of role models and exposure is possibly a bigger issue. Lack of exposure and role models is a symptom of long term systemic racism though, but it doesn't manifest in the same way many people think of racism. Lack of positive thinking isn't quite the right term here, because it assumes that if Black kids just believed in themselves and thought differently it would fix all issues. It goes back to a stereotype that Black culture doesn't value STEM or intelligence, which isn't the case.
So it is racism then? Its ok to say it. Its racism. OC was racist too.
I agree. My comment was worded in order to avoid confusing people that equate racism with individual bigotry and prejudice
> People tend to be heavily influenced by their environment as they grow up.
Are you referring to the country's history of slavery, segregation and mass incarceration? Because I'd agree that "the environment" that black people are raised in is definitely shaped by racism, past and present. That you acknowledge its existence as a footnote makes me think you're underestimating the impact of 400 years of treating people as sub-human.
Are you referring to the country's history of slavery, segregation and mass incarceration? Because I'd agree that "the environment" that black people are raised in is definitely shaped by racism, past and present. That you acknowledge its existence as a footnote makes me think you're underestimating the impact of 400 years of treating people as sub-human.
That you insinuate i'm being racist even as you acknowledge my acknowledgement of the existence of racism just tells me that you're here to fight and not willing to have a civil discourse.
People get angry when the possibility that culture has something to do with black (vs asian, for example) success in America is floated. They will scream racism without even allowing the conversation.
What I said is that your analysis is missing historical context; that your acknowledgement is inadequate given that context. I certainly didn't mean to insinuate that you're racist, and I don't see what would give you that idea. Are you sure that I'm the one spoiling for a fight?
Your convenient explanation doesn't explain why more and more black people are accessing to the middle-class and above.
Neither does it explain why, in Europe for example, where there was no slavery, you probably see as few black people in STEM as in the US.
This article says white people are underrepresented in earning science and engineering bachelor degrees. Lol.
The stats on black/white/Asian college achievement makes for an uncomfortable discussion. It's okay to suggest that systemic racism is why black people don't participate in college as much as you'd expect based on their prevalence in society, but it's also okay to say that the reason Asians are over-represented is because culturally they've made it a huge priority to attain as much education as possible.
Maybe we should focus less on trying to identify and somehow solve systemic racism and more about making it culturally acceptable and desirable for black people to enter the STEM fields. Highlight the superstars in STEM who are kicking ass (e.g. Neil deGrasse Tyson) and encouraging people to identify with him and motivate them to work even harder.
Maybe we should focus less on trying to identify and somehow solve systemic racism and more about making it culturally acceptable and desirable for black people to enter the STEM fields. Highlight the superstars in STEM who are kicking ass (e.g. Neil deGrasse Tyson) and encouraging people to identify with him and motivate them to work even harder.
Exactly. The cognitive dissonance must be painful, for some people.
Poverty explains part of it but there is a cultural and familial part too.
Society isn't responsible for everything.
Would it also be okay to suggest Asians are over-represented because of unearned Asian privilege?
What about suggesting whites are (hypothetically) over-represented because they've made attaining education a priority?
Forgive me for noticing, but "one-sided" doesn't even begin to describe this debate.
What about suggesting whites are (hypothetically) over-represented because they've made attaining education a priority?
Forgive me for noticing, but "one-sided" doesn't even begin to describe this debate.
>Would it also be okay to suggest Asians are over-represented because of unearned Asian privilege?
That would be an incredibly stupid and unequivocally false thing to suggest because the odds are actually stacked against Asians, and they must work harder than most other people to achieve the same thing. Asians have earned everything they've attained in this country. They deserve whatever success they've gotten, and for that, they receive undeserved discrimination and disrespect.
That would be an incredibly stupid and unequivocally false thing to suggest because the odds are actually stacked against Asians, and they must work harder than most other people to achieve the same thing. Asians have earned everything they've attained in this country. They deserve whatever success they've gotten, and for that, they receive undeserved discrimination and disrespect.
> "That would be an incredibly stupid and unequivocally false thing to suggest because the odds are actually stacked against Asians, and they must work harder than most other people to achieve the same thing."
As an Asian, I don't agree with that. Many Asians emigrated from Asia with very little possessions and started their lives in Western countries in conditions as bad or worse than the poorest native born, including a significant language barrier and, yes, racism in their newly adopted homelands. Yet, by and large, they have built successful lives.
I'd describe the statement as incredibly accurate and unequivocally true.
As an Asian, I don't agree with that. Many Asians emigrated from Asia with very little possessions and started their lives in Western countries in conditions as bad or worse than the poorest native born, including a significant language barrier and, yes, racism in their newly adopted homelands. Yet, by and large, they have built successful lives.
I'd describe the statement as incredibly accurate and unequivocally true.
I think you are misreading something. I am arguing against the suggestion that Asians have unearned privilege which allowed them to become successful in America.
Ah, sorry. I did indeed misread your comment.
Not sure about other Asians, but most South Asians that immigrated to US already had degrees and were upper-middle class (having the money to buy international plane tickets automatically qualifies you to be upper-middle class). Sure they had to live poor initially but their mentality was "this is temporary and we will improve our situation soon enough".
> Sure they had to live poor initially but their mentality was "this is temporary and we will improve our situation soon enough".
so to get back to the grandparent post's question - why don't black people have this same mentality? What is it that's specific that's causing the disparity between asians and blacks?
so to get back to the grandparent post's question - why don't black people have this same mentality? What is it that's specific that's causing the disparity between asians and blacks?
1. Poverty, especially generational poverty, is extremely difficult to get out of. Studying in a university means you won't be able to help your family financially for 5-8 years. Which can be really difficult for many.
2. No role model. Let's say you can somehow manage those hardships. But how do you know all this effort and education loans will be worth it? There are not many role models for African Americans in STEM so they are afraid to dream big. For Indians it's very easy, our culture (especially the Brahmin upper-middle class culture) has always had plenty of role models.
3. They never really paid the true price of getting out of poverty. Education in India and China is highly state sponsored, so all the quality education you got there was mostly tax paid, which enabled them to immigrate to US in the first place. If you give African Americans the same quality education fully sponsored by the state things will change for them too.
2. No role model. Let's say you can somehow manage those hardships. But how do you know all this effort and education loans will be worth it? There are not many role models for African Americans in STEM so they are afraid to dream big. For Indians it's very easy, our culture (especially the Brahmin upper-middle class culture) has always had plenty of role models.
3. They never really paid the true price of getting out of poverty. Education in India and China is highly state sponsored, so all the quality education you got there was mostly tax paid, which enabled them to immigrate to US in the first place. If you give African Americans the same quality education fully sponsored by the state things will change for them too.
So these are true for the current generation of immigrants.
What about the generation of asians [0] that were from the beginning of the 19th century? They broke out of poverty, despite all the same disadvantages.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Chinese_Americans#:....
What about the generation of asians [0] that were from the beginning of the 19th century? They broke out of poverty, despite all the same disadvantages.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Chinese_Americans#:....
I don't believe the Indians and Chinese who immigrated back in 1900s ever got rid of poverty. It's only the last few decades of educated immigrants that changed the narrative that Asians are the model minority, it's been a part of US propaganda for decades now - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/29/the-r...
I can see the same happen in my ancestry too. The ones who migrated back in 1900s or during the wars never made it big while the educated ones who went there after 50s are doing well.
I can see the same happen in my ancestry too. The ones who migrated back in 1900s or during the wars never made it big while the educated ones who went there after 50s are doing well.
My great grandfather immigrated to USA in 1920s from Kapurthala in Punjab. Most of his descendants work as nurses if they went beyond high school, few went to college but almost all own property, so I’m not sure what you mean here.
So they were military/landlords back in Punjab and did the same in US? Where's the American Dream™ upgrade? Btw if you were a Jatt in Punjab you were already upper-middle class but now in US you downgraded to lower-middle class.
I would like to see if a Chamaar from Punjab was able to go to US before 1960s and able to become a land owner.
I would like to see if a Chamaar from Punjab was able to go to US before 1960s and able to become a land owner.
One obvious result is generational poverty and what hints at 'learned helplessness' of sorts and loss of hope. It isn't limited to just the racial context. London schools found that their low end of the bell curve were native working class children. Worse than even refugees from a non-privileged background in even the 'relative to origin' sense.
The phenomenon is larger than race, although it may be involved in any given instance or manifestation. It is a shared cliche for successful professionals hailing from both inner city to suburbs and dying small town Midwest that they never want to return to. That 'they're ones of the ones who made it out of that (shit/hell)hole', along with a disgust at its inhabitants or melancholy resignation that they are stuck in dysfunction, along with optional lingering resentment over mistreatment by the local crab-bucket.
I'm not sure anyone has an answer for how to solve those issues. A hypothetical solution probably wouldn't be very popular even if it isn't anything morally or ethically uncomfortable just from how 'counter-intutive' it would have to be.
The phenomenon is larger than race, although it may be involved in any given instance or manifestation. It is a shared cliche for successful professionals hailing from both inner city to suburbs and dying small town Midwest that they never want to return to. That 'they're ones of the ones who made it out of that (shit/hell)hole', along with a disgust at its inhabitants or melancholy resignation that they are stuck in dysfunction, along with optional lingering resentment over mistreatment by the local crab-bucket.
I'm not sure anyone has an answer for how to solve those issues. A hypothetical solution probably wouldn't be very popular even if it isn't anything morally or ethically uncomfortable just from how 'counter-intutive' it would have to be.
deogeo(1)
> Would it also be okay to suggest Asians are over-represented because of unearned Asian privilege?
Reverse racism, as it were?
> What about suggesting whites are (hypothetically) over-represented because they've made attaining education a priority?
Well, first they'd need to be over-represented ;).
> Forgive me for noticing, but "one-sided" doesn't even begin to describe this debate.
On the contrary, there seems to be a bazillion sides to this whole discussion.
Reverse racism, as it were?
> What about suggesting whites are (hypothetically) over-represented because they've made attaining education a priority?
Well, first they'd need to be over-represented ;).
> Forgive me for noticing, but "one-sided" doesn't even begin to describe this debate.
On the contrary, there seems to be a bazillion sides to this whole discussion.
> Well, first they'd need to be over-represented ;)
Not at all - behold, an entire article complaining about too many whites on Harvard [1], despite being the most under-represented group [2].
[1] https://slate.com/business/2019/09/harvard-admissions-affirm...
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21130080
Not at all - behold, an entire article complaining about too many whites on Harvard [1], despite being the most under-represented group [2].
[1] https://slate.com/business/2019/09/harvard-admissions-affirm...
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21130080
When I did my computer engineering undergrad, there were just a handful of US-born white people (or black people) in any of my classes. They were mostly filled with the children of working-class immigrants and foreign students.
edit: we joked that the progression of generations went: immigrant maid/janitor -> engineer/nurse/lab tech -> doctor/lawyer -> artist/unemployed philosopher
edit: we joked that the progression of generations went: immigrant maid/janitor -> engineer/nurse/lab tech -> doctor/lawyer -> artist/unemployed philosopher
Not just STEM - in Harvard too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21130080
True. I didn't get that
Is it just me or is 13% of the population getting 9% of bachelors degrees - and then the 9% going on to get 7% of PhDs not such an outrageous stat?
I thought the numbers were a lot more worrying.
I thought the numbers were a lot more worrying.
Why are there so few white people in pro basketball?
Pro sports are (nowadays) highly specialized, highly optimized professions, where one millisecond counts. Whether it be though underlying genetic predisposition, or social opportunities/incentives (both discussed in other replies), it is not unlikely that one identifiable section of the population would have inherent advantages.
STEM (or similar endeavors) are no such thing and never will be. Progress in these fields require the entirety of human virtue (and perhaps vice) - over and above that which can be strictly measured, categorized, in-calculated or trained. There is no good reason why any part of humanity should be under-represented in these undertakings.
STEM (or similar endeavors) are no such thing and never will be. Progress in these fields require the entirety of human virtue (and perhaps vice) - over and above that which can be strictly measured, categorized, in-calculated or trained. There is no good reason why any part of humanity should be under-represented in these undertakings.
There is no good reason why any part of humanity should be under-represented in these undertakings.
So for you culture has no impact on an individual? Why should a particular field of human activities represent equally all the subsets of human groups?
Individuals are part of groups and groups have their inner dynamics and features.
Why are they more male chefs with 4 Michelin stars? Should there be an equal representation of women? No.
So for you culture has no impact on an individual? Why should a particular field of human activities represent equally all the subsets of human groups?
Individuals are part of groups and groups have their inner dynamics and features.
Why are they more male chefs with 4 Michelin stars? Should there be an equal representation of women? No.
The thing is, basketball is no such thing either.
There's nothing really stopping anyone from playing or enjoying a game, and as kids back in the day we used to play for fun on schoolyard courts. The problem is cultural; we as a culture have not really valued sports as recreation, but as either professional calling or consumer activity.
Trying to argue from the outlier really doesn't work as you said, but its also more of a cultural issue that we really don't value participation in sport over production of it.
There's nothing really stopping anyone from playing or enjoying a game, and as kids back in the day we used to play for fun on schoolyard courts. The problem is cultural; we as a culture have not really valued sports as recreation, but as either professional calling or consumer activity.
Trying to argue from the outlier really doesn't work as you said, but its also more of a cultural issue that we really don't value participation in sport over production of it.
Because suburbia. The four year old kids are stuck in their cardboard palace and can't go shoot hoops in the public park, even if they would like to. It's inequality baked into the system.
> Why are there so few white people in pro basketball?
Because Whites don't face systematic discrimination in (or in the pipeline leading to) the whole host of fields where Blacks do, so taking a shot that is about as reliable as investing all your income in lottery tickets if you have the signs that you might be able to make it to shoot for a pro basketball career isn't as likely to make any kind of sense for Whites.
Because Whites don't face systematic discrimination in (or in the pipeline leading to) the whole host of fields where Blacks do, so taking a shot that is about as reliable as investing all your income in lottery tickets if you have the signs that you might be able to make it to shoot for a pro basketball career isn't as likely to make any kind of sense for Whites.
For more on this, William Rhoden wrote a book on the topic:
"Forty Million Dollar Slaves: The Rise, Fall, and Redemption of the Black Athlete"
For those who may pass judgment based on the title and the inclusion of the word slave, I leave this NYT review from historian Warren Goldstein as a mark of quality. [0]
[0] https://www.nytimes.com./2006/07/23/books/review/23goldstein...
"Forty Million Dollar Slaves: The Rise, Fall, and Redemption of the Black Athlete"
For those who may pass judgment based on the title and the inclusion of the word slave, I leave this NYT review from historian Warren Goldstein as a mark of quality. [0]
[0] https://www.nytimes.com./2006/07/23/books/review/23goldstein...
Pro basketball's viewership is also majority non-white, so there's probably some feedback loop effects going on with the people interested in becoming players in the first place (which then influences the audience, and so on).
Do you have data to back this up? My understanding was that the viewership was predominately White/Asian/Hispanic with black being the minority.
https://morningconsult.com/2018/01/25/nfl-isnt-divisive-spor...
> During the NBA's 2016-2017 regular season, 66 percent of TV viewers were racial minorities, according to data from ratings provider Nielsen: Blacks made up 47 percent of the audience, Hispanics 11 percent and Asians 8 percent.
> During the NBA's 2016-2017 regular season, 66 percent of TV viewers were racial minorities, according to data from ratings provider Nielsen: Blacks made up 47 percent of the audience, Hispanics 11 percent and Asians 8 percent.
Historically you can say interest and opportunity.. The league has gotten whiter over the years most because of influx of european talent. White people didn't get taller anything. They just in europe gotten to see the benefits of being a basketball player via things like the dream team, internet, and a more connected world.
What are you implying?
I read his comment as "inherent racial disparities in ability". For basketball, I doubt you'll find many that disagree.
For STEM, or computer programming and math at least, it's far harder to know. Certainly there are very few black people in tech/math, at least at the higher levels.
Perhaps part of the problem is that empty virtue signaling (like banning the terms "master" and "slave") is easy, but actually doing the work that would really matter is hard. I spent a couple hours helping a black kid polish up for his Google interview (he made it).
That's something, but it will really take serious tutoring and a society wide scale to bridge the gap. And other socioeconomic factors might still prove overwhelming.
And for gods' sake, the whole "girls that code" thing needs to die right now. Can you imagine how a young black man would be affected by that?
For STEM, or computer programming and math at least, it's far harder to know. Certainly there are very few black people in tech/math, at least at the higher levels.
Perhaps part of the problem is that empty virtue signaling (like banning the terms "master" and "slave") is easy, but actually doing the work that would really matter is hard. I spent a couple hours helping a black kid polish up for his Google interview (he made it).
That's something, but it will really take serious tutoring and a society wide scale to bridge the gap. And other socioeconomic factors might still prove overwhelming.
And for gods' sake, the whole "girls that code" thing needs to die right now. Can you imagine how a young black man would be affected by that?
I'm implying no such thing. There's no gene for basketball, just as there's no gene for engineering. Yet, certain populations excel at one or the other. Aptitude arises out of cultural and socioeconomic factors. Clearly, science and engineering are not strong factors in some populations' culture and lifestyle. Whereas, it is a lifestyle from an early age for hundreds of millions of whites and Asians, mostly boys. There could be a genetic component but such has not been proven.
I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. There is a gene for basketball--it's called being tall and fairly muscular. There's a reason why there are very few great Ashkenazi basketball players, and it's not racism or culture.
> There is a gene for basketball--it's called being tall and fairly muscular
so then by that logic, you can argue why there are so few whites in basketball must be that they aren't as tall and muscular.
so then by that logic, you can argue why there are so few whites in basketball must be that they aren't as tall and muscular.
I think most basketball fans would agree with that argument.
And yet when there's little or no representation of one race in one area of human endeavour, it's OK and accepted. But in another endeavour, it's frowned upon and spell racism.
Professional sports is a competitive industry where absolute performance is irrelevant. Only relative performance counts. In cooperative industries like engineering and software development only absolute performance counts. As long as someone is competent enough to be able to bring in enough money to pay for food and rent they will be hired and since that is such an incredibly low bar there is no reason to exclude "less skilled" people who perform 3.4% worse than the best. Those "less skilled" people are more important than the top performer simply because they are in the majority. Having 10 competent people is better than only having the best person for the job.
the_omegist(1)
Maybe because there were 300 years of systemic natural selection in this country called "slavery" where black Americans were bought/sold and bred based solely on their physical attributes?
Do you realize that this is full-fledged, genetics-based racism?
That is what slavery produced, yes.
The Jews must have transcendent superhuman athleticism then. Basketball used to be dominated by immigrant Jews before World War 2.
Not sure about their athleticism, but it's true that they have been awarded Nobel prizes between 5000% and 20000% of their population share (depending on the discipline), and it's time to put an end to this blatant systemic racism. /s
Much like the basketball dominance was caused by Jews playing the sport in large numbers, the dominance of scientific prizes was largely a result of them going into scientific fields in large numbers.
Any decent sized ethnic group could dominate a profession if they wanted to.
Any decent sized ethnic group could dominate a profession if they wanted to.
Where do black Africans fit in within this theory?
In "Raj Chetty: The Fading of the American Dream | Amanpour and Company" (https://youtu.be/_rffAhR4mSs) (summary below), Chetty makes the case that doing what works is essential. The discussion ) ultimately turns to race and black boys in particular. Turns out that black boys (versus white boys or black girls) need their father present.
What spoke to me the most was Chetty's statement that race always mattered no matter income, education, family, neighborhood. Go to 18:15 to learn more. Basically, while system and program improvements could result in lifting black boys/men up the ladder, the system was pushing against them. This is a profoundly difficult thing to labor against even in a systematic, data-informed, policy- and practice-driven way. But the failure to take a piecemeal approach may result in so few black people in STEM.
---
Summary: Raj Chetty believes he may have found a way to reignite the American Dream. Using “Big Data,” Chetty says we can offer equality of opportunity to kids of disadvantaged backgrounds. The renowned Harvard Professor has received plaudits for his work in harnessing data to propose solutions to economic inequality. He sits down with Hari to explain his work.
What spoke to me the most was Chetty's statement that race always mattered no matter income, education, family, neighborhood. Go to 18:15 to learn more. Basically, while system and program improvements could result in lifting black boys/men up the ladder, the system was pushing against them. This is a profoundly difficult thing to labor against even in a systematic, data-informed, policy- and practice-driven way. But the failure to take a piecemeal approach may result in so few black people in STEM.
---
Summary: Raj Chetty believes he may have found a way to reignite the American Dream. Using “Big Data,” Chetty says we can offer equality of opportunity to kids of disadvantaged backgrounds. The renowned Harvard Professor has received plaudits for his work in harnessing data to propose solutions to economic inequality. He sits down with Hari to explain his work.
Who is getting the rest of the undergrad science degrees if Asians, Blacks, and Whites only account for 74% of them?
the numbers are from this source: https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf19304/digest/field-of-degree-m...
it distinguishes between white (59.3), Asian (10.8), Black or African American (3.9), Hispanic or Latino (10.4), American Indian or Alaska Native (0.3) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0.1) and Temporary visa holder (9.3) for Engineering
Edit: and More than one race, unknown, or other (5.9), adds up to 100
it distinguishes between white (59.3), Asian (10.8), Black or African American (3.9), Hispanic or Latino (10.4), American Indian or Alaska Native (0.3) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0.1) and Temporary visa holder (9.3) for Engineering
Edit: and More than one race, unknown, or other (5.9), adds up to 100
[deleted]
Possibly Native Americans/First Peoples, Pacific Islanders, or individuals who self-identify by ethnicity rather than race on these types of reports.
Also people of Indian descent, for whom it can sometimes be pretty annoying to get dumped into the 'Asian' bucket.
That was my first thought. Probably (maybe wrong, just IME) most 'people from the Western portion of continental Asia' don't see themselves (I suppose we say 'self-identify' now) as 'Asian'.
Similarly to we Britons speaking of 'Europe' and particularly 'Europeans' with the 'continental' implied - and even that phrase not really making sense, not meaning the same as 'mainland'!
Similarly to we Britons speaking of 'Europe' and particularly 'Europeans' with the 'continental' implied - and even that phrase not really making sense, not meaning the same as 'mainland'!
Doesn't America have a great deal of mixed-race people (like their prior President)? Or is that not usually treated as a separate category there?
Perhaps some come from the 2nd Largest demographic group, Latinx, (about 16% of the population). As another commenter said, that leaves about 9% who don’t fall into these major groups.
On modern surveys of this sort (for example, the US Census), 'of Hispanic descent' is usually a separate question entirely from the 'White / Black / Asian / etc' one, in a clumsy attempt to capture the overlap of mixed-ethnicity groups.
That would support the hypothesis, if latinx people check ‘other’ and ‘of Hispanic descent’.
Many modern forms just say ‘check any that apply’, so you can check both white and Asian, for example.
Many modern forms just say ‘check any that apply’, so you can check both white and Asian, for example.
I think it's because of Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is clearly Latin-American, but many Puertoricans would identify as Black as well, and these two are independent.
Note: I'm an African-American man who works in Silicon Valley as a researcher in an AI lab.
I believe there are a number of reasons why there are so few African-Americans in STEM.
1. Many of us grew up in low-income households that don't have the same amount of resources to devote to education that higher-income households do. Many of us also grew up in households where the parents don't have college degrees. Roughly 70% of African-Americans are born to unmarried parents, and many African-Americans live in single-parent homes; being a single parent is very challenging. Many low-income housing areas are unfortunately crime-ridden. It takes a lot of determination for parents to raise their children under such circumstances.
2. Having a successful STEM career means being able to master technical subjects that require a considerable amount of time and focus to study, such as mathematics. Consider the type of mathematics and science preparation needed to enter a top-tier undergraduate STEM program. Now compare that to the education opportunities that are available at most American high schools, especially those located in the low-income neighborhoods that many African-American high schoolers attend. Without the influence of a really good teacher or mentor, or without the influence of a parent who has earned a college degree, how would a student learn the study skills that are necessary for obtaining a STEM degree? I'll give a personal anecdote: despite my perfect high school GPA (4.0 unweighted), my history of being in gifted programs, and having taken seven community college courses (including three computer science courses), the transition to attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as a computer science major was a rough one for me because I didn't know how to study for rigorous university-level STEM courses. I basically skated through my entire pre-university experiences; I didn't know what it was like to actually have to sit down and truly study something that I wasn't already passionate about (I was able to teach myself programming and Japanese, but I found it difficult going through my physics textbooks). Despite this, I stuck with it at Cal Poly and ended up eking out a 3.0 GPA, which was just enough for me to enter a PhD program, though not my dream school of Carnegie Mellon. Unfortunately I knew of many students who either dropped out or switched to less demanding majors.
3. So, despite the odds, you end up with a freshly-minted STEM degree and it's time to take on the world! Well, the challenges aren't over yet. Imagine being the first in your family to have a white-collar job, as was the case with me. Who is going to give you advice about how corporate America works and how to succeed under that environment? Imagine being the only black person in your office, or sometimes at the company? Thankfully I grew up with a lot of immersion in various cultures and so I'm comfortable with being the only black person around, but that doesn't always mean that the people I work with are comfortable around me. I personally haven't experienced discrimination at the workplace, but I know other people who have. There are also non-work stresses; there's taking care of other family members, there's dealing with the police, there's dealing with dating, which I've found difficult in Silicon Valley. These challenges could mount up and have people think of alternatives.
I believe that any solution to addressing the shortage of black people in STEM will involve addressing all three issues above. Starting from #3 and working my way up to #1:
- We need to retain the black professionals in STEM that we already have by providing mentorship opportunities that will help us navigate our careers and our personal lives.
- For university students, we need to teach them how to study STEM and what it means to truly master a topic. Mastery of the foundations is important for research and developing technologies.
- Our high schools need to be more rigorous. By the time a high school student graduates, the student should know how to study at the college level, and the student should be able to be competent in a wide field of subjects, not only STEM, but also English, history, economics, government, and a foreign language. Middle school and elementary school should also be made more rigorous in order to prepare students for high school. Ideally the level of competence of a high school graduate should be equivalent to an associate's degree. Alan Kay once quoted an English woman who said, "[y]ou Americans have the best high school education in the world -- what a pity you have to go to college to get it!"
- Finally, we need to address the social problems mentioned in #1, though unfortunately I don't have specific solutions regarding these problems.
I believe there are a number of reasons why there are so few African-Americans in STEM.
1. Many of us grew up in low-income households that don't have the same amount of resources to devote to education that higher-income households do. Many of us also grew up in households where the parents don't have college degrees. Roughly 70% of African-Americans are born to unmarried parents, and many African-Americans live in single-parent homes; being a single parent is very challenging. Many low-income housing areas are unfortunately crime-ridden. It takes a lot of determination for parents to raise their children under such circumstances.
2. Having a successful STEM career means being able to master technical subjects that require a considerable amount of time and focus to study, such as mathematics. Consider the type of mathematics and science preparation needed to enter a top-tier undergraduate STEM program. Now compare that to the education opportunities that are available at most American high schools, especially those located in the low-income neighborhoods that many African-American high schoolers attend. Without the influence of a really good teacher or mentor, or without the influence of a parent who has earned a college degree, how would a student learn the study skills that are necessary for obtaining a STEM degree? I'll give a personal anecdote: despite my perfect high school GPA (4.0 unweighted), my history of being in gifted programs, and having taken seven community college courses (including three computer science courses), the transition to attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as a computer science major was a rough one for me because I didn't know how to study for rigorous university-level STEM courses. I basically skated through my entire pre-university experiences; I didn't know what it was like to actually have to sit down and truly study something that I wasn't already passionate about (I was able to teach myself programming and Japanese, but I found it difficult going through my physics textbooks). Despite this, I stuck with it at Cal Poly and ended up eking out a 3.0 GPA, which was just enough for me to enter a PhD program, though not my dream school of Carnegie Mellon. Unfortunately I knew of many students who either dropped out or switched to less demanding majors.
3. So, despite the odds, you end up with a freshly-minted STEM degree and it's time to take on the world! Well, the challenges aren't over yet. Imagine being the first in your family to have a white-collar job, as was the case with me. Who is going to give you advice about how corporate America works and how to succeed under that environment? Imagine being the only black person in your office, or sometimes at the company? Thankfully I grew up with a lot of immersion in various cultures and so I'm comfortable with being the only black person around, but that doesn't always mean that the people I work with are comfortable around me. I personally haven't experienced discrimination at the workplace, but I know other people who have. There are also non-work stresses; there's taking care of other family members, there's dealing with the police, there's dealing with dating, which I've found difficult in Silicon Valley. These challenges could mount up and have people think of alternatives.
I believe that any solution to addressing the shortage of black people in STEM will involve addressing all three issues above. Starting from #3 and working my way up to #1:
- We need to retain the black professionals in STEM that we already have by providing mentorship opportunities that will help us navigate our careers and our personal lives.
- For university students, we need to teach them how to study STEM and what it means to truly master a topic. Mastery of the foundations is important for research and developing technologies.
- Our high schools need to be more rigorous. By the time a high school student graduates, the student should know how to study at the college level, and the student should be able to be competent in a wide field of subjects, not only STEM, but also English, history, economics, government, and a foreign language. Middle school and elementary school should also be made more rigorous in order to prepare students for high school. Ideally the level of competence of a high school graduate should be equivalent to an associate's degree. Alan Kay once quoted an English woman who said, "[y]ou Americans have the best high school education in the world -- what a pity you have to go to college to get it!"
- Finally, we need to address the social problems mentioned in #1, though unfortunately I don't have specific solutions regarding these problems.
Interestingly, you should read up on Thomas Sowell's work and books. There are also plenty of videos on Youtube where you can get some distillation of his work.
Here are some of his "controversial" views:
1. Reduce the incentive to destroy the family unit by providing large benefits to single parents
2. School choice
For the first one, even the leftist economists don't dispute the distortions caused by these transfers. As for point 2, they'll always shriek about things even though it makes sense to tie the child to the money and not the money to the school. Parents will always suss out the better option and will send their child to a better school.
Here are some of his "controversial" views:
1. Reduce the incentive to destroy the family unit by providing large benefits to single parents
2. School choice
For the first one, even the leftist economists don't dispute the distortions caused by these transfers. As for point 2, they'll always shriek about things even though it makes sense to tie the child to the money and not the money to the school. Parents will always suss out the better option and will send their child to a better school.
Because sometimes some people choose not to go into STEM. It's an individual's choice.
It seems like since he wasn't really clearly specifying a region, I should be a little suspicious of the premise. I mean, if you go to a country with mostly black people in good economic standing and find a major university, it seems unlikely that generalization would hold.
I could venture a guess, and its probably why i'll never go from my current job as a diesel mechanic to junior python programmer no matter how badly i want to:
criminal record.
in the US you can discriminate against employees who have any sort of criminal record. I've served jailtime for possession of cannabis, so that automatically rules me out for a lot of white-collar jobs. Black people tend to get the brunt of policing, and hold disproportionately high rates of misdemeanor and felony charges and longer sentences. I got 3 years for my conviction, but i know a black machinist who served 8 and a parole for an almost identical charge.
We call them "correctional facilities" but continue to discriminate in housing and employment for anyone who's been 'corrected' in one...sort of a standing biblical retribution.
criminal record.
in the US you can discriminate against employees who have any sort of criminal record. I've served jailtime for possession of cannabis, so that automatically rules me out for a lot of white-collar jobs. Black people tend to get the brunt of policing, and hold disproportionately high rates of misdemeanor and felony charges and longer sentences. I got 3 years for my conviction, but i know a black machinist who served 8 and a parole for an almost identical charge.
We call them "correctional facilities" but continue to discriminate in housing and employment for anyone who's been 'corrected' in one...sort of a standing biblical retribution.
I have never once checked a reference or performed a background check on any candidate for our now 20 person company. There are a ton of companies like mine. My guess is more than less but that’s just a hunch.
Diesel mechanic isn’t a bad career (my dad is an elevator mechanic and I still sometimes think I should have just done that), grass is always greener etc
Diesel mechanic isn’t a bad career (my dad is an elevator mechanic and I still sometimes think I should have just done that), grass is always greener etc
Not discounting you experience, as I've known people who have been absolutely condemned by their record, but I also don't think you should give up just yet.
I've heard of a lot of guys with much bigger drug charges breaking into the field. I was reading a thread a few weeks ago, where one person basically said as long as it isn't something like a serious financial crime or computer crime they'd be willing to hire someone.
I've heard of a lot of guys with much bigger drug charges breaking into the field. I was reading a thread a few weeks ago, where one person basically said as long as it isn't something like a serious financial crime or computer crime they'd be willing to hire someone.
> for possession of cannabis... I got 3 years
Sorry if I ask, but how much? Three years seems an awful lot of time.
Second, for how long can companies access this kind of record? Isn't it unacceptable to discriminate candidates based on something that has nothing to do with the qualification for a job?
Sorry if I ask, but how much? Three years seems an awful lot of time.
Second, for how long can companies access this kind of record? Isn't it unacceptable to discriminate candidates based on something that has nothing to do with the qualification for a job?
sorry to say, but this kind of question gets asked constantly in every part of my life. Suddenly the interviewer is now your personal arbiter. You're living your sentencing all over again as someone youve never met is now deciding if you get to keep your apartment, buy a car, or get a job. It makes you feel intensely vulnerable and uncomfortable. Its one of the reasons I just dont look for anything anymore.
You shouldn't be sorry. I thought it was a pretty rude question myself. Curiosity shouldn't be an excuse for being a jackhole.
Not that I want to discuss about manners but, after someone told you, unrequested, some very personal stuff, I don't find it impolite to ask some further detail- although I accept it if he doesn't want to answer.
The question in itself wasn't out of idle curiosity but because the sentencing seems disproportionate. I wanted to double check this before launching in a tirade against the US justice :)
The question in itself wasn't out of idle curiosity but because the sentencing seems disproportionate. I wanted to double check this before launching in a tirade against the US justice :)
Fair enough. Asking personal questions out of idle curiosity is something I tend to be sensitive to, so I apologize if I seemed overly harsh.
> how long can companies access this kind of record?
Until you get your record expunged, assuming you can (some states, e.g. Washington, make that impossible). It's not like a credit report there's no 7 year filter on what shows up in a background check.
> Isn't it unacceptable to discriminate candidates based on something that has nothing to do with the qualification for a job?
Unacceptable, or illegal? It's [mostly] only illegal to discriminate against a protected class, everything else is fair game. Whether it is acceptable is an opinion.
Until you get your record expunged, assuming you can (some states, e.g. Washington, make that impossible). It's not like a credit report there's no 7 year filter on what shows up in a background check.
> Isn't it unacceptable to discriminate candidates based on something that has nothing to do with the qualification for a job?
Unacceptable, or illegal? It's [mostly] only illegal to discriminate against a protected class, everything else is fair game. Whether it is acceptable is an opinion.
So your premise is all Black people have criminal records and that is why they aren't in STEM?
No, but there are plenty of statistics showing that every step of the criminal justice system is biased against minorities from stop and frisk , to traffic stops, to tickets vs warnings, to the “War on Drugs”.
in many states, a felony conviction will disqualify you from education grants.
that same felony will also basically permaban you from any educational loans, or most other loans fwiw. Check cashing is now your friend.
Also not all black people, but the fact that black people make up 14% of america but 40% of the prison population is not helping the prospects for a more diverse STEM.
that same felony will also basically permaban you from any educational loans, or most other loans fwiw. Check cashing is now your friend.
Also not all black people, but the fact that black people make up 14% of america but 40% of the prison population is not helping the prospects for a more diverse STEM.
The article doesn't say that all black people aren't in STEM. So your statement is completely wrong. Additionally drug bans are often completely arbitrary and therefore they can carefully chosen to impact certain races more than others. Cigarettes are equally popular among all ethnics but something like cannabis might be especially popular in black communities. So cannabis gets banned but cigarettes can stay. The public doesn't care because they think junkies are bad people and should go to jail even if going to jail doesn't actually result in decreased drug usage.
If you come from a demographic making the lowest amount of money e.g. 41k/yr per the article would it not make sense to do a career with a more immediate reward? PhD is for people with trust funds who can afford to take a 50-60k postdoctoral position in a vhcol city due to a trust fund paying out at least 50-60k per year.
I know dozens of PhDs.
Literally not a single one of them has a trust fund.
I know probably about a dozen people with trust funds. None of them got anything past a Masters (but most did actually go for the masters).
Obviously this is anecdotal, but in my experience your assertion is not true. If you have stats to back it up though I'd be happy to see them.
Literally not a single one of them has a trust fund.
I know probably about a dozen people with trust funds. None of them got anything past a Masters (but most did actually go for the masters).
Obviously this is anecdotal, but in my experience your assertion is not true. If you have stats to back it up though I'd be happy to see them.
Occam's Razor says that they aren't a lot of black people in STEM positions because companies aren't hiring black people in STEM positions. There are plenty of black candidates applying to FAANG companies only to be rejected because "they don't fit in with the culture" or they "weren't Google-y enough", or "they couldn't write a depth-first-search algorithm in less than 2 seconds in front of a whiteboard ("white board" pun fully intended) so they must not be smart." Over enough time, those parents go on to have kids who then encourage those kids to go elsewhere and invest their study time in other areas where they know they can be successful.
For context: I am Black.
I think it’s a pipeline problem. How many Blacks are graduating from top schools in STEM? I didn’t graduate from a top school at all. But that was back in the mid 90s and by choice. I just needed a degree. I knew I could get a job and be competitive with anyone being self taught in both C and a variety of assembly languages.
I just got a job at Amazon under AWS Professional Services. I got a customer facing role as a Black guy. If there were going to be discrimination, that would be where it would be. Because of Covid, the interview was completely virtual. I’m coming from a long 25 year career of working for mostly small companies that no one has ever heard of. All of my AWS experience came from a company with less than 50 people.
I can honestly say that I don’t think I have ever been discriminated against in hiring. I have had maybe 3 rejections in 25 years, plenty of interviews and since I only use recruiters, my resume doesn’t go through the ATS black hole.
I think it’s a pipeline problem. How many Blacks are graduating from top schools in STEM? I didn’t graduate from a top school at all. But that was back in the mid 90s and by choice. I just needed a degree. I knew I could get a job and be competitive with anyone being self taught in both C and a variety of assembly languages.
I just got a job at Amazon under AWS Professional Services. I got a customer facing role as a Black guy. If there were going to be discrimination, that would be where it would be. Because of Covid, the interview was completely virtual. I’m coming from a long 25 year career of working for mostly small companies that no one has ever heard of. All of my AWS experience came from a company with less than 50 people.
I can honestly say that I don’t think I have ever been discriminated against in hiring. I have had maybe 3 rejections in 25 years, plenty of interviews and since I only use recruiters, my resume doesn’t go through the ATS black hole.
I'm black too, but I've had the opposite experience. Turned down at Google, Microsoft, and a few other Top N tech companies. Is it because I'm black? Probably not. But throughout all of the interviews, I've never met or seen another black engineer on the teams, let alone interviewed by one. It's hard enough to get through the hackerrank-style "gotcha" questions, but it's even harder to feel connected to an interviewer who wants to talk about their team culture in terms of rollerblading or playing sandlot volleyball.
My virtual interviews with AWS were very structured and very much focused on soft skill questions and “describe your projects”. My only technical interview was the first one before I went through “the loop”.
Anyone who studied for the AWS Architect Associate could pass it.
Of course, I did have a resume that showed a lot of real world experience with AWS in particular and leading technical projects in general -thanks to working at small companies.
I wouldn’t make it past the first 10 minutes of an algorithm style interview for a software dev position at $BigTech at this point in my life. I knew my way in would be through the consulting department.
Anyone who studied for the AWS Architect Associate could pass it.
Of course, I did have a resume that showed a lot of real world experience with AWS in particular and leading technical projects in general -thanks to working at small companies.
I wouldn’t make it past the first 10 minutes of an algorithm style interview for a software dev position at $BigTech at this point in my life. I knew my way in would be through the consulting department.
Do you think you're too old to put the month in grinding leetcode or just don't have the time?
Why would I? I got a job at Amazon (AWS Consulting) paying the same amount as a software engineer and it is a remote position that allows me to live in a relatively low cost of living area.
I did nothing special to prepare to work for Amazon. I just did my job, gained experience, and made sure I could answer soft skill questions based on the “Leadership Principles”.
I wasn’t even thinking about working at Amazon pre-Covid before my company had across the board pay cuts. My company made the announcement, the next day a recruiter from Amazon emailed me and I thought “Why Not?” They asked me to put in an application. I did it and a month and a half later I had an offer.
I definitely didn’t spend months “grinding leetCode” like the fresh college grads over at r/cscareerquestions.
I did nothing special to prepare to work for Amazon. I just did my job, gained experience, and made sure I could answer soft skill questions based on the “Leadership Principles”.
I wasn’t even thinking about working at Amazon pre-Covid before my company had across the board pay cuts. My company made the announcement, the next day a recruiter from Amazon emailed me and I thought “Why Not?” They asked me to put in an application. I did it and a month and a half later I had an offer.
I definitely didn’t spend months “grinding leetCode” like the fresh college grads over at r/cscareerquestions.
It seems one of the most insidious effects of racism is the nagging feeling when a job interview doesn't work out, or someone was rude to you, in the back of your mind wondering if racial bias had anything to do with it. Even if one could keep a relatively accurate accounting, just having to constantly process this being a real possibility would be exhausting.
I disagree. Most companies are actually trying to INCREASE diversity, be it based on skin colour or gender. So it may actually be much EASIER to get accepted in this companies if you are black.
I know in some STEM fields (not all in STEM is CS), you have MUCH MUCH higher chances to land a good job at a big company if you are female. But being female in medicine or law buys you nothing since there is no imbalance.
I know in some STEM fields (not all in STEM is CS), you have MUCH MUCH higher chances to land a good job at a big company if you are female. But being female in medicine or law buys you nothing since there is no imbalance.
Yeh you'd think that but if the interviewer doesn't like you doesn't even matter. When I graduated a few years ago I made a spreadsheet to see why. The strongest predictor wasn't how well I think I did out of 10, or hours of prep I did before hand. There were certain people regardless of what I need gave me 100% rejection. I'm not saying it was prejudice, but it was a very clear pattern.
Dude, nobody is worse in getting a job than me. But let me tell you a few things:
1. Mostly it is how much people like you and how much they share with you.
2. 1st class people hire 1st class people, 2nd class people hire 3rd class people
3. Being rejected tells nothing about you. The guy they hired tells a lot about the company.
1. Mostly it is how much people like you and how much they share with you.
2. 1st class people hire 1st class people, 2nd class people hire 3rd class people
3. Being rejected tells nothing about you. The guy they hired tells a lot about the company.
Of course everybody says they're TRYING to increase diversity, but none have actually DONE it. But not because there's a lack of qualified diverse candidates applying there. If they wanted to solve the problem, they could, but it's not a priority for them. Facebook grew their overall employee base by nearly 400% over the past 6 years, but their percentage of black employees only grew by 0.8%.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/12/six-years-into-diversity-rep...
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/12/six-years-into-diversity-rep...
Growing from 3% to 3.8% is 26% growth over 5 years or roughly 5% per year. That's incredibly far away from "none have actually DONE it". If you could solve systemic problems in just 5 years then why hasn't anyone done it over the last 200 years?
By the way the facebook data is only from 2014 to 2019. The headline is misleading when you only look at facebook.
By the way the facebook data is only from 2014 to 2019. The headline is misleading when you only look at facebook.
Nitpick, FAANG hasn't been around nearly long enough to have enough parents with workforce age children for this to be true. Especially not for them to have gone through recent (last 5-10 years) interview processes that people complain about.
I know some of the first Black software engineers at Facebook and none of them have kids (they're early 30s). The rest of it is true, people are discouraged both by bias in interviews and internal promotion/politics.
I know some of the first Black software engineers at Facebook and none of them have kids (they're early 30s). The rest of it is true, people are discouraged both by bias in interviews and internal promotion/politics.
Apple and Microsoft have both been around since the early 80s. Yes I realize that Microsoft isn’t included in the FAANG acronym, but it’s much larger than Netflix.
True, this could apply to Apple or Microsoft. Microsoft especially had poor interview practices in the past (lightbulb puzzle style brainteasers). Anecdotally I don't know of any Black parents that discouraged their children from going into tech due to a poor or biased interview experience. I know many Black engineers with a parent that was an engineer and encouraged them to go into th field. Lack of awareness, many people did not know computer programmer was a job growing up, is a bigger issue.
That’s true. I grew up in the 80s with an Apple //e. I was programming in Basic and assembly by the time I hit high school. But, that was only because my mom knew college professors that could find books from other colleges - there was no internet back then.
There were 4-5 weeks at different where I just ran out money and sat on bed instead of eating thinking I couldn't be hungry is I was sleep. I usually found enough money to collect to buy a bag of rice for the month. But regardless of race this is hard. Given there no attempt to help anyone with anything as simple as a food shelter on college campus why would they stay.
It's kind of un-nerving watching some engineers friends discuss this. It's kind of arrogant and presumptuous. I'm not even close to the smart person I grew up with. When they discuss that maybe black people may not have the intellect, that I know a guy who was forced to work a meat packing plant that could run circles around you in any STEM subject, but wasn't given the opportunity or was willing to starve himself for the chance.
I think the US leaves a lot of talent on the cutting room floor especially those interested in subject we deem essential. It's pretty saddening.