Equity in Science - Julie R. Posselt

I would not hesitate to say that Equity in Science is the most important and rewarding book that I've read this year. Everyone should read it, both in and outside of academia. I bought a copy shortly after seeing Prof. Julie Posselt give a (virtual) talk at Stanford in June, and have been steadily working through the book until last week. It turns out I consume sociological studies at a much lower rate than my usual sci-fi...

In Equity in Science, Posselt focuses on graduate education as a societal bottleneck through which all academics must pass, making it the perfect place to study (in)equity genesis and propagation. The book goes through several case studies of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) effects and efforts at a variety of universities (most of which are anonymized for, you know, science). The studies are ordered from small to large community scales, starting with a single geology summer class, then a look at several physics and chemistry departments, and finally discipline-related societies in physics and astronomy. The book closes with a thorough summary and recommendations for how to actually implement the lessons learned. I am also excited to say that the University of Michigan (where I did my doctoral work) features as an un-anonymized, positive example of how to do DEI well!

Before diving into some of my takeaways, I'll quickly mention one part that I thought would be a stretch, and nearly turned me away. Early on, Posselt mentions "quantum insights for institutional change," and draws rough analogies between  quantum physics and sociology in terms of observers, change, and entanglement. While this felt like nonsense* at the beginning of the book, one really helpful and insightful message shined through for me: "We are also part of the communities we are trying to change. Our identities and associated subjectivities are factors that have strong weights in the calculus of change" (pg. 22).

Now, on to some takeaways! Basically, Chapter 7 of the book (a summary and recommendations of how to do DEI) is the entire takeaway. But I did want to package a few bite-sized ideas to share here:

• Scale: Inequity is created at the person-to-person level, but this is through individuals acting on norms created by their communities and disciplines. So, change has to happen at all levels simultaneously to really stick.
• Community: Shoehorning people from varied backgrounds into science is bound to fail without creating a support structure and community that respects and acknowledges the differences of experience associated with different backgrounds. Thus, it is critical to hire people to take on the difficult job of cultural translation (for example, between students and professors with very different lived experiences). It is similarly vital to ensure that students or young faculty have mentors and supportive communities in which they are not tokenized.
• Merit: Existing, traditional methods of assessing students for graduate admission were created by inequitable systems, so they lack equity as a central idea. This can be overcome with a holistic, comprehensive revision of the admissions process that implements transparent and consistent structure to ensure "that we are doing more than succumbing to instinct" (pg. 154).
• Boundaries: The most important takeaway for me is that we have to have conversations across the boundaries of identity, though they are often uncomfortable. It sounds right enough to say this, but the book shows why it is important, specifically through the power of cultural translation: "A core finding of [Posselt's] research is the need to create spaces for communication that make our personal and professional differences intelligible" (pg. 30).

No short summary will really do justice to the core message of the book, which should be taken as a solid foundation for how to implement DEI efforts in academia, but is also up-front about not being the final or perfect solution. Posselt is crystal clear: "[By] presenting a candid picture of the strengths and shortcomings of equity work, it is my hope that this book will embolden readers that they do not have to engage in total overhaul or get it perfect in order to get started" (pg. 16).

All told, this book is uplifting and encouraging about the possibilities of building a more equitable academic culture. It provides practical examples and advice, while being honest about inevitable challenges and frustrations that we will face at every community level, from individuals to societies. By presenting a holistic view of equity work, Equity in Science gives me hope and a sense of direction.

As a final aside, I recommend reading this book with a pen in hand per Russ Tedrake's advice. I scribbled all over every page in an effort to engage with and internalize the presented material, which has helped me with other books. Mostly I just underlined bits that I felt were especially good.

Happy reading!

* In my first draft of this post, I had written "mumbo jumbo" instead of "nonsense." When proofreading, I became curious if this phrase had racist origins. Turns out, yup.