The Leadership Alliance: Twenty Years of Developing a Diverse Research Workforce

Abstract

The Leadership Alliance is a national academic consortium currently comprising 32 academic institutions including Ivy League and major-research and minority-serving institutions, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). For 2 decades these institutions have worked collaboratively to train, mentor, and support underrepresented minority students from undergraduate through advanced graduate training programs. Effectively bridging the research capacity of Ivy League and leading research institutions with minority talent at HBCUs and minority-serving institutions, the Alliance has leveraged its long-standing partnership to develop and implement the Summer Research Early Identification Program (SR-EIP) and the Leadership Alliance National Symposium (LANS), proven programs for diversifying the pipeline of scholars. The objectives of this descriptive study are to demonstrate (a) the impact of these programs on student participants' undergraduate learning experience, and (b) the subsequent academic and career outcomes that occur for program participants. Discussion of the data sources and analysis approaches used in this study follow a description of the SR-EIP/LANS program participants. The outcome data demonstrate that the Alliance has become a nationally established pipeline program that successfully mentors underrepresented students along the entire academic pathway to produce scholars and researchers poised to contribute to a competitive 21st-century workforce.

INTRODUCTION

The racial and ethnic composition of the 21st-century professoriate has yet to reflect the cultural diversity of the nation's population. Women and minority groups have been historically underrepresented in advanced degree programs that equip students with skills to engage in careers that contribute to a robust and competitive domestic workforce. Furthermore, U.S. Census Bureau (2004) data project that the country's population will be 50% non-White by 2050. Such projections increase a societal concern for the persistent diversity gap in academia. Indicators of this concern have been more recently documented in a National Science Board report, which showed that underrepresented minority (URM) students (Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians/Alaska Natives) in 2009 totaled 12% of students enrolled in graduate science and engineering programs compared to Whites, who made up 48% (National Science Board, 2012). Although the data show modest increases in doctoral degree conferrals to African Americans and Hispanics across all disciplines in 2009, the comparative analysis with White doctorate degree recipients is staggering. Whites account for nearly half (48% of doctorate recipients vs. 4.4% for African Americans and 3.8% for Hispanics; National Science Foundation [NSF], 2009).

These sobering statistics have prompted government agencies to recommit efforts that will increase diversity along the educational and workforce development career pathways in science and engineering and to do so with a sense of urgency. Toward this end, the Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering and the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology have each published reports that discuss and provide recommendations on broadening participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and workforce (Committee on Equal Opportunities in Science and Engineering, 2011; NSF, 2009; U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy, 2012). A common theme in both reports involves establishing innovative collaborations and partnerships to diversify academic and career pathways in STEM disciplines.

The Leadership Alliance

Partnership was a central concept that shaped the ideals and mission of the Leadership Alliance at its inception in 1992. As such, the Alliance brought together, within its organizational framework, different types of institutions with distinct strengths, resources, and expertise. As a result, this innovative partnership, comprising Ivy League institutions and prestigious research and minority-serving institutions, provides an infrastructure for institutional collaboration whereby best practices, resources, and expertise are shared (Table 1). The synergistic efforts of the Alliance consortium have resulted in the development and implementation of effective interventions that support the academic and professional development of both students and faculty, build capacity at partner institutions, and promote institutional transformation.

TABLE 1 Member Institutions of the Leadership Alliance

Brown University

Claflin University

Columbia University

Cornell University

Dartmouth College

Dillard University

Harvard University

Howard University

Hunter College

Johns Hopkins University

Montana State University-Bozeman

Morehouse College

Morgan State University

New York University

Princeton University

Spelman College

Stanford University

Tougaloo College

Tufts University

University of Chicago

University of Colorado at Boulder

University of Maryland, Baltimore County

University of Miami

University of Pennsylvania

University of Puerto Rico

University of Virginia

Vanderbilt University

Washington University in St. Louis

Xavier University of Louisiana

Yale University

The Summer Research Early Identification Program (SR-EIP) and the Leadership Alliance National Symposium (LANS) compose the Partnership for Minority Science Education (PMSE). Through the National Institutes of Health PMSE grant program, the Alliance established a unified program, defined by a core set of research experiences, training, and mentoring approaches, that is implemented across the participating institutions. The distinctive feature of the Alliance's PMSE is its core activity of mentoring through each critical transition along the academic pathway by combining a multi-institutional internship program, the SR-EIP, and a national research conference, the LANS. The literature abounds with articles describing the benefits of undergraduate research experiences as an educational tool that enhances the undergraduate experience (Lopatto, 2003, 2004; Seymour, Hunter, Laursen, & DeAntoni, 2004), improves research skills and productivity (Kremer & Bringle, 1990), increases interest and understanding of pursuing graduate-level degrees (Hathaway, Nagda, & Gregerman, 2002), and clarifies career pathways in the STEM workforce (Lopatto, 2009). Through the PMSE, the Alliance's core summer research and research symposium programs were further developed to offer many of the aforementioned benefits by linking the resources of the Alliance's research-serving institutions to the talent pools of underrepresented students from its minority-serving partners and institutions across the country.

The SR-EIP provides a structured 8- to 10-week research experience for undergraduates at an Alliance research institution. Using a unified application, the program enables students to apply to three institutions from more than 20 competitive research institutions. Each of the institutions associated with the Alliance shares one goal: to provide a top-quality mentored research experience for each student participant. Students actively engaged in the research process acquire a variety of skills and competencies by conducting their own research projects under the supervision of their faculty mentors. As the summer progresses, students become more independent as their skills and understanding of the research project develop and as they acquire tools for critical thinking and problem solving useful for independent research in their respective academic disciplines. One of the unique features of the program is that research opportunities are available in a wide range of academic disciplines. Whereas the majority of the research experiences have been in the STEM disciplines, recent support from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation has been instrumental in increasing opportunities for students in the humanities and social sciences. The academic diversity of the program emulates the interdisciplinary nature of scholarly activity. Access to this cross-disciplinary understanding gives students critical insight on establishing future academic collaborations. In addition to the scholarly activities, professional development activities have been developed to build community and provide program participants with a comprehensive understanding of the graduate school application process and research-based careers. Thus, through the research mentorship and ancillary training activities, students obtain career-affirming knowledge to assist them in decision making about enrolling and persisting in graduate programs.

The literature suggests that career decision making is a complex venture, one that includes at least three factors: (a) accurate information, (b) clarity of goals, and (c) a sense of the outcomes if the chosen goals are pursued (Germeijs & De Boeck, 2003). The decision-making process requires multiple inputs from knowledgeable sources. A great deal of factual information is provided on-site by the summer programs as ancillary training. In addition, the LANS serves as an extension of these summer program training activities but has a compelling difference: The LANS provides the opportunity to validate this knowledge by its applicability to a national context represented by the Alliance network. The LANS is the national networking venue for all members of the Alliance and provides an important forum for the students’ oral or poster presentations of the research conducted at their research site. Students hone their presentation skills at the LANS in a supportive environment that equips them to become competitive at larger, discipline-specific conferences.

Students at the LANS also interact with a diverse group of participants in various stages of the academic training pathway. The symposium is designed to assist students in developing robust networking relationships with their peers and particularly with graduate deans and senior administrators who can provide additional information to students about their graduate programs throughout the academic year. Consequently, students remain in contact with their new and expanded network long after the symposium ends. Such extended networking is evidenced through the LANS mentoring support for Alliance alumni in advanced stages of their academic pathways. Skill-building workshops and professional development opportunities are provided for Alliance alumni who are in Ph.D. or M.D.-Ph.D. programs as well as for alumni who have completed their doctoral degrees, referred to as Leadership Alliance Doctoral Scholars. This aggregation of minority talent offers a comprehensive, tiered mentoring structure whereby Alliance professionals mentor the doctoral scholars, who mentor the graduate students, who mentor undergraduates. This structure leverages the expertise of all LANS participants and promotes interaction with role models from similar backgrounds. Thus, the Alliance, by means of its national symposium, provides a forum for research exchange, an arena for networking that builds community, a site for enhancing skills through training, and a venue that ensures career readiness and success for students and institutional leaders. The LANS also provides documented models and effective strategies for supporting and clarifying academic career choices by developing methodologies and resources that are shared with the academic community at large.

The collective resources of the Alliance partnership combined with programmatic activities of its SR-EIP and LANS initiatives create a community of scholars, who share in skill-building, professional development, and networking opportunities that are critical to preparing URMs for progression into and completion of doctoral-level training programs. Through these activities, the Alliance contributes to the societal goal of increased representation of scholars from underrepresented populations as research leaders for the 21st century.

The objectives of this descriptive study are to demonstrate the impact of this combined program on student participants’ undergraduate learning experience, and the subsequent academic and career outcomes that occur for program participants. Discussion of the data sources and analysis approaches used in this study follow a description of the SR-EIP/LANS program participants.

METHOD

Program Participants

The Leadership Alliance SR-EIP participants are recruited from a national applicant pool of undergraduates from Alliance and non-Alliance member institutions. From 1993 to 2011, a total of 2,633 students participated in the SR-EIP. For the past 10 years, our average acceptance rate has been 18%.

As illustrated in Figure 1, the SR-EIP has hosted a diverse cohort of students from 1993 to 2011. Although the primary focus has been on URMs, Asian American and White students from various socioeconomic backgrounds also benefit. The racial composition of SR-EIP cohorts has shifted over time from an average of 80% African American between 1993 and 2000 to 53% between 2007 and 2011. Broader recruitment at member institutions and national conferences targeting Hispanic students resulted in an increase from an average of 24% early in the program to 38% in more recent years (Figure 2). As illustrated in Figure 3, female students have consistently represented nearly two thirds of participants overall.

FIGURE 1 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program students by race within three cohort groups.

FIGURE 2 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program students by ethnicity within three cohort groups.

FIGURE 3 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program students by gender within three cohort groups.

The SR-EIP has extended programming to undergraduates at various stages of their academic pathway with an opportunity to participate in a competitive research internship. Figure 4 indicates that in the first 8 years of the SR-EIP, more than half of undergraduate participants were seniors and just over one third were juniors. The distribution of seniors increased to just over 65% in subsequent years, with the proportion of juniors and sophomores remaining relatively consistent.

FIGURE 4 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program students by undergraduate level within three cohort groups.

Since the inception of the SR-EIP, research opportunities have been provided in a wide range of academic disciplines. The academic diversity of the undergraduate participants is presented in Figure 5. Over the years, the biological science related disciplines have consistently accounted for nearly half (47–50%) of the reported disciplines, which is consistent with the high level funding the program receives from the National Institutes of Health. Undergraduate disciplines in the social sciences and humanities have ranged from 26% to 31% of cohort participants, with the physical sciences, engineering, and math increasing from 13% initially to more than 20% of the national cohorts in more recent years. Female representation consistently predominated in the biological sciences, humanities, and social sciences-related disciplines throughout the 18-year period. Similar to national trends, men outnumbered women in the physical science and engineering disciplines (NSF, 2012) early on, but women have more recently surpassed men in these disciplines (Figure 6).

FIGURE 5 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program students by undergraduate discipline within three cohort groups.

FIGURE 6 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program students by undergraduate discipline and gender within three cohort groups.

Data Sources

Student data are compiled from both primary and secondary resources. The online SR-EIP application provides the Alliance with baseline demographic data for each program participant as well as information such as undergraduate major, type of undergraduate institution, date of expected graduation, and academic plans. Registration data for the LANS adds information about participants’ research activities and mentors. These data are organized within a relational database to afford targeted inquiry regarding different program cohorts, demographic groups, or discipline groups over time.

External evaluations of the SR-EIP have been implemented since 2002 and constitute the secondary data resource for this study. Early evaluation activities employed a mixed-methods approach including quantitative data from an annual survey and qualitative data from focus groups and interviews with students, faculty, and administrators at their respective research sites (Pearson et al., 2003a, 2003b, 2004; Pearson, Leggon, & Lain, 2011; Pearson et al., 2010; Pearson, Leggon, & Mullis, 2005; Pearson, Mullis, & Leggon, 2006; Pearson, Mullis, Leggon, & Brown, 2007, 2008; Pearson, Mullis, Leggon, Brown, & Colhoun, 2009; Pearson, Mullis, Russell, Leggon, & Etzkowitz, 2002). Due to budget constraints in more recent years, qualitative data collection was limited to groups convened during the LANS. Surveys were administered in paper format, distributed to participants by on-site institutional coordinators, and returned in sealed packets to the external evaluator. Administration of the surveys took place prior to the LANS. Given the varying start and end dates of the summer research programs across the Alliance research sites, a small portion of students had another week to 2 weeks of their program after the LANS to complete the survey. In 2011, the SR-EIP survey administration moved to an online format, allowing a staggered administration to align with the end dates of all program sites (Gracia, 2011). Response rates for the SR-EIP evaluation survey from 2002 through 2011 are provided in Table 2.

TABLE 2 SR-EIP Participants, Evaluation Survey Respondents and Corresponding Response Rates by SR-EIP Cohort Year

	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011
SR-EIP participants	160	161	168	147	151	155	183	190	226	233
Survey respondents	135	133	119	121	138	140	168	171	201	227
Response rate	84%	83%	71%	82%	91%	90%	92%	90%	89%	97%

Note. SR-EIP = Summer Research Early Identification Program.

Since 2002, up to two thirds of the survey items have been retained to afford trend data on participant self-reported perceptions of their knowledge and skills development, research and mentoring experiences, and support received through the program. Scales for different construct components are comprised of primarily close-ended, Likert-type items, self-reporting before and after items, and some nominal or classification scale items. Additional items were added in different years to address more temporal issues or activity-related data (e.g., to cite various contexts or structures of the program as improvements or additions were made in response to previous evaluation findings). Evaluation findings were most often provided in percentage formats with the 2011 evaluation using mean ratings and correlational analysis to describe findings. Consequently, comparison of results on some items or constructs across survey administrations is limited.

Participant feedback from the LANS is collected regularly as part of the Alliance's internal program evaluation activities. Anonymous survey forms for three role groups—undergraduates, graduate students, and doctoral scholars—are administered in paper format at the LANS. Forms are included in the symposium program packets corresponding to the respective role groups targeted for administration. The participants deposit all forms in boxes provided at the closing session. With the institution of incentive awards (e.g., raffle tickets for Kindles) for those submitting their forms, response rates have increased from a low of 28% in 2004 to a more representative response rate of 76% in 2011. LANS surveys use primarily close-ended, Likert-type response items to monitor participant ratings of different professional development and networking activities. In addition, the surveys solicit open-ended suggestions on other training or development activities of interest to participants.

Finally, the Executive Office of the Leadership Alliance tracked and monitored the academic and career trajectories of all SR-EIP participants between 1993 and 2011. Using the database of SR-EIP application data, information on graduate training, degree completion, and early career placements are recorded and updated over time. Tracking activities are iteratively implemented, working through complete program cohorts to assure coverage of all participants. Methods include web searches, social media, and direct follow-up contacts via e-mail. Information is also obtained through volunteered updates from participants, their mentors, and/or institutional coordinators. A distributed tracking system is being developed that will involve data reviews and updates by coordinators at each member research site and sending institution on an annual basis.

Analysis Approach

Secondary analysis of external evaluation findings between 2002 and 2011, as appropriate, was conducted to describe the immediate impact of SR-EIP and LANS programming on students’ undergraduate learning experience, their research knowledge and skill development, their academic and career plans, and their support network. Data are profiled within three periods to contextualize reporting of trends over time: 1993–2000, 2001–2006, and 2007–2011. These periods mark the transition from early program development years to the maturation of program structures and practices, and then through program establishment and expansion in more recent years.

Outcomes for Alliance program participants are derived from analysis of enrollment, degree completion, and career placements over the near 20-year span of participation. Measures are disaggregated by degree type, discipline, and demographic characteristics for the overall population of participants. Between 1993 and 2011, 2,633 individuals have participated in Alliance programs. Of these, 2,315 are reported to have completed their undergraduate training. Outcomes at this point in time are based on the eligible pool of undergraduate degree recipients. The Alliance continues outreach and tracking efforts to obtain complete records of academic outcomes.

RESULTS

Discussion of findings from analysis of evaluation, participation, and outcome data are organized to focus first on the impact of Alliance programming on student learning experiences and academic interests. Outcomes of these programs subsequent to undergraduate student participation are then described.

Impacts of the SR-EIP and LANS

Key constructs, measured over time through the annual SR-EIP evaluations, were used to gauge the impact of Alliance programming. These included assessments of students’ overall satisfaction with the summer research experience, self-reported improvements in knowledge, perceived usefulness of the program, and self-reported changes in students’ commitment to pursue a research career. The majority of respondents consistently rated their overall summer experience as “very good” or “excellent,” with high ratings ranging between 82 and 90% over the 2002 through 2011 time frame.

The usefulness of the SR-EIP was measured across different areas of emphasis in the program. Overall, survey respondents found their summer research experience to be useful and rated the program as “very useful” to “totally useful” in six specific areas (Table 3). These areas focused on program activities designed to help students: more clearly understand what it takes to earn a Ph.D. and become a researcher, decide whether to pursue graduate school, gain specific knowledge about selecting and applying to graduate school, learn about career choices, and more clearly decide what to do with the balance of their undergraduate careers. Although less than half of survey respondents rated program information pertaining to financial support as “totally useful” or “very useful” in 2002, increases in these ratings were observed in subsequent years. Thus, this comprehensive assessment provided valuable feedback that was used to make adjustments in the program and ensure the goals and objectives of the program were being accomplished.

TABLE 3 Percentage of Summer Research Early Identification Program Respondents Who Rated Program “Very to Totally Useful” on Selected Program Topics

	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011^a
Clearly understanding what it takes to earn a Ph.D. and become a researcher	87%	87%	84%	83%	90%	83%	76%	84%	87%	73%
Making the decision to pursue graduate school	82%	76%	73%	78%	79%	73%	77%	78%	81%	62%
Gaining specific knowledge about selecting and applying to graduate school	71%	77%	76%	74%	78%	73%	71%	76%	77%	69%
Learning about the availability of fellowships, assistantships, and other forms of support for graduate study	47%	57%	42%	50%	57%	59%	51%	62%	53%	53%
Learning about career choices	66%	70%	60%	68%	65%	64%	64%	67%	71%	46%
Helping clearly decide what to do with the balance of undergraduate career	65%	65%	59%	54%	64%	65%	55%	67%	70%	52%

^aResponse scale modified in 2011 from a 5-point to a 4-point scale, with the highest ratings being somewhat useful to very useful; Table 3 data for 2011 represent only those respondents choosing very useful for each of the selected program topics.

The SR-EIP has also contributed to participants’ knowledge base about the research process (Table 4). Between 2002 and 2011, 75% to 84% of students reported “a great deal of improvement” and “tremendous improvement” in their knowledge of the research process. The consistency of this finding suggests that practical, hands-on interactive and peer-learning activities provided through the program are highly effective. In fact, as shown in Table 5, students routinely report that the SR-EIP strengthened their commitment to pursue a research career. In 2002, 66% of respondents replied in the affirmative. This increased to 76% in 2003 and remained relatively constant for the remaining 8 years, thus indicating that more than two thirds of survey respondents remained steadfast in their plans to pursue a research career.

TABLE 4 Students’ Self-Report Perceptions of Summer Research Early Identification Program's Contribution to Their Improved Knowledge of the Research Process

	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011^a
% reporting a “great deal” of or	81%	82%	84%	84%	81%	82%	77%	75%	85%	81%
“tremendous” improvement

^aResponse scale was modified in 2011 to measure level of knowledge before and after program; Table 4 shows percent change from lower to higher levels of reported knowledge before and after program.

TABLE 5 Percentage of Summer Research Early Identification Program Participants Indicating Positive Impact of Program on Their Commitment to Pursue a Research Career

	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011
Evaluation item: As a result of participation in the summer program, I have strengthened my commitment to pursue a research career	66%	76%	71%	75%	71%	74%	73%	75%	75%	74%

The culminating event of the SR-EIP is the LANS, which provides a venue to showcase the summer research efforts of the undergraduates and provide professional development, training, and networking opportunities for Alliance-affiliated trainees who are at various stages along the academic pathway. More than half of undergraduates who participate in the LANS have never attended any professional conferences. Earlier data from 2004 to 2006 provided aggregate data on prior conference participation consistent with this finding; Table 6 shows that while the lack of prior professional conference experience is more pronounced for sophomores and juniors, it is still a new experience for up to half of seniors. As a result, the LANS is designed as a learning and developmental opportunity for participants.

TABLE 6 Percentage of Leadership Alliance National Symposium Participants by Class Who Reported Never Attending Another Conference Intended to Help Students Learn About Academic Careers

	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011
Sophomore	50%	83%	83%	74%	84%
Junior	54%	68%	67%	66%	76%
Senior	45%	51%	44%	48%	53%

Over time, undergraduate participation in the presentation component of the LANS has increased to include almost all attendees. Within the supportive LANS environment, these undergraduates have an opportunity to make, in most cases, their first oral or poster presentation to a national audience and receive formative feedback on their content delivery and presentation skills. With increasing support and encouragement at SR-EIP sites to develop skills for scientific discourse, up to two thirds of students have chosen to make oral presentations in the past several years. Between 81% and 92% of students report high satisfaction with their oral presentation, rating it as a “valuable” to “very valuable” experience. In response to early comments and satisfaction ratings in the 73% to 75% range by students making poster presentations, the poster sessions at LANS were scheduled in a different time slot that did not conflict with oral presentations and, as a result, boosted the ratings into the 85% to 89% range for the last 3 years (see Table 7 for a summary of these findings).

TABLE 7 LANS Undergraduate Participants’ Presentation Rates, Type of Presentation, and Satisfaction With Presentation Experience

	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
No. of LANS undergraduate participants	287	305	318	284	320	350
No. of undergraduate presenters	262	268	291	265	301	338
Presenters as % of participants	91%	88%	92%	93%	94%	97%
% of presentations by type
Oral	57%	56%	70%	69%	65%	65%
Poster	43%	44%	30%	31%	35%	35%
Satisfaction by presentation type
Oral	90%	81%	84%	92%	90%	92%
Poster	75%	73%	74%	89%	86%	85%

Note. LANS = Leadership Alliance National Symposium.

Workshops and panel discussions are also provided at the LANS for students seeking advice about resources and time frames for making decisions about the next step in their careers. As evidenced in Table 8, the most successful undergraduate workshops have been the Graduate School Application Process and the Graduate School Experience sessions. The workshop on graduate school applications is offered in three concurrent discipline-specific sessions. Each session features a national panel of experts who discuss how to choose and be competitive for the right graduate programs, and how to review application submission requirements and funding opportunities for graduate programs relevant to their discipline. The workshop on graduate school life hosts a panel of current graduate students who formerly participated in the SR-EIP and represent a wide range of academic disciplines. Undergraduates thus receive practical advice from a trusted network of graduate students about life as a graduate student.

TABLE 8 Percentage of Leadership Alliance National Symposium Undergraduate Students Reporting High Ratings of Importance and Value for Workshops

	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Undergraduate workshops
Graduate School Application Process	58%	78%	59%	75%	82%	80%
The Graduate School Experience	61%	78%	62%	75%	73%	80%

Leadership Alliance Outcomes

The Leadership Alliance's broadening participation efforts have contributed significantly to developing and diversifying competitive graduate training programs and the academic workforce. Of the 2,633 SR-EIP participants, 88% have completed their undergraduate degree by 2011. As shown in Figure 7, just over 53% of Leadership Alliance SR-EIP students who completed their undergraduate degrees enroll into a graduate level program versus the national rate of 40% enrollment into graduate programs (U.S. Department of Education, 2006). This cumulative figure includes those who went on to complete their graduate degree. Of this 53%, 42% enrolled in or completed Ph.D. programs (Figure 8). Of those who completed Ph.D. programs, nearly two thirds (65%) were awarded degrees in the STEM disciplines.

FIGURE 7 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program alumni by degree completion and graduate enrollment. Note. Based on n = 2,633.

FIGURE 8 Distribution of Summer Research Early Identification Program alumni by PhD degree completion and PhD program enrollment.

The increasing numbers of Leadership Alliance alumni who have obtained a Ph.D. or M.D.-Ph.D., referred to as Doctoral Scholars, are a valuable source of highly qualified applicants for nationally competitive positions. The first Ph.D. recipients began to emerge in 2000; by March 2008, the Alliance reached the milestone of more than 100 SR-EIP alumni who obtained a Ph.D. (106) or M.D.-Ph.D. (10). As of March 2012, the number of Alliance of Doctoral Scholars has more than doubled to 215 Ph.D.s and 19 M.D.-Ph.D.s. The diversity of this Doctoral Scholar cohort, which is predominantly but not exclusively composed of underrepresented groups, is illustrated in Figure 9. More than half of the Doctoral Scholar cohort is composed of African Americans. The remaining 21% who chose to indicate their race self-identify as Pacific Islanders, Asian, or Biracial/Multiracial. One third of the group report being of Hispanic ethnicity.

FIGURE 9 Distribution of doctoral scholars by race.

Female Doctoral Scholars account for two thirds of the doctoral degree recipients in the biological sciences. They also outnumber men in the humanities and social sciences disciplines. Consistent with national trends, men account for the majority of doctoral degree recipients in the physical sciences, engineering, and computer science (Figure 10). The disciplinary diversity of these emerging scholars is a reflection of Alliance summer program participants to date.

FIGURE 10 Distribution of male and female doctoral scholars within discipline areas.

The early career choices for these emerging scholars reveal the impact the Leadership Alliance is having on developing the current and future research workforce in academia, government, and industry. These individuals are becoming valuable resources as leaders and role models who are capable and well prepared to mentor and encourage the next generation of students. As shown in Figure 11, the majority (58%) of these young professionals are engaging in career positions in academia, and 42% are occupying a variety of positions in the government, industry, and private sectors.

FIGURE 11 Career positions of doctoral scholars.

Leadership Alliance member institutions are also benefitting from the presence of these Doctoral Scholars in their faculty ranks. To date, Alliance institutions have recruited nearly one fourth (23%) of this highly qualified talent pool, comprising STEM and non-STEM scholars. Nearly 70% of the Doctoral Scholar faculty members are employed by research intensive (58%) or doctoral institutions (10%) as determined by their Carnegie Classification status (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2010; Figure 12).

FIGURE 12 Percentage of doctoral scholar faculty placements by type of institution.

Taken together, these data demonstrate that the Alliance has demonstrated its effectiveness as a model for identifying, training, and mentoring diverse scholars who are poised to expand and diversify the base of the 21st-century STEM workforce.

DISCUSSION

Over the past 20 years, the Alliance has developed a time-tested partnership of 32 institutions that work collaboratively to ensure greater diversity in the nation's competitive graduate training programs and professoriate. Leveraging the resources, expertise, and exceptional training opportunities of its member institutions, the Alliance has developed a series of evidenced-based mentoring initiatives along the entire academic pathway that have resulted in the successful enrollment of URM students into graduate training programs and completion of doctoral degrees.

The success of the Alliance can be attributed to the strengths of the partnership and the proven mentoring components of the PMSE, which include the SR-EIP and LANS. The key components of the partnership are discussed here.

Relationships that have been established among coordinators facilitate more targeted placement of students into summer research programs and recruitment of alumni into graduate training programs, postdoctoral fellowships, and even faculty positions. The diversity of Alliance cohorts is due in large part to the strategic partnership between research and minority-serving institutions. Approximately 60% of SR-EIP undergraduates attend Alliance member institutions, with the remainder representing a wide variety of institution types from across the country. The established relationships between coordinators help to identify minority students who would benefit from training in a competitive environment at one of the partner institutions. This serves two main purposes: first, evaluation data indicate that these experiences boost students’ confidence in their ability to compete successfully among their peers from larger, more prominent institutions and enhances the quality of their undergraduate education (Pearson et al., 2003a); second, minority students who have research credentials and skills are more competitive candidates for graduate programs. To further promote the enrollment of students in member institution graduate programs, the Alliance has established a fee-waiver policy that enables former SR-EIP students to apply to designated Alliance doctoral degree programs without an application fee. These formal and informal arrangements have strengthened and diversified Alliance's graduate programs with top minority talent.

Moreover, the institutional diversity of the consortium partners fosters the sharing of multiple perspectives from research institutions and minority-serving partners on what does and does not work in program development and practices. During biannual business meetings, coordinators discuss and assess program priorities and share best practices, resulting in continuous improvements in the quality of Alliance programming and a greater understanding of effective strategies to recruit, train, and mentor students from underrepresented groups.

The Alliance SR-EIP and LANS have a significant impact on developing and diversifying the STEM and non-STEM workforce. To address the shortage of underrepresented students in graduate programs, the Alliance has leveraged the institutional resources of the partnership to establish mentoring initiatives that will expose students to competitive training opportunities, increase their awareness of research-based careers, and establish a professional network of like-minded scholars. External evaluation data provide insights into the components of the SR-EIP and LANS that contribute to the academic and career progression of Alliance students. First, students are exposed to the rigors of graduate school and have unparalleled opportunities to work with renowned researchers. This experience also helps them evaluate the possibilities of pursuing an academic career, which gives them a greater sense of purpose and clarifies career goals. Second, these programs provide multiple opportunities to create social and professional networks. These networks provide students with resources that will help them navigate their academic and career trajectories. In this regard, mentoring and support continue throughout the academic year. Students report that they keep in touch with their faculty mentors who are available to provide letters of recommendation. These letters are a critical component of competitive graduate school applications.

The network that students develop at their research sites is enhanced at the LANS. The LANS links students with role models and peers across the country with whom trusted communication and future research collaborations can be established and fostered. In this supportive environment, students build their confidence in making research presentations and clarify their knowledge about the steps needed to apply for and succeed in various training pathways, including career pathways in academia and the public and private sectors.

A unique and the most significant feature of the LANS is the provision of role models at each stage of the academic pathway. Undergraduates are mentored by the graduate students, who are mentored by the doctoral scholars, who serve as role models for the undergraduates and graduate students and are mentored by a network of Alliance professionals.

Together, the partnership of the Alliance, the learning and development experiences of the SR-EIP and the LANS, and the process of mentoring and networking reinforce the supports and benefits afforded through each of these critical components. The ever-increasing demand for these experiences by URM students and the faculty and administrators who engage these students speaks to their motivation and initiative to succeed in academia and the research workforce. The Alliance has proven its ability to leverage this motivation and, more recently, to respond with results in addressing the persistent gaps of URM in graduate training and the professoriate.

FUNDING

This research was supported in part by grants from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, Eli Lilly and Company, and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Medeva Ghee

Medeva Ghee, Ph.D., is the Executive Director of the Leadership Alliance. Prior to this appointment, she worked with the Clinton Foundation as a Laboratory Systems Specialist for the HIV/AIDS Initiative in Sub-Saharan Africa. With a doctoral degree in microbiology from NYU School of Medicine, Dr. Ghee conducted her postdoctoral research in Paris, France, focusing on biochemical and gene therapy technologies to investigate the impact of protein aggregation in Parkinson's disease.

Deborah Collins

Deborah Collins, Ph.D., is Associate Director of the Leadership Alliance. Prior to joining the Alliance, Dr. Collins was Director of Research and Evaluation at the Education Alliance at Brown University, where she directed large-scale and program evaluations of school reform, choice, STEM, and partnership initiatives funded through the Northeast Regional Education Laboratory at Brown, the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Microsoft Partners in Learning, and regional/state agencies.

Valerie Wilson

Valerie Wilson, Ph.D., is the Deputy Division Director for Graduate Education. Prior to her position at the National Science Foundation, Wilson was Associate Provost and Director of Institutional Diversity and Clinical Professor of Health Services, Policy and Practice at Brown University. Concurrently, she served as Executive Director of the Leadership Alliance, a consortium of leading teaching and research institutions dedicated to preparing underrepresented students for careers in academia and public and private sectors. 

Willie Pearson

Willie Pearson, Jr., Ph.D., is a professor of sociology in the School of History, Technology, and Society at Georgia Institute of Technology. He specializes in the sociology of science and sociology of the family. He is the author or coeditor of eight books and monographs and numerous articles and chapters. Currently, he serves on advisory committees at the National Science Foundation, the Burroughs Wellcome Fund, and the White House.