The Racial Contract

Systemic Racism: A Theory of Oppression

ment differences by race/ethnicity and sex, taken from a number of sources including the Chronicle of Higher Education and the U.S. census. He determines that “the data . . . are consistent with the argument that women and people of color are . . . the true victims” of discrimination (p. 19). The main exception, as expected, is the fact that Asians, aged 25 or “older . . . had the highest level of educational attainment” (p. 9). As the second method, the author conducted interviews with 27 white individuals who had contacted him via a “posting . . . [that he made] on an anti-affirmative action Website . . . [and] Issues Forum” (p. 94). While interesting, I found the study a bit confusing since “the results of these interviews are discussed in Chapters 1 and 7,” with the methods described in more detail in the latter chapter (p. xi). Adding to the confusion is the fact that Pincus uses these data to test a series of hypotheses that he derives from a literature review that is similarly located in Chapter 7. His findings reveal, among other things, that the respondents, who had all selfidentified as reverse discrimination “victims” tended to have “more . . . complaints of race [than sex] discrimination . . . [and a greater number regarding] promotion and firing . . . than . . . hiring and quotas” (pp. 94 and 105). Pincus also conducted two other studies to answer the question that he proposed in Chapter 1 and to test the hypotheses he developed in Chapter 7. The first one, discussed in Chapter 8, examines “unpublished EEOC data for FY 1995–2000,” while the second, which is presented in Chapters 8 and 9, reviews cases adjudicated by U.S. federal appeals courts from “January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2001” (pp. 107 and 108). He finds that the studies “show that affirmative action does not have a large, negative impact on white males” (p. 120). Pincus further contends that “black and female plaintiffs are . . . likely to be unsuccessful in traditional discrimination cases” and adds that “those who argue that the legal system is stacked against white men are simply wrong” (p. 138). The author concludes that “reverse discrimination [is not] one of the serious problems that white men face” (p. 139). While this outcome is not surprising in view of the data analyzed, I worry about the author’s lack of objectivity in this work. Pincus, an associate professor of sociology, explains early that the “book was . . . written from a pro-affirmative action perspective” and describes himself as “an outspoken advocate of affirmative action” (p. ix). Particularly telling is his statement that “it is a testimony to the sad state of race and gender relations that, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, it is necessary to write a book to prove that discrimination against white men is less common than discrimination against women and people of color” (pp. 19–20). The only other major criticism that I have of this work is that it took Pincus six chapters to get from his question to three of the studies designed to answer that question. I would have suggested fewer but longer introductory chapters with the literature review, located in Chapter 7, placed earlier in the book. In Chapter 6, the book’s strongest chapter, the author cleverly redefines reverse discrimination in terms of white male privilege, which makes a great deal of sense. Even though the book also contains other minor problems, it nonetheless emerges as a good overview of the debate over reverse discrimination and the many complexities involved in that debate. The clear writing and short chapters make the work especially useful to individuals unfamiliar with the topic.

Whitewashing Race: The Myth of a Color-Blind Society

Mentorship is a catalyst capable of unleashing one's potential for discovery, curiosity, and participation in STEMM and subsequently improving the training environment in which that STEMM potential is fostered. Mentoring relationships provide developmental spaces in which students' STEMM skills are honed and pathways into STEMM fields can be discovered. Because mentorship can be so influential in shaping the future STEMM workforce, its occurrence should not be left to chance or idiosyncratic implementation. There is a gap between what we know about effective mentoring and how it is practiced in higher education. The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEMM studies mentoring programs and practices at the undergraduate and graduate levels. It explores the importance of mentorship, the science of mentoring relationships, mentorship of underrepresented students in STEMM, mentorship structures and behaviors, and institutional cultures that support mentorship. This report and its complementary interactive guide present insights on effective programs and practices that can be adopted and adapted by institutions, departments, and individual faculty members.

The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEMM

The racialized structure of STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) higher education maintains gross inequities that are illustrative of structural racism, which both informs and is re...

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.3102/0013189X20972718

Interrogating Structural Racism in STEM Higher Education

In this chapter, we argue that intersectionality is a theoretical and methodological framework by which education researchers can critically examine why and how students in STEM fields who are memb...

(Un)Hidden Figures: A Synthesis of Research Examining the Intersectional Experiences of Black Women and Girls in STEM Education:

Recent public events have unnerved the country, touched the consciousness of the populace, and reveal the resurgence of the White supremacist movement, causing many citizens to reflect on race rela...

Stacey McDonald Lowe

Papers

(Un)Hidden Figures: A Synthesis of Research Examining the Intersectional Experiences of Black Women and Girls in STEM Education:

Racism, Social Programming, and Evaluation: Where Do We Go From Here?