TRANSFORMING TRAJECTORIES
FOR WOMEN OF COLOR
IN TECH
Evelynn Hammonds, Valerie Taylor, and Rebekah Hutton, Editors
Committee on Addressing the Underrepresentation
of Women of Color in Tech
Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine
Policy and Global Affairs
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences, National Institute of Standards and Technology (SB134117CQ0017/1333ND20FNB100131), and National Science Foundation (CNS-1923245). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26897-4
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26897-4
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26345
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022932722
This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Transforming Trajectories for Women of Color in Tech. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26345.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON ADDRESSING THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF WOMEN OF COLOR IN TECH
EVELYNN M. HAMMONDS (Chair), Barbara Gutmann Rosenkrantz Professor of the History of Science, Professor of African and African American Studies, Harvard University
VALERIE TAYLOR (Chair), Director, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory; CEO and President, Center for Minorities and People with Disabilities in IT
GILDA BARABINO, President, Olin College of Engineering
SARITA E. BROWN, Co-founder and President, Excelencia in Education
JAMIKA D. BURGE, Director of Design Research, Capital One; Co-Founder of blackcomputeHER.org
FRANCES COLÓN, Senior Director, Center for American Progress
SARAH ECHOHAWK, Chief Executive Officer, American Indian Science and Engineering Society
ELENA FUENTES-AFFLICK, Professor of Pediatrics and Vice Dean for Academic Affairs, University of California, San Francisco
ANN QUIROZ GATES, Senior Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs and Director, Computing Alliance of Hispanic-Serving Institutions, The University of Texas at El Paso
SHAWNDRA HILL, Senior Lecturer, Columbia Business School, Columbia University
MARIA (MIA) ONG, Senior Research Scientist and Evaluator, TERC
MANUEL A. PÉREZ-QUIÑONES, Professor, Department of Software and Information Systems, University of North Carolina, Charlotte
KARL W. REID, Senior Vice Provost and Chief Inclusion Officer, Northeastern University
ALLISON SCOTT, Chief Executive Officer, Kapor Center for Social Impact
KIMBERLY A. SCOTT, Professor of Women and Gender Studies, Arizona State University
RAQUEL TAMEZ, Chief Executive Officer, Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers (until January 2021)
BRENDA DARDEN WILKERSON, President and Chief Executive Officer, AnitaB.org (until November 2020)
CYNTHIA WINSTON-PROCTOR, Professor of Psychology, Howard University; Principal, Winston Synergy, LLC
Study Staff
REBEKAH HUTTON, Program Officer and Study Director
ASHLEY BEAR, Acting Board Director
ALEX HELMAN, Program Officer (until October 2020)
PRIYANKA NALAMADA, Associate Program Officer (from April 2020)
MARQUITA WHITING, Senior Program Assistant
CRYSTAL GRANT, Mirzayan Fellow (January 2020 to April 2020)
ADRIANA COUREMBIS, Senior Financial Business Partner (until May 2020)
BARDIA MASSOUDKHAN, Senior Financial Business Partner (from May 2020)
THOMAS RUDIN, Board Director, Board on Higher Education and Workforce (until December 2020)
Preface
Being the first and only has been a characteristic of many women’s lives in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. The challenges they face in their academic and professional careers seem to resonate across sectors, yet for women of color, in particular, decades of efforts by academic institutions, industry, and government to create strategies for improving not only representation but also inclusion, belonging, and advancement are not moving the needle. Systemic racism, misogyny, ableism, ageism, and a multitude of other factors have perpetuated environments where women of color are often not able to fully use their talents in authentic ways. Increasing numbers of girls and women in tech without addressing these systemic factors will not produce sustainable change.
There is a critical need for institutions and organizations to take an intersectional approach—that takes into account how the intersection of race, gender, and economic disparities influences the experiences of women of color—when developing interventions aimed at improving equity, diversity, and inclusion in the vast number of STEM disciplines. Although this committee’s task defines tech as computer science, computer and information science, information technology, and computer engineering, many of the findings and recommendations presented in this report have a broader applicability to transforming the experiences of women of color in tech across a broad range of sectors and contexts.
In much of the published research and data related to the representation of women in tech, the data for women of color have not been disaggregated, and the reported experiences of women do not reflect the experiences and representation
of women of color, which can vary substantially from that of white women. Recent research described in this report demonstrates the importance of addressing the specific needs and particular challenges of women of color who are of African American, Latinx, Asian, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islander descent. Within these groups, varied histories, cultures, communities, and support systems shape women’s lived experiences in their academic and professional careers. Data that include these contexts will ensure that descriptions of the experiences of women truly reflect the experiences of all women. Given the widespread use of technology in all disciplines, ranging from the sciences to the humanities, analyses that take these nuanced experiences into account are critically important to transform the trajectories of women of color in technology such that they are engaged and driving technological innovations to produce robust and broadly applicable solutions.
In November 2017, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee on Women in Science, Engineering and Medicine (CWSEM) organized a workshop on Women of Color in STEM attended by approximately 250 individuals. The workshop included two panels; the first one provided a historical perspective—identifying areas in which progress has been made to overcome barriers as well as barriers that still remain. The second panel focused on evidenced-based initiatives and programs to address these barriers. One of the outcomes of the November 2017 CWSEM Workshop on Women of Color in STEM was identification of the need for a consensus study focused on evidence-based initiatives and recommendations to increase the representation of women of color in tech. With funding from the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Academies convened this committee to issue a consensus report on this topic, informed by a series of four regional workshops, published research literature, and other sources of data. The result is this report, with significant findings and recommendations that identify gaps in existing research that obscure the nature of challenges faced by women of color in tech, address systemic issues that negatively affect outcomes for women of color in tech, and provide guidance for transforming existing systems and implementing evidence-based policies and practices to increase the success of women of color in tech.
Persisting inequities such as opportunity gaps and the widening digital divide continue to reveal cracks in our society. Failure to address these issues will cause a generation of talent to be lost as a result of not having access to tools that allow them to access pathways into tech and to thrive in tech disciplines. It is critically important to disaggregate data using an intersectional approach to develop effective strategies for increasing the success of women of color in tech and meet these challenges head on. When policymakers, educators, and corporate leaders study issues related to women in tech, the term “women” must reflect the experi-
ences of all women. We have the tools in place to effect the change we know is required to make a more equitable future. Now is the moment for true change and systemic transformation.
| Evelynn Hammonds Harvard University Committee Co-Chair |
Valerie Taylor Argonne National Laboratory Committee Co-Chair |
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgments
This report would not have been possible without the contributions of many people. Special thanks go to the members of the committee who dedicated extensive time, expertise, and energy to the drafting of the report. The committee also thanks the members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine staff: Rebekah Hutton, Ashley Bear, and Priyanka Nalamada for their significant contributions to the report, Alex Helman for her early contributions to the committee’s work, Crystal Grant for her contributions to helping organize the committee’s workshops during her time as a Mirzayan Fellow, and Marquita Whiting and Abigail Harless for their administrative and logistical support of the committee.
The committee would like to thank Karin Matchett for her editing of the report as well as Heather Lavender, Nuria Jaumot-Pascual, Audrey Martínez-Gudapakkam, and Christina B. Silva for their work on the committee’s commissioned literature review. We would also like to thank National Academies staff members who provided invaluable support throughout the project: Tom Rudin for his guidance and leadership; Anne Marie Houppert and Rebecca Morgan for their research support and fact checking; Adriana Courembis and Bardia Massoudkhan for their financial management assistance; Julie Eubank and Christopher King for their insights and guidance; Marilyn Baker and Erik Saari for their guidance through the report review process; and Amy Shifflette, Clair Woolley, and Holly Sten for their assistance with the final production of the report.
Many individuals volunteered significant time and effort to address and educate the committee during our four public workshops. The insights, perspectives, and personal experiences shared with the committee played an essential role in informing the committee’s discussions and deliberations. We thank Stephanie
Adams, Carlotta M. Arthur, Twyla Baker, Sandra Begay, Kamau Bobb, Enobong “Anna” Branch, Mary Schmidt Campbell, Jennifer Carlson, Ashley Carpenter, Julie Carruthers, Nizhoni Chow-Garcia, Dilma Da Silva, Kathy DeerInWater, Andrea Delgado-Olson, Kaye Husbands Fealing, Dwana Franklin-Davis, Juan Gilbert, Raquel Hill, Evelyn Kent, Stephanie Lampkin, Bo Young Lee, Shirley Malcom, Marisela Martinez-Cola, Kyla McMullen, Carolina Huaranca Mendoza, Cherri Pancake, Melonie Parker, Alice Pawley, Denise Peck, Timothy Pinkston, Joan Reede, Dora Renaud, Monique Ross, Beena Sukumaran, Rati Thanawala, Rocío Medina van Nierop, Kenneth Walker, Bridgette Wallace, Gregory Walton, Gloria Washington, JeffriAnne Wilder, and Renee Wittemyer.
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Lilia Abron, PEER Consultants, P.C.; Sandra Begay, Sandia National Laboratories; Quincy Brown, AnitaB.org; Gabriela Gonzalez, Louisiana State University; Vandana Janeja, University of Maryland, Baltimore County; Patty Lopez, Intel; Rati Thanawala, Harvard University; Roli Varma, University of New Mexico; and Renee Wittemyer, Pivotal Ventures.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Ana P. Barros, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Shirley M. Malcom, American Association for the Advancement of Science. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
Finally, the committee would like to thank the sponsors of this study for making this work possible. Funding for this study was provided by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Contents
2 LITERATURE REVIEW OF RESEARCH ON GIRLS AND WOMEN OF COLOR IN COMPUTING, SCIENCE, AND TECHNOLOGY
4 INCREASING RECRUITMENT, RETENTION, AND ADVANCEMENT OF WOMEN OF COLOR IN THE TECH INDUSTRY
5 THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN ADDRESSING THE UNDERREPRESENTATION OF WOMEN OF COLOR IN TECH
6 ALTERNATIVE PATHWAYS FOR WOMEN OF COLOR IN TECH AND THE ROLE OF PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES
Boxes, Figures, and Tables
BOXES
1-2 Common Forms of Bias Experienced by Women in STEM
4-1 A Snapshot of Lockheed Martin’s Approach to Diversity and Inclusion
4-2 Workforce Diversity, Retention, and Data Transparency at Intel
4-3 Advancing Women with Leadership Potential at IBM
4-4 The Impact of COVID-19 on Women of Color in Tech
FIGURES
2-1 Examples of social and structural factors that hinder or support women of color in tech
3-2 Samples of user interface prototypes designed by African American middle school girls
4-2 Senior-level women are much more likely than senior-level men to practice allyship
4-3 Employees who say they are allies do not always take action
6-1 Number of certificates, which take less than four academic years, awarded in computing 2015-2019
6-3 Carnegie Mellon’s Robotics Academy Badge Pathway to Certification
TABLES
3-1 Evaluation Criteria for Effective Initiatives
4-1 Change in San Francisco Bay Area Tech Workforce, 2007 to 2015
4-2 San Francisco Area Executive Parity Index, 2015
4-3 San Francisco Area Management Parity Index, 2015
6-1 Racial/Ethnic Demographics of Individuals in Tech-Related Fields Without a Bachelor’s Degree
