Science - USA (2020-01-17)

SCIENCE sciencemag.org 17 JANUARY 2020 • VOL 367 ISSUE 6475^239

ILLUSTRATION: DAVIDE BONAZZI/SALZMAN ART

W

hen Abigail Thompson, chair of

the math department at the Uni-

versity of California (UC), Davis,

penned an essay in the December

2019 issue of the Notices of the

American Mathematical Soci-

ety criticizing mandatory “diversity state-

ments” in university hiring, simmering

frictions in math boiled over. Researchers

rushed to author op-eds and joint pub-

lic letters both supporting and opposing

Thompson. The reactions reflect a tension

between mathematicians who see efforts to

promote diversity as an intrusion of poli-

tics into research, and those who

see opening their field to histori-

cally marginalized communities as

the surest way to advance research.

As befits the field, each side claims

numerical data support their view.

Academic math skews over-

whelmingly white and male. Ac-

cording to American Mathematical

Society data, women made up 30%

of new tenure-track hires in 2018.

Data for ethnicity are harder to

come by, but black and Hispanic

faculty are rare. According to a 2017

National Science Foundation diver-

sity report, black people are earning

fewer degrees in math today than

20 years ago.

To improve diversity in all fields,

eight of the 10 UC campuses as well

as an increasing number of other

universities across the country

require faculty job applicants to submit

a statement explaining steps they have

taken to enhance diversity and equity, as

well as how they will support students and

colleagues from diverse backgrounds as a

university employee. At UC, hiring com-

mittees consider these statements along-

side teaching experience, research, and

university and public service.

“This is a contentious issue whose dis-

cussion has been suppressed,” Thompson

tells Science. Her essay applauds inclusivity

efforts of recent decades, including encour-

aging people from diverse backgrounds to

pursue a math career. But she calls diver-

sity statements a “political litmus test” that

she compares to the McCarthyist “loyalty

oaths” faculty members were asked to sign

in the 1950s disavowing association with

communist thought. “Whatever our views

on diversity and how it can be achieved,

mandatory diversity statements are equally

misguided,” she wrote.

Thompson says she has received “strong

support” from colleagues at UC Davis and

elsewhere. But to Chad Topaz, a mathema-

tician at Williams College, requiring such

diversity statements isn’t political; it’s a

recognition that math generates better re-

search when everyone can participate. “We

want math to be the best it can be, so we

have to make it accessible to everybody.”

Carrie Diaz Eaton, a computational sci-

entist at Bates College, agrees. Building

diversity, she says, requires “explicitly en-

couraging our junior colleagues and men-

toring and cultivating their talents and

enthusiasm for this work.”

Bands of mathematicians, including

Topaz and Eaton, wrote and cosigned pub-

lic letters responding to Thompson’s essay,

17 of which were published in December

2019 on the Notices website. Three of the

letters each gained hundreds of signatures.

One heavily criticized Thompson’s essay

and spoke in favor of diversity statements

and other attempts to boost diversity. A

second letter supported Thompson, call-

ing her courageous and agreeing that mak-

ing diversity statements mandatory is a

mistake. A third struck a middle ground,

supporting Thompson’s right to voice her

opinion and calling for more research into

the effectiveness of diversity statements.

Topaz, Eaton, and several other like-

minded mathematicians then organized

a quick research project, hiring contrac-

tors to look up publicly available informa-

tion about the signatories. In a preprint on

SocArXiv, they revealed that cosigners of the

two pro-Thompson letters were overwhelm-

ingly male (79% and 85%, respectively) and

white (89% for both). The majority (88%

and 60%) had tenure. By contrast, cosigners

of the letter in favor of diversity statements

were evenly split between men and women,

and about 80% were white. And only one-

quarter were tenured, with another 45%

or so on the tenure track. In other

words, Topaz says, the mathemati-

cians who support mandating diver-

sity statements “look a lot like the

demographics of America” and rep-

resent math’s future.

Carina Pamela Curto, a mathemati-

cian at Pennsylvania State University,

University Park, sees a different story

in the numbers. She describes her-

self as pro-diversity, but she signed

the letter calling required diversity

statements a mistake. When hir-

ing committees prioritize diversity,

candidates’ other skills are necessar-

ily devalued, she says. Especially for

women and candidates from under-

represented races and ethnicities,

she adds, spending time and effort

developing diversity credentials can

distract from doing research.

She and graduate student Joshua

Paik reanalyzed Topaz’s data and found that

71% of the three letters’ female signatories

who are tenured professors at research-

intensive institutions signed one or both of

the letters supporting Thompson. To her, the

finding indicates that once women serve on

hiring committees, their enthusiasm for di-

versity statements often cools.

However, Curto describes Thompson’s

comparisons to McCarthyism as “totally

counterproductive,” saying the piece “polar-

ized the community in unfortunate ways.”

The community will have a chance to

work things out face-to-face this week in

Denver at the annual Joint Mathematics

Meetings, which features dozens of ses-

sions dedicated to diversity, equity, and

social justice in math. j

PROFESSION

‘Diversity statements’ divide mathematicians

Hundreds choose sides both for and against requiring such statements in academic hiring

By Michael Price

NEWS | IN DEPTH

Published by AAAS