In recognition of American with Disabilities Act Day on July 26, this week’s post is about the low representation of individuals with disabilities in the biomedical research workforce and efforts underway at the NIH to change this.
Systemic racism persists in the scientific endeavor.
June is Pride Month, an opportunity to celebrate the various perspectives and experiences of our sexual and gender minority (SGM) colleagues who enhance the mission of NIH.
Women of Color face many systemic obstacles in the scientific workforce, from experiences of racial microaggressions to disproportionate expectations of academic service relative to their male counterparts.
In this week's blog post, I am happy to introduce Dr. Carl Hashimoto. Dr. Hashimoto leads the NIH Distinguished Scholars Program (DSP) and is the Senior Advisor for Faculty Development in the NIH Office of Intramural Research.
In this week’s blog post, we are happy to introduce Janine Austin Clayton, M.D., FARVO, director of the NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health (ORWH) and co-chair (along w
The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Extramural Scientific Workforce – Outcomes from an NIH-Led Survey03.25.21 Marie A. Bernard and Mike Lauer
One year later, the COVID-19 pandemic has drastically affected our individual lives and communities. We have observed disproportionate effects observed in underserved populations, leaving them vulnerable to higher infection and mortality risk.
Black History Month (also known as African American History Month) is an opportunity to look at past accomplishments. The NIH has been a leader in supporting science and technology, with that mission fostered by several prominent African American/Black trailblazers.
For this week’s blog post, we are happy to introduce Dr. Charles Dearolf, who is the Director of Program Development and Support at NIH’s Office of Intramural Research (OIR). He has been a member of the OIR senior leadership team since 2008.
The NIH encourages and supports applications for grants and funding by all members of the biomedical research community.
On December 3rd of this year, the United Nation’s International Day of Persons with Disabilities was observed.
While categorizations of race, class, and gender may influence individuals’ self-perceptions, recent work has focused on a more nuanced view of identity, suggesting the activities individuals engage in may also be influential.
The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic go beyond a direct health effect and can impact individuals at both personal and institutional levels.
While we last looked at how the COVID-19 pandemic has shifted institutional policies, this post will focus on the effect the pandemic has had on individuals in the U.S.
The COVID-19 pandemic has made a substantial and likely enduring impact on the U.S. biomedical workforce and forced institutional-wide changes. But the effects are likely not shared equally.
The #MeToo movement has brought heightened scrutiny to interpersonal interactions in all walks of life – making us think carefully about what it means to be sexually harassed or to be a harasser. This global wave of recognition has not escaped the world of science.
"Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." – Henry Ford
In a previous blog, "Tomorrow’s Scientists, Today," I wrote about the NIH-funded Diversity Program Consortium (DPC).
As NIH Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity, my main goal is to promote scientific workforce diversity as a means to institutional excellence as I have described in previous blogs.
Few 20th century achievements portend more promise than the digitalization of biology, made possible by the Human Genome Project and a whirlwind of subsequent advances.
In my role as NIH Chief Officer for Scientific Workforce Diversity, every week I encounter hundreds of individuals and groups in the massive enterprise that is biomedical research.
Chances are, if you aren’t related to a scientist, or have never known one personally, you probably wouldn’t imagine yourself as one. Psychologists call this a lack of science identity.