For the past 20 years, the percentage of the American population consisting of nonwhite minorities has been steadily increasing. By 2050, these nonwhite minorities, taken together, are expected to become the majority. Meanwhile, despite almost 50 years of efforts to increase the representation of minorities in the healthcare professions, such representation remains grossly deficient. Among the underrepresented minorities are African and Hispanic Americans; Native Americans, Alaskans, and Pacific Islanders (including Hawaiians); and certain Asians (including Hmong, Vietnamese, and Cambodians). The underrepresentation of underrepresented minorities in the healthcare professions has a profoundly negative effect on public health, including serious racial and ethnic health disparities. These can be reduced only by increased recruitment and development of both underrepresented minority medical students and underrepresented minority medical school administrators and faculty. Underrepresented minority faculty development is deterred by barriers resulting from years of systematic segregation, discrimination, tradition, culture, and elitism in academic medicine. If these barriers can be overcome, the rewards will be great: improvements in public health, an expansion of the contemporary medical research agenda, and improvements in the teaching of both underrepresented minority and non-underrepresented minority students.
This article describes the ingredients of successful programs for the development of minority faculty in academic medicine. Although stung by recent cuts in federal funding, minority faculty development programs now stand as models for medical schools that are eager to join the 140-year-old quest for diversity in academic medicine. In this article, the ingredients of these successful faculty development programs are discussed by experts in minority faculty development and illustrated by institutional examples. Included are descriptions of program goals and content, mentoring and coaching, selecting participants, providing a conducive environment, managing the program, and sustaining support. This article is a companion to another article, "Successful Programs in Minority Faculty Development: Overview," in this issue of the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine.
Despite recent drastic cutbacks in federal funding for programs to diversify academic medicine, many such programs survive and continue to set examples for others of how to successfully increase the participation of minorities underrepresented in the healthcare professions and, in particular, how to increase physician and nonphysician minority medical faculty. This article provides an overview of such programs, including those in historically black colleges and universities, minority-serving institutions, research-intensive private and public medical schools, and more primary care-oriented public medical schools. Although the models for faculty development developed by these successful schools overlap, each has unique features worthy of consideration by other schools seeking to develop programs of their own. The ingredients of success are discussed in detail in another article in this theme issue of the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine, "Successful Programs in Minority Faculty Development: Ingredients of Success."
Since efforts to increase the diversity of academic medicine began shortly after the Civil War, the efforts have been characterized by a ceaseless struggle of old and new programs to survive. In the 40 years after the Civil War, the number of minority-serving institutions grew from 2 to 9, and then the number fell again to 2 in response to an adverse evaluation by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. For 50 years, the programs grew slowly, picking up speed only after the passage of landmark civil rights legislation in the 1960s. From 1987 through 2005, they expanded rapidly, fueled by such new federal programs as the Centers of Excellence and Health Careers Opportunity Programs. Encompassing majority-white institutions as well as minority-serving institutions, the number of Centers of Excellence grew to 34, and the number of Health Careers Opportunity Programs grew to 74. Then, in 2006, the federal government cut its funding abruptly and drastically, reducing the number of Centers of Excellence and Health Careers Opportunity Programs to 4 each. Several advocacy groups, supported by think tanks, have striven to restore federal funding to previous levels, so far to no avail. Meanwhile, the struggle to increase the representation of underrepresented minorities in the health professions is carried on by the surviving programs, including the remaining Centers of Excellence and Health Careers Opportunity Programs and new programs that, funded by state, local, and private agencies, have arisen from the ashes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.