The Next Decade of Discovery in Solar and Space Physics: Exploring and Safeguarding Humanity's Home in Space (2025)
Chapter: Appendix F: Report of the Panel on the State of the Profession: A Vision for a People-Centered Solar and Space Physics (Heliophysics) Community
F
Report of the Panel on the State of the Profession: A Vision for a People-Centered Solar and Space Physics (Heliophysics) Community
F.1 INTRODUCTION
This report of the Panel on the State of the Profession presents a people-centric, evidence-based discussion on the current state of the solar and space physics–heliophysics profession and highlights the barriers and pathways to developing and ensuring a healthy, accessible, inclusive, diverse, creative, collaborative, innovative, agile, accountable, and sustainable solar and space physics community in the next decade. Though there have been significant positive changes within the community over the past decade, much remains to be done.
This panel report provides actionable suggestions to enable the improvement of the community’s culture, team dynamics, and supporting mechanisms. The panel focused on efforts that are directly applicable to and actionable within the solar and space physics community. Many broader issues, though also applicable to solar and space physics, have been raised in other recent decadal surveys (such as the decadal surveys on planetary science and astrobiology [NASEM 2022c] and on astronomy and astrophysics [NASEM 2023b]) and therefore are not elaborated upon here. This panel carefully considered topics raised by the community and chose to adopt a succinct, objective, and evidence-based narrative to help move the community to action.
The panel understands that language is important, contains cultural meaning, and can evoke implicit bias and be noninclusive (Kramsch 2014). With this understanding, the panel adopted “community input papers” instead of “white papers” and uses this term to describe the written input from the community to inform the decadal survey process.
The panel thanks those who are reading this report and recognizes that each one comes to this discussion with different lived experiences, privileges, and understanding of the social science research that underpins many of the suggestions made here. Some topics discussed in this report might be uncomfortable for some members of the solar and space physics community, for various reasons. The panel values lived experiences and hopes that this report’s narrative does not professionally or personally hurt people from marginalized communities who have already been affected by their negative experiences.
The panel also hopes that those not from marginalized communities or early in their understanding of issues around diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility, and other aspects of inclusion and fairness (DEIA+) see themselves as allies, champions, and change agents willing to fully engage in the required personal learning and activities that can create a new, more equitable, inclusive, diverse, and innovative solar and space physics community. Everyone needs to come together to learn from each other; have grace, empathy, and understanding; and approach this work with a growth mindset. Addressing such issues in a transparent way is fundamental for the health, vitality, and sustainability of the science community. The fact that part of the promoted discussion still causes discomfort
in 2024 highlights the importance of shedding light on such topics. Furthermore, there is personal growth in not shying away from having conversations and implementing actions that make some uncomfortable (Woolley et al. 2022). The panel notes that some concepts and ideas described in this report may put some within the community on the defensive if their individual responsibility is not clearly distinguished from systemic or institutional structures (DiAngelo 2011).
The intention of the discussions raised in this report is to promote the well-being of the solar and space physics community, which is predicated on the well-being of individuals. The COVID-19 pandemic amplified the disparate effects of existing bias in the science community (Myers et al. 2020) and exacerbated what was already a mental health crisis in the broader science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce (Abbott 2021; Kaska 2022) and specifically in solar and space physics (Nikoukar et al. 2023). The panel acknowledges that discussions of mental health still carry stigma that are often driven by corrosive cultures (Hall 2023) and that some of the suggestions made in this report are not actionable in some states due to recent state laws that create barriers for DEIA+ (Marijolovic 2023). Nevertheless, the panel chose to address those issues and make suggestions in this report.
For those who are new to the effort of culture change and may not be familiar with many of the recent reports and literature relevant to this work, this report provides data (specific to the solar and space physics community when available), brief summaries of relevant social science research, and descriptions of barriers that underrepresented people in the solar and space physics community face disproportionately. For solar and space physicists to thrive, the entire community needs to participate and welcome allies willing to learn and contribute to fostering inclusive excellence (Williams et al. 2005).
This panel report presents 14 identified barriers for the advancement of a healthy and sustainable solar and space physics community in the next decade and 29 actionable suggestions, of which 13 are considered high impact, divided into the following three categories:
- Short term: 7 actions that can be taken immediately;
- Medium term: 21 actions expected to be in place before the next midterm assessment; and
- Long term: 1 action expected to be in place by the next decadal survey.
The 13 high-impact suggestions are discussed in Section F.10.
Section F.2 provides an overview of the approach and background from research pertinent to the state of the solar and space physics profession. It highlights the importance of a healthy culture for the advancement of the solar and space physics community. A call for accountability at different levels and among different components of the solar and space physics community (including funding agencies and principal investigator institutions) permeates this panel report and is considered crucial to the progress and advancement of the solar and space physics profession.
Section F.3 covers the state of the solar and space physics profession.
Section F.4 covers the overarching goals for the next decade and offers suggestions for reaching those goals.
Section F.5 presents a detailed discussion of DEIA+, including the barriers to achieving full inclusion and fairness, and suggests approaches for overcoming those barriers.
Section F.6 looks broadly at the culture of research, and Section F.7 discusses teamwork. In both sections, the panel identifies barriers to achieving the stated goals and suggests ways to overcome them.
Section F.8 covers sustainable growth for the solar and space physics workforce—also known as the heliophysics workforce. It looks in detail at attracting, retaining, and advancing workers in the field and offers suggestions for overcoming the identified barriers.
Section F.9 offers the panel’s summary and details its suggestions for the solar and space physics community. It includes a summary of the information received from the community input papers and details the alignment of the panel’s suggestions with recent reports of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
F.2 OVERVIEW
Like the development of the coupled systems framework of the solar and space physics discipline (consisting of the connected Sun and heliosphere, and the magnetospheres, ionospheres, and neutral atmospheres of Earth
and other planets [NRC 2013]), the solar and space physics community consists of the closely coupled systems of individuals, departments, and institutions that are driven by funders, professional societies, and societal needs.
The recognition that the discoveries, missions, facilities, training, and education within the solar and space physics community are made, designed, and accomplished by people is the reason this 2024–2033 solar and space physics decadal survey explicitly included this Panel on the State of the Profession. Understanding the human element is essential for creating and fostering a healthy community that can attract and retain talent, provide opportunities for individuals and institutions to thrive, answer fundamental scientific questions, and meet urgent societal needs. In the past few years, the focus on the health and vitality of individuals and institutions as key for the overall success of the discipline has been highlighted in several important National Academies reports, including ones focused on sexual harassment (NASEM 2018), the foundations for healthy and vital research community in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) (NASEM 2022a), and the importance of anti-racism, diversity, equity, and inclusion (NASEM 2023). These themes are the backbone of the findings and recommendations from the midterm assessment (NASEM 2020a) of the 2013 solar and space physics decadal survey (NRC 2013; hereafter “the 2013 decadal survey”), and the planetary science and astrobiology (NASEM 2022c) and astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey (NASEM 2023b), and significantly inform this report.
This report uses a systems model to address the tasks outlined in the statement of task (see Appendix A) to explicitly center people within the institutions and culture that enable the solar and space physics research and education enterprise. This systems model also provides the opportunity to identify the mutually reinforcing feedback between the components and integrate efforts across them (Graves et al. 2022). The solar and space physics community is made up of subcommunities studying the Sun, heliosphere, magnetospheres, ionospheres, and thermospheres, and the interconnections between them and the connections to technology and society. Understanding this system of systems helps organize science efforts. Analogously, the people that make up the solar and space physics community also work and study in different institutions and organizations—universities, labs, federal agencies, and industry: see Figure F-1. Understanding the interconnections among these components enables us to better understand and assess the community. It is important to recognize that suggested changes to one system component create repercussions beyond that system and therefore understanding the coupling among the components is critical for advancing the health and vitality of the solar and space physics and space weather community and the science it produces.
Physical scientists have frequently ignored that professional assumptions, beliefs, and biases are formed by the professional community and that they have perpetuated disparities in opportunities and outcomes for individu-
NOTES: Researchers, faculty, and students are explicitly included to highlight that the community is made up of individuals. NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; NSF, National Science Foundation.
als and the discipline (Thorp 2023). Despite significant efforts to broaden participation in the STEM community in general, and in the Earth and space sciences community in particular, very little has changed in decades with respect to gender and racial diversity (Bernard and Cooperdock 2018). As shown in the next section, though, there are indications of small improvements in gender representation in solar and space physics since the 2013 decadal survey (NRC 2013), but continued lack of comprehensive data stymies assessment of progress and identification of issues. Like many systems, the solar and space physics research system’s current culture is set by the dominant demographic group (White, male, able-bodied, heterosexual, cisgendered), which significantly influences the structures, values, and ideas of excellence and fairness (e.g., Culture—see definition in the Glossary of this appendix).
The solar and space physics community’s current culture does not promote and is not conducive to fostering diverse, equitable, inclusive, health-centered, and accessible institutions, hindering its ability “to tackle strategic problems and maximize scientific return” (Diaz-Garcia et al. 2013; pp. 2008, 2017; NASA 2020b; Sommers 2006). This is reflected in the current demographic imbalance, and in findings from the limited climate surveys from individual institutions and community workshops. In part, this current culture is driven by the traditional metrics used for “success” in the discipline (awards, discoveries, missions, papers, citations, and graduates), which flow from the interactions of the components and depend on three pillars: (1) institutional policies and procedures; (2) behaviors and performance of individuals and leaders; and (3) the culture that attracts, trains, and supports people. Unfortunately, people-centered metrics—such as quality mentoring; supporting education and training; providing career development, effective team building, productive teamwork, health-promoting policies; and engaging in public communication—are often more difficult to quantify and therefore are not always assessed or rewarded as part of the traditional metrics of success. In addition, people from marginalized communities disproportionately support these activities (Simien and Wallace 2022; Zambrana et al. 2017) to the detriment of their career advancement (Gumpertz et al. 2017).
To better understand the influence of a dominant demographic group of any professional community in its definition of success (and in its overall culture), one needs to understand the metrics adopted by this community to evaluate or measure one’s performance, how they are used, and how they perpetuate the status quo:
- The adopted set of metrics is used to evaluate excellence among the community workforce, defining the opportunities for an individual to be accepted, hired, promoted, and to receive awards (Araúla et al. 2016; Blair-Loy and Cech 2016).
- The adopted metrics are likely to reflect the dominant group’s values, assumptions, experiences, biases, and stereotypes.
- Therefore, the definition of excellence of this community will often perpetuate the status quo, even when it is not intrinsically or overtly discriminatory, coercive, or prejudiced. This outcome also perpetuates the fallacy of meritocracy, in which success would be the result of individual talent, experiences, training, and motivation, and the inequalities would be the fault of individuals from marginalized populations and not the social system.
The impact of the current metrics of success was shown in the Advancing Diversity report (NASEM 2022): there are significantly fewer women or people of color acting as NASA mission principal investigators (PIs) compared to White men. Advancing Diversity raised other existing issues to justify this finding, such as the fact that mission PIs generally are at a senior level of their careers and since there are fewer senior women in the field, there would be a proportionally smaller number of female PIs. But one cannot ignore the role of bias in the traditional “success metric” adopted to evaluate those who aspire to be a mission PI. Hence, many of the suggestions made in Advancing Diversity focus on “fixing” access and training and not on the culture that perpetuates the inequalities. The concept of “inclusive excellence” (Williams et al. 2005) attempts to broaden the set of success metrics to include factors that are important to the health and vitality of the discipline and that are centered around DEIA+.
Much of the solar and space physics community does not actively participate in DEIA+ discussions and actions at the individual level because of society’s and the discipline’s belief systems and culture (Dancy and Hodari 2023). Furthermore, people in the dominant group generally lack awareness surrounding the climate of people of color and women or understand the impact of their implicit biases (NASEM 2023; Shelton 2013). A recent National
Academies (2023) report calls for systemic change at all levels (or components in the solar and space physics system shown in Figure F-1 above) and focuses on institutional-level “gatekeepers”—those in authority who can perpetuate inequality, exclusionary practices, and biases. This panel report makes actionable suggestions to funding agencies to support and hold accountable such gatekeepers at the individual, unit, and institutional levels to implement systemic changes to improve the culture of the solar and space physics community for all.
The role that harassment, discrimination, and bullying play in the professional culture also needs significant attention. The American Geophysical Union (AGU) helped lead the community’s redefinition of research ethics to include identifying as scientific misconduct—harassment, discrimination, and bullying in scientific endeavors (McPhaden et al. 2017). The National Academies itself revised its membership policies to expel members found responsible for research misconduct, including sexual harassment (Kaiser 2021). NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF) are significantly behind the standard that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has set to address these issues (NIH 2022). For example, NIH publishes annually the number of reported research misconduct cases and results from individual cases that include not only NIH employees, but also grantees. This panel report makes suggestions for improving the culture of research by minimizing scientific misconduct and providing policy and procedure suggestions to enable reporting and accountability.1
Centering community efforts around individual well-being also needs significant attention. Issues of financial stress, career instability, work–life imbalance, and mental and physical health, although they affect individuals across various demographics, disproportionately affect students, early career workers, and people from marginalized communities (Nicholls et al. 2022). These individual issues significantly hinder the health and vitality of the entire solar and space physics profession. This panel report calls for centering a health-promoting culture throughout the community.
F.3 STATE OF THE SOLAR AND SPACE PHYSICS PROFESSION: CURRENT STATUS
Studies of different subsets of the community, following from the 2013 decadal survey, are provided here to show the type of data that are important to be routinely collected. Bagenal (2023) provided a summary of the data from the 2013 decadal survey, data from the 2023–2032 planetary science and astrobiology decadal survey (NASEM 2022c), and data from the astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey (NASEM 2023b), in addition to data regarding physics degree recipients. The study highlighted some of the key data needed to understand demographic trends in physics, which can inform the community, but it emphasized the differences between physics and the subfields of space science that only solar and space physics–specific studies can address.
Unfortunately, only a limited number of specific studies have been done on solar and space physics, despite a clear recommendation made in the midterm assessment (Recommendation 6.2 in NASEM [2020]). Assessing the current state of the profession is difficult due to the lack of a common identity for the field. This lack of a common identity hinders the compilation of important data, such as the size of the community, its demographics (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, job descriptions—such as tenure and tenure track and soft money research scientists), career stage, funding levels, and research productivity (including papers, patents, and citations). Individual professional societies, federal agencies, universities, research communities—such as the NSF Geospace Environment Modeling (GEM); Coupling, Energetics, and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions (CEDAR); and Solar, Heliospheric and Interplanetary Environment (SHINE) communities—and national laboratories have begun efforts to compile these data and conduct the needed surveys, but there has not been an effort to accomplish this specifically for the solar and space physics community since the 2013 decadal survey.
The most complete demographic data and preliminary culture survey data of the broad solar and space physics community, which grew out of the 2013 decadal survey, are presented here. The methodology, survey, and raw results can be found at Moldwin and Morrow (2021), but the panel notes that these data were only recently made accessible and are now more than 10 years old. This panel report also provides more limited data from NASA, the AGU Space Physics and Aeronomy (SPA) section, and the NSF CEDAR and GEM communities, as well as other studies, but emphasizes that these are snapshots in time and reflect only subsets of the solar and space physics
___________________
1 This paragraph was modified after release of the report to accurately reflect NASA’s antiharassment policy.
community. The studies also do not necessarily use the same categories for gender, race, and ethnicity and have had varying degrees of participation.
As part of the 2013 decadal survey process, the Education and Workforce Working Group developed a community survey that was implemented by the American Institute of Physics (AIP) and funded by an NSF grant. The goals of the survey were to determine the demographics of the field and assess the health of the field. The survey request was sent to 2,560 unique email addresses from the AGU SPA, the American Astronomical Society (AAS) Solar Physics Division (SPD), Space Weather Week attendee lists, and NSF PI lists. A total of 1,305 responses (51 percent) were received, of which 1,171 indicated that they considered themselves in the field of solar, space, and upper-atmospheric physics and currently work and reside in the United States. The survey generated 125 pages of single-spaced responses to several open-ended questions. These responses have not yet been systematically analyzed, so this summary of the report is preliminary and focuses on demographic statistics (Moldwin and Morrow 2021).
Of the respondents, 83 percent were men and 17 percent women. Most were White (81 percent), 13 percent were Asian or Asian American, and 6 percent other. The median age of the respondents was 51 years old with a symmetric distribution (the middle 50 percent were between 40 and 62 years old). Physics was by far the most common undergraduate degree (62 percent). For those earning their PhDs in 1999 or earlier, physics was the most common degree field (40 percent), while the most common degree for those receiving PhDs since 2000 was space physics (36 percent, while physics dropped to 27 percent). Almost three-quarters of graduate student support and two-thirds of undergraduate student research support is from NASA or NSF. Nearly three-quarters of those who received their PhDs since 2000 participated in some form of undergraduate research. About half of the respondents reported that they were involved at some level in K–12 education or public outreach.
The survey asked several Likert-scale questions (which offer several options for responses) with the opportunity to elaborate on their answers—two of which are highlighted here. One question asked if they strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree, or “don’t know” regarding the following statement, “The next generation of scientific leadership is emerging in my field, and I am confident that they will be able to answer the scientific questions of the next decade.” Two-thirds of the respondents agreed or agreed strongly with the statement, while one-quarter disagreed or disagreed strongly. The open-ended comments were generally optimistic about the abilities of the next generation, but pessimistic about reduction in funding and NASA missions. Another question asked, “What have been the barriers to your career up until this point?,” and the responses were divided between men and women. Over 31 percent (48 of 154) of the written responses from women indicated some form of gender discrimination or lack of family-friendly policies as barriers.
The 2013 decadal survey also compiled the number of job advertisements posted in the AGU SPA and the AAS SPD newsletters for postdoctoral (postdoc), research scientist, and faculty positions in addition to the number of new PhDs granted each year in solar and space physics from North American universities (Moldwin et al. 2013). An alarming finding was that in 2010 (just into the great recession of 2008–2009), global postdoc, research scientist, and faculty job ads fell to the lowest levels in the decade (and for faculty positions to just 7 from the typical 15–25 per year from 2001 to 2009). The big questions raised by Bagenal (2023) were, “What has happened in the past decade? Have the trends . . . persisted or changed?” Below, these questions are partially addressed with new analysis for 2010–2020.
Figure F-2 shows the number of job ads for (a) postdocs, (b) research scientists, and (c) tenure and tenure-track faculty and includes data from the 2013 decadal survey for context along with data from the 2011–2020 update. The data are divided between positions in the United States and international positions. The numbers rebounded in 2015 and for faculty, moved back to the 20-per-year range seen in the previous decade. It seems clear that the recommendation supporting the NSF Faculty Development in Space Sciences (FDSS) program has helped significantly since the publication of the previous decadal survey, with 18 new assistant professor faculty hires made through this program and a new funding cycle just announced.
Since 2016, the number of advertisements in all three positions have reached all-time highs. However, absent a quantitative census to determine the size of the field it is impossible to say whether these increases are sufficient to keep pace with growth of the discipline. The methodology used for the 2011–2020 data is identical to that used in Moldwin et al. (2013), and the new data are available in Moldwin (2023).
NOTES: The figure includes data from the 2013 decadal survey (NRC 2013) for context, along with data from the 2011–2020 update. SPA, Space Physics and Aeronomy (section of the American Geophysical Union); SPD, Solar Physics Division (of the American Astronomical Society).
SOURCE: Based on data from Moldwin (2024), https://doi.org/10.7302/fpp2-pc60. CC BY-NC 4.0.
From 2016 to 2021 the SPA primary AGU membership (3,600) and total (5,600) membership2 was steady. The AGU SPA primary section affiliation membership in 2021 was 23.9 percent women, compared with 33 percent of all AGU members, 35 percent of planetary scientists (Bagenal 2023), and 17 percent women in the previous decadal survey snapshot taken in 2013. In 2017, 31 percent of AAS members were women (Pold and Ivie 2019). Taken at face value, the solar and space physics community as represented by AGU SPA membership demographics has made progress in representation of women (from 17 to 24 percent), but women are still underrepresented in comparison with the broader Earth and space science community and with other space science disciplines.
The NSF CEDAR community has begun to ask demographic questions for workshop attendees and the data provide a comparison with the previous decadal survey data, the more recent AGU SPA demographic breakdown by gender and career level (AGU 2018), and the Advancing Diversity report (NASEM 2022). In 2021, 28 percent of the CEDAR registrants gender identified as she/her, while 58 percent identified as he/him. The questionnaire also gave the option of “non-binary” (1 percent) and “no response” (13 percent). In general, these studies reported women or the gender identity of she/her of approximately 30 percent (±10 percent) of student and professional populations in AGU SPA, as well as those serving as PIs or co-investigators (Co-Is) in heliophysics research and analysis proposals submitted to the NASA Solicitation and Proposal Integrated Review and Evaluation System (NSPIRES) between 2014 and 2020. However, comparing CEDAR gender demographics as a function of career stage is quite difficult given the lack of consistent demographic collection across heliophysics—a common theme noted in several recent National Academies reports cited herein.
With respect to race and ethnicity, CEDAR attendees in 2021 were 56 percent White, 35 percent Asian, and 9 percent other. Underrepresented minority registrants in STEM fields represented 9–12 percent of all registrants for the CEDAR workshops in 2021 and 2022. While CEDAR demographic data generally show that earlier career participants tend to be slightly more diverse than those at mid- and senior career levels, the 12 percent or less of minority representation falls below the noted 15 percent participation level cited by Cain and Leahey (2014) as an important benchmark for realizing the benefits of diversity in groups. However, the underrepresented participants in recent GEM workshops for 2020–2022 have seen a steady increase from 14–30 percent, with declining numbers of participants choosing “prefer not to answer.” This is encouraging news and raises an interesting key question: Is there a causal relationship between reporting of underrepresented participations, PIs, Co-Is, other invested parties, and other designations and choosing “prefer not to answer” to demographic questionnaires and surveys?
___________________
2 AGU allows members to indicate primary sections and multiple other section affiliations, such as planetary, atmospheric, or education.
The panel also notes that in 2021 the CEDAR community had a significantly higher proportion of Asians than the proportion identified in the 2013 solar and space physics demographic survey data: see Figures F.3, F.4, and F.5. Figure F-6 shows data from recent GEM workshops. These data raise another interesting question: Is CEDAR representative of the overall community or do the data simply reflect year-to-year fluctuations in attendees? Again, this question further highlights the need for regular and consistent collection of, as well as transparent reporting of, demographics in the solar and space physics community.
CEDAR, GEM, and SHINE are programs funded by the NSF Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences Division under the Directorate for Geosciences. The demographics from the recent CEDAR and GEM workshops represent subsets of the solar and space physics community; this type of demographic collection by such programs are new, grassroots efforts that need to continue. However, demographic information from proposals solicited by NSF and NASA, two of the major funders of solar and space physics education, research, and infrastructure, are starting to emerge in either the peer-reviewed literature or published by the agencies themselves and offer a view into the current state of the profession.
A fairly extensive demographic study by Chen et al. (2022) investigated the trends in NSF funding rates from 1996 to 2019, paying specific attention to race and ethnicity: see Figures F-7 and F-8. While Chen et al. (2022) looked at NSF trends in funding rates only down to the directorate level, some important trends were revealed. The number of proposals submitted to Geosciences Directorate at NSF steadily declined between 2012 and 2016, while the number of awards remained fairly constant, and overall funding rates ranged between ∼25 and 30 percent.
NOTE: CEDAR, Coupling, Energetics, and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions.
SOURCE: Jones and Maute (2022), https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspas.2022.1074460/full. CC BY 4.0.
NOTE: CEDAR, Coupling, Energetics, and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions.
SOURCE: Jones and Maute (2022), https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspas.2022.1074460/full. CC BY 4.0.
Other striking results show that the proposals (both research and nonresearch) submitted to the NSF Geosciences Directorate were overwhelmingly from White PIs for 2012–2016, some 20 percent higher than reported by the NASA Heliophysics Division for 2014–2020. Also, Asian and Hispanic/Latino PIs submitting proposals to the NSF Geosciences Directorate saw a funding award deficit (i.e., funding rates below overall directorate funding) for 2012–2016; see Figure F-7. Such racial disparities in funding are concerning; repeating a Chen et al. (2022) study at the NSF divisional level, specifically the Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, is needed to understand funding rates and trends for most of the solar and space physics community. With about 5,000 proposals per year
NOTE: CEDAR, Coupling, Energetics, and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions.
SOURCE: Jones and Maute (2022), https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspas.2022.1074460/full. CC BY 4.0.
NOTE: GEM, Geospace Environment Modeling.
SOURCE: Huang (2023).
(of which about 600 and 200 per year submitted by investigators who identify as Asian and Hispanic, respectively) the award surplus or deficits and differences between relative funding rates by race for the most part are statistically significant.
Chen et al. (2022) also reported another concerning trend regarding the nonreporting of demographic information from 1999 to 2020. The percentage of proposals submitted by PIs to NSF who provided information on their gender, race, or ethnicity drastically dropped between 1999 and 2020: see Figure F-8. The authors also reported that this trend is accelerating and reported that there was a 10 percent drop in the response rate between 2019 and 2020 alone. The cause of such a drop and prevalence at the directorate and division level is unknown, and it is somewhat at odds with CEDAR and GEM demographic information (detailed above). Nonetheless, such a trend in “prefer not to answer” responses, if present in the Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences Division, needs to be addressed. One suggestion is to clearly articulate the value of the data and emphasize that it is not used in the selection process; this could help increase participation.
In 2023, the NASA Office of the Chief Scientist released the NASA Researcher Demographics Report (NASA 2023), summarizing the demographic data collected by NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) for 2014–2020. These data were collected voluntarily through the NSPIRES web portal used to respond to announcements of opportunity, Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Science (ROSES) proposal solicitations, mail-in panel reviews, and student fellowship opportunities. Demographic data collected from NASA announcements of opportunity were reported only at the SMD level, while demographic data collected from ROSES PIs and Co-Is were presented at the division level. Therefore, the panel summarizes below the salient demographic data collected on ROSES PIs and Co-Is for proposals submitted to the NASA Heliophysics Division. Note that this includes only a fraction of all the information detailed in the NASA Researcher Demographics 2023 Report, and it is strongly suggested that the solar and space physics community review the full NASA report for more details.
NOTE: AA, African American; AI/AN, American Indian/Alaskan Native; NH/PI, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander; NSF, National Science Foundation; PI, principal investigator.
SOURCE: Chen et al. (2022). CC0 1.0.
NOTES: The solid line in Panel A represents data from 2005 to 2019 (National Science Foundation Merit Review Reports after and including 2012), where individuals self-identifying as a particular race are included regardless of their race or their ethnicity (non-Hispanic, Hispanic, or unknown). The dashed line represents data from 1996 to 2011, where individuals are only included in a particular race category if they are non-Hispanic.
SOURCE: Chen et al. (2022). CC0 1.0.
The majority of proposals submitted to ROSES solicitations in heliophysics were submitted by individuals identifying as male, with percentages ranging from 67 to 71 percent for 2014–2020: see Figure F-9. Roughly 70 percent male representation of ROSES PIs and Co-Is in heliophysics is broadly consistent with the AGU SPA membership numbers reported in 2018 (AGU 2018) and those from CEDAR workshop data for 2021 and 2022 (see above). Submissions by female PIs and Co-Is range from 17 to 21 percent over the 7-year period studied by NASA. “Prefer not to answer” responses from PIs and Co-Is represented between 11 and 16 percent of ROSES submissions. Of note is the weak downward trend in the “prefer not to answer” category, which is encouraging and opposite of those reported by Chen et al. (2022) for NSF. Also encouraging from the NASA Researcher Demographics 2023 Report is that success rates for proposals submitted to the NASA Heliophysics Division appear to be increasing. With such a short time series, it is hard to assess gender disparities for funding success rates; continued demographic data collection would facilitate analyses of this kind.
Most PIs and Co-Is submitting proposals in response to NASA ROSES solicitations in Heliophysics identify as White, ranging between ∼50 and 60 percent for 2014–2020. The next largest group of PIs and Co-Is selected “prefer not to answer,” representing 21 percent of all proposals submitted between 2014 and 2020, with values ranging from 18 to 24 percent. These data raise the question of why solar and space physics applicants are selecting “prefer not to answer” at this high rate, one that requires further probing over the next decade.
The remaining PIs and Co-Is submitting to ROSES solicitations in Heliophysics identified as Asian (16 percent) or Hispanic (3 percent); those identifying as Black and or “race not listed” accounted for less than 1 percent
NOTE: PNA, prefer not to answer.
SOURCE: NASA (2023).
of the proposals. Such a very low number of proposals submitted to ROSES solicitations in heliophysics by those who indicated that they are underrepresented minorities, coupled with the data for the participation numbers in CEDAR and GEM, is some of the best evidence on the lack of diversity in the field and requires action.
Success rates for all proposals submitted to NASA ROSES solicitations in Heliophysics for 2014–2020 were between 23 and 27 percent. Proposals with PIs and Co-Is identifying as White had a slightly higher success than those whose PIs and Co-Is identified as Asian, Hispanic, or chose not to answer these demographic questions (as shown in Figure F-10). The success rates for PIs and Co-Is identifying as Black and “race not listed” are not shown in in Part B of Figure F-10 because those PIs and Co-Is accounted for less than 1 percent of all proposals submitted.
NOTE: PNA, prefer not to answer.
SOURCE: NASA (2023).
The NASA Research Demographics 2023 Report (NASA 2023) states: “There are too few Black individuals in Heliophysics to allow reporting, so their success rate is unknown at this time” (p. 39). Even though the percentages of all proposals submitted from PIs and Co-Is identifying as Black and “race not listed” are extremely small, having the actual number of proposals submitted by these groups is nonetheless important to evaluate the state of the profession. Of note is the fact that proposal success rates for White PIs and Co-Is are slightly higher than all other groups for 2014–2020 for Heliophysics and 4 percent higher than Hispanic PIs and Co-Is, which may suggest an award surplus and deficit for such PIs and Co-Is, respectively, following the Chen et al. (2022) definition (i.e., funding rates above overall division level). However, an award surplus or deficit among the different race and national origin demographic categories reported in Figure F-10 is difficult to assess given the percentage of individuals selecting “prefer not to answer.” Furthermore, a direct comparison of funding award surplus or deficit between the NASA and NSF results found by Chen et al. (2022) cannot be done because the NASA report did not include the total number of proposals submitted or funded. In addition, the year-to-year data presented by NASA on funding success rates do not include Hispanic or Black data due to the small numbers.3
As part of the NASA Researcher Demographics 2023 Report, NASA SMD reported data for applicants with disabilities, and those data are extremely encouraging: see Figures F-11 and F-12. Across all years, roughly 3 percent of all PIs and Co-Is submitting proposals to NASA ROSES Heliophysics solicitation identified as having a disability. The “prefer not to answer” responses for race and national origin slightly decreased over time. With only 4 years of reported data, it is hard to see any trend in proposal success rate for PIs and Co-Is who identified as having a disability, but those funding rates were generally between 27 and 30 percent in the available data.
Both Chen et al. (2022) and the NASA demographics report state that limitations in the available data reported make it very difficult to evaluate, understand, and compare demographic information. For example, there were reports that the lack of publicly available data from NSF precludes multivariate and intersectional examinations of NSF racial funding rates alongside other factors, such as gender, career stage, and institution type (Chen et al. 2022). Lack of data access also makes it difficult to examine additional factors that affect funding rates, such as educational background and training, scholarly productivity, institutional knowledge and support, prior funding success, and mentoring. Furthermore, the NASA demographics report identifies the need for synchronizing
___________________
3 The NASA Researcher Demographics 2023 Report also included success rates for proposals submitted to ROSES in heliophysics, which increased for every race and national origin category recorded for NASA, including PIs and Co-Is identifying as White, Asian, and prefer not to answer. However, success rate trends for 2014–2020 PIs and Co-Is identifying as Hispanic, Black, and race not listed were not provided.
NOTE: PNA, prefer not to answer.
SOURCES: NASA (2023).
demographic surveys between NASA, NSF, AIP, and other relevant organizations to improve the usefulness and intercomparison of demographic information across the STEM enterprise. For example, the discrepant trends between the “prefer not to answer” responses to demographics questions in NSF proposals in 2012–2016 (Chen et al. 2022) and the 2023 NASA demographics report in Heliophysics further highlight this need.
F.4 OVERARCHING GOALS FOR THE NEXT DECADE
By the next decadal survey, the solar and space physics community will become a clearly identifiable community within the space sciences, and, similar to other professional communities (e.g., astronomy), regularly and easily measuring itself and assessing its health and vitality.
SOURCE: NASA (2023).
F.4.1 Identified Barriers
Currently, “solar and space physics” is one of the umbrella terms that encompass the community’s different components—that is, the solar, heliospheric, magnetospheric, ionospheric, thermospheric, mesospheric, and space weather communities. Within NASA’s SMD, the single-word term “heliophysics” is used and clearly distinguishes it from the Earth science, astrophysics, and planetary science communities.
As highlighted in the 2013 decadal survey, this multiplicity of terms and the “newness” of heliophysics hinders it in communicating its science to other stakeholders, including the public. Other barriers identified by the panel include the following:
- Lack of unique identity: Understanding who makes up the current solar and space physics community and the ability to study trends to assess the health and vitality of the discipline continues to be difficult by the lack of a standard name of the discipline within different organizations: solar and space physics (National Academies), heliophysics (NASA), geospace sciences (NSF), space weather (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] and the American Meteorological Society [AMS]), space physics and aeronomy (AGU), solar physics (AAS SPD), and various other permutations within universities. The lack of a common name was raised in the 2013 decadal survey and continues to hinder its ability to articulate its science broadly and assess the state of the profession.
- Lack of demographic numbers: Basic demographic data of the solar and space physics community are not available. Broader measures or reporting (such as AIP’s surveys of physics and astronomy or NSF’s National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics Reports) are not sufficient for understanding the solar and space physics community. Understanding how the climate and culture of the community has changed considering broader societal change is not possible without routine and regular climate surveys. These points have been made by almost every National Academies report focused on culture, climate, and people in the STEM enterprise over the last 2 decades. The stated goals of the solar and space physics community’s institutions and funding agencies regarding improving diversity cannot be taken seriously unless they hold themselves accountable. Accountability is impossible without consistently updated, quantitative demographic and climate data.
F.4.2 Suggestions
This report numbers each suggestion but they are not ranked ordered. The time frame for when suggested changes are implemented is given as short term, medium term, and long term. These correspond to immediately, by the next midterm assessment, and by the next decadal survey.
- A Common Name for the Field (Medium Term). The panel suggests the community coalesce around a single name—either solar and space physics or heliophysics4—in NASA, NSF, NOAA, and the higher education community so that numbers of faculty, researchers, practitioners, and students can be tracked across departments, institutions, professional societies, and employers. Using keywords in ORCID5 by individual investigators could over time help self-identify the community, especially as having an ORCID identification number is now required by professional societies and funding agencies.
- Heliophysics Consortium (Medium Term). The panel suggests an interagency-funded mechanism (co-led by NASA and NSF with participation of other relevant agencies) to unify the multiple disciplinary subgroups and facilitate networking, collaboration, and communication among them, focusing on integrating and
___________________
4 In the rest of this report, the term heliophysics is included with solar and space physics.
5 ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) is a nonproprietary alphanumeric code to uniquely identify authors and contributors of scholarly communication and, on ORCID’s website and services, to look up authors and their bibliographic output.
-
strengthening solar and space physics–heliophysics research and education. This proposed heliophysics consortium would enable:
- Unification of the community message and language, making available education and public outreach–related resources;
- Creation of a community code of conduct and ethics, based on ones developed by AGU;
- Creation of a community message and job board (centralizing, e.g., the newsletters and job advertisements from AGU SPA, AAS SPD, AMS Space Weather, SHINE, CEDAR, GEM, and the Triennial Earth-Sun Summit), as well as the development and active curation of a unified web page similar to the National Space Weather Program Unified Space Weather Portal6;
- Establishment of a shared graduate application process, including all the higher education programs that offer degrees related to the field (e.g., a common application like the American Physical Society [APS]/ AGU Bridge program in which students can indicate that they are willing to have their application considered by multiple institutions); and
- Administration of a community climate survey (following on the 2013 decadal survey) in preparation for the next midterm assessment to help identify the solar and space physics–heliophysics community (e.g., FDSS, NASA Postdoctoral Program, graduate fellowships, AAS SPD, AGU SPA, and AMS participants; higher education institutions; federally funded research and development centers; and other institutions).
- Demographics Data System (Medium Term). The panel suggests that federal agencies systematically and transparently collect, monitor, and analyze demographic data that will better inform what are the barriers and opportunities for career advancements (e.g., NASA could assess gender differences in award rates). The panel also suggests that NASA, NSF, and NOAA work with independent organizations (such as AIP) to conduct regular climate surveys every 5 years of the community and routinely provide proposal and award data to the proposed heliophysics consortium. In addition, professional societies (AGU, AAS, and AMS) could provide data on meeting attendees and journal authors and referees. The proposed consortium could take the lead in developing, implementing, analyzing, and communicating the results of climate surveys and the health and vitality of the community and engage social scientists in crafting the surveys, interpreting the results, and recommending actions. Development of a communitywide (and accessible to the entire community) database can be used to assess demographic trends and provide input to the decadal midterm review to assess the effectiveness of strategies and programs adopted. In addition, to aid the identification of the community and help unify the community under a single name, it would be valuable to use a common keyword on ORCID ID profiles—for example, “#Heliophysics.”
F.5 DEIA+ DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION, AND ACCESSIBILITY+
To expand opportunities for new discoveries and to incorporate advanced tools and technologies in a healthy and sustainable solar and space physics community over the next decade, the community has to be more diverse, equitable, inclusive, accessible, anti-racist, accountable, health-promoting, and just DEIA+. The panel uses the “+” throughout the report to highlight that “DEIA” by itself is missing many components—especially accountability. As society is witnessing, DEIA has become the victim of the culture wars and literally outlawed in some states (Burch 2023). Even without the politicization of the acronym, it has often become a “check box” used to highlight efforts without making real progress. Although institutions and society have changed in the wake of the #MeToo movement and George Floyd’s murder by police, too often survivors of sexual assault or harassment are the ones who suffer negative consequences at the hands of their institutions, and implicit and explicit bias and systemic barriers continue to hinder progress.
___________________
6 Note that https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/portal is no longer maintained.
Another aspect of the current research culture is to discount the importance of personal well-being in promoting excellence. Having a health-promoting culture is essential to attract a diverse and talented workforce and to help sustain and enable the solar and space physics–heliophysics community to innovate and make discoveries. Health-promoting is included in the “+” to highlight the importance of well-being (including aspects of mental health, work–life balance, compensation, job stability, and safety) of individuals, teams, departments, universities, and other research institutions. (In addition to the discussion in this section, additional aspects of the issue are covered in the Section F.8, below, on workforce sustainable growth.)
Before presenting DEIA+ goals for the next decade, the panel offers a few observations to help set the stage for the panel’s suggestions. These observations are from the social sciences (Cech 2022; Graves et al. 2022; Thomsen 2022) and address concepts and beliefs that have created the current state and hinder efforts at developing a more DEIA+ community. These statements are made to counter arguments that are often made or beliefs that are held that have hindered progress in changing culture.
- Lack of progress is not due to a few “bad apples” but is driven by systemic issues (McDonald 2021).
- Subtle beliefs and practices matter (Offermann et al. 2014).
- Positive change is not inevitable; it requires work (Holvino et al. 2004).
- Dominant group members often do not understand the climate of marginalized people, such as people of color, women, and those who identify as LGBTQ+ (NASEM 2023; Shelton 2013).
- Small advantages and disadvantages accumulate over time—the so-called Matthew Effect7: see Figure F-13.
- DEIA+ efforts are not recognized or rewarded as part of the research culture (LeanIn.Org and McKinsey and Company 2021).
- Women and minorities who engage in fixing systemic issues at a much higher rate than dominant group members are often penalized (Johnson and Hekman 2016).
- Quality evaluation and assessment requires resources and collaboration among social scientists and the solar and space physics–heliophysics community (Jones et al. 2022).
F.5.1 Overarching Goals for the Next Decade
An overarching goal is that by the next decadal survey, the solar and space physics (heliophysics) community will have fully adopted leading DEIA+ practices at the individual (especially gatekeeper), institutional, and agency levels. As with all complex, coupled systems, the solar and space physics community system behavior is driven by two-way coupled feedbacks between the components, and therefore mutually reinforcing leading practices and behaviors will have been identified and strengthened. Specifically, the panel’s hope over the next decade is that the solar and space physics (heliophysics) community will be one defined by equitable practices and will broaden the definition of research excellence to incorporate inclusion. Rodriguez (2016) defines “equity” as enactment of specific policies and practices that ensure equitable access and opportunities for success for everyone. Equity can be viewed as providing resources and structures that are not equal, but meet people where they are, to ensure that all people can participate in solar and space physics (Pendergrass et al. 2019). Inclusive excellence rewards those who engage and promote broadening participation and inclusive practices that promote well-being and belonging.
F.5.2 Identified Barriers
- Lack of DEIA+ strategies beyond compliance: Decades of research has shown that as part of the broader STEM community, solar and space physics–heliophysics is not diverse, equitable, inclusive, accessible, or developing anti-racist and health-promoting strategies to confront structural barriers for full participation. Also, despite significant efforts to address these shortcomings, little progress was made in the last decade in the solar and space physics–heliophysics community.
___________________
7 The Matthew Effect (Merton 1968) is the tendency of individuals to accrue advantages in proportion to their initial level of success and takes its name from the Parable of the Talents in the biblical Gospel of Matthew.
SOURCES: J.M. Jebsen, K. Nicoll Baines, R.A. Oliver, and I. Jayasinghe, 2022, “Dismantling barriers faced by women in STEM,” Nature Chemistry 14:1203–1206, Springer Nature.
- DEIA+ barriers by individual states: Several states have passed or are considering bans in state-funded DEIA+ initiatives. As NASA and NSF have components of awards dependent on DEIA+ plans and other, broader impacts following the President’s Executive Order (Biden 2021) and agency strategic initiatives, the state bans are creating confusion among the solar and space physics community.
- Lack of well-being: A culture that does not promote safe workplaces for all and work–life balance, provide clear pathway options for stable careers, support working parents, or provide a livable wage for many students and early career professionals is not healthy or sustainable.
F.5.3 Suggestions
As noted above, the panel’s suggestions are numbered but not rank ordered, and they are identified as short term (immediate), medium term (by the next midterm assessment), or long term (by the next decadal survey).
-
Committees with DEIA+ Subject-Matter Experts (Short Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, NSF, and the solar and space physics–heliophysics institutions create or continue committees with DEIA+ subject-matter experts. NASA, NOAA, and NSF continue to hire and fund DEIA+ subject-matter experts to integrate relevant teams, organizations, and committees in the agency to:
- Map structural, organizational, individual bias, inequalities, and racism in solar and space physics–heliophysics funded activities;
- Understand the role of leadership and organizations in propagating the issues;
-
- Create roadmaps and metrics to improve DEIA+ in heliophysics; and
- Evaluate gatekeepers’ and organization’s programs, policies, and practices in an effective way (e.g., using NIH as an exemplar).
- DEIA+ Plans for Large Team Proposals (Short Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF require DEIA+ plans for large team proposals and that they be included as an evaluation factor. Proposal review panels would include DEIA+ experts or trained reviewers to properly evaluate a required DEIA+ plan (i.e., NSF broader impacts and NASA IDEA [inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility] plans). Resources regarding DEIA+ best practices and how to develop strong accountable plans could be provided to proposing teams. The plans would be evaluated and be part of the overall proposal evaluation.
- Educating the Solar and Space Physics–Heliophysics Community on DEIA+’s Importance (Short Term). The panel suggests NSF and NASA support efforts on educating the solar and space physics–heliophysics community on DEIA+’s importance. For example, the NSF could provide coordination across SHINE, GEM, and CEDAR to support and fund workshops and professional development opportunities at the workshops around DEIA+. This would include training and support for involving local communities in any fieldwork or infrastructure development.
- Policy Changes That Enable Accountability for DEIA+ Efforts (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, NSF, and solar and space physics–heliophysics institutions implement policies that enable accountability for DEIA+ efforts. Funding agencies, recipient universities, institutions, and PIs ought to be held accountable for ensuring that the approved DEIA+ plan is implemented. The survey-sponsoring agencies would monitor compliance with approved DEIA+ plans and take appropriate actions in cases of noncompliance (this could include withdrawal of a current grant to denial of a grant renewal). Mechanisms for anonymous 360-degree evaluations of the team could be included to reduce power differentials and increase the validity of the assessments.
- Core Values of Health Promotion (Medium Term). The panel suggests that as part of the core value of health promotion held by NASA, NOAA, and NSF, those organizations raise undergraduate and graduate student stipend and postdoc researcher salary minimum requirements to a livable wage adjusted by location (e.g., locality-adjusted General Schedule pay) and be reviewed annually. Levels at or above these minimums to be a requirement for programs (such as NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates [REUs], NASA Future Investigators in NASA Earth and Space Science and Technology [FINESST], or AGS postdocs) and individual investigator grants funded through such programs as NSF GEM or NASA ROSES. Solar and space physics community institutions and funding agencies need to have health promotion at the center of their mission. The Okanagan Charter adopted by many research universities is a model (International Conference on Health Promoting Universities & Colleges, 2015).
F.6 RESEARCH CULTURE
Research culture is difficult to assess, can be different for different individuals, and it is not included in traditional metrics of “health and vitality” of an individual, team, department, or institution. The goal of this panel report is to recenter and reframe the discussion around the people who make up the profession. People interact with each other through shared structures, values, and ideas of excellence and fairness. These cultural norms, schema, and beliefs were created and are propagated by the community, which has been, and is still, majority White, cisgendered, able-bodied, heterosexual men (Bagenal 2023).
F.6.1 Overarching Goal for the Next Decade
By the next decadal survey, the solar and space physics community will be fully centered on people in the profession and recognize that the diversity of identities, backgrounds, cultures, education, and experiences is a strength. This goal includes the creation of programs and policies to enable a healthy and innovative community culture.
F.6.2 Identified Barriers
- Continued, pervasive sexual harassment, bullying, and discrimination: There is a lack of straightforward, clear, and anonymous mechanisms to report harassment and abuse, and, once reported, a lack of accountability. Nearly all of this panel’s members had experienced harassment due to their gender or race and encountered reporting barriers or institutional pushback. This anecdotal evidence is consistent with results from Funk and Parker (2018) that showed both female and underrepresented minorities (specifically, African Americans) in STEM faced higher rates of discrimination (≥50 percent of the more than 2,300 U.S. adults surveyed in the study), compared with their non-STEM counterparts.
- Principal investigator power dynamics: Significant power dynamics are inherent in academia, and research teams and organizations contribute to opportunities for abuse.
- Lack of support and recognition for those who lead the attraction, retention, and advancement of individuals from underrepresented groups: To amplify a recommendation from the astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey: there is a need for increased funding and recognition for the people who lead the recruitment, retention, and advancement of individuals from underrepresented groups (NASEM 2023b). This report highlights that those who lead the recruitment, retention, and advancement of those people in STEM, many of whom are themselves from underrepresented groups, take a significant amount of work, time, and energy and often are not recognized or valued as important aspects of their professional responsibilities (Domingo et al. 2022; Hekman et al. 2016; Lerma et al. 2020; Porter et al. 2018). Typically, grants supporting this work (e.g., REUs) have rigid requirements and do not acknowledge the sacrifice the leading PIs are making on their own scientific productivity.
F.6.3 Suggestions
As noted above, the panel’s suggestions are numbered but not rank ordered, and they are identified as short term (immediate), medium term (by the next midterm assessment), or long term (by the next decadal survey).
- Mechanisms of Accountability of PIs (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, NSF, and other institutions develop mechanisms of accountability of for PIs. Such accounting would include adopting a code of research ethics and conduct (perhaps modeled after AGU or those of other organizations or agencies) for individual laboratories and teams. In addition, the panel suggests that policies be developed that prevent PIs who have had disciplinary findings of research misconduct from obtaining or taking grants to new institutions (i.e., the “pass the abuser” issue).
- Ombudsperson to Receive Anonymous Complaints (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF provide an ombudsperson to receive anonymous complaints and reports from grantees and contractors and adopt mechanisms to hold accountable any people found to have violated codes of conduct. NIH is an example of providing an ombudsman to all stakeholders (NIH employees, contractors, grantees, students, and trainees), as well as providing annual reports on violations.
- Mechanisms to Address Issues of Power Dynamics (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF programs create mechanisms to eliminate or reduce the effects of unequal power dynamics. This could be accomplished by providing funds directly to students (as done with NSF graduate fellowships) and early career professionals (such as postdoc and early career investigators). The programs could provide training for, and assessment of, PI mentoring of students and postdoc and assessment of departments for adopting leading practices around mentoring: one example is the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s Sea Change.8
___________________
8 See American Association for the Advancement of Science, SEA Change, https://www.aaas.org/programs/sea-change.
- Support and Reward Those Who Lead Community Efforts (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF support and reward those who lead community efforts that sustain a healthy solar and space physics–heliophysics community. Following a suggestion of the astronomy and astrophysics decadal survey, federal agencies could provide material support to researchers who build and lead programs designed to retain, recruit, and advance people from underrepresented minority groups in heliophysics. This approach would expand the community’s definition of “excellence” to “inclusive excellence,” recognizing and rewarding the value added for these efforts. An example highlighted from that decadal survey report would be to increase the budgets for research grants for those who propose to advance DEIA+ efforts in their institution or the broader community. Funding 5 to 10 grants with an additional $100,000 extra would cost between $500,000 and $1 million per year per agency.
F.7 TEAMWORK
Advancing solar and space physics (heliophysics) research requires teamwork among personnel who possess varying levels of solar and space physics–heliophysics domain expertise and a variety of other high-level skills (including engineering, computer science, mathematics, data science, machine learning, artificial intelligence, meteorology, operations, community building, communications, team science, citizen science, and software engineering). Unfortunately, it is well documented in the social sciences that teams often underperform in terms of their potential due to a variety of “process losses.” Moreover, high-profile scientific projects are increasingly tackled by scientific multiteam systems (i.e., interdependent systems of two or more component teams bound together by shared superordinate goals) rather than small stand-alone scientific teams. In comparison with stand-alone teams, multiteam systems offer several benefits, including greater resource capacity and the ability for component teams to specialize and focus on different subtasks. However, the size and scope of multiteam systems often creates additional barriers to teamwork and project management in comparison with stand-alone teams.
The scientific study of teamwork demonstrates that teams and multiteam systems are most likely to be effective when members (1) collaborate rather than compete with one another; (2) coordinate their actions in support of shared goals; (3) develop a shared and accurate understanding of their goals, tasks, and teammates; and (4) feel engaged, motivated, cohesive, and psychologically safe. However, these patterns of behaviors, cognitions, motivation, and affect are not guaranteed. Individual differences play a key role in determining the team processes and psychological states that underpin team and multiteam performance—especially such deep-level characteristics as personality, skills, expertise, and training. Beyond individual differences, research on teamwork demonstrates that a variety of interventions can increase team and multiteam system effectiveness. These interventions include reward systems that reinforce collaborative behaviors, a well-articulated team plan or “charter,” functional leadership (i.e., leadership behaviors targeted toward supporting collective goals), team-building activities, teamwork training, frame-of-reference training, systematic and structured debriefing sessions, and assessment systems geared toward understanding and supporting team and system functioning.
F.7.1 Overarching Goal for the Next Decade
By the next decadal survey, the solar and space physics community will have invested in formally training, assessing, and rewarding inclusive and effective teams and multiteam systems by drawing from research on the science of team science as well as the broader science of teams (NRC 2015).
F.7.2 Identified Barriers
- Team assembly through limited networks: For many solar and space physics–heliophysics investigations there are difficulties identifying collaborators and assembling teams. For early career investigators, the current mechanisms of team building through “old boy networks” perpetuates inequalities and exclusion (e.g., Case and Richley 2013).
- Developing teamwork capacity: Heliophysicist training requires extensive time developing many research skills but devotes significantly less time developing teamwork, communication, leadership, and collaboration skills.
- Managing large, geographically distributed teams or multiteam team systems: It is difficult to develop skills and solutions needed for managing and coordinating multiteam system structures, navigating hybrid communication dynamics, having scientists and engineers on multiple teams simultaneously (pulled in different directions), integrating and managing affiliated specialists (such as computer and data scientists), and integrating and developing opportunities for emerging roles (Carter et al. 2019).
F.7.3 Suggestions
As noted above, the panel’s suggestions are numbered but not rank ordered, and they are identified as short term (immediate), medium term (by the next midterm assessment), or long term (by the next decadal survey).
- Science Team Plans for Mission, Center, and Large Investigations (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF require science team plans for mission, center, and large investigations. Providing sufficient resources to develop science team plans (i.e., charters, codes of conduct, succession, and communication plans) and making them required for proposals as an evaluated factor would strengthen solar and space physics–heliophysics investigations. Review panels would include team experts or trained reviewers (as was done for the NASA Diversify, Realize, Integrate, Venture, Educate (DRIVE) Center evaluation). Agencies could offer team science planning resources prepared by team experts and pay attention to the level of effort of each member of the team (thinking of efficiency and career impact), how well early career scholars are mentored and trained, and the quality of the succession plan.
- Development of Team Science Activities and Curriculum (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF support development of team science activities and curriculum for the solar and space physics–heliophysics higher education community. Like other important skills needed for success beyond the disciplinary content that traditionally have not been part of graduate educational programs (e.g., written and oral communication skills, research ethics, and open science and data management), NASA and NSF could support the development of materials and curriculum (including online resources) to enable individuals and departments to implement team science training.
F.8 THE SOLAR AND SPACE PHYSICS–HELIOPHYSICS WORKFORCE: SUSTAINABLE GROWTH
The 2013 decadal survey defined the community narrowly by including only those with PhD degrees doing research (Moldwin and Morrow 2016). This panel suggests thinking more broadly about who makes up the community and especially reconsidering the “traditional” pipeline model that neglects the myriad pathways in and out of the community and the broader allied professions that support solar and space physics (heliophysics) endeavors, especially considering the burgeoning commercialization of space and the wide adoption of space technologies into society. Using the braided river model can represent the multiple entry points and pathways and the numerous barriers and opportunities to creating a sustainable and healthy profession: see Figure F-14 (Batchelor et al. 2021).
A common thread throughout the panel’s community input papers and direct input to the panel in the public meetings is the need for a workforce of “heliophysics”: specifically, a workforce that has varying levels of solar and space physics–heliophysics domain expertise but in tandem with other high-level skills. Examples include engineering expertise; adaptive optics, for cutting-edge instrument development; computer science and mathematics for exascale computer modeling; data science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence for advanced empirical modeling and making sense of the massive quantities of data collected; meteorology and operations researchers for the next generation of space weather forecasters; community-building skills, including communications, public engagement, and team science, for ambitious citizen science projects; and software engineering for virtually everything.
NOTES: The red bullets highlight identified barriers (indicated by the
symbol) in different moments of the career pathways and the panel’s suggested actions (indicated by the 
symbol) to overcome them. DEIA+, diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, as well as anti-racism, accountability, and justice; MSI, minority-serving institution; REU, Research Experience for Undergraduates (National Science Foundation); SSPH, solar and space physics–heliophysics; STEM, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.SOURCE: Adapted from R.L. Batchelor, H. Ali, K.G. Gardner-Vandy, A.U. Gold, J.A. MacKinnon and P.M. Asher. 2021. “Reimagining STEM Workforce Development as a Braided River.” Eos 102. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EO157277. CC BY-NC-ND 3.0.
Currently, the profession of “heliophysicist” is quite limited, primarily referring to those with science and engineering PhDs who pursue career trajectories that lead to either a professorship or research career. This limited view neglects the significant number of pathways that contribute to solar and space physics (heliophysics) education, public outreach and communications, professional development training, operations, infrastructure development, computer modeling, space technology and instrument development, and management. It also neglects the expectations of the emerging workforce that include demands for flexibility around remote work and increased opportunities in broader technology industries and other career paths. Even more broadly, it neglects the rapidly growing commercial space sector. To accommodate the diverse needs of the profession, it is necessary to expand the definition of the solar and space physics (heliophysics) community to include a wider variety of entry points, skill sets, training opportunities, and career trajectories. Many of the existing education programs can contribute to the training of the space scientists and engineers that are needed to support the vast commercial space ecosystem, and companies would benefit from a workforce knowledgeable about the space environment.
F.8.1 Overarching Goal for the Next Decade
The solar and space physics (heliophysics) community expands its definition of community to be able to attract and retain talented students, early career, and other professionals to contribute to addressing solar and space physics (heliophysics) fundamental and applied problems.
F.8.2 Identified Barriers
Recognizing that the traditional rigid pipeline model, with its narrow definition of the community (PhD to researcher or professor) and single-entry point with multiple “leaky” exits, limits efforts to build and support the diverse solar and space physics–heliophysics community. Moving from the pipeline model to the braided stream model would create a healthier and sustainable community by identifying different career paths. It would also enable thinking not only about exit points (barriers) and the traditional main career channel, but also about entry paths and other career paths (such as for those with undergraduate or master’s degrees) that make up the community. For example, as shown in Figure F-14, the braided stream model enables one to envision colleagues at R2 universities,9 liberal arts colleges, and minority-serving institutions, in addition to the R1 universities10 with graduate programs in solar and space physics, considering how best to support their careers and programs that support the solar and space physics community.
Attracting, retaining, and advancing diverse talent are important aspects that will define the health and vitality of solar and space physics–heliophysics over the next decade. This is especially so in light of the systemic biases that exist in scholarly research communities, including heliophysics, which lead to a lack of diversity in the field (AGU 2018 and AAS 2018 summarized in Jones and Maute 2022; Liemohn et al. 2023). There now exist a significant number of evidence-based practices for attracting and retaining new and diverse talent both inside and outside of STEM. The community can learn from these evidence-based practices and adapt such practices quickly and effectively over the next decade. A number of these evidenced-based practices are outlined and referenced in a recent National Academies report (NASEM 2020b) that investigated promising practices for addressing the underrepresentation of women in science, engineering, and medicine. A goal over the next decade is to be moving toward expanded recruitment and solidified retention, especially for those in solar and space physics–heliophysics who are from historically minoritized communities in STEM.
- Attracting: Traditionally, a slight majority of people in the solar and space physics research community received their undergraduate degrees in physics programs (results from 2013 decadal survey). The others obtained degrees in a wide variety of disciplinary departments, including geoscience, atmospheric sciences, and engineering. About half of the current solar and space physics science research workforce obtained degrees abroad; the other half came mostly from about 12 universities across the country, a fact that highlights the obstacle for graduates from nontraditional and minority-serving institutes to join the field. One of the most effective pathways to the solar and space physics research career has been the NSF REU program. However, there are a variety of other career pathways in solar and space physics (such as in the space weather operations or space technology areas) that are hidden from many students and early career professionals, limiting their possible career transitions and alternatives.
- Retaining: To remain engaged in the field, professionals need to feel they belong and are safe and valued. Safety of the community includes safe workplace environments, access to health care, protections for gender identity and sexual orientation, and gun safety. Many states have health care access restrictions, lack of protections for the LGBTQ+ community, and lax gun safety laws.
___________________
9 Classified as those with high research activity.
10 Classified as those with very high research activity.
- Advancing and enabling professional growth and success: Graduate students and postdocs need to be provided a living wage and be well mentored. The postdoc career stage is designed to be a temporary training position that provides significant career and skill growth. Low morale among postdocs due to low pay, career instability, lack of community mentor training and evaluation, and toxic workplace cultures has only been exacerbated since the start of the pandemic. For those who identify as female, people of color, and people from other marginalized communities, there are systemic barriers to equal opportunity to participate, including gender and racial bias in proposal and paper reviews, invited speakers and panelists, and awards (Ford et al. 2018; Graves et al. 2022; Hanson et al. 2020; Lerback et al. 2020; Ranganathan et al. 2021).
F.8.3 Suggestions
As noted above, the panel’s suggestions are numbered but not rank ordered, and they are identified as short term (immediate), medium term (by the next midterm assessment), or long term (by the next decadal survey). They are also identified as addressed to attracting, retaining, or advancing diverse talent.
Attracting
- The Value of Solar and Space Physics–Heliophysics as a Potential Career Path (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF create opportunities for the community to clearly develop and articulate the “value” of solar and space physics–heliophysics as a potential career path. A critical aspect to attracting and retaining talent is ensuring a meaningful value proposition to entering the field. “Value” in this context includes doing interesting and personally fulfilling work, but also includes work–life balance, opportunity costs, success rates, career stability, and financial compensation. This definition of value needs to also include the experience of people who contribute to the field, from undergraduates to postdocs, but ultimately pursue opportunities elsewhere. Absent a clear value to pursuing a career in heliophysics, one cannot hope to attract and retain a workforce to make solar and space physics–heliophysics a desirable, thriving, technically competent, and eventually diverse field of study. Clearly articulating and quantifying this “value” is needed.
- Multitude of Solar and Space Physics–Heliophysics Career Pathways (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF support the panel’s proposed heliophysics consortium to create a centralized career resource center and advertise the multitude of solar and space physics–heliophysics career pathways. These would include opportunities for those with undergraduate, master’s, doctoral, and no degrees, and for those from underrepresented minority groups. The full breadth of the community, including other professionals who are part of large teams (e.g., programmers and communication specialists) and career pathways in solar and space physics–heliophysics, needs to be determined. This includes careers “outside” the research community, such as careers in space weather operations, mission and instrument technology development, and the burgeoning commercial space sector.
- Solar and Space Physics–Heliophysics Activities in Curriculum and Degree Programs (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF fund the development of solar and space physics–heliophysics activities for introductory physics courses, “introductory” solar and space science courses, and relevant curriculum and degree programs. The expertise of midcareer and established NSF FDSS and CAREER [Faculty Early Career Development] Award winners could support the proposed heliophysics consortium to identify and support the higher education community, especially in developing mentoring efforts for early career faculty.
- Citizen Science Initiatives (Short Term). The panel suggests that NSF and NASA continue to support citizen science initiatives. Professional societies (such as AGU, AAS, and AMS), nonprofit STEM partners (such as the Adler Museum’s Zooniverse), and the proposed heliophysics consortium can help connect and engage those interested in and involved in citizen science to add pathways in the solar and space physics–heliophysics braided stream (see Figure F-14) and enable science, science communication, and public engagement.
- Education and Public Outreach and Workforce Development Opportunities (Short Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF fund the creation and expansion of education and public outreach and workforce development opportunities. These activities span from K–12 through the post-PhD level, focusing on increasing DEIA+ and collaborating with minority-serving institutions and targeting underserved populations, including nontraditional students. The proposed heliophysics consortium could be used to advertise and highlight research and funding opportunities in education and public outreach and connect those engaged in those fields. In addition, the proposed heliophysics consortium could pilot new workforce development opportunities to reach currently marginalized student populations by supporting alternatives to traditional internships, such as virtual research opportunities, as well as recruiting from minority-serving institutions.
- Diversify Undergraduate Research Experiences (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF expand opportunities to support and diversify undergraduate research experiences. This would include the support and development of a network of programs for potential applicants (such as a common app to enable highly qualified and diverse applicants to find a program), professional development opportunities for both students and faculty mentors (including inclusive mentoring training), and data collection to support continued mentoring and understanding of the effects of the programs. The increase in opportunities could be through expansion of solar and space physics–heliophysics REU programs, opportunities for NSF and NASA investigators to request undergraduate research supplements, and programs specifically targeted to fund undergraduate research programs and opportunities (such as the National Center for Atmospheric Research’s Significant Opportunities in Atmospheric Research and Science [SOARS]). It could also include expanding the variety of research experiences available to include opportunities for hybrid or virtual research or provide more flexible time frames, such as short (a week or 2) undergraduate experience “camps” instead of the traditional 8- to 12-week REU experiences; such short-term camps would be more accessible and have less environmental impact.
Retaining
- Educational and Training Initiatives (Short Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF continue to fund summer schools, student workshops, and other STEM and solar and space physics-heliophysics-related educational and training initiatives; professional and mission-focused training programs (such as early career investigator programs); and mentor training and evaluation. These programs enable the training of a diverse next-generation student and early career cohort in emerging techniques and the evolving needs of the solar and space physics–heliophysics community, including computer programming, data and cloud-based science, and space weather operations.
- Physical and Psychological Safety, and Accessibility (Short Term). The panel suggests that NSF, NOAA, and NASA support the community by considering the full physical and psychological safety and accessibility of all participants in selecting meeting locations. Adopting several leading inclusion practices for conferences, meetings, and workshops will contribute to a healthier and more diverse community. For example, announcements could include a community code of conduct, gender neutral restrooms, family-friendly policies (onsite child care, family grants, and virtual options), and inclusion of pronouns on badges. Despite their shortcomings, remote or hybrid meetings could be incentivized to reduce the environmental travel impact and enhance accessibility for people from minority-serving institutions and the international community (Marabelli et al. 2023).
Advancing
- Continual Evaluation for Bias (Short Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NSF, NOAA, conference organizers, AGU, and solar and space physics institutions begin the continual evaluation for bias of invited speakers and panelists, journal editorial boards, referees, grant reviewers and panelists, advisory boards, and funding and paper acceptance outcomes. This responsibility spans the funding agencies and professional societies and could be coordinated by the panel’s proposed heliophysics consortium. Efforts
- to minimize bias (such as NASA’s dual-anonymous peer review) could be expanded where possible. Opportunities could also be expanded to support early career positions (such as NSF’s FDSS program) and create and expand mentoring programs, for both individuals and institutions. The panel also suggests that professional societies (such as AGU) be required to make their editorial, publications, meetings, and award data publicly available.
- Learning and Implementing DEIA+ Leading Practices (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF require all funding calls to include opportunities to support learning and implementing DEIA+ leading practices for individuals, teams, and organizations. NASA provides workshops for developing, implementing, and evaluating DEIA+ plans, and it could include the quality of the DEIA+ plan in the overall evaluation of proposals. NSF could assign a larger weight to the broader impacts effort and use it only as a potential factor in the overall evaluation of a proposal. The panel suggests that agencies support evaluation of different DEIA+ plan efforts and provide these reports and resources to support the broader community.
- Assess the Balance Between Different Degrees and Positions (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF fund the proposed heliophysics consortium to assess the balance between the number of PhDs, postdocs, and permanent positions, as well as the balance between soft money and hard money permanent positions. Sharing the results of these regular assessments would inform those considering solar and space physics–heliophysics career paths and help the community address imbalances.
- Promote Work–Life Balance (Long Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF—in their grants, contracts, fellowships, and internships—promote well-being that includes providing a living wage; encouraging family-friendly policies, including child care subsidies; supporting professional development opportunities; and providing seed funding for early career and bridge funding for mid- and experienced career members. Work–life balance in many competitive professional careers in the United States is difficult to maintain, and solar and space physics–heliophysics is not an exception. Evaluation metrics for hiring, promotion, and awards need to be expanded to include inclusive metrics, such as scientific program leadership, contributions to DEIA+, communication, teamwork, and mentoring, following an “inclusive excellence” model.
- Incentives to Include Minority-Serving and Other Small Research Institutions (Medium Term). The panel suggests that the NASA, NOAA, and NSF programs for large research projects (both mission and modeling, like NASA and NSF’s DRIVE Science Centers and Heliophysics Theory Modeling Centers) provide incentives to include applicants from minority-serving and other small research institutions, following the example of NASA’s Bridge Program.
- Reduce the Time Needed to Write and Evaluate Grant Proposals (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF investigate ways to reduce the time needed to write and evaluate grant proposals. The amount of time required to compete for funding, the opaque funding rates, and the disadvantages inherent in early career opportunities (e.g., many institutions do not allow postdocs to be PIs) has increased over time. There are many mechanisms that can be leveraged to reduce the amount of labor that goes into an individual proposal. One consideration is using such mechanisms as just-in-time budgeting (Jebsen et al. 2022; NIH 2024), in which certain administrative aspects of a proposal are requested later in the application process, creating a Step 0. Similarly, having down-selects between Step 1 and 2 proposals would reduce the total number of full proposals that are written. In addition, grant cycles targeting students, such as NASA FINESST, could be phased with the academic calendar. Currently, the NASA Heliophysics Division decisions occur late in the summer or at the beginning of the academic year, which negatively affects graduate student support.
- Increase the Typical Funding Level for Individual Investigator Grants (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF increase the typical funding level for individual investigator grants to support a sufficient level of effort by the individual investigator or small teams. The level of support of individual investigator PI-type grant funds is no longer sufficient to support significant individual effort, let alone support small teams or students. Total costs for PhD students at many universities now exceed $100,000 per year, and it needs to increase to support larger stipends. Most investigators, including postdocs and early career soft-money scientists, need to have several funded grants to support their full-time effort, fragmenting their attention to specific problems and contributing to career instability and poor working conditions. The panel recognizes that without increased overall funding, implementing this suggestion would mean a decrease in the number of investigations that can be funded.
F.9 SUMMARY AND PANEL PRIORITIES AND ALIGNMENT WITH RECENT NATIONAL ACADEMIES REPORTS
The panel’s suggestions on developing a people-centered, healthy, and sustainable solar and space physics (heliophysics) workforce focuses on DEIA+, culture, teams, and the workforce. The panel envisions a healthy and thriving community that makes significant discoveries and benefits the space-age technological society as a result of its creative, diverse, and inclusive community, as well as with health-promoting and inclusive excellence values. Recognizing that individuals make up all of the components of the solar and space physics (heliophysics) community system leads us to highlight the diversity of experiences and requires diverse approaches to support equity in opportunities. Rodriguez (2016) defines equity as enactment of specific policies and practices that ensure equitable access and opportunities to success for everyone. To be equitable, one cannot treat everyone the same, but one treats individuals according to their needs and provides multiple opportunities for success. Equity can be viewed as providing resources and structures that are not equal but meet people where they are at, to ensure that all people can participate in solar and space physics (heliophysics) (Pendergrass et al. 2019).
The panel considered well-known and documented barriers of race, ethnicity, gender, class, ableism, and background, and hostile workplace climates (Marín-Spiotta et al. 2020); implicit bias in recommendation letters (Houser and Lemmons 2018); disproportionate service expectations (O’Meara et al. 2017a,b); gender, racial, and sexual harassment (Aycock et al. 2019; Clancy et al. 2017); systemic racial disparities in proposal funding (Chen et al. 2022); lower publication acceptance and citation rates (Lerback et al. 2020); fewer speaking opportunities at conferences (Ford et al. 2018, 2019); and many other impediments, such as retaliation for those that choose to support students and colleagues from groups affected by these barriers (Hughes 2018). These barriers impede people from underrepresented groups and gender diverse people, as well as people with disabilities. They are not novel, revelatory, or unfounded through all of STEM.
The panel acknowledges that federal funding agencies (NASA, NOAA, and NSF) and professional societies (AAS, AGU, and AMS) are making slow progress addressing such barriers. Nonetheless, the panel chose to prioritize 13 of the suggestions discussed above on ways to lower barriers in the solar and space physics profession (see Table F-2).
Previous National Academies reports, including the midterm assessment in solar and space physics, the decadal surveys of planetary science and astrobiology and astronomy and astrophysics, the Advancing Diversity report, and a number of others have all outlined the barriers to DEIA+ throughout science (see Bagenal 2023). The panel agrees and supports these previous suggestions and recommendations (see a list of relevant recommendations from previous decadal surveys and other relevant National Academies’ reports in Annex F.A).
As background for the panel’s suggestions, the next section of this appendix presents the findings from the community input papers that the panel received. The subsequent section lists the panel’s 29 suggestions and links them to previous recommendations from National Academies’ report, which are detailed in the annex to this appendix.
F.9.1 Findings from the Community Input Papers
Table F-1 presents nine themes and summaries of the content from community input papers received by the panel for this decadal survey.
F.9.2 Panel Suggestions
Table F-2 summarizes the panel’s 29 suggestions, mapping each one of them to the similar recommendations from recent reports (see Annex F.A) and associated themes from the community input papers, detailed in Table F-1. The panel’s 13 high-impact and actionable suggestions are indicated by asterisks and are further elaborated in Box F-1.
Box F-1 details the high-priority suggestions, whether they are for the short term (immediately) or medium term (by the next midterm assessment), and indicates who is responsible for implementation.
TABLE F-1 Summary of Nine Themes from Community Input Papers Received for This Decadal Survey
| Themes | Summary |
|---|---|
|
These papers focus on diversity, equity, inclusivity, and accessibility (DEIA+), and the invested interest in the solar and space physics community to support DEIA+, mentorship, and efforts to create a healthy working environment. |
|
These papers make recommendations to support citizen science. Furthermore, many of these papers discuss the benefits of citizen science as it pertains to improved science accessibility, education, and cross-disciplinary research. |
|
These focus on developing more efficient ways in which to collect and disseminate data. These also relate to transdisciplinary efforts. |
|
Many of the papers make funding recommendations (e.g., supporting citizen science efforts). These papers focus more on changing the infrastructure in which funding is allocated, rather than stating where it be allocated. |
|
These papers address examining a bigger scientific scope and pooling in talents from outside of one’s “silo” of funding. |
|
These papers focus on facilities and technological advancements. They also generate training and workforce development opportunities. |
|
These papers highlight the importance of community summer schools, as well as specialized/focused training workshops to support both education and networking. |
|
These papers discuss the need for multi- and cross-disciplinary skills in order to generate software and models that address fundamental science. |
|
These papers address how solar and space physics–heliophysics can be branded and advertised in such a way the public understands and is excited to participate. They also give examples and suggestions for engaging with taxpayers and the world at large. |
TABLE F-2 Panel Suggestions Mapped to National Academies Report Recommendations
| Number | Suggestion | Themes Addressed in Community Input Papers | Similar Recommendations (Rec) from Recent Reports |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1* | A Common Name for the Field | IX | NRC (2014), Rec1.0 |
| 2* | Heliophysics Consortium | V | NRC (2014), Rec1.0; NASEM (2020a), Rec3.1; NASEM (2022c), Rec4a; NASEM (2023a), Rec3.1 |
| 3* | Demographics Data System | I | NASEM (2020a), Rec5.1, Rec6.1, Rec6.2; NASEM (2022b), Rec7 to Rec9; NASEM (2022c), Rec1; NASEM (2023a), Rec3.1, Rec6.1; NASEM (2023b), Rec6 |
| 4* | Committees with DEIA+ Subject-Matter Experts | I | NASEM (2022b), Rec1 to Rec4, Rec9; NASEM (2022c), Rec2; NASEM (2023a), Rec2.1, Rec4.1, Rec6.2 |
| 5 | DEIA+ Plans for Large Team Proposals | I | NASEM (2020a), Rec3.2.5; NASEM (2022b), Rec5; NASEM (2023b), Rec7 |
| 6 | Educating the Solar and Space Physics-Heliophysics Community on DEIA+’s Importance | I, VII | NASEM (2022b), Rec10 to Rec12; NASEM (2023a), Rec5.1 to Rec5.5; NASEM (2023b), Rec1, Rec2 |
| 7 | Policy Changes that Enable Accountability for DEIA+ Efforts | I, IV | NASEM (2022b), Rec6; NASEM (2022c), Rec4a |
| 8* | Core Values of Health Promotion | I | NASEM (2022b), Rec6, Rec15; NASEM (2023), Rec2.1 |
| 9* | Mechanisms of Accountability of PIs | NASEM (2023), Rec8.1 | |
| 10 | Ombudsperson to Receive Anonymous Complaints | V | NASEM (2022c), Rec4b; NASEM (2023b), Rec5 |
| 11 | Mechanisms to Address Unequal Power Dynamics | IV | NASEM (2022c), Rec3a; NASEM (2023a), Rec7.1, Rec8.1, Rec8.3 |
| 12* | Support and Reward Those Who Lead Community Efforts | IV | Rec1; NASEM (2022b), Rec13 to 15; NASEM (2022c), Rec3a; NASEM (2023a), Rec8.2; NASEM (2023b) |
| 13* | Science Team Plans for Mission, Center, and Large Investigations | I, IV, V | NRC (2015), Rec8 |
| 14 | Development of Team Science Activities and Curriculum | I, V, VII, IX | NRC (2015), Rec8 |
| 15 | “Value” of Solar and Space Physics– | V, VII, IX | |
| Heliophysics as a Potential Career Path | |||
| 16 | Multitude of Solar and Space Physics–Heliophysics Career Pathways | V, VII, IX | NASEM (2020a), Rec3.2.4; NASEM (2023a), Rec3 |
| 17* | Solar and Space Physics–Heliophysics Activities in Curriculum and Degree Programs | V, VII | |
| 18* | Citizen Science Initiatives | II | |
| 19 | Education and Public Outreach and Workforce Development Opportunities | V, IX | |
| 20* | Diversify Undergraduate Research Experiences | III, VII, VIII | |
| 21 | Educational and Training Initiatives | VII | NASEM (2022c), Rec3d |
| 22* | Physical and Psychological Safety, and Accessibility | I, V | NASEM (2022c), Rec4a; NASEM (2023a), Rec 8, Rec11 |
| 23 | Continual Evaluation for Bias | I, VII | NASEM (2023a), Rec8.1 |
| Number | Suggestion | Themes Addressed in Community Input Papers | Similar Recommendations (Rec) from Recent Reports |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24* | Learning and Implementing DEIA+ Leading Practices | I, V | NASEM (2022b), Rec4; NASEM (2023a), Rec6.2 |
| 25 | Assess the Balance Between Different Degrees and Positions | IV | NASEM (2020a), Rec3.2.5 |
| 26 | Promote Work-Life Balance | I, IV | NASEM (2022b), Rec13 |
| 27 | Incentives to Include MSI and Other Small Research Institutions | I, IV, V | NASEM (2022c), Rec3b, Rec3c |
| 28 | Reduce the Time Needed to Write and Evaluate Grant Proposals | IV | |
| 29 | Increase the Typical Funding Level for Individual Investigator Grants | IV |
NOTES: * indicates high-impact suggestions; see text for discussion. Recommendation numbers were assigned if unnumbered in the original source. DEIA+, diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, as well as anti-racism, accountability, and justice; MSI, minority-serving institution; PI, principal investigator.
BOX F-1
High-Impact and Actionable Suggestions
- A Common Name for the Field (Medium Term). The panel suggests that the community—including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the higher education community—coalesce around a single name (solar and space physics or heliophysics) so that numbers of faculty, researchers, practitioners, and students can be tracked across departments, institutions, professional societies, and employers. Using keywords in ORCID by individual investigators could over time help self-identify the community, especially as having an ORCID number is now required by professional societies and funding agencies.
- Heliophysics Consortium (Medium Term). The panel suggests an interagency mechanism, funded by NASA, NOAA, and NSF, to unify the multiple subgroups and facilitate networking, collaboration, and communication among them, focusing on integrating and strengthening solar and space physics–heliophysics research that supports the large research intensive universities and laboratories, but also smaller regional universities, minority serving institutions (MSIs), and early career researchers to enable tackling grand challenge solar and space physics–heliophysics questions.
- Demographics Data System (Medium Term). The panel suggests that the relevant agencies systematically and transparently monitor and analyze demographic data on the barriers and opportunities for career advancements, including the continuation of NASA’s assessment of gender differences in award rates. The panel suggests that NASA, NSF, and NOAA work with independent organizations (such as the American Institute of Physics) through the proposed heliophysics consortium to conduct regular, 5-year surveys of the community and its culture and routinely provide proposal and award data to the proposed heliophysics consortium. Similarly, the panel suggests that professional societies (the American Geophysical Union [AGU], the American Astronomical Society, and the American Meteorological Society) provide data on meeting attendees and journal authors and referees to the proposed heliophysics consortium. In the panel’s conception, the proposed consortium would take the lead in developing, implementing, analyzing, and communicating the results of surveys and the health and vitality of the discipline; it could also engage with social scientists in crafting the surveys, interpreting the results, and recommending actions.
- Committees with DEIA+ Subject-Matter Experts (Short Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NOAA, and NSF, as well as other solar and space physics–heliophysics institutions, continue to hire and fund DEIA+ (diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, as well as anti-racism, accountability, and justice) subject matter experts to integrate relevant teams, organizations, and committees to (1) map structural, organizational, individual bias, inequalities, and racism in solar and space physics–heliophysics activities; (2) understand the role of leadership and organization in propagating the issues; (3) create road maps and metrics to improve DEIA+ in heliophysics; and (4) evaluate gatekeepers’ and organization’s programs, policies, and practices in an effective way (e.g., using the National Institutes of Health as an exemplar).
- Core Value of Health Promotion (Medium Term). The panel suggests that salaries and stipends at the undergraduate and graduate levels be raised to a livable wage adjusted for location and reviewed annually as part of ensuring that solar and space physics–heliophysics community institutions and funding agencies have health-promotion at the center of their mission. The Okanagan Charter adopted by many research universities is a model (International Conference on Health Promoting Universities & Colleges, 2015). NASA and NSF can support the well-being of the solar and space physics–heliophysics community by increasing the undergraduate and graduate student stipend and postdoc salary minimum requirements to a livable wage adjusted by location (e.g., locality-adjusted general schedule pay). Levels at or above these minimums would be a requirement for programs such as NSF’s Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REUs), NASA’s Future Investigators in NASA Earth and Space Science and Technology (FINESST) program, and postdoctoral fellowships from NSF’s Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, and individual investigator grants funded through programs such as NSF’s Geospace Environment Modeling (GEM) and NASA’s Research Opportunities in Space and Earth Science (ROSES) programs.
- Mechanisms of Accountability of Principal Investigators (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA, NSF, NOAA, and other relevant institutions adopt a code of research ethics and conduct (modeled after that of the AGU or other agencies) for individual laboratories and teams. In addition, the panel suggests that policies be developed that prevent principal investigators who have had disciplinary findings of research misconduct from taking grants with them to new institutions (i.e., the “pass the abuser” issue).
- Support and Reward Those Who Lead Community Efforts (Medium Term). The panel suggests following Goal 2, Suggestion 4 of the decadal survey in astronomy and astrophysics (NASEM 2023b) that federal agencies provide material support to researchers who build and lead programs designed to retain, recruit, and advance people from underrepresented minority communities in heliophysics. This approach would expand the community’s definition of “excellence” to “inclusive excellence” by recognizing and rewarding the value added for these efforts. An example highlighted in Astro2020 would be to increase budget size for research grants for those who propose to advance DEIA+ efforts in their institution or the broader community. Funding 5–10 grants with an additional $100,000 would cost between $500,000 to $1 million per year per agency.
- Science Team Plans for Mission, Center, and Large Investigations (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF provide sufficient resources to develop science team plans (e.g., charters) and make them required for proposals as an evaluated factor in order to strengthen solar and space physics–heliophysics investigations. Review panels would include team experts or trained reviewers, as was done for the NASA Drive Center evaluation. Agencies would offer team science plan resources prepared by team experts and pay attention to the level of effort of each member of the team (thinking of efficiency and career impact), how well early career scholars are mentored and trained, and the quality of a succession plan.
- Solar and Space Physics–Heliophysics Activities in Curriculum and Degree Programs (Medium Term). The panel notes that the expertise of midcareer and established NSF Faculty Development in the Space Sciences and CAREER (Faculty Early Career Development) Award winners could support the proposed heliophysics consortium in identifying and supporting the higher education community, especially in developing mentoring efforts for early career faculty.
- Citizen Science Initiatives (Short Term). The panel suggests that NSF and NASA call on professional societies (such as AGU), nonprofit STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) partners (such as Adler Museum’s Zooniverse) and the proposed heliophysics consortium to help connect and engage those interested in and involved in citizen science to add pathways into the solar and space physics–heliophysics community and promote science, science communication, and public engagement.
- Diversify Undergraduate Research Experiences (Short Term). The panel suggests that NASA and NSF support and develop a network of programs to exchange applicants (e.g., a common app to enable highly qualified and diverse applicants to find a program), professional development opportunities for both students and faculty mentors (including inclusive mentoring training), and data collection to support continued mentoring and understanding of the impact of the programs. The increase in opportunities could be through expansion of solar and space physics–heliophysics REU programs, opportunities for NSF and NASA investigators to request undergraduate research supplements, and programs specifically targeted to fund undergraduate research programs and opportunities (e.g., programs such as SOARS [Significant Opportunities in Atmospheric Research and Science]). The panel also suggests that NASA and NSF expand the variety of research experiences available to include opportunities for hybrid or virtual research or provide more flexible time frames, such as short (1–2 weeks) undergrad experiences “camps” instead of the traditional 8- to 12-week REU experiences; such short experiences would be more accessible and have less environmental impact.
- Physical and Psychological Safety and Accessibility (Short Term). The panel suggests that NSF, NASA, and NOAA adopt a number of leading practices for inclusion for conferences, meetings, and workshops that will contribute to a healthier and more diverse solar and space physics–heliophysics community. Examples include a community code of conduct; gender-neutral restrooms; family-friendly policies, such as onsite child care, family grants, and virtual options; and inclusion of pronouns on badges. Remote or hybrid meetings could be incentivized to reduce the environmental travel impact and enhance accessibility for people from MSIs and for the international community.
- Learning and Implementing DEIA+ Leading Practices (Medium Term). The panel suggests that NASA provide workshops for developing, implementing, and evaluating DEIA+ plans and include the quality of the DEIA+ plan in the overall evaluation of the proposal. The panel suggests that NSF assign a larger weight to the broader impacts effort and not use it only as a potential factor in the overall evaluation of a proposal. The panel suggests that both agencies support evaluation of different DEIA+ plan efforts and provide these reports and resources to support the entire solar and space physics–heliophysics community.
F.10 REFERENCES
Abbott, A. 2021. “COVID’s Mental-Health Toll: How Scientists Are Tracking a Surge in Depression.” Nature 590:194–195. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00175-z.
AGU (American Geophysical Union). 2018. “2018 Section Membership Demographics.” https://www.agu.org/-/media/files/agu_membership_demographics_2018.pdf.
Aycock, L.M., Z. Hazari, E. Brewe, K.B.H. Clancy, T. Hodapp, and R.M. Goertzen. 2019. “Sexual Harassment Reported by Undergraduate Female Physicists,” Physical Review Physics Education Research 15:010121. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010121.
Bagenal, F. 2023. “Enhancing Demographics and Career Pathways of the Space Physics Workforce in the U.S.” Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences 10:1130803. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspas.2023.1130803.
Barthelemy, R.S., M. Swirtz, S. Garmon, E.H. Simmons, K. Reeves, M.L. Falk, W. Deconinck, E.A. Long, and T.J. Atherton. 2022. “LGBT+ Physicists: Harassment, Persistence, and Uneven Support.” Physical Review Physics Education Research 18(1):010124. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.010124.
Batchelor, R.L., H. Ali, K.G. Gardner-Vandy, A.U. Gold, J.A. MacKinnon, and P.M. Asher. 2021. “Reimagining STEM Workforce Development as a Braided River.” Eos 102. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EO157277.
Beasley, M.A. 2011. Opting Out: Losing the Potential of America’s Young Black Elite. University of Chicago Press.
Bernard, R.E., and E.H.G. Cooperdock. 2018. “No Progress on Diversity in 40 Years.” Nature Geoscience 11:292–295. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-018-0116-6.
Biden, J. 2012. “Executive Order on Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Federal Workforce.” White House Briefing Room. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/06/25/executive-order-on-diversity-equity-inclusion-and-accessibility-in-the-federal-workforce.
Biden, J. 2023a. “Executive Order on Further Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” White House Briefing Room. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/02/16/executive-order-on-further-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government.
Biden, J. 2023b. “Fact Sheet: President Biden Signs Executive Order to Strengthen Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Across the Federal Government.” White House Briefing Room. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/16/fact-sheet-president-biden-signs-executive-order-to-strengthen-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-across-the-federal-government/.
Burch, A. 2023. “Texas Lawmakers Pass Ban on D.E.I. Programs at State Universities.” New York Times, May 29. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/29/us/texas-dei-program-ban.html.
Cain, C.L., and E. Leahey. 2014. “Cultural Correlates of Gender Integration in Science.” Gender, Work and Organization 21:516–530. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12052.
Cannady, M.A., E. Greenwald, and K.N. Harris. 2014, “Problematizing the STEM Pipeline Metaphor: Is the STEM Pipeline Metaphor Serving Our Students and the STEM Workforce?” Science Education 98:443–460. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21108.
Carter, D.R., R. Asencio, H.M. Trainer, L.A. DeChurch, R. Kanfer, and S.J. Zaccaro. 2019. “Best Practices for Researchers Working in Multiteam Systems.” Pp. 391–400 in Strategies for Team Science Success: Handbook of Evidence-Based Principles for Cross-Disciplinary Science and Practical Lessons Learned from Health Researchers, K. Hall, A. Vogel, R. Croyle, eds. Springer.
Case, S.S., and B.A. Richley. 2013. “Gendered Institutional Research Cultures in Science: The Post-Doc Transition for Women Scientists.” Community, Work and Family 16(3):327–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2013.820097.
Cech, E.A. 2022. “The Intersectional Privilege of White Able-Bodied Heterosexual Men in STEM.” Science Advances 8(24):abo1558. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abo1558.
Chang, M., J. Sharkness, S. Hurtado, and C. Newman. 2014. “What Matters in College for Retaining Aspiring Scientists and Engineers from Underrepresented Racial Groups.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 51(5):555–580. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21146.
Chen, C.Y., S.S. Kahanamoku, A. Tripati, R.A. Alegado, V.R. Morris, K. Andrade, and J. Hosbey. 2022. “Meta-Research: Systemic Racial Disparities in Funding Rates at the National Science Foundation.” Elife 11:e83071. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83071.
Clancy, K.B., K.M. Lee, E.M. Rodgers, and C. Richey. 2017. “Double Jeopardy in Astronomy and Planetary Science: Women of Color Face Greater Risks of Gendered and Racial Harassment.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets 122(7):1610–1623. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017JE005256.
Coe, I.R., R. Wiley, and L.G. Bekker. 2019. “Organisational Best Practices Towards Gender Equality in Science and Medicine.” The Lancet 393(10171):587–593.
Dancy, M., and A. Hodari. 2022. “How Well-Intentioned White Male Physicists Maintain Ignorance of Inequity and Justify Inaction.” https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.03522.
DiAngelo, R. 2011. “White Fragility.” International Journal of Critical Pedagogy 3(3):54–70.
Domingo, C.R., N.C. Gerber, D. Harris, L. Mamo, S.G. Pasion, R.D. Rebanal, and S.V. Rosser. 2022. “More Service or More Advancement: Institutional Barriers to Academic Success for Women and Women of Color Faculty at a Large Public Comprehensive Minority-Serving State University.” Journal of Diversity in Higher Education 15(3):365–379. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000292.
Eaton, A.A., J.F. Saunders, R.K. Jacobson, and K. West. 2020. “How Gender and Race Stereotypes Impact the Advancement of Scholars in STEM: Professors’ Biased Evaluations of Physics and Biology Post-Doctoral Candidates.” Sex Roles 82:127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01052-w.
Espinosa, L. 2011. “Pipelines and Pathways: Women of Color in Undergraduate STEM Majors and the College Experiences That Contribute to Persistence.” Harvard Educational Review 81(2):209–241. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.2.92315ww157656k3u.
Ford, H.L., C. Brick, K. Blaufuss, and P.S. Dekens. 2018. “Gender Inequity in Speaking Opportunities at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting.” Nature Communications 9(1):1358. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03809-5.
Ford, H.L., C. Brick, M. Azmitia, K. Blaufuss, and P. Dekens. 2019. “Women from Some Under-Represented Minorities are Given Too Few Talks at the World’s Largest Earth-Science Conference.” Nature 576(7785):32–35. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03688-w.
Freeman, S., S.L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M.K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M.P. Wenderoth. 2014. “Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23):8410–8415.
Funk, C., and K. Parker. 2018. “Women and Men in STEM Often at Odds Over Workplace Equity.” Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2018/01/09/women-and-men-in-stem-often-at-odds-over-workplace-equity/.
Gámez, R., B.W.L. Packard, and T.M. Chavous. 2022. “Graduate Bridge Programs as Nepantla for Minoritized Students in STEM: Navigating Challenges with Non-Bridge Peers and Faculty.” Journal of Diversity in Higher Education 15(1): 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000346.
Graves, Jr., J.L., M. Kearney, G. Barabino, and S. Malcolm, 2022. “Inequality in Science and the Case for a New Agenda.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 119:e2117831119.
Gumpertz M, R. Durodoye, E. Griffith, and A. Wilson. 2017. “Retention and Promotion of Women and Underrepresented Minority Faculty in Science and Engineering at Four Large Land Grant Institutions.” PLoS ONE 12(11):e0187285. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187285.
Haacker, R. 2015. “From Recruitment to Retention.” Nature Geosciences 8(8):577–578. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2501.
Hall, S. 2023. “A Mental-Health Crisis is Gripping Science—Toxic Research Culture is to Blame.” Nature 617:666-668. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-01708-4.
Hekman, D.R., S.K. Johnson, M.D. Foo, and W. Yang. 2017. “Does Diversity-Valuing Behavior Result in Diminished Performance Ratings for Non-White and Female Leaders?” Academy of Management Journal 60(2):771–797. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0538.
Holvino, E., B.M. Ferdman, and D. Merrill-Sands. 2004. “Creating and Sustaining Diversity and Inclusion in Organizations: Strategies and Approaches.” pp. 245–276 in The Psychology and Management of Workplace Diversity, M.S. Stockdale, and F.J. Crosby, eds. Blackwell Publishing.
Houser, C., and K. Lemmons. 2016. “Implicit Bias in Letters of Recommendation for an Undergraduate Research Internship.” Journal of Further and Higher Education 42(5):585–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1301410.
Huang, C.L. 2023. National Science Foundation. “NSF DEI Effort.” Presentation to the Panel on the State of the Profession. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Hughes, B.E. 2018. “Coming Out in STEM: Factors Affecting Retention of Sexual Minority STEM Students.” Science Advances 4(3):eaao6373. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aao6373.
International Conference on Health Promoting Universities & Colleges (7th : 2015 : Kelowna, (B.C.)). 2015. “Okanagan Charter: An International Charter for Health Promoting Universities and Colleges.” http://dx.doi.org/10.14288/1.0132754.
Jebsen, J.M., K.N. Baines, R.A. Oliver, and I. Jayasinghe. 2022. “Dismantling Barriers Faced by Women in STEM.” Nature Chemistry 14:1203–1206. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41557-022-01072-2.
Johnson, S.K., and D.R. Hekman. 2016. “Women and Minorities are Penalized for Promoting Diversity.” Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/03/women-and-minorities-are-penalized-for-promoting-diversity.
Jones, Jr., M., and A. Maute. 2022. “Assessing the Demographics of the 2021 and 2022 CEDAR Workshop.” Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences 9:1074460. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspas.2022.1074460.
Jones, M.T., A.E. Barlow, and M. Villarejo. 2010. “Importance of Undergraduate Research for Minority Persistence and Achievement in Biology.” The Journal of Higher Education 81(1):82–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2010.11778971.
Jones, Jr., M., A.G. Burrell, J.L. Gannon, A.J. Halford, A.N. Jaynes, A. Maute, and K. Thiero. 2022. “Recommendations on Simple but Transformative Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Measures in Heliophysics Over the Next Decade.” Frontiers in Astronomy and Space Sciences 9:1062970. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspas.2022.1062970.
Kaiser, J. 2021. “Astronomer Geoff Marcy Booted from National Academy of Sciences in Wake of Sexual Harassment: First expulsion Under Academy’s 2019 Policy.” Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abj7157.
Kaska, S. 2022. “Addressing the Mental Health Crisis Among Predoctoral and Postdoctoral Researchers in STEM.” Federation of American Scientists. https://fas.org/publication/addressing-the-mental-health-crisis-among-predoctoral-andpostdoctoral-researchers-in-stem.
Kramsch, C. 2014. “Language and Culture.” AILA Review 27(1):30–55.
LeanIn.Org. 2021. Women in the Workplace. McKinsey and Company. https://leanin.org/women-in-the-workplace/2021.
Lerback, J.C., B. Hanson, and P. Wooden. 2020. “Association Between Author Diversity and Acceptance Rates and Citations in Peer-Reviewed Earth Science Manuscripts.” Earth and Space Science 7(5):e2019EA000946. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EA000946.
Lerma, V., L.T. Hamilton, and K. Nielsen. 2020. “Racialized Equity Labor, University Appropriation and Student Resistance.” Social Problems 67(2):286–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spz011.
Lopez, R.E., and N.A. Gross. 2008. “Active Learning for Advanced Students: The Center for Integrated Space Weather Modeling Graduate Summer School.” Advances in Space Research 42(11):1864–1868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2007.06.056.
Marabelli, M., S. Zaza, S. Masiero, J. Li, amd K. Chudoba. 2023. “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the AIS: Challenges and Opportunities of Remote Conferences.” Information Systems Journal 33(6):1370–1395. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12458.
Marijolovic, K. 2023. “How Anti-DEI Bills Have Already Changed Higher Ed.” Chronicle of Higher Education. www.chronicle.com/article/how-anti-dei-bills-have-already-changed-higher-ed.
Marín-Spiotta, E., R.T. Barnes, A.A. Berhe, M.G. Hastings, A. Mattheis, B. Schneider, and B.M. Williams. 2020. “Hostile Climates are Barriers to Diversifying the Geosciences.” Advances in Geosciences 53:117–127. https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-53-117-2020.
McDonald, A. 2021. “The Racism of the ‘Hard-to-Find’ Qualified Black Candidate Trope.” Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://doi.org/10.48558/FY9D-0T84.
McPhaden, M.J., L. Gundersen, and B.M. Williams. 2017. “AGU Revises its Integrity and Ethics Policy.” Eos 98. https://doi.org/10.1029/2017EO082469.
Merton, R.K. 1968. “The Matthew Effect in Science: The Reward and Communication Systems of Science are Considered.” Science 159(3810):56–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.159.3810.56.
Miller, D., J. Deshler, T. McEldowney, J. Stewart, E. Fuller, M. Pascal, and L. Michaluk. 2021. “Supporting Student Success and Persistence in STEM With Active Learning Approaches in Emerging Scholars Classrooms.” Frontiers in Education 6:667918. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.667918.
Moldwin, M.B. 2024. “Dataset for Updated Solar and Space Physics 2024 Job Ad Study.” University of Michigan. https://doi.org/10.7302/fpp2-pc60.
Moldwin, M.B., and C. Morrow. 2016. “Research Career Persistence for Solar and Space Physics PhD.” Space Weather 14(6):384–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/2016SW001382.
Moldwin, M.B., and C. Morrow. 2021. “Solar and Space Physics Decadal Survey AIP Demographic Study Results.” American Institute of Physics. https://dx.doi.org/10.7302/25.
Moldwin, M.B., J. Torrence, L.A. Moldwin, and C. Morrow. 2013. “Is There an Appropriate Balance Between the Number of Solar and Space Physics PhDs and the Jobs Available?” Space Weather 11(8):445–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/swe.20075.
Myers, K.R., W.Y. Tham, Y. Yin, N. Cohodes, J.G. Thursby, M.C. Thursby, P. Schiffer, J.T. Walsh, K.R. Lakhani, and D. Wang. 2020. “Unequal Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Scientists.” Nature Human Behavior (4):880–883. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0921-y
NAS/NAE/IOM (National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine). 2007. Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11741.
NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration). 2023. NASA Research Demographics: 2023 Report. NP-2023-04-3125-HQ. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/researcher-demographics-2023-report.pdf.
NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2018. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24994.
NASEM. 2020a. Progress Toward Implementation of the 2013 Decadal Survey for Solar and Space Physics: A Midterm Assessment. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25668.
NASEM. 2020b. Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25585.
NASEM. 2022a. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26575.
NASEM. 2022b. Advancing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26385.
NASEM. 2022c. Origins, Worlds, and Life: A Decadal Strategy for Planetary Science and Astrobiology 2023–2032. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26522.
NASEM. 2023a. Advancing Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in STEMM Organizations: Beyond Broadening Participation. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26803.
NASEM. 2023b. Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26141.
NCSES (National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics). 2023. “Diversity and STEM: Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities 2023.” Special Report NSF 23-315. National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/wmpd.
NIH (National Institutes of Health). 2022. “NIH Policy Requirements.” https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/harassment/policy-requirement.htm.
NIH. 2024. “2.5.1 Just-in-Time Procedures.” Revised April. NIH Grants Policy Statement. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/nihgps/html5/section_2/2.5.1_just-in-time_procedures.htm.
Nikoukar R., L. Regoli, A.J. Halford, M.D. Zettergren, K. Dialynas, and R. Filwett, 2023. “Raising Awareness on Mental Health in the Heliophysics Community.” Frontiers in Physics (11). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2023.1237166.
NRC (National Research Council). 2013. Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13060.
NRC. 2015. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/19007.
Offermann, L.R., T.E. Basford, R. Graebner, S. Jaffer, S.B. De Graaf, and S.E. Kaminsky. 2014. “See No Evil: Color Blindness and Perceptions of Subtle Racial Discrimination in the Workplace.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 20(4):499–507. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037237.
O’Meara, K., A. Kuvaeva, and G. Nyunt. 2017a. “Constrained Choices: A View of Campus Service Inequality from Annual Faculty Reports.” The Journal of Higher Education 88(5):672–700.
O’Meara, K., A. Kuvaeva, G. Nyunt, C. Waugaman, and R. Jackson. 2017b. “Asked More Often: Gender Differences in Faculty Workload in Research Universities and the Work Interactions That Shape Them.” American Educational Research Journal 54(6):1154–1186.
Pendergrass, A., J. Zelikova, J. Arnott, J. Bain, R. Barnes, J. Barron, K. Dutt, et al. 2019. “Inclusive Scientific Meetings: Where to Start.” 500 Women Scientists. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/582cce42bebafbfc47a82b04/t/5ca0fe7d9b747a3d7dc7a71f/1554054781756/Formatted+Inclusive+Meeting+Guidev5.pdf.
Pold, J., and R. Ivie. 2019. “Workforce Survey of 2018 US AAS Member Summary Results.” American Astronomical Society. https://aas.org/sites/default/files/2019-10/AAS-Members-Workforce-Survey-final.pdf.
Porter, K.B., J.R. Posselt, K. Reyes, K.E. Slay, and A. Kamimura. 2018. “Burdens and Benefits of Diversity Work: Emotion Management in STEM Doctoral Students.” Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education 9(2):127–143.
Ranganathan, M., E. Lalk, L.M. Freese, M.A. Freilich, J. Wilcots, M.L. Duffy, and R. Shivamoggi. 2021. “Trends in the Representation of Women Among US Geoscience Faculty from 1999 to 2020: The Long Road Toward Gender Parity.” AGU Advances 2(3):e2021AV000436. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021AV000436.
Rodriguez, A. 2016. “For Whom Do We Do Equity and Social Justice Work? Recasting the Discourse About the Other to Effect Transformative Change.” In Interrogating Whiteness and Relinquishing Power: White Faculty’s Commitment to Racial Consciousness in STEM Classrooms, N.M. Joseph, C. Haynes, and F. Cobb, eds. Peter Lang Group. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-1-4539-1716-9.
Salazar, C., J.J. Park, and R.M. Parikh. 2020. “STEM Student-Faculty Relationships: The Influence of Race and Gender on Access to Career-Related Opportunities.” Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering 26(5):413–446. https://doi.org/10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2020031959.
Shelton, C., and D.A. Thomas. 2013. “The Study on White Men Leading Through Diversity & Inclusion.” White Men’s Leadership Study.
Shen, H. 2013. “Inequality Quantified: Mind the Gender Gap.” Nature 495(7439):22–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/495022a.
Simien, E.M., and S.J. Wallace. 2022. “Disproportionate Service: Considering the Impacts of George Floyd’s Death and the Coronavirus Pandemic for Women Academics and Faculty of Color.” PS: Political Science and Politics 55(4):799–803. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096522000580.
Theobald, E.J., M.J. Hill, E. Tran, S. Agrawal, E.N. Arroyo, S. Behling, N. Chambwe, et al. 2020. “Active Learning Narrows Achievement Gaps for Underrepresented Students in Undergraduate Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(12):6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117.
Thiry, H., T.J. Weston, R.P. Harper, D.G. Holland, A.K. Koch, and B.M. Drake. 2019. Talking About Leaving Revisited: Persistence, Relocation, and Loss in Undergraduate STEM education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25304-2.
Thomson, R.M. 2022. “Advancing Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion: A How-to Guide.” Physics Today 75(1):42–49. https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.4921.
Thorp, H.H. 2023. “It Matters Who Does Science.” Science 380(6648):873. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adi9021.
White, S., G. Anderson, and R. Ivie. 2011. “Results from the 2011 Survey of Solar, Space and Upper Atmospheric Physicists.” American Institute of Physics-Statistical Research Center. http://dx.doi.org/10.7302/25.
Williams, D.A., J.B. Berger, and S.A. McClendon. 2005. “Toward a Model of Inclusive Excellence and Change in Postsecondary Institutions.” Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Windham, T., A. Stevermer, and R. Anthes. 2004. “SOARS® - An Overview of the Program and Its First 8 Years.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 85(1):42–47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26216928.
Woolley, K., and A. Fishbach. 2022. “Motivating Personal Growth by Seeking Discomfort.” Psychological Science 33(4): 510–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211044685.
Zambrana, R.E., A.H. Wingfield, L.M. Lapeyrouse, B.A. Dávila, T.L. Hoagland, and R.B. Valdez. 2017. “Blatant, Subtle, and Insidious: URM Faculty Perceptions of Discriminatory Practices in Predominantly White Institutions.” Sociological Inquiry 87:207–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12147.
F.11 GLOSSARY
Accessibility: “Accessible” means a person with a disability is afforded the opportunity to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as a person without a disability in an equally effective and equally integrated manner, with substantially equivalent ease of use. (From Department of Education)
Anti-Racism: The practice of actively identifying and opposing racism. The goal of anti-racism is to actively change policies, behaviors, and beliefs that perpetuate racist ideas and actions. (From Boston University)
Coupling, Energetics and Dynamics of Atmospheric Regions (CEDAR): A National Science Foundation sponsored initiative to understand the fundamental properties of the space-atmosphere interaction region, to identify the interconnected processes that define the local and global behavior, the evolution, and influence on the Sun-Earth system; and to explore the ionosphere-thermosphere predictability.
Culture: The values and beliefs, language, communication, and practices that are shared in common by a group of people.
Diversity: The practice or state of involvement of persons across a variety of social and demographic characteristics within organizational, institutional, and interactional settings. (From Advancing DEIA in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions [NASEM 2022b])
Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Accessibility plus (DEIA+): The phrase used to define policies, behaviors and beliefs that support the opportunity for all to participate and develop within a community. The “+” includes antiracism, accountability, and justice.
Equity: The absence of barriers, biases, and obstacles that impede access, fair treatment, and opportunity for contribution by all members of a community, recognizing that different resources or approaches are needed to remedy the uneven playing field that exists across different groups. (From Advancing DEIA in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions [NASEM 2022b])
Geospace Environment Modeling (GEM): A National Science Foundation sponsored initiative to coordinate and focus research on the near-earth portion of geospace from the lower ionosphere to where the Earth system interacts with the solar wind.
Historically minoritized communities in STEM: Socio-demographic groups (e.g., certain genders, racial/ethnic groups) that, as a result of historical and contemporary processes of oppression and bias have been excluded from full and representative participation in STEM. (From Advancing DEIA in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions [NASEM 2022b])
Inclusion: The practice of facilitating the equal distribution of opportunities, resources, and recognition to persons regardless of social and demographic characteristics within organizational, institutional, and/or interactional environments. (From Advancing DEIA in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions [NASEM 2022b])
Minority Serving Institution (MSI): Institutions of higher education that serve minority populations and include Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs), Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), and Asian American and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AAPISIs).
Solar, Heliospheric, and INterplanetary Environment (SHINE): A National Science Foundation sponsored initiative within the solar, interplanetary, and heliospheric communities, dedicated to promoting an enhanced understanding of the processes by which energy in the form of magnetic fields and particles are produced by the Sun and/or accelerated in interplanetary space and on the mechanisms by which these fields and particles are transported to Earth through the inner heliosphere.
Underrepresented Minority (URM): The federal government classifies African American, Hispanic, Native American, Alaskan and Pacific Islander, women, and those with disabilities URM with respect to STEM. Note that this group does not include Asian Americans, who are slightly over-represented in STEM compared to their overall percentage of the U.S. population. If you include Asian-Americans, this category accounts for about 69 percent of the U.S. population (NCSES 2023) (i.e., White-Males make up about 31 percent of the U.S. population).
Well-Being: A positive outcome that is meaningful for people and society, because it tells us that people perceive that their lives are going well and integrates mental health (mind) and physical health (body). Good living conditions (for example, affordable housing) and other positive quality of life indicators (job satisfaction) are essential for well-being.
ANNEX F.A
RELEVANT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PREVIOUS DECADAL
SURVEYS AND OTHER NATIONAL ACADEMIES REPORTS
New Executive Order on Racial Equity
Expanding on the executive order on DEIA issued on the President’s first day in office, on February 16, 2023, the Biden administration issued a new executive order on racial equity and supporting underserved communities. The new order “reaffirms the Administration’s commitment to deliver equity and build an America in which all can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential” (Biden 2023b).
Among its provisions:
- Gives federal agencies 30 days to set up Agency Equity Teams and designate senior leaders to implement the mandate. Agency Equity Teams will be responsible for equity training and leadership. It is also designed to improve collaboration and accountability and streamline progress reporting.
- Agencies produce yearly equity action plans.
- Promotes transparency and equity with data. The order directs the Interagency Working Group on Equitable Data (now institutionalized at the National Science and Technology Council) to improve data collection and analysis to better report progress on racial equity initiatives.
- Requires agencies to improve their community engagement process and to consult with communities as equity action plans are developed.
“Achieving racial equity and support for underserved communities is not a one-time project. It must be a multi-generational commitment, and it must remain the responsibility of agencies across the Federal Government,” President Biden said in the executive order (Biden 2023a). The solar and space physics–heliophysics community needs to work with NASA, NOAA, and NSF to be engaged in these efforts.
Identifying Key Recommendations from Previous Reports
Extracts from the relevant recommendations in recent National Academies reports are shown in Table F.A-1.
TABLE F.A-1 Relevant Recommendations from Recent National Academies Reports
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
| Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society (NRC 2013) | |
|
NRC (2013) Rec1.0 |
Implement DRIVE (Diversify, Realize, Integrate, Venture, Educate)): Educate: 1. The NSF Faculty Development in the Space Sciences (FDSS) program should be continued and be considered open to applications from 4-year as well as Ph.D.-granting institutions as a means to broaden and diversify the field. NSF should also support a curriculum development program to complement the FDSS program and to support its faculty; 2. A suitable replacement for the NSF Center for Integrated Space Weather Modeling summer school should be competitively selected, and NSF should enable opportunities for focused community workshops that directly address professional development skills for graduate students; 3. To further enhance the visibility of the field, NSF should recognize solar and space physics as a specifically named subdiscipline of physics and astronomy by adding it to the list of dissertation research areas in NSF’s annual Survey of Earned Doctorates. |
| Progress Toward Implementation of the 2013 Decadal Survey for Solar and Space Physics: A Midterm Assessment (NASEM 2020) | |
|
NASEM (2020) Rec3.1 |
NASA and NSF should continue to use the DRIVE framework within their Research and Analysis programs. As the program elements that are part of DRIVE continue to evolve, they should remain visible and continue to be tracked in a transparent manner. |
|
NASEM (2020) Rec3.2.4 |
NASA and NSF should maximize the scientific return from large and complex data sets by supporting (1) training opportunities on modern statistical and computational techniques; (2) science platforms to store, retrieve, and process data using common standards; (3) funding opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration; and (4) supporting the development of open-source software. These four components should be considered alongside experimental hardware in the planning and budgeting of instrumentation. |
|
NASEM (2020) Rec3.2.5 |
NASA should find ways to increase solar and space physics community participation in strategic missions and enhance the diversity of mission teams. The Planetary Science Division’s Participating Scientist program is a model that could be considered to achieve this goal. |
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
NASEM (2020) Rec5.1 |
NASA, NSF, and NOAA should develop strategic plans for the Heliophysics community with goals and metrics to improve the diversity of race, gender, age, and country of origin. The next decadal survey should include a State of the Profession Panel, similar to the Astro2020 decadal survey. The State of the Profession Panel should have in advance the demographics/diversity survey data recommended in this report’s Recommendation 6.2. |
|
NASEM (2020) Rec6.1 |
NASA and NSF should implement and fund advanced planning for the next solar and space physics decadal survey that involves the community strategically in the formulation of decadal goals and stretch goals (ambitious objectives that might extend past the next decade). NASA and NSF could request the Space Studies Board’s Committee on Solar and Space Physics (SSB-CSSP) to evaluate options for implementing this planning for the next decadal survey. |
|
NASEM (2020) Rec6.2 |
NASA Heliophysics Division should conduct a demographics/diversity survey before the next heliophysics decadal survey to understand how the community’s demographics have evolved and to assess whether progress has occurred in enhancing diversity in the community (see also this report’s Recommendation 5.1). Thereafter, to benefit all of the space science disciplines within NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and to inform decadal survey planning across SMD, NASA, at the SMD-level, should conduct this demographics/diversity survey on a 5-year cadence with clear identification of science areas relevant for each science division. It is important that career survey specialists, such as the American Institute of Physics, are involved in a new survey. |
| Advancing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions (NASEM 2022a) | |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec1 |
NASA should empanel an ongoing NASA Advisory Council (NAC) committee specifically focused on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA), whose committee chair serves directly on the NAC. This committee should have a broad charter and external world-class membership in this area to directly advise top NASA leadership and ensure an ongoing strong focus on NASA’s broadening DEIA efforts. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec2 |
NASA should work to make the pre-proposal “competition before the competition” process transparent and accessible. Additionally, NASA should use its own resources to expand support of pre-proposal and proposal efforts of diverse, external principal investigators through its field centers and encourage other institutions in the business of supporting and investing in Science Mission Directorate proposals and missions to do the same. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec3 |
NASA should reconsider the requirements for site visits to emphasize the evaluation of technical and programmatic readiness, and eliminate any unnecessary elements. NASA should evaluate the benefit of providing uniform funding to each team that is preparing a site visit, disallowing supplemental funding and other contributions that may result in inequities across teams. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec4 |
NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) should develop and make public a systematic and transparent process to assess how the review of proposals submitted for research support is conducted.
|
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec5 |
In keeping step with its core values of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA), NASA Science Mission Directorate should:
|
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec6 |
NASA should regularly monitor and assess adherence to the proposed diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility plans throughout the mission lifecycle and require up-to-date reporting on climate within mission teams in ways that go beyond compliance. For designing and interpreting climate assessments, NASA Science Mission Directorate should engage with content experts (e.g., survey design experts, social science scholars). |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec7 |
NASA Headquarters (HQ) should develop a systematic and transparent process that employs routine monitoring and tracking of proposal submissions and selections, and submit an annual report of these data to the diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility committee of the NASA Advisory Council as well as make the report publicly available. This report should include data on dimensions such as funding rates and diversity in team participation in principal investigator–led missions as well as research and analysis grants; but could also include data on other important dimensions of interest to the agency. NASA HQ should seek professional statistical expertise to set in place the needed infrastructure to support robust data collection, monitoring, and reporting including, but not limited to, adequate staffing, data collection standards of practice, monitoring and analytic systems, annual reporting capability, and external partnerships, to overcome the challenges of tracking participation in NASA’s Earth and space science activities. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec8 |
Working with experts in demographics data gathering and analysis, NASA should review, update and expand the NSPIRES Personal Profile questions and regularly encourage proposers to update their responses. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec9 |
To regularly assess the state of the profession, NASA Science Mission Directorate should provide funding for professional organizations (e.g., American Institute of Physics, American Astronomical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Physical Society, etc.) to employ the necessary professional expertise in survey methodology and statistical analysis to systematically carry out surveys of the workforce, within and across the four science divisions with competed missions, to inform NASA of the participation of different demographic groups as well as the barriers and opportunities for advancement along entire career pathways in the Earth and space sciences. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec10 |
NASA should expand and increase the frequency of training programs that are aimed at encouraging women and historically minoritized communities to become more involved in mission leadership. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec11 |
To engage and train diverse teams at all stages of professional talent development, NASA should offer mission-related research, mentorship, and training opportunities—ideally, integrated into actual NASA missions—through colleges/universities as well as NASA centers, that should start as early as first-year undergraduates and graduate students (e.g., internships), and extend to the ranks of postdocs (e.g., fellowships), and established scientists (e.g., participating scientists). |
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec12 |
Principal investigator (PI)-led missions present opportunities for aspiring PIs to gain invaluable experiences. NASA should expand resources (e.g., instructional materials, seminars, workshops) for aspiring PIs to gain leadership experience and connect with individuals with mission experience for mentorship opportunities. This may include:
|
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec13 |
NASA should evaluate the skills and expertise needed for success as a principal investigator (PI) beyond scientific competencies, including abilities leading and managing diverse, equitable, inclusive, and accessible teams. This more expansive set of competencies should be reflected in discussions about PI-ship in instructional materials and other outreach efforts. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec14 |
In order to ensure a vibrant, next generation pool of excellent and diverse talent for leadership in competed space missions, NASA Science Mission Directorate, in collaboration with the Office of STEM Engagement, should provide consistent and adequate funding for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics initiatives that are explicitly centered on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, address recruitment and retention challenges in the Earth and space sciences, and support and expand opportunities for individuals from underrepresented groups. These investments should reflect a pathways approach spanning the academic and career continuum from post-secondary through post-PhD years in order to establish flexible and robust education-to-career trajectories into the Earth and space sciences workforce, and ultimately into principal investigator–led missions. A systematic process should also be in place to document measurable impacts of these investments. |
|
NASEM (2022a) Rec15 |
Recognizing the critical role that Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), and other Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) play in educating and employing women and racially minoritized populations in the Earth and space sciences workforce, NASA leadership, specifically the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) and the Office of STEM Engagement Associate Administrators, should charter a joint team to examine and strengthen the historic and current relationship between the two organizations with respect to investments in MSIs. NASA’s investments should also redress the historical inequities in NASA supported research and training at these institutions. Specifically, NASA should:
|
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
| Advancing Antiracism, DEI in STEMM Organizations (NASEM 2023a) | |
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec2.1 |
Federal funding agencies, private philanthropies, and other grantmaking organizations should provide increased opportunities for grants, awards, and other forms of support to increase understanding of how the policies, programs, and practices of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) support students and faculty. Notably, one issue for further investigation should be understanding the core principles of historically-based minority serving institution (MSI)-based programs and how to translate them to predominantly White institutions of higher education and other science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine organizations. In addition, predominately white institutions should seek sustainable partnerships with all MSIs (HBCUs, TCUs, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and Asian American, Native American, and Pacific Islander Serving Institutions). |
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec3.1 |
To understand the relative persistence of students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) higher education, data collection organizations, such as the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics, should collect and share online with the public information on the demographics of students entering college planning to study STEM and their subsequent educational outcomes, disaggregated by race and ethnicity, gender, and field of study, including:
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec4.1 |
There are a few noteworthy ways to describe how people from historically and systemically minoritized groups respond to racism in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) educational and professional environments. These responses can be loosely grouped as follows: exiting the field, implementing strategies to fit in, and collectively mobilizing to transform the STEMM environment. |
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec5.1 |
Leaders and gatekeepers of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized people’s individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices:
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec5.2 |
Leaders and gatekeepers of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized people’s individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices:
|
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec5.3 |
Leaders and gatekeepers of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized people’s individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices:
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec5.4 |
Leaders and gatekeepers of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized people’s individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices:
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec5.5 |
Leaders and gatekeepers of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) organizations, higher education, and human resource offices can improve minoritized people’s individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices:
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec6.1 |
Leaders of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) organizations and directors of human resource offices can improve minoritized people’s individual and interpersonal experiences in STEMM educational and professional environments through the following practices:
|
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec6.2 |
Additional research is needed to examine the psychological impacts of perpetuating racism from the perspective of the gatekeeper in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine. |
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec7.1 |
Gatekeepers who manage teams, including but not limited to principal investigators and heads of laboratories and research groups, should be intentional about creating the following conditions. These can support positive team performance outcomes and help reduce instances of interpersonal bias.
|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec8.1 |
Organizational leaders should take action to redress both individual bias and discrimination as well as organizational processes that reproduce harm and negative outcomes for peole from minoritized racial and ethnic groups at critical points of access and advancement. This action should include a review of evaluation criteria and decision-making practices (i.e., in admissions, hiring and wage-setting, and promotion and advancement) to understand if and to what degree existing standards perpetuate underlying racial and ethnic inequities.
|
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec8.2 |
Leaders, managers, and human resource departments in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine organizations should anticipate resistance to antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts and investigate with rigorous empirical tools, the impacts of training on different types of antiracism, diversity, equity, and inclusion outcomes (hiring, climate, promotion, retention, leadership roles, resource allocation). |
|
NASEM (2023a) Rec8.3 |
Presidents, chief executive officers, and leaders of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine organizations, including those in higher education and the private sector, should use a framework (such as those listed below) to evaluate the institution’s values and norms and identify specific ways to address norms that impede diversity and promote a culture that is genuinely accessible and supportive to all. These top-level leaders should work with managers, supervisors, and other mid-level leaders who influence the local culture within organizations and can be a critical part of implementation. The evaluation should include review of:
|
| Origins, Worlds, and Life: Planetary Science and Astrobiology in the Next Decade (NASEM 2022b) | |
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec1 |
NASA PSD and NSF with its wide experience with programs such as the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP) and Organizational change for Gender Equity in STEM Academic Professions (ADVANCE), should make it a priority to obtain currently lacking evidence about fundamental aspects of the state of planetary science and astrobiology communities. NASA PSD and NSF should engage with experts to undertake data collection on 3- to 5-year cycles with a focus on obtaining accurate data on:
|
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec2 |
NASA PSD should adopt the view that bias can be both unintentional and pervasive. To address potential bias issues, NASA should:
|
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
|
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec3a |
NASA PSD (Planetary Science Division) should revisit the centralization policy on public engagement and consider mechanisms to support direct engagement of planetary scientists with members of society, particularly students in STEM fields. |
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec3b |
PSD should regularly evaluate programs that enhance participation of students and faculty from URC’s; fellowship programs that facilitate engagement of NASA-funded planetary scientists and astrobiologists with faculty at URC institutions; and mechanisms for supporting education and outreach as an integral part of research via, e.g., the inclusion of outreach activities as optional add-ons to R&A grants, or as a requirement for missions or cooperative agreements. |
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec3c |
NASA PSD should strengthen and expand programs aimed at educating the community about the mission proposal process (e.g., PI Launchpad) and actual mission operations (e.g., participating scientist programs), particularly to reach out to URCs. Providing access to personnel or tools that can help guide investigators through the process should be considered, including participation as contributing members of the mission teams. |
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec3d |
NASA and PSD should reinstate the Harriett G. Jenkins and similar predoctoral fellowship projects as part of an effort to retain members of URC in the fields of PS&AB prior to them reaching existing pinch points at which substantial decline in URC representation is seen in both fields. |
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec4a |
PSD should implement Codes of Conduct (CoC) for funded field campaigns, conferences, and missions, and should expect acknowledgement of receipt and understanding. The CoC should be codified, reviewed, and updated at regular intervals. An effective CoC should outline expected behavior, explain unacceptable behavior, explain how policies will be enforced, provide clear instructions on how to report incidents, and explain consequences of violations. The process should demonstrate sensitivity to the difficulty of bringing forward accusations and to the rights of the accused. |
|
NASEM (2022b) Rec4b |
NASA PSD and affiliated institutions should clearly identify a Point of Contact or ombudsperson as part of the CoC to provide access to individuals who experience violations to the CoC. The egregious nature of the sexual harassment reported in field work requires immediate attention by NASA. |
| Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s (NASEM 2023b) | |
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec1 |
Funding agencies should increase funding incentives for improving diversity among the college/university astronomy and astrophysics faculty—for example, by increasing the number of awards that invest in the development and retention of early-career faculty and other activities for members of underrepresented groups. |
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec2 |
NASA, NSF, and DOE should reinvest in professional workforce diversity programs at the division/directorate levels with purview over astronomy and astrophysics. Because academic pipeline transitions are loss points in general, supporting the creation and continued operation of “bridge” type programs across junctures in the higher-education pipeline and into the professional ranks appear especially promising. |
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec3 |
NSF, NASA, and DOE should implement undergraduate and graduate “traineeship” funding, akin to the NIH MARC and NIH “T” training grant programs, to incentivize department/institution-level commitment to professional workforce development, and prioritize interdisciplinary training, diversity, and preparation for a variety of career outcomes. |
| Report and Recommendation Number | Recommendation Text |
|---|---|
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec4 |
NASA and NSF should continue and increase support for postdoctoral fellowships that provide independence while encouraging development of scientific leaders who advance diversity and inclusive excellence (e.g., NASA Hubble Fellows program, NSF Astronomy and Astrophysics Postdoc program). |
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec5 |
NASA, NSF, DOE, and professional societies should ensure that their scientific integrity policies address harassment and discrimination by individuals as forms of research/scientific misconduct. |
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec6 |
NASA, NSF, and DOE should implement a cross-agency committee or working group tasked with establishing a consistent format and policy for regularly collecting, evaluating, and publicly reporting demographic data and indicators pertaining at a minimum to outcomes of proposal competitions. |
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec7 |
NASA, DOE, and NSF should consider including diversity—of project teams and participants—in the evaluation of funding awards to individual investigators, project and mission teams, and third-party organizations that manage facilities. Approaches would be agency specific, and appropriate to the scale of the projects. |
|
NASEM (2023b) Rec8 |
The astronomy community should, through the American Astronomical Society in partnership with other major professional societies (e.g., American Physical Society, American Geophysical Union, International Astronomical Union), work with experts from other experienced disciplines (such as archaeology and social sciences) and representatives from local communities to define a Community Astronomy model of engagement that advances scientific research while respecting, empowering and benefiting local communities. |
|
NASEM (2021) Rec11 |
The astronomy community should increase the use of remote observing, hybrid conferences, and remote conferences, to decrease travel impact on carbon emissions and climate change. |
| Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science (NRC 2015) | |
|
NRC (2015) Rec8 |
Funders should require proposals for team-based research to present collaboration plans and provide guidance to scientists for the inclusion of these plans in their proposals, as well as guidance and criteria for reviewers’ evaluation of these plans. Funders should also require authors of proposals for interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary research projects to specify how they will integrate disciplinary perspectives and methods throughout the life of the research project. |
NOTE: Acronyms are defined in Appendix H.
REFERENCES TO ANNEX F.A
NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2020. Progress Toward Implementation of the 2013 Decadal Survey for Solar and Space Physics: A Midterm Assessment. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25668.
NASEM. 2022a. Advancing Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility in the Leadership of Competed Space Missions. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26385.
NASEM. 2022b. Origins, Worlds, and Life: A Decadal Strategy for Planetary Science and Astrobiology 2023–2032. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26522.
NASEM. 2023a. Advancing Antiracism, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in STEMM Organizations: Beyond Broadening Participation. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26803.
NASEM. 2023b. Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26141.
NRC (National Research Council). 2013. Solar and Space Physics: A Science for a Technological Society. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13060.
NRC. 2015. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/19007.
