statistics on the numbers of Blacks receiving mathematics Ph.D.s since 1993

The data below comes from the National Science Foundation. Also in pdf.

With the exception of Asians, minorities are a small proportion of scientists and engineers in the United States. Asians were 9 percent of scientists and engineers in the United States in 1993, although they were only 3 percent of the U.S. population. Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians as a group were 23 percent of the U.S. population but only 6 percent of the total science and engineering labor force.  Blacks and Hispanics were each about 3 percent, and American Indians were less than 1 percent of scientists and engineers. Within the doctoral science and engineering labor force, the differences in representation of racial and ethnic groups are greater than is the case within the science and engineering labor force as a whole. Underrepresented minorities are an even smaller proportion of doctoral scientists and engineers in the United States than they are of bachelor's or master's scientists and engineers. Asians were 11 percent of doctoral scientists and engineers in the United States in 1993. Blacks were 2 percent, Hispanics were 2 percent, and American Indians were less than half of 1 percent of doctoral scientists and engineers.

Within the science and engineering labor force as a whole, the distribution of minority scientists and engineers by field differs depending on the minority group. Asians are concentrated in engineering, in computer science, and in the life and physical sciences. Black scientists and engineers are disproportionately likely to be in the social sciences and in computer science. Hispanics and American Indians do not differ greatly from whites in terms of field. Minority women, with the exception of Asian women, are similar to white women in terms of field. Black and Hispanic women are more likely than minority men to be in computer or mathematical sciences and in social sciences and are less likely than minority men to be in engineering. Asian women, although less likely than men to be engineers, are more likely than other women to be engineers. Asian women, like Asian men, are less likely than other women to be social scientists.

Black and American Indian scientists and engineers are more likely than white, Hispanic, or Asian scientists and engineers to have a bachelor's as the terminal degree. For example, 66 percent of black scientists and engineers in the U.S. labor force have a bachelor's as the highest degree compared to 55 percent of all scientists and engineers.

Among doctoral scientists and engineers, field differences in employment follow the differences in field of doctorate noted in chapter 4. Black doctoral scientists and engineers are concentrated in the social sciences and are underrepresented in the physical sciences and engineering. Half of black doctoral scientists and engineers, but only 29 percent of all scientists and engineers, are in the social sciences and psychology. Only 11 percent of black doctoral scientists and engineers compared with 21 percent of all doctoral scientists and engineers are in physical sciences, and only 11 percent of black doctoral scientists and engineers, compared with 16 percent of the total, are in engineering. Hispanic doctoral scientists and engineers are similar to whites in terms of field.

Asians are more likely than other doctoral scientists and engineers to be in engineering and are less likely than other doctoral scientists and engineers to be in social science. Thirty-seven percent of Asians are in engineering, compared with 16 percent of all doctoral scientists and engineers, and only 10 percent of Asians are social scientists, including psychologists, compared with 29 percent of all doctoral scientists and engineers.

Racial/ethnic groups differ in field of teaching and in academic employment characteristics. They differ in the types of institutions in which they teach, in employment status, in highest degree, in research activities, in rank, and in tenure.

Blacks are underrepresented and Asians are overrepresented among engineering faculty. Although blacks are 4 percent of science faculty, they are only 2 percent of engineering faculty. Within the sciences, black faculty are a higher proportion of social science faculty (6 percent) than they are of other disciplines. Asians are 15 percent of engineering faculty and 5 percent of science faculty

The types of schools in which racial/ethnic groups teach differ. Asian faculty are farless likely than other groups to be employed in 2-year colleges. Black faculty are less likely than other groups to be employed in research institutions and are more likely to be employed in comprehensive institutions, liberal arts schools, and 2-year colleges. Hispanic faculty are less likely than other groups to be employed in research institutions and are more likely to be employed in 2-year colleges.

Minority faculty also differ in research activities. Asian science and engineering faculty are far more likely than other groups to be engaged in research and to prefer spending time doing research, especially in the doctorate and comprehensive universities. They are also more likely than others to be engaged in funded research, to be principal or co-principal investigators , and to have published within the last 2 years-at all ages and within research universities.

Black and Hispanic faculty differ little from white science and engineering faculty in time spent in teaching or research and in preferred time in teaching or research. Other than in Mathematics, Black faculty, have fewer publications than white scientists and engineers in the previous 2 years-at all ages and in all types of schools. Black faculty are also less likely than other groups to be engaged in funded research or to be a principal investigator or co-principal investigator.

Differences in faculty rank and tenure among racial/ethnic groups exist as well. Although Asians are not underrepresented in science and engineering employment, as is the case with underrepresented minorities, they are less likely to be full professors or to be tenured. Among full-time ranked science and engineering faculty, Asians, blacks, and Hispanics are less likely than whites to be full professors. Forty-one percent of Asians, 33 percent of blacks, and 45 percent of Hispanics, compared with 49 percent of whites, are full professors. These differences are partly explained by differences in age. Black, Hispanic, and Asian scientists and engineers are younger on average than white and American Indian scientists and engineers. When age differences are accounted for, Asian and Hispanic faculty are as likely or more likely than white faculty to be full professors, but black faculty are still less likely than other faculty to be full professors. Among ranked faculty who received doctorates 13 or more years previously, only 58 percent of black faculty compared to 70 percent of white faculty were full professors.

Black, Hispanic, and Asian faculty are also less likely than white faculty to be tenured., compared with 64 percent of white faculty, are tenured. Black, Hispanic, and Asian faculty are more likely than white faculty to be on a tenure track. Thirty percent of black faculty, 48 percent of Hispanic faculty, and 27 percent of Asian faculty, compared with 19 percent of white faculty, are on a tenure track. Again, these tenure differences are likely to be related to age differences.

A similar pattern of primary work activity is found among doctoral scientists and engineers. Black and Hispanic doctoral scientists and engineers employed in business or industry have primary work activities similar to white doctoral scientists and engineers. Asians, on the other hand, are much more likely than other groups to be in research and development.

An analysis of the differences in average salaries among racial/ethnic groups was performed analogous to that done for the gender salary gap among full-time employed science and engineering doctorate-holders.  Because of the relatively small number of individuals within some of the racial/ethnic groups, the results are necessarily more tentative than was the case for the gender salary gap.

The salary differences between whites and the racial/ethnic minority groups are not as large as the gender salary gap. The differences range from $4,100 for Asians to $7,100 for blacks. Although smaller than the $13,300 gender gap, these are not trivial differences and rightly raise the question of the extent to which these differences can be accounted for by other variables in a manner analogous to that done for the gender salary gap.

The background variables, including years since receipt of the doctorate and field of degree, explain substantial parts of the observed black/white and Hispanic/white salary gaps (35 percent and 33 percent, respectively). Adding the remaining work-related and life-choice variables to the analysis explains the remaining racial/ethnic salary gaps for blacks and Hispanics.

The analysis of the Asian/white gap shows a very different pattern than that for blacks and Hispanics. Field of degree has a strong "negative" explanatory effect on the salary gap. This indicates that when Asians and whites are statistically "equalized" on field of degree, the resulting salary gap is larger than the observed gap. This is attributable to the fact that Asians are concentrated in degree fields such as engineering that have relatively high salary levels. Employer characteristics also have a strongly negative explanatory effect. This effect largely results from Asians being relatively more likely to be employed in the private sector (47 percent of Asians are so employed compared with 29 percent of whites). After statistically equalizing Asians and whites on all variables in the analysis, the "unexplained" salary gap between Asians and whites is approximately $900 (23 percent of the observed gap).

The salary gap for American Indians and whites shows an explanatory pattern that is different from the other groups examined. The data do not indicate that American Indians have been increasing their participation in the doctoral labor force over time. Therefore, years since doctorate is not an important factor in explaining the salary gap between American Indians and whites. All of the variables combined explain approximately 57 percent of the $6,500 salary gap. Thus, approximately 43 percent of the observed gap remains unexplained. For American Indians, this constitutes approximately $2,800. The reader is cautioned, however, that the number of American Indians in the sample is quite small and that these estimates must be considered fairly imprecise.

Before leaving the topic of racial/ethnic salary differences, it is interesting to look at whether significant "unexplained" racial/ethnic salary gaps are evident when one looks separately at U.S.-born and non-U.S.-born individuals, since a disproportionately high percentage of minority group members in the doctoral population are born outside the United States and the decomposition of the salary gaps for U.S.-born individuals could be quite different than for those born outside of this country. Examination of the data indicates that for U.S.-born individuals, the variables examined "explain" all or almost all of the observed racial/ethnic salary gaps for all the groups examined except for American Indians. In fact, U.S.-born blacks and Asians have higher average salaries than would be expected, given the different racial/ethnic group characteristics on the variables examined, when compared with whites.

The relatively high salaries of U.S.-born blacks and Asians may, of course, be the result of imperfections in the model used in this analysis. It is possible, for example, that the obstacles placed in the way of minority entry into the doctoral science and engineering labor force result in those minority members who are successful being more qualified than whites on factors, such as "willingness to work hard," that we were unable to measure. Alternately, the relatively high salaries of U.S.-born blacks and Asians may indicate that employers have a preference for U.S.-born blacks and Asians-perhaps in response to affirmative action programs.

Among the non-U.S.-born, Hispanics have similar salaries to whites with similar characteristics; however, approximately $2,300 of the Asian/white and black/white gaps remain unexplained. 

In sum, these data do not indicate that racial/ethnic status has much effect on salary within this very "elite" population of full-time-employed individuals with doctoral science and engineering degrees when one compares groups with similar characteristics on relevant variables. After adjusting for differences in work-related characteristics, the only U.S.-born minority group with an average salary substantially lower than that of U.S.-born whites was American Indians. Because the sample contains few American Indians, however, this result may be attributable to sampling variability. For U.S.-born blacks and Asians, minority group salaries are actually somewhat higher than would be expected on the basis of the characteristics adjusted for in this analysis.

Statistics on the Undergraduate Mathematics Major 1980-2000

7.69% of math majors with Bachelors get the Ph.D. in Mathematics within the next 6 years.

Percentage of Freshman Intending to Major in Mathematics
ETHNIC GROUP	1985	1990	1995	2000
WHITE	1.1%	0.9%	0.7%	0.7%
BLACK	0.7%	0.5%	0.7%	0.5%

reference: undergrad1980-2000

Back to Mathematicians of the African Diaspora