Is the NIH...unaware that access to NIH funding is often a major determinant in whether women ascend the academic hierarchy?
And I don't just mean success rates, which the NIH is good at reporting! I mean:
ability to get add'l R01s, which can be linked to promotion at some institutions
not consistently getting scores that are borderline and having to navigate that cognitive load and risk assessment
ability to get add'l R01s, which can be linked to promotion at some institutions
not consistently getting scores that are borderline and having to navigate that cognitive load and risk assessment
the add'l labor of having to apply more times to get or stay funded
the lack of transparency about how some grants are "picked up" or bridge funding is allocated
recognizing service during grant review
analyzing disparities on a per study section level, not just in aggregate
the lack of transparency about how some grants are "picked up" or bridge funding is allocated
recognizing service during grant review
analyzing disparities on a per study section level, not just in aggregate
Yes there are things that institutions can do to address gender disparity but it likely requires acknowledging the subtle ways that institutional resources, service and scientific recognition gets allocated, an assessment NIH seems unlikely to perform on itself
β’ β’ β’
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
γ
