by Katherine A. Carosella, M.A., University of Minnesota
Many students would agree that the process of gaining admission to graduate programs is arduous but the process of completing a doctoral program is significantly more difficult. This is the case for all graduate students, though students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds, namely those who are not white and from an affluent background, face even more obstacles to completion. There are numerous systemic barriers that, in my opinion, disproportionately hinder the retention of these students that must be addressed to increase the retention of traditionally underrepresented students in graduate programs and the field of psychology as a whole. In this article, some of the financial barriers and potential solutions will be discussed.
Increasing stipends:
From my experience, graduate school is taxing in terms of time and energy and provides relatively low levels of compensation for these sacrifices, all with the goal of future success. This delayed gratification can be difficult to navigate emotionally but can be even more difficult, if not impossible, to manage financially. Many graduate stipends fall below the livable wage level for their respective region (Kroeger et al., 2018). Even if students were paid a “livable wage”, expenses such as medical care associated with chronic illnesses or disabilities, emergencies, and payments for pre-existing loans incurred in the pursuit of graduate admittance would not be covered (Yao et al., 2017). The failure to pay students enough to comfortably survive in their environment means that students may need to rely on external sources of funding to supplement their income such as familial support or additional employment. For students from low incomes backgrounds, familial financial support may be impossible. Attempting to supplement graduate student income by seeking additional employment decreases the amount of time that can be dedicated to reaching academic milestones, placing students who need this funding at a disadvantage compared to their peers who do not. The stress caused by financial discomfort and/or temporal pressure caused by external commitments disproportionately impacts students from low-income backgrounds or those who have additional expenses due to medical needs, groups who are already underrepresented in higher education (Tate et al., 2015). Graduate programs that are genuinely committed to increasing diversity among their students and the field of psychology must financially invest in the retention, well-being, and long-term success of students by providing stipends that at minimum meet local livable wages.
Compensation for efforts promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion:
From my understanding, many psychology departments have undertaken work to promote diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and accessibility, or some combination of those phenomena. In my experience, the work to examine existing structures, educate program members, and institute change towards these goals is frequently done by graduate students and faculty members who volunteer their time and talents. Even in well-meaning organizations, these volunteers are disproportionately made up of individuals from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds (Jimenez et al., 2019). This may be in large part because of their increased awareness of the barriers to diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and accessibility and the urgent need to address them compared to their peers to whom academia is more welcoming. Further, students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds are frequently called upon to mentor undergraduates and post-baccs with shared identities and experiences in formal and informal ways. The experience of mentoring and being mentored is of great value to the individuals involved and to the field as a whole. In the same way, there is great value in being involved in a group of like-minded individuals working towards common goals, such as occurs among those volunteering to advance program/department goals of diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and accessibility. However, the disproportionate temporal and emotional burden that falls on students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds is of great concern. The time spent on these efforts, in my experience, is almost universally unpaid, further exacerbating previously discussed financial stressors. Programs must begin to compensate their students for all time spent promoting their goals, not just those associated with research and/or teaching. If programs claim to be promoting diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and accessibility but rely solely on unpaid volunteers to accomplish these goals, they are exploiting those they are purporting to be supporting.
Appropriate financial compensation for traditional graduate student roles such as conducting research and teaching, as well as for promoting stated departmental or program goals, is crucial to removing some of the systemic barriers to the retention of students from traditionally underrepresented backgrounds. Future work will discuss the roles that mentorship, community support, and discrimination play in retention as well.
_______________________________________________________________
References
Jimenez, M. F., Laverty, T. M., Bombaci, S. P., Wilkins, K., Bennett, D. E., & Pejchar, L. (2019). Underrepresented faculty play a disproportionate role in advancing diversity and inclusion. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 3(7), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0911-5
Kroeger, T., McNicholas, C., Wilpert, M. von, & Wolfe, J. (2018). The State of Graduate Student Employee Unions: Momentum to Organize among Graduate Student Workers Is Growing Despite Opposition. In Economic Policy Institute. Economic Policy Institute. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED587798
Tate, K. A., Fouad, N. A., Marks, L. R., Young, G., Guzman, E., & Williams, E. G. (2015). Underrepresented First-Generation, Low-Income College Students’ Pursuit of a Graduate Education: Investigating the Influence of Self-Efficacy, Coping Efficacy, and Family Influence. Journal of Career Assessment, 23(3), 427–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069072714547498
Yao, C., Parker, J., Arrowsmith, J., & Carr, S. C. (2017). The living wage as an income range for decent work and life. Employee Relations, 39(6), 875–887. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-03-2017-0071
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this newsletter are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System (PCSAS).