Adriana Espinosa, Ph.D.
Dr. Adriana Espinosa discusses how MPA students can create social change by integrating engaged, interdisciplinary research into their public service work.
We’ve been discussing gender disparities in STEM professions as well as microaggressions and workplace discrimination. What can we do to solve these problems? Should we focus on cultural change – changing individuals – or should we change institutions first?
Who’s in charge of the institutions? It’s people, ultimately, right? It’s all of us. If we from the start have a cultural shift, then the discriminatory institutional culture would not exist. I mean, it’s really hard to do. Equality across the board is not going to happen overnight, but if we start acknowledging that above all we are all human beings, and accordingly should treat each other as such, then we’ll be moving in the right direction.
Some might argue that bad institutions make people behave badly. A woman or person of color might reach a position of power that is traditionally occupied by white males, but in order to do so they would have to uphold discriminatory institutions, which could harm other women and people of color.
Yeah, you have situations where women oppress other women, racial minorities oppress other racial minorities, but institutions are led by people, ultimately. The change needs to happen from the top, and by the top I mean “institutional leadership”. It is hard for people who are not in power to change the institution.
You’ve said that one avenue of change is engaged research. Is that the same as applied research?
At City College I manage the ARHAMP lab, which stands for Applied Research on the Health and Adaptation of Minority Populations. The word “applied” highlights the fact that we rely heavily on sound research design and rigorous statistical analyses. We are not just restating our own opinions, but rather publishing the evidence.
Engaged research corresponds to making research findings accessible to the general consumer. This is extremely important and it is what we’re trying to do with the MPA program and the scholar-in-residence. Research should not be defined only by publishing in academic journals, because only a very narrow segment of the population actually pays attention to these journals. We also need the general public to know and understand the empirical evidence regarding these social problems.
Wouldn’t some argue that popularizing research reduces rigor and objectivity?
We have to maintain the rigorous, evidence-based research for academic journals, which have a process of peer review and data validation that works. But when we talk about the findings, we can tone down the academic rigor, communicate via other mediums, and make it so that other people can understand our findings and their implications. I’m not talking about writing purely opinion pieces for magazines, or affiliating with a nonprofit that has its own political agenda. I mean communicating the rigorous academic research in an accessible format to a broader audience. That’s where many academics fall short at times.
Many of our students are planning to become managers of political campaigns, think tanks, or social enterprises that might prioritize social impact goals and not be as focused on academic rigor. How can students bridge that divide between academia and political engagement?
Academic researchers need to be completely objective. At the same time, when you are putting your work out there, you can publish the facts and maintain objectivity while making your work accessible to a broad range of audiences. Partnerships with nonprofits could help with this, but they must have managers who know how to interpret academic research, and communicate it in a straightforward way without sacrificing rigorous methods. That’s what you all, the MPA students, are learning to do.
What is your approach to reaching beyond academic circles?
I belong to various academic organizations that focus on social issues and disseminate my work, via social media and the like. I also volunteer as a Board Member for a local organization that promotes the education and well-being of members of disadvantaged groups in my community.
I have presented my work on diversity issues in math and STEM at two international mathematics conferences, and I’ve been invited back for a third conference. I also published an article on diversity in an upcoming issue of Contemporary Mathematics, a mathematics journal of the American Mathematics Society.
Consistent with the Powell School mission, your research has extended at times beyond a single discipline. Why do you take an interdisciplinary approach?
I have learned greatly from the different methodologies for analyzing data and the different theories that these other disciplines are founded upon. Psychology may focus on the individual, while economics focuses on the aggregate, and political science is maybe a combination of both. For example, it is not just one person suffering depression; it is the societal costs this leads to, and what kind of policies can be implemented to deal with the issue.
The interdisciplinary part keeps you real, because if you’re not interdisciplinary, then you’re talking to people in their own language and possibly repeating what they are also saying. However, there is no one way of looking at the solution to societal problems. When you are open to other disciplines, then you may see issues from a different perspective and therefore gain more valuable information. Being interdisciplinary is not easy, though. To be a well-respected interdisciplinary researcher, you have to be more than just familiar with the theories and approaches used in the multiple fields that constitute your “interdisciplinary” approach. Otherwise, you’ll be viewed as lacking focus and not taken seriously.
How is your work related to MPA students and other students you work with at CCNY?
City College students constitute an amazingly rich and diverse group of students who have most likely been impacted by the stressors that I talk about. So in a sense, my work is based on the stories and experiences of CCNY students who, above all predicaments, thrive and get ahead. In fact, many of my studies are based on CCNY students who are kind enough to volunteer.
MPA students, in particular, are going to be making decisions that will impact others. They can use this power and influence to implement change and empower those who are negatively impacted by social forces.
Do you see progress happening? What gives you hope that change will come?
The progress that I see is that we are giving a voice to people who did not have a voice before. We are joining forces, and we are sending the message that human rights apply to all humans. In terms of progress, we are seeing a lot of political movement from women and other underrepresented groups, especially in leadership. We are seeing a lot of privileged individuals join the battle of the unprivileged ones.
It gives me hope that more and more people are focusing on people’s humanity and shunning the dehumanization of individuals, including holding immigrant children hostage and all the horrible things that are happening to minority individuals on a day-to-day basis.
It gives me hope that one day we will give a little girl in Guatemala, Kenya or anywhere the opportunity for her to become a pioneer in finding a cure for cancer or some other horrible disease because we would value her as an equal, rather than accuse her or her family of coming here to commit crimes or use up our resources.
Thank you very much for taking the time to do this interview. Your work is a huge benefit to our students and to society. We appreciate your service as scholar-in-residence.
This interview is Part 2 of two. See Part 1 here.
The MPA scholar-in-residence program is made possible by generous support from the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service.
Want to become part of the MPA Program? Apply now to join us in fall 2019!
Find out more about our internship program, scholarships, and career development.