loading page

Rethinking Committee Work in the Research Enterprise: The Case of Regenerative Gatekeeping
  • +5
  • Jonathan C. Lewis,
  • Aixa Aleman-Diaz,
  • Mona Behl,
  • Sarah Kolesar,
  • Lisa White,
  • Brandon Jones,
  • Corey Garza,
  • Sharon K. Cooper
Jonathan C. Lewis
Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana University of Pennsylvania

Corresponding Author:[email protected]

Author Profile
Aixa Aleman-Diaz
American Geophysical Union, American Geophysical Union, American Geophysical Union, American Geophysical Union
Author Profile
Mona Behl
University of Georgia, University of Georgia, University of Georgia, University of Georgia
Author Profile
Sarah Kolesar
Oregon State University, Oregon State University, Oregon State University, Oregon State University
Author Profile
Lisa White
Museum of Paleontology, University of California Berkeley, Museum of Paleontology, University of California Berkeley, Museum of Paleontology, Museum of Paleontology
Author Profile
Brandon Jones
National Science Foundation, National Science Foundation, National Science Foundation, National Science Foundation
Author Profile
Corey Garza
California State University Monterey Bay, California State University Monterey Bay, California State University Monterey Bay, California State University Monterey Bay
Author Profile
Sharon K. Cooper
Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory, Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory, Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory, Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory
Author Profile

Abstract

Committees touch nearly every facet in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) research enterprise. However, the role of gatekeeping through committee work has received little attention in Earth and space sciences. We propose a novel concept called, “regenerative gatekeeping” to challenge institutional inertia, cultivate belonging, accessibility, justice, diversity, equity, and inclusion in committee work. Three examples, a hiring committee process, a seminar series innovation, and an awards committee, highlight the need to self-assess policies and practices, ask critical questions and engage in generative conflict. Rethinking committee work can activate distributed mechanisms needed to promote change.