Sairam Moturi, Ph.D.’s Post

The English word "fair" carries a connotation as in "the right thing to do". Clearly after reading this post (and what I have observed while working a broad for more than 25+ years) that meaning does not carry across cultures. I also see #equitable and #equity in similar veins as they have related meanings. In my view, ALL of the above (and more) are essential when societies -- and not national cultures -- are going to tackle important issues, regional problems, and the pressing gender imbalances.

What would you think is the most important predictor of scientific brilliance? 🤔 A recent study shows that over 75% of Nobel laureates in the sciences came from the top 5% families in terms of income. The average Nobel Prize winner grew up in an 87th percentile household. This suggests that most scientific talent is drawn from a very small elite group. Imagine how much untapped potential is out there—people with brilliant minds but fewer resources. Also telling, Female laureates tend to come from even more elite families (91st percentile), suggesting additional barriers that family resources help mitigate. For me, the conclusion is clear: expanding access to educational opportunity isn’t just the fair and right thing to do, but also essential if we are going to find solutions for the most important problems facing our planet.

Not long ago, I studied how the Nobel Prize is mostly awarded to U.S. scholars and men. Today, I was fortunate enough to read this insightful post by @AlexGenevsky, where he explains another fascinating aspect: the influence of socio-economic background on the likelihood of winning this prestigious award. I highly recommend reading it! [https://t.co/ssbLSQcGyQ]

There is no solution for humanity. Or we make sure everybody has access to a minimal (and we can do so, taxing who already, mostly through benefiting from the system, is already there, by acting to the benefit of all with transparency and democracy) or we will keep suffering from diseases, from easily preventable sicknesses, from poverty and more. Human life is already tough without such issues, why can’t we aliviate what is possible to do so?

I agree with Alex's conclusion: "expanding access to educational opportunity isn’t just the fair and right thing to do, but also essential if we are going to find solutions for the most important problems facing our planet." To identify solutions to these pressing problems we need great teamwork. But, again, in most of the teams I see in organizations people with power and status define the problems and direct the conversation. This wastes valuable experience and talent. It doesn't happen in the highest-performing teams I've studied. They understand that every person has genius inside them. So they value the ideas everyone brings, which allows them to do a superior job of *defining* and solving problems. Great teams create norms that draw-out the genius of everyone in the room.

What do you think is the biggest reason someone becomes a brilliant scientist? A recent study shows that more than 75% of Nobel Prize winners in science come from the richest 5% of families. The average Nobel Prize winner grew up in a family that was richer than 87% of other families. This shows that most top scientists come from a small, wealthy group. Think about how many smart people are out there who could become great scientists but don’t have the same resources. It’s also interesting that female Nobel winners usually come from even richer families (the 91st percentile). This suggests that women need more family support to overcome extra challenges in science. To me, the message is clear: giving more people access to education isn’t just fair, it’s necessary. If we want to solve the big problems our world faces, we need to make sure everyone has the chance to learn and succeed.

Many people will make an impact in their fields, but not win a Nobel. However, there is something to be considered when most Nobel winners come from affluency. It means that the children had time and the parents had money for enrichment activities. It may have meant that the parents helped ensure that their children didn't have to work to afford college or graduate school. It may have meant that the parents helped support the new graduate while they were earning a lower income (kept them from working a 2nd job). What it means is that there are really good scholars who might be a winner IF they had come from affluence. It means that we need to continue to support education for all. #educationforall #wherearethepoornobels #sciencenobelsareohsowhitemale #stemdiversity

DISMANTLE NARRATIVES And they only discuss with the same top peers. In the sciences, it is mandatory to gather different points of view and ideas, regardless of their backgrounds. Another problem, in addition to the chart below, is who is being discussed with within the research teams. A current example is the unfortunate statements made by James Robinson regarding Colombia's economy and its roots of inequality. He is spreading the bias of some economists at Universidad de los Andes - Colombia, and some corporate media are merely using his decontextualized opinion regarding the current government’s economic plan. I don’t understand why an economist who won the Nobel Prize for his research on inequalities is presenting a detached perspective on Colombia's conflict. Does Professor Robinson truly have a comprehensive understanding of our country, or has he only received a superficial view based on his experiences at the University of the Andes? What do you think, Leopoldo Fergusson , about James Robinson's regrettable opinions on Colombia? Has he really conducted in-depth research on our country? TREES another idea about inequalities, plese look post below.

🌟 How to Win a Nobel Prize: Unpacking the Secrets of Success! 🏆 Ever wondered what it takes to join the prestigious circle of Nobel laureates? Well, Nature has crunched the data on every science prizewinner from chemistry, physics, and physiology or medicine since 1901 to find out! Here’s a snapshot of what they discovered: 1. Optimal Age: The magic number is 54! That's the age with the highest number of laureates, with an average age of 58. 2. Pioneering Youth: The youngest was Lawrence Bragg at 25, while the oldest was John B. Goodenough at 97. 3. Gender Dynamics: Historically, if you identify as a woman, your best bet is in physiology or medicine, though recent decades have seen an improvement in gender diversity. 4. Geographical Edge: Being in North America might just give you that extra edge, with 54% of all Nobel prizes awarded there. 5. Academic Lineage Matters: Joining a lab with a history of Nobel laureates could significantly increase your chances, thanks to the rich mentorship and innovative environment. 6. Long Wait: Be prepared to wait about two decades after your groundbreaking work to potentially receive the prize. 🔗 Dive deeper into this fascinating analysis by Nature and get inspired to perhaps start your journey towards Nobel glory! https://lnkd.in/ew8pN_SD 📊 Here’s to dreaming big and pushing the boundaries of science! 🌌 #NobelPrize #ScienceInnovation #AcademicExcellence

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐖𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚 𝐍𝐨𝐛𝐞𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐳𝐞🪙? 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐄𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 👶—𝐋𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐁𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐫𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐲 𝐏𝐢𝐜𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐖𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡𝐲 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 💲𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 👨🔬! - 𝐅𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐖𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐍𝐨𝐛𝐞𝐥 𝐋𝐚𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬: A recent study points out that Nobel Prize winners in the sciences tend to come from affluent backgrounds, with the average laureate growing up in households in the 87-90th income percentile. - 𝐈𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬: This lack of access hinders many high-potential individuals from reaching their full scientific potential, slowing down overall scientific progress in our society. -𝐁𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐖𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧: Female laureates tend to come from even more elite families than their male counterparts, indicating that women face additional societal barriers in accessing scientific opportunities. - 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐌𝐨𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞: Regions with greater intergenerational mobility (where children from lower-income families can achieve higher incomes) produce more Nobel laureates from non-elite backgrounds. Source: Access to Opportunity in the Sciences: Evidence from the Nobel Laureates #NobelPrize #SocialMobility #STEM #Innovation #Inequality #education