 So now what I would like to do is to ask the other two panelists to join Rita with your mic and video on and we will start with some questions. And I have one and perhaps you can just address them in the order in which you spoke. So the first question comes from Monica Monica Bosco, who says, in the past few years diversity and inclusion positions have become very popular in various organizations. Can you comment on the value of this really why don't you start. I guess what I would say I totally agree with that, but it's also been WS sword, I guess maybe about 10 or 15 years ago at a research institution I will not call the name of it. When they had a call for that position. They got about 80 or 90. Of those 75% of the people had a PhD in the stem field. And so part of the issue is that I think if they are given if the office is given the support of the president or chancellors of the institutions to actually make change. And I'm not talking about kind of cosmetic change. I think it could be very successful. But I do know that some of my colleagues who have been very active and trying to diversify science really have a concern that more and more underrepresented groups are leaving the research field and taking those kind of positions. What it speaks to as a large issue of not pitting one thing against the other, but having more people from what Rita was talking about if you have more people you can afford for people to go in different areas. The challenge right now is that for underrepresented groups. We don't have that luxury. That would be my take on it. Rita, why don't you go ahead? Sure. I agree with Willie it's definitely a double-edged sword because the fact that you have to have an office of minority affairs really again, again segregates and I find disturbing. But on the other hand, you need to pay attention to the issues. So I think we need to find ways, just as we did with advance to build this in from the bottom up but include the top down. In other words, the magic of the advanced program is that the president or the senior vice president is the PI and has to be accountable. And it has to deliver. And that changes the dynamic. So I think we need to have this top down bottom up. Pinscher, if you will, for effect. Yes, I agree with both Willie and Rita on this issue. I think that the important thing we must have is accountability. And I agree that accountability has to start at the CEO level, the person who is responsible for the activities of the entire organization unless that accountability begins at the top and is held as a requirement on everyone who is below. Progress cannot be made. And I think that's part of the history that we have seen in in our universities as well as in our in our corporations. People in the organization have to know that this is serious. And that they have to do. They have to be a part of the process and they have to be serious as well in making certain that the change has occurred and change is sustained. Otherwise, we will not see the progress that we need. Thank you. And now who's beginning to speed up on the questions thank you keep them coming because we will come back to them if we don't get them all today. There is a question from an anonymous attendee that asks that DEI efforts are being advertised but how does one deal with the pushback that diversity leads to less academic excellence. I will start we have to recognize that and expect that there will be pushback. But again, there has to be this commitment from the top that says regardless of that pushback, we are going to proceed. And that this is important for our organization, and that it is something that we are going to do, regardless of the fact that there are people who resist the change. I think that we have to be realistic and realistic approach says that there are some people who are not going to agree with what it is that we're we're trying to do. I try to bring them along, but even if they do not subscribe to the idea of making a change to make our organization more diverse and inclusive. We will continue to proceed along that journey because it is important not only to us, but to the nation. That is the only way I think that we can overcome the pushback that is inevitable. Let me jump in. I agree very much with john, but I would also add that we need to point out that diversity in business when you include the underrepresented on the boards, they make more money. It's more profitable. And that's because you bring in other perspectives. And I think the concern here is that that it's different to to have a representation so widely. But the point is that that representation brings other dimensions and makes the scholarship even more powerful. I think the negative approach is wrong. It needs to be positive. If business makes more money. Certainly we can produce a lot better and more science if we have complete ideas from every direction. So that's my my response on that issue. I'm going to go on to we have time for perhaps one or two more questions. I would note that the questions can be answered by typing an answer so any of the panelists both from this panel or others are please feel free to answer some of these questions. This question comes from a college freshman Molly Shan. She's at Harvard now, and she wonders about the fact that there are more subtle instances that that, for example, Rita, you heard overt no, or you can't do this or you don't belong here. And she says, However, I've noticed recently, there have been more subtle instances of discrimination where opportunities are not necessarily blocked for underrepresented groups in science but instead are framed as yes, with a condition attached. That's indeed the great iceberg in the report of the National Academy of Sciences. It is a diagram which is very powerful. And it shows that on the surface, you can see the iceberg but underneath, there's the tremendously larger portion that carries it and makes it floating in seawater. The under portion of the hidden slights, the hidden slurs, the hidden dissing, the actual pretending that the search is open when in fact it may not be. Yes, we still have to deal with this and be blunt about it. It's there. It's not, it has not gone away. And this is where, unfortunately, society has become less civil, but it still behooves us to work really hard to regain civility and to ensure equity and ensure honesty. We have to fight it. I don't know what else to say. William John, I think that applies not just to women in general, but certainly people of color from all of the groups that are underrepresented including I would hasten to add those who are disabled or have other reasons for gender identity, for example, for being excluded. So, where was I so how would you answer Molly with respect to those groups. At least for me, I think that the question is spot on but it's not actually new. The same things have been occurring ever since I can remember. But I do think with what Rita was saying that you, you, one thing I think that when you have a very good mentor, who's very honest and authentic. It tends to have an idea that these things are going to be there. And how do you best deal with them. But how do you best keep your own sense of self without being destroyed by those kind of things. And I know for myself has been one of those persons who was kind of the only one in my field but also going to different places that you just had to have a tough skin, but it can also be psychologically wearing on it. So you have to have, I think when you have someone else in your life who's a supporter of you could be a family member because we people in profession. You have to be prepared for that because it's not going to really change that much. And I think no matter what the field whether science whether sports whether it's anything else, you get the same kind of thing because there's a power dynamic when another group is seeing this losing some of its power, then you have that process so that's where I think that it's critical to have authentic mentoring. I had people who were my mentors who were really tough, but I was prepared to go out and understand that you don't give up. You just pick yourself up and keep going because you, you have to be prepared for someone who's coming behind you. And I think that's what happens that when you come down to situations of this kind of quiet and sometimes but it's still something that I've experienced and I suspect that all of us who are on this panel experienced something like that. There's no question that that's true and I agree with what both Rita and and Willie have said about the importance of recognizing that these things implicit bias and and confrontations can and will occur but I think we have a responsibility to help society understand that one can have equity and excellence at the same time and that quality and equality are not usually exclusive. I feel very strongly about that and I've seen it happen in life at one of the educational institutions that I serve. We focused on making certain that that was fully understand throughout the organization and even though it took a while to to overcome the reluctance of some alumni and and trustees to recognize and appreciate that it began to happen and I am convinced that we must focus on that if we are to see a sustainable change in the way underrepresented minorities and women are included in our science and engineering workforce. Thank you. And now even we have some excellent comments and questions that remain in the question and answer box. Any panelists please feel free to answer these and I would like to assure the attendees that these questions are being saved. And we will if nothing else address them in our final report which you will get a copy of.