Tag Archives: HBCU innovation

Is the Love of Sports Costing African America the STEM Future It Desperately Needs?

The future will not belong to those who can jump the highest, but to those who can think the deepest.” — Anonymous (Modern African Proverb Reimagined)

For every hour a Black boy or girl spends practicing, playing, or watching sports, it becomes an hour not spent mastering math, science, literature, or history. Over time, those missed hours compound not just in skill gaps, but in confidence gaps. And confidence, in education as in life, is everything. The long-term consequence of this imbalance may be far greater than lost academic opportunities. It may be the loss of African America’s ability to compete in the 21st-century economy and the slow erosion of its intellectual sovereignty.

Sports are a cherished part of African American culture, woven through family traditions, community pride, and generational memory. From Jackie Robinson to Serena Williams, from Doug Williams to Simone Biles, athletic greatness has symbolized resilience and excellence in a world that too often sought to deny both. But beneath the surface of that cultural triumph lies an uncomfortable reality: the love of the game may have become too consuming, crowding out the time, attention, and aspiration needed for mastery in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics — the disciplines defining wealth and power in the modern world.

A study by GradePower Learning found that American students spend about 1,000 hours in school each year — and roughly the same amount watching screens. For African American youth, however, there’s an additional pull: sports participation, practices, and games can consume 10 to 20 hours a week, not counting the time spent watching sports media, highlights, or discussing the latest player stats. By the time a child reaches high school graduation, those hours can exceed 8,000 — the equivalent of four full years of math or science instruction. What might have been time spent learning quadratic equations or Newton’s laws becomes time devoted to perfecting a crossover dribble or memorizing playbooks.

In theory, sports are said to teach discipline, teamwork, and perseverance — invaluable traits for life and leadership. But decades of African American participation in sports have shown that, in practice, these virtues rarely translate into collective advancement or institutional power for the community. Sports teach many to endure, but not necessarily to build. They inspire personal excellence but often without structural returns. Meanwhile, other ethnic groups are compounding their time in STEM preparation. In Asian households, it is not uncommon for students to attend supplemental weekend academies for math and science. The same can be said of many immigrant families who prioritize educational mastery as a direct pathway to generational wealth.

This divergence begins early. By middle school, African American students already lag behind in math and science proficiency, and by high school, many have internalized the belief that they “aren’t math people.” Yet, that belief is not innate; it’s cultivated by the habits of time and attention society rewards.

The youth sports economy in the United States is now valued at over $30 billion, according to USA Today. Parents are spending thousands each year on club fees, travel tournaments, gear, and coaching — often with dreams of athletic scholarships or professional contracts that statistically almost never come. A 2025 USA Today report noted that many parents invest between $5,000 and $10,000 annually per child in competitive sports, hoping to secure a college scholarship. Yet, NCAA data show that less than 2% of high school athletes earn athletic scholarships, and an even smaller fraction go on to professional sports.

When those numbers are mapped against household wealth, the economic irony becomes staggering. The median net worth of African American families remains around $44,900, compared to $285,000 for White families. If the average family spends $10,000 per year on youth sports for a decade, they could instead have invested $100,000 into a 529 education savings plan or a family investment fund. Compounded annually at 7%, that investment would yield roughly $196,000 by the time their child turns 18 — enough to pay for college tuition, or serve as seed capital for a business. But the investment goes into jerseys, tournaments, and sneakers. Sports is not just a pastime anymore; it’s an industry — one that thrives on hope, marketing, and the dream of ascension. For African American families, that dream often overshadows a deeper one: intellectual independence.

From the earliest ages, children internalize the models of success they see. If every hero they admire dribbles, runs, or dunks, it subtly shapes what they believe they must become to matter. The African American community has created icons in every field, but sports icons receive disproportionate visibility, media coverage, and cultural veneration. Young boys can name more NFL quarterbacks than Black engineers, scientists, or inventors. This imbalance creates a quiet but powerful feedback loop. The more the community celebrates athletic success as the highest expression of Black excellence, the fewer young people will be inspired to emulate scientific or entrepreneurial greatness. The idolization of the athlete — rather than the innovator — becomes a generational tax on imagination.

STEM confidence, like athletic skill, is built through repetition and exposure. A child who spends thousands of hours practicing sports builds confidence in their athletic identity. A child who spends thousands of hours exploring robotics or chemistry develops confidence in their intellectual identity. The problem is not talent — it’s time allocation.

If African America’s endowments are to grow, its intellectual capital must first be rebalanced. STEM fields are not just high-paying; they are high-leverage. Engineers design cities, coders build economies, and scientists control the frontiers of technology and medicine. When African American students are absent from these sectors, it isn’t just a diversity gap — it’s a sovereignty gap. Every innovation African America fails to own is an innovation it must rent from others. Every algorithm not written, every patent not filed, every lab not funded contributes to institutional dependency. Historically Black Colleges and Universities sit at a unique crossroads. While they have been strong in liberal arts, education, and social sciences, they must now pivot aggressively toward STEM dominance. Yet even they face a cultural headwind — many incoming students have been nurtured to see physical performance as validation of worth, while intellectual rigor is often seen as a burden rather than a badge.

An HBCU graduate in engineering or computer science may go on to invent, design, and build. An HBCU athlete may entertain millions. But the wealth gap between those two trajectories is not just individual — it’s institutional. Consider the compound effect of lost hours: one hour per day diverted from academic enrichment equals 365 hours per year. Over 13 years of schooling (Pre-K through 12th grade), that’s nearly 4,750 hours — more than two full school years of instruction. That’s just for one hour. Many student-athletes spend much more time — often 10 or more hours weekly — on practice, travel, and games. By high school, this could exceed 10,000 hours — the exact amount Malcolm Gladwell famously cited as the threshold for mastery in any field.

African American students are becoming masters — just not in the fields where mastery translates into institutional control or generational wealth. Imagine if even half of those hours were redirected into robotics clubs, science fairs, financial literacy programs, or coding bootcamps. The shift in intellectual and economic trajectory would be profound. Culture cannot change overnight, but it can evolve intentionally. African American parents, educators, and institutions must begin redefining what excellence looks like — and where the applause should go. Families should celebrate as loudly when a child aces a chemistry exam or builds a mobile app as when they score a touchdown. Public affirmation must follow academic achievement with the same enthusiasm it gives athletic performance.

The money spent on club sports, travel, and equipment could be partially reallocated to STEM programs, tutoring, or even early college credit courses. Financial discipline must mirror the rigor of athletic discipline. Imagine a Saturday morning robotics league with the same energy as youth basketball — complete with team jerseys, community support, and trophies. Institutions like HBCUs could sponsor regional competitions to make intellectual pursuit a spectator event. HBCUs can create mentorship pipelines connecting student-athletes with STEM majors to promote balance. Athletic departments should collaborate with STEM departments on interdisciplinary projects that merge sports analytics, biomechanics, and data engineering. Families can begin small: a weekly science documentary, math challenges at the dinner table, or trips to museums and tech expos. What matters most is that curiosity and analysis become part of the household rhythm.

America’s future wealth and power will flow through those who master technology, not those who merely consume it. The engineers designing renewable energy grids, the programmers writing AI code, and the scientists developing space propulsion systems are the ones shaping the next civilization. African America cannot afford to be absent from that frontier — nor can it afford to lose another generation to the illusion of athletic access as a substitute for academic and economic power. The cultural love of sports, once a symbol of survival and community, must now evolve into a love of systems, science, and strategy. The same passion that drives the athlete can drive the engineer. The same discipline that fuels a 5 a.m. workout can fuel a 5 a.m. study session. But only if the institutions — families, schools, and HBCUs — are intentional in redirecting that energy.

The African American community once used sports as a pathway to dignity in a segregated world. Now, the challenge is to use STEM as a pathway to dominance in a digitized one. The scoreboard has changed, and so must the game. For every hour spent on a basketball court, a track, or a field, there should be an equal hour at a computer, in a lab, or under a microscope. Not because sports don’t matter, but because the future does. To win this century, African America must love the pursuit of knowledge more than the pursuit of applause. Its children must learn to compete not just on the field — but in the lab, the boardroom, and the data center. Otherwise, the highlight reels will continue to roll, but the ownership of the next generation’s wealth and innovation will belong to someone else.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.

VentureX & The Biotech Boom: Lessons in Innovation Strategy for HBCUs from UTMB’s Institutional Pivot

“The future is not a place we are going. It is one we are inventing.” — John Schaar

While many HBCUs still seek validation in a PWI-centered research ecosystem, the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) is doing something more audacious: redefining the rules of engagement. With its inaugural VentureX Summit, UTMB isn’t merely seeking grant money—it’s building an innovation economy. And HBCUs, if bold enough, could do the same.

In a summer dominated by political unrest and macroeconomic uncertainty, the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) in Galveston, Texas, quietly launched what may prove to be one of the most strategically significant higher education events of the decade. The VentureX Summit, hosted on July 17, 2025, marked UTMB’s formal entrance into the growing arena of translational innovation—a sector where science, venture capital, and state-backed institutional development converge to shape the 21st-century economy.

For HBCUs, often relegated to the margins of federal and philanthropic investment in research, the implications of UTMB’s maneuver are profound. Not because UTMB is a peer—it isn’t. But because it offers a roadmap.

UTMB President Dr. Jochen Reiser didn’t mince words in his summit address. Education, research, and patient care were no longer enough. A “fourth pillar”—innovation—was now essential to institutional longevity, impact, and sovereignty. By formally integrating innovation into UTMB’s strategic framework, the institution is doing something few public universities in the South have dared: turning research into economic infrastructure.

This isn’t a rebranding exercise. It’s a full-throated shift in power orientation. UTMB’s Office of Technology Transfer has been reborn as the Office of Innovation & Commercialization, while the Life Science Incubator, adjacent to its research facilities, is being marketed as a landing zone for biotech startups, investors, and licensing agents alike.

Compare this with the strategic inertia found at most HBCUs. While many tout research agendas, few have even minimal infrastructure for commercialization. Fewer still think in terms of venture scalability or intellectual property portfolios. UTMB’s pivot exposes this gap—not as a deficiency of talent, but of institutional courage and vision.

The VentureX Summit focused heavily on kidney therapeutics—a seemingly narrow domain until you recognize that kidney disease costs the U.S. healthcare system nearly $130 billion annually, and disproportionately affects African Americans.

UTMB highlighted three major innovations during the summit: suPAR science, a biomarker-driven immune research platform that reframes the way inflammation and chronic disease are treated; anti-miR-17 for ADPKD, a therapy targeting polycystic kidney disease, recently acquired by Novartis; and Atacicept, a biologic aimed at IgA nephropathy, another major kidney condition with limited treatment options.

Each of these originated at UTMB and moved through stages of clinical validation, patent protection, startup spin-out, and either acquisition or venture partnership. The fact that these stories are not one-off flukes but institutionalized outputs is a direct result of UTMB’s realignment around innovation.

For HBCUs with schools of pharmacy, biology, or public health—particularly those serving communities with high chronic disease rates—this is a flashing neon signal. Owning the intellectual property that treats your community’s disease burden is not just good science. It’s power. It’s capital. It’s destiny.

A painful truth: HBCUs receive less than 1% of NIH research funding. The reasons range from grant-writing disparities and institutional size, to deeper systemic racism in peer review and proposal evaluation.

But what the VentureX Summit revealed is that institutions no longer need to center their R&D portfolios on NIH alone. The venture capital ecosystem—especially in biotech—is beginning to bypass the traditional federal-funding pipeline. Startups and scientists are courting angel investors, family offices, and strategic pharma partnerships earlier than ever.

This trend is significant for HBCUs because it decentralizes capital—opening doors beyond federal gatekeeping; rewards translational impact over pedigree; and allows for mission-aligned ventures—especially in diseases like diabetes, hypertension, and sickle cell that disproportionately affect African Americans.

Imagine a Howard University or Xavier University of Louisiana spinout that secures $5 million in seed capital to develop a culturally tailored mental health AI app. Or a consortium of HBCU researchers patenting an algorithm for early-stage dementia detection among Black elders. With the right infrastructure—IP management, deal-flow coaching, investor networks—this is no longer fantasy. It’s overdue.

That UTMB chose to host VentureX in Galveston, a city more often associated with hurricanes than high finance, is symbolic. It was not at the Texas Medical Center, nor at the flashier campuses of Austin or Dallas. Instead, UTMB used the summit to stake Galveston as a regional biotech innovation node, a move that builds on Houston’s recent success as a Brain Capital hub with Rice University and the Texas Medical Center Innovation Institute.

For HBCUs, particularly in the South, this strategy is critical. The clustering of biomedical and tech innovation around coastal cities like Boston, San Francisco, and Seattle has created access and visibility challenges. But regional clustering, especially when supported by state policy and university systems (as in Texas), creates a new terrain—one that Southern HBCUs like Meharry, Tuskegee, Florida A&M, or Prairie View A&M could dominate.

The key is not just research. It’s the integration of policy, capital, and narrative—what UTMB has shown is possible.

Let’s imagine that a group of HBCUs—say, North Carolina A&T, Howard, Jackson State, and Xavier—joined together to create an annual Black HealthTech Innovation Summit.

Its components could mirror VentureX: showcasing translational research in diabetes, maternal health, cancer, and neurodegeneration; pitch competitions where researchers and student-founders present to Black-owned VCs, foundations, and corporate venture arms; investor speed networking to build relationships beyond the conference walls; and policy roundtables with state legislators to promote technology transfer tax incentives and university IP protections.

This could be rotated annually among campuses, forming the basis of a HBCU Tech Transfer Consortium, modeled after the University of California’s system-wide innovation strategy or Texas’s CPRIT (Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas) fund.

Beyond optics, such a summit would provide a platform to rewrite the power structure of Black health, wealth, and innovation. It would signal to both the federal government and philanthropic sector that HBCUs are not just asking for funding—they are offering investable opportunity.

One of the less discussed but perhaps most important takeaways from UTMB’s summit was the sheer willingness to claim space in the innovation economy. While other universities remain passive, waiting for “innovation” to emerge organically, UTMB made clear that innovation is a designed outcome, not an accidental one.

This is where many HBCUs fall short. The fear of failure, of overreach, of stepping outside the traditional academic role, looms large. But UTMB’s leadership—and the state of Texas—are demonstrating that academic institutions can be architects of economic infrastructure, not just participants.

This is a mindset shift.

For HBCUs to replicate UTMB’s success, they must invest in tech transfer offices staffed with professionals who understand patents, licensing, and venture capital—not just compliance officers; build research parks and incubators that bridge the university with startup ecosystems; champion internal innovation competitions where faculty and students propose scalable solutions to community problems—with funding and follow-up; and cultivate industry partnerships that go beyond recruiting to include co-development and revenue-sharing IP agreements.

The VentureX Summit offered a model of regional self-determination wrapped in a biotech suit. But for African American institutions, it carries heavier implications. Innovation, in this context, is not just about research prestige. It’s about ownership, equity, and the future of Black health and wealth.

Just as land ownership, education, and voting rights were once the battlegrounds of civil rights, ownership of innovation ecosystems must become a new frontline. Because if we are not at the table—writing the patents, launching the startups, leading the trials—then we will once again find ourselves as the subject, not the author, of the future.

HBCUs must now ask: Are we ready to hold a summit of our own? Or will we remain an afterthought in the innovation economy we helped build?

From Classrooms to Cleanrooms: What HBCUs Must Do to Compete with PWIs in Deep Tech and Semiconductor Innovation

“A lot of kids growing up today aren’t told that you can be whatever you want to be. I am living proof you can do that. If you have the talent and the passion, you can build the future.” – Mark Dean, Black IBM engineer and inventor who co-created the personal computer and holds three of IBM’s original nine PC patents

In late June 2025, HEXAspec—a Rice University spinout—captured a $500,000 National Science Foundation (NSF) Partnership for Innovation grant for its breakthrough work in thermal management for GPUs. In a tech world grappling with the environmental and efficiency challenges of artificial intelligence (AI) and high-performance computing, the achievement turned heads across academic, investment, and scientific communities alike. Yet amid the applause lies a hard truth: not one HBCU was remotely close to competing for that same prize. Not because HBCUs lack talent, but because they lack the systemic infrastructure to harvest, incubate, and capitalize on that talent.

The chasm between HBCUs and predominantly white institutions (PWIs) in deep tech commercialization is as wide as it is worrisome. Deep tech—defined by transformative innovation in areas like semiconductors, quantum computing, and climate technology—requires long-term capital, robust research infrastructure, and high-trust, high-dollar partnerships with government and industry. These are precisely the things HBCUs have historically been denied or underinvested in. The question now is not whether HBCUs can catch up—but whether they will prioritize institutional shifts necessary to stop losing by default.

The Innovation Economy: The New Gateway to Power

Today’s innovation economy is no longer driven by consumer startups hawking mobile apps. Instead, it is being shaped by semiconductors, AI infrastructure, clean energy technologies, and advanced materials. These domains form the core of what the Department of Commerce calls “national critical capabilities”—a short list of sectors that will dictate U.S. competitiveness in the coming century.

The federal government, through the CHIPS and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and NSF initiatives like the Engines program, has made clear where it will direct its attention—and money. However, most of that funding has flowed to elite PWIs like MIT, Stanford, and Rice. Why? Because those institutions have built systems that convert faculty research into startups, license technologies to Fortune 500 companies, and aggressively pursue government grants through dedicated offices with seasoned staff and alumni connections.

HBCUs, by contrast, often find themselves trapped in subsistence mode—juggling shrinking state funding, donor droughts, and outdated infrastructure. Even when they do produce brilliant scientists and engineers, they are often siphoned off by PWIs, venture capital firms, or federal labs where their IP contributions enrich other institutions.

The goal for HBCUs is not just to get a slice of the pie—it is to own the bakery.

Why HBCUs Are Losing in Deep Tech (And How To Fix It)

1. No Institutionalized Commercialization Pathways

Rice University’s HEXAspec didn’t win a grant because of luck. It emerged from the university’s Liu Idea Lab for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (Lilie), which exists solely to help faculty and students translate research into viable companies. Most HBCUs do not have such a lab—or even a dedicated Office of Technology Transfer.

To compete, HBCUs must institutionalize commercialization in their mission. This means establishing:

  • Internal seed funding mechanisms for promising research
  • Technology transfer offices with experienced patent lawyers and startup advisors
  • Accelerator programs targeting deep tech verticals
  • Alumni angel networks to fund spinouts

Without these, ideas will remain trapped in the lab—and the economic fruits will go elsewhere.

2. Lack of Research Infrastructure in Key Industries

Semiconductors, materials science, and energy storage require state-of-the-art labs, cleanrooms, and expensive machinery. These are multi-million-dollar commitments most HBCUs currently lack. But waiting for philanthropy or state generosity to fund them is a losing strategy.

Instead, HBCUs should pursue regional consortia to co-own such infrastructure. For example, a Deep South Semiconductor Consortium could bring together Jackson State, Tuskegee, Southern University, and Prairie View A&M to jointly invest in fabrication labs, wafer testing facilities, and AI research clusters. Land-grant HBCUs have both the land and the federal designation to attract such funding—if they are organized and bold.

3. Underleveraged Alumni Networks

MIT alumni fund startups before most even have a name. At HBCUs, alumni often wait for a call to contribute to scholarships or athletic departments. There is little systemic cultivation of alumni as early-stage investors, strategic partners, or board members in research spinouts.

This must change. Institutions like Howard, Morehouse, and NC A&T should be grooming alumni with industry experience to invest in campus spinouts. HBCU endowments should allocate a small percentage to internal venture capital—seeding their own companies instead of investing in white-led VC funds that ignore Black founders.

4. Faculty Incentives and Sabbaticals

Many HBCU faculty juggle overwhelming teaching loads, with little time or incentive for research commercialization. Unlike PWIs, where professors routinely take sabbaticals to commercialize research or sit on startup boards, HBCUs rarely support such flexibility.

Presidents and provosts must restructure faculty contracts to reward commercialization, encourage patent filings, and support teaching reductions for faculty leading deep tech ventures. Faculty must become institutional entrepreneurs, not just employees.

Federal Funding Alone Won’t Save Us

Yes, HBCUs have been historically underfunded. Yes, they face structural racism. But federal funding, when it comes, should meet us halfway—not pull us from the basement. Competing for NSF grants requires grant writers, internal review committees, and aggressive outreach. When Rice University wins NSF money, it’s because the institution has a playbook.

HBCUs need a playbook. The White House’s Initiative on HBCUs can fund technical assistance centers focused on grant acquisition, proposal design, and intellectual property strategy. These centers should live at HBCUs, not just be managed by consulting firms and retired PWI administrators with no stake in HBCU sovereignty.

Deep Tech is a Strategic Asset. HBCUs Must Treat it as Such.

In 2025, global supply chains are being rewritten. Semiconductor control is no longer just an industry issue—it is national security. Nations are forming tech alliances. Cities are building innovation districts. And investors are backing companies with decade-long R&D timelines because the rewards are generational.

HBCUs must enter this arena with the same clarity and urgency as any geopolitical actor. The institutions that helped engineer Black America’s ascent during segregation must now help engineer Black America’s role in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. That means going far beyond DEI rhetoric and focusing on institutional capital, not just human capital.

What a Competitive HBCU Ecosystem Could Look Like

Imagine this:

  • Howard University launches a Deep Tech Lab with funding from Black-led venture capital firms.
  • NC A&T, already a top producer of Black engineers, builds a quantum computing facility co-owned with MIT Lincoln Lab, with graduates flowing into DARPA-backed projects.
  • Fisk University, with its elite physics tradition, leads a semiconductor materials initiative funded through an HBCU Engines grant from NSF.
  • HBCU United, a new consortium of 30 HBCUs, pools $100M in alumni capital to invest in research commercialization, faculty sabbaticals, and patent acquisition.

This is not fantasy. It is simply the result of what happens when HBCUs start behaving like institutions of power—not institutions asking for inclusion.

Compete or Be Colonized (Again)

The innovation economy is not just about startups and science. It is about who will own the 21st century. If HBCUs do not build internal capacity to compete in the deep tech space, they will become labor farms—training brilliant Black minds who will go on to build white wealth.

Rice University’s HEXAspec is a signal — and a threat. It tells us what’s possible. The question is whether HBCUs will treat it as a wake-up call or another missed opportunity.

In the words of Frederick Douglass, “Power concedes nothing without a demand.” It’s time HBCUs demand more—of themselves and of the systems they are meant to challenge. The lab coats may be new, but the game remains the same: compete, or be colonized.

Disclaimer: This article was assisted by ChatGPT.