Notes from Cathy Trower talk; Brooklyn College; 11-15-03
The highlights:
1.) “even if we don’t think we are biased, there’s a good chance that we are”;
2.) academic culture emphasizes values “congenial to a white, middle-class orientation”;
3.) women “are normed against males and trapped by sex-role stereotypes where masculine traits are favored over feminine”;
4.) an “accumulated disadvantage” for faculty of color is that they find that their teaching and scholarship don’t meet the requirements for tenure;
5.) “merit is socially constructed by a dominant coalition”;
6.) “improvement of society as well as advancement of knowledge” necessary for excellence in research;
7.) colleges should “require job candidates to demonstrate a commitment to furthering diversity on campus”;
8.) Among the “excuses” for colleges not enacting diversity agendas in hiring, arguments of affirmative action opponents; opponents of affirmative action will ignore all evidence contrary to their beliefs and just gather all evidence to support their view;
9.) Opponents of her ideas content with “20th century university”; need “21st century university.”
1.) Diversity law of the land—Supreme Court
2.) Diversity official college policy—Kimmich quote 9-16 Fac meeting—all Brooklyn faculty required to support diversity
3.) Problems of pipeline, academic culture, entrenched v. emergent interests block achievement of a diverse faculty
Pipeline: 51% PhDs 2002 were women; 7% Asian; 6% black; 5% Hispanic
Faculty as whole: 64-36 male
Assistant professors: 55-45 male
Full professors—79-21 male
These figures suggest that women are not rewarded for their tendency of doing more teaching and service, which they are often forced to do. [No mention of generational gap as possible explanation for fact that % of women faculty doesn’t equal % of women PhDs.]
14% faculty people of color
“many faculty of color in particular find the faculty experience to be marked by frustration and isolation”
why? Academic culture—“the values they emphasize are those congenial to a white, middle-class orientation” Menges and Exum 1983, p. 136.
in fact, multiple academic cultures:
--national system of higher education—belief that universities interested in knowledge production; collegiality coupled with autonomy;
--profession—research orientation, writing, autonomy, academic freedom, intellectual honesty and fairness;
--discipline—standards
--institution
--department
“academic values and norms can mask a great deal of bias and discrimination”
values lead to “reflecting pools”—faculties see themselves and that’s who they hire
“even if we don’t think we are biased, there’s a good chance that we are”
women and faculty of color have “accumulated disadvantages” for tenure
women:
1.) excluded from “old-boy” network;
2.) have fewer mentors;
3.) “are normed against males and trapped by sex-role stereotypes where masculine traits are favored over feminine”;
4.) teach more, serve on more committees, and spend more time with students, and therefore have less time for research
5.) publish less because of sex-role stereotyping and in part as matter of personal style;
6.) more likely to experience “negative consequences of tokenism”;
7.) familial requirements;
8.) subtle discrimination
faculty of color:
1.) overt racism—stereotyped as beneficiaries of affirmative action, pigeon-holed into study of minority topics [how does this fit with later endorsement of Sotello that colleges should manipulate job descriptions to ensure that minorities are hired?]
2.) higher teaching and service load;
3.) experience isolation and exclusion
4.) research often discredited, especially if on minority issues
5.) increased emphasis on “affective, moral, and civil developments”—want “ability to affect social change” and are not rewarded for doing so;
6.) negative unintended consequences of affirmative action;
7.) find that their teaching and scholarship don’t meet the requirements for tenure;
8.) represent their race or ethnicity in college committees and to students
Need to develop “21st century university”
“20th century university” “21st century university”
--emphasis on individual --emphasis on teams
--academic control and authority --research direction shaped by interaction between
researchers and users, research must be relevant to
current day affairs
--discipline-based --“problem and issue based”—“trans-disciplinary”
--local organizational knowledge --organizational diversity
--quality judged by peer review --broad-based quality control; work must have social
and economic impact
This change reinforced by “emergent” beliefs among newer faculty [doesn’t say how, if new faculty hired according to “reflecting pool” principle, all of these new faculty have completely different beliefs from older faculty]
Traditional views “Emergent views”
--confidentiality ensures quality --openness, equity, fairness, transparency
--secrecy allows bias to occur
--merit is objective --“merit is socially constructed by a dominant
coalition”
--merit is inherently subjective
--competition improves performance --cooperation, collaboration improves collective
performance, reinforces “collegiality and community”
--support and collaboration with senior faculty necessary
for success in the academy
--institutions should formalize mentoring for jr. Faculty
--research should be organized around --research should be organized around “problems”
disciplines --relevance, rather than rigor, should determine quality
--more than one way to evaluate research
--“improvement of society as well as advancement of
knowledge” necessary for good research
--quantity and quality of scholarship determines --teaching and service should pay off
tenure --“citizenship should mean more than self-advancement”
--life of the mind only --life of the mind and heart
Best practices—Sotello (AAC&U, 2002)
--create search committees committed to diversity and one that is itself diverse
--require search committees to undergo ‘diversity training’
--“require job candidates to demonstrate a commitment to furthering diversity on campus”
Why has it been difficult to achieve diversity in the academy?
1.) difficult to overcome the status quo
--“Is the tenure system . . . really central for women and faculty of color?—dates from 1915, founded by 400 elite white men at Johns Hopkins, reflects their culture attitudes
2.) denial that a problem exists—white males think women and minorities have equal opportunities
--stereotyping becomes a “programmed response”
--enough successful women and minorities that this “deflects attention” from the problem
--some people “sincerely express meritocratic and egalitarian beliefs”
3.) has to be some other explanation for the problem
--pipeline—but pipeline problem largely created by gender and racial biases in professorate
--child care
4.) excuses—and “underlying” excuses is “resentment against the issue being raised”
--“diversity is not always a top priority for many of us”
--opponents of affirmative action will ignore all evidence contrary to their beliefs and just gather all evidence to support their view
--hiring minorities actually raises the bar, because all have overcome far more hurdles than most white people
“our real values are often not the same as those we espouse”
“Traction for Brooklyn College”
1.) examine the literature
2.) consider what’s being done elsewhere
3.) collect data—cultural adjectives exercise—list three adjectives that describe values of faculty
4.) “identify excellence” and reward departments for “excellence” in diversity
5.) “dialogue with senior faculty about what kind of workplace they want”
6.) “reexamine” foundations of institution, and “redefine” excellence
--competition vs. collaboration
--independence vs. interdependence
--objective knowledge vs. subjective knowledge
--discipline-based approach vs. community-based approach
--basic research vs. how research is applied to the real world