Wednesday, January 12, 2011

 

Diversity Hiring

I’m on the horns of a dilemma here, and I’m hoping that crowdsourcing the problem might lead to a sustainable solution. Wise and worldly readers, I’m counting on you!

Like many colleges, my college's faculty does not reflect the demographics of either its students or its community. Bluntly, it's a lot whiter. The disparity is largest on the faculty side.

The Board of Trustees has made a public commitment to diversifying the college. However, opportunities for hiring are fewer and farther between now than they once were, with the recession-driven cuts in state aid. The pincer movement of 'a drive to diversify' and 'a paucity of openings' means that the college has to take a serious shot at candidates from underrepresented groups whenever it can. That’s proving harder than one might expect.

The teaching load here is typical for community colleges in this region, which is to say, it's not for the faint of heart. And while the benefits are good, the starting salaries won't blow the doors off.

Even in this economy, we've had trouble recruiting minority faculty. We've made offers, but we keep losing out to places with higher salaries or lower teaching loads. Minority candidates are in much higher demand than others, so even in this market, they can command offers far sweeter than what we can muster. And faculty salaries here are determined by a pretty mechanistic collective bargaining agreement.

We've exhausted the low-hanging fruit. We advertise in venues likelier to attract minority applicants. We have racially mixed search committees. We screen job posting language carefully to ensure that nothing in them creates unnecessary barriers. The low-cost, nonconflictual stuff is already done.

Which means, in practice, that the available options are few.

One is to simply make the salary offers the contract allows, and to hope for the best. When we get turned down, turn to whomever else is available. It's legally clean, but in practice, it makes an already very white faculty that much whiter. It winds up placing a value of 'zero' on diversity, with predictable results.

Another would be to go above the grid and simply endure the grievances. If paying an extra, say, 5k will make the difference, and the Trustees have determined that the difference is worth making, then so be it. The advantage of this approach is that it stands a greater chance of actually recruiting people. The disadvantages, though, are several. For one, it virtually guarantees protracted legal battles with the union. For another, it stirs up resentments that tend to get ugly fast. And at a really basic level, it raises the question of just what, exactly, the candidate is being paid for.

The union, of course, would prefer that we simply raise the entire salary scale until the whole thing is high enough that we can recruit without premiums. But that's a budget buster, and it would actually freeze the existing imbalances in place. It's both unaffordable and unhelpful. It's a nonstarter.

(And please, don't start in with the usual “bloated administrative salaries” crap. We've already shed administrators, and I'm looking now at the fourth consecutive year at the same salary.)

Which means that the second option is rapidly becoming the preferred one. Without it, recent results have shown, the racial gaps will simply continue to grow.

But if we go with the second option, the question of magnitude becomes real. So, wise and worldly readers, is there a reasonably elegant and sustainable way to improve our minority hiring results within the confines of limited resources and a vigilant union? I’d honestly like to know.

Comments:
Does diversity necessarily have to be about race? You've tried to do it that way, and it doesn't seem to be working. So try expanding your notion of diversity. Do you have faculty from all regions of the country? Any that are foreign-born? Any who grew up very poor or very rich? Any with military experience? If not, you could have some notable blind-spots as an organization.

Diversity can have a lot of dimensions if you let it.
 
"Underrepresented groups"--a distressing phrase suitable for Lebanon or some dim corner of the Balkans.... The Board of Trustees ought to be looking for tiptop teachers, period, even if they all turn out to be a bunch of old white guys.
 
Have you discussed the issue with the union? Does the union have a commitment to diversity? Can you use that to convince them to accept a salary differential?

I grew up hearing my Dad discuss union negotiation (he was management), and they seemed pretty able to negotiate when they saw the members' benefit and didn't approach things in a totally adversarial way.
 
Totally unhelpful comments, guys.

Clearly the Trustees (and everyone else in the world) means a more racially and gender-diverse faculty.
 
Okay ~ let me help you out here. 1. I don't know where, geographically, you are talking about. That makes a difference relative to your ability to attract ethnic minority candidates. (I am assuming that is your reference in using the term "diversity"). If you are in a culturally white area, there are only two reasons I would come there. (a) Does the benefit of the 5k balance the social & emotional cost of uprooting myself and working in that environment? (b) Would my experience in that environment translate into opportunities elsewhere - let's say 3 years down the road.
If the answer to each is "no" or "not likely" then I am not coming. Makes sense?
So you are left with another option: Search within an environment, similar to the one you're in, where the population you are looking for (Blacks, Latinos) are already acculturated. They've grown-up in the environment.
3. You have differences (not the point of discussion here) between African Americans and Africans, or African Americans and Caribbeanos. Africans and Caribbeanos are more readiliy acculturated or "acculturable" (See - I made up a word) than African Americans. Why, is not our point of discourse here. You target that population.
Finally, it is according to what you want them to teach. There are readied populations in certain areas...there are invisible populaltions in other areas of academia. There are certain areas of academic that we have not yet discovered, been advised of, engaged in...blah, blah, blah.
Good Luck.
Hey ~ I'm going to take this blog and attach it to mine...okay!
 
Academics typically aren't all that motivated by money anyway, are they? They are passionate about their subjects, and want to work in those subjects. Can you try to offer more opportunities to do that, when you're making a special effort to recruit someone?

Like -- can you give them a chance to either teach a course in their specialty? You'd have to make it count for some kind of useful credit or no students would take it, but would it really be such a terrible thing if some students got their English Lit "out of the way" with a course on 17th century poetry instead of a broad survey course? It wouldn't have to hurt your academic quality and reputation -- might actually enrich it -- and would probably go a lot further than $5,000 with a lot of academics, not just minorities.

Alternatively, or maybe as well, can you recruit diversity candidates by emphasizing "diversity studies"? Liberal arts colleges these days have departments of women's studies and African American History and so on. Not many community colleges do, I'd imagine. Something like that could really set you apart in the hiring market, and if it were tailored to the community you serve, it could offer real value to the students as well. I know creating a whole new department might be administratively unfeasible, but even a "center" or some kind of "working group"..?
 
How about holding the old white dudes accountable to actually perform their job? A few semesters of that and they might actually retire.

Your only other option is to offer a bonus for skin color? Unbelievable!
 
That stray "either" in my comment was meant to be "either teach a course or do some kind of research?" I know community colleges aren't research institutions, but everyone who's got a PhD got it by doing research, so it's obviously something that they enjoy. Any kind of support you could offer for doing any research at all might be a big selling point with some people.

But I know time off for research might be even harder to get the union to agree to than extra money, and might be just as hard on the budget, which is why I deleted that suggestion from my original post. Still, maybe you could think of something, even just permission to miss a few days of class to attend a conference once a year..?
 
This doesn't answer your question but I have to ask is the push for diversity in the faculty because your current faculty due to their similarities produce woefully unprepared students. Are the "old white dudes" so bad at their jobs that your retention and graduation rates have hit rock bottom? Or is it because it looks better to have someone with a different skin color or gender on the rolls. If the "old white dudes" aren't hacking it and really doing a disservice then find a way to get rid of them. It seems though that that is not the case. It also seems that having a union is more trouble than its worth. I personally wouldn't teach at a school where I was required to join one. Maybe that's part of the reason why too.
 
Some of these responses are unbelievable, I have to say. What century is this?

Has the Union been approached with the information you have just given us here and asked if they would consider waiving grievances in certain cases or, better yet, working with administration to craft a plan that will increase diversity and protect worker's rights? I know that my union would be open to doing something like that as part of our broader efforts to increase diversity and equity.
 
So, you're telling me that you would have two candidates, equally qualified, to do the same work, and offer those candidates differing salaries (or any other set of special preferences) based on race / ancestry.

How is this situation different than having two people come up to board a bus, pay the same fare, and force one to sit in the back of the bus because of race / ancestry?

I am appalled at the blatant racism being posited in the name of ‘diversity.’
 
Do you have an objective criteria "weighting" used in your screening or hiring decisions? Something like Phd = 5 points, published papers = 1 pt each, diverstiy hire = 20 points, etc. up to a sum total? It's rigging the game, but if it makes all your candidates into acceptable hires, then you can just go down the list until someone accepts.
 
Can we all just pretend Dean Dad didn't mention diversity and just asked "What can I do to hire a desirable candidate for whom there is a lot of competition when I can't offer more money?"

If you don't think there is anything desireable about a minority candidate by virtue of the fact that they're a minority (really? even if nearly all your other professors are white men and hardly any of your students are? no value to role models who look like you and come from your background? no value in changing the culture so that those students actually have more opportunities?) that's a separate discussion.

The practical question Dean Dad asked really doesn't have anything to do with race, and it's important.
 
Do you have any actual data as to why minority candidates are turning you down? Is it because they aren't being paid enough, or because people like some of the above commenters are on the committees?
Are you sure adding more money won't be a huge red flag? i.e. "this place is so desperate to hire minorities, any minorities, that they have to bribe them... what kind of people need to do that and what kind of friction will it cause when I arrive there? Will I have to worry about pathetic jackhats who are quite sure there is no value to diverse people and who resent me in the extreme for making more than them?

If you can't raise salary, is reducing the teaching load incompatible with the union?
Unless your system gives a lot of weight to admin and service work, a minority candidate on a campus with few minorities is often aware there will be additional administrative burdens and very little credit for them (i.e. pressure to serve on committees so there is a minority presence, more active advising of students who would appreciate a minority role model...). Indeed, that's part of why they are brought on board.
It seems like it's perfectly fair to expect them to teach less if you can't pay them more. Maybe the union will see it that way if you write those additional responsibilities into the official role, instead of just expecting them to do it for extra credit?
 
Pretty brave, Dean Dad, asking for constructive comments on such a charged issue on the open internet. I'm generally impressed by the quality of comments here, but still, you're opening the floor to those with the strongest opinions to shout the loudest...

From either side, affirmative action/ diversity hiring is always an issue of fairness. In general, one side determines their version of 'fair' but focusing only on a subset of the problem and drowning out everything else.

Looking at a more complete picture, 'fair' is never going to be attainable for everyone involved, especially since the equation has to balance individual fairness against fairness at the institutional and cultural levels.

One thing I enjoy about your writing is that time and time again you talk eloquently about having to make decisions in the real world under real, conflicting constraints. Only idealized versions of the world allow idealized solutions, so please don't listen too closely to my fellow commenter who may ignore that.

At least you're asking the right questions and making an honest attempt. Kudos and good luck.
 
things must be incredibly different at community colleges.

i got my degree in engineering, and i would say 90% of my professors within mathematics/engineering were all asian or indian, and aroudn 60% of the grad students in engineering were asian or indian (undergrad was mostly white).

i would say that less than 1/3 of the professors i had in college were white, and less than 1/4 were white males.

i love how diversity is more important than talent
 
"What can I do to hire a desirable candidate for whom there is a lot of competition when I can't offer more money?"

Oh honey, I feel your pain. We went through this in our department – three times we tried to hire people for one position and every single time the final candidate rejected our offer because of the cost of housing v. what we could pay. We learned an important lesson from that – recruit locally or from high cost locales where candidates have had a chance to get over housing stickershock.

Finding candidate - Look at your adjunct pool (hold your nose and do it! I know you don't like this approach but it might help!) If these “minority” folks are not in your adjunct pool, find them and recruit them to it. Look for underemployed spouses of people who have jobs in the local area and recruit them. Instead of offering extra pay, try finding a staff position that would work as a spousal hire (would work MUCH BETTER than any increase in pay you could come up with and would make the faculty member much more likely to stay.)

My favorite: Create a local pool of minority candidates with a declared interest in teaching at a CC or minority serving institution - in the sciences, this means apply for a NIH K12 grant and partner with a local R1 to get minority postdocs teaching at your campus (do they have this in the social sciences and humanities?) In other words, apply for grant funds to create one year appointments for minority post-docs to teach at your school - ostensibly to broaden your students exposure to R1 people but actually to create a pool of folks that know and love your institution. Have a plan to support diversity hires with opportunities on-campus and underscore that support to people who come visit for interviews. Go to conferences for minority scholars and schmooze the pants off people (in science SACNAS, IRACDA). Host a conference for minority scholars and schmooze the pants off people. Offer to let faculty in your college go to a conference - if it deals with minorities and scholarship. Recruit minority teachers from R1 schools that are too far to commute from but close enough that the grad students might want to move to your area when they finish and offer them on-line courses to teach so that they get experience wth your institution. Sell your mission – talk about the help people can do for society and people trying to move up socioeconomically by working with your students.

Work with your housing department so that when people come to interview, you can offer them information about subsidized loans and housing assistance. Work with a bank or local credit union to talk to candidates about low cost loans for faculty. This is also worth more than salary in terms of real dollars.

Solving this problem will take time if you take the “build your own” approach but you strike me as the patient sort. These folks don't just arise fully formed from the forehead of Zeus - they are made over time and formed by their experience. Make your institution part of that experience. I think there are grant funds out there that can help you.
 
I'm going to have to chime in and ask about teaching load, since it's the part of the high load/low pay equation you didn't mention. Can you hire new people with a lower teaching load w/o generating grievances? If not, the best I've got is boondoggle. Make advising substitute 1-1 for teaching load (measured in classroom hours, which assuming that advising takes less prep time will reduce load), then give advising to minorities, on the premise that it's more important in one-on-one advising to be able to develop direct rapport with the student. A separate "minority advising center" you use for the same purpose might complicate things with the union less.
 
I'm assuming your current salary schedule has vertical steps for experience and horizontal columns for education. The lowest salaries are at the upper right-hand corner; highest salaries are at the lower left-hand corner.

An easy solution to your problem is to simply lop off a few of the beginning vertical steps on the salary schedule. This makes beginning salaries higher without busting the budget by raising all salaries.

I'm a red-eyed union guy, and I can't see why your union would object to this. A recent hire, someone on, say, step two of your current salary schedule would benefit because s/he'd be on step two of the newer and better salary schedule. Old guys like me wouldn't lose anything except possibly lower future pay increases (because the money pie for faculty will be larger so each faculty member gets less--and even this assumes that there's going to be money available for a pay raise).

While unions are certainly concerned about the here-and-now, we've also got a commitment to making things better for folks in the future. Higher starting salaries seem like a win-win situation to me.

Finally, one of the arguments we always use for higher salaries is that they're in the best interest of management because they affect the ability to attract and retain faculty. It's pretty clear that your school can no longer attract and retain desirable candidates.

--Philip
 
Oops.

The low numbers on a salary schedule are at the upper LEFT-hand corner, and the high numbers are at the lower RIGHT-hand corner.

Most faculty salary schedules I've seen have between 15 and 30 vertical steps and 5 to 8 horizontal columns.

--Philip
 
Instead of offering more $, can you put a clause in the contract stipulating that the candidate will have no more than a [specified] bare minimum of service expectations for the first three years? Diversity hires often get swamped by committee work, because all committees need, well, diversity. An ironclad "sorry, I'd love to but my contract won't let me" escape clause (even if temporary) might sweeten your deal for a job candidate.
 
Another fringe benefit is guaranteeing a subsidized spot for their child in the (hopefully on campus, education dept service learning) day care center. Minority hires want to know their kids can go to high quality but also diverse schools. And never underestimate the value of childcare as a fringe benefit. It also has the advantage of being very attractive to woman (who obviously are juggling a lot) minority hires.
 
I agree!! A bonus for race! Excellent idea and obviously the only alternative. Having been passed over because I was not "diverse" enough, this discussion is enough to sicken. The diverse person hired actually left for a "better" job 1 year after being hired.

Question: Is race the only diverse card at play here? What about age? What about religion?

Interesting article: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0DXK/is_5_16/ai_54668694/

Did someone say lawsuit? Did someone say winning lawsuit?

Professor Wins Reverse Discrimination Lawsuit
Black Issues in Higher Education, April 29, 1999

* 1
* 2
* Next

SAN FRANCISCO -- A lecturer denied tenure has been awarded $2.75 million for reverse discrimination after a college dean allegedly said a White man would be hired "over my dead body."

A Superior Court jury voted 11-1 in favor of Howard E. McNier, who is White, 51 years old, and who had been a full-time lecturer on hospitality and hotel management for five years at San Francisco State University's College of Business when a tenure-track position opened up in 1995.

McNier, who has a law degree and master's in business administration, claimed he was advised by the department chairwoman not to apply but did so anyway.

In April 1996, the department hired a Chinese citizen from Hong Kong who had a doctorate -- which McNier lacked -- but less practical experience, says Robert Jaret, McNier's attorney.

"There's evidence there was a mandate in the College of Business to hire recognized minorities over Caucasians," Jaret says. "Howard was precluded from the list of candidates solely because they wanted to hire a recognized minority."

A tenured business professor testified that Arthur Wallace, former dean of the College of Business, said he would refuse to consider White males for staff openings. Wallace, who is Black, was dean from 1993 to 1998.

McNier also was awarded $2.2 million in a unanimous verdict for retaliation, but a pretrial agreement limits the total award to the higher of the two. His suit claimed he lost teaching jobs and suffered a cut in salary after filing a discrimination complaint.

University officials maintained the claims had no merit.

"We are shocked, dumbfounded, deeply, deeply disappointed, and we are actively considering all of our options at this point," says university spokeswoman Ligeia Polidora.
 
SAN FRANCISCO -- A lecturer denied tenure has been awarded $2.75 million for reverse discrimination after a college dean allegedly said a White man would be hired "over my dead body."

A Superior Court jury voted 11-1 in favor of Howard E. McNier, who is White, 51 years old, and who had been a full-time lecturer on hospitality and hotel management for five years at San Francisco State University's College of Business when a tenure-track position opened up in 1995.

McNier, who has a law degree and master's in business administration, claimed he was advised by the department chairwoman not to apply but did so anyway.

In April 1996, the department hired a Chinese citizen from Hong Kong who had a doctorate -- which McNier lacked -- but less practical experience, says Robert Jaret, McNier's attorney.

"There's evidence there was a mandate in the College of Business to hire recognized minorities over Caucasians," Jaret says. "Howard was precluded from the list of candidates solely because they wanted to hire a recognized minority."

A tenured business professor testified that Arthur Wallace, former dean of the College of Business, said he would refuse to consider White males for staff openings. Wallace, who is Black, was dean from 1993 to 1998.

McNier also was awarded $2.2 million in a unanimous verdict for retaliation, but a pretrial agreement limits the total award to the higher of the two. His suit claimed he lost teaching jobs and suffered a cut in salary after filing a discrimination complaint.

University officials maintained the claims had no merit.

"We are shocked, dumbfounded, deeply, deeply disappointed, and we are actively considering all of our options at this point," says university spokeswoman Ligeia Polidora.
 
In terms of finding more applicants, I'd suggest trolling fresh University graduates. Many markets are still stuck for young Ph.D.'s who aren't aware of their options in the "real world."

Sweetening the pot is a very difficult challenge (while trying to keep costs low and without irritating the other faculty). There is a recent increase in two-year college research (at least in the sciences). Have you explored government research grants for minority faculty members? Minority faculty might be interested in side research that comes with a $5 or $10K bump as a "bonus."
 
Some of these responses are unbelievable, I have to say. What century is this?

Indeed! Race-based salary discrimination? Unbelievable.
 
I have to agree with the comment that urges you to 'grow you own.' As a student at a community college (and a Diversity Fellow), I can't tell you the number of students I've met who at some point in the semester say, "If I wasn't getting my business degree, I'd like to teach here."

Your college (and mine) should have a process that identifies these students and links them with HR and Staff Development programs and with faculty mentors.

Then when the students meet the application requirements, their participation in the college's 'grown your own' program has earned them a special note in their file or priority interviews or something TBD.

"From student to instructor" -- trustees love those kind of success stories. And it's actually good for the school to have people already familiar with the campus culture and student life.
 
Wow, these comments are even more . . . conservative . . . than usual.

To address a few:

1) It is not good for students to show up to campus and have nobody look like them in the upper echelons. It just isn't. So teacher "quality" is not an objective measure which can be measured and applied. Teachers are packages as human beings, and teams of teachers are just as much so.

2) Community colleges swing higher percentage minority than four-year colleges. That's the point of community colleges, to offer opportunities to disadvantaged groups. So CC's have even more of an incentive to seek out qualified minority candidates, to provide role models and institutional input.

3) This problem is not solvable, but not for the reasons you think.

Essentially, the reason salaries at CC's are so low is that some communities give social status to college professors and teachers, and members of those communities are willing to take enormous salary hits to enjoy that status. If you are hiring outside that community, you are no longer able to shaft your faculty, and so you're going to have to pay for their actual education level. As DD notes, this simply cannot be done. There is no way to square this circle without deceptive and discriminatory practices, such as reducing teaching loads through backdoor counseling practices, which won't work anyway, because you can't even advertise this.

This is a problem that cannot be solved as long as the adjunct problem exists. Salaries are just too low and working conditions too poor for people who haven't already talked themselves into getting screwed out of appropriate compensation for their talent and education.

The only thing you can do, DD, is calculate the cost of the inevitable EEOC lawsuit, compare it to the cost of bringing up salaries, and try to make the case that it's better to spend the money on faculty than on lawyers.
 
TL;DR: You can't base your salary range on white liberal guilt, service, and status and expect to hire lots of people who aren't guilty, service-oriented, status-interested white liberals.
 
All of that said, I do have one solution:

Explicitly drop the Ph.D. preference for minority candidates. You will suffer little to no loss in teaching quality and increase the size of your applicant pool. If you want to be clever about it, you could just drop the preference entirely, and happen to enjoy the results with one group of people more.

In a general sense, if you've got any hoops that are poorly correlated to teaching performance, this is an excellent reason to ditch them.
 
Having just re-entered the job market myself, I would say if the college offers to pay the minority candidates' travel expenses to the interviews, it could be a low-cost friendly gesture for out-of-state candidates.

Please allow me to borrow DD's forum to ask a question for those of you on hiring committees (unfortunately that's one of the committees I haven't served on): as a minority candidate with Ph.D. and quite a few years of combined adjunct/full-time experience at several CC's, would most CC at least put me on their interview list, in order to justify their diversity hiring?
 
What century, indeed! Reverse discrimination is hello discrimination. Will being a minority get on the interview list???? Play the cards you need to play.

My cc is chock full of veterans back from war. Do they see professors who "look" like them? Nah! Maybe we should hire those who have ptsd!

Cognitive and intellectual flexibility, dialectical and depth of thinking are correlated with years of college, not with having professors who are of the same . A college education contributes to acceptance of others' views, religions, race, etc.

All I can say is oi vey!
 
This might not apply to your particular situation, but:

Is there a particular skill (eg: fluency in spanish for a CC with a large hispanic student population) that figures into your salary calculations and is called out in your job posting? This might make the whole thing less about race/gender and more about a tangible advantage that person has that you can point to as a reason why they should get more money or whatever.
 
This is nice, but either you accept the current consensus that diversity in race and gender is, in and of itself, a positive -- or you don't.

Kate's trying to make a joke, but she's proving the point. How valuable would it be to the college to have some faculty or administration who have dealt with PTSD, either personally or professionally, in crafting policies that touch on Iraq War veterans? Sounds like you could prevent a few nasty problems that way.
 
You got jokes! I don't!! No joke! Diversity means more than race and gender. Much more. My Yiddisha nana taught me that back in the day, as my students say.
 
And what's wrong with a professor that doesn't look like the student? Isn't that student suppose to learn from others regardless of their difference?

Are students really that ignorant or is it that "liberal" administrators feel that students are bigots like themselves?
 
Target your alumni for networking and hiring.

As per your description, they're likely to be POC, which is what you want. And of course, they're already familiar with the school and the area. Every alumni who has an appropriate graduate degree should get a call--if not to offer them a job, then at least to ask for their help in finding faculty.

Even if you target alumni for adjunct positions you can always choose to groom them for full track.

I might note that this also will increase your tenure-tracked grads and will improve your stats.

If hiring your own seems too incestuous, find some other colleges nearby with the same issues, and arrange a degree of cross-pollination using each others' graduates.
 
I am appalled at the blatant racism being posited in the name of ‘diversity.’.

Ditto. I hope you get sued.
 
Most conservatives hope most colleges get destroyed, so that's not an interesting point of view. I'm sorry that the well-tanned people you don't like also get educated appropriately on your taxpayer dime, but you're just going to have to survive the horror of going to bed at night and waking up in a First World country. If that's not acceptable, there are plenty of other places which aren't.
 
"Isn't that student suppose to learn from others regardless of their difference?"

As an entitled, whiny white man -- have you ever been in a room where you were the only white person, and where the ordinary pattern of speech was not what you were used to?

And did you feel totally comfortable, with no culture shock whatsoever?

Really?
 
All of the conservative entitled whining about not being allowed to hurt people they don't like with impunity aside, this is still the problem:

TL;DR: You can't base your salary range on white liberal guilt, service, and status and expect to hire lots of people who aren't guilty, service-oriented, status-interested white liberals.
 
Punditus Maximus;

Chyunida!

Wo dangran shang ke zhi yo wo yige baizhongren. Ye yo zhi yo wo gen bieda ren zhnag buyiyangde hwa.

Ni kandedong wo xiede?

Of course, I'll ask you if you understand what I just wrote; but I won't hold my breath.

You only seem to know how to "name call" when someone has a different opinion from your own. Now, that unfortunately is what passes for academic discourse thesedays.
 
Meh, beats conservative incapacity to read written English.

If you have that level of international background, then you are deeply familiar with culture shock and are just getting off on finding ways to make people who belong to groups you dislike fail. Which is fine! I just wish y'all would be more honest about it.

Heh, my captcha says "conshill"
 
I don't work in a union environment, so I don't know what will and won't fly, but here are a few strategies you could consider.

1) Consider other ways of sweetening the candidate's offer, other than salary. For instance, maybe you can offer a reduced teaching load for the first two years, or choice of teaching assignment. Or maybe you can offer them $10K in discretionary funds, for them to use for any work-related purpose (conference travel, etc.) -- call it a "Dean's Fellowship", if you want. Someone else suggested childcare, and that's a good one.

2) Be open to "target of opportunity" hiring for diversity hires. This is particularly effective in years when there is little or no hiring. If you tell a department chair "sorry, you aren't authorized to make any hires this year, we don't have budget for it... but if you find a strong diversity hire, come talk to me, and I'll work to open up a special target-of-opportunity slot for that particular person", how do you think the department chair is going to respond? I've seen this in my own department, and let me tell you, it works wonders in prodding a hiring committee to suddenly find some strong diversity candidates: you wouldn't believe how effective it is. Because, after all, if your choice is "I don't get to hire and grow my department" vs "I do get to make a hire and grow my department", well, I know which a pragmatic department chair is likely to choose. That's especially true in harsh financial times, like now, when there seems little prospect for growth and serious risk of downsizing. You'll have to hedge your wording when you get the word out and act discreetly, to avoid legal troubles, but I'm sure you can convey the idea.

3) Do you have any private donors who you could approach to set up a private funding source for supporting diversity hires? Is there any way to make that work?
 
Are your counselors, librarians, and Instructional Designers counted as faculty? If not, and if they are not as white as your instructors, then giving them faculty status might be a way to get better numbers (even if it doesn't actually "diversify" the pool of instructors.
 
When I was hired, I was privately told that I had little chance of being promoted, as for reasons of "equity" women were given preference. The fact that over 3/4 of those holding higher positions at the time were female led me to conclude that "equity" didn't mean what I thought it did.

(Since then, as the 'old guard' of males has retired, the upper echelons are about 85% female—but the policy is still in place. I guess "equity" means something different in the HR world.)
 
It is really hard to read many of the angry responses when you are the minority faculty candidate interviewing for faculty jobs. Depressing. The negative responses to an honest entry of a well intentioned administrator becomes one more way of sharing some sort of White anger. Count 1 to 10, think about what may inform his concerns. The country's demographics are changing but we are still in some for of apartheid. Count ... try to think beyond the way you were told things should be. Be empathic. May be this is part of the reparation. This administrator is searching for ways of making the faculty body look a bit more like the student body.
 
Wow...this is where we are in America today!

A lament that there are too many white men on the faculty because the women and minorities are in such heavy demand that the university cant afford their top dollar fee?

This is hilarious: white males are so desperate they are ready to work for less. Women and minorities can afford to play around with multiple job offers and demand top dollar for their time. And the real victim who needs additional help in all this is women and minorities?

From the way it works in my field (math), women will soon be able to demand a fee of $10,000 minimum to attend an interview.
 
Recruitment Software
Our application is not just an Application Tracking System (ATS) - it also provides the functionality of a Customer Relationship Management.

 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?