1. Christiane Spitzmueller Erika Henderson
ADVANCE
Effects of Faculty Search Toolkit implementation and Search Chair Workshops on Faculty Job Applications 2016/2017
Mark Clarke
Christiane Spitzmueller Erika Henderson
Results of Search Toolkit Implementation and Search Chair Workshops 2016/2017

2. DIVERSITY SEARCH COMMITTEE TRAINING
Past approach:
Ad posted on professional website with EOS-compliant language
Applications initially ranked, then candidates ranked in an impression-based system
Current approach:
Ad posted with diverse publications and organizations using encouraging diversity language
Bring in a broader pool of applicants ranked by rubric-based approaches
Changed how we conduct faculty searches
rubric-based approach - screens faculty applications
specific set of performance-related criteria
evidence based, and demonstratively results in the hiring of more qualified and more diverse applicants.
Providing databases of diversity-oriented professional associations for a host of disciplines, faculty recruitment toolkit, policy and resources to facilitate dual career hires
What happens after we hire candidates and they attain tenure?

3. SEARCH COMMITTEE TRAINING – Attended by 175 Faculty during Fall 2016
ITEM
STRONGLY AGREE
AGREE
DISAGREE
STRONGLY DISAGREE
NOT SURE
The recruitment toolkit provides practical information that can be used by faculty to enhance the search committee process
68%
26% 1% 4% 0%
The presenters provided an appropriate level of detail for each topic
52%
33% 9%
The information was presented in a logical manner
65%
25%
As a result of today’s training, I have a better understanding of how to address specific issues that may arise during the faculty search process
57%
36% 2%
Overall, today’s training was worthwhile
60%
30% 6%
Add number of participants in search committee training = 175

4. So – is it working?
Method: Collected data through OJS on all TT faculty applications during the 2016/2017 recruitment cycle
Recruitment research supports that about 8% of variance can be accounted for by individual recruitment practice components (Collins, C. J., & Han, J. (2004). Exploring applicant pool quantity and quality: The effects of early recruitment practice strategies, corporate advertising, and firm reputation. Personnel Psychology, 57(3), )
Analyzed job applications across STEM/SBS/Other
Determine % changes in women applicants
Determine % changes in underrepresented applicants

5. Overall applications per position are up by 21% - significant improvement despite targeted hire searches in SBS

6. Overall: Improved number of URM applicants per position
19% more applications by African Americans
4% fewer Hispanic applicants total
Increase in multiracial and non-disclosures

7. STEM overall applications increased substantially in the last year – 32.7% increase
Improved recruitment processes have resulted in significant uptick in overall STEM TT faculty applications

8. STEM: 24% increase in Applications by African Americans, 46% increase Hispanic Applicants
Progress through diversity oriented search tools, improved recruitment language in ads

9. Social and behavioral sciences: No movement due to targeted hiring 2016/2017
Predominantly targeted hires – substantially lower applications than in other years
Will re-evaluate this coming year

10. Non-ADVANCE areas: 62% increase in applications per position
Larger number of position postings than last academic year
Applications per position have increased by 62%
Although Hispanic Applicants per Position declined slightly, large uptick in applications submitted by African Americans
33% increase in submissions per position by African Americans

11. Gender and Recruitment – substantial applicant pool increases
Other disciplines: applications for men went up by 80%, application by women went up by 27%
In STEM, 33% more women and 35% more men applied for positions

12. Implications Continue to engage in recruitment best practices
Communicate success to stakeholders
Develop behavior-based interviewing methods to augment quality of site visit experiences
Measure quality of site visit experiences for URM candidates to provide feedback and learn from best practices