1. Recruitment and Diversity: current status and best practices Marlene Zuk Associate Vice Provost Faculty Equity & Diversity University of California, Riverside

2. Diversity and the University of California  Not about hiring quotas, or showing preference to particular groups  Allows the best use of our talent  Removing barriers and providing equal access and equal opportunity –Sometimes those barriers are subtle or subconscious

3. The importance of diversity: California Universities Consortium  “For each of our universities, diversity is integral to the achievement of excellence and enhances each institution’s ability both to accomplish its academic mission and to serve all the people of California and the nation.” May 19, 2006  Not an add-on, but part of what we do

4. Who is our focus?  Some variation by area, but generally we are concerned with: –Gender equity –Under-represented minorities:  African-American  Chicano/Latino  American Indian/Alaskan Native

5. What are our goals?  Faculty should represent the availability of qualified candidates from each group –So, for example, all departments are not expected to have a 50:50 sex ratio, or the same % of Latinos  We use federally-mandated data, obtained every year from the National Opinion Research Council –Based on number of Ph.D.s in each field  UCR statistics available from the Office of Faculty and Staff Affirmative Action (or from Marlene Zuk)

6. University of California President’s Task Force on Faculty Diversity Availability Pool for Ladder Rank Faculty

7. University of California President’s Task Force on Faculty Diversity Faculty Headcount 1989-2005

8. University of California President’s Task Force on Faculty Diversity Faculty Hiring vs. Availability 2000-01 to 2003- 04 UC hires women faculty below availability in all fields Assistant ProfessorsAssoc & Full Professors

9. University of California President’s Task Force on Faculty Diversity Faculty Hiring vs. Availability 2000-01 to 2003-04 UC hires URM below availability in some fields and above in others Assistant ProfessorsAssoc & Full Professors

11. What can we do?  Ensure that recruitment and hiring are fair and as unbiased as possible  Targeted recruitment is legal and desirable, even with Prop. 209; hiring preferences are not

12. Some myths about hiring and faculty diversity  “Faculty should reflect the composition of California, or Riverside, or UCR undergrads” –Hiring should reflect availability pool for each field –We are striving for equity, not favoritism

13. Some myths about hiring and faculty diversity (cont’d)  “We only use quality as a criterion for hiring. Adding diversity will therefore compromise quality.” –Quality can be hard to define, and can be applied differently to different groups  Unconscious biases influence our evaluations  Example 1: 147 heads of departments sent fictitious resumes, asked to suggest rank if candidate were to be appointed in their dept –Same resume given lower rank if had female name –Similar results for race, in other situations

14. Quality is subjective: the myth of pure merit (cont’d)  Unconscious biases influence our evaluations –Example 2: Evaluation of > 300 letters of recommendation for successful candidates in medical school positions (Trix & Psenka 2003)  letters for women were shorter  letters for men focused on research ability, letters for women on how hard they worked

15. Letters of recommendation: differences by gender  Most common semantic categories of objects of possessive phrases for women: –Her training –Her teaching –Her application  Most common semantic categories of objects of possessive phrases for men: –His research –His skills and abilities –His career  By this measure, women are portrayed more as students and teachers, while men are portrayed more as researchers and professionals.

16. Myths about hiring and faculty diversity (cont’d)  “Relatively few qualified women or minority candidates are available, and these are highly sought-after, so we are unlikely to recruit them.” –Although availabilities differ, in most cases we are not hiring faculty anywhere close to the proportion that are available –Data suggest that minorities are not sought-after  Ford Foundation minority postdocs: 89% had just one offer, 54% never approached by any institution for recruitment

17. Some myths about hiring and faculty diversity (cont’d)  “We are doing everything we can, so the situation is already the best it can be.”  “The problem is all due to older white men, so once they die/retire, things will automatically improve.” –Biases occur in everyone, regardless of gender/ethnicity –Hiring for many groups has been flat despite increased availability –Many institutions have made significant changes  UC Irvine: 14 of 28 hires in biological sciences over 3 years were women; women faculty went from 16.5% to 25.5%

18. Quality and Diversity  Hiring a more diverse faculty will improve quality, not compromise it. –Affirmative action brought objectivity to the hiring process, by requiring formal searches with advertisement and interviews  More heterogeneous groups have greater creativity, bring wider range of viewpoints to academic endeavor.  We cannot afford to ignore talent.

19. Search committees and job advertisement  Follow UC procedures (see Recruitment Toolkit)  Consider diversity from the beginning  Cast a wide net, with a broad description –More women and under-represented groups in the pool means greater likelihood of hiring

20. Generating the applicant pool  Advertise in your usual outlets (we can help)  Be proactive – have search committee members and others call up potential applicants and invite them to apply –Be sure to include assistant professors –Evidence suggests women stop looking once they have a job, men don’t  Such cherry-picking can greatly increase the number of qualified applicants without flooding the pool

21. Review of applications  Take enough time –At least 10 - 15 minutes per file –Martell 1991: Distracted evaluators under time constraints rated women lower than men for same written job performance; when less pressured, less biased  Make evaluation criteria explicit –Avoid the Supreme Court pornography approach –Consider qualification grid to help articulate goals  Not a narrow or rigid description of qualities (“must have published 7 papers in 2 years”), but a way to guard against falling back on biases

22. Interviews  Make sure everyone – search committee, faculty, graduate students – knows about appropriate and inappropriate questions  Ask all candidates similar questions  Use Recruitment Toolkit  Make information about family-friendly policies available to all candidates

23. Sources of help  Speakers in STEM fields  UC President’s Postdocs –Hiring incentives  Additional candidate funding  Diversity IC supplements  Spousal/partner accommodation –Notify me as soon as possible –Can help with on- and off-campus referrals, search waivers

24. Resources  Marlene Zuk –vpequity@ucr.edu vpequity@ucr.edu –2-3541  Office of Faculty and Staff Affirmative Action –affirmativeaction.ucr.edu/index.htm –Affirmative.Action@admin.ucr.edu Affirmative.Action@admin.ucr.edu  UCOP Faculty Diversity site: –www.universityofcalifornia.edu/facultydiversity/