Promoting Diversity but Striving for Excellence: Opening the ‘Black Box’ of Academic Hiring

Orupabo, Julia; Mangset, Marte

doi:10.1177/00380385211028064

Cited by 29 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the absence of a defined metric, the selection process is subjective in nature and biased. One can only begin to imagine the selection process as a “black box.” [ 43 ] Wright and Vanderford [ 44 ] drew attention to the need for transparency and highlighted university ranking as a powerful predictor in faculty search, further maintaining the robust social rank system. Our study is not associated with the intricacies of the selection process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If not all, most high-ranked institutions attest to taking on sensitive and complex topics on diversity, equity, and inclusion and stressing the need for DEI as part of their diversity recruitment plans. If DEI is premised on accommodating differences, ensuring impartial and fair processes from beginning to end, and then privileging graduates of elite institutions in the hiring process cements the logic to exclusion [ 43 ]. In this case, the logic of exclusion alludes to intentionally excluding the candidate pool in the initial screening process that does not fall under the auspice of the top 20 ranked, Ivy League, Tier 1, and top globally ranked institutions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic exclusion induced by institutional ranking in engineering faculty hiring: Introducing a cycle of winners and losers

Ermagun

Erinne

2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study empirically investigates exclusion induced by institutional ranking in engineering faculty hiring and introduces a cycle of winners and losers formed by privileging graduates of high-ranked institutions in the U.S. higher education system. We analyze and visualize academic origin (i.e., institutions faculty graduated from) and destination (i.e., institutions faculty are hired at) of 5,356 tenure-track faculty in four engineering disciplines of Chemical, Civil, Electrical, and Mechanical at the top 20 and bottom 20 of the top 100 engineering institutions according to the 2022 U.S. News & World Report. Our findings indicate that the hiring of engineering faculty in the U.S. higher education system is skewed in favor of graduates from high-ranked institutions, regardless of the discipline. Concerning each engineering discipline, 78% of electrical, 76% of chemical, 71% of mechanical, and 67% of civil engineering faculty of top 20 ranked institutions have academic origins in the top 20 ranked institutions. This hiring practice fosters inequalities by excluding qualified candidates and cementing the ranking system as the sole factor of academic quality. We bring attention to the pitfalls stemming from the exclusion in the U.S. higher education system, including (1) financial resources, (2) faculty and student resources, (3) selectivity and self-selection, and (4) geography. The cascading effect of the ranking practice is the unintended consequence of inaugurating a virtuous and vicious cycle, which creates a cycle of winners and losers that is difficult to break. High-ranked institutions easily dominate and maintain their ascendancy status in the ranking system as benefactors of the virtuous cycle. Low-ranked institutions are entrapped in the vicious cycle that makes it nearly impossible to (1) attract and retain both students and faculty, (2) secure external funding, (3) obtain resources for new programs, and (4) advance engineering research. Unless the U.S. higher education system is intent on squandering talent, confirming the belief that diversity is symbolic, and cementing the ranking system as the sole factor of academic quality, we recommend faculty hiring beyond the standard sociodemographic indicators and academic origins in hiring decisions. A proactive, open-minded, and neutral approach to the faculty selection process void of decision-making based on affinity should be the central tenet of the selection committee.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic exclusion induced by institutional ranking in engineering faculty hiring: Introducing a cycle of winners and losers

Ermagun

Erinne

2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The lack of diversity across all axes amongst university employees (including but certainly not limited to gender, race or disability), especially in academic and management posts, reflects prolonged systemic inequalities in policies and practices in Higher Education (Dowey et al, 2021;Orupabo and Mangset, 2021). Some efforts to improve recruitment, such as unconscious bias training, are a useful start but have limited evidence of material outcomes, and there are growing calls for more direct action (Cardel et al, 2020).…”

Section: More Considerate Recruitment Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Traversing the academic ladder as an early career researcher in earth and environmental sciences

Alderson¹,

Clarke²,

Schillereff³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is growing concern in Higher Education around job security, work-life balance and inequalities, and early career academics must make difficult trade-offs and life choices. Ample literature confirms that women navigating academia face additional challenges. Few studies have sought to connect contractual circumstances, employment priorities and their impacts on the life choices of individual academics. We report results from a survey exploring the experiences of 48 Early Career Researchers traversing the academic ladder in geomorphology and earth/environmental science and contextualise these findings by drawing on personal experiences and wider literature. Overall, we find evidence of multi-directional pressures that have materially negative effects on life choices, including concern amongst men and women that academic employment is a barrier to living where and with whom one may want to. The scale of precarity amongst survey respondents is stark in terms of years on fixed-term contracts (maximum 10), individual contracts held (maximum 14) and number of different institutions (maximum 6). Overall, women respondents opted to spend fewer years on precarious contracts, which will amplify the leaky pipeline and gender gaps at more senior levels. We also find that women put somewhat more emphasis on job security when applying for academic posts. Perceived institutional prestige was a low priority for the majority of respondents. We also find notable divergences between career advice given by more senior colleagues and the priorities of those seeking guidance. Our results furthermore infer that men were generally more satisfied by financial aspects of university employment. Drawing on input from survey respondents, we put forward a set of recommendations under four themes: improving policies on parental leave and flexible working; formalising and improving mentorship; transparency on pay and promotion; more considerate recruitment procedures. We believe these recommendations are within the scope of action by departments, laboratories and research groups.

show abstract

“…De tidlige feministiske tilnaermingene tilbyr viktige redskaper for å forstå de underliggende driverne bak skjevheter som ser ut til å overleve utallige forsøk på å kompensere og tilrettelegge for likestilt representasjon. Også nyere studier peker i retning av at den kjønnede arbeidsdelingen forklarer en god del av den manglende kjønnsbalansen i akademiske toppstillinger (se for eksempel Orupabo & Mangset, 2022;. Akademisk virksomhet krever mentalt rom og konsentrasjon som muliggjør kompleks tenkning».…”

Section: Kjønnsarbeidsdelingens Epistemiske Splittelseunclassified

Kjønn og akademia

Mangset¹,

Orupabo²,

Reisel³

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flertallet av studentene ved landets høyere utdanningsinstitusjoner er kvinner, og det er like mange kvinner som menn som tar doktorgrad. Likevel er over to tredeler av professorene ved landets universiteter og høyskoler menn. Hvordan kan vi forstå denne vedvarende kjønnsubalansen? Hva er det med akademia som gjør at kvinner faller fra på veien opp mot professornivå? Denne boken springer ut av Forskningsrådets BALANSE-program, et initiativ for å bedre kjønnsbalansen i norsk universitets-, høyskole- og instituttsektor. Forfatterne har samlet kunnskap og erfaringer fra prosjektene, og presenterer nye analyser og perspektiver knyttet til kjønn og akademia. Boken løfter frem kjønnsbalanseproblematikken og setter den inn i ulike kontekster. Tekstene inneholder både skråblikk, dilemmaer og nye perspektiver som vil være verdifulle for forskere, studenter og andre som engasjerer seg i spørsmål om kjønn og utdanning.

show abstract

Promoting Diversity but Striving for Excellence: Opening the ‘Black Box’ of Academic Hiring

Cited by 29 publications

References 27 publications

A systematic exclusion induced by institutional ranking in engineering faculty hiring: Introducing a cycle of winners and losers

A systematic exclusion induced by institutional ranking in engineering faculty hiring: Introducing a cycle of winners and losers

Traversing the academic ladder as an early career researcher in earth and environmental sciences

Kjønn og akademia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About