Workshop on Faculty Recruitment for Diversity and Excellence

1. Workshop on Faculty Recruitment for Diversity and Excellence ADVANCE Office of Faculty Development Strategies and Tactics for Recruiting to Improve Diversity and Excellence

2. Strategies and Tactics for Recruiting to Improve Diversity and Excellence Jackie Isaacs, Professor of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Chair Dan Danielsen, Professor of Law Jack Dennerlein, Professor of Physical Therapy Marjorie Platt, Professor of Accounting Darien Wood, Professor of Physics Kathrin Zippel, Professor of Sociology Erinn Taylor de Barroso, Assistant Director ADVANCE Office of Faculty Development Previous STRIDE members: George Adams, Mechanical & Industrial Engr.; Dana Brooks, Electrical & Computer Engr.; Agnes Chan, Computer and Information Sciences; Barry Chung, Counseling and Applied Educational Psychology; Max Diem, Chemistry and Chemical Biology; Luis Falcon, Sociology and Anthropology; Craig Ferris, Professor Psychology; Miriam Leeser, Professor Electrical and Computer Engineering; Ineke Marshall, Sociology and Anthropology, Criminal Justice; Ramiro Martinez, Professor Criminology and Criminal Justice; Carla Mattos, Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology; Sanjeev Mukerjee, Chemistry and Chemical Biology; Rajmohan Rajaraman, Professor Computer and Information Sciences; Mark Williams, Professor of Physics; Judy Hall, University Distinguished Professor of Psychology

3. Introductions

4. STRIDE Workshop Goals Participants will discuss and learn from each other… • How to improve the search process • Strategies to avoid implicit bias • Good practices for search committees

5. Agenda • Introduction • Activity: Highest risk for bias • Research on implicit bias • Activity: Effective practices • Neutralizing implicit bias • Activity: Take away • Evaluation

6. Word Recall bed, rest, awake, tired, dream, wake, snooze, blanket, doze, slumber, snore, nap, peace, yawn, drowsy, thread, pin, eye, sewing, sharp, point, prick, thimble, haystack, thorn, hurt, injection, syringe, cloth, knitting, nurse, sick, lawyer, medicine, health, hospital, dentist, physician, ill, patient, office, stethoscope, surgeon, clinic, cure

7. “Bias is something that has to be identified, acknowledged and mitigated against.” Yassmin Abdel-Magied

8. Unconscious bias can result from….. • Automatic patterns of thoughts that organize our social information and assumptions (schemas). • Reduce the amount of info to process • Reduce ambiguity • Allow people to act without effort • Make decisions faster, easier • Difficult to change even in light of new information. • Research shows that we all perceive and treat people based on our schemas about their social groups (race/ethnicity, economic and social status, gender, sexual orientation, disability, culture, academic institution, etc.). } We keep using them

9. Northeastern Current State of the Faculty 2013 to 2017 Total T&TT URM 2018 = 8%

10. Northeastern Current State of the Faculty2013 to 2017 *% of FURM and MURM within gender

11. Five Stages of a Faculty Search • Define criteria and qualities • Actively recruit a diverse pool • Review and identify the long/short list • Conduct an effective on campus interview • Recommend finalist(s) to Chair

12. Activity 2: Identify Challenges We all make decisions based on implicit associations. In some cases, this can result in bias. • Decide what stage your group believes is most “at risk” for biased interactions or outcomes (5 minutes) • Debrief with the larger group (10 minutes)

13. Research on Implicit Bias in Hiring/Evaluation Brochure

14. Bias in Evaluation/Hiring • All research is probabilistic; our summary makes generalizations • Research is based on correlational studies, controlled experiments, and literature reviews including meta-analysis • Bias can be explicit or unconscious (implicit)

15. An applicant’s gender and ethnicity can bias hiring and salary judgments—triggered simply by the applicant’s name Men are considered more suitable for male-stereotypic jobs In a Nutshell…

16. Letters of recommendation use gender-biased language, affecting impressions of competence Student evaluations are biased against women faculty—shown even in a blind experimental study of an online course In a Nutshell…

17. There is a racial disparity in receipt of NIH grants—could signal bias, or weaker mentoring/networking There is bias against women with children (and opposite for men with children)—even though women with families don’t publish less than single women In a Nutshell…

18. Men are promoted more on potential while women on past productivity Women’s junior authorships are held against them more than men’s In a Nutshell…

19. Men and women self-present differently: men more likely to inflate own capabilities, women to deflate them Women in male-stereotypic roles face difficult balance between being “feminine” and being “masculine” in their behavior In a Nutshell…

20. Subtle cues stemming from assumptions about a candidate’s abilities, motivation, and attitudes can unconsciously produce confirming behavior (self-fulfilling prophecy) In a Nutshell…

21. Research documents existence of biased outcomes Research shows that some evaluators have more bias than others Research shows that individuals’ measured implicit biases predict their behavior ALL EVALUATORS must be alert to bias in themselves and others Bottom Line

22. Activity 3: Brainstorm Strategies • Brainstorm effective practices for avoiding implicit bias for a search stage (10 minutes) • Debrief with the larger group (15 minutes) • What are two things you will do during your next faculty search?

23. Five Stages of a Faculty Search • Define criteria and qualities required for position • Actively recruit a diverse pool, and develop strategies for proactive faculty hiring • Review and identify the long/short list • Conduct an effective on campus interview • Recommend finalist(s) to Chair

24. What Can We Do?

25. Stage A: Define Criteria and Qualities Required for the Position • Define attributes such as ‘fit’, ‘excellence’, ‘quality’ • Develop a rubric for initial review and final ranking – don’t use your ‘gut’ • Discuss diversity and its meaning to the dept. • Write the ad using broad research area

26. Sample of Evaluation Rubric Please comment on the candidate’s research program: Please comment on the candidate’s expertise: Other Comments:

27. Stage B: Actively Recruit a Diverse Pool… • Develop a departmental strategy for year-round strategic recruiting • Know the number of women and minorities receiving PhDs • Build relationships with diverse scholars at national conferences • Broaden institutions from which you recruit and collaborate • Search prestigious fellowship holders including minority fellowships • Go beyond your own network – beyond the people you know • Send the ad to national women and minority organizations, committees, and caucuses in your discipline • Don’t assume people are not moveable Data handout

28. Stage B. …and Develop Strategies forRecruiting of Senior Faculty • Look at who held leadership positions in national organizations • Explore databases of funded awards for diverse candidates • NIH Research Portfolio Reporting Tool-http://RePORT.nih.gov • NSF Awards Search (http://nsf.gov/awardsearch/) • Web of Science database (available on the library website) • National Academies directories • National Endowment for the Humanities awards • ACLS Fellowships • Guggenheim Fellowships

29. Stage C: Review and Identify the Short List • Use objective criteria contained in the evaluation rubric • Completely review all applications • Consider PhD/postdocs from schools other than the top • Be aware of implicit biases: • gender (women rated lower than men) • ethnic names receive fewer call backs • letter writer and reader biases • Tom Forth's online Gender Bias calculator • women with children Letter writer handout

30. Stage D: Planning for an Effective On-Campus Interview • Value each candidate as an individual, not as a token • Ask if there are individuals/groups the candidate wants to meet • Create a list of questions to allow comparison of common factors for each candidate • Aim for diverse and welcoming audiences when scheduling meetings – for all candidates • Send candidate’s CV to colleagues before interview Good Practices for Interviews Handout

31. Family status Race Religion Gender Age Stage D: On-Campus…Do Not Ask Discriminatory Questions Federal / state laws and regulations prohibit questions about these classes to protect them: • Arrests • Citizenship or nationality • Disability • Sexual Orientation • Pregnancy Northeastern Provost’s Guide for Conducting Interviews: http://www.northeastern.edu/provost/resources/faculty/

32. Stage D: On-Campus…Questions That Could Lead to Bias • Appropriate • How can we best accommodate you? • We offer all candidates information on our childcare center – there is a website…. • We offer all candidates information on benefits – you can reach out to an HR representative for questions confidentially. • Inappropriate: Reflects poorly • on the University… • Are you married? • Are you planning to start a family? • What is your spouse's name? • What is your maiden name? • Do you have any children? • Are you pregnant? • What are your childcare arrangements? Candidates should be assessed on their ability to perform the job

33. Stage E: Recommend Finalist(s) to Chair • Encourage faculty to complete evaluation rubric for each candidate within 24 hours • Use consistent objective criteria in evaluation of every candidate

34. Faculty Search Resources • STRIDE slides http://www.northeastern.edu/advance/recruitment/stride-faculty-search-committee-workshop/ • VPAA Resources – Faculty Hiring http://www.northeastern.edu/provost/resources/faculty/ • University Search Guide • Guidance for Conducting Interviews – including what not to ask • Candidate Visit Information • ADVANCE Resources - NU and External http://www.northeastern.edu/advance/resources/ • Sample Faculty Candidate Review Matrix • Links to find Ph.D degrees granted by discipline • Candidate institutional information • Partner placement information • Tom Forth’s Gender Bias Letter Calculator https://www.tomforth.co.uk/genderbias/

35. Activity 4: Take aways and evaluation Reflect on one concrete thing you plan to implement in your search committee as a result of this workshop. Please take 5 minutes and complete the STRIDE Workshop Evaluation in your packet.

36. STRIDE THANK YOU!

37. References (1) Slide 7: Antonio, et. Al (2004) “Effects of Racial Diversity on Complex Thinking in College Students”.  Psychological Science, Vol 15, Issue 8  http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00710.x Freeman, R. and Huang, W. (Sept. 18 2014).  “Strength in diversity”  Nature 513.7518. p.305  http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA383049080&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=fulltext&issn=00280836&p=AONE&sw=w&authCount=1&u=wit_main&selfRedirect=true Sommers, Samuel R. (2006)  “On racial diversity and group decision making: Identifying multiple effects of racial composition on jury deliberations.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 90(4), Apr 2006, 597-612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.4.597 Slide 1: Fiske, S. T. (2002). What We Know Now About Bias and Intergroup Conflict, the Problem of the Century. Current Directions in Psychological Science Current Directions in PsycholSci,11(4), 123-128. Slide 12: Kleider, H. M., Pezdek, K., Goldinger, S. D., & Kirk, A. (2008). Schema-driven source misattribution errors: Remembering the expected from a witnessed event. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(1), 1-20. Lerner, M. (1980). The Belief in a Just World: A Fundamental Delusion. Plenum: New York Greenwald, A. G., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2014). With malice toward none and charity for some: Ingroup favoritism enables discrimination. American Psychologist,69(7), 669-684. Slide 15: Moss-Racusin, C.S., Dovidio, J.F. et. al. (2012). Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Bias Favor Male Students. PNAS,109, 41. Koch, A. J., D’Mello, S. D., & Sackett, P. R. (2015). A meta-analysis of gender stereotypes and bias in experimental simulations of employment decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(1), 128-161. Syal, R. (10/2009). Undercover job hunters reveal huge race bias in Britain’s workplaces. The Guardian Bertrand, M., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. The American Economic Review, 94(4), 991-1013.

38. References (2) Slide 16: Madera, J. M., Hebl, M. R., & Martin, R. C. (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1591. Slide 17: Flaherty, C. (2018, March 14). Same Course, Different Ratings. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/03/14/study-says-students-rate-men-more-highly-women-even-when-theyre-teaching-identical Farr, M. (2018, August 28). Arbitration decision on student evaluations of teaching applauded by faculty. Retrieved from https://www.universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/arbitration-decision-on-student-evaluations-of-teaching-applauded-by-faculty/?fbclid=IwAR3Rijfs2OsWfCAb249wbXKdSn8SOnMei4eWiENSPShnmicZ7ehcox1Mhl4 Slide 18: Tormala, Z. L., Jia, J. S., & Norton, M. I. (2012). The preference for potential. Journal of personality and social psychology, 103(4), 567. Barnett, R. and Rivers, C. (2014). How the “New Discrimination” is holding women back. Catalyst report. Retrieved from https://www.catalyst.org/zing/how-new-discrimination-holding-women-back Sarsons, Heather. 2017. "Recognition for Group Work: Gender Differences in Academia." American Economic Review, 107 (5): 141-45. Slide 20: Correll, S. J., & Benard, S. (2007). Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty? 1. American journal of sociology, 112(5), 1297-1339. Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1987). Marriage, motherhood and research performance in science. Scientific American, 256(2), 119-125.Xie, Y., Shauman, K. A., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes (Vol. 26, No. 73.4). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

39. References (3) Xie, Y., Shauman, K. A., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes (Vol. 26, No. 73.4). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Slide 21: Stein, R. (2011). Blacks less likely than whites to get NIH grants, NIH study https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-commissioned-study-identifies-gaps-nih-funding-success-rates-black-researchers Slide 22: Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1978). Interpersonal expectancy effects: The first 345 studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 377-415. Trusz, S., & Bąbel, P. (Eds.). (2016). Interpersonal and intrapersonal expectancies. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Biesanz, J. C. et al. (2001). When accuracy-motivated perceivers fail: Limited attentional resources and the reemerging self-fulfilling prophecy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 621-629. Word, C. O., et al. (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 109-120.