Read the draft policy that was sent to you via email. Use these headings when commenting to this post.
What are your general thoughts on the policy?
What is particularly good?
Anything not-so-good, or troubling?
What recommendations do you have for improvement in concept or wording?
Choose one recommendation and cite research literature that supports that aspect of the policy TO BE RETAINED.
Choose one recommendation and cite research literature that supports that aspect of the policy TO BE REMOVED.
It is great that they are TRYING. The fact that they have something in place is beneficial for what they are trying to accomplish. The wording of it gets sort of strange and akward at times... "ghettoized" the "meat-packing plants" mention. There are a few other things, but you get my point. I think that they could leave these sort of things out, or at least reword them by making them less intense or strange to the document. The meat-packing plant part could be completely left out, they can be given a tour there, but it is not needed to say that as if it is one that should be paid most attention to. For retaining, I like the mention about having everyone be involved in students that are minorities and not just teachers that are minorities themselves. I think by bringing people together and making them less of a foreign group, they will bring them into their own in-group and ignore the negative stereotypes they may have with their out-group they were a part of. This was evident in a few of the articles we have read. To be removed I think they need to eliminate the encouragment of connecting with people who are like them on and off campus and focus just on connecting with PEOPLE. By having them connect only with others that are like them, they are less likely to branch out and connect with other people. They should be incorportaed with others so that they are not excluded or seen as negative.
One other thing that bothers me is the fact that they are pushing waterloo so much in the article. Cedar Falls is actually where the school is, so directly them to where they are not necessarily going to be is kind of misleading. There are good things in Cedar Falls, and I understand that they want them to feel like they can fit in here, but they shouldn't try to make it feel like a lie. They will feel isolated here only if we make them feel isolated. If we make them feel like they are different by singling them out and having them only be with people who are like them, they won't be inclined to fit in and feel comfortable around those in the out-group.
Overall, the policy is a great start in moving toward a better policy for hiring and retaining diverse faculty on campus. The areas of emphasis were especially purposeful which seemed to be very promising.
The areas that showed the most promise were those that encouraged concentration on areas regarding diversity. There were many suggestions that would create a "path of least resistance" for projects that focused on multicultural, diversity, or social justice issues. To me, this part of the proposal will go the furthest in creating a campus culture where a minority faculty member will feel welcome and not just 'token'. If everyone's projects (not just the diverse faculty)are encouraged to be open-minded and look outside the "traditional", I can see a lot of opportunities presenting themselves in terms of cooperation across fields, more dynamic ideas, and more rigorous study.
While I saw a number of positive suggestions, some of the suggestions felt a bit obtuse even though they were prefaced by saying that was not their intent. Going about an initiative like this with the vision that bringing in diverse faculty will make UNI a more diverse place will just not work. Furthermore, suggesting that we should make a special point to show off our 'diverse groups' will end up less than tactful and come across as profiling. While it is important to make it known that someone will not be an island if they choose to work here, it is also important that the expectation isn't that they need to fill this 'diversity' role.
The concept is quite well-founded. The execution leaves something to be desired. My recommendation would be to go back to why diversity is desired in the first place, and then make a conscious effort to infuse that desire in the wording of this document. Instead of talking about identifying minority candidates as if they were 'items to put on the shelf', wording should lean more toward networking with various organizations and institutions in order to proactively recruit faculty that can contribute meaningfully and diversely to UNI.
It is easy to conflate diversity with novelty, but novelty has no place in this document. Diversity at UNI needs to be 'business as usual' rather than 'a grand experiment'. This document is ultimately trying to recruit professionals that will bring valuable perspectives to UNI. So instead of 'appealing to their interests' we should lean more toward valuing academic rigor and interdisciplinary research. As cooperation is one of the things that goes the furthest in making strong ingroup cohesion (Geartner, et al. 1990), it stands to reason that the opportunities like mentorships and relevant organizations will be great for retaining faculty. I would even like to see this sense of camaraderie become the norm. That way, whatever the interests of the incoming faculty may be, knowing that UNI is behind them will not just seem like an afterthought.
Finally, diversity does not need to be a one sided phenomenon. Regardless of what those who have lived in Iowa their entire lives may think, Iowa is a culturally rich place. Instead of flaunting our pseudo-diversity in Waterloo, why don't we just give an impression of being a tolerant institution that values equality and justice. We can go all the way back to Allport (1954) or Tajfel and Turner (1986) to assess the workings of groups and becoming a part of one. Making someone feel welcome in a group does not mean you have to show them that there are people like them in the group but rather that their presence and contributions to the group will be valued. Because of this, I would suggest dialing down the emphasis on seeking out 'groups like them'. Respecting their group identifications and then welcoming them into this group will be the best way to do this. Showing that UNI and the Waterloo/Cedar Falls area offers many opportunities is not the same as going on a scavenger hunt to find all the diverse people. It's about respecting the faculty member's intelligence, empathizing with their situation, and valuing what they can bring to the college.
(By the way, there was no mention of the absolutely unique diversity in Waterloo regarding the Bosnian population. For the past 15 years this area has been a home to thousands of Bosnian refugees, and with them comes their rich culture only matched by places like Chicago and New York City. Those are little things that are actually unique and should be mentioned.
I think that the emphasis on including minority-related areas of study seems appropriate, particularly because the proposal mentions the two ways in which it might attract candidates from underrepresented groups: the direct way, in which they might be interested in studying these issues themselves; and the indirect way, in which they might feel that the university is open to different topics and perspectives, which is always attractive.
Another good point that research has suggested is effective for the reduction of automatic stereotypes (and therefore could lead to more positive interactions among diverse populations) is the participation in anti-bias education of faculty and university staff. Research has shown a reduction in bias after participating in semester-long diversity courses (Rudman, Ashmore, & Gary, 2001).
However, the section dealing with preventing potential candidates from feeling isolated could be expressed in more appropriate terms. The proposal mentions that the most of the “diversity” of the region is in Waterloo, but the UNI campus is in Cedar Falls. Although they are sufficiently close, it seems that they are implicitly recommending them to live in Waterloo, since in Cedar Falls they will feel isolated. What if they would prefer to live closer to campus?
Another troubling section is the one in which the proposal refers to “the real Iowa with which most new hires cannot be expected to be familiar”. I believe that it is difficult to define what “the real” is; it depends on the perspective. “Real” could mean the bias-related incidents that have occurred recently, or the obvious separation of racial groups (e.g., the separation in the two cities, some groups live in Waterloo, while others live in Cedar Falls). The wording is confusing in this section, since the word “real” can have a rather negative connotation, contrary to the purpose of the proposal.
Another suggestion is to avoid emphasizing group activities that relate to specific groups. The focus should be on integrating potential candidates to the larger UNI community, promoting participation in all kinds of group activities, not only those related to their groups. The Common Ingroup Identity Model (Gaertner et al., 1993) suggests creating a large-group identity that encompasses individuals from diverse backgrounds collaborating towards a shared objective. Potential candidates should be made to feel that their unique characteristics will be valued for the attainment of common goal of creating a rigorous academic and scientific community at UNI.
I agree with what others have been saying. I think it is good that they are trying to address one of these issues. There are some good points and bad points in this policy. Some concerns I have are with the wording of certain parts. I'm not sure if I would use the word "ghettoized." It just seems to be awkward wording. Mentioning the meat packing plant is not needed, as well. Sure, show them the place, but do not specifically mention it as an area of emphasis.
I do like the ideas they mention with recruiting. Research has shown that names can influence how a resume is evaluated, especially when it comes to race (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2002), so I think it is good that this issue is addressed in the policy. I also think it is interesting that they mention what other universities do in regard to having a higher minority population graduate. Considering some of the statistics that were in the Newsweek article, it is appropriate to examine that particular question.
Others have mentioned the Common Ingroup Identity Model (Gaertner et al., 1993) with regard to creating large-group identities. I think this is an important point to keep in mind when evaluating this policy. Making candidates feel a part of the UNI community overall not just their particular group should be a main goal. I'm not sure why they emphasize Waterloo so much, when most of the time that particular issue is ignored. It seems like they are pushing for minorities to live in Waterloo just because they are minorities. People may want to live closer to campus in Cedar Falls. Overall, there are some good things about the policy, but there are other things that need to be possibly changed.
We’re do I begin, in the recommendations of hiring and retaining diverse faculty; it starts with recognizing every individual and their ethnicity. Whether they our applying for a position in administration, as an instructor, faculty, or as a student who is going to attend the University of Northern Iowa. There are different points which I believe are key factors in hiring or in retention.
From a student’s perspective , this coming April will be the third year that I will be on a student committee member for the San Antonio visit which helps in recruiting non-traditional, traditional, underrepresented students who visit UNI. As a member we have the opportunity to sell a product, and an image of the university. It starts with every individual student’s involve, from committee members to current student as well as past student that come to speak about their experience here at UNI. We see what other students’ many not see and that is the opportunity to achieve a goal in getting a higher education. Every individual will see things from a different perspective, by observing and dictate socialize interaction as we drive or escort visiting students, as well as during the interview process which admissions overlooks and meets at a later time with committee members to talk about selections. During the whole visit it is part of the (in-group identity) or the trust factor, based on ethnicity and how they relate to us as student as we elaborate on our own experiences, testimony, and how we adjusted to a new atmosphere. It’s the stories of successes and opportunity, and the chance that all of us took in getting the opportunity to obtain a higher education, as well as the staff that believe in us such as Student Support Services (SSS) and the instructors who give their time to explain and see us succeed. Instead of looking at the economical “quota” which some may look at, in how much funding they would be getting for each minority student from the Department of Education? It’s about the hope and dreams that someone has, an opportunity to achieve a goal, and to make a difference. There is more of a need for outreach in the surrounding communities around Cedar Falls, such as Waterloo, Waverly, and Evansdale, Sioux City, Tama, Des Moines based on what I have seen; it’s not that I am not appreciated of coming to Iowa, but most student that do earn a degree go back to their home states. The use of words such as “ghettoized” in the proposal is really uncalled for. The fact that recruitment efforts is ideal to recruit students that unrepresented is the bases of academic enhancement if there is not any recruitment of that many minorities students; if you look at the web page there is about 8 to 10 African American, 5 to 8 Hispanics. If you look at the organization here on campus there are is the Hispanic Latino Student Union, Lambda Theta Phi, Latin fraternity Inc., the Interested Ladies of Lambda Theta Alpha, Latina Sorority, Incorporated, Black Student Union, Black Male Leaders Union, the Divine 9 African American Sororities/ Fraternities which are separated from the Caucasian fraternity/Sororities here on campus so is their not a bias there. As a founding member of Lambda Theta Phi there is not a need for a Latin Fraternity because the numbers are not here at UNI.
Now from the perspective of hiring and retaining one major point is that you have to respect the candidate for who they are as a person no matter if they are applying for a position in administration, faculty, and staff or as a student because everyone is different culturally. The main focus should be their field of study, prior experience, and specific studies which they have conducted. Ethnicity should not matter, but from the readings that we have had there is a firm belief in the implicit bias when it come to hiring minorities do to last name as they are over looked. If UNI is or says it is an affirmative action establishment there would be more faculties of underrepresented cultures. It also states that there is an overall scarcity of minorities PhDs’ in all virtually all disciplines, mostly in the sciences and social behavioral sciences; does this have to do with what Newsweek magazine showing the statistic percentage rates of minorities that do graduate for all major Universities throughout the United States. Or the fact the Iowa has not implemented the DREAM act for immigrants’ that was signed into law in April 2009. The main purpose is that things need to change, the reason being is that no matter what ethnicity one is there qualifications should speak for itself, but the reality of it, it does not matter. If an applicant wants to teach pertaining to their field of studies, or culturally it should be their choice. So let’s say you have a female applicant whose field of study is in the Natural Sciences with an emphasis in biomedical genetics, and there is an opening in Latin studies of genetics history & etymology; would it be fare for her to teach that, based on her ethnicity, if she is Latina? If she falls under an underrepresented group, should she have an obligation to teach that subject based on her ethnicity, only and she meets the entire requirement to be hired?
What are your general thoughts on the policy?
I think over all it is good to know that our university is taking steps to insure a more diverse faculty. I think their reasoning is very sound and that there are some great ideas on how to get these new faculty oriented to a life in Cedar Falls. I think some revisions could really help this and that with some more fine tuning this could be of great benefit to UNI.
What is particularly good?
I think the overall idea is very good. UNI definitely needs a more diverse faculty to benefit the students and the university as a whole. Thought was clearly put into why we may not have a very diverse faculty now and some ideas on how to recruit successfully. Going to professional organizations
and national conferences for recruitment is a great idea. Also, an orientation for the new hires is a great idea so that they can become acclimated to what could be a very different community than they are used to. Also, rewarding faculty involvement in diverse activities is a great way to insure that our current faculty become more diverse and a way to pipeline new faculty into good habits that open them up to new things.
Anything not-so-good, or troubling?
One thing that is troubling is that it seems to be very geared towards recruiting African American faculty. While this would be helping to diversify our faculty, there is more to diversity than African Americans. Also, using the terms "ghettoized" and "lilly-white" do not portray a professional grade policy. There are better ways to get these points across than these terms.
What recommendations do you have for improvement in concept or wording?
One definite recommendation would be to go into a little more detail on some things and clean up some of the language. As mentioned before, not using "ghettoized" and "lilly-white" for instance. Also, explain in more detail about the anti-bias education for faculty and staff and more detail about the spousal hiring policy. Also, expand up on what kind of recruitment tools you will be using since applicants are "reluctant to label themselves". Also, either remove or re-word the "tours of major employers (including meatpacking plants)". This comes across as very stereotypical. Mention John Deere, local businesses, etc. in addition to "meatpacking plants".
Choose one recommendation and cite research literature that supports that aspect of the policy TO BE RETAINED.
Colds Fechter (2004) found bias against African Americans in mock job searches. This, and similar findings, lead me to believe that the "reluctant to label themselves" part of the policy should stay. It has been proven that bias occurs during selection process towards minorities.
I think that it is a great idea to try to recruit faculty that is diverse. We are a very homogeneous state and need to take extra steps to ensure that diversity expands, and one of the easiest ways to do so is a diverse university system (not just UNI). Iowa has an increasingly diverse with immigration from Africa, eastern Europe, and Latin America, and we should reflect that in our university system.
I like the section about interviewing faculty that are leaving. This will help us know what needs to change in the university to ensure that we maintain future faculty members.
As others have mentioned the wording is not great in a number of spots. The terminology seems out dated, and awkward at times. This needs to be brushed up before the document is finalized.
As many others have said retaining the sections about creating common in group identity is important (Gertner et al, 2003). Having a group that they feel they are a part of will make faculty more likely to stay than if they feel they are alone.
What are your general thoughts on the policy?
I don't think anyone can really disagree that it would be bad for students to experience a variety of diverse faculty.
What is particularly good?
The idea is good. They are also consdering the families of the new faculty that they might want to hire, which I think is an important factor for families who might be moving and starting a new job in a new place. They are also concentrating on the long-term commitment of their faculty that they want to hire. I think that is a plus for both the college and the faculty they are looking to hire.
Anything not-so-good, or troubling?
I thought that the ideas of saying that their spouses and other loved ones could work at and tour meat-packing plants was sort of odd. Saying that is all we have for them doesn't bode well on NE Iowa. The other idea of taking them over to Waterloo to experience diversity and not in Cedar Falls where they will be working and maybe living.
What recommendations do you have for improvement in concept or wording?
Some of the wording are 'out of the ordinary' sort of terms. so maybe updating them to more commonly used terms. I thought that some of the words took the attention off of what these people were trying to say, and the words are all people would concentrate on in the discussions.
Choose one recommendation and cite research literature that supports that aspect of the policy TO BE RETAINED.
I had read a study that discussed underprivelged kids and how working with college students and doing college course work in high school, helped them suceed in college and they were more likely to graduate from college instead of dropping out. I thought of this study when I was reading the part on recruitment and their discussion on the "grow your own" programs, like done with the McNair Scholars program.
Choose one recommendation and cite research literature that supports that aspect of the policy TO BE REMOVED.
I thought that them telling the new faculty that they can do activities and that their are places for them to go to be with people lke them created an in-group/out-group senario. While we are trying to make them feel welcomed and comfortable, we are also showng them the differences between us and them. I know we have discussed a lot of studies in class about how telling people they are in an outgroup can harm the situation more than help. I think they have good intentions, it just might be too much.
Overall, I think it's a decent start. I think as people have mentioned the wording gets a little weird at times, especially the use of the word "ghettoized." I also agree that the meat-packing part should be taken out and there should be equal focus on CF and Waterloo. We want to show them that they can feel at home in the town they are going to teach and not be like "This is where all the non-White people are!" I think that going to conferences to recruit is a good idea, but we don't want to rely on that exclusively to gain minority faculty members. I think keeping Gaertner's CIIM is important to keep in mind as well. We want to give them minority faculty members to rely on for advice but we also don't want to make them feel like they have to go to those people when they have questions. Creating the identity that they are a 'UNI faculty member' may lessen the in-group/out-group dynamic.