RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF UNDERREPRESENTED FACULTY
AT CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE: 1995-2005
DRAFT REPORT
A PRELIMINARY STUDY BY THE
SENATE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY COMMITTEE (SEEC)
Committee:
Peter Nwosu, Department of Communication Studies, Committee Chair
Carolyn Okazaki, Department of Counseling Services
Bronte Reynolds, Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies
Advisors to the Committee:
Karen Dosanjh, Department of Business Law, and Chair, SEEC
Jose Luis Vargas, Director, Educational Opportunity Program
Penelope Jennings, Associate Vice President, Faculty Affairs
December 2006
1. Introduction
The recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty has been a subject of interest and concern to many faculty and administration at the university for sometime now. The renewed interest comes about as the university continues to grow and serve an increasingly diverse student population and region. The university’s 33,000 students plus (nearly two-thirds from underrepresented groups) reflect the rich ethnic and cultural diversity of the San Fernando region. Of the more than 840 full time faculty members, about 25% are from underrepresented groups (African Americans, Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans). Increasing the diversity of its faculty so that professors more closely reflect the student population has been a major goal of the university. University officials have long believed that a student body as inclusive as CSUN deserves faculty that reflects that diversity. Thus, attracting and retaining underrepresented faculty is seen as an important step in achieving this goal.[1] The university is also committed to hiring faculty members with the ability to work with a diverse student population. The university is guided by the fundamental assumption that a diverse faculty provides opportunity for diverse points of view—an essential requirement for building and maintaining a democratic society.
In the last five years alone, several of the initiatives for recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty have been carried out at both the college and department levels. For example, in Spring 2004, Interim Dean John Mason of the College of Humanities commissioned a study to exam the status of faculty of color at CSUN. The study led by Dr. Teresa Williams of the Department of Asian American Studies and Dr. Breny Mendoza of the Department of Women’s Studies examined the challenges experienced by female faculty of color in three colleges (Humanities, Social and Behavioral Sciences, and Science and Mathematics) as they go through the university’s retention, tenure, and promotion process. The mostly climate survey found that female faculty of color perceived the environment that they work in the three colleges as “hostile” and “disheartening.”
In Fall 2004, faculty in the Michael D. Eisner College of Education acknowledged the importance of having a diverse faculty, and approved a revised Faculty Governance Manual, that calls upon the college administration to ensure that it develops “viable plans for the recruitment and retention of faculty of color,” including the development of a “sustainable system of mentoring” at the departmental level.
While the university works with departments in conducting inclusive search processes to increase the opportunity for diverse applicant pool, there has not been any major effort to provide a more systematic and coordinated approach to dealing with the recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty on our campus. In this regard, the Senate Educational Equity Committee in Spring 2006 established an Ad hoc Committee to address this issue. The Committee was charged with the following tasks:
a. review campus efforts with respect to recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty over a ten-year period from 1995-2005, including opportunities for professional development and academic advancement at the university
b. identify factors that may impact recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty at the university
c. recommend viable strategies for recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty—(i.e. how can CSUN become a more welcoming environment for underrepresented faculty?); and
d. identify appropriate campus units that would ensure implementation of recommended strategies.
2. Methodology
The committee is the first Faculty Senate group convened to examine the issue of recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty at the university. The committee found no evidence of any such group in the past. The committee implemented its tasks as follows:
· examined some current national literature on the issue
· examined and clarified quantitative comparative system-wide data (CSU campus recruitment surveys) as provided by the office of the chancellor
· reviewed and clarified campus data provided by the office of the vice president for faculty affairs
· reviewed other faculty reports on campus on the issue, including policies at the college level.
Recognizing that quantitative data provide only partial information, the
committee interviewed a number of underrepresented faculty and held a meeting with the Council of Chairs to assess their views on the issue. Council members also recommended revisions to the draft protocol documents regarding recruitment template and exit interviews.
3. Underrepresented faculty and study limitations
There is a large body of national data that examines the issue of recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty across the country. The term “underrepresented faculty” implies several things. The expansive definition would include women and historically underrepresented minority groups such as African Americans, Hispanics/Latinos/Chicanos (including Puerto Ricans), Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders and Native Americans/Alaskan Natives (AHANAs). Federal law defines historically underrepresented minorities as underrepresented faculty. We have employed this federal definition in our study to ensure consistency.
This study is by no means exhaustive. We underscore its preliminary nature because we recognize that there may be various campus efforts in different units and departments aimed at enhancing recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty that we have not been able to fully capture. We also are conscious of the limited scope of our assessment: what the university has done in the last ten years. More studies may therefore be needed.
4. Recruitment data and discussion
Historical tracking of demographic data on faculty recruitment at the CSU began
only in 1998. The data we reviewed for this study come from the CSU Faculty
Recruitment Surveys which began system-wide tracking of new tenure track faculty appointments the same period. The CSU reporting requirements are, in some cases, different from other universities. For example, in the CSU, Librarians, Counselors, and Coaches are included in the Faculty Recruitment Survey data. The survey data which shows recruitment patterns in the 23 campuses of the California State University system may be accessed at www.calstate.edu/HR/FacRecruitment.shtml.
A review of the surveys for both CSUN and the CSU show the following hiring
patterns by ethnicity, for tenure track faculty positions at CSUN and system-wide for 1998/1999 (data for both years reported together) and for each year from 2000 to 2005.
Percentage and Number of Total Hires by Ethnicity
CSU CSUN African Ame. Hispanic Asians Other Non white CSUN total hires
1998/1999 27% 25.6% 7.0% 9.3% 9.3% 0 86
2000 28% 30.9% 1.5% 16.2% 10.3% 0 68
2001 30% 39.1% 4.3% 21.7% 13.0% 0 46
2002 28% 37.7% 8.2% 14.8% 13.1% 0 61
2003 28% 36.1% 8.3% 6.9% 19.4% 0 72
2004 33% 27.7% 6.4% 6.4% 14.9% 0 47
2005 28% 43.8% 12.5% 12.5% 18.8% 0 16
Source: CSUN Office of Faculty Affairs and CSU Faculty Recruitment Survey
Percentage of Hires by Gender of Ethnicity at CSUN
White Males White Females Minority Males Minority Females
1998/1999 41% 34% 13% 13%
2000 32% 37% 13% 18%
2001 35% 26% 13% 26%
2002 44% 18% 20% 18%
2003 33% 31% 17% 19%
2004 38.3% 34% 19.1% 8.5%
2005 12.5% 43.8% 6.3% 37.5%
Source: CSUN Office of Faculty Affairs and CSU Faculty Recruitment Survey
Generally for the eight years reported, Cal State, Northridge has maintained a high success rate with its recruitment efforts. The most recent recruitment efforts in fall 2005 resulted in 18 searches from which 16 appointments were made. The recruitment efforts, overall, have moved along at a healthy pace. Faculty Recruitment Survey data also show that CSUN ranks third among CSU campuses with the largest appointment of underrepresented faculty for fall 2005—44% compared to Monterrey with 50% and Long Beach with 46%. Between 1995 and 2005, CSUN successfully recruited 471 new faculty. Of this number, 152 (about 32.2%) were from underrepresented groups.
However, the global and rosy picture about progress to date should not obscure the conspicuous absence of diverse faculty in a number of academic units and departments at the university. A careful look at the CSUN numbers will show that while several academic units/departments are moving along at a healthy pace in terms of recruitment of underrepresented faculty, there are still many departments that have not been successful in diversifying their faculty profile. More efforts will therefore be required in this regard in the years ahead.
5. Retention data and discussion
CSU does not have in place a system for tracking retention efforts across the 23 campuses of the university system. Such questions as: why did a faculty member separate from the university; does the experience of a faculty member from an underrepresented group differ from the experience of the other faculty members who decide to separate from the CSUN; what mechanisms exist at the college or departmental levels for monitoring retention efforts?, were difficult for the committee to address because of this gap. The “Annual CSU Faculty Recruitment and Retention Survey” (See Attachment 1), which department chairs are required to complete each year does not, in any way, address the issue of retention, beyond just asking for the number of resignations from each campus. Why a faculty member may decide to separate is not sought for in the data request. At Cal State, Northridge, the Office of Faculty Affairs does not track any information on retention efforts at either the college or departmental levels. Thus, the answer to the question: “why did a faculty member leave the university?” becomes a mirage. Data provided to our committee by the Office of Faculty Affairs revealed that the university does in fact keep information on resignations. In the last ten years (1995 to 2005, the university recorded 110 faculty resignations. Approximately 27% of these resignations (that is as many as 31 faculty) were from underrepresented groups. Below is a breakdown of the number and percentage, by ethnicity:
Percentage and Number of resignations by Ethnicity [1995-2005]
White 78 70.8%
Asian American 11 9.9%
African American 10 9%
Hispanic 9 8%
Native American 1 -1%
Other 2 1.8%
Source: CSUN Office of Faculty Affairs
While privacy regulations prevent the university from disclosing the specific reasons for faculty separations (even if it had it), there are proactive steps that can be taken to ensure that the reasons for separation (especially for underrepresented faculty) have nothing to do with the perception of an unwelcoming environment at the university.
6. Recommendations and strategies for improving recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty
The specific goal of this study is to improve and strengthen current efforts at recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty at the university. The recommendations and strategies presented below are very specific in helping the university to achieve this goal.
a. Recommendations for recruitment
· Create/develop an online data bank of potential recruitment sites for underrepresented faculty for use by academic units/departments in their recruitment efforts [Faculty Affairs and Institutional Research and Planning to develop]
· Develop recruitment template for departments [See Attachment 2 for recommended template—checklist of things to do—Faculty Affairs and Academic Affairs to implement use]
· Revise AAI form to ensure that instrument contains minimum qualification for diversity (See Attachment 3 for recommended changes in current A1 forms—Faculty Affairs to implement]
· Conduct hiring workshops with a focus on issues of diversity for departments and use of Recruitment template and revised A1 forms—Faculty Affairs to implement].
· Conduct campus-wide workshop or workshop series for faculty and administration that recasts the issue of diversity in the post-affirmative action phase [CIELO, Faculty Affairs, Academic Affairs, and Senate Ed Equity to implement].
· Collect data annually from each unit (College/Department, Divisions, Schools, Colleges) related to the recruitment effort and hiring ratios—the relationship between under-represented minority (URM) applicants to fill each vacancy and under-represented minority hires selected for the position.
· Collect data annually from each unit (College/Department, Divisions, Schools, Colleges) related to the turn-over ratios (Turn-Over Quotient)—the relationship between under-represented minority faculty and all faculty leaving their position.
· Collect qualitative data on faculty who stay. Establish means of collecting such data.
Recommendations for retention
· Develop a system/mechanism to track data on retention [See Attachment 4 for Exit Interview Protocols and Procedures developed by Committee—Senate Educational Equity Committee to work to ensure implementation]
· Develop exit interview instrument [Senate Educational Equity Committee to develop—See Attachment 5 developed by Committee]
· Conduct exit interviews [Faculty Affairs and Senate Ed Equity to coordinate and implement]
· Review and analyze exit interview data every year to identify trends and patterns that might be useful for addressing recruitment and retention issues [Senate Educational Equity Committee and Faculty Affairs to implement]
· Conduct campus-wide Climate Survey of Underrepresented Faculty to develop a better understanding of underrepresented faculty perceptions about workplace environment at CSUN [Senate Educational Equity, CIELO Faculty Development Grant, and Faculty Affairs—Faculty release time and funding to conduct study]
· Initiate discussion about incorporating working with diverse student population in RTP processes [Senate Educational Equity Committee, PP&R and Faculty Senate to discuss and implement]
· Recommendation for data disbursement—Share all data on recruitment and Retention by unit (College/Department, Divisions, Schools or Colleges) to the following university agencies:
· Office of the President
· Provost’s Office
· Council of Chairs
· Faculty Senate
· Faculty Affairs
· Units (Colleges and Departments)
7. Conclusion
While the university has maintained a steady increase in recruitment of diverse faculty, the result has not been because of any campus-wide organized and sustained effort. With regard to retention of underrepresented faculty, there has also been little organized effort. While this study represents a preliminary first step, the recommendations should move the university toward the development of a more coherent and systematic approach to the recruitment and retention of all faculty, in particular, underrepresented faculty. In this way, the university is able to fulfill its goal of increasing the diversity of its faculty so that professors more closely reflect the student population. As the university has noted, a diverse faculty provides opportunity for diverse points of view—an essential requirement for building and maintaining a democratic society.