Associated Colleges of the South

Home/GDI :: Home :: Growing Departmental Inclusiveness/GDI :: Protection from Bias 3

GDI :: Protection from Bias 3

  • An inclusive department actively protects faculty members from bias. 
  • What does a relative weakness in Protection from Bias mean? There may be many meanings for each department, but here are some things to consider.
  • Faculty are expected to conform to identity-based stereotypes of what their focus should be in terms of research, teaching, or service
  • Faculty are often held to a different set of standards based on their identities
  • Faculty discover that identity-related issues that impinge upon their work are not adequately considered in performance reviews
  • Faculty learn that if their scholarship is not “mainstream” from a traditional, monocultural perspective, it is not valued as highly
  • Faculty are overburdened with advising and committee assignments that are reflective of their identities, or choosing to engage heavily in these is not valued by the department

Valuing Identities and Avoiding Assumptions

  • Providing a productive workspace that recognizes and reduces bias for faculty of diverse identities requires acknowledging the range of creative interests held by faculty from underrepresented groups and the variability in expectations placed upon them.  But more is needed than just to be aware of these circumstances. Ongoing and proactive administrative adjustments need to occur to prevent and respond to common concerns, and the Chair and senior faculty must remain open to unanticipated problems that disproportionately affect the underrepresented. As all members of underrepresented groups are unique individuals, it is also important to avoid and check assumptions and expectations of faculty based on their group membership.  The ultimate goal for protection from bias is that through deep acknowledgment of differing circumstances and tailored administrative adjustment, faculty from underrepresented groups will enjoy a comparable level of academic freedom and latitude as other faculty. 
  • Some faculty from underrepresented groups may establish an academic identity that is highly consonant with their own. For example, a Latine sociologist may study understudied Latine-related topics with uncommon methodologies, advise many Latine students and provide a diverse perspective for multiple college committees. However, if the Latine faculty member does not desire such a heavy service load, the department may need to assist with shedding obligations. On the other hand, if those valuable service contributions are free choices (recognizing that the options can be restricted by the environment, as in the case of having few or no other Latine faculty), administrative adjustments to different workloads, along with assurances of appreciation of their research area may need to be thoughtfully instituted. As a counter-example, consider a transgender historian who may have no interest in transgender topics related to their scholarship, nor especially wish to mentor transgender students or provide an alternatively gendered voice for committees. This is also an example of valuable diversity, and the faculty member should not be burdened with different expectations based on their transgender identity. These two examples of faculty for underrepresented groups represent extremes in work portfolios; real people fall anywhere along this continuum or outside it.

Create Fairness in Reviews and Institute a Protective Process

  • Work with colleagues and the Dean to ensure clarity of expectations in documents that relate to promotion and tenure
  • Ensure that all members of departmental review committees have bias training
  • Ask all faculty under review to reflect on the bias that they have experienced in a separate section in a review cover letter or statement, but only if the department is confident–through a process of gaining feedback from multiple faculty from underrepresented groups–that the reflections will not harm the reviewee’s reputation, status, or opportunities for advancement.
  • Separately and deliberately evaluate the impact of bias on faculty under review in all reviews and include findings in all departmental review reports in a separate section.  Ensure that the reviewee’s understanding of the presence and impact of any bias is welcomed, especially focusing on student evaluations, which have been shown in multiple studies to be biased against faculty from underrepresented groups.
  • To protect faculty from bias, consider adding a non-voting, non-evaluating review committee member who is highly trained in bias.  This committee member can help clarify the impact of bias and assist the reviewers in maintaining fairness and equity in their discussions and recommendations.
  • Consider the following resources for more ideas in creating review fairness:

Value and Respond Supportively to Departmental Diversity

  • Celebrate teaching and research from diverse areas. The Chair and department can de-prioritize traditional curriculum in favor of faculty teaching their strongest areas of inquiry. If predominantly White and male, the department may strongly favor standard curricula and scholarship. Avoid the pitfall of having underrepresented faculty become the sole representatives of curricular and scholarly diversity by tangibly rewarding faculty for developing courses and inquiry that support and sustain diversity.
  • Ensure that diversity of research and teaching area is acknowledged as a strength in the documentation of departmental expectations
  • “Walk the walk” of valuing all areas of inquiry by highlighting faculty members’ work in campus colloquia or other talks
  • Share faculty members’ accomplishments through announcements, webpage, and department meetings
  • Gather information from campus climate surveys, share results with departmental faculty, and note how the department is or is not meeting the needs of students from underrepresented groups
  • Conduct surveys of department majors and minors that ask about the needs of students from underrepresented groups and note how the department is or is not meeting the needs of these students
  • Consider the following resources for reinforcing the value of diversity in your department:

Provide Support for Workload Management to Faculty from Underrepresented Groups

  • Beginning with the hiring process, work with all departmental colleagues to clarify the distinction between the general benefits of hiring a diverse faculty to the institution and the unreasonable expectation that individual faculty should fulfill certain roles based on their identities. 
  • Consider that contingent and adjunct faculty are often underrepresented in terms of identity. How can the department create an environment in which underrepresented populations receive due job security and support?
  • Ensure that new faculty from underrepresented groups know there is no departmental or university expectation that they pursue scholarship, teaching, or service congruent with their identity. Point out that university and student sources may create this expectation (e.g., serving on a specific committee or supervising a particular project by a student), reaffirming the faculty member’s choices. Offer guidance, assistance, and intervention around any unwanted demands that emerge.
  • If a faculty member is overloaded with service which is connected to identity, the Department Chair can assist with obligation management through mentorship or direct intervention (e.g., document direction to limit obligation(s), depending on the wishes of the faculty member)
  • The Department Chair can negotiate with faculty members (who desire it) to keep service and advising burdens by lessening other expectations (in consultation with the Dean, for example). Document any of these efforts, and note them in subsequent reviews.
  • Consider the following resources regarding equity in workload:

Explore more