THIS SUMMER, the University lost five black faculty members. At the end of this year, three more will be added to that list. We have yet to hear what University administrators plan to do about this loss.
At our distinguished University, we are taught by some of the most prolific scholars in the nation. While that is a privilege we do not take for granted, our faculty composition still falls short of representing the state of Virginia — let alone the country. The numbers stand in contradiction to the University’s commitment to diversity.
As of last fall, 4.8 percent of full-time faculty at the University were black, 5.9 percent were Asian-American, 1.2 percent were Latino/a, and 0.2 percent were American Indian. Although this problem is not endemic to the University, it was ranked number one in 2005 among the 62 research universities of the AAU for white faculty representation at 87.4 percent.
But why is faculty diversity important? First, having a diverse faculty brings together different perspectives. Each needs to be valued and nurtured. Secondly, it creates a more comfortable environment for students because students of color see someone with which they can identify. Thirdly, several studies in higher education point to the importance of faculty diversity in the success of students of color, as these faculty members often serve as advisers and mentors. Similar to arguments against affirmative action, arguments against directed recruitment of faculty of color claim race neutrality — that somehow our focus on race and ethnicity shrouds and detracts from our search for qualified academics. Race neutrality, however, ignores the realities of an unequal system. For years, white males, who are currently over-represented in colleges across the country, benefited directly from the exclusion of scholars of color; the lack of competition made their success easier.
Here, several challenges pose an impediment to recruitment and retention of faculty. Faculty members of color are often under more pressure and stress in their departments. First, faculty of color are often asked to sit on more committees than their white counterparts. Faculty of color feel pressured to accept so as to not give the impression that they have no interest in multicultural issues at their university. Time spent participating in these meetings takes away from the research on which evaluations for tenure-tracks are based. It is important that the additional demands and non-traditional work expected of faculty of color are considered when it comes time to make promotions.
Faculty of color are pigeonholed into certain subjects and often feel that their credentials are overlooked in favor of their race or ethnicity. At the same time, when faculty of color teach about minority issues, their work can be de-legitimized. An Asian professor teaching courses on APA issues can be considered self-serving. Whereas research by white professors on race-neutral topics is often not questioned, research by minority faculty on “minority” issues is considered minor or less academically-rigorous work. This last point can lead to a bias in the awarding of promotions and tenure. Faculty of color are also often outside established, informal networks. These are important because next to credentials, relationships with senior faculty are a big determinant of success in academia. This can easily lead to isolation in their departments.
We propose several solutions to these problems. Mentorships are essential to helping faculty members gain a sense of ownership of their position at the University. Similarly, opportunities to work on University programming related to their field of study should be available to faculty of color.
A wealth of diverse graduate students, the quality of their education, and their access to mentorships directly affect our success in the recruitment of faculty of color. Surrounding graduate students with diverse faculty creates a pipeline towards a more representative pool of future faculty. This will not be an easy task: A recent report by the American Council on Education, “Too Many Rungs on the Ladder? Faculty Demographics and the Future Leadership of Higher Education” points to the small number of young tenure-track faculty today. The report found that younger faculty members were more diverse, but they are a part of a much smaller group nationally. This trend has significant implications for the face of academia in the future; effectively guaranteeing that the leadership pool will be much smaller. With very few new faculty, the current makeup of leadership in Academia will remain unchanged without aggressive recruitment efforts.
With this in mind, the University needs to ensure that resources are devoted to recruitment efforts. In the face of budget cuts, we should not be tempted to cut funding from such offices as the Vice President for Faculty Advancement. Resisting these cuts sends the resounding message of a real commitment towards faculty diversity, not an empty claim that simply seeks a positive image for the University.
Carlos Oronce and Bernice Ramirez are co-chairs of the Minority Rights Coalition.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Donald Trump will be a threat to student loan forgiveness
By Ryan Williams | YesterdayTo be sure, this is not a problem of the University’s making. Nevertheless, understanding the uncertainty of financial accessibility in education, the University must step up to the plate.
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 6 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | January 13, 2025After all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
