College presidents must be able to multitask. Though not in the official job descriptions, these administrative leaders must be figureheads, court the general public, delegate effectively and always keep an eye on the horizon to guide their ships to bigger, better waters. It is a tough job and like many high-profile ones, comes with its share of scrutiny in the public eye.
As the latest wave of college presidents looks towards retirement, the higher education community has the opportunity to promote a more diverse presidential core. The next five years will set the tone for college leadership at the highest level for the coming decades and really for the entire student population too.
Here are some interesting facts about college presidents:
61. Average age of college presidents in 2011.
• 92. Percentage of college presidents aged in the mid-50s to mid-70s.
• 14. Average number of years retiring college presidents first serve in the role.
• 40. Normal number of new college presidents in the American Association of State Colleges and Universities every year.
• 109. Actual number of new college presidents from April 2011 to August 2012.
• 6. Number of new college presidents this school year in the California State system alone.
• 13. Percentage of college presidents who are racial or ethnic minorities, as of 2012.
• 14. Percentage of college presidents who were racial or ethnic minorities in 2006.
• 26. Percentage of women college presidents.
So how do you introduce diversity at the college president level? Here are a few steps.
Take advantage of the new way to find college presidents. In the past, college presidents from other schools and college vice presidents have most often ascended the ranks to fill empty presidential seats. While this still happens about 19 and 25 percent of the time, respectively, other leaders like provosts and deans are increasingly being considered to fill the college president vacancies. Some schools even search outside the college community to find leaders from other industries that fit the bill. There is really no hiring formula that applies to all college president spots and a “qualified” candidate could feasibly jump several levels of hierarchy to claim the spot.
Recognize the opportunity at hand. American institutions of higher education often consider how a diverse student, and even faculty, population should look but do not extend that to top-tier leadership roles. Colleges need to rethink that strategy. I believe the trickle-down diversity effect works well in college settings. Instead of starting with the largest group (students), start cultural change at the top of the pyramid. If a school has a well-balanced student population already in place, chances are that the faculty and administration reflect that fact too.
Includediversity in the search process. I’m not saying that white men with the right qualifications should be excluded from the running; I just mean that colleges with open president seats should make sure the short list of candidates has some variety in experience, ethnicity, sex and race. The Rooney Rule, established in 2003 by the NFL, mandates that at least one minority candidate be interviewed for all head coaching spots. I think colleges need to do that same with their academic leaders.
Those in lower to middle-level leadership roles in colleges that have presidential aspirations should get ready now. Make sure your name is associated with talks about the future of the college by getting yourself involved in the action. Get published. Envision yourself on the same plane as the college presidents that went before you but realize that you have a unique voice to lend to the college community you want to lead. Embrace the turning tides. Be an active part of the changes in college administration and you will in turn be part of the progress.
College and university campuses are places for progress. The nation’s youngest minds and most educated adults work together to not only better their individual lives, but to improve society. This comes in the form of medical breakthroughs, scientific discoveries, advancement of the arts and more. College and university settings are the birthplace of much of the nation’s innovation.
Academics are not the only area that benefit from the collaborative and ambitious natures of higher education populations, though. Advancements in social thought also take place on these campuses, creating the mold of behavior that the rest of the country should, and often, follows. Diversity programs on college campuses, both school- and student-sponsored, are about more than cashing in on a perennial buzzword. These initiatives make a difference, from impacting immediate communities to influencing public policy and laws.
In my own research, I read about a lot of different schools doing tremendous things in the areas of promoting diversity, on campus and beyond. Here’s a look at a few of the strongest programs I’ve come across recently:
California Community Colleges
As reported on this site, the California Community College system recently announced a partnership with Historically Black Colleges and Universities that will link two-year achievements at the California schools with furthering that education at nine of the nation’s HBCUs. Students who earn a transfer level associate’s degree and at least a 2.5 GPA will have priority status for admissions, housing and even financial aid at HBCUs. What I like so much about this program is that it is actually boosting diversity on HBCU campuses, particularly when it comes to California’s relatively large Latino/Latina college student populations. It is not just black students who will benefit from this program; other minorities, and even white students, will also have greater opportunities beyond their two-year degrees.
College of William and Mary
Sometimes the diversity programs outlined officially by elite colleges can come across at being a little bit dry, or lacking passion. Over the years as I’ve read about them, it has often struck me that these policies are more a result of duty and less driven by a desire for real change (to be fair, a lot of official college diversity policies come across this way, not just on expensive or elite campuses). This feeling is exactly why I was so impressed to read about a student-led initiative at the College of William and Mary called “Table Talk.”The four-part series of conversations aligns with the school’s sixth annual diversity celebration and features topics like “Assumptions and Stereotypes.” There is even diversity within the diversity topics, with religion, socioeconomic class, ability, gender identity and ethnicity all on the Table Talk agenda.
University of Buffalo, Law School
In 2012, the law school at the University of Buffalo launched a four-week summer program that targeted minority students who would be a good fit for law school, even if those students had never considered law as a profession. The program has continued every summer since then. Inspired by a request from the Minority Bar Association of Western New York the program was launched to help expose first-generation and minority college students to life as a lawyer, or in other law professions, and in the process recruit a more diverse graduating body of lawyers. The University of Buffalo is not the first to participate in the DiscoverLaw program, which has taken place on 18 campuses since launching in 2002, but it is an important one because of its east coast presence. Twenty-eight past participants answered a survey about the program at Buffalo and 17 said that they had applied to or planned to apply to law school. A country with more diverse legal minds is vital to progress for all citizens and this Buffalo program is on point with its aim to recruit more variety in law students in the pipeline.
As colleges and universities continue to evolve, so will society. Diversity programs on official and non-official levels matter when it comes to the country’s overall progress in areas like acceptance, tolerance and respect.
Each year online learning initiatives becomes less of a fringe movement and more of an incorporated, and accepted, form of education. More than 6.7 million people took at least one online class in the fall of 2011 and 32 percent of college students now take at least one online course during their matriculation. It is even becoming commonplace for high schools to require all students to take an online class before graduation as a way to prep them for the “real world” of secondary education.
The flexibility and convenience of online learning is well known but what is not as readily talked about is the way distance education promotes diversity of the college population. With less red tape than the traditional college format, online students are able to earn credits while still working full time, maintaining families and dealing with illnesses. Whether students take just one course remotely, or obtain an entire degree, they are able to take on the demands of college life more readily – leading to student population with more variety.
The Babson Survey Research Group recently revealed that while online college student enrollment is on the rise, traditional colleges and universities saw their first drop in enrollment in the ten years the survey has been conducted. This drop is small – less than a tenth of one percent – but its significance is big. A trend toward the educational equality of online curriculum is being realized by students, institutions and employers across the board. The benefits of a college education through quality online initiatives are now becoming more accessible to students that simply cannot commit to the constraints of a traditional campus setting.
A controversial experiment that could lead the way to even more college credit accessibility is MOOCs, or massive open online courses. As the name implies, these classes are offered to the general public at a low cost, or no cost, in the hopes of earning their students college credit. California-based online course provider Coursera recently had five of its offerings evaluated by the American Council on Education for college credit validity. Four of the courses were recommended for college credit by ACE, and one was endorsed for vocational credit, providing student work verification through a strict proctoring process.
These credits are not earned through community colleges or online-institutions; Duke University, the University of California at Irvine and the University of Pennsylvania are on Coursera’s list of places the courses will earn credit for students that pay a nominal fee. Students that obtain these credits through Coursera can approach any higher education institution and seek their inclusion in a degree program, but the final discretion is up to the particular school.
MOCCs are certainly in an infancy stage and do not provide a “sure thing” yet for students that participate. In the Babson survey mentioned earlier, only 2.6 percent of schools offer a MOOC, but an additional 9.4 percent are building a MOCC plan. The potential for further diversity and equality in education through MOCCs is certainly on the horizon. This form of online learning means that students do not have to commit to an entire course of study to obtain credits or even commit to a particular institution upfront.
MOOCs will further eliminate the socio-economic barriers that keep promising students from seeking out college credits. Students are given more flexibility in scheduling at an affordable price. Though the MOOC trend has its dissenters, I believe it will win over even the most skeptical and increase accessibility for all people that seek higher education. After all, at one time the mention of online courses raised a few eyebrows in the educational community and look how far the concept has come. Further development of online initiatives, specifically in the area of MOOCs, represents the next big step for enriching the diversity of the college student population in America.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
Dressed in a black hoodie and sagging jeans, DeAndre (name changed) swaggers down the street, singing loudly the gritty lyrics of a gangsta rap.
This routine typifies DeAndre’s journey to and from school. Many of those watching DeAndre’s behavior during his school commute could assume him to be a thug and a gangster.
Such a narrative, a result of theracialized and gendered narratives that black male adolescents live with in urban areas, is part of DeAndre’s schooling as well as out-of-school experiences.
Black males are presumed to lack intelligence when it comes to academics, particularly mathematics.
For more than ten years, I have been researching the lives and experiences of black STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) high school students all the way up the pipeline to black STEM faculty. I have looked at the achievements of black students in mathematics within their first eight or nine years of schooling.
The truth is DeAndre is a high school junior and a high-achiever in mathematics and science from an urban area. DeAndre is not hardened, but he is fragile.
His STEM identity is especially tenuous.
DeAndre is not alone. There are thousands of young men like DeAndre in urban cities across the country, who are STEM high-achievers and have the potential to succeed as STEM professionals.
However, too often they receive negative messaging about their continued success in STEM. Such messages from teachers or counselors downplay or minimize their mathematics abilities. The low expectations from these talented boys serve to further discourage them from pursuing STEM fields.
In 2011, whites held 71% of STEM jobs, Asians held 15% and blacks only 6%. In 2009 white students obtained 65.5% of the STEM undergraduate degrees. However, STEM undergraduate degrees for blacks have remained flat for the last 9 years.
When it comes to academic success, young black students face many other challenges that are only made worse by the negative messaging.
There are societal messages that equate black maleness with criminality, with teachers often being afraid of their black male students.
Often enough, as my own research shows, unequal access to treatment results in poorer healthoutcomes for black kids.
The early academic years for these students are riddled with long-term (two months or longer) illnesses that negatively impact their schooling and result in attending at least one summer school term.
DeAndre, for example, has a higher rate of school transfer; his current school is his third high school in three years. This lack of continuity for high achieving black male students can lead to additional pressures to prove their intellectual abilities in mathematics to an unwelcoming or skeptical school culture.
Fighting racial stereotypes can also wear them down.DeAndre is weary of racial stereotypes in general and stereotypes about black males in particular.
DeAndre’s coarse behavior during his school commute is actually performed to repel or deflect potential violence via aggressive posturing, as evident in his “swagger.” In reality, he hasn’t been in any “real” fight since second grade and is filled with trepidation every time he walks home from school.
Such few options
Young black students also work toward what is called “performing whiteness.” This in their words means: talking ultra proper English while enunciating every syllable, dressing preppy, not talking about their families, pretending to go on vacations, not telling too many jokes and proving to their white female teachers that they are not to be feared but to be loved and nurtured.
The result is that their intrinsic motivation for learning mathematics and steadfast internal drive get constantly eroded by a host of structural and environmental challenges.
In addition to all these above challenges, they are often at schools that do not offer enough academic opportunities to support their interests. DeAndre’s school does not offer AP classes that would position him more favorably for a STEM college major.
Another problem that black kids face is an absence of role models. The successful black role models that students like DeAndre are exposed to are mostly athletes and rappers. DeAndre does not want to be an athlete or a rapper.
Even so, the likelihood of DeAndre going on to pursue STEM remains frail.
Instead DeAndre has chosen to be a social worker. Through this justice-orientated work, DeAndre wants to address the social and racial inequities in his neighborhood. We don’t know if he will use STEM in the future or not.
If DeAndre has managed to come this far, it is thanks to the support he has received from family members. DeAndre has fond memories of playing dominoes with his grandfather and mathematically complicated card games with his aunts.
His first mathematics teacher was his father. Today, DeAndre is like a human calculator, spitting out complicated number algorithms.
Diversity vital to STEM
As we work to minimize the fragility factors affecting youth like DeAndre, we often overlook what protects DeAndre’s STEM and academic identity. The socialization in mathematics that does happen in many black households remains unappreciated by schools as it does by the predominantly white social structures.
My experience of investigating lives, such as those of DeAndre has convinced me of the need for rigorous research that contributes to a more accurate and nuanced portrayal of black males in STEM.
The vitality of United States will be derived in large part from fostering the STEM identities of young men like DeAndre who reside within our urban communities. Their participation is important for innovation – and for a more equitable society.
Our DeAndres should not see a conflict between pursuing a STEM college trajectories and an unyielding sense of responsibility for the improvement of their home communities.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
By Kelly Walsh
The Rise of Regionally Accredited Competency Based Education in HigherEd
I’ve been a fan of the idea of Competency Based Education since I first heard of it. It seemed like such a positive development and a step ahead in the evolution of higher education here in the US and abroad. But I figured it would be quite a while (as in years, possibly quite a few years) before the country’s regional accreditors would become comfortable with assessing and approving CBE programs.
In the U.S., colleges and universities need to be regionally accreditedif they wish for students to be eligible for the federal education funds commonly referred to as Title IV aid (in the form of grants and loans). Many students simply can’t afford tuition at even the least costly colleges without some help from federal aid.
So, getting back to CBE and accreditation … I knew that Western Governors University wasa pioneer in CBE and that their programs had been regionally accredited, but they were well ahead of the game and seemed to be very much the exception, at least they were when I first learned about them a couple years ago. I also knew that EDUCAUSE was exploring CBE through their Breakthrough Models Incubator program last year, and this further influenced my perception that CBE had a lot of maturing to do before it was ready to take off (or so I believed).
“Three important developments stand to dramatically change the way we think about degree programs and pathways:
The rapid adoption of competency-based education (CBE) programs, often using industry and employer authority for guiding the creation of the competencies and thus programs
An eventual move to suborganizational accreditation, with Title IV funds available for credits, courses, and microcredentials offered by new providers in new delivery models, part of the accelerating trend toward “unbundling” higher education
Increasing recognition that postsecondary education will no longer be contained to the existing and traditional degree levels but will instead be consumed at various levels of granularity—less than full degree programs and continuing throughout lives and careers”
That statement about the “rapid adoption” of CBE got me curious, especially given the other statements being made here and the awareness that regional accreditation stands between several of these ideas and any sort of widespread proliferation of them. So I started searching the web for regionally accredited competency based education degree programs. I was quite surprised by what I found.
Accredited CBE Programs are Growing at a Faster Rate Than Many Would Have Anticipated. Is it Gradually Going Mainstream?
What has shocked me a bit (in a good way) has been learning that quite a few CBE programs have been accredited already, and that the regional accreditors have defined paths for CBE program accreditation.
First, I came across this regionally-accredited CBE program from the University of Wisconsin, the “UW Flexible Option“. Then I found this article explaining how a some of Washington’s 34 community and technical colleges are rolling out regionally accredited CBE degrees (with the help of advising from WGU). In this article, we learn that in addition to UW, two other “Big Ten” Universities having introduced CBE degree programs – the University of Michigan and Purdue University.
The article, Competency-Based Degree Programs On The Rise, not only confirms my perception, it also reminds us that big online players like Capella University and SNHU’s College for America have accredited CBE programs.
While I was at it, I figured I would confirm that the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (our accreditor at CW) has a formal process for seeking accreditation for CBE programs, and learned that they do indeed (they announced the establishment of a “Direct Assessment” Approval Process in July of last year). Given this and the approved programs noted above, it seems likely that all of the regional accreditors now have a similar process!
While trolling the Web for this information, I also came across this organization and website – the “Competency Based Education Network” (http://www.cbenetwork.org/about/). “The Competency-Based Education Network is a group of regionally accredited colleges and universities working together to address shared challenges to designing, developing, and scaling competency-based degree programs.” There are dozens of colleges and universities in this group.
CBE is becoming a meaningful part of the higher education landscape here in the U.S. much faster than I realized. Might President LeBlanc’s other “developments” also come about a lot sooner than many would think? What do you think?
(Okay, I’ll say it … sorry for the corny article title, but I’ve been wanting to use that classic headline ‘hack’ for years now and this was such a good opportunity! It really has been a bit of a shock to learn how quickly accredited CBE is evolving and changing the landscape of higher ed :)).
This post originally appeared onEmerging EdTech, and was republished with permission.
________________________
Kelly Walsh is Chief Information Officer at The College of Westchester, in White Plains, NY, where he also teaches. In 2009, Walsh founded EmergingEdTech.com. As an education and instructional technology advocate, he frequently delivers presentations on a variety of related topics at schools and conferences across the U.S. Walsh is also an author, and online educator, regularly running Flipped Class Workshops online. His eBook, the Flipped Classroom Workshop-in-a-Book is available here. Kelly also writes, records, and performs original music … stop by kwalshmusic.com and have a listen!
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest post by Ellis Jones, College of the Holy Cross via The Conversation
I regularly teach a course called The Sociology of Television & Media in which my students and I critically explore newscasts, entertainment programming and (both commercial and political) advertising. The theme that I use as a touchstone throughout the class is: What happens when, as a society, we begin to mix fantasy and reality together in mass media?
We discuss how a range of troubling outcomes emerge for a public that has difficulty telling truth from fiction. Max Horkheimer, a German-Jewish sociologist, argued that this is part of what led to the rise of Nazism in Germany.
Once we lose our ability to detect lies, we become vulnerable to demagogues.
Six categories of rhetoric
About halfway through the semester, I have students deconstruct political ads, and we discuss practical resources for navigating the web of truths, half-truths and outright lies that proliferate unhindered during each election cycle.
One resource that I offer is Politifact.org’s Truth-o-Meter. Students fact-check politicians’ statements to determine how much, if any, truth is contained therein (they actually won a Pulitzer Prize for their work fact-checking the 2008 election).
The first, and perhaps most important, takeaway from their work is that modern political statements cannot accurately be rated as simply “true” or “false.” So sophisticated has the art of mixing truth and lies become that the scale Politifactcurrently uses includes six separate categories of political rhetoric: true, mostly true, half true, mostly false, false and “pants on fire” (for statements that aren’t just false but also completely ludicrous – and yet still stated as truth).
In essence, while there is still but one way to tell the truth, there are now at least five times as many acceptable ways to lie.
Boehner’s team was apparently trying to compare global sales of antacids (including all seven billion people on the planet) to USspending on elections (about 320 million of us) – a false comparison.
On April 23 2015, Hillary Clinton provided a good illustration of a statement that rates as a “half truth.” When addressing the Women in the World Summit in New York City, Clinton asserted that the US ranks “65th out of 142 nations” when it comes to equal pay for women. The statistic comes from the World Economic Forum’s 2014 Global Gender Gap Report.
However, the primary measure generated by this report ranks the US 20th in gender equity. The ranking of 65th is taken from a subcategory in the report that relies on a survey of perceptions of executives rather than hard numbers. So, while it is technically true, it may actually be overstating the severity of the gender pay gap comparison.
Whom can we trust?
The second takeaway, though it may not be much of a surprise, is that there are no politicians in this country that exclusively tell the truth. Every single one, to a greater or lesser extent, spins, bends, twists or breaks the truth.
Perhaps this is the price of power in our modern democracy, but we should find it at least a little troubling.
So where does this leave us? Well, knowing that every one of our politicians lies, the most important question, in my mind, becomes: Who is most often telling the truth and who is lying to us repeatedly in order to gain our support?
In other words, whom can and whom can’t we trust?
With this question in mind, I had my students add up the raw numbers for 25 major politicians (based on Politifact’sfact-checking over the past eight years) and write the results up on the board in rank order from most to least honest based on the data. The results were intriguing.
While the prototype point system was not particularly sophisticated (two points for each true statement, one point for each mostly true statement, zero for half-truths, etc.), the numbers revealed that many well-known politicians were abusing the truth far more than they were embracing it.
When I asked the class what they thought of the results, one student raised her hand and replied, “I’m not shocked.” Many of the others immediately nodded their heads in agreement.
I wondered if we’ve become so accustomed to the bending and breaking of the truth that we no longer expect truth from our leaders. Now we’re teaching the next generation not to expect it either.
After seeing these preliminary results, I was hooked.
Generating ‘honesty’ report cards
I quickly returned to my office and began running the numbers on a total of 42 politicians (Republicans and Democrats) with the greatest name recognition and included every current presidential hopeful who has expressed some level of interest in running in the 2016 presidential election, to boot.
As of May 5 2015, only 37 of the 42 politicians included have made 10 or more statements that have been fact checked in Politifact’s database, so I immediately set aside the other five politicians as having too small of a statement sample to consider in the results (the possibility for error being too significant).
I decided to grade our politicians the same way that I would grade my students if their assignment was to tell the truth.
They receive an A+ (100) if they actually tell the whole truth, a B (85) if what they say is mostly true, a C (75) if they tell a half-truth, a D (65) if what they say is mostly false, an F (55) if it is plainly a lie, and no credit (0) if they fail to take the assignment seriously at all (“pants on fire”).
Each politician’s Honesty Score is then calculated based on the overall percentage of their statements that are true, false or somewhere in between. The results are as follows (hold on to your socks):
0 A’s, 3 B’s, 22 C’s, 9 D’s, and 3 F’s.
As of May 2015, according to a synthesis of Politifact’s fact-checking of actual statements over the past eight years:
The two most honest 2016 presidential hopefuls are:
Republican: Jeb Bush [B-]
Democrat: Hillary Clinton [B-]
The two least honest 2016 presidential hopefuls:
Republican: Ted Cruz [D-]
Democrat: Lincoln Chafee [C]
The only three politicians to receive failing grades:
Michele Bachmann [F], Herman Cain [F], Donald Trump [F]
Our three most powerful current representatives:
Barack Obama [C+], John Boehner [C-], Mitch McConnell [C]
The most honest politician in the US:
Cory Booker [B-]
You can take a look at the results for yourself:
2016 Presidential Hopefuls
Notable Democrats
Notable Republicans
Keep in mind, this kind of data tells us nothing about the views the candidates hold, or their policies, or even what kind of a leader they may ultimately turn out to be.
It does, however, tell us something important about how often they tell the truth to the public, and that should be something we hold them accountable for. It will be interesting to see how these same political leaders fare six months or a year from now when the races have really started to heat up, particularly those who look like they may be viable presidential candidates.
As teachers, caught up in our own subject matter, we easily forget that our students are hungry to apply what they’re being taught in our classes to something meaningful in their own lives.
It is our obligation to offer each generation a sense of social responsibility, hope for the future and the practical tools that will allow them to build it for themselves.
Something like a yearly Honesty Report Card might serve us well at this point in our democracy’s evolution. At the very least, let’s use this idea as a starting point for some kind of political unity in this country.
Whether you are liberal or conservative, can’t we at least agree that our politicians should start telling us the truth?
Since the 1980s, there has been robust real-world evidence of a preference for hiring women for entry-level professorships in science, engineering, technology and math (STEM). This evidence comes from hiring audits at universities. For instance,in one audit of 89 US research universities in the 1990s, women were far less likely to apply for professorships – only 11%-26% of applicants were women. But once they applied, women were more likely to be invited to interview and offered the job than men were.
But what went on behind the scenes with these hiring decisions? Did women applicants give better job talks than men, publish more or in better journals, or have stronger letters of recommendation? Were hiring committees trying to address the faculty gender balance that typically skews more male than female?
To find out why academic faculty preferred women, an experiment was needed, and we recently conducted one.
Collecting hypothetical hiring data
Previously, in five national experiments, we asked 873 faculty from 371 colleges and universities in all 50 US states to rank three hypothetical applicants for entry-level professorships, based on narrative vignettes about the candidates and their qualifications. We told participants our goal was to collect information about what faculty looked for in job applicants when hiring, so we could advise our own graduate students.
We asked them to imagine that colleagues in their department had already met these hypothetical applicants, evaluated their CVs, attended their job talks, read their letters of recommendation – and rated the applicants as 9.5 out of 10 (very impressive) or 9.3 (still impressive, but just less so).
One of the applicants was an outstanding woman, pitted against an identically outstanding man. Because men and women were depicted as equally talented, any hiring preference had to be due to factors other than candidate quality. We included a third, male, foil candidate as one of the many ploys we employed to mask the gendered purpose of the experiment. In this previously published research, we found that both female and male faculty strongly prefer (by a 2-to-1 margin) to hire an outstanding woman over an identically outstanding man. The sole exception to this finding was that male economists had no gender preference.
Faculty of both genders exhibit 2-to-1 preference for hiring women applicants with identically outstanding qualifications, with the exception of male economists.
Even when we gave faculty only a single applicant to evaluate, those given the woman rated her more hireable than did those given the identical applicant depicted as a man. Not surprisingly, this finding caused a media frenzy, as it contradicted what many believe to be sexist hiring in academia.
Note that these experiments were not designed to mimic actual academic hiring, which entails multi-day visits, job talks and so on. The purpose of our experiments was not to determine if women are favored in actual hiring but rather to determine why data suggest they are in real-world conditions. To answer this question, one needs a controlled experiment to equate applicants.
Remember that our experiment looked at typical short-listed candidates – who are extremely qualified – at the point of hiring, and did not address advantages or disadvantages potentially experienced by women, girls, men and boys throughout their development. It is worth acknowledging, though, that a 2-to-1 advantage enjoyed at the point of tenure-track hiring is substantial and represents a pathway into the professoriate that is far more favorable for women than men.
Finding the limit to a preference for women
We wondered how deeply the faculty preference for women that we’d previously identified ran. Do faculty prefer a woman over a slightly more qualified man? How about a much more qualified man?
Ourmost recent experiment, just published in the journal Frontiers in Psychology, examined this question.
Using the same methods from our earlier study, we presented 158 STEM faculty with two male applicants and one female applicant for a tenure-track assistant professorship in their specific field. We presented another 94 faculty with two female applicants and one male applicant. In one contest, the female applicant was slightly less outstanding than her two male competitors, although still impressive; in the other, the male applicant was slightly less outstanding than his two female competitors.
It turned out that faculty of both genders and in all fields preferred the applicant rated the most outstanding, regardless of gender. Specifically, faculty preferred to hire slightly more outstanding men over slightly less outstanding women, and they also preferred to hire slightly more outstanding women over slightly less outstanding men.
Reconciling with other STEM sex bias research
These results show that the preference for women over equally outstanding men in our earlier experiments does not extend to women who are less accomplished than their male counterparts. Apparently, when female and male candidates are not equally accomplished, faculty view quality as the most important determinant of hiring rankings.
This finding suggests that when women scientists are hired in the academy, it is because they are viewed as equal or superior to males. These results should help dispel concerns that affirmative hiring practices result in inferior women being hired over superior men.
The absence of preference for a less outstanding man does not necessarily imply that academic hiring is meritocratic under all conditions. It is possible that with different levels of candidate information (or if the candidates were somewhat less competent, as opposed to being stellar), results might differ. Discrimination may be a concern when candidate qualifications are ambiguous, but, based on our study, not when candidates are exceptionally strong. Thus, our interpretation of our results is that women who are equal to or more accomplished than men enjoy a substantial hiring advantage.
These findings may provoke concerns. If affirmative action is intended to not merely give a preference to hiring women over identically qualified men, but also to tilt the odds toward hiring women who are slightly less accomplished but still rated as impressive, gender diversity advocates may be disheartened. Those who’ve lobbied for more women to be hired in fields in which they are underrepresented, such as engineering and economics, may find the present findings dismaying and argue that extremely well-qualified female candidates should be given preference over males rated a notch higher.
One claim finds no support in our new findings: the allegation that the dearth of women in some fields is the result of superior female applicants being bypassed in favor of less accomplished men. If excellent women applicants were given short shrift, the slightly less qualified man would have been chosen frequently over more qualified women. But this scenario occurred only 1.2% of the time – similar to the number of times a slightly less accomplished woman was chosen over a more accomplished man.
None of this means women no longer face unique hurdles in navigating academic science careers.
Nor do the present findings deny that historic sexism prevented many deserving women from being hired, or that current implicit stereotypes associating science with menare not related to lower science course-taking.
All of these studies suggest areas in need of further work to ensure equality of opportunity for women.
On the other hand, based on hundreds of analyses of national data on the lives of actual faculty women and men across the United States, we and economists Donna Ginther and Shulamit Kahn found that the overwhelming picture of the academy since 2000 is one of gender fairness. Our analyses examined hiring, remuneration, promotion, tenure, persistence, productivity, citations, effort and job satisfaction in every STEM field. The experiences of women and men professors today are largely comparable, as is their job satisfaction.
Our new experimental findings call into question unqualified claims of biased tenure-track hiring. Sex biases and stereotypes might reduce the number of women beginning training for the professorial pipeline, but when a woman emerges from her training as an excellent candidate, she is advantaged during the hiring process.
Throughout the nation’s history African-Americans struggled to combat economic, education, political and social obstacles. For instance, grandfather clauses and literacy tests were designed to prevent African-Americans from participating in the electoral process. Despite the barriers African-Americans stood steadfast and slowly chipped away at policies designed to maintain a caste system. To counter years of oppression stakeholders utilized the judicial system to reverse Jim Crow policies. After years of incremental steps African-Americans continued to encounter roving groups that sought to maintain a system of oppression through physical intimidation. Fortunately the overt threats did not deter civil rights organizers from pushing for a legislative framework that addressed systemic flaws. Several HBCU alumni including Ella Baker, Thurgood Marshall, Martin Luther King, Jr. and countless others helped to reshape the political landscape. Today, the lessons learned from HBCU alumni of the past can help solidify the future for HBCUs.
Recently, Congressman Bobby Scott, Ranking Member, Education and Workforce Committee and Senators Tammy Baldwin and Corey Booker introduced the “America’s College Promise Act.” The bill is an extension of President Obama’s free community college proposal, which is modeled after Tennessee’s education plan. The bill provides $10 billion over a ten-year period that would benefit thousands of minority, first generation and underserved students. Congressman Scott’s and Senators Baldwin and Booker’s plan would benefit HBCUs by strengthening the post-secondary pipeline, encouraging more Black and Latino students to attend HBCUs, support the efforts of students who require academic enrichment and lower student debt.
Throughout his tenure President Obama highlighted the importance of increasing opportunities for students of color. The President recognizes that the nation’s success is linked to creating more opportunities for all Americans. Ignoring the gaps between affluent and underserved communities could undermine efforts to increase the number of Americans with postsecondary degrees or certificates. HBCUs are uniquely equipped to enroll students from various socioeconomic backgrounds and prepare them to compete in the global economy. However, they need additional funding to ensure students have access to academic and social supports to achieve the American dream. Passing “America’s College Promise Act” would provide HBCUs with vital resources to improve conditions for students from urban and rural communities with limited resources. Without a new funding stream thousands of students will not have the opportunity to pursue a postsecondary education.
Recently, social upheaval in Baltimore and Ferguson reignited calls from social justice advocates to improve conditions in under-resourced communities. This neo-Civil Rights movement is reminiscent of the fight in the 1960’s that pressured the U.S. government to pass the Great Society programs. Events including sits-ins led by North Carolina A&T students galvanized the African-American community and reshaped the nation. A half a century later HBCU advocates, alumni, faculty, staff and students could use the template developed by Civil Rights advocates to increase support for “America’s College Promise Act.” Advances in technology allow supporters to coordinate via social media to encourage legislators to pass initiatives that close the resource gap.
Utilizing relationships with alumni and student government associations, black greek letter organizations (BGLO’s) and sports related groups is important. Working closely with these organizations provide critical linkages that exist in states throughout the United States. HBCUs should work collectively to encourage politicians to back proposals aimed at funding traditionally underserved institutions. Based on recent history it is apparent that efforts to protect HBCUs can produce positive results.
The 2013 decision was significant for two reasons: acknowledging HBCUs were treated unfairly and creating a template for other institutions to follow. For example, Cheyney University filed a lawsuit against the commonwealth of Pennsylvania asserting that the state did not abide by a 1999 agreement with the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights. Cheyney is the oldest HBCU in the nation and faces several obstacles that supporters contend are directly related to the state’s refusal to meet specific guidelines outlined in the agreement.A coalition of civil rights lawyers, alumni and advocates “Heeding Cheyney’s Call” believe the state is culpable and seeks to remedy years of inequitable funding. The decision by alumni and supporters in Maryland and Pennsylvania to fight for changes could impact HBCUs in states throughout the nation.
HBCUs continue to encounter barriers that hamper efforts to improve programs, recruit faculty, lower attrition rates and renovate facilities. Consequently, institutions have used the judicial system to address years of unfair treatment. Despite the barriers HBCUs graduate 25% of Black science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) majors and create pathways for students from predominantly low and moderate-income households. With additional financial support HBCUs could increase the six-year graduation rate for Black students. Ensuring students from traditionally underserved communities have access to a quality education is important. The nation is at a crossroad. Currently, a disproportionate number of Black and Latino students live below the poverty line yet the country’s demographics continue to change. Supporting initiatives that address years of unequal funding between HBCUs and PWIs is the key to protecting the nation’s future.
Dr. Larry J. Walker is an educational consultant focused on supporting historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs). His research examines the impact environmental factors have on the academic performance and social emotional functioning of students from HBCUs.
Do you have a good university lecturer? What makes them good? Is it because they make their classes relevant? Are their lectures interesting or challenging?
Or maybe they’re just fun to be around?
Good quality teaching can be hard to define and there is no single way of measuring it. But all students, throughout their education, experience the highs and lows of teaching ability.
In my own case, my love of some subjects was destroyed by incompetent, boring and, at times, uncaring teachers. But others helped me develop a passion for a subject that I never thought I would be interested in. My good teachers were the most creative and served as role models. They mentored their class on a journey of lifelong learning.
In my own experience as both a teacher and a student, I’ve found there are some key skills that good quality teachers have in common. You need to be creative, enthusiastic, be clear and keep the information relevant. Those tired lecturers, who never vary from the same worn lecture notes or PowerPoint slides year after year until they reach retirement, do a great disservice to themselves, the students and their profession.
But is good (or bad) teaching something you can measure?
My field is statistics and the students I teach are, in the main, doing an MBA and have an average age of about 30, along with generally being in middle to high management positions. They do not want simply to be entertained, but actually want to learn something of substance that can be applied in the “real world”. Otherwise they see a course as a waste of their time and money.
Students surveys can be an imperfect indicator. But these mature students can distinguish a “quality” teacher from a “popular” one, who might present an easy course that can be passed with little effort. In this sense these students’ judgements generally coincide with what academic colleagues think about the teacher as well.
I undertook a five year study of these surveys that included an overall rating of the teacher, along with questions regarding the teacher’s knowledge, the class dynamics, the teacher’s preparedness, organisational skills, enthusiasm for the subject and teaching, availability outside class time and a number of other factors.
Although these responses all correlated to varying degrees with the overall rating given to the teacher, there was one question that was consistently most highly associated across all subjects areas over all the years.
This was the one that asked whether the teacher was able to explain the course material clearly. There were a number of instances where a teacher was rated enthusiastic, knowledgeable and well-prepared, but still was considered a poor teacher overall.
The conclusion from this study was that if you cannot explain the concepts in a way that the audience can understand, it doesn’t matter what else you do. In this case, they will not enjoy the experience but leave frustrated.
Whenever I introduce a new topic, particularly if it is complex, into the lecture room, I am fully aware that although I have been familiar with it for many years, it is the first time that most of them will have heard it. And during my explanation I think to myself, “if I had been hearing this for the first time, would I have understood what I just said?”.
Sometimes the answer is no, and so I then go through it again in a slightly different way. I need to be satisfied that at least the majority of students have understood the principles and, of course, I always encourage questions at any time.
Whether a teacher has been effective or not naturally depends on just what the student has learned from the experience. A teacher might rate well immediately after a course is completed, but several years down the track when the student looks back they may find what they learned of little value or relevance.
This often means that they have retained next to nothing not long after the final exam, did not develop a passion to explore the field further or find any use for it in later life. To me that is a great shame.
Although students may not always remember what you teach them, they will always remember their outstanding lecturers and how good they made them feel about the subject. That is their greatest gift and the mark of a good teacher.
This piece is appearing as part of a series on Choosing a University. Read more pieces in the series here. This topic will also be discussed on #TalkAboutIt on ABC News 24, iview and abc.net.au
John Croucher, Professor of Statistics at Macquarie Graduate School of Management
*The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest post by Lizzie Weakley
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) estimates that there are over 3 million professional teachers educating about 50 million students. Teaching is one of the most challenging, yet rewarding careers. Teachers play an active role in helping both young and older students learn knowledge, develop skills and achieve success in life. Every day teachers across American make a difference in students’ lives as they inspire, encourage creativity and teach practical skills. Below introduces five of the best education degrees for aspiring teachers.
Special Education
There is a growing demand for special education teachers with the ability to help students struggling with emotional problems, behavioral disorders and learning disabilities. Some special education teachers cover all common core subjects and adapt them to their students’ needs. Others have specialized training to provide unique help to their students. These include audiologists, speech pathologists and adaptive special education teachers, who work with students with physical disabilities.
Mathematics
According to a recent Pearson’s report, American students currently rank 14th in the world for math and science cognitive skills. American students need passionate and competent teachers to help improve the current mathematic educational crisis. Potential teachers can choose a general four-year degree in math or specialize in Algebra, Calculus and Geometry.
English Language
As mentioned above, American students struggle with math and science. Even worse, American students ranked 17th in literacy rates. An aspiring teacher with a degree in English Language can teach almost every educational level, from elementary to college. English Language specializations include creative writing and period specializations, such as American or British literature.
Vocational Education
A bachelor of Vocational Education (VBE) is an excellent choice for teachers who want to help students learn practical skills through hands-on training. These teachers generally work in public schools or vocational institutions and teach a variety of subjects. These include health, business, agriculture and industrial arts and trades. Aspiring teachers can work with either high school or college aged students.
Social Sciences
There are multiple benefits to having a degree in social sciences. Aspiring teachers who wish to teach at higher levels of education can specialize in civics, sociology, anthropology, history, economics and political science. One of the best benefits of studying a social science is that these programs are all offered online. For example, a potential teacher could easily obtain an online masters in history while working full-time.
In conclusion, teaching is a rewarding job that offers unique teaching opportunities.
_________
Lizzie Weakley is a freelance writer from Columbus, Ohio. She went to college at The Ohio State University where she studied communications.
