January, 2004 University of Michigan ASSESSING THE ACADEMIC WORK ENVIRONMENT FOR FACULTY OF COLOR IN SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NSF ADVANCE Project Institute for Research on Women and Gender 1136 Lane Hall, 204 S. State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1290 Phone: (734) 764-9537 http:www.umich.edu/~advproj Assessing the Academic Work Environment for Faculty of Color in Science and Engineering asked his faculty advisory committee, the Senate Assembly Academic Af- Assessing the Academic fairs Advisory Committee, to devise Work Environment for approaches to address the problem of underrepresentation of persons of Faculty of Color in color within faculty ranks. Science and Engineering Nearly a decade later, UM President Bollinger declared, “our mission and core expertise is to create the best educational environment we can. We do this in part through a diverse faculty and student body." [UM News Release, 10/14/97]. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As recently as June 2003, University President Mary Sue Coleman reminded the campus, Examining Race-Ethnicity at the “We must look to the future and affi rm our University of Michigan institutional commitment to diversity in every The University of Michigan’s commitment to aspect of our community: our student body, our racial-ethnic diversity is clear, as evidenced faculty, and our staff.” Many faculty and admin- most publicly by its legal defense of its continu- istrators have worked long and hard to ensure ing efforts to maintain a diverse student body. that the University has a faculty that is excellent It has also made continued efforts to develop in every respect, including in its racial-ethnic and sustain a diverse faculty. According to an diversity. account in the University Record from 1995 (Lomax, Moore & Smith, April 17, 1995), Despite the commitment to creating a diverse faculty (and student body), faculty of color at When James J. Duderstadt became the University remain a small minority in most President of the University of Michi- fi elds. This report examines the specifi c situa- gan in 1988, he committed himself, tion of instructional track faculty of color in the his administration and the University sciences and engineering on the UM campus. to the Michigan Mandate, a blueprint for fundamental change in the ethnic The data analyzed for this report were originally composition of the University com- collected to examine the situation of women munity. One major objective of the science and engineering faculty at the Univer- Mandate was to increase by the year sity of Michigan. But we deliberately designed 2000 the representation of persons of the data collection to include enough faculty of color within the professoriate so that color to permit examination of race-ethnicity as the proportion of such individuals well as gender. Many studies have shown that would correspond more closely to while race-ethnicity and gender are different in their proportion in the population of some ways, they also operate similarly in others the State of Michigan and the United (Valian, 2000; Clark & Corcoran, 1983; Menges States of America. At the beginning & Exum, 1983); it is therefore always useful to of the 1989-1990 academic year, be mindful of both when making efforts to cre- Charles Vest, appointed by President ate and maintain a diverse workforce. Duderstadt to serve as Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, One of the challenges in writing this report 1 Assessing the Academic Work Environment for Faculty of Color in Science and Engineering was choosing terminology. We recognize that The low representation of faculty of color there is no neutral language for describing an in science and engineering fi elds is in part a individual's race-ethnicity and that different “pipeline” problem (i.e., not enough doctorates communities and individuals find specific being awarded to students of color). Among language to be more appropriate than others. science and engineering doctorates awarded to Some challenge the use of color or place of U.S. citizens where the race/ethnicity of the in- origin language as unhelpful or misleading, dividual could be identifi ed, minorities (includ- while others fi nd minority/majority terminol- ing Asian-Americans) earned just over 11% in ogy too dependent on context. Because we 1989 and 17% in 1998 (Figure 1a); meanwhile, had to make a choice, and we are reporting on a underrepresented minorities earned just under hetereogeneous group in terms of race-ethnicity, 5% of the science and engineering doctorates we have adopted the term "of color" to refer to in 1989 and 8% in 1998 (Figure 1b). faculty who self-identify as a member of any racial-ethnic minority group. The con trast ing Figure 1b: Doctorates Earned by Faculty of Color in Science, Medicine and Engineering Fields (and also heterogeneous) group of "white" by Race/Ethnicity Group faculty refers to faculty who self-identify as 50 European-American. underrepresent ed minorit y doct orat es (blacks, Hispanics, American Indians) 40 doctorates of color (including Asian Background Americans & faculty of Asian background Among full-time doctoral scientists and engi- 30 neers working in four-year colleges or universi- ties, faculty of color (defi ned as those of Asian, 20 black and Hispanic background) are less likely Percentage than white faculty to be at the rank of full profes- 10 sor, or tenured (NSF, 2000). In addition, black and Hispanic science and engineering faculty 0 are paid less than white faculty in the same fi eld, 1989 1998 even after controlling for age and experience (NSF, 2000). These inequities also exist across minority racial/ethnic groups, and between men The problems are not limited to the “pipeline,” and women within those groups. though. Recent studies have shown that fac- ulty of color who complete a Ph.D. in science Figure 1a: Earned Doctorates in Science, or engineering and pursue an academic career Medicine and Engineering Fields often encounter more obstacles than their white by Race/Ethnicity counterparts. Studies indicate that organiza- doctorates of color tional and environmental factors, such as a 100 white doctorates hostile working environment, may limit the 80 career attainment and satisfaction of faculty of color in science and engineering fi elds, as 60 in academe more generally (Allen et al., 2000; 40 Brown, 2000; CAWMSET Report, 2000; Laden Percentage & Hagedorn, 2000). Faculty of color report 20 feeling like outsiders in the world of academic science, citing strained collegial relationships 0 with white faculty, particularly when white 1989 1998 2 Assessing the Academic Work Environment for Faculty of Color in Science and Engineering faculty mistakenly believe that affi rmative ac- the impact of NSF ADVANCE-supported ef- tion policies have permitted the hiring of less forts at institutional change. qualifi ed faculty. In response, faculty of color report feeling pressured to continually prove In this report we focus on using that dataset they have earned their positions (Johnsrud & to assess the academic work environment for Sadao, 1998; Menges & Exum, 1983; Reyes instructional track science and engineering & Halcon, 1988). faculty of color at the University of Michigan. First we compare the responses of instruc- Some faculty of color report that several obsta- tional track faculty of color in the sciences cles limiting their ability to reach professional and engineering to those of white faculty. We goals in traditionally white institutions are the also explore gender differences among these result of discrimination and racism (Brown, faculty of color, comparing the experiences of 2000). For purposes of analysis, scholars have female scientists and engineers of color to two found it helpful to distinguish overt from covert key comparison groups: male scientists and racism (Johnsrud & Sadao, 1998; Dube, 1985), engineers of color, and female social scientists and interpersonal from institutional racism of color. It is important to note, then, that one (Johnsrud & Sadao, 1998; Haas,1992). With set of analyses examines the overall effect of institutional racism the discrimination may be race-ethnicity across gender. The other set unintentional, but the policies or practices of an identifi es the effect of gender within race-eth- institution result in disparate treatment, even if nicity, and of type of discipline within gender they are believed to be racially/ethnically (or and race-ethnicity. gender) neutral. Sample. The survey sample was drawn from While there is increasing research on the status instructional, research and clinical track fac- of scientists and engineers of color as well as ulty in science and engineering with paid ap- that of women scientists and engineers, the par- pointments at the University of Michigan-Ann ticular position of women of color in academic Arbor as of May 31, 2001. Because the number science and engineering has remained largely of faculty of color in science and engineering unexplored. Garrison (1987) has suggested fi elds at the University of Michigan is small, that women of color are also overlooked in the the ADVANCE Evaluation Advisory Commit- government’s bifurcated efforts to increase par- tee1 recommended purposely sampling faculty ticipation of minorities and women in scientifi c of color to yield numbers large enough to per- degree programs. Understanding their singular mit analysis by race/ethnicity, and to protect position, at the intersection of race and gender, confi dentiality. We therefore sampled nearly is essential for addressing