1

University of Virginia

2016 November Faculty Search Seminars

Formative Assessment Report

Prepared by

Karen K. Inkelas

Catherine Uffman

December 2016

2

Introduction

The following report summarizes formative evaluation feedback from participants in the Faculty Search Seminars held on November 14 and November 15, 2016. On November 14, two sessions were held that focused on Search Committee Dynamics and Dual Career Resources. On November 15, a session was held on Department Chair and Search Chair leadership. At the end of each session, attendees were asked to complete a paper evaluation form. After the event, attendees were invited by email to complete an online survey if they had not completed the paper form. A total of 16 participants attended one of the November 14 seminars, and 13 participants completed an evaluation form. A total of 14 participants attended the November 15 session, and 7 participants completed an evaluation form. Table A below summarizes information about the attendees at each session.

Table A: Summary Statistics for Participants in Faculty Search Seminars

November 14 November 15 Total

Event attendees 16 14 30

Total respondents 13 7 20

Response rate 81% 50% 67%

This report is divided into three parts. Part I: Respondent Characteristics summarizes demographic information about respondents and respondents’ knowledge and experience with the subject matter. Part II: Search Committee Dynamics and Dual Career Resources presents results from an assessment of respondents who attended the November 14 seminars. Part III: Department Chair and Search Chair Leadership presents results from an assessment of respondents who attended the November 15 session. Parts II and III summarize the insights respondents gained from attending the seminar, as well as the changes they intend to make as a result of attending. The “Recommendations” subsection below summarizes findings and provides recommendations for future CHARGE initiatives.

Recommendations Future CHARGE initiatives might focus more on explicit strategies to address implicit bias.

Respondents to the Day 1 questionnaire largely agreed that they understood issues with bias in the search process, but 38 percent indicated that they were neutral when asked about their ability to reduce gender bias that affects the evaluation of candidates. As such, participants might benefit from training that builds confidence in their ability to address bias in the search process.

Similarly, participants may benefit from time for reflection on specific aspects of search committees in their departments that they would like to change. Though Day 1 respondents largely agreed that they will work with colleagues to reduce bias, more than 50 percent had not identified specific aspects of search committees that they would like to change. Respondents may be better able to identify specific aspects of search committees they would like to change if given time to reflect during the seminar.

Future CHARGE programs on dual career resources at UVa may include more information on how departments can make plans to welcome dual career spouses. Though respondents largely indicated that they planned to use dual career resources, fewer respondents on Day 1 and 2 agreed that they

3

would work with their departments to make plans to welcome dual career spouses. Faculty may benefit from more training on how to welcome dual career faculty at the department level.

Comparison to September Seminar Results In the Faculty Search Seminars on September 26 and 27, participants provided similar feedback to the November 14 and 15 participants. Namely, in September, as in November, respondents were confident in their understanding of equitable search practices, but were less confident in their ability to identify and implement specific strategies to address implicit bias. Furthermore, both September and November participants had identified specific aspects of search committees in their departments that they would like to change. In both months, most respondents rated their knowledge of implicit bias higher than their confidence in taking action related to implicit bias. Consistency in these results suggests that future CHARGE initiatives should provide participants with training on strategies to address implicit bias and aim to build confidence in taking action to improve equity.

I. Respondent Characteristics

This section summarizes characteristics of the participants in the Faculty Search Seminars on November 14 and 15. Specifically, this section details respondents’ demographic characteristics, school affiliation, position or rank, and prior knowledge and experience with the topics discussed at the seminars. Because the content of the sessions on November 14 (Day 1) and November 15 (Day 2) varied, participants in the Day 1 sessions answered questions about their knowledge and experience that the participants in the Day 2 seminar were not asked to report.

A. Respondent Demographics

Gender More women than men attended a seminar on both Day 1 and Day 2. A greater proportion of women (80 percent) attended a Day 1 seminar on Search Committee Dynamics and Dual Career resources than attended the Day 2 seminar on Department Chair and Search Chair Leadership (57 percent). Figure 1-1 presents the demographic composition of attendees.

4

Figure 1-1: Respondents’ Gender

Day 1 (N=10) Day 2 (N=7)

School or College Affiliation Respondents were asked to report their school or college affiliation. On Day 1, 40 percent of respondents were affiliated with the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences and 20 percent were affiliated with the School of Engineering and Applied Science. Ten percent of Day 1 respondents were affiliated with the Darden School of Business, 10 percent with the School of Continuing and Professional Studies, 10 percent with the Curry School of Education, and 10 percent with the School of Medicine. On Day 2, 50 percent of respondents were affiliated with the School of Continuing and Professional Studies, 33 percent were affiliated with the Curry School of Education, and 17 percent were affiliated with the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. No respondents attending a seminar on Day 1 or Day 2 were affiliated with the School of Architecture, McIntire School of Commerce, School of Law, or F. Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy.

Female, 80%

Male, 20%

Female, 57%

Male, 43%

5

Figure 1-2: Respondents’ School or College Affiliation

Day 1 (N=10) Day 2 (N=6)

School or College Day 1 (N=10) Day 2 (N=6)

Percentage

Count Percentage Count

College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences 40% 4 17% 1

School of Engineering and Applied Science (SEAS) 20% 2 0% 0

Darden School of Business 10% 1 0% 0

School of Continuing and Professional Studies (SCPS) 10% 1 50% 3

Curry School of Education 10% 1 33% 2

School of Medicine 10% 1 0% 0

Position or Role

Respondents reported their position or rank in their academic department or unit. On Day 1, the majority of respondents held instructional positions, with 70 percent of respondents holding the positions of Assistant Professor (30 percent), Associate Professor (10 percent), Professor (10 percent), or Lecturer (20 percent). One participant on Day 1 serves as Associate Dean, and two participants on Day 1 hold “other” positions at the university. On Day 2, a large proportion of attendees held instructional positions (29 percent were Professors and 14 percent were Assistant Professors), but several participants also held non-instructional or administrative roles. For instance, two respondents were Department Chairs, one respondent was an Associate Dean, and two respondents held “other” positions at the university.

Table 1-1: Respondents’ Position or Role

Position Day 1 (N=10) Day 2 (N=7)

Percentage Count Percentage Count

Department Chair 0% 0 29% 2

Associate Dean 10% 1 14% 1

Dean 0% 0 0% 0

Dean of Diversity 0% 0 0% 0

Program or Center Director 0% 0 0% 0

Director of Diversity and Inclusion 0% 0 14% 1

Advocate (SEAS) 0% 0 0% 0

Darden, 10% SCPS, 10%

Curry School,

10%

School of Medicine,

10%

SEAS, 20%

College of Arts and Sciences,

40%

College of Arts

and Sciences

17%

Curry School,

33%

SCPS, 50%

6

Position Day 1 (N=10) Day 2 (N=7)

Percentage Count Percentage Count

Professor 10% 1 29% 2

Associate Professor 10% 1 0% 0

Assistant Professor 30% 3 14% 1

Lecturer 20% 2 0% 0

Other 20% 2 29% 2 Note: Respondents may hold more than one position.

B. Experience and Knowledge

Experience on a Search Committee Respondents were asked to report their experience serving on search committees at UVa. Of day 1 participants, 46 percent are currently serving on a search committee. Thirty-one percent of day 1 participants are not currently serving, but have previously served on search committees, and 15 percent of participants have never served on a search committee. Eight percent of respondents indicated that they are not faculty members. Of Day 2 participants, 29 percent reported that they are not faculty members, 21 percent reported that they have previously served, but are not currently serving on search committees, and 7 percent of respondents have never served on a search committee. Twenty-one percent of Day 2 respondents are currently serving as search chairs, and 14 percent have served as search chairs in the past. Figure 1-3 presents Day 1 and 2 respondents’ experience on search committees.

Figure 1-3: Respondents’ Experience on Search Committees Search Committee Experience Search Chair Experience

Note: Day 1 (N=13); Day 2 (N=7)

46%

31%

15% 8% 7%

21%

7%

29%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Currentlyserving on a

searchcommittee

Not currentlyserving, but

havepreviouslyserved on

searchcommittee

Never servedon a searchcommittee

Other: Not afaculty

member.

Day 1Day 2

21%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Currently serving assearch chair

Previously served assearch chair

7

Experience with and Understanding of Implicit Bias

Day 1 participants reported their experience with CHARGE workshops on implicit bias. Almost all respondents (92 percent) had limited experience with implicit bias training. Forty-six percent of respondents had never attended a CHARGE workshop on implicit bias, and 46 percent of respondents had attended a CHARGE workshop on implicit bias one or two times. Figure 1-4 below presents Day 1 respondents’ experience with CHARGE workshops on implicit bias.

Figure 1-4: Respondents’ Experience with CHARGE Workshops on Implicit Bias (N=13)

Experience with Workshops on Implicit Bias

Day 1 participants were asked to report their knowledge and confidence in taking action related to implicit bias. On a 7-point scale, with 1 being the lowest level of knowledge or confidence and 7 being the highest level of knowledge or confidence, respondents rated slightly higher knowledge than confidence in taking action related to implicit bias. On average, respondents rated their knowledge of implicit bias 5.2 and their confidence in taking action 5.0. However, more respondents gave ratings of 6 or above to their confidence in taking action related to implicit bias than to their knowledge of implicit bias. Four respondents rated their confidence in taking action a 6 and one respondent a 7, while only two respondents rated their knowledge of implicit bias a 6. Overall, results suggest that participants have a relatively high level of bias literacy. Figure 1-5 and Table 1-2 summarize respondents’ bias literacy.

46% 46%

8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Never 1-2 times 3-4 times 5 times More than 5times

8

Figure 1-5: Respondents’ Level of Bias Literacy Day 1 Respondents (N=12)

Table 1-2: Summary Statistics, Respondents’ Bias Literacy

Average Median Minimum Maximum

Knowledge 5.2 5.3 4 7

Confidence 5.0 5.0 4 7

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1 2 3 4 5 5.5 6 7

Knowledge Confidence

9

II. Day 1: Search Committee Dynamics and Dual Career Resources This section describes the insights gained and intended changes of respondents who participated in the November 14 seminar on Search Committee Dynamics and Dual Career Resources.

A. Insights Gained from Seminar

Equity in the Search Process Most respondents indicated a strong understanding of bias in the search process. For instance, 100 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are better able to “recognize gender biases that affect the evaluation of candidates” after attending the seminar. Ninety-two percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they had increased their understanding of search committee dynamics and awareness of equitable search practices from attending the seminar. Although 62 percent of respondents agreed that they were able to “reduce gender biases” after attending the seminar, 38 percent of respondents indicated neutral agreement with the statement, suggesting that though respondents learned concepts of implicit bias from the seminar, they are still not confident in their ability to apply them in everyday situations.

Figure 2-1: Respondents’ Insights Gained Related to Equity (N=13)

Dual Career Resources Respondents’ answers to questions about their knowledge of dual career resources at UVa indicated strong understanding and ability to identify resources. All respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they know when candidates may begin to use dual career resources, understand how to refer someone to the Dual Career Office, and can identify resources for dual career faculty. Figure 2-2 summarizes responses related to insights gained about dual career resources.

38%

8%

8%

39%

54%

61%

77%

23%

38%

31%

23%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%

I am able to reduce gender biases that affectthe evaluation of candidates.

I have increased my awareness of equitablesearch practices.

I have increased my understanding of searchcommittee dynamics.

I can better recognize gender biases thataffect the evaluation of candidates.

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

10

Figure 2-2: Respondents’ Insights Gained on Dual Career Resources (N=13)

B. Intended Changes

Equity in the Search Process Respondents largely indicated their intention to address issues with gender bias in the hiring process. One hundred percent of respondents stated that they would work with their academic unit to reduce gender bias in the hiring process, and 92 percent of respondents indicated that they would share what they learned about gender bias in the search process with their colleagues. More than 50 percent of respondents were “Unsure” whether they had identified specific aspects of faculty search committees in their academic unit that they would like to change. This finding suggests that future sessions may provide participants with time to reflect and identify specific changes they hope to make after attending the workshop.

46%

46%

38%

54%

54%

62%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I can identify resources for dual careerfaculty at UVa.

I understand how to refer someone to theDual Career office at UVa.

I know when candidates may begin to useUVa's services for dual career faculty.

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

11

Figure 2-3: Respondents’ Intended Changes Related to Equity in the Search Process (N=10-13)

Dual Career Resources Respondents largely indicated their intention to use dual career resources in their academic unit. For instance, 100 percent of respondents indicated that they would share what they learned about dual career resources with their department, and 90 percent of respondents indicated that they will refer eligible candidates to UVa’s dual career resources. Though 80 percent of respondents agreed that they would work with their department to make a plan for welcoming dual career spouses, 20 percent of respondents indicated that they would not do so. Figure 2-4 summarizes respondents’ intended changes related to dual career resources at UVa.

38%

92%

100%

8% 54%

8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I have identified specific aspects of facultysearch committees in my department or

school/college that I would like to change.

I will share with my department orschool/college what I learned about gender

biases in the search process from thisseminar.

I will work with my department orschool/college to reduce gender biases in our

hiring practices.

Yes No Unsure

12

Figure 2-4: Respondents’ Intended Changes Related to Dual Career Resources (N=10)

Hope for Change Respondents all indicated that they were “hopeful” or “very hopeful” that UVa CHARGE initiatives such as the seminar will “contribute to the adoption of more equitable faculty search processes” and “lead to greater diversity among the faculty.” Figure 2-5 summarizes responses.

Figure 2-5: Respondents’ Hope for Improving UVa Climate for Diversity (N=9)

80%

90%

100%

100%

20%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I will work with my department orschool/college to make a plan for welcoming

dual career spouses.

I will refer eligible candidates to UVa'sresources for dual career faculty.

I will share with my department orschool/college what I learned about

resources for dual career faculty.

I have experienced challenges related to dualcareer faculty hiring and/or retention in my

department or school/college.

Yes No Unsure

44%

56%

56%

44%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Lead to greater diversity among thefaculty

Contribute to the adoption of moreequitable faculty search practices at this

university

Not at all hopeful A little hopeful Neutral Hopeful Very hopeful

13

Undergraduate Participation Respondents varied in their level of interest in allowing undergraduates to participate in the search process. Although 40 percent of respondents indicated that they were “very interested” in allowing undergraduates to participate, 20 percent indicated that they were only “a little interested,” and 20 percent of respondents indicated that they were “not at all interested” in allowing undergraduates to participate. Respondents’ preferences may vary based on the culture of their school or academic department. Figure 2-6: Respondents’ Interest in Allowing Undergraduates to Participate in Faculty Search (N=10)

III. Day 2: Department Chair and Search Chair Leadership This section summarizes respondents’ insights gained and intended changes after attending the November 15 seminar.

A. Insights Gained from Seminar

Equity in the Search Process Most respondents indicated that they understand equitable practices in the search process. For instance, all respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they understand the importance of assessing the search process at critical points, and 86 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of strategies to address implicit bias in the search process. Although nearly 72 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are “aware of strategies for managing search committees to improve diversity,” 28.6 percent of respondents indicated “neutral” agreement with the statement. Figure 3-1 presents respondents’ insights gained related to equity in the search process.

20% 20%

10% 10%

40%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Not at allinterested

A littleinterested

Neutral Interested Very Interested

14

Figure 3-1: Respondents’ Insights Gained Related to Equity in the Search Process (N=7)

Interdisciplinary and Cluster Hiring Overall, respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are able to recognize implicit bias in interdisciplinary and cluster hiring and are able to identify strategies to address bias. Almost 60 percent of respondents indicated that they have not experienced challenges with interdisciplinary or cluster hiring in their academic unit, and 43 percent of respondents indicated neutral agreement with this statement. Figure 3-2 presents respondents’ insights gained related to interdisciplinary and cluster hiring.

28.6%

14.3%

42.9%

42.9%

71.4%

28.6%

42.9%

28.6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I am aware of strategies for managing searchcommittees to improve diversity.

I am aware of strategies to address implicitbias in the search process.

I understand the importance of assessing ourprocess at critical points, either by meetingwith an Associate Dean or HR professional.

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree

15

Figure 3-2: Respondents’ Insights Gained Related to Interdisciplinary and Cluster Hiring (N=7)

Dual Career Resources Respondents overwhelmingly demonstrated an awareness of dual career resources at UVa. All respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they “understand how to refer someone to the Dual Career Office,” and most respondents (86 percent) agreed or strongly agreed that they are able to identify resources for dual career faculty and know when candidates may begin to use UVa’s services for dual career faculty. Figure 3-3 summarizes respondent’s insights gained related to dual career resources.

Figure 3-3: Respondents’ Insights Gained Related to Dual Career Resources (N=7)

42.8% 14.2% 42.8%

14.2%

14.2%

71.4%

42.8%

14.2%

42.8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I have experienced challenges withinterdisciplinary or cluster hiring in my

department or school/college.

I am able to identify strategies to addressimplicit bias in interdisciplinary and cluster

hiring.

I understand how implicit bias hindersinterdisciplinary and cluster hiring.

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree

14.3%

14.3%

28.6%

28.6%

71.4%

71.4%

57.1%

14.3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I understand how to refer someone to theDual Career Office.

I know when candidates may begin to useUVa's services for dual career faculty.

I am able to identify resources for dual careerfaculty at UVa.

Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly agree

16

B. Intended Changes

Equity in the Search Process Respondents largely indicated that they intend to make changes to address issues with bias in interdisciplinary and cluster hiring. One hundred percent of respondents indicated that they intend to work with their academic unit to reduce implicit bias in interdisciplinary and cluster hiring. Eighty-six percent of respondents indicated that they plan to share what they learned about implicit bias in the search process with their colleagues. Although 71 percent of respondents had identified specific aspects of faculty search committees that they would like to change, more than 28 percent of respondents did not indicate that there were specific aspects of search committees in their department that they would like to change. Figure 3-4 summarizes respondents’ intended changes related to equity in the search process.

Figure 3-4: Respondents’ Intended Changes Related to Equity in Interdisciplinary Hiring (N=7)

Dual Career Resources Almost all respondents indicated that they intend to refer eligible candidates to UVa’s resources for dual career faculty and share what they learned about dual career resources with their academic unit. Though most respondents indicated that they would work with their academic unit to make a plan for welcoming dual career spouses, 14 percent of respondents indicated that they were “unsure.” Figure 3-5 summarizes respondents intended changes related to dual career resources at UVa.

71.4%

85.7%

100%

14.3% 14.3%

14.3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I have identified specific aspects of facultysearch committees in my department or

school/college that I would like to change.

I will share with my department orschool/college what I learned about implicitbias in the search process from this seminar.

I will work with my department orschool/college to reduce implicit bias in

interdisciplinary and cluster hiring.

Yes No Unsure

17

Figure 3-5: Respondents’ Intended Changes Related to Dual Career Resources (N=7)

Hope for Change Most respondents indicated that they are “hopeful” or “very hopeful” that UVa CHARGE efforts such as the Faculty Search Seminar will improve the climate for diversity at UVa. Figure 3-6 summarizes respondents’ hope for change in the climate for diversity.

Figure 3-6: Respondents’ Hope for Improving the Climate for Diversity (N=7)

85.7%

100%

100%

14.3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I will work with my department orschool/college to make a plan for welcoming

dual career spouses.

I will share with my department orschool/college what I learned about

resources for dual career faculty.

I will refer eligible candidates to UVa'sresources for dual career faculty.

Yes No Unsure

14.3%

14.3%

71.4%

57.1%

14.3%

28.6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Reduce bias in the faculty search process at thisuniversity

Lead to greater diversity among the faculty

Not at all hopeful A little hopeful Neutral Hopeful Very hopeful

18

Undergraduate Participation Respondents varied in their interest in allowing undergraduates to participate in the faculty search process. While few respondents indicated strong interest, most respondents expressed neutrality or moderate interest in including undergraduates in the search process. Twenty-nine percent of respondents indicated that they were “Neutral,” and 29 percent of respondents were “Interested” in allowing undergraduates to participate. Figure 3-7 summarizes respondents’ interest in allowing undergraduates to participate in the search process.

Figure 3-7: Respondents’ Interest in Allowing Undergraduate Participation (N=7)

14% 14%

29% 29%

14%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Not at allinterested

A little interested Neutral Interested Very interested