Our focus in this paper is on the process of increasing the representation of women in STEM as it occurred in academic departments within a research university explicitly committed to diversifying the faculty in science and engineering fields. We used thematic analysis of interviews with 59 senior faculty drawn from 20 departments to identify forces that enabled or constrained demographic change over 13 years. The accounts by faculty from departments that most increased the representation of women included references to four enabling forces (open recognition of a serious problem coupled with shame about past circumstances; strong leadership on diversity from one or more department chairs; change-enabling features of the departmental and disciplinary context; and proactivity in pursuing diversity). The accounts by faculty from departments that did not increase diversity at all included reference to three constraining forces (viewing other priorities as more important than diversity; external factors that constrain or limit the possibility of change; and unfavorable features of the departmental context). Departments that increased faculty diversity somewhat expressed some enabling and some constraining forces, and omitted some. We discuss the implications of these findings for successful departmental change, particularly in the context of larger institutional change efforts.
Purpose Many university programs seek to promote faculty diversity by reducing biases in hiring processes. The purpose of this paper is to conduct two studies to test the individual- and department-level impact of a faculty recruitment workshop (FRW) on faculty attitudes toward evidence-based, equitable hiring practices. Design/methodology/approach Study 1 included 1,188 faculty who had or had not attended an FRW. Respondents were surveyed about their attitudes and their intentions to use specific equitable search practices. The authors assessed the proportion of faculty in each department to test for the impact of department-level workshop attendance on individual faculty attitudes. Study 2 employed a similar design (with 468 faculty) and tested whether effects of workshop attendance are explained by changes in beliefs about social science research. Findings Faculty had more favorable attitudes toward equitable search strategies if they had attended a workshop or if they were in a department where more of their colleagues had. Workshop attendance also increased intentions to act on two of three recommendations measured, and led to greater belief in evidence-based descriptions of gender biases. Some evidence suggested that these beliefs mediated the influence of the FRW on attitudes. Research limitations/implications Because faculty were not randomly assigned to attend the workshop, no strong claims about causality are made. Practical implications The present studies demonstrate that an evidence-based recruitment workshop can lead faculty to adopt more favorable attitudes toward strategies that promote gender diversity in hiring. Originality/value These studies provide evidence of the role of belief in social science research evidence in explaining the effectiveness of a program designed to increase faculty diversity.
The Academic Pediatric Association fully endorses the Pediatric Hospitalist Medicine Core Competencies to define the knowledge skills and attitudes necessary to provide the highest quality of inpatient care for our nation's children. We will continue to lead and collaborate in projects to develop, implement and evaluate educational projects to disseminate the Competencies.
COVID-19 reinforced the need for effective leadership and administration within Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program hubs in response to a public health crisis. The speed, scale, and persistent evolution of the pandemic forced CTSA hubs to act quickly and remain nimble. The switch to virtual environments paired with supporting program operations, while ensuring the safety and well-being of their team, highlight the critical support role provided by leadership and administration. The pandemic also illustrated the value of emergency planning in supporting organizations’ ability to quickly pivot and adapt. Lessons learned from the pandemic and from other cases of adaptive capacity and preparedness can aid program hubs in promoting and sustaining the overall capabilities of their organizations to prepare for future events.
Within the Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design (BERD) component of the Northwestern University Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, we created a mentoring program to complement training provided by the associated Multidisciplinary Career Development Program (KL2). Called Research design Analysis Methods Program (RAMP) Mentors, the program provides each KL2 scholar with individualized, hands-on mentoring in biostatistics, epidemiology, informatics, and related fields, with the goal of building multidisciplinary research teams. From 2015 to 2019, RAMP Mentors paired 8 KL2 scholars with 16 individually selected mentors. Mentors had funded/protected time to meet at least monthly with their scholar to provide advice and instruction on methods for ongoing research, including incorporating novel techniques. RAMP Mentors has been evaluated through focus groups and surveys. KL2 scholars reported high satisfaction with RAMP Mentors and confidence in their ability to establish and maintain methodologic collaborations. Compared with other Northwestern University K awardees, KL2 scholars reported higher confidence in obtaining research funding, including subsequent K or R awards, and selecting appropriate, up-to-date research methods. RAMP Mentors is a promising partnership between a BERD group and KL2 program, promoting methodologic education and building multidisciplinary research teams for junior investigators pursuing clinical and translational research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.