Diana J. R. Lafferty, Erin A. McKenney, Tru Hubbard, Sarah Trujillo, DeAnna E. Beasley
{"title":"前进之路:创建公正、公平、多元和包容的学术文化","authors":"Diana J. R. Lafferty, Erin A. McKenney, Tru Hubbard, Sarah Trujillo, DeAnna E. Beasley","doi":"10.1002/bes2.2117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Institutions of higher education (IHE) throughout the United States have a long history of acting out various levels of commitment to diversity advancement, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Despite decades of DEI “efforts,” the academy is fraught with legacies of racism that uphold white supremacy and prevent marginalized populations from full participation. Furthermore, politicians have not only weaponized education but passed legislation to actively ban DEI programs and censor general education curricula (https://tinyurl.com/antiDEI). Ironically, systems of oppression are particularly apparent in the fields of Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology (EECB), which recognize biological diversity as essential for ecological integrity and resilience. Yet, among EECB faculty, people who do not identify as cis-heterosexual, nondisabled, affluent white males are poorly represented. Furthermore, IHE lacks metrics to quantify DEI as a priority. Here we show that only 30.3% of United States faculty positions advertised in EECB from Jan 2019 to May 2020 required a diversity statement; diversity statement requirements did not correspond with state-level diversity metrics. Though many announcements “encourage women and minorities to apply,” empirical evidence demonstrates that hiring committees at most institutions did not prioritize an applicant's DEI advancement potential. We suggest a model for change and call on administrators and faculty to implement SMART (i.e., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) strategies for DEI advancement across IHE throughout the United States. We anticipate our quantification of diversity statement requirements relative to other application materials will motivate institutional change in both policy and practice when evaluating a candidate's potential “fit.” IHE must embrace a leadership role to not only shift the academic culture to one that upholds DEI but to educate and include people who represent the full diversity of our society. In the current context of political censure of education including book banning and backlash aimed at Critical Race Theory, which further reinforce systemic white supremacy, academic integrity and justice are more critical than ever.</p>","PeriodicalId":93418,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America","volume":"105 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bes2.2117","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Path Forward: Creating an Academic Culture of Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion\",\"authors\":\"Diana J. R. Lafferty, Erin A. McKenney, Tru Hubbard, Sarah Trujillo, DeAnna E. Beasley\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bes2.2117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Institutions of higher education (IHE) throughout the United States have a long history of acting out various levels of commitment to diversity advancement, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Despite decades of DEI “efforts,” the academy is fraught with legacies of racism that uphold white supremacy and prevent marginalized populations from full participation. Furthermore, politicians have not only weaponized education but passed legislation to actively ban DEI programs and censor general education curricula (https://tinyurl.com/antiDEI). Ironically, systems of oppression are particularly apparent in the fields of Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology (EECB), which recognize biological diversity as essential for ecological integrity and resilience. Yet, among EECB faculty, people who do not identify as cis-heterosexual, nondisabled, affluent white males are poorly represented. Furthermore, IHE lacks metrics to quantify DEI as a priority. Here we show that only 30.3% of United States faculty positions advertised in EECB from Jan 2019 to May 2020 required a diversity statement; diversity statement requirements did not correspond with state-level diversity metrics. Though many announcements “encourage women and minorities to apply,” empirical evidence demonstrates that hiring committees at most institutions did not prioritize an applicant's DEI advancement potential. We suggest a model for change and call on administrators and faculty to implement SMART (i.e., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) strategies for DEI advancement across IHE throughout the United States. We anticipate our quantification of diversity statement requirements relative to other application materials will motivate institutional change in both policy and practice when evaluating a candidate's potential “fit.” IHE must embrace a leadership role to not only shift the academic culture to one that upholds DEI but to educate and include people who represent the full diversity of our society. In the current context of political censure of education including book banning and backlash aimed at Critical Race Theory, which further reinforce systemic white supremacy, academic integrity and justice are more critical than ever.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93418,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America\",\"volume\":\"105 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bes2.2117\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bes2.2117\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bes2.2117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
美国的高等教育机构(IHE)长期以来一直在不同程度上致力于促进多样性、公平和包容(DEI)。尽管几十年来一直在 "努力 "促进多元化,但学术界仍充满了种族主义的遗留问题,这些问题维护了白人至上主义,阻碍了边缘化人群的全面参与。此外,政客们不仅将教育武器化,还通过立法积极禁止 DEI 项目,审查普通教育课程 (https://tinyurl.com/antiDEI)。具有讽刺意味的是,压迫体系在生态学、进化论和保护生物学(EECB)领域尤为明显,该领域承认生物多样性对生态完整性和恢复力至关重要。然而,在生态学、进化论与保护生物学(EECB)领域的教职员工中,非顺式异性恋、非残疾、富裕的白人男性所占比例很低。此外,国际高等教育学院缺乏量化 DEI 优先事项的指标。我们在此表明,2019 年 1 月至 2020 年 5 月期间,在 EECB 上公布的美国教职中,只有 30.3% 的职位要求提供多样性声明;多样性声明要求与州一级的多样性指标不一致。尽管许多公告 "鼓励女性和少数族裔申请",但实证证据表明,大多数院校的招聘委员会并没有优先考虑申请人的 DEI 晋升潜力。我们提出了一个变革模式,并呼吁管理者和教职员工在全美国的高等院校实施 SMART(即具体、可衡量、可实现、现实、及时)战略,以促进 DEI 的发展。我们预计,相对于其他申请材料而言,我们对多样性声明要求的量化将促使机构在评估候选人的潜在 "适合性 "时改变政策和做法。国际高等教育机构必须扮演领导者的角色,不仅要将学术文化转变为坚持 DEI 的文化,而且要教育和吸纳代表我们社会全面多样性的人才。在当前教育受到政治谴责的背景下,包括禁书和针对批判种族理论的反弹,进一步强化了系统性的白人至上主义,学术诚信和公正比以往任何时候都更加重要。
A Path Forward: Creating an Academic Culture of Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Institutions of higher education (IHE) throughout the United States have a long history of acting out various levels of commitment to diversity advancement, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Despite decades of DEI “efforts,” the academy is fraught with legacies of racism that uphold white supremacy and prevent marginalized populations from full participation. Furthermore, politicians have not only weaponized education but passed legislation to actively ban DEI programs and censor general education curricula (https://tinyurl.com/antiDEI). Ironically, systems of oppression are particularly apparent in the fields of Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology (EECB), which recognize biological diversity as essential for ecological integrity and resilience. Yet, among EECB faculty, people who do not identify as cis-heterosexual, nondisabled, affluent white males are poorly represented. Furthermore, IHE lacks metrics to quantify DEI as a priority. Here we show that only 30.3% of United States faculty positions advertised in EECB from Jan 2019 to May 2020 required a diversity statement; diversity statement requirements did not correspond with state-level diversity metrics. Though many announcements “encourage women and minorities to apply,” empirical evidence demonstrates that hiring committees at most institutions did not prioritize an applicant's DEI advancement potential. We suggest a model for change and call on administrators and faculty to implement SMART (i.e., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) strategies for DEI advancement across IHE throughout the United States. We anticipate our quantification of diversity statement requirements relative to other application materials will motivate institutional change in both policy and practice when evaluating a candidate's potential “fit.” IHE must embrace a leadership role to not only shift the academic culture to one that upholds DEI but to educate and include people who represent the full diversity of our society. In the current context of political censure of education including book banning and backlash aimed at Critical Race Theory, which further reinforce systemic white supremacy, academic integrity and justice are more critical than ever.