More Like this

1. Cross-Institutional Mentoring Communities Program

   Minerick, A. (June 2022, Zone 1 Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education)

   This paper describes the development and implementation of a Cross-Institutional Mentoring Communities (CIMC) program. CIMCs were designed to create networks of mentoring as a robust support and feedback mechanism for faculty facing compounded challenges related to their personal characteristics and/or specific identities, especially intersectional identities traditionally underrepresented in STEM (e.g., women of color, LGBTQIA+ faculty, faculty with disabilities), or simultaneous demands of an academic career and family caregiving responsibilities. Communities were formed with two to three junior and/or mid-career faculty, women, and men, from four midwestern institutions; each CIMC was facilitated by one or two more senior mentors. Virtual meetings were held at roughly bimonthly intervals. Mentors were regularly provided guidance on mentoring and topics to discuss with their mentoring groups. The CIMC networks facilitated career obstacle problem-solving, as well as enhanced a sense of community and belonging. The program worked to reduce the isolation, exclusion, and silencing of non-majority individuals within the typical academic career progression in addition to adapting to support during pandemic-altered faculty challenges. Key advantages of CIMCs included enabling inter-institutional exchanges and reflective learning among committee members about similarities and differences in climate and opportunities on different campuses. This paper will review the premise and literature on peer and peer-plus mentoring as well as describe the process of forming and supporting the CIMCs. Formative assessments for this ongoing program will also be discussed. This paper can serve as a guide for other institutions to form communities of support for diverse faculty. 

   more » « less
2. Cross-Institutional Mentoring Communities Program

   Minerick, A. (July 2022, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Meeting, Proceedings Paper # 37576)

   This paper describes the development and implementation of a Cross-Institutional Mentoring Communities (CIMC) program. CIMCs were designed to create networks of mentoring as a robust support and feedback mechanism for faculty facing compounded challenges related to their personal characteristics and/or specific identities, especially intersectional identities traditionally underrepresented in STEM (e.g., women of color, LGBTQIA+ faculty, faculty with disabilities), or simultaneous demands of an academic career and family caregiving responsibilities. Communities were formed with two to three junior and/or mid-career faculty, women, and men, from four midwestern institutions; each CIMC was facilitated by one or two more senior mentors. Virtual meetings were held at roughly bimonthly intervals. Mentors were regularly provided guidance on mentoring and topics to discuss with their mentoring groups. The CIMC networks facilitated career obstacle problem-solving, as well as enhanced a sense of community and belonging. The program worked to reduce the isolation, exclusion, and silencing of non-majority individuals within the typical academic career progression in addition to adapting to support during pandemic-altered faculty challenges. Key advantages of CIMCs included enabling inter-institutional exchanges and reflective learning among committee members about similarities and differences in climate and opportunities on different campuses. This paper will review the premise and literature on peer and peer-plus mentoring as well as describe the process of forming and supporting the CIMCs. Formative assessments for this ongoing program will also be discussed. This paper can serve as a guide for other institutions to form communities of support for diverse faculty. 

   more » « less
3. Cross-Institutional Mentoring Communities Program.

   Minerick, A.; Cervato, C.; Goltz, S.; Bilen-Green, C.; Rouleau, M.; Wahl, D.; Sotirin, P. (July 2022, Zone 1 Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education)

   This paper describes the development and implementation of a Cross-Institutional Mentoring Communities (CIMC) program. CIMCs were designed to create networks of mentoring as a robust support and feedback mechanism for faculty facing compounded challenges related to their personal characteristics and/or specific identities, especially intersectional identities traditionally underrepresented in STEM (e.g., women of color, LGBTQIA+ faculty, faculty with disabilities), or simultaneous demands of an academic career and family caregiving responsibilities. Communities were formed with two to three junior and/or mid-career faculty, women, and men, from four midwestern institutions; each CIMC was facilitated by one or two more senior mentors. Virtual meetings were held at roughly bimonthly intervals. Mentors were regularly provided guidance on mentoring and topics to discuss with their mentoring groups. The CIMC networks facilitated career obstacle problem-solving, as well as enhanced a sense of community and belonging. The program worked to reduce the isolation, exclusion, and silencing of non-majority individuals within the typical academic career progression in addition to adapting to support during pandemic-altered faculty challenges. Key advantages of CIMCs included enabling inter-institutional exchanges and reflective learning among committee members about similarities and differences in climate and opportunities on different campuses. This paper will review the premise and literature on peer and peer-plus mentoring as well as describe the process of forming and supporting the CIMCs. Formative assessments for this ongoing program will also be discussed. This paper can serve as a guide for other institutions to form communities of support for diverse faculty. 

   more » « less
4. Faculty Perceptions of Diversity Statements in STEM Faculty Job Applications

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--42270  

   Cropps, Torrie; Pearson, Yvette; Wu, Jue; Phillips, Canek (June 2023, Proceedings ASEE annual conference)

   This research paper describes a study designed to help inform STEM faculty hiring practices at institutions of higher education in the U.S., where over the past two decades, diversity statements have become more popular components of application packages for faculty jobs. The purpose is to explore the ways and extent to which diversity statements are utilized in evaluating faculty applicants. The research questions are: (1) To what extent do universities equip search committees to evaluate applicants’ diversity statements? (2) What are STEM faculty’s perspectives of diversity statements in job applications? This paper is derived from a larger two-phase sequential mixed methods study examining the factors current faculty members and administrators consider important when hiring new STEM faculty. During the first phase, we deployed a nationwide survey to STEM faculty members and administrators who have been involved in faculty searches, with 151 of 216 respondents answering questions specific to diversity statements. About 29% of survey respondents indicated their departments required diversity statements; 59% indicated their institutions did not provide guidance for evaluating them. The second phase was a phenomenological study involving interviews of 25 survey respondents. Preliminary analyses of interview data indicated that a little more than half (52%) of participants’ departments required a diversity statement. Of the departments that required diversity statements, a little more than half used a rubric for evaluation, whether as part of a larger holistic rubric, or as a standalone rubric. For some departments that did not require diversity statements, applicants were required to discuss diversity within their other application materials. Regarding faculty members’ perceptions of diversity statements, some felt that diversity statements were necessary to assess candidates’ beliefs and experiences. Some noted that when diversity is discussed as part of another document and is not required as a stand-alone statement, it feels like the candidate “slaps on a paragraph” about diversity. Others viewed diversity statements as a “bump” that gives candidates “bonus points.” A few faculty felt that diversity statements were “redundant,” and if applicants were passionate about diversity, they would organically discuss it in the other required documents. Many shared frustrations regarding the requirement and evaluation practices. Most participants indicated their postings provided applicants with little to no guidance on what search committees were looking for in submitted diversity statements; they felt it would be beneficial for both the search committee and the applicants to have this guidance. Shared through a traditional lecture, results from this study may be used to help inform strategies for recruiting faculty who are committed to diversity - and ideally, equity and inclusion - and for addressing equity in faculty hiring. 

   more » « less
5. Faculty Perceptions of Diversity Statements in STEM Faculty Job Applications

   Cropps, T.; Pearson, Y.E.; Boyle, S.; Phillips, C.; Wu, J. (June 2023, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition)

   This research paper describes a study designed to help inform STEM faculty hiring practices at institutions of higher education in the U.S., where over the past two decades, diversity statements have become more popular components of application packages for faculty jobs. The purpose is to explore the ways and extent to which diversity statements are utilized in evaluating faculty applicants. The research questions are: (1) To what extent do universities equip search committees to evaluate applicants’ diversity statements? (2) What are STEM faculty’s perspectives of diversity statements in job applications? This paper is derived from a larger two-phase sequential mixed methods study examining the factors current faculty members and administrators consider important when hiring new STEM faculty. During the first phase, we deployed a nationwide survey to STEM faculty members and administrators who have been involved in faculty searches, with 151 of 216 respondents answering questions specific to diversity statements. About 29% of survey respondents indicated their departments required diversity statements; 59% indicated their institutions did not provide guidance for evaluating them. The second phase was a phenomenological study involving interviews of 25 survey respondents. Preliminary analyses of interview data indicated that a little more than half (52%) of participants’ departments required a diversity statement. Of the departments that required diversity statements, a little more than half used a rubric for evaluation, whether as part of a larger holistic rubric, or as a standalone rubric. For some departments that did not require diversity statements, applicants were required to discuss diversity within their other application materials. Regarding faculty members’ perceptions of diversity statements, some felt that diversity statements were necessary to assess candidates’ beliefs and experiences. Some noted that when diversity is discussed as part of another document and is not required as a stand-alone statement, it feels like the candidate “slaps on a paragraph” about diversity. Others viewed diversity statements as a “bump” that gives candidates “bonus points.” A few faculty felt that diversity statements were “redundant,” and if applicants were passionate about diversity, they would organically discuss it in the other required documents. Many shared frustrations regarding the requirement and evaluation practices. Most participants indicated their postings provided applicants with little to no guidance on what search committees were looking for in submitted diversity statements; they felt it would be beneficial for both the search committee and the applicants to have this guidance. Shared through a traditional lecture, results from this study may be used to help inform strategies for recruiting faculty who are committed to diversity - and ideally, equity and inclusion - and for addressing equity in faculty hiring. 

   more » « less