Faculty Diversity in Higher Education: Progress, Gaps, and What Works

Faculty diversity in American higher education has been a stated institutional priority for decades, and progress has been real but far slower than the growth in student body diversity would suggest is possible. The gap between the demographic composition of the student population and the faculty who teach them is largest at selective research universities, which are simultaneously the institutions with the most resources for faculty recruitment and the most competitive markets for academic talent. Understanding the structural barriers and evidence-based interventions is essential for institutions serious about closing the gap. Data on faculty diversity tell a consistent story. While students of color make up substantial fractions of enrollment at many institutions, faculty of color, particularly at the tenured and tenure-track level, remain significantly underrepresented relative to the student population and even more so relative to their share of doctoral degree earners in many fields. Black, Hispanic, and Native American faculty are underrepresented relative to the population in virtually all academic disciplines and institutions. Asian American faculty are better represented in some STEM fields but remain underrepresented in the social sciences and humanities and face their own distinctive dynamics in academic careers. The pipeline argument, which attributes faculty diversity gaps to insufficient numbers of doctoral graduates from underrepresented groups, is partially valid but frequently overstated. In many academic fields, the proportion of doctoral graduates from underrepresented groups exceeds the proportion of those groups in faculty positions, suggesting that differential attrition during the faculty career pipeline, not just supply, explains the gap. Research on the academic career tracks of underrepresented scholars documents higher rates of departure from the tenure track, lower promotion and tenure rates in some institutional contexts, and different career experiences that affect retention. Faculty recruitment practices are a significant locus of inequity. Search processes that rely heavily on informal networks reproduce the networks of predominantly white senior faculty who dominate most academic fields. Job descriptions that list requirements calibrated to a narrow vision of the ideal candidate can inadvertently screen out highly qualified candidates whose career trajectories look different from the modal white male academic path. Search committees that have not been trained in recognizing and counteracting bias in evaluation processes may apply different standards to candidates from different groups. Cluster hiring, which simultaneously recruits multiple faculty in related areas around shared themes or problems, has been advanced as a strategy for building critical masses of underrepresented scholars and addressing the isolation that can come from being a solo underrepresented faculty member in a department. Research on cluster hiring finds that the approach can increase diversity in hiring, but that its effectiveness depends on institutional commitment to creating the supportive environment that allows recruited faculty to thrive. Retention is as important as recruitment, and institutions that recruit diverse faculty without investing in the conditions for their success see high attrition rates that undermine diversity progress. Research on the experiences of underrepresented faculty documents that they often carry disproportionate service burdens related to diversity work, advising students from their groups, and institutional committee work, while receiving less recognition for this labor in tenure and promotion decisions. Isolation, hostile climates, microaggressions, and lack of mentoring from senior colleagues create additional retention challenges. Pre-doctoral fellowship programs, which support graduate students from underrepresented groups through fellowships, mentorship, and professional development, represent an effort to address pipeline development while also building professional networks and institutional connections that support subsequent faculty careers. Programs like the Ford Foundation Fellowship, the American Association of University Women, and various institutional fellowship programs have contributed to increasing the pool of underrepresented scholars prepared for academic careers. Mentoring programs for junior faculty from underrepresented groups have been implemented at many institutions. Research on formal mentoring programs documents benefits for retention, productivity, and career satisfaction when programs are well-designed with clear goals, appropriate mentor matching, and institutional support. Mentoring across race and gender boundaries, while more challenging to implement than same-group mentoring, has also shown positive effects in some research.