CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
INTEGRATING ISSUES OF DIVERSITY
IN FACULTY RECRUITMENT
August 31, 2010 & September 1, 2010
A Workshop for Deans, Department Chairs, Equity & Diversity Representatives, and
Personnel/Search Committees
Presented by the Faculty Senate Educational Equity Committee
Subcommittee Members/Facilitators: Lauren McDonald (Chair); Shane Frehlich; Christine
Hayashi; Daisy Lemus; Carolyn Okazaki; Bronte Reynolds; April Taylor; Dianah Wynter
GOAL
 To assist academic units/departments to develop diverse and talented applicant
pools.
 To assist academic units/departments to recruit qualified candidates who have the
ability to work across differences.
WORKSHOP AGENDA
 Introduction
 Panel - Recruitment Experiences of Current CSUN Faculty
Panelists for August 31st Workshop: Nathan Durdella, Education Policy Studies;
April Taylor, Child & Adolescent Development
Panelists for September 1st Workshop: Jody Dunlap, Education Policy Studies; Janet Oh,
Psychology; David Wakefield, Child & Adolescent Development
 Break Out Groups –
1. Share your experiences with recruitment (both positive and negative). Have you
discussed or incorporated the issue of diversity into your hiring practices in the past?
2. What can you specifically do going forward to develop a more diverse applicant pool?
What information can your department/college provide to a diverse pool of candidates
during the recruitment process that would make them want to come to CSUN?
WHY SHOULD WE INCLUDE DIVERSITY IN OUR RECRUITMENT EFFORTS?
The mission of California State University, Northridge clearly articulates its values, including a “respect
for all people” and a “commitment to educational opportunity, inclusion, and excellence.” Over the past
several years, the demographics of the University have undergone a somewhat dramatic shift, as
evidenced by the ever-changing diversity of its student population. In 2005, the Senate Education Equity
Committee commissioned a sub-committee to investigate the changing demographics of our educational
community, including the diversity among both students and faculty in order to make recommendations
associated with recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty, staff, and administration. Draft
proposals of documents, events, and activities related to the work of this Recruitment and Retention Sub-
1
Committee were presented to agencies and individuals throughout the university, so that input could be
received and ideas incorporated into final proposals that have been adopted. The need for this workshop is
now also integrated into Section 600, the faculty-governing document.
As the Committee continues to work on the issue of diversity consistent with the university’s mission and
the faculty governing document, it is important that audiences are clear regarding the rationale for the
hiring workshop. Notwithstanding Proposition 209 prohibiting the establishment of racial and ethnic
quotas for the selection of students and faculty, the Committee asks that our colleagues consider and,
indeed, acknowledge the benefits associated with a diverse faculty. We are not talking about numbers
here. We are not seeking ethnic parody with our students. We are not suggesting the achievement of some
kind of balance among underrepresented faculty, staff, and administration. We are talking about our
ethical and moral responsibility to create an aggressive recruitment program at all levels of the University,
to the end that we expand the pool of highly qualified candidates, which increases, significantly, the
potential for capturing a diverse field of candidates from which to select faculty and staff during the
screening and selection process.
The ability to select highly qualified candidates is impeded by the small ratio of qualified minority
candidates to majority candidates. Evidence of this fact is found in the all-too-common explanation for a
search committee’s failure to select characteristically diverse faculty and/or staff - that “there just weren’t
enough highly qualified candidates from which to choose.” The result is a university leadership, faculty,
and staff that come up short of capturing and reflecting the richness of our diverse culture of students and
community, which is dynamic and ever changing. Indeed, engaging in an effort to broaden the scope of
our candidate base through aggressive recruiting of all candidates will generate a diverse field of
candidates who can effectively work within the context of diverse cultural differences. To do so sends a
positive message to our constituency. Failing to do so sends a different message. President Jolene Koester
acknowledges in her Web Address “California State University, Northridge is a vibrant, diverse
university community of nearly 34,000 students,” “regionally focused, nationally recognized.” Let’s work
to model that rich diversity in our departments and colleges through dynamic recruitment plans.
IN SUM, OUR RATIONALE IS SIMPLE:






The changing demography of our student population—we are a diverse university community of
over 34,000 students;
Our commitment to inclusion as clearly expressed in the university’s mission, values, and vision
statements;
A more diverse faculty strengthens the breadth, depth, and quality of our teaching and research;
A more diverse faculty provides a variety of role models and mentors for our increasingly diverse
student make-up;
The 2006 study from the Faculty Senate Educational Equity Committee calls for a more
systematic and coordinated approach to recruitment and retention practices on our campus.
Section 600, the faculty manual, also now requires this conversation.
2
Resources for the Recruitment of Diverse Faculty
1. Diverse Issues in Higher Education: www.diverseeducation.com
2. The Compact for Faculty Diversity:
www.instituteonteachingandmentoring.org/Institute/index.html
3. Minority and Women Doctoral Directory: www.mwdd.com/Home.html
4. National Minority Faculty ID Program: www.southwestern.edu/natfacid/
5. National Association of University Women: http://nauw1910.org/
6. Women in Higher Education: www.wihe.com
7. Faculty for the Future: www.engr.psu.edu/fff/
8. National Women’s Studies Association: www.nwsa.org/
9. National Association of Women MBAs: www.mbawomen.org
10. Association for Women in Science: www.awis.org
11. Society of Women Engineers: http://societyofwomenengineers.swe.org/
12. National Society of Black Engineers: www.nsbe.org/
13. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering:
www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
14. National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering: http://www.nacme.org
15. UCLA Asian American Studies Center: www.aasc.ucla.edu/
16. Asian American Studies Programs: www.asianamerican.net/center_main.html
17. Association of University Centers on Disabilities: www.aucd.org
18. Native American & Indigenous Studies Association: http://naisa.org
19. National Indian Education Association: www.niea.org/
20. American Indian Higher Education Consortium: http://www.aihec.org/
21. American Association of Hispanics in Higher Education: http://aahhe.org/
22. Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers: http://oneshpe.shpe.org/wps/portal/national
23. National Society of Hispanic Physicists: http://www.hispanicphysicists.org/
24. American Society of Hispanic Economists: http://asheweb.net/
25. Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education: http://www.HispanicOutlook.com
26. National Association of Chicana and Chicano Studies: http://www.naccs.org/
27. American Association of Blacks in Higher Education: http://blacksinhighered.org/
28. Association of Black Sociologists: www.blacksociologists.org/
29. The Association of Black Psychologists: www.abpsi.org/
30. The Association of Black Women Historians: www.abwh.org/index.htm
31. National Conference of Black Political Scientists: www.ncobps.org/
32. National Society of Black Physicists: nsbp.org/
33. National Association of Black Social Workers: http://www.nabsw.org
34. National Association of African American Studies: www.naaas.org/
35. National Association for Ethnic Studies: http://www.ethnicstudies.org/
36. Consortium of Higher Education LGBT Resource Professionals: http://lgbtcampus.org/
37. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Faculty and Staff Association:
www.csudh.edu/brokeback/LGBTFSA.html
3
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF UNDERREPRESENTED FACULTY
AT CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE: 1995-2005
A PRELIMINARY STUDY BY THE SENATE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY COMMITTEE 2006
RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION STUDY COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Peter Nwosu, Committee Chair; Carolyn Okazaki; Bronte Reynolds
Executive Summary
The executive summary below presents an overview of the principal conclusions and recommendations
from the above study conducted in 2006. These conclusions and recommendations are outlined in greater
detail in the detailed report that follows this executive summary.
A.
Principal Findings and Conclusions
1. Increasing the diversity of its faculty so that professors more closely reflect the student population
remains a major goal of the university.
2. Guided by the fundamental assumption that a diverse faculty provides opportunity for diverse
points of view, the university is also committed to hiring faculty members with the ability to work
with a diverse student population.
3. While the university works with departments in conducting inclusive search processes to increase
the opportunity for diverse applicant pool, there has not been any major effort to provide a more
systematic and coordinated approach to dealing with the recruitment and retention of
underrepresented faculty on our campus.
4. While the principle of valuing diversity is embraced by the university and reflected in public
documents, processes however are not fully in place for a coordinated, systematic, or strategic
implementation of this principle at the college or departmental levels.
5. On recruitment, the study found that CSUN has moved along at a healthy pace. For the 10 years
under review—1995-2005, CSUN successfully recruited 471 new faculty with 152 (about 32.2%)
coming from underrepresented groups.
6. While several academic units/departments are moving along at a healthy pace regarding
recruitment of underrepresented faculty, there are still many departments that have not been
successful in diversifying their faculty profile.
7. On retention, the study found that there is no system or mechanism in place for tracking retention
efforts across the 23 campuses of The California State University System.
8. At CSUN, the Office of Faculty Affairs tracks information on resignations. For the period under
review—1995-2005, the university recorded 110 faculty resignations. Approximately 27% of
these resignations (that is as many as 31 faculty) were from underrepresented groups.
B. Recommendations for Recruitment
1. Create/develop an online data bank of potential recruitment sites for underrepresented faculty for
use by academic units/departments in their recruitment efforts [Faculty Affairs and Institutional
Research and Planning to develop]
4
2. Develop recruitment template for departments [Checklist of things to do—Faculty Affairs and
Academic Affairs to implement]
3. Revise AAI form (Position Announcement Boilerplate) to ensure that instrument contains
minimum qualification for diversity [Academic Affairs and Faculty Affairs to implement]
4. Conduct hiring workshops with a focus on issues of diversity for departments and use of
Recruitment template and revised AA1 forms—Faculty Affairs to implement].
5. Conduct campus-wide workshops or workshop series for faculty and administration that recasts
the issue of diversity in the post-affirmative action phase [CIELO, Faculty Affairs, Academic
Affairs, and Senate Ed Equity to implement].
6. Collect data annually from each unit (College/Department, Divisions, Schools, Colleges) related
to the recruitment effort and hiring ratios—the relationship between under-represented minority
(URM) applicants to fill each vacancy and under-represented minority hires selected for the
position.
7. Collect data annually from each unit (College/Department, Divisions, Schools, Colleges) related
to the turn-over ratios (Turn-Over Quotient)—the relationship between under-represented
minority faculty and all faculty leaving their position.
8. Collect qualitative data on faculty who stay. Establish means of collecting such data.
C. Recommendations for Retention
1. Develop a system/mechanism to track data on retention [See Exit Interview Protocols and
Procedures developed by Committee—Senate Educational Equity Committee to work to ensure
implementation].
2. Develop an exit interview instrument (see instrument developed by committee) and conduct exit
interviews to gain an understanding of reasons for separation and to help improve recruitment and
retention processes at the university. [Faculty Affairs and Senate Ed Equity to coordinate and
implement].
3. Review and analyze exit interview data every three years to identify trends and patterns that
might be useful for addressing recruitment and retention issues [Senate Educational Equity
Committee and Faculty Affairs to implement]
4. Conduct campus-wide Climate Survey of Faculty to develop a better understanding of faculty
perceptions about workplace environment at CSUN with respect to diversity [Senate Educational
Equity, CIELO Faculty Development Grant, and Faculty Affairs—Faculty release time and
funding to conduct study]
5. Incorporate working with diverse student population in RTP processes [Senate Educational
Equity Committee, PP&R and Faculty Senate to discuss and implement]
D. Recommendation for data distribution—Share all data on recruitment and retention by unit
(College/Department, Divisions, Schools or Colleges) to the following university agencies:
1. Office of the President; 2. Provost’s Office; 3. Council of Chairs; 4. Faculty Senate;
5. Faculty Affairs; 6. Units (Colleges and Departments)
5