RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF UNDERREPRESENTED FACULTY
AT CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE: 1995-2005
DRAFT REPORT
A PRELIMINARY STUDY BY THE
SENATE EDUCATIONAL EQUITY COMMITTEE (SEEC)
Committee:
Peter Nwosu, Department of Communication Studies, Committee Chair
Carolyn Okazaki, Department of Counseling Services
Bronte Reynolds, Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies
Advisors to the Committee:
Karen Dosanjh, Department of Business Law, and Chair, SEEC
Jose Luis Vargas, Director, Educational Opportunity Program
Penelope Jennings, Associate Vice President, Faculty Affairs
December 2006
1.
Introduction
The recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty has been a subject of
interest and concern to many faculty and administration at the university for
sometime now. The renewed interest comes about as the university continues to
grow and serve an increasingly diverse student population and region. The
university’s 33,000 students plus (nearly two-thirds from underrepresented groups)
reflect the rich ethnic and cultural diversity of the San Fernando region. Of the more
than 840 full time faculty members, about 25% are from underrepresented groups
(African Americans, Asians, Hispanics, and Native Americans). Increasing the
diversity of its faculty so that professors more closely reflect the student population
has been a major goal of the university. University officials have long believed that a
student body as inclusive as CSUN deserves faculty that reflects that diversity. Thus,
attracting and retaining underrepresented faculty is seen as an important step in
achieving this goal.1 The university is also committed to hiring faculty members with
the ability to work with a diverse student population. The university is guided by the
fundamental assumption that a diverse faculty provides opportunity for diverse points
of view—an essential requirement for building and maintaining a democratic society.
In the last five years alone, several of the initiatives for recruitment and retention
of underrepresented faculty have been carried out at both the college and department
levels. For example, in Spring 2004, Interim Dean John Mason of the College of
Humanities commissioned a study to exam the status of faculty of color at CSUN.
The study led by Dr. Teresa Williams of the Department of Asian American Studies
1
University strives for more diverse faculty. Daily Sundial, November 22, 2005.
2
and Dr. Breny Mendoza of the Department of Women’s Studies examined the
challenges experienced by female faculty of color in three colleges (Humanities,
Social and Behavioral Sciences, and Science and Mathematics) as they go through the
university’s retention, tenure, and promotion process. The mostly climate survey
found that female faculty of color perceived the environment that they work in the
three colleges as “hostile” and “disheartening.”
In Fall 2004, faculty in the Michael D. Eisner College of Education acknowledged
the importance of having a diverse faculty, and approved a revised Faculty
Governance Manual, that calls upon the college administration to ensure that it
develops “viable plans for the recruitment and retention of faculty of color,”
including the development of a “sustainable system of mentoring” at the departmental
level.
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. In this
regard, the Senate Educational Equity Committee in Spring 2006 established an Ad
hoc Committee to address this issue. The Committee was charged with the following
tasks:
a.
review campus efforts with respect to recruitment and retention of
underrepresented faculty over a ten-year period from 1995-2005,
including opportunities for professional development and academic
advancement at the university
3
b.
identify factors that may impact recruitment and retention of
underrepresented faculty at the university
c.
recommend viable strategies for recruitment and retention of
underrepresented faculty—(i.e. how can CSUN become a more
welcoming environment for underrepresented faculty?); and
d.
identify appropriate campus units that would ensure implementation of
recommended strategies.
2.
Methodology
The committee is the first Faculty Senate group convened to examine the issue of
recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty at the university. The committee
found no evidence of any such group in the past. The committee implemented its tasks as
follows:

examined some current national literature on the issue

examined and clarified quantitative comparative system-wide data (CSU
campus recruitment surveys) as provided by the office of the chancellor

reviewed and clarified campus data provided by the office of the vice
president for faculty affairs

reviewed other faculty reports on campus on the issue, including policies at
the college level.
Recognizing that quantitative data provide only partial information, the
committee interviewed a number of underrepresented faculty and held a meeting with the
Council of Chairs to assess their views on the issue. Council members also recommended
4
revisions to the draft protocol documents regarding recruitment template and exit
interviews.
3.
Underrepresented faculty and study limitations
There is a large body of national data that examines the issue of recruitment and
retention of underrepresented faculty across the country. The term “underrepresented
faculty” implies several things. The expansive definition would include women and
historically underrepresented minority groups such as African Americans,
Hispanics/Latinos/Chicanos (including Puerto Ricans), Asian Americans/Pacific
Islanders and Native Americans/Alaskan Natives (AHANAs). Federal law defines
historically underrepresented minorities as underrepresented faculty. We have employed
this federal definition in our study to ensure consistency.
This study is by no means exhaustive. We underscore its preliminary nature because
we recognize that there may be various campus efforts in different units and departments
aimed at enhancing recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty that we have
not been able to fully capture. We also are conscious of the limited scope of our
assessment: what the university has done in the last ten years. More studies may therefore
be needed.
4.
Recruitment data and discussion
Historical tracking of demographic data on faculty recruitment at the CSU began
only in 1998. The data we reviewed for this study come from the CSU Faculty
Recruitment Surveys which began system-wide tracking of new tenure track faculty
appointments the same period. The CSU reporting requirements are, in some cases,
different from other universities. For example, in the CSU, Librarians, Counselors, and
5
Coaches are included in the Faculty Recruitment Survey data. The survey data which
shows recruitment patterns in the 23 campuses of the California State University system
may be accessed at www.calstate.edu/HR/FacRecruitment.shtml.
A review of the surveys for both CSUN and the CSU show the following hiring
patterns by ethnicity, for tenure track faculty positions at CSUN and system-wide for
1998/1999 (data for both years reported together) and for each year from 2000 to 2005.
Percentage and Number of Total Hires by Ethnicity
CSU
CSUN
African Ame. Hispanic Asians Other Non white CSUN total hires
1998/1999
27%
25.6%
7.0%
9.3%
2000
28%
30.9%
1.5%
2001
30%
39.1%
2002
28%
2003
9.3%
0
86
16.2% 10.3%
0
68
4.3%
21.7%
13.0%
0
46
37.7%
8.2%
14.8%
13.1%
0
61
28%
36.1%
8.3%
6.9%
19.4%
0
72
2004
33%
27.7%
6.4%
6.4%
14.9%
0
47
2005
28%
43.8%
12.5%
12.5%
18.8%
0
16
Source: CSUN Office of Faculty Affairs and CSU Faculty Recruitment Survey
Percentage of Hires by Gender of Ethnicity at CSUN
White Males
White Females
Minority Males
Minority Females
1998/1999
41%
34%
13%
13%
2000
32%
37%
13%
18%
2001
35%
26%
13%
26%
2002
44%
18%
20%
18%
2003
33%
31%
17%
19%
2004
38.3%
34%
19.1%
8.5%
2005
12.5%
43.8%
6.3%
37.5%
Source: CSUN Office of Faculty Affairs and CSU Faculty Recruitment Survey
6
Generally for the eight years reported, Cal State, Northridge has maintained a high
success rate with its recruitment efforts. The most recent recruitment efforts in fall 2005
resulted in 18 searches from which 16 appointments were made. The recruitment efforts,
overall, have moved along at a healthy pace. Faculty Recruitment Survey data also show
that CSUN ranks third among CSU campuses with the largest appointment of
underrepresented faculty for fall 2005—44% compared to Monterrey with 50% and Long
Beach with 46%. Between 1995 and 2005, CSUN successfully recruited 471 new
faculty. Of this number, 152 (about 32.2%) were from underrepresented groups.
However, the global and rosy picture about progress to date should not obscure the
conspicuous absence of diverse faculty in a number of academic units and departments at
the university. A careful look at the CSUN numbers will show that while several
academic units/departments are moving along at a healthy pace in terms of recruitment of
underrepresented faculty, there are still many departments that have not been successful
in diversifying their faculty profile. More efforts will therefore be required in this regard
in the years ahead.
5.
Retention data and discussion
CSU does not have in place a system for tracking retention efforts across the 23
campuses of the university system. Such questions as: why did a faculty member
separate from the university; does the experience of a faculty member from an
underrepresented group differ from the experience of the other faculty members who
decide to separate from the CSUN; what mechanisms exist at the college or
departmental levels for monitoring retention efforts?, were difficult for the committee
to address because of this gap. The “Annual CSU Faculty Recruitment and Retention
7
Survey” (See Attachment 1), which department chairs are required to complete each
year does not, in any way, address the issue of retention, beyond just asking for the
number of resignations from each campus. Why a faculty member may decide to
separate is not sought for in the data request. At Cal State, Northridge, the Office of
Faculty Affairs does not track any information on retention efforts at either the
college or departmental levels. Thus, the answer to the question: “why did a faculty
member leave the university?” becomes a mirage. Data provided to our committee by
the Office of Faculty Affairs revealed that the university does in fact keep
information on resignations. In the last ten years (1995 to 2005, the university
recorded 110 faculty resignations. Approximately 27% of these resignations (that is
as many as 31 faculty) were from underrepresented groups. Below is a breakdown of
the number and percentage, by ethnicity:
Percentage and Number of resignations by Ethnicity [1995-2005]
White
78
70.8%
Asian American
11
9.9%
African American
10
9%
Hispanic
9
8%
Native American
1
-1%
Other
2
1.8%
Source: CSUN Office of Faculty Affairs
While privacy regulations prevent the university from disclosing the specific reasons
for faculty separations (even if it had it), there are proactive steps that can be taken to
8
ensure that the reasons for separation (especially for underrepresented faculty) have
nothing to do with the perception of an unwelcoming environment at the university.
6.
Recommendations and strategies for improving recruitment and retention
of underrepresented faculty
The specific goal of this study is to improve and strengthen current efforts at
recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty at the university. The
recommendations and strategies presented below are very specific in helping the
university to achieve this goal.
a. Recommendations for recruitment

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]

Develop recruitment template for departments [See Attachment 2 for
recommended template—checklist of things to do—Faculty Affairs and
Academic Affairs to implement use]

Revise AAI form to ensure that instrument contains minimum
qualification for diversity (See Attachment 3 for recommended changes
in current A1 forms—Faculty Affairs to implement]

Conduct hiring workshops with a focus on issues of diversity for
departments and use of Recruitment template and revised A1 forms—
Faculty Affairs to implement].

Conduct campus-wide workshop 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].

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.
9

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.

Collect qualitative data on faculty who stay. Establish means of collecting
such data.
Recommendations for retention

Develop a system/mechanism to track data on retention [See Attachment
4 for Exit Interview Protocols and Procedures developed by Committee—
Senate Educational Equity Committee to work to ensure implementation]

Develop exit interview instrument [Senate Educational Equity Committee
to develop—See Attachment 5 developed by Committee]

Conduct exit interviews [Faculty Affairs and Senate Ed Equity to
coordinate and implement]

Review and analyze exit interview data every year to identify trends and
patterns that might be useful for addressing recruitment and retention
issues [Senate Educational Equity Committee and Faculty Affairs to
implement]

Conduct campus-wide Climate Survey of Underrepresented Faculty to
develop a better understanding of underrepresented faculty perceptions
about workplace environment at CSUN [Senate Educational Equity,
CIELO Faculty Development Grant, and Faculty Affairs—Faculty release
time and funding to conduct study]

Initiate discussion about incorporating working with diverse student
population in RTP processes [Senate Educational Equity Committee,
PP&R and Faculty Senate to discuss and implement]

Recommendation for data disbursement—Share all data on recruitment
and Retention by unit (College/Department, Divisions, Schools or
Colleges) to the following university agencies:






Office of the President
Provost’s Office
Council of Chairs
Faculty Senate
Faculty Affairs
Units (Colleges and Departments)
10
7. Conclusion
While the university has maintained a steady increase in recruitment of diverse
faculty, the result has not been because of any campus-wide organized and sustained
effort. With regard to retention of underrepresented faculty, there has also been little
organized effort. While this study represents a preliminary first step, the
recommendations should move the university toward the development of a more
coherent and systematic approach to the recruitment and retention of all faculty, in
particular, underrepresented faculty. In this way, the university is able to fulfill its
goal of increasing the diversity of its faculty so that professors more closely reflect
the student population. As the university has noted, a diverse faculty provides
opportunity for diverse points of view—an essential requirement for building and
maintaining a democratic society.
Finally, the committee is grateful to all those members of the university
community who provided support in the development of this preliminary report. The
challenge now rests with the Senate Educational Equity Committee to engage
appropriate units on campus regarding the subject of this report and how best to
implement the recommendations thereof.
11