New Paradigms for Diversifying Faculty and
Staff in Higher Education: Uncovering Cultural
Biases in the Search and Hiring Process
**Professional Development workshop
**DVD/workbook program
**Train-the-trainer model
Produced by DiversityWorks Inc.
(Champaign, Illinois)
Since 2004, Approximately 750 Colleges and
Universities Have Used New Paradigms:
University of Colorado at Denver, University of
North Carolina, Southern Methodist
University, Arizona State University, Portland
State University, Missouri State University,
University of Colorado at Boulder, California
State University, Albuquerque Technical
Vocational Institute, University of Scranton,
University of Kentucky,
Colleges and Universities Who Bought the DVD
or Contracted for On-Campus Workshops:
Washington State University, University of
Wisconsin, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Rochester Institute of Technology, Texas A&M
University, Indiana University, University of
Illinois, University of South Florida, Colgate
University, Tulane University, University of
Missouri, Northeastern University, University of
Rhode Island, Purdue University, Auburn
University, Virginia Tech University, University of
Iowa, University of California Irvine, MIT, etc.
Rationale and Design for New Paradigms (from
2006 article in Multicultural Education):
• Crucial role of
search committees
• Crucial role of
departmental and
institutional culture
• “Revolving door”
syndrome (i.e.
recruitment is not
retention)
• Naming and
understanding
individual/institutional
resistance
• Myths about search
committees (they
have no biases!)
• Assessment of
intercultural
sensitivity/role of
cultural identity
Milton Bennett’s Developmental Model of
Intercultural Sensitivity (1993):
• People “in defense”
construe cultural
differences as an
“attack” on them.
• “Defensive” educators
would equate
incompetence,
affirmative action, and
special treatment with
diverse candidates.
• People “in
minimization” prefer to
emphasize ethnocentric
similarities and avoid
differences.
• Educators “in
minimization” would
only consider
candidates like
themselves who “fit”
Using Bennett’s Development Model To Analyze
Search Committee/Hiring Dynamics:
• People “in acceptance”
recognize, appreciate,
and value cultural
differences.
• Educators “in
acceptance” would
advocate for diverse
hiring but not for
changes in hiring
practices, policies, and
procedures.
Consider the dynamics of
a search committee—
two in defense, four in
minimization, and two
in acceptance: How
likely will an African
American or Latino
candidate be
considered,
interviewed, and
recommended?
The Role of Cultural and Racial Identity in Search
Committee Decisions:
• Bill Cross, “Stages of
Nigrescence” (1991)—
Black identification:
• Pre-encounter—African
American is assimilated
and race is not an
important aspect of
identity.
• Encounter—negative
experience makes race
more salient to identity.
• Immersion/Emersion—
race becomes the
central aspect of
identity and selfdefinition.
• Internalization—race
becomes an
internalized aspect of
identity but not the
only one (i.e. gender,
nationality, religion,etc.)
The Role of Cultural and Racial Identity
in Search Committee Decisions
• Janet Helms, “Stages of
Racial Consciousness
Among Whites” (1985):
• In Contact stage, Whites
are aware of other
cultures but regard
themselves as
“individuals”.
• In Disintegration,
experience dissonance
because their group is
seen as racist and
dominant.
• In Reintegration, feel
“under siege,” become
defensive, and refuse to
empathize with other
groups.
• In Pseudo-Independence,
accept differences on a
cognitive level and want
more knowledge of and
experiences with other
cultures.
Janet Helm’s “Stages of Racial
Consciousness Among Whites” (1985)
• In Autonomy, Whites
White Educators who are
actively seek out crosseither in disintegration
cultural interactions and
or reintegration: Will he
begin to re-evaluate
or she be hired?
their own culture.
**Most likely, any diverse
• Consider, an African
candidate hired by this
American candidate
committee will be an
who is in immersion
assimilated minority
(very Black identified)
who “fits”; other
interviewing with a
diverse candidates
search committee of…
won’t be considered.
Goals of Professional Development on Diverse
Hiring in Higher Education:
• Assist in moving out of
defense and minimization
stages of intercultural
sensitivity and into
acceptance and
adaptation.(Bennett)
• Support in developing
into pseudo-independent
and autonomous stages
of racial
consciousness.(Helms)
• Increase their
intercultural awareness
and understanding.
• Enable them to identify
and address their cultural
biases in the search and
hiring process.
• Nurture a transformation
in attitudes and behaviors
while not provoking
defense and backlash.
The Key To Effective Professional
Development for Predominantly White
Search Committees:
Non-threatening, cognitive-affective
approach that combines support,
challenge, collaboration, theory,
empathy, and practical application
Objectives of New Paradigms for
Diversifying Faculty and Staff:
• To describe the benefits
of diverse faculty/staff to
the department, the
institution, etc.
• To analyze how
institutional, workplace,
and departmental
cultures could be
fostering an unwelcoming
and exclusionary climate
for cultural diversity.
• To identify cultural biases
in the search/hiring
process that might be
discouraging or excluding
culturally diverse and
minority candidates.
• To examine institutional,
workplace, and
departmental obstacles to
hiring and keeping a
diverse faculty and staff.
Results and Recommendations:
**By listening to video interviews of
faculty and staff of color, participants
understand (many for the first time)
their concerns, anxieties, frustrations,
and dreams.
**By the end of the workshop, a
majority (not just the choir) are
recommending specific changes that
can be implemented immediately to
increase diverse hiring.
Design, Approach, and Tone:
• Encourages
collaboration and
problem-solving to
address diverse hiring.
• Minimizes and disarms
defensiveness from
those who feel they are
being coerced into
hiring “unqualified”
minorities.
• Fosters “buy-in” by
more than just the
“usual” supporters of
diversity.
• Offers a nonthreatening model of
inquiry to support
practical
recommendations and
action plans on diverse
hiring.
Four Paradigms:
1. Five Dimensions of Faculty and Staff
Diversity
2. Stages of Institutional Impact of
Diverse Faculty and Staff
3. Four Frameworks on Diversity in
Educational Organizations
4. Individualism and Collectivism in
Relational Dynamics
(Communication Style Differences)
“If colleges and universities are serious
about faculty/staff diversity…
• They must make a concerted effort to educate
everyone who serves on their search committees
and is involved in the hiring process.
• Diversification of faculty and staff can not occur
without search committees becoming aware of
how their biases, assumptions, and stereotypes
influence their perceptions, judgments, and
decisions.”
Pauline E. Kayes, “New Paradigms…” Multicultural
Education, Winter 2006: 65-69.