Article Preview
TopLiterature Review
Data from 2018 indicate that African American and Latinx scholars each occupy 6% of full-time faculty positions though they comprise 13% and 16%, respectively, of the general U.S. population. By comparison, White academics hold 75% of faculty positions (United States Department of Education, 2020). The effects of this disparity are strongly felt in STEM disciplines and complicated with gender disproportionality within these male-dominated arenas. Racialized faculty have reported encountering barriers in the academy including racism, the inability to discuss diversity issues, service tax, and challenges with mentorship.
According to a survey of 10,438 STEM faculty, only 354 (3.3%) men and 260 (2.5%) women identified as underrepresented minorities (URM) (this definition excluded Asian faculty) (Matchett, 2013). Further, the percentage of URM women faculty in STEM shrank as rank increased, whereas the opposite trend was seen among URM men (Hurtado & Figueroa, 2012).
Racialized Faculty
Zambrana et al. (2017) found that racialized faculty largely view the academy as an unwelcoming environment, with racism being part of the “everyday experience.” Stanley (2006) found that the idea of race was exploited by White colleagues to drive claims of reverse racism and minimize the seriousness of microaggressions against RF. Majority faculty often question RF qualifications, devalue their accomplishments, and marginalize their research, forcing the need for RF to work twice as hard to succeed (Joseph & Hirshfield, 2011; Zambrana et al., 2017).
Several studies have identified an increased service burden among RF. This “racial ethnic tax” (Zambrana et al., 2017), or service tax, included longer time expectations for a minoritized person for mentorship and collaboration on committees, university functions, and departmental and university diversity initiatives (Stanley, 2006; Griffin et al., 2011). Stanley (2006) reported challenges with balancing the desire to support minority student groups, communities, and junior faculty with department/university diversity expectations and the research agendas critical for tenure and promotion. Similarly, Joseph and Hirshfield (2011) reported unequal faculty expectations around supporting minority students, providing the voice for diversity, and being pioneers and advocates for diversity initiatives. Connecting with and supporting students and junior FC is a critical component of success in the academy. For example, Stanley (2006) found that the quality of mentorship experiences and the collegiality with White university colleagues were seen as make-or-break experiences for RF. However, many traditional processes within the academy can be experienced as exclusionary and even oppressive. For instance, a study of Latinx experiences with the tenure and promotion process at a PWI by Urrieta et al. (2015) found that participants reported being isolated and socially excluded, being expected to suppress their ways of knowing based on their ethnicity, gender, and political views.