Academic Leadership in the Time of COVID

Posted on by laraeducation
"COVID-19 - The year of the virus" by joncutrer is marked with CC0 1.0
“COVID-19 – The year of the virus” by joncutrer is marked with CC0 1.0

by Luke Lara, Ed.D.

Part I: How it Began

One year ago this week, I began my journey as the Academic Senate President. It also happened to be a few days after the death of George Floyd and right before the pandemic began a second wave in America. Our local Academic Senate usually does not meet during the summer. I thought: How should I respond? What do the faculty expect to hear from me? It did not take me long to decide what to do.

There were many ways I had imagined embracing this important role; however, entering a quickly and ever shifting world of remote education and reckoning with systemic racism were not on my mind three years earlier when I ran for vice president and then president-elect. The latter I was well prepared for, but the pandemic certainly exacerbated it and forced a racial awakening for everyone, everywhere.

I had just finished a year of consulting with the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, collaborating with various constituency groups, writing papers, and doing presentations across the state. I made contributions to moving policy and discussion around student success, equity-driven systems, anti-racism, equity in hiring, and faculty diversification and retention. Equity, anti-racism, and naming systemic racism were at the root of my writings and presentations.

My initial reaction was to take this opportunity to address the faculty. Everyone was on break. I did not know what to expect. I sent a letter to my faculty colleagues on 5/30/2021. It contained a personal message to introduce myself, a uniting message in the face of chaos, and resources for action including allyship training, anti-racism resources, petitions, donations, mental health resources for the Black community, and organizations for those who want to get involved.

Excerpts of the letter are here:

  • …This is not the way I imagined my first email to our community as the Academic Senate President during my first week in this role. I write with a heavy heart and tears in my eyes. While many of our own Black faculty, staff, and students are mourning their loved ones as a result of the disproportionate impact that COVID-19 has had on the Black community, they are also grieving in unison for the victims of police brutality, their families, and communities. The recent police violence and hate crimes against members of the Black community (Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, Nina Pop, D’Andre Campbell, Tony McDade, Regis Korchini-Paquet, and Ahmaud Arbery) have seared a pain that has reverberated across the nation.
  • …Diversity, equity, and inclusion are buzz words for most, but these terms carry a spirit that has defined how I embrace life and how I move in this world.
  • …Given that we will remain in a mostly distance education format for the summer and fall, it is important that we engage purposefully as a community. I urge us to be race conscious, to be equity-minded, and anti-racist in what we do, teach, and how we enact our roles.

Part II: What has Developed

We met on June 25, 2020, in a special meeting of the Academic Senate to review, discuss, and approve a resolution of the Academic Senate: Declaration that Black Lives Matter and a Call to Action. Throughout this past year, we have steadily implemented changes based on this resolution. The following are examples of implemented changes:

  • The Academic Senate surveyed BIPOC faculty to learn about the faculty experience of the tenure process and institutional retention efforts. A taskforce gathered the survey results and presented recommendations to the Academic Senate in May 2021.
  • The Academic Senate’s subcommittee on Diversity, Equity, and Cultural Competency created a joint taskforce with the Tenure Review and Evaluation Committee to make recommendations to changes to the tenure review process, evaluation criteria, and training.
  • The Academic Senate worked closely with the administration to create a Student Conduct and Police Advisory Committee in the fall of 2020. The charge of the committee is to review data on campus police interactions with students, give guidance on restructuring of the police department, and make recommendations to policies and procedures.
  • The Academic Senate subcommittee on curriculum, the Courses and Programs Committee, have steadily reviewed policies and procedures around the philosophy of the associates degree to make changes that are equity based (pending approval), including: allowing the use of “C-” grades for major courses, reducing the number of units required for the science general education area, and reducing the number of units required in general education for the high unit Nursing degree.
  • Professional development partners, including inter-college groups, our online educators’ group, our teaching and learning center, and others, have been creating, facilitating, and sharing opportunities locally, state-wide, and nationally with all faculty on topics ranging from anti-racism and equity in online course delivery, curriculum, teaching, and student engagement. Faculty have been inspired to create discussion groups to discuss race and racism. Two faculty leaders have coordinated a formal group of 12 faculty during a year-long journey to review their own curriculum and teaching practices through an equity lens. This group is called the Cultural Curriculum Collective.

All of the above, unfortunately, would not have been possible within one year if the tragedies of our Black community have not happened. We are only just beginning to make transformative change. Before I get burned out, I need to take a step back, take a deep breath, and be mindful in this moment.

Part III: How I Sustain a Forward-Attitude

In the academic world we talk about GPA’s all the time, but one thing is for sure, my GPA has strong this past year. No, I am not talking about an academic GPA. I am talking about having Gratitude, Patience, and Adaptability. I want to acknowledge that my colleagues have demonstrated a strong GPA and resolve this year and we were only able to accomplish the above list as a collective. So, you could say that our cumulative GPA is what allowed us to be successful.

I am grateful to all of my colleagues. I have seen us work together, complain together, brainstorm together, laugh together, and still be focused on what’s most important—our students.

I have learned to be more patient and to practice mindful breathing. As many of you may have experienced, I am not only working at home, but I am teaching my children, being responsive to important relationships in my life, being anti-racist, and also trying to stay mentally and physically and healthy.

Lastly, I am completely in awe of our adaptability to the changes that this past year has thrown us. In 2019, we could not have imagined what it would be like to offer the majority of our courses through distance education, conduct our work remotely, or even begin to decolonize our institutions or even have campus-wide discussions about race. But here we are!

This is not a moment. This is not a blip. We have embarked on a journey that will lead to healing and transforming practices and policies. We cannot go back to how things were in 2019. That was the past. I look forward to reflecting again in a year from now when my presidency ends. Until then, join me in sustaining our collective GPA through community. Equity work is hard. Transforming systems and institutions is hard. Yet, we can do it together. ¡Si se Puede!

CRT and the Tensions between Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion – What Leaders Need to Know

Posted on by laraeducation

By Luke Lara, Ed.D.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion are often conflated. These are three separate concepts that are inextricably connected. Many leaders confuse these terms, treat them as one concept, or only focus on one at a time. A great leader will work on all three at the same time, understanding the nuances of how they interrelate, and engage in equity-minded practices. – June 2018

I want to further reflect on the natural tensions between these three concepts.

More colleges are beginning to explicitly value diversity, equity, and inclusion in mission statements and board policies. Many are genuinely changing procedures and practices to transform their institutions to truly reflect the diversity of their communities, create equitable outcomes, and foster inclusivity. Few know how to achieve these goals: move from written policy to social justice in action.

To better understand and acknowledge the tension and often contradicting nature of these three concepts, we need to apply a critical framework. For example, critical race theory acknowledges that race and racism are ubiquitous and are problematized even more when looking at the intersectionality of race with class, gender, sexual orientation, and other identities; it challenges the dominant ideology; and it centralizes the experiential knowledge of those who are oppressed. Applying CRT, we can then ask interrogating questions to understand the complexity of these terms. The current dominant ideology centers the white, heterosexual male. It is through this dominant ideology that diversity, equity, and inclusion are traditionally defined.

Diversity refers to representation based on myriad individual/group identities (e.g., counting the population). We should ask ourselves: As we add different people to the group, at what point is the group diverse? How many women do we need? How many people of different racial and ethnic backgrounds do we need? A common myth is that diversity is a zero-sum concept. For example, if we were to hire more African Americans, then this inevitably means we hire less of another racial group (i.e., white people – those at the center). This misconception stokes fears of “reverse discrimination” or “bias” from the dominant majority, which contradicts their own orientation of inclusion. Proponents of diversity argue, as I do, that representation needs to be responsive to historic and contemporary needs of the community that is being served. For example, if your institution is designated a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI), and your Hispanic student population is 33%, then there should be at least a proportional representation in the faculty, staff, and administration of that same demographic. By the way, a white person actually asked me this question, “Does this mean the institution should not hire more white people?” No. What it means is that the institution should be gathering and evaluating data and being responsive to the rich diversity of its community. Decisions will need to be made to increase the diversity of faculty, staff, and administrators. Also, it may have been acceptable thirty years ago to hire someone who is “sensitive” to diversity, but current equity gaps and inclusion efforts require higher standards, beyond sensitivity.

Inclusion is the notion of welcoming all people. It implies that “others” are “allowed” to participate. The dominant group still controls the rules and the culture of the group or organization. However, from a CRT perspective, it means that everyone in the community has a meaningful opportunity to contribute to the decision-making and learning process. Thus, a new ideology is created through a collaborative process, uplifting formerly marginalized voices and experiences and centering them in the process. In relation to hiring, being inclusive means that the composition of the search committee not only has a meaningful representation of racial and ethnic members, but that each of these members is respected and whose contributions are validated and equally weighed alongside those of others (i.e., white members). The token person of color on the search committee is indicative of a diversity framework centered in the traditional definition of inclusion. An inclusion framework expands on diversity to truly create the conditions and culture within the search committee to allow for meaningful participation and perspective. For example, an inclusion framework allows for a diversity of perspectives to engage and challenge the dominant ideology, thus allowing a new and co-created culture.

While diversity and inclusion can be superficially achieved, it requires conscientious effort and action to achieve equity (not to be confused with equality). The PolicyLink research and action institute define equity as, “Just and fair inclusion into a society in which all can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential.” Equity work is about removing barriers. It is about possessing equity-minded competencies such as being culturally competent, implementing race conscious principles, analyzing disaggregated data, approaching equity systemically, and taking responsibility as an institutional agent to remove barriers. In this respect, equity-mindedness is a characteristic that can be learned; a skill that can be assessed. Equity work leads to results that transform students, institutional agents, and institutional structures. If we are looking to change inequities, we need to apply an equity framework to address historic and contemporary issues for our diverse student populations. This work is both individual (e.g., practices) and institutional (e.g., policies, procedures). This work can be practiced by anyone, regardless of racial or ethnic background. Someone asked me, “So, when it comes to hiring, does this mean that we don’t need to worry about diversity? No. Although the concepts of diversity and equity are seemingly different and contradictory, they in fact interact. For example, while the race of an applicant should not be the determining factor of whether they should be hired, a search committee that seeks equity-mindedness will more likely hire a candidate that is not in the dominant majority (i.e., white) based on equity-minded competencies.

In education we are very concerned with the performance of minoritized student groups. We tend to frame education through a liberal lens, where everyone is treated equally, and everyone has the same opportunities. Yet, the reality is that minoritized students are not experiencing the same outcomes. In another example, if we look at the racial diversity of faculty in higher education, we see that despite the commitment of colleges and universities to diversify their faculty, there is little success of the past several decades to significantly increase racial representation. In both cases, we frame the problem around diversity. That is, we blame the outcomes on the minoritized students and faculty. Dr. Estela Mara Bensimon makes the case to reclaim the racial justice meaning of equity, because this will allow us to reframe these racial issues through a racial action-oriented and systemic approach. She states that race is missing in equity conversations and definitions because leaders take an “ALL! Students matter” approach and avoid discussing race, even when the data clearly show a racial opportunity gap in outcomes.

While it is all the “buzz” to say “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion,” think twice before you string these three words together. I have noticed that some college leaders have created the acronym DEI to further conflate these concepts, which ignores their tension, and simplifies their significance. We tend to create acronyms in higher education, which is detrimental in this case, if leaders do not fully comprehend these terms. Understand and acknowledge the tensions between these terms. The three concepts can coexist and help you achieve your goals, but there are too many misunderstandings around these concepts to effectively advance your mission. Clearly communicate the complex nature and relationship of these three concepts to your constituents. Utilize a critical framework to interrogate these concepts. Help everyone understand the differences between these concepts and how these three concepts will strengthen your capacity to serve your community.

Fatal Flaws of Equity Work in Community Colleges – What Leaders Need to Know

Posted on by laraeducation

fatal flaw

by Luke Lara, Ed.D.

When I go shopping for eggs at the local grocery store, I open the egg carton and check every egg. If I find one that is ever so slightly cracked, I put the carton back and begin the search process all over again. One time I went through my routine, bought a dozen eggs, and returned home. The next morning, when I took out an egg, I discovered that there was a very long and obvious crack along the bottom of the egg. I had not lifted and checked each egg at the store. I had only observed the top halves. My fatal flaw was that I did not check the underside of each egg. Luckily, I learned my lesson, avoided salmonella, and have modified my routine.

In this blog I write about my personal observations of leaders in regard to issues of equity (for students and employees). I describe three fatal flaws and provide examples for each one. A fatal flaw reflects a crucible moment in which a leader displays anti-equity mindedness attitudes or behaviors, thus disorienting the equity momentum or movement at their college.

Fatal Flaw #1: All Lives Mattering Issues of Equity

Most community college leaders agree that diversity, equity, and inclusion are worthy goals. In California, there are funds dedicated to improving the retention and completion rates of our students. Colleges have to create and submit a detailed plan of how the funds will be spent. Colleges were asked to identify student populations (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender, age, veteran status, socio-economic status, disability) that experience disproportionate impact in areas of access, course completion, basic skills, transfer, and degree attainment. Once a group is determined to experience disproportionate impact, an intervention and plan is created for the specific student group and area. However, we make the fatal mistake of arguing that the resources should provide equity for all students. This is akin to detractors from the Black Lives Matter movement insisting that “all lives matter,” whose claims negate the disproportionate number of unarmed black and brown bodies murdered by police. Institutional data indicate that not all students need more resources to succeed. For example, there is disproportionate impact experienced by Black, Latinx, and other racial and ethnic groups at the community college. Therefore, we must boldly and directly address race, racism, systemic racism, and White Supremacy. When we “all lives matter” issues of equity, we conveniently ignore issues of race, which also intersect with gender and socio-economic status.

Bottom line: Leaders, lead bold discussions about race, racism, systemic racism, and white supremacy. You may not be the expert, but you are the leader. Reach out to those that can help you deliver the message to the various constituencies on campus and off-campus. Avoid “all lives mattering” equity work.

Fatal Flaw #2: Not Protecting the Community

Free speech is a hugely debated topic in higher education. Many college leaders hide behind the rhetoric of protecting free speech, while alienating students and employees affected by vile speech (e.g., not harsh enough to be a hate crime, yet enough to create harm to the community). In many instances, these leaders’ responses are reactionary and are often done because an internal community pressures the administration for a response. Leaders and institutions of higher education are averse to negative publicity.

The University of California, Santa Barbara is a great example of how a university has been proactive in an age of hate. In the summer of 2016, campus leaders came together to discuss creating a discourse campaign that would be a positive and proactive measure in the heat of the presidential election season. They called it: “Resilient love in a time of hate.” As soon as student leaders arrived in the fall of 2016, they were incorporated into the development and implementation of the campaign. A series of events were created with renowned scholars, artists, and leaders. Stickers and shirts were printed. The campaign sought to promote conversation and creative work forged in a love-driven response to hate, hurt, and fear. I heard about this at the National Conference on Race and Ethnicity (NCORE) in higher education. The workshop presenters shared multiple stories of how issues of free speech were supported, while creating an environment for authentic discourse and diffusing the potential for alienation and marginalization. In essence, a community was created around a campaign of love.

Bottom line: Leaders, if you are only reacting, you are not creating community, you are contributing to the hurt and pain caused by the protection of free speech. Remember, create and sustain community so that issues of free speech can be dealt with in an environment that supports authentic discourse. People come first.

Fatal Flaw #3: Marginalizing Equity

Equity work is often seen as the responsibility of specific individuals (e.g., chief diversity officer, dean of equity programs), specific departments (e.g., student equity office, sociology department), or specific committees (e.g., committee on equity-minded practices). In other words, equity work is not centered institutionally as a core value that is upheld by everyone, every department, and every committee. By relegating equity work to a small few, leaders marginalize equity. This may not be intentional. However, the results are damaging. For example, equity work requires examination of and changes to structural and systemic policies and practices. Few individuals, if any, can make substantial changes to historical structures. The eventual fallout includes burn out and low morale by the individuals involved within this marginalization of equity work. However, it is important to identify a responsible person/committee/department to facilitate the equity work of the campus, but only in an environment where it is understood that the work is collective and driven by the institution’s core values.

Bottom Line: Leaders, agree to center equity as a core value, then present and apply a clear and consistent message to every corner of the institution: We will center equity and everyone is responsible for identifying the changes that need to be made.

Community Colleges and Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity – What Leaders Need to Know

Posted on by laraeducation

by Luke Lara, Ed.D.

Many community colleges are grappling with the notion of diversity, inclusion, and equity. Often, these three words are strung together, as if they are one thing. Leaders must be clear on these terms and steer their institutions so that they reflect the needs of their students. Clarity comes from understanding the history of higher education in the United States, especially the development of America’s community colleges.

The roots of community colleges are a mix of seemingly opposed grassroots and elitist movements in higher education to create access to the populace and also maintain the intellectual rigor of the university, respectively (see Cohen and Brawer). Community colleges now have a multi-pronged mission to serve the community through workforce development, associate degree and certificate attainment, preparation for university transfer, and lifelong learning. Over the last century, the American community college has gained prominence in contributing to local workforce development and creating greater access to higher education for minoritized communities. For instance, in 2009, president Barack Obama announced “The American Graduation Initiative: Stronger American Skills Through Community Colleges” that called for five million additional graduates by 2020. Thus, recognizing the strength of community colleges in advancing economic prosperity to millions of Americans.

There are roughly about 1,200 community colleges in America. Half the students in higher education in the United States are enrolled in a community college and the majority of students in the community college are non-white (see the American Association of Community Colleges Fast Facts 2018). Across most measures (completion, degree attainment, etc.), community colleges and four-year institutions struggle to close the racial achievement gap. Shapiro and colleagues (2017) found that “while almost one in four Asian students and one in five white students had completed [a] transfer pathway by the end of the six-year study period, just one in 10 Hispanic students and about one in 12 black students did” (p. 2). In other words, when disaggregated by race, retention and completion outcomes for minoritized students are less than those for white students. These data points are critical in understanding why community colleges are grappling with the notion of diversity, inclusion, and equity.

Some colleges are beginning to close the racial achievement gap. For example, with the support of the Achieving the Dream Network (ATD), Texarkana College has dramatically increased graduation rates for their Black students (by 18 percentage points from 2011 to 2017). They attributed their success to “an institutional commitment to evidence-based decision making, part of a holistic change model the team learned from their work with Achieving the Dream” (para. 7). The ATD’s vision, mission, and values are grounded in a commitment to equity. ATD “expects colleges to dismantle the barriers facing underserved students” (para. 12). While some colleges are making a difference in regard to equity, many are not. Yet, the equity movement is on the rise.

Have you seen this image before?

equity

Three people reaching for some apples hanging from a tree. One person is tall, then second person is of medium height, and the third person is the shortest of the three. Only the tall person can reach the apples. The label on this image is equality. It demonstrates that all standing on the same ground equally, yet only one can reach the apple. The picture labeled equity shows the same three people. However, in this image, they all attain the apple. The shortest person receives two additional crates to stand on and the medium sized person receives one additional crate to stand on.

If you search for images related to the word “equity,” you’ll see a variety of interpretations of this concept of equality vs. equity. What also appears in a search for the term equity is a definition stating that equity is “the quality of being fair or impartial.” One of the synonyms listed is “egalitarianism.” The fiction that higher education is egalitarian is rooted in the idea that by providing access to higher education is enough to create present and future opportunities for a student willing to put in the effort to be successful. As a primarily open access institution, the community college has prided itself on providing opportunities for communities that otherwise would not have access to higher education (e.g., minoritized student populations such as Black/African American, Latinx, and Native American students). However, in the age of accountability (since the 1980’s), institutions of higher education have been pressured more and more by outside forces such as the public, legislatures, and accrediting agencies to be more accountable to outcomes including graduation, transfer, and job placement rates. The equity movement seeks to scrutinize these outcomes further and decidedly change the structures that create these outcomes.

Bensimon, Dowd, and Witham (2016) argued that to do equity work, one must be equity-minded. In other words, to be equity-minded is to have “an awareness of the ways in which many groups within US society have been historically excluded from educational opportunities, or marginalized within the structures and institutions that house those opportunities” (para. 1). They explained that this approach “foregrounds the policies and practices contributing to disparities in educational achievement and abstains from blaming students for those accumulated disparities” (para. 1). Thus, equity-mindedness requires educators to recognize that higher education has never been an egalitarian system.

The simplistic imagery of the three people picking apples leaves out a critical step. Leaders and stakeholders must engage in discussions about WHY we are generating inequitable outcomes (e.g., contemporary analysis, historical reflections). We must ask: What institutional structures disenfranchise our minoritized student populations? The self-examination can be performed through hiring external entities or from within the colleges. The results must be actionable plans that fundamentally reshape the institutions and improve the students’ experiences through the college that include instruction, advising, and co-curricular opportunities.

Diversity and inclusion are not pronouncements. They must be action oriented and radical interrupters of the status quo. Diversity must be about reflecting the people you serve (e.g., proportional representation). This is important because in higher education, the vast majority of employees are White, while the growing majority of students are racially and ethnically minoritized students. The disparity is even more so within the faculty and administrative ranks. However, having proportional representation must also be accompanied by a meaningful culture of inclusion. Inclusion requires on-going access to power structures, prominence in voice, and acceptance of difference for and by all members of the community. Thus, to create an inclusive culture there needs to be a foundation of equity principles that drive the work of sustaining a diverse environment. Equity requires dismantling structures of oppression and creating new structures that truly allow for inclusion and diversity. To achieve equity, we need to understand how we became inequitable.

It is no wonder that diversity, equity, and inclusion are often conflated. These are three separate concepts that are inextricably connected. Many leaders confuse these terms, treat them as one concept, or only focus on one at a time. A great leader will work on all three at the same time, understanding the nuances of how they interrelate, and engage in equity-minded practices.

Community Colleges and Racial Equity – What Leaders Need to Know

Posted on by laraeducation

race

by Luke Lara, Ed.D.

Twenty-first Century Community College Leaders must account for and understand the impact of race, racism and white supremacy. The foundation of oppression in the United States of America is racial and is infused in our social institutions, such as higher education. Race is central to all inequitable outcomes and is compounded when it intersects with other subordinations (e.g., gender, sexual orientation, disability, age).

Historian Dr. Ibram Kendi writes that racist policies create racist ideas, not the other way around. This would explain why people cannot accept that they are themselves racist. Racist policies create racist structures, which create and maintain White Supremacy. These structures have been imbedded in every institution in the United States. Higher education privileges white students, staff, faculty, and administrators. Leaders of the 21st century must be visionary while also facing our past, learning from it, and dismantling racism and white supremacy.

On a national level, there is little guidance from professional associations.

One of the primary advocacy and leadership development organizations for community colleges is the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). In 2013, AACC introduced a second edition of the AACC Competencies for Community College Leaders. Within this document, meant for the 21st century leader, the word “equity” is only written once. It is recommended that after three years of leadership, the CEO must be able to “create an environment that promotes access, inclusion, and equity for all members of the community.” There is no mention of centering equity or centering racial equity within the document.

In 2016, AACC, along with the Association of Community College Trustees (AACT) wrote a “Joint Statement of Commitment to Equity, Diversity, and Excellence in Student Success and Leadership Development.” Their statement centers socio-economic background: “AACC and ACCT remain committed to programs that improve educational outcomes for all students, especially those representing various socioeconomic [emphasis added] backgrounds including, but not limited to race, gender, and age.”

What would it look like to center race in this equity statement? “The AACC and ACCT remain committed to programs that improve educational outcomes for all students, especially those representing various racial backgrounds including, but not limited to socio-economic, gender, and age.”

It would acknowledge what our students experience: gender, age, and socioeconomic status intersect with race and further compound oppression experienced within a white supremacy structure.

The joint statement acknowledges “that much work is required to provide programs for diverse students and equip current and future leaders with the skills and knowledge necessary to succeed in an increasingly diverse and demanding higher education environment.” We need the AACC to lead and advocate for change by centering race in equity.

One of the most importance competencies for the emerging leader and CEO in the 21st century is to be able to facilitate bold and critical conversations about white supremacy, its history in higher education, its impact on people (students, staff, faculty, administration), and its legacy on policy (locally, regionally, and nationally). Let’s talk about race, and then let’s get to work on changing our institutions.

 

Tips for Community College Faculty Position Applicants – Especially Faculty of Color

Posted on by laraeducation

pexels-photo-59554.jpeg

by Luke Lara

Many institutions of higher education have a stated commitment to diversity. Institutions are judged by a variety of constituents (e.g., the public, Equal Employment Opportunity Offices, students) on the amount of racial and gender diversity in all positions. In fact, public institutions of higher education need to have an Equal Employment Opportunity Plan detailing how the institution plans to diversify its staff. Look up the plan at the institutions in your job search. However, how to achieve greater racial and gender diversity is harder than it seems.

Certain laws are in place (with good intention) to prevent discrimination based on protected classes such as race, gender, and many other categories. These non-discrimination laws (e.g., affirmative action, equal employment opportunity) are meant to create an “equal” playing field. That is, race and gender are not to be considered as factors in the employment decision. I make a more detailed and nuanced critique in my dissertation, which is forthcoming. However, for today’s blog, let me just say that despite these color-blind and gender-blind approaches to hiring, there is much to be desired in our diversity outcomes.

Employers cannot consider race, but they are expected to have a racially diverse pool of applicants and subsequently racially diverse hires.

Until race and gender can be dealt with directly in the search process, many institutions who authentically want to improve their diversity outcomes use indirect strategies.

One such approach is to seek equity-minded or cultural competent candidates in the search process. The Center for Urban Education (CUE) at the University of Southern California a great working definition of equity-mindedness. CUE has been leading a movement for equity reform and institutional transformation in California and around the nation. If you are in California, it is likely that the community college you are applying to has worked with CUE. The National Education Association also has a great diversity toolkit for educators, which is based on a cultural competency framework.

Candidates of color have an opportunity to shine as institutions and search committees infuse a cultural competency framework or equity-mindedness lens in the search process. Here are 4 tips for candidates of color to help them tap into their natural talents, gifts, and general awesomeness.

  1. Translate – The committee is most likely going to composed of mostly White people. You may be sharing an experience or cultural concept that the committee may not be familiar with, but is obvious to you. Be detailed in written and in your oral communication. For example, if you are asked a question about how you work with students that are from underrepresented backgrounds, do not say, “I am Latinx and have been all my life, so that means I am able to understand the students’ experiences.” This answer focuses on you, but the question was about students. A better answer would be, “I draw upon my experiences as a Latinx person in k-16 education, and my professional training to understand how systemic barriers impact historically underrepresented students. I engage in X, Y, Z practices to support my students.” If the committee is truly focused on equity and cultural competency, your personal knowledge, and professional skills will be valued as long as you keep the focus on the students and what you have done to facilitate their success.
  2. Transfer – You may have many transferable skills, but if you do not specifically write about them, you will most likely not get an interview. For example, if the job announcement has a desirable skill that the candidate have two years of teaching in the community college, but you only have one semester, how will you stand out? What else have you been doing that is transferable to this experience? Did you teach in high school or at a university? Did you teach adult classes? Just stating these on a resume or cover letter is not enough. You need to explain how these experiences are transferable to the job you are applying for. Connect the dots for the reader of your application. The way you describe your experiences will indicate how well you know the requirements of a community college faculty position. For instance, the committee is more likely to invite you for an interview if they can make the connections between what you have done and what they are asking. Do that job for them (translate) in your c.v. and cover letter. Now that job descriptions will have more equity-minded language, your work with racially diverse populations in non-traditional settings can be a strength if you can translate those experiences to the community college.
  3. Student Outcomes – Equity-mindedness is about acknowledging that there are disparities in student outcomes and taking action to improve those outcomes. It is not just about being student centered. It is about being action-oriented to improve student outcomes. CUE suggested that equity-minded faculty members “use systematic and data driven self-reflection to improve their own practices with a focus on students of color” CUE Multiple Measures Rubric for Application Review, 2017, p. 1). The term students of color can be replaced with any other disproportionately impacted student group (e.g., veterans, women, older students, low-income students), which may vary at each institution or within each department. In California, you can search for the Student Equity Plan at each community college to learn more about which student groups are disproportionately impacted. You should know which specific student groups are not achieving established measures at proportional rates as compared to other student groups within the same category. Here are examples of how to read data in a student equity plan. What percentage of students who have completed key college courses (math and English) and earned a certain amount of units within a given amount of time are Latinx? What percentage of graduating students are Latinx? If the ratio is less than 1.0, then we have disproportionate impact. If the ratio is 1.0 or greater then we do not have disproportionate impact for Latinx students for this measure. In the interview, be able to discuss student outcomes, how you measure them (or how you use data), and how you have addressed them. As a person of color, you are constantly assessing outcomes (formally or informally), as you navigate teaching students and/or interactions with your colleagues. Be ready to explain your strategies in direct and compelling ways.
  4. Cultural Competency – CUE also identified that an equity-minded faculty possess cultural competency. An equity-minded faculty member “shares common experiences with the students at the institution or intentionally creates classroom practices based on student backgrounds” (CUE Multiple Measures Rubric for Application Review, 2017, p. 1). This provides candidates of color an opportunity to really shine in the interview by drawing upon their experiences and what they do in the classroom for students based on student backgrounds. Saying “I treat all students the same” is not an acceptable answer. As educators, we have a responsibility to validate our students, learn from our students, and understand our students. This requires us to be culturally competent. As people of color, most of us are in-tune with our racial identities and how systemic racism has impacted our own experiences. We cannot all have the same experience, even if we are of the same race, however, we can be more compassionate and empathetic toward others because of our shared experiences. Be ready to highlight a couple of vivid examples. Also, be clear about the ways that you are culturally competent toward student groups who are from different backgrounds than you. Anticipate sharing how you arrived at this competency and how it shapes what you do in and out of classroom.

I hope these tips help you approach your job applications and interviews. May you shine and get the position you apply for.

Equity in Faculty Hiring

Posted on by laraeducation

Placeholder Image

by Luke Lara

I just attended an Equity in Faculty Hiring Institute hosted by the Center for Urban Education from the USC Rossier School of Education. This institute hosted over 200 community college faculty, staff, and administrators. Estela Mara Bensimon, Professor & Director, Center for Urban Education, recently wrote in an email to all institute participants:

As you may know, currently in our California community colleges, Latinos represent approximately 45% of the student population, but only 15% of the full-time faculty. Whites, however, make up 26% of the student population, but 60% of full-time faculty. Recognizing that the California Community College system has made a commitment to close equity gaps, the Center for Urban Education (CUE) recently hosted our first ever Institute for Equity in Faculty Hiring at Community Colleges.

A wealth of information was provided within a very tight schedule of 1.5 days. While the topic is timely, it really deserves more conversation. I wonder what the 20 teams of 10 people from each institution will take back and work on.

The community colleges typically begin the process of hiring with the program review process. For example, this is when a department/discipline reviews data, program goals, and determines projected needs, including hiring additional faculty. The process continues with an Academic Senate approved committee that reviews proposed faculty hires and ranks them against each other. A parallel process that involves the CBO, the CEO, and budget forecasting helps determine how many faculty members the district might be able to hire. This sets the limit for the ranked positions. The CEO takes the recommendations and makes a decision, relying primarily on the advice and judgment of the Academic Senate (in most cases). This preliminary process varies from school to school, but typically takes place from August to December (at least at my college).

Now, the fun begins. Job announcements are created and posted. Committees are composed and trained. Committees meet to determine evaluation criteria, interview questions, topics for teaching demonstrations, and other structural components of the interview process. Then, the candidates apply, the committee reviews and select applicants to interview and finally, the interviews happen. After the interviews are complete (usually take place over a two or three day period), deliberation ensues about who to recommend for the 2nd level interview with the college president. The finalists are sent forward, references are checked, and the 2nd level interview takes place. This part typically takes three to four months and happens over the spring semester. The CEO makes the final decision (in most cases) and makes an offer to the selected candidate. The candidate will typically begin their full-time track at the beginning of the following fall semester.

My concern is that this institute had rich resources and an amazing message, yet it replicated the problems that we face in the community college. It was rushed. The tools were laid out before us and they were force fed to us. Sure, we’ll be able to make some modifications here and there, but they will be minimal unless we (our institutions) decide to invest the TIME that is necessary to have bold conversations about what equity means in hiring.

Speaking of equity, what does that really mean. If you read Dr. Bensimon’s email, the percentages refer to racial diversity. Let’s call it what it is. Let’s be bold about RACE. However, at some point in the conference, the conversation turned to looking for faculty who are equity-minded. Again, what was being said was, “We are looking for faculty who are race-conscious when working with students.” For example, Eloy Oakley Ortiz, Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, said, “People of color are not always equity-minded.” While this may be technically true, this message, coming from a person of color, gives permission to all the White people to use this as an excuse to not hire faculty of color.

The real conversation needs to be about how color-blind ideology is pervasive within hiring practices in the community college (see my forthcoming dissertation). CUE’s institute was a breath of fresh air and I am so happy that conversations about equity in hiring are beginning to happen. However, authentic conversations about race, racism, color-blind ideology, and equity need time, space, and regularity. Then, tools like the ones provided to us at CUE’s institute will be meaningful to us and allow us to make powerful and lasting changes to our processes.