ADVANCE Results of Search Toolkit Implementation and Search Chair Workshops 2016/2017 - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

ADVANCE

Results of Search Toolkit Implementation and Search Chair Workshops 2016/2017

Effects of Faculty Search Toolkit implementation and Search Chair Workshops on Faculty Job Applications 2016/2017

Mark Clarke

Christiane Spitzmueller

Erika HendersonSlide2

DIVERSITY SEARCH COMMITTEE TRAINING2

Past approach: Ad posted on professional website with EOS-compliant languageApplications initially ranked, then candidates ranked in an impression-based system

Current approach:

Ad posted with diverse publications and organizations using encouraging diversity language

Bring in a broader pool of applicants ranked by rubric-based approachesSlide3

SEARCH COMMITTEE TRAINING – Attended by 175 Faculty during Fall 2016

ITEMSTRONGLY AGREE

AGREEDISAGREE

STRONGLY DISAGREENOT SURE

The recruitment toolkit provides practical information that can be used by faculty to enhance the search committee process

68%26%

1%4%0%The presenters provided an appropriate level of detail for each topic52%33%4%9%

1%

The information was presented

in a logical manner

65%

25%

4%

4%

1%

As a result of today’s training, I have a better understanding of

how to address specific issues that may arise during the faculty search process

57%

36%

2%

4%

0%

Overall, today’s training was worthwhile

60%

30%

2%

6%

1%Slide4

So – is it working?

4

Analyzed job applications across STEM/SBS/Other

Determine % changes in women applicants

Determine % changes in underrepresented applicants

Method:

Collected data through OJS on all TT faculty applications during the 2016/2017 recruitment cycle

Recruitment research supports that about 8% of variance can be accounted for by individual recruitment practice components

(

Collins, C. J., & Han, J. (2004). Exploring applicant pool quantity and quality: The effects of early recruitment practice strategies, corporate advertising, and firm reputation.

Personnel Psychology

,

57

(3),

685-717

.

)Slide5

Overall applications per position are up by 21% - significant improvement despite targeted hire searches in SBS

5Slide6

Overall: Improved number of URM applicants per position

6

19% more applications by African Americans

4% fewer Hispanic applicants total

Increase in multiracial and non-disclosures Slide7

STEM overall applications increased substantially in the last year – 32.7% increase

7

Improved recruitment processes have resulted in significant uptick in overall STEM TT faculty applications Slide8

STEM: 24% increase in Applications by African Americans, 46% increase Hispanic Applicants

8

Progress through diversity oriented search tools, improved recruitment language in ads Slide9

Social and behavioral sciences: No movement due to targeted hiring 2016/2017

9

Predominantly targeted hires – substantially lower applications than in other years

Will re-evaluate this coming year Slide10

Non-ADVANCE areas: 62% increase in applications per position

10

Larger number of position postings than last academic year

Applications per position have increased by 62%

Although Hispanic Applicants per Position declined slightly, large uptick in applications submitted by African Americans

33% increase in submissions per position by African Americans Slide11

Gender and Recruitment – substantial applicant pool increases

11

In STEM, 33% more women and 35% more men applied for positions

Other disciplines: applications for men went up by 80%, application by women went up by 27%Slide12

Implications

12

Continue to engage in recruitment best practices

Communicate success to stakeholders

Develop behavior-based interviewing methods to augment quality of site visit experiences

Measure quality of site visit experiences for URM candidates to provide feedback and learn from best practices