Achieving Tenure for Professors

What problem or issue is being addressed? 

The primary problem or issue addressed in this article is the vicissitudes of members of historic minority groups attempting to maintain careers in academia. Specifically, this article addresses common scenarios that befall members of faculty “of color” (Diggs et al, 2009, p. 312) as they strive to achieve tenure. The authors also consider the effect that gender has on such faculty members. There are frequent comparisons to situations which occur for minorities and women and those which take place between Caucasian men—and the inherent differences which seem to occur because of these demographic dissimilarities. From this perspective, the problem discussed is the effect of race/ethnicity/sex for those involved in academic positions in higher level education.

What are the main research questions?

The main research question is what impact race and ethnicity has for members of historic minority groups attempting to achieve long term faculty positions within scholastic settings. This question is explored within the context of such faculty members engaged in university and collegiate environments in which those of European descent form the majority. The researchers seek to determine what effects the demographic differences have on the faculty members, and how they factor into the retention of historic minority group members in academia. They also hope to ascertain which impediments are present for these faculty members in this sort of environment (Diggs et al, 2009, p. 313).

What theoretical frameworks and methodologies are used? How do they help to illuminate the research question(s) (or not)?

The authors actually deploy multiple methodologies to elucidate the answers to these questions. Firstly, they conduct an extensive literature review to ascertain the findings of previous research on this subject. Next, the authors employ “a self study that presents the experiences of four faculty of color navigating the tenure process in a predominately white Research Institution” (Diggs et al, 2009, p. 313). Significantly, this study and the research it entails is underpinned by Critical Race Theory. Although this theory encompasses a number of different facets, the most significant one to the article is that racism is institutionalized and considered normal in the United States (Diggs et al, 2009, p. 316). The self-study was supported by both group discussions and individual interviews.

What are the main findings? To what extent are they expected or surprising? How so?

The main findings were largely expected. They were that race, ethnicity and gender play a substantial role in impacting the ability for minority faculty members to achieve tenured positions. The nature of that role was largely prohibitive. These traditional demographic boundaries were found to account for instances of sexism, racism, and marginalization (Diggs et al, 2009, p. 316). They were also responsible for feelings of alienation and difficulty in allowing minority faculty members to perform their jobs.

These findings are not surprising because they were well documented in the literary review, although they also became manifest during the self-study portion of the research. Moreover, the researchers also unveiled the fact that issues of recruitment and retention of minority faculty members was also affected by themes including mentoring, confronting diversity, safe spaces, and academic identity. These themes proved points of difficulty for the majority of the participants in the study. They were the four areas in which participants were challenged by issues of race and diversity in institutions which were predominantly composed of Caucasians. The issue of safe space was somewhat surprising, since it is predicated on the notion that minorities “have to create our space” (Diggs et al, 2009, p. 324) in such institutions.

What are the implications of this research?

The predominant implications of the research in this article is that members of historic minority groups would benefit from “the creation of space for faculty of color to learn, think, socialize and process the academic environment among themselves” (Diggs et al, 2009, p. 328-329). The research implies that it is a greatly different experience being a minority faculty member at predominantly Eurocentric universities and colleges. Thus, there are certain accommodations such faculty require for long term sustainability in these settings. The most notable is a space reserved for these faculty members, complete with mentoring.

Overall, what are the strengths and weaknesses of this article? Who (if anyone) would benefit from reading it?
The overall strength of this article is the sincerity of the authors. This sincerity manifests itself in a fairly exhaustive literature review. Furthermore, it emanates from the self study and the type of data gleaned from it which the authors have published in this paper. It is apparent that the authors believe in the relevance of this subject and its effect upon society, let alone upon academia. The overall weakness of the article is that it is not very well written. It is certainly not written poorly, but better vocabulary and more sophisticated sentence structure could have aided the paper’s cogency. Those with sway in collegiate academic settings would benefit from this read.

References
Diggs, G., Garrison-Wade, D., Estrada, D., & Galindo, R. (2009). Smiling Faces and Colored Spaces: The Experiences of Faculty of Color Pursing tenure in the Academy. Urban Review, 41(4), 312-333. doi:10.1007/s11256-008-0113-y