Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Diversity Update 2010 September 2010

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Diversity Update 2010 September 2010"— Presentation transcript:

1 Diversity Update 2010 September 2010

2 Equity Scorecard Framework AccessExcellence Institutional Receptivity Retention Equity in Educational Outcomes The Equity Scorecard was developed by Dr. Estela Mara Bensimon at the Center for Urban Education, University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/education/CUE/). Each of the four perspectives has an objective. From this objective we can: -Measure baseline performance -Set an improvement target -Work towards equity in educational outcomes.

3 Identities for Analysis This presentation is limited to identities for which we have quantitative information, including:  Race/ethnicity  Income level  First-generation in college  Gender  Geographic diversity. Information is not systematically available for other groups that are important to inclusive excellence.

4 Diversity of: – Faculty – Staff – Administrators Climate AccessExcellence Institutional Receptivity Retention Institutional Receptivity Equity in Educational Outcomes

5 Institutional Receptivity: Employees Employees self-identify their race/ethnicity at the time of hire. Employees may choose any of the following designations, and may select more than one designation as of 2009: White Black Asian American Indian Hispanic/ Latino/a Hawaiian A Campus survey was completed in 2009 to allow individuals to update their race/ethnic designation based on new reporting rules and the addition of Hawaiian/Pacific Islander to the race/ethnic categories.

6 Institutional Receptivity: Employees 2010 data available in December 2010 Employees by Category

7 Institutional Receptivity: Employees 2010 data available in December 2010

8 Institutional Receptivity: Faculty 2010 data available in December 2010

9 Institutional Receptivity: Faculty Increase in the percent of faculty hires that are minority hires data available in December 2010

10 Institutional Receptivity: Faculty In 2009: 2,175 total faculty members 16.8% (364) of Faculty are racial/ethnic minorities. 7.2% increase in minority faculty since data available in December 2010

11 Institutional Receptivity: Staff In 2009, 2,183 Instructional Academic Staff members 11.7% (256) of Instructional Academic Staff are racial/ethnic minorities 2.6% increase in minority instructional academic staff since data available in December 2010

12 Institutional Receptivity: Staff In 2009: 4,938 non-instructional Academic Staff 12% of non- instructional Academic Staff are minorities 3.4% increase in minority non- instructional academic staff since data available in December 2010

13 Institutional Receptivity: Staff In 2009: 5,366 Classified Staff members 12.6% (676) of classified staff are minorities 8.4% increase in minority classified staff since data available in December 2010

14 Institutional Receptivity: Staff In 2009: 399 Executive/Director /Administrators 11.2% of Executive/Director /Administrators are racial/ethnic minorities Slight increase in the proportion who are minorities data available in December 2010

15 Institutional Receptivity: Staff Minority faculty members make up almost 17% of all faculty members. This is the largest proportion among the various employment groups data available in December 2010

16 Institutional Receptivity: Employees 2010 data available in December Women made up around 50% of all employees at UW-Madison. -A smaller proportion of faculty members are women (30%)

17 Institutional Receptivity: Employees 2010 data available in December Around 13% of all employees are minorities -A larger proportion of faculty are minorities, especially among men.

18 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion For these rates, those that did not receive tenure include the following: – Those who were denied tenure – Those who left the university for another position elsewhere – A few faculty members still hold probationary appointments after 9 years. Tenure and promotion rates are calculated at 6 and 9 years after hire, in order to allow for those who have extensions on the tenure clock. Data for tenure charts in this slideshow combine hires from to or to This is necessary due to the small number of faculty, especially women and minority faculty, who are hired within a division in a given year. Small Ns make tenure/promotion rates subject to large variation. Notes about faculty promotion data:

19 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion At 9 years, 64% of women faculty have been promoted to tenure. Percent tenured based on data for hires from to

20 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion A lower percentage of women and men are promoted to tenure within the Social Studies. The largest gap in tenure rates by gender is within the Physical Sciences division. Data on faculty hires from to

21 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion At 9 Years, 64% of minority faculty members have been promoted to tenure. Percent tenured based on data for hires from to

22 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion A lower percentage of faculty members are promoted to tenure within the Social Studies division. The largest gap in tenure rates by minority status is within the Physical Sciences and Arts and Humanities. Data on faculty hires from to

23 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion Selecting a divisional affiliation is a step in the tenure process. Faculty are not required to identify their divisional affiliation at the time of hire, but many do. Women, especially minority women, are heavily concentrated within the Social Studies Division See next slide for numbers of faculty by division, gender, and minority status Note: Chart excludes 41 faculty members who have not yet selected a disciplinary division, as they are not required to do so until they go up for tenure. Data as of October 2009 payroll.

24 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion Women, especially minority women, are heavily concentrated within the Social Studies Division See previous slide for percent by division Note: Chart excludes 41 faculty members who have not yet selected a disciplinary division, as they are not required to do so until they go up for tenure. Data as of October 2009 payroll.

25 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion Data on faculty hires from to

26 Institutional Receptivity: Promotion Data on faculty hires from to All groups have lower promotion rates within the Social Studies division. Women, and especially minority women, are more likely to be within the social studies division. For groups with small hiring pools, the effect of one person’s tenure/non-tenure can affect the percent tenured dramatically. Those not receiving tenure includes those who took a position elsewhere or still have a probationary appointment after 9 years. Key findings from tenure/promotion data:

27 Institutional Receptivity: Peer Comparisons for Faculty Diversity Non-White Full-Time Faculty as a Percent of Total Full-Time Faculty at AAU Public Institutions, 2008 Average Percent Non-White Faculty for AAU Public Institutions: 25.5% Source: IPEDS Fall HR,

28 Institutional Receptivity: Climate Some Recent Climate Studies UW-Madison participation in UW System Climate Study Pilot Project (limited to CALS and Office of Student Life), Letters & Science Climate Study, ; with linkages to STEM, teaching and learning communities CALS Climate Study, NSSE Survey includes many climate-related questions, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011 (planned) WISELI Studies and Programs, on-going since 2002

29 Institutional Receptivity: Climate Participation in the UW System Climate Study, UW-Madison is participating in Tier III of the UW System Climate Study Initiated by UWSA at the request of the Board of Regents Tier I was implemented in Tier II was implemented in Questionnaire will go to all employees and students in Spring 2011; responses are anonymous and confidential For logistical reasons, the study will be fielded only in CALS and Division of Student Life Reports are expected in summer 2011 Campus oversight by a “Diversity Leadership Committee” Institutional implementation by the “Climate Study Working Group” More detail:

30 Institutional Receptivity: Climate Selected NSSE Results ** significantly different Percent of Seniors who often or very much: See:

31 Institutional Receptivity: Climate Selected NSSE Results ** significantly different Percent of Seniors for whom the university emphasizes quite a bit or very much: See:

32 Equity Scorecard Framework AccessExcellence Institutional Receptivity Retention Equity in Educational Outcomes The Equity Scorecard was developed by Dr. Estela Mara Bensimon at the Center for Urban Education, University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/education/CUE/). In UW-Madison will formally participate in the Equity Scorecard framework.

33 Diversity Update 2010 Slideshow available at Questions about these slides: – Sara Lazenby – Jocelyn Milner


Download ppt "Diversity Update 2010 September 2010"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google