Advancing STEM Faculty Diversity in Community Colleges by Localizing the Self-Assessment Tool
Introduction
Community colleges are known for their diverse student populations, yet the diversity of their faculty lags significantly behind. In 2016, approximately 75% of community college faculty were White, while more than half of the student body consisted of historically underrepresented groups, including Black, Latinx, and Asian students (AACC, 2018). By 2022, 46% of students enrolled in community colleges came from minoritized backgrounds, but only 23.5% of adjunct faculty shared these identities (AACC, 2024). Research highlights the positive impact of faculty diversity on student success. For instance, Black students perform better and persist longer when taught by Black instructors at four-year institutions (Main, 2018; Price, 2010). Similarly, Dyer-Barr’s (2010) mixed methods study revealed that a significant proportion of African American respondents preferred mentors of the same race. Moreover, institutions with higher proportions of faculty who share the race or ethnicity of their minoritized students report increased graduation and transfer rates for those students (Cross & Carman, 2022).
Gender inequity in STEM fields presents another challenge. In 2019, only 8.7% of female doctorate holders in STEM were employed in academia compared to 36.3% of their male counterparts (NSB, 2021). This disparity stems from factors such as underrepresentation, stereotyping, and lack of institutional support, all of which contribute to the attrition of female faculty in STEM disciplines (Casad et al., 2021). Although women represent over half of community college faculty (AACC, 2024), STEM fields within these institutions remain male-dominated. This imbalance can negatively affect female students in STEM, as studies show that they achieve better academic outcomes when taught by female instructors (Bowman et al., 2022). Female mentorship in STEM has also been linked to higher graduation rates for female students (Carrell et al., 2010), and a larger proportion of women than men report preferring mentors of the same gender (Dyer-Barr, 2010).
These findings underscore the urgent need to increase representation and improve working conditions for minoritized faculty at community colleges. Doing so is crucial for fostering the academic success and equity of historically underrepresented students within STEM. This brief summarizes a potential application aimed at sustaining and scaling faculty diversity within STEM disciplines at community colleges—an institutional self-assessment tool developed in collaboration between the Association of Public Land Grant Colleges and Universities (APLU), the Office of Community College Research and Leadership (OCCRL), and community college stakeholders across the country.
Image #1: aelitta/DigitalVision Vectors/Getty Images (Perna, 2023)
How Can We Localize the Self-Assessment Tool?
We have this data and know faculty diversity is an issue, but what is happening to support faculty? How do we localize these efforts to the community college level? The lack of faculty diversity may show that community colleges are not sufficiently valued as unique foundations supporting postsecondary pathways for individual and communal development. We must change the practice of solely celebrating student diversity because faculty diversity is just as important.
To assist in efforts toward faculty diversity, we have localized the original Self-Assessment Tool to reflect the unique context of community colleges, mainly focusing on racial and gender disparities. By incorporating characteristics unique to community colleges, the localized Self-Assessment Tool will better reflect faculty diversity in STEM fields within these institutions.
The original tool, developed for four-year institutions, is grounded on the Institutional Model for Increasing Faculty Diversity (Griffin et al., 2020). The Model is a conceptual framework designed to understand the factors influencing faculty diversity. The Self-Assessment Tool suggests that to increase faculty diversity in meaningful ways, institutions should take a comprehensive approach by integrating four core areas—institutional context, recruitment, transition, and retention—rather than treating each area separately (Griffin, 2020).
Image #2: Original Institutional Model for Increasing Faculty Diversity (Griffin et al, 2020, p. 7)
Image #3: Here is the localized Institutional Model for Increasing Faculty Diversity, with key changes implemented to this updated model in red font (Baber et al., 2022, p. 6).
What Areas Should be Examined Through the Self-Assessment Tool?
The localized Self-Assessment Tool expands on these four core areas and adjusts some of them to fit the community college context. The following sections explain the areas and their significance regarding faculty diversity.
Institutional Context
Each institution's context is unique, leading to different approaches to managing diversity. Thus, no best practices apply to all institutions regarding organizational structures and strategies to increase faculty diversity (Griffin, 2020). Furthermore, scholars have highlighted the importance of having a president who actively promotes a diversity agenda (McMurtrie, 2016). While leadership plays a significant role, creating an inclusive environment for everyone, including faculty, should be a collective responsibility across all institutional units (Griffin, 2020).
In addition to the importance of leadership, fostering a more inclusive and equity-centered institutional climate is also essential. An equity-minded perspective emphasizes the importance of broadening the conversation around diversity by incorporating “equity” and “inclusion” alongside it. This change signifies a shift from merely increasing the number of minoritized faculty members to critically examining and addressing the underlying structures that contribute to inequity within institutions. Focusing on these aspects underscores the need for a more holistic approach to fostering an inclusive environment that values diversity and works actively to correct systemic inequities (Griffin, 2020).
Recruitment
Recruitment is a “long-term formative process” that highlights the importance of faculty of color networks (Dua et al., 2024, p. 424). Thus, recruitment is not one activity; it is a multi-stage process that creates interest in faculty professions, encourages people to apply for openings, effectively navigates a selection process, and persuades someone to accept an offer. Therefore, two additional sub-dimensions were added to reflect the multi-staged recruitment process. One was "networking," defined as building a professional community of historically marginalized faculty applicants in STEM in the context of community college; the other was "follow-up," which aims to keep in touch with applicants regardless of whether the offer is accepted. Since faculty members at community colleges, as opposed to four-year institutions, primarily concentrate on teaching rather than research, the Self-Assessment Tool was revised to reflect a more teaching-centered rather than research-focused approach (Reed, 2016).
Transitioning
Faculty candidates regard institutional support during the transition period as a vital resource for adjusting to their new environment. Research indicates that institutional intervention at the onset of employment can enhance newcomers’ job satisfaction and intent to persist within the organization (Chonody et al., 2023). By establishing a mentoring network that promotes self-efficacy, role clarity, and social connections (Bauer et al., 2007), institutions can assist faculty candidates in adapting to their new environments, which also applies to the context of community colleges since better socialization can influence faculty to become more satisfied, informed, and engaged (Haiduk-Pollack, 2015). Providing adequate social and emotional support benefits faculty candidates and enhances the institutions.
To emphasize this transition period—an ongoing process from application to entry (Griffin, 2020)—the section was renamed “transitioning” (from “transition”). This change focuses on “fostering a smooth and welcoming entry into the institution” (Griffin et al., 2020, p. 5), outlining subcomponents such as pedagogy, professional status, work-life balance, and the role of community college agents. A significant addition is the inclusion of questions regarding how institutions support faculty members' mental health, particularly considering the substantial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on colleges, which has led to an increase in mental health challenges (Ganesan et al., 2021).
Retention
While many colleges emphasize hiring new staff, retaining existing professors in academia is just as crucial. Low retention of minoritized faculty may cause implicit and explicit costs of failing to address systemic challenges, underscoring the urgent need for structural reforms to ensure the retention of diverse faculty (Stanley, 2006). Hiring minoritized faculty is a critical component that should be celebrated, but it is not the end—efforts must be made to retain them. Griffin (2020) initially advises organizations to reevaluate their retention strategies and policies, emphasizing these crucial areas: professional development, advancement, and satisfaction and support. Such support can positively affect faculty members’ career satisfaction and success (Anafarta & Apaydin, 2016).
One significant modification is using earlier and more senior faculty members than faculty ranks, such as junior or associate professors. Many faculty members renew their appointments yearly, and most community colleges do not have a tenure system. Thus, we tried to adopt terminology that better reflected the context of community college faculty. When it comes to retention, regardless of earlier or more senior status, community college faculty have reported high levels of burnout, which is significant to consider (Stowe et al., 2023). As a result, we included questions in the localized Self-Assessment Tool that intentionally ask about burnout.
Takeaways
The localized Self-Assessment Tool represents more than just an instrument for assessing faculty diversity; it embodies a paradigm in how community colleges approach systemic equity and inclusion. In line with Kuhn's notion of paradigm shift, which signifies fundamental changes in the underlying assumptions of a field, this tool highlights the importance of moving beyond incremental solutions and recognizing the interconnected, structural nature of diversity challenges. Rather than considering the tool a one-time initiative, this paradigm shift encourages continuous reflection and adaptation, reshaping institutional cultures to foster equity at all levels. The localized Self-Assessment Tool can be a practical starting point toward actively dismantling systemic barriers and advancing faculty diversity and equity in community colleges.
References
Anafarta, A., & Apaydin, Ç. (2016). The Effect of Faculty Mentoring on Career Success and Career Satisfaction. International Education Studies, 9(6), 22-31.
American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2018, June 6). DataPoints: Faculty and staff diversity. AACC - Building a Nation of Learners by Advancing America’s Community Colleges.
American Association of Community Colleges (AACC). (2024, March 5). DataPoints: Trends among adjunct/part-time instructors. AACC - Building a Nation of Learners by Advancing America’s Community Colleges.
Baber, L., Leach, E., & Turpen, C. (2022, April). Fostering institutional support for faculty diversity and inclusion in STEM education at community colleges [PowerPoint slides]—National Institute for Staff and Organizational Development & ASPIRE Collaborative Internal Feedback Session.
Bauer, T. N., Bodner, T., Erdogan, B., Truxillo, D. M., & Tucker, J. S. (2007). Newcomer adjustment during organizational socialization: A meta-analytic review of antecedents, outcomes, and methods. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 707–721
Bowman, N. A., Logel, C., LaCosse, J., Jarratt, L., Canning, E. A., Emerson, K. T. U., & Murphy, M. C. (2022). Gender representation and academic achievement among STEM-interested students in college STEM courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59(10), 1876–1900.
Carrell, S. E., Page, M. E., & West, J. E. (2010). Sex and Science: How Professor Gender Perpetuates the Gender Gap. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(3), 1101–1144.
Casad, B. J., Franks, J. E., Garasky, C. E., Kittleman, M. M., Roesler, A. C., Hall, D. Y., & Petzel, Z. W. (2021). Gender inequality in academia: Problems and solutions for women faculty in STEM. Journal of Neuroscience Research, 99(1), 13–23.
Chonody, J., Kondrat, D., Godinez, K., & Kotzian, A. (2023). Job Satisfaction amongst Social Work Faculty: The Role of Relationships. Journal of Social Work Education, 59(3), 803–817.
Cross, J. D., & Carman, C. A. (2022). The relationship between faculty diversity and student success in public community college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 46(12), 855–868.
Dua, E., Sequeira, D.-L., & Shenoda, M. (2024). Going Beyond Employment Equity in Universities: Readiness as Emerging Practice. Journal of Canadian Studies, 58(2), 419–434.
Dyer-Barr, R. M. (2010). The role and prevalence of faculty mentoring among African American and Latino undergraduates in different institutional contexts: A mixed methods study (Doctoral dissertation)—University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Ganesan, B., Al-Jumaily, A., Fong, K. N. K., Prasad, P., Meena, S. K., & Tong, R. K.-Y. (2021). Impact of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak Quarantine, Isolation, and Lockdown Policies on Mental Health and Suicide. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12.
Griffin, K. A. (2020). Institutional Barriers, Strategies, and Benefits to Increasing the Representation of Women and Men of Color in the Professoriate: Looking Beyond the Pipeline. In L. W. Perna (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. 35, pp. 1–73). Springer International Publishing.
Griffin, K., Mabe, A., & Bennett, J. (2020). A Guidebook for a Campus Self-Assessment of Successes and Challenges in STEM Faculty Diversity and Inclusion (2020). OSF.
Haiduk-Pollack, C. K. (2015). Socialization of Adjunct Faculty at a Southern California Community College (Doctoral dissertation). Walden University.
Main, J. B. (2018). Kanter's theory of proportions: Organizational demography and PhD completion in science and engineering departments. Research in Higher Education, 59(8), 1059–1073.
McMurtrie, B. (2016). How Do You Create a Diversity Agenda? Chronicle of Higher Education, 62(36), A4–A6.
National Science Board (NSB). (2021). The STEM Labor Force of Today: Scientists, Engineers, and Skilled Technical Workers: Science, engineering, and health doctorate holders employed in academia by type of position, sex, and degree field: 1973–2019.
Perna, L.W. (2023, January 09). Why We Need Better Data on Faculty Diversity. Inside Higher Ed.
Price, J. (2010). The effect of instructor race and gender on student persistence in STEM fields. Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 901–910.
Reed, K. L. (2016). Finding More Like Us: Values and Practices for Hiring in Community Colleges. Journal of Library Administration, 56(1), 83–90.
Stanley, C. A. (2006). Coloring the academic landscape: Faculty of color breaking the silence in predominantly White colleges and universities. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 701–736.
Stowe, J. B., Stowe, J., Self, S. W., Hochanadel, C., & Struble, K. (2023). Burnout in Virginia’s Community College Adjuncts with Relation to Gender, Age, and Number of Jobs. Journal of Organizational Psychology, 23(2).