Dr. Atkins, Thanks for your questions and comment! The faculty we interviewed reported varying levels of training and learning opportunities offered/required at their institutions. Many reported that more learning opportunities/trainings would motivate them to do more DEAIB work. Many also reported that they would be more motivate if the work was collective- multiple faculty of faculty/students engaging together. 

When we asked in the survey about the faculty member's personal engagement in DEAIB work, integration into research was selected at the lowest rate amongst the 4 options (learning/trainings, teaching, service, or research) with slightly over half reporting DEAIB work associate with research. In the interviews, many of the faculty who reported DEAIB engagement in their research had funding to do so, which supports your belief that if funding agencies (or institutions) provide resources for this work, faculty are more likely to engage. 

Dr. Drayton, 

You raise an excellent point about clarity of expectations and methods for documenting DEAIB work in research. One of our primary recommendations for improving motivations is to explicitly document and reward DEAIB work in all areas of faculty evaluation- teaching research and service. This includes providing diverse examples of what this work might look like. For example, within research it might include developing clear lab of field guides and protocols that communicate expectations to all researchers, including expectations of communication, data sharing, inclusion of colleagues in publications, and safety plans.  Or it could be a community engaged project that results in policy development rather than journal articles.  Clarity and examples are key. 

Unfortunately, we have not seen professional society mentioned significantly in the interview and survey responses. The recent URGE pods were mentioned frequently and folks were excited to participate in those discussions with colleagues and work collaboratively to create policy/resource change within their institutions. The collaborative component seems to be a positive for many faculty- many want to be doing this type of work within a team, not on their own. 

Dr. Coley, 

Faculty mentioned having clear expectations around DEI work (within the context of Tenure and Promotion) as one of the incentives. They also indicated that if there were collaborative efforts, with training and resources, this would be an incentive. Overall, clarity in expectations, collaboration, funding, and time were two resource incentives that faculty mentioned as motivators to do more DEI work. Faculty want their work to be recognized and valued in meaningful ways that elevate the efforts. 

We are conducting a related study in engineering where we investigate what faculty feel to be their responsibility in establishing and/or advancing antiracist and inclusive academic environments. We believe some of this also is centered in the values held and prioritized by faculty and the greater STEM academic culture. Where can we gain more information about the instrument used to conduct your national survey on faculty? We are working to establish a similar instrument and would be curious to know more about the items selected for inclusion on your instrument.

Dr. Podleski, 

Thanks for your comment. Yes, I agree that it needs to be more than a "checkbox". In both the interviews and the surveys it is clear that faculty want their efforts to "count", but that they don't think it would be a good idea to required DEI work of everyone, at least not yet. This can be a bit complicated to navigate in practice, but we are working on recommendations that departments can try. 

I am not sure that requiring DEI work of everyone is the best strategy, but recognizing that it is valuable and a contribution to the university that is worthy of being one of several different choices of "service" or some of the other standard categories that are considered for promotion and tenure seems reasonable.

Many faculty we interviewed agreed that it should not be required of everyone, but for those that are doing DEI work it should be valued and rewarded. There was also a general consensus that it needs to be recognized and valued in ALL areas of faculty work, not just service. Inclusive teaching, diversifying courses, working on community engaged research, practicing culturally responsive graduate advising, etc. all need to be valued and rewarded. 

Exactly - I think it has a place in all of the areas, but maybe place to start is to look for it in at least some areas (as appropriate for the specifics of the university community). 

Dr. Lewis, 

Unfortunately, we have not found examples of T&P policies that are doing this well- but we would love to see them. We have been collecting ideas from the literature, but the lack of concrete examples is frustrating. We are hoping to develop some example language that we can test in departments here and hopefully share with others outside our institution, but testing/seeing an impact will take time. We are also working on example language for annual evaluation, which could see more immediate results.