Download
1 / 23
E N D
Gretal Leibnitz, Ph.D., leibnitz@wsu.edu Implicit Bias This material was supported with funds from the National Science Foundation ADVANCE Institutional Transformation grant #0810927. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived and dishonest—but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - JFK
Overview • 2008 (Sept.) ADVANCE Institutional Transformation grant awarded • Four Initiatives: • Institutional Transformation • Leadership Training • Preparing and Recruiting a Diverse Faculty • Work/Life
Implicit Bias Work at WSU • Policy Work: Diversifying the Faculty at Washington State University: Accountability and Inclusive Search Procedures (Sept. 2, 2010) • Senior Diversity Liaisons • Leadership Training: Provost’s Institutional Transformation Workshop (Oct. 16th, 2012) • Recruiting a Diverse Faculty: On-Line Faculty Search Training (pending) • ADVANCE Implementation Mentors (AIM) Network: National ADVANCE Program Coordinators/Directors Community of Practice
1. Senior Diversity Liaisons* • Senior Faculty Nominated by College Dean (Fall, 2012) • The Senior Diversity Liaison role is to serve as a diversity advocate in faculty searches • Training • Sr. Diversity Orientation: HRS (Sept. 19th, 2012; 2:30-4:00pm) • Oregon State University Search Advocates Training (Oct. 17th, 2012; 8:15-4:30pm) *Note: Poster presented at ADVANCE Workshop 2013
Search Advocate Training Objectives • Explain the role of the Senior Diversity Liaison • Enhance the training participant’s understanding of unconscious bias, diversity, and legal framework in the search process • Provide the training participant’s with the skills to: • Recognize and minimize bias in the search process; • Advocate effectively for diversity • Help committee members test their thinking • Assist the search committee in developing inclusive screening processes, and • Recommend search practices that reduce unconscious bias, and enhance accountability and inclusiveness in the search/selection process.
2. Provost’s Institutional Transformation Workshop (Oct. 16th, 2012) • Key Note: Brian Nosek’shttp://projectimplicit.net/nosek/Mindbug’s: The Ordinary Origin of Bias • Nosek’s talk was similar to University of Michigan’s ADVANCE presentation by Nilanjana (Buju) Dasgupta’sMindbugs: How Implicit Bias Affects Faculty Evaluations in Academia: http://www.adapp-advance.msu.edu/implicit-bias-resources
Implicit Bias: Take-Home Messages • We ALL have implicit biases. • When confronted with ambiguity or complexity, we draw on heuristics or assumptions to fill in the gaps. • We are not necessarily aware or in control of what information is used. • Once we have a presumption, we seek to confirm or presumptions rather than identify how we are wrong. Brian Nosek, Oct. 16th, 2012
What to do? • Recognize cultural implicit biases change over time. • Provide training on ways to avoid influence of bias. • Restructure decision-making processes to reduce the influence of bias. Brian Nosek (Oct. 16th, 2012)
Where might bias operate? • Hiring √ • Resource allocation • Task assignment • Performance evaluation • Promotion and bonus allocation • Succession planning • Organizational climate Brian Nosek (Oct. 16, 2012)
3. On-Line Faculty Search Training http://advance.wsu.edu/
On-Line Faculty Search-Training Objectives Following this training you will: I. Gain awareness of personal biases II. Learn about and understand tips to minimize common institutional biasesin the search process III. Review stages of the search process and learn tips to reduce biases at each stage IV. Identify additional resources V. Review a summary checklist
4. ADVANCE Implementation Mentors (AIM) Network Survey • AIM Network Implicit Bias meeting (2/12/13) • Follow-up 8-question survey (disseminated 2/15/13--2/28/13) • 77% Response Rate (34/44 institutional responses)
“The bottom line is, we are all biased. We all tend to think of women’s work as somewhat smaller, derivative, inferior. We do so unconsciously and involuntarily. We are not aware of it, nor do we notice it in others. That’s what all these studies are saying. It’s as if everyone is wearing glasses with the same tint. You’re wearing them even if you’re “open-minded” or “against discrimination”, even if you start your sentences with “I’m not against women, but…” It is not, and never has been, only about a few individuals who forgot to catch up with the times. It’s not about trolls who say horrible things about women on unmoderated blogs. It’s about you, and me, and everyone we know. It’s about the nice, polite, progressive people who just wish that their female colleague down the hall didn’t try to be more ambitious than is good for her. (She’s clearly good, but does she really think she’s equal to X and Y? And she doesn’t have the same leadership quality, either.) It’s about that paper by two female authors that’s just not quite as groundbreaking as this other paper written by two men. In other words, you need to start by examining your own bias.” http://ilaba.wordpress.com/2013/02/09/gender-bias-101-for-mathematicians/
Discussion Questions? Are there practices in which unwanted biases might be influencing outcomes? What is happening or can happen to detect, address, or prevent them?
