Author
Listed:
- Dawn Culpepper
- Damani White-Lewis
- KerryAnn O’Meara
- Lindsey Templeton
- Julia Anderson
Abstract
Many colleges and universities now require faculty search committees to use rubrics when evaluating faculty job candidates, as proponents believe these “decision-support tools” can reduce the impact of bias in candidate evaluation. That is, rubrics are intended to ensure that candidates are evaluated more fairly, which is then thought to contribute to the enhanced hiring of candidates from minoritized groups. However, there is scant — and even contradictory — evidence to support this claim. This study used a multiple case study methodology to explore how five faculty search committees used rubrics in candidate evaluation, and the extent to which using a rubric seemed to perpetuate or mitigate bias in committee decision-making. Results showed that the use of rubrics can improve searches by clarifying criteria, encouraging criteria use in evaluation, calibrating the application of criteria to evidence, and in some cases, bringing diversity, equity, and inclusion work (DEI) into consideration. However, search committees also created and implemented rubrics in ways that seem to perpetuate bias, undermine effectiveness, and potentially contribute to the hiring of fewer minoritized candidates. We conclude by providing stakeholders with practical recommendations on using rubrics and actualizing DEI in faculty hiring.
Suggested Citation
Dawn Culpepper & Damani White-Lewis & KerryAnn O’Meara & Lindsey Templeton & Julia Anderson, 2023.
"Do Rubrics Live up to Their Promise? Examining How Rubrics Mitigate Bias in Faculty Hiring,"
The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 94(7), pages 823-850, November.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:94:y:2023:i:7:p:823-850
DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2023.2168411
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:94:y:2023:i:7:p:823-850. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uhej .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.