Dec 26, 2017 | Uncategorized
Increases in underrepresented and international students
Enrollment at the University of Delaware reached 23,774 this fall, the highest on record in the University’s history and an increase of 765 students over last fall.
The Newark campus set enrollment records for both undergraduate and graduate student populations: Undergraduates total 18,144, up from 17,669 in fall 2016, and graduate students total 4,024, an increase from 3,930 last fall.
The University also welcomed the largest-ever first-year class on the Newark campus—4,306 students, up from 3,952 in fall 2016.
The Newark campus is also becoming more diverse, with 2,206 international students, the highest since the University began collecting global enrollment data in 1994. These students represent 96 countries.
The undergraduate student population includes 2,777 domestic underrepresented minority students, a 62 percent increase over 10 years ago. What’s more, over half of the 2,500 UD undergraduate students receiving Pell grants are Delaware residents—the most since 2007—demonstrating the University’s commitment to providing access and removing barriers, particularly for Delawareans.
Read more on UDaily | Article by Cindy Hall, Infographic by Danny Wright
Dec 22, 2017 | Uncategorized
JAN. 23-25:
From the Caribbean to Asia to the Middle East, each evening features a different theme. Article by Dante LaPenta Photo illustration by Bethany Comegys.
CHS and Dining Services offer “Learning About World Cultures Through Food”
The Nutrition Program of the Department of Behavioral Health and Nutrition (BHAN) is teaming up with University of Delaware Dining Services and student groups to present “Learning About World Cultures through Food” this Winter Session. Unidel-funded winter session event is held Jan. 23-25 from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. in Russell Residential Dining.
Attendees can learn about culture while enjoying food, demonstrations and crafts. Nutrition students and students from the featured cultures helped plan the experience. Recipes, fun facts about the cultures and healthy eating tips are also provided. Each evening has a different theme.
- Tues., Jan 23: Caribbean night with music, Caribbean food and photo booth
- Wed., Jan 24: Asian night with demonstration of making Bento boxes, a chance to try origami and enjoy Asian foods
- Thurs., Jan 25: Middle Eastern and Indian night with a hummus bar, henna tattoos, and professional belly dancer
Event planners include Kelebogile Setiloane, Sandra Baker, Kathryn Sieminski, Robin Moore, Debra Miller and student groups.
Dec 20, 2017 | Uncategorized
Speakers at academic seminars are the voices and faces of their fields, whether they like it or not. So it’s important that those voices and faces reflect who’s actually working in a given discipline. A new study says that colloquiums continue to fall short on that front, at least in terms of gender.
The study, published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that some 3,652 colloquium speakers at 50 selective institutions in 2013-14 were more likely to be men than women, even when controlling for rank and representation of men and women in the disciplines that sponsored the events — the factors often cited to explain gender imbalances in academe.
“There are implications all over, but one of reasons we wanted to do this study is we’re profoundly interested in the idea of gatekeepers — people who, by virtue of their positions, have the ability to keep members of certain groups from achieving their full potential,” Michelle Hebl, study co-author and Martha and Henry Malcolm Lovett Professor of Psychology and professor of management at Rice University, said Monday. “They may do this unwittingly or not, but this is one of those situations where gatekeeper bias has some real consequences, since it’s very important to give these colloquium talks. It’s a really great way to build your network and showcases your research and your credibility.”
Christine Nittrouer, lead author and one of Hebl’s graduate students, said colloquium remarks sometimes serve as pseudo-job talks that lead to job offers or other professional opportunities. Yet the processes governing speaker invitations are far less formal than job searches and therefore less likely to include what Nittrouer called egalitarian protections.
“When we’re not cognizant of these things, our subtle biases can creep in in subtle ways,” she said.
Beyond gender and rank of available speakers, the researchers also investigated whether female and male faculty members at top universities valued speaking engagements differently or turned them down at different rates. They found no significant evidence of either hypothesis, though women did nominally value speaking engagements more than men did.
The authors did find, however, that female colloquium chairs made a big difference in women being selected as speakers: female chairs chose women 49 percent of the time, on average. Male chairs, meanwhile, chose women as speakers 30 percent of the time.
Big Implications
Hebl said the study’s implications extend beyond colloquiums, to other major kinds of career-impacting decisions. The answer isn’t rushing to put women on the “holiday party committee,” since they’re already overrepresented in service roles, she said. But it may be important to put them — in bigger numbers — on truly important committees to share their input as gatekeepers.
For their study, Nittrouer, Hebl and their co-authors created a database from all the featured colloquium speakers on departmental websites of the top 50 U.S. universities, as ranked by U.S. News & World Report. In an attempt to represent the main divisions or colleges at the institutions with neither overly small nor overly large shares of women, they focused on the following disciplines: biology, bioengineering, political science, history, psychology and sociology. Those fields range from 22 percent to 47 percent female, according to the study. To establish an available speaker pool, they created a list of professors from those departments in the top 100 institutions, according to U.S. News & World Report.
The researchers also emailed a subset of faculty members to determine whether giving colloquium talks was significantly more important to men and women, and whether men reported declining invitations to talk significantly less frequently than women did. They also called administrators of each of the 300 programs studied to identify the gender of the colloquium chair or gender composition of the colloquium committee, to see who was making decisions about speakers.
Results
Men gave more than twice as many colloquium talks over all (69 percent, or 2,519) as did women (31 percent, or 1,133). Although full professors gave the most colloquium talks (1,781), many associate professors (989) did as well. Some 882 assistant professors also gave talks. In an advanced analysis controlling for rank and program, the effect of gender was highly significant. Men were still 1.2 times more likely than women to speak at colloquia.
Figure 1: Study 1: percentage of male and female speakers out of the available pool by department giving colloquium talks. For biology, roughly 24 percent men and 20 percent women. For bioengineering, roughly 26 percent men and 22 percent women. For political science, roughly 18 percent men and 17 percent women. For psychology, roughly 15 percent men and 13 percent women. For sociology, roughly 19 percent men and 18 percent women. For history, roughly 16 percent men and 15 percent women.
Finding no evidence of women’s self-selection out of talks, the researchers moved on to their “gatekeeper” data. Regarding who selects speakers, they found that about one-third of speakers were selected by an individual and two-thirds were selected by committee. Of their sample of colloquium chairs, 11 were women and 23 were male. Female chairs sponsored talks in which 49 percent of speakers were women. Male chairs sponsored talks in which 30 percent of speakers were women. Colloquium committees that had a greater percentage of women on them were marginally more likely to have a higher percentage of female colloquium speakers — meaning that, at least in a group setting, both men and women may exhibit bias against women speakers.
Amber E. Boydstun, associate professor of political science and chancellor’s fellow at the University of California, Davis, said the new paper’s findings are directly in line with research on implicit bias. In this case, she said, bias means that when people — both men and women — organize colloquiums, they’re more likely to think about and therefore ask male scholars than female ones.
“Add to that implicit bias the fact that scholarly networks tend to be dominated by men, and it makes perfect (if unfortunate) sense that women — and women of color especially — would be underrepresented as colloquium speakers,” she added via email.
Boydstun co-authored a paper earlier this year on political science’s Women Also Know Stuff movement to increase representation of women and their research in disciplinary discussions, decisions and events. One of the project’s key recommendations is that academics involve women in colloquiums and other conferences.
Featuring only or mostly men in colloquiums gives the “impression that women are not doing important work,” Boydstun and her co-authors wrote. “By disproportionately inviting men to give talks, we unnecessarily diminish the profiles of our women colleagues.” Womenalsoknowstuff.com includes a list of more than 1,300 female political scientists for reference for putting together syllabi, conferences and more.
The new paper calls for further study across disciplines not surveyed. But other research suggests such findings would likely be parallel. A 2014 study regarding large microbiology conferences, for example, found that the inclusion of even one woman on “convener” teams had a major impact on who gets to speak: about 25 percent of the speakers invited by all-male teams were women, compared to about 43 percent of the speakers invited by teams with at least one female member. Organizing teams with at least one woman were also much less likely than all-male organizing teams (9 percent versus 30 percent) to produce symposia in which all panel members were men.
Nittrouer and Hebl co-wrote their study with Rachel Trump-Steele, another graduate student at Rice, and David Lane, an associate professor of psychology, statistics and management on campus. They were joined by Leslie Ashburn-Nardo, an associate professor of applied social and organizational psychology at Indiana University-Purdue University in Indianapolis, and Virginia Valian, distinguished professor of psychology at Hunter College and the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.
–INSIDE HIGHER ED, by Colleen Flaherty
Dec 20, 2017 | Uncategorized
Women receive less credit for speaking up in the workplace than men, finds study.
Women receive less credit for speaking up in the workplace than their male counterparts, a study has found.
“In sum, we find that when men speak up with ideas on how to change their team for the better they gain the respect of their teammates—since speaking up indicates knowledge of the task at hand and concern for the well-being of the team,” said Kyle Emich, from the University of Delaware in the US.
“Alternatively, when women speak up with ideas on how to change the team for the better, they are not given any more respect than women who do not speak up at all, and thus are not seen as viable leadership options,” Emich said.
In the study published in the Academy of Management Journal, Emich said when most individuals imagined a leader they were likely to expect that leader to be a man by default.
On average in 10-people teams, Emich said, men who spoke up more than two-thirds of their teammates were voted to be the No. 2 candidate to take on team leadership.
“Women who speak up the same amount are voted to be the No. 8 candidate. This effect size is bigger than any I have seen since I began studying teams in 2009,” he said.
Further, in the team’s second study, a lab study of working adults, Emich said, “We find that men are given more credit than women even when saying the exact same thing.”
This reminds us about Miranda from the movie Sex and the City. Miranda, a successful lawyer, had to leave her job because her boss never gave a chance to speak up and took credit for her work. There was a scene where her boss raised his hand during an important board meeting indicating Miranda to shut up!
The astonishing study result has only confirmed our doubts. “Yes, it’s true,” said Anindita Rao, a senior manager at an MNC, adding, “It’s easy being a woman but it’s difficult being a strong woman at workplace. A lot of times I am not taken seriously and my ideas about bringing about change in the team to improve performance often fall upon deaf ears.”
This subtle gender stereotyping at workplace is not only a major setback for working woman but also sends out the message that we are not yet ready for strong women at workplaces who could prove to be far better workers than their male counterparts.
–The Times of India
Sep 20, 2017 | Uncategorized
Honor recognizes outstanding commitment to diversity, inclusion
The University of Delaware has been presented the 2017 Higher Education Excellence in Diversity (HEED) Award from INSIGHT Into Diversity magazine, the oldest and largest diversity-focused publication in higher education. The annual HEED Award is a national honor recognizing U.S. colleges and universities that demonstrate an outstanding commitment to diversity and inclusion.
“At UD, diversity and inclusive excellence are bedrock institutional values that inform and guide everything we do,” said President Dennis Assanis. “We have made an ongoing commitment to ensure that our campus is diverse and welcoming and that every student has the opportunity and resources necessary to succeed. Everyone at UD understands that diversity strengthens our institution, and this award recognizes their hard work and dedication.”
UD was selected for its efforts toward enhancing diversity and inclusion in all aspects of the campus. Specific strengths and areas of progress include:
- New staff positions, rich programming, scholarships and community-based partnerships focused on attracting underrepresented and first-generation undergraduate and graduate students and ensuring their success and persistence to graduation;
- New resources dedicated to the recruitment, retention and advancement of a diverse faculty;
- Trainings, courses and mentoring programs to bolster hiring and retention of underrepresented employees and encourage respect for and appreciation of individual differences; and
- Mechanisms for ensuring continued diversity planning and accountability.
A status report posted on the University’s Diversity webpage provides a comprehensive update on these areas and other progress made toward the goals set forth in the Diversity Action Plan established in spring 2016.
Carol Henderson, vice provost for diversity at UD, said, “I am so pleased the University is being honored for the progress we are making toward a more diverse and inclusive campus, and I applaud the many staff, faculty and students who have contributed to these efforts. We have a lot of hard work to do yet, and this award provides encouragement that we are on the right track.”
UD joins 79 other HEED Award recipients to be featured in the November 2017 issue of INSIGHT Into Diversity magazine.
“The HEED Award process consists of a comprehensive and rigorous application that includes questions relating to the recruitment and retention of students and employees — and best practices for both — continued leadership support for diversity, and other aspects of campus diversity and inclusion,” said Lenore Pearlstein, publisher of INSIGHT Into Diversity magazine. “We take a holistic approach to reviewing each application in deciding who will be named a HEED Award recipient. Our standards are high, and we look for institutions where diversity and inclusion are woven into the work being accomplished every day across their campus.”
Other recipients of the 2017 HEED Award include: SUNY System Administration, James Madison University, University of Virginia, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Georgia Institute of Technology and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, among others.
For more information about INSIGHT Into Diversity, visit insightintodiversity.com.
— Article by Cindy L. Hall September 11, 2017
Sep 20, 2017 | Uncategorized
Using data to improve climate, bolster research
The University of Delaware ADVANCE Institute will host a panel discussion on the results of the 2016 Faculty Climate Survey on Sept. 20, from 3:30 p.m. to 5 p.m. The event will be held in Smith Hall, room 140. Anyone from the University community may attend.
The biannual faculty climate survey, launched in 2014, is sent to all full-time faculty to learn more about campus climate, faculty satisfaction and other factors that impact faculty development.
Provost Domenico Grasso will open the forum with brief remarks followed by a presentation of key survey results by Shawna Vican, director of UD ADVANCE. Topics include degree of professional satisfaction, attitudes toward the promotion and tenure process, mentoring, work-life balance and diversity. Vican will discuss implications of the findings for UD and how UD ADVANCE is working to address these issues.
The presentation will be followed by a panel discussion and Q&A with the audience moderated by Pam Cook, UD ADVANCE Principal Investigator (PI).
Panelists include:
- Calvin Keeler, president of American Association of University Professors – UD Chapter
- Martha Buell, president of the Faculty Senate
- Carol Henderson, vice provost for diversity
- Matt Kinservik, vice provost for faculty affairs
- Robin Andreasen, UD ADVANCE co-PI
The ADVANCE team will also discuss the upcoming spring 2018 faculty climate survey. All faculty will be encouraged to complete the survey as a large response rate enables the University to gain a more accurate picture of experiences of faculty and also provide more meaningful research.
An example of research based on the 2014 faculty climate survey is the paper “Gender Differences in Pathways to Faculty Career Satisfaction,” written by Heather Doty, assistant professor of mechanical engineering, Robin Andreasen, associate professor of linguistics and cognitive science, and Dandan Chen, a doctoral candidate in the School of Education.
Relying on UD survey data, the authors used path analysis to determine the importance of various aspects of faculty work-life on career satisfaction and potential gender differences in these areas. The researchers found that effective institutional leadership and organizational mentoring influence job satisfaction for both men and women faculty. The effectiveness of the department chair is a factor especially relevant for women faculty.
The study was awarded the Denise Denton Best Paper Award at the 2017 American Society for Engineering Education annual meeting.
The researchers plan to use the results to improve the campus climate for women faculty, especially in fields where they are underrepresented. Due to limitations in sample size, researchers could not explore pathways to career satisfaction for faculty of color.
About the UD ADVANCE Institute
The UD ADVANCE Institute is aimed at implementing large-scale, comprehensive change to increase the representation and advancement of a diverse faculty workforce. It is supported by a five-year Institutional Transformation grant from the National Science Foundation.
— Article by UDaily Staff September 06, 2017
