A Stochastic Model of Consensus Reaching in Committee Decisions for Faculty Advancement, Promotion and Tenure: Does Diversity Matter?
| Autor: | Jennifer Eliason, Ilana S. Mittman, J. Renee Navarro, Taniecea A. Mallery, Laura Castillo-Page |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male Consensus Faculty Medical media_common.quotation_subject Promotion (rank) Humans Personnel Selection Decision Making Organizational media_common Stochastic Processes Community engagement Racial Groups Equity (finance) Cultural Diversity General Medicine Middle Aged Deliberation Assistant professor Social research Career Mobility Scholarship Social Capital Female Psychology Social psychology Diversity (business) |
| Zdroj: | Journal of the National Medical Association. 111:418-426 |
| ISSN: | 0027-9684 |
| Popis: | Purpose There are considerable gender and racial disparities in academic promotions regardless of academic qualifications, suggesting bias. The investigators studied the academic promotions process by simulating the work of Advancement, Promotion and Tenure (APT) committees and applying a mathematical model to assess the impact of diversity on consensus reaching. Method The study targeted academic faculty during an annual Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) meeting. Participants evaluated the academic dossier of a male Assistant Professor with a focus on community engagement during four simulations. All dossiers were identical, with the singular exception of the candidate's race (white vs. black). Committee composition varied with respect to racial diversity. Participants scored the candidate before and after the deliberations. The DeGroot Model was used to compare individual scoring to group convergence. Results While there was no statistically significant difference in the candidate's overall scores between the groups, the least diverse groups rated the candidate the lowest (p = 0.0595). Participants ranked activities related to diversity and equity as the least important. Moreover, criteria deliberated more heavily showed significant score changes after deliberation. Lastly, ambiguity about the review process at various institutions was reported by project participants, increasing the opportunity for bias in real world situations. Conclusions While there was not enough statistical power to measure intragroup differences, the model shows promise in illuminating how individual perceptions, committee composition and group dynamics sway consensus reaching. The model also suggests that social research, community engagement and diversity work do not carry the same weight as traditional scholarship, impacting the career trajectory of minority scholars. The model can be used to evaluate bias not only in academic promotions but also in admissions, hiring and grant review. This will allow improved methods and processes for equitable academic performance reviews, enhancing the career trajectory and retention of minority scholars. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|