Research rarely considers the roles of disability—and ableism—in shaping the experiences of Black faculty. Drawing from semi-structured interviews with 26 Black disabled faculty members, this study reveals how participants grapple with intersections of racism, ableism, and disablism (Dolmage, 2017) while deliberating disclosure. I leverage disability critical race theory (DisCrit; Annamma et al., 2013; Banks et al., 2022) and argue that non-disclosure is a strategic act of agency to resist marginalization at their institutions. However, the conditions that make non-disclosure a prudent decision limit the full participation of Black faculty in the academy. I conclude with recommendations for research and practice.

Faculty diversity is a key concern across U.S. colleges and universities, especially in computer science (CS) departments, where there is both a faculty shortage and a lack of diversity among faculty. Given the crucial role CS faculty play in shaping the field, in terms of both producing knowledge and mentoring the next generation of computer scientists, developing diverse and robust pathways to the professoriate must be an institutional priority. This panel will offer interdisciplinary perspectives from scholarly experts in CS and higher education, leveraging panelists' knowledge about diversity and equity in pathways to the CS professoriate. Panelists will provide relevant empirical insights about students' academic pathways and institutional practices that may broaden access to faculty careers. Panelists will also engage in a conversation about reimagining pathways to the CS professoriate with equity-minded policies and practices.

As universities face unprecedented pressure to diversify, campus communities must reckon with the fact that nearly one-third of underrepresented and racially minoritized (URM) faculty are in an academic couple. Despite the prevalence of URM academic couples, research rarely captures their perspectives, which could shed light on their experiences with dual-career hiring and inform faculty diversification efforts by revealing barriers to their inclusion. Guided by critical race theory, this study draws upon couple and individual interviews with nine URM faculty couples, and reveals how they endure racialized devaluation of their merit and racialized sexism against women partners. Implications for recruitment and retention are discussed.

In this paper, we examine the relationships between overall institutional faculty diversity and law student diversity at institutions with Top 14 law schools and Association of American Universities (AAU) member institutions with law schools over the past decade. We chose to examine these institutions because they are arguably the most influential and have the greatest likelihood to produce students who become university professors (Gasman, 2022 ). In addition, their graduates are more likely to become prominent judges, politicians, and attorneys (Deo, 2019 ). The paper includes 12 major findings, including: Diversity at higher ranking law schools shows more law student diversity in contrast to law schools that are ranked lower. It appears that law students of color tend to attend higher ranked law schools as a preference upon decision to attend law school.

Dual-career hiring is crucial to cultivating gender equity in the professoriate. Women are more likely than men to be in an academic couple, therefore institutions that do not use dual-career hiring systematically disadvantage women in faculty hiring. Yet, institutional resistance to dual-career hiring is not the only obstacle hindering women in academic couples from entering and progressing in the faculty ranks. Women also make decisions about their employment within a broader social context where gendered norms privilege men's careers. Gendered norms and gender expectations pressure women in heterosexual couples to make choices that prioritize their partner's career. In this article, I analyze couple and individual interviews with nine heterosexual faculty couples of color to explore how women make career sacrifices when accepting dual-career offers. I argue that liberal and post-structural feminist theories are insufficient for understanding the career choices of women of color and illustrate how intersectionality is a useful analytical lens for shedding light on racialized factors informing their decisions. The findings extend past understanding by elaborating on not only how women's position type (e.g., tenure-track vs. clinical) and rank (e.g., tenured vs. not tenured) are seen as negotiable, but also how women sacrifice their institutional and departmental fit. For women of color, these career sacrifices are racialized in ways that are detrimental to their inclusion and job satisfaction. The findings shed light on how gendered career decisions and institutional norms converge to perpetuate women's underrepresentation in the tenure system and full professor ranks.

AbstractThe COVID‐19 pandemic has refocused higher education on issues of work‐life conflict among faculty members with children. This study draws from interviews with 13 heterosexual couples (26 participants) who were employed as faculty members and who cared for at least one child during the pandemic. Using the theory of perceived organizational support, we considered how institutional actions shaped the extent to which academic couples who parent felt supported in managing pandemic‐related work‐life conflict. We found centralized mechanisms for sharing concerns, innovative childcare resources, and flexibility and transparent communication enhanced participants' sense of organizational support, while inaction and unsystematic institutional responses undermined perceptions of organizational support. Our findings are consistent with past work on the relationship between organizational policies and resources and perceptions of organizational support, but also suggest alternative strategies for institutions that want to enhance perceived and real support for academic couples who parent.

Given the academic and labor market benefits of study abroad, closing gaps in study abroad participation is essential to educational equity. Students of color remain underrepresented in study abroad despite past efforts at diversification. Traditionally, study abroad opportunities for U.S. students have been designed for White audiences, and past research has indicated that a perceived disconnect between students of color's identities and the available programs has served as one of the barriers to their participation. This qualitative inquiry of the Frederick Douglass Global Fellowship. a 4-week study abroad initiative that was crafted for students from minority-serving institutions, investigates how the 10 participants' narratives of their experiences in the program illustrate principles of cultural relevance outlined in Museus' (2014) culturally engaging campus environments model. The marketing and framing of the program attracted students to apply for it, as many valued that it honored Frederick Douglass, presented the rare opportunity to study abroad with other students of color, and would prepare them to serve their communities more effectively upon returning. The instructors' pedagogical strategies validated students' identities and, in concert with the programming, presented numerous opportunities for students to learn more about themselves and others. The ethnic, regional, and institutional diversity within the cohort enhanced their experiences because of the abundant opportunities that it provided for cross-cultural engagement. These findings point to strategies that might be used in the development. promotion, and facilitation of study abroad programs for diverse audiences.

Drawing upon 15 qualitative interviews with early-to mid-career faculty (seven men and eight women) at Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), this study examines the diverse motivations and paths those faculty members have taken to becoming professors at their respective institutions. The faculty come from a range of MSIs (Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institutions, and Predominantly Black Institutions) across the country and represent a broad spectrum of disciplines. This study sheds light on factors that guide their choices of discipline and entrance into the faculty ranks at MSIs. Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) was used as a lens during qualitative coding and analysis in order to develop the findings, which reveal that (1) teaching, activism, and community uplift were primary motivators to enter the professoriate; (2) supportive environmental factors, including single individuals, proved pivotal in influencing faculty to take these roles; and (3) career transitions into the academy were spurred by learning experiences that revealed disciplinary and teaching interests. The findings suggest that MSIs attract community-oriented individuals to their faculty positions, and that colleges and universities interested in diversifying their faculties should craft such roles in ways that are appealing to the populations that they are trying to recruit and retain.