Thread: An understated trend in higher ed is the influx of faculty jobs that focus on race, gender, identity, and critical theory. These have become the hottest areas, the specialties most likely to land a job.
Here are a few from the first page of the MLA's job board.
Duke University is hiring two literature professors.
Ideal fields include critical race and ethnic studies, gender and sexuality studies, decoloniality and post-colonial theory.
Priority given to candidates in Latinx studies.
UC Davis Department of English is hiring a professor of Chicanx/Latinx literature.
Specializations: "Indigenous literary and cultural studies," "disability studies," "gender and sexuality studies," "environmental humanities."
Fairfield University's English Department is hiring in 20th and 21st Century Postcolonial Literature in English.
The job listing encourages a secondary focus on "anti/post/decolonialism" and "critical theory."
Wake Forest University, Spanish.
The department is "particularly interested in candidates whose critical perspectives are linked to the experiences of groups historically underrepresented in higher education in ways that inform and influence their pedagogical approach."
Dartmouth is hiring a professor of Native American Literature and Indigenous Studies.
Secondary fields: "women’s, gender and sexuality studies," "critical race theory," "queer theory," etc.
Again, these are just from the first page of a languages job board, basically a random sample, and yet a majority focus on identity, with ideologically-coded language.
Toronto, Assistant Professor, Inter-Asia Gender and Sexuality.
(See highlighted text.)
"The English Department at Southwestern University invites applications for a tenure-track position in Latino/a/x-Chicano/a/x literature and culture."
Colgate University, Assistant Professor of German.
"We are particularly interested in candidates with interests in environmental humanities, gender studies, art and aesthetics, or transnational/multiethnic and colonial/postcolonial cultures in German-speaking contexts."
Williams, Assistant Professor of German.
The department has "a particular interest in candidates who work in the areas of migration, race and anti-racism, post- and decolonial approaches, disability, and/or memory studies."
Of course, scholars should be able to study race and gender. Universities shouldn't ban scholars from focusing on critical race theory.
But when a majority of a random sampling of jobs are like these, it starts to resemble a political agenda.
Ohio State, Latinx Folklore.
Also Ohio State:
On top of that, of course, most of these roles require diversity statements.
At Bates College, candidates for a role in Japanese Language and Asian Studies must submit a statement on how their work advances "equity, inclusion, access, antiracism, and educational justice."
But for many roles, the whole job application is functionally a diversity statement. Like this position at St. Olaf College in African American Studies, which calls for a focus on "Black Feminisms."
This is only the beginning. Universities now regularly emphasize that they want to hire more people in these areas, in an effort to increase demographic diversity.
This kind of push influences every area of higher education.
Graduate students: to get a good job, emphasize race and gender.
English and German classes: taught by a scholar who focuses on race and gender, focuses on race and gender.
Faculty research: focuses on race and gender, and rewarded for that focus.
NEW: During one hiring cycle at Ohio State, 60% of new arts and humanities faculty jobs fell in the “DEI” category, according to emails I obtained.
This was after OSU announced it would hire “100 underrepresented and BIPOC hires in all fields of scholarship.”
🧵on my latest.
In 2021, Ohio State’s then-president Kristina Johnson announced an initiative to hire 50 scholars focused on “social equity” and 100 “underrepresented and BIPOC” hires in all disciplines.
Documents I’ve acquired, reported in @CityJournal, shed light on how that played out.
@CityJournal The documents reveal how administrators were keeping tabs on the hiring spree.
In November 2022, an OSU diversity dean said over email that she wanted to meet with the finalists for a DEI-focused faculty job: professor of “indigenous knowledges.”
Last week, the DOJ released guidance for federal funding recipients.
The memo—which clarifies how nondiscrimination law should be applied—is a huge development for universities. A lot of their worst policies are looking more fragile than ever. 🧵
2/ The DOJ specifically highlights the use of racial proxies. Hiring on the basis of "cultural competence" or using diversity statements is unlawful if the purpose is to give an advantage to specific racial groups.
This is an even bigger deal than it might seem.
3/ Universities often take on large-scale hiring programs that select for an emphasis on "equity."
Inevitably the programs recruit ideologues. More importantly, this criteria is justified because it's seen as a way to favor minorities. It's right there in their own documents ⬇️
NEW: Around the country, college deans monitor finalist slates, shortlists, and applicant pools for faculty jobs. If a list isn't "diverse," a search can be outright cancelled.
I've acquired a trove of records that show who bankrolled this practice: the federal government.
🧵
As I’ve previously reported, these checkpoints give administrators diversity-based veto power in hiring (see ⬇️⬇️⬇️ for examples).
But the practice didn’t emerge organically. At many universities, it was adopted as direct result of National Science Foundation (NSF) funding.
Here’s what those grants look like.
In 2003, Case Western Reserve University received one of the early NSF ADVANCE grants ($3.5 million).
As a part of the grant, “deans could send a list back to the department if it did not reflect the diversity of the national pool.”
NEW: Universities across the U.S. have embraced diversity checkpoints in faculty hiring.
Administrators monitor the demographics of applicants throughout the process, with consequences for searches that don't "pass muster"—according to a trove of records I've obtained.
🧵
In one email—acquired via a records request—UT Austin professor Carma Gorman asked diversity-dean John Yancey whether her search committee’s pool was sufficiently diverse to advance.
The dean said yes, but if the numbers dropped “then things don’t look good anymore.”
At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC), the Human Resources director would send weekly “diversity of the pool reports,” which would continue up to the selection of finalists.
If the makeup was deemed “insufficient,” more administrators would get involved.
DOCUMENTS: At Cornell, search committees that were hiring biomedical scientists had to pass four "checkpoints" to make sure their pools were "sufficiently diverse."
"That certainly looks like a Title VII violation," one legal expert told me when discussing the program.
🧵
In 2021, Cornell received a $16 million NIH grant for the Cornell FIRST hiring program—aiming, in the proposal’s words, to "increase the number of minoritized faculty" at Cornell and beyond.
I acquired a trove of documents that show how this played out.
According to a proposal and set of progress reports, the program's leadership team screened applicants at four separate stages—the initial pool, longlist, shortlist, and finalist slate—to ensure “as diverse a pool as possible.”