MIT Pledges to Improve Conditions for Minority Faculty Members

Those so-called "URMs" also trail white faculty by 10 percentage points in obtaining tenure. In looking for possible explanations, the report cites a disproportionate number of "poor or negative mentoring experiences" among minority faculty members. It also notes that white males "view diversity as less critical to MIT's core value of excellence" than their African-American and Hispanic colleagues.

The most subtle, but perhaps most telling, comment involves the incendiary question of whether efforts to increase diversity will undermine the quality of the faculty. The report refers obliquely to "the tension created by the outward presumption that a true meritocracy is already essentially achieved at MIT." So let Paula Hammond, a professor of chemical engineering and chair of the panel, explain what that really means. Hammond spoke to ScienceInsider today:

There are people who believe that, if you focus on anything other than what they perceive to be the science and technology aspects of the candidate, that you have dirtied the search and that you're not focusing on quality. Let me call them the purist perspective. People believe that they are being pure by ignoring any other aspect of the candidate. This is really common in STEM fields, the idea that you can blindly find the best candidate. It's a meritocratic outlook that is blind to all other aspects of humanity. And we as scientists are raised to believe very deeply in that concept.

It's a wonderful ideal. The problem is in the interpretation of how close we are to achieving that. There have been studies that show that blind isn't really blind. There's a famous study of musicians, for example, in which men and women are selected equally when the reviewers are blind, but that men are chosen more often when the reviewers can see the performers. So the reality is that we come with hidden biases or preferences--all of us--that prevent us from being pure.

So the idea that we can executive the meritocratic ideal is an illusion. And the problem is that many faculty don't realize that this illusion is present. That's why we have to consciously look for opportunities amongst people who are different. Because that will allow us to evaluate that person on a different level.

MIT President Susan Hockfield says the report makes clear "we still have much work to do … to achieve a true culture of inclusion." Embracing the report, Provost Rafael Reif said MIT will adopt its recommendations for a stronger mentoring program, training for chair and department heads to detect "hidden biases," partnerships with other universities to broaden recruitment, and the use of cluster hires that allow more flexibility in hiring talented individuals. Hammond expects an extensive campus discussion this spring before any changes are implemented.