-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 26
Predictors of Diversificationof Journalism &
MassCommunication Faculties1989-1998LEE B. BECKER, JISU HUH AND
TUDOR VLAD
Lee B. Becker ([email protected]) is a professor in the Grady
College of Journalism and MassCommunication and director of the
James M. Cox Jr. Center for International Mass Commu-nication
Training and Research at the University of Georgia. Jisu Huh
([email protected])is a doctoral student and research assistant
in the Cox Center. Tudor Vlad ([email protected])is assistant director
of the center. Preparation of this report was made possible by a
grantfrom the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.
The percentage of faculty injournalism and mass
communicationprograms who are women is increasing,but the change is
so gradual that, at thepresent rate, it will be around the year2035
before the faculty looks like thestudents enrolled in journalism
andmass communication programs todayin terms of gender.
The situation is much the same interms of race and ethnicity.
Growth inthe percentage of faculty who are notwhite is such that,
at the present rate,it will be at least 2035 before the facultyis
as diverse as today’s students. Thetarget is moving, however, and
by 2035,the percentage of students who aremembers of racial and
ethnicminorities is likely to be higher than it
is today. This means that if today’s rateof change in journalism
and masscommunication faculty continues, in2035 there still will be
a gap betweenthe characteristics of the faculty andthe
students.
From 1989 to 1998 — the periodfor which data on the
characteristicsof faculty in journalism and masscommunication are
available— theamount of change averaged acrossfaculties in the
country represented theaddition of three-fourths of a womanto the
faculty. In terms of minorities,the average change was an increase
ofhalf a faculty member.
Yet some journalism and masscommunication programs have
madestrides in diversifying their faculties,
-
SPRING’ 0327
both in terms of gender and race. Forexample, one journalism
programadded thirteen women to its facultyfrom 1989 to 1998, and
one added sixfaculty members who are members ofracial or ethnic
minorities.
What explains that variation? Whyhave some journalism and
masscommunication programs enjoyedmore success than others
indiversifying their faculties? This articleexamines three
different factors thatcould explain the variability:
thecharacteristics of the region in whichthe journalism program is
located, thecharacteristics of the university thathouses the
program, and thecharacteristics of the journalismprogram
itself.
Interviews and observational dataare used to answer questions
about theforces that explain variability indiversification
outcomes.
Literature ReviewSystematic research on the
determinants of diversification injournalism and mass
communicationprograms has not been undertaken todate. The review of
basic data on thestatus of women and minorities injournalism
education by Manning-Miller and Dunlap1 in this journaloffered a
sound springboard for studyof the topic.
Much has been written generallyabout diversity issues in
highereducation, with current literaturefocusing on the impact of
affirmativeaction on student enrollments and theconsequences of
that enrollment.Bowen and Bok, in their study ofstudents at
selective colleges anduniversities, found that black
studentsperformed well in those institutions,
graduated at rates higher than thenational average, and were
successfulin their careers after college.2 Cole andBarber, however,
reported that blackstudents did less well at selective thanat less
selective institutions.3
The “Top 10 percent” plan used inTexas as an alternative to
affirmativeaction has been shown to be ineffectivein returning
minority enrollment levelsto their level under affirmative actionat
the state’s two most selective publicuniversities.4 Renner has
noted that,while access to higher education hasincreased for all
Americans in the lastthirty years, the biggest gains have beenmade
by whites, not by Hispanics orblacks, resulting in an increasing
gapbetween the races.5
In general, research has shown thathaving appropriate faculty
role modelsat institutions improves suchaffirmative action goals as
improvedenrollment and retention rates.Blackwell, 6 for example,
found that thebest predictor of black studentenrollment in
professional schools andgraduation from those programs wasthe
number of Black faculty in thatschool. Kaigler-Love7 conducted
in-depth interviews with seven femalefaculty members at two
universities inOklahoma to determine how mentoringaffects retention
of female minoritystudents. The female faculty whoparticipated in
this research said thattheir mentoring not only increased thenumber
of female minority students butalso was key for the purposes
ofrecruiting and retaining qualified anddiverse candidates through
tograduation. Cole and Barber, however,found that role model’s race
and gendermade virtually no difference on studentcareer decisions
once they are in theuniversity.8
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 28
While Reskin9 shows that there isgenerally support for the
principles ofaffirmative action in the general public,at least one
study of university facultyand administrators has shownlimitations
to that support. Miller 10
found in a study at one urban collegethat those not targeted for
affirmativeaction tend to show negativeperceptions based on the
view thatthose hired by the affirmative actionprogram are less
competent thanothers. Those against affirmative actionsaid that
diversification initiativesignore merit, seek quotas, and
lowersstandards of quality.11
Research has shown theimportance of administrativeleadership in
hiring more diversifiedfaculty. Hill12 conducted interviewswith
departmental leaders and searchcommittee chairs in two
publicdoctoral granting universities andshowed that how a search
committeedefines affirmative action dependedlargely on how the
department chairdefines the term. Smith13 studiedminority doctoral
degree recipients andshowed that a close workingrelationship
between the searchcommittee and the administrationcontributed to
the success of the searchand the hiring of minority faculty.
Hitt,Keats, and Purdum14 surveyedpersonnel and affirmative
actionofficers of colleges and universities ina southwestern state.
These expertsalso identified commitment fromhigher administration
and a receptiveattitude on the part of key universitypersonnel as
the two most criticalfactors that contributed to
effectiveaffirmative action programs. Reskin15
has concluded, based on her review ofresearch in the workplace
generally,that an organization whose leaders
support affirmative action is likely toimplement substantive
programs, andsubstantive programs translateaffirmative action
policies intonondiscriminatory practices.
An essential part of affirmativeaction in the workplace,
according toReskin,16 is the replacement ofsubjective and biased
hiringprocedures with practices that treat allprospective and
actual employeesuniformly through job posting, openrecruitment
methods, andstandardized evaluations. Smith17 hasargued that
approaching the searchprocedure in the usual ways would notincrease
diversification. Mickelsonand Oliver18 found that
institutionaldifferences are less important thanindividual
attributes in predicting howblack students will perform in
graduatestudies. They concluded that thetraditional way in which
qualifiedcandidates for academic positions areidentified, screened,
and selected forthe short list has hindered affirmativeaction
programs from achievingsignificant changes in universities. Inthe
hiring process, search committeesoften rely on so-called
provencategories of evaluation such asranking of a candidate’s
graduatedepartment and the recommendationsof prestigious scholars.
Thesetraditional screening criteriadisadvantage many
minorityapplicants, who may have attendedless prestigious programs
due tovarious reasons other than talent, andmay have not had
opportunities towork with prominent scholars becauseof lack of
support and mentoring forminority students.
The research evidence is thatnarrowness of the search network is
abarrier to diversification.
-
SPRING’ 0329
Administrators at prestigiousuniversities interviewed by
Knowlesand Harleston 19 said that unfamiliaritywith the work of
minority scholars anda failure to note minority
scholars’achievements or accomplishmentslimits searches for
faculty. Manyassume that minority scholars excelonly in minority
subjects, thusnarrowing the scope of recruitment,the administrators
said. Smith20
concluded, based on her interviewswith doctoral degree
recipients, thatinstitutions must be more active insearch for
minority faculty bydeveloping personal connections ornetworking
with diverse scholars. Shealso concluded that universities musthave
diverse search committees toaccess and evaluate candidates
fromunderrepresented groups.
Tradition and the status quo onmany campuses have been found to
bean obstacle to diversification offaculties, contributing to the
stresslevel of women and minority facultymembers. Smith,21 who
interviewed299 minority Ford, Mellon andSpencer Fellowship
recipients whohad earned their degrees between 1989and 1995, found
that isolation, lack ofappreciation, institutional disinterestin
diversity, racism, and sexismcreated an unsupportive climate
oncampuses, making it hard for manyminority faculties to earn
tenure.Burroughs,22 who conductedinterviews with female
facultymembers at a major research universityin Texas, found that
female facultiesperceived the organizational culture ofthe
university as patriarchal andunsupportive for women. Turner
andMyers23 interviewed 55 minorityfaculty members in institutions
thatwere members of the Midwestern
Higher Education Commission. Thefaculty members reported a
“chillyclimate” in many universities andunsupportive work
environment.
Aisenberg and Harrington,24 basedon interviews with 62
women,including widely recognized scholarsand successful teachers
as well as thosewho have left the university, reportedthat women
faculty members engage inteaching more often than in researchand
that they are less satisfied withtheir positions than their
malecounterparts. Iacona25 surveyed morethan 1,300 faculty members
in 372different universities and colleges andfound that female
faculty weresignificantly less satisfied with theirpresent
positions, current salary, anddepartmental structure than males,
andthe likelihood to leave academia wasgreater for women and
minorities thanfor the white male majority. Mason andGoulden,26
based on data from 1973-1999 from the National ScienceFoundation
research on doctoraldegree recipients, found a consistentand large
gap in achieving tenurebetween women and men who hadchildren early
in their careers. Insciences and engineering, for example,the gap
between men and women was24 %, with women being lower.Nabinet 27
found in a survey of 649faculty in three state researchuniversities
that black and Hispanicfaculty spent a disproportionateamount of
time in community-relatedactivities, on and off campus,
thereforelimiting available time and energies foracademic
research.
Administrators of highereducation institutions report that
thepool of job applicants has made itdifficult for them to
diversify theirfaculties.28 In fact, according to the
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 30
most recent NSF Survey of EarnedDoctorates, in 2001 females
received44.0 % of all doctorates, which is thehighest percentage of
women everrecorded by the survey. A total of 4,254members of U.S.
racial minority groupswere awarded doctorates, representing16.1 %of
the U.S. citizens earningresearch doctorates in 2001. Thepercentage
represents an increase from15.8 %in 2000, and is the
highestpercentage yet recorded in the survey.Blacks earned the most
doctorates(1,604) of the four main U.S. minoritypopulations in
2001, followed byAsians (1,382), Hispanics (1,116), andAmerican
Indians (149).
Rai and Critzer examined datafrom forty-one states in an effort
todetermine which social and politicalfactors predicted success in
achievingfaculty diversification at both publicand private
institutions.29 They foundlittle evidence that the
politicalideology of state leaders had an impact.Level of
industrialization, urbanizationand income in the state also did
notmake a difference. What did matter wasthe minority groups’
percentage withina state. Public institutions also weremore diverse
than private ones.
ExpectationsThis literature provides a
perspective for analyzing the outcomeof efforts to increase the
diversity offaculties of journalism and masscommunication around
the country. Itsuggests that forces outside theindividual
university — that is, thecharacteristics of the region in whichthe
journalism program is located —might have impact. It also suggests
thatcharacteristics of the university thathouses the program may
make a
difference. Finally, the literaturesuggests that the
characteristics of thejournalism program itself, such as thenature
of its leadership, may beimportant.
MethodologyTo examine the forces at work in
determining success of journalism andmass communication programs
increating diverse faculties, data weretaken from a number of
sources. Onesource was the Annual Survey ofJournalism & Mass
CommunicationEnrollments, conducted in the JamesM. Cox Jr. Center
for International MassCommunication Training andResearch, a unit of
the Grady Collegeof Journalism and MassCommunication at the
University ofGeorgia.30
Schools listed in either theAEJMC Journalism &
MassCommunication Directory or TheJournalist’s Road to Success, A
Careerand Scholarship Guide, prepared byThe Dow Jones Newspaper
Fund Inc.,are included in the population ofsurveyed schools.
In October of each year, aquestionnaire is mailed to
theadministrator of each of theseprograms. Subsequent mailings of
thissame questionnaire are sent to non-responding schools in
December,January and February. Non-respondingschools are
subsequently contacted bytelephone and asked to complete
thequestionnaire over the telephone.31
Even after these efforts, not allschools report and not all
respond toall questions asked. Two characteristicsof
schools—membership in theAssociation of Schools of Journalismand
Mass Communication and
-
SPRING’ 0331
accreditation by the AccreditingCouncil on Education in
Journalismand Mass Communication — are usedto make projections when
schools donot report complete data. Data from thereporting
accredited schools are usedto estimate characteristics of
theaccredited schools for which there wasany missing information.
Similarly,statistical means from the non-accredited ASJMC schools
are used toestimate missing data from similarschools, and data from
the non-accredited schools not affiliated withASJMC are used to
estimate missingdata for those schools. The overallestimates, then,
are based on completeinformation and best approximationsabout data
not reported.
The survey instrument includesquestions on number of
studentsenrolled in the program, characteristicsof those students,
and the number ofdegrees granted, as well as thecharacteristics of
those receiving thedegrees. In the 1989, 1992, 1995 and1998
enrollment surveys,administrators were asked to report
thecharacteristics of their facultymembers by gender,
race/ethnicity andrank.
Data gathered by the NationalCenter for Education Statistics and
bythe U.S. Bureau of the Census wereused to supplement the
informationobtained from the Annual Survey ofJournalism & Mass
CommunicationEnrollments. University-widepercentages of minority
and femalefaculty members were computed fromthe Integrated
PostsecondaryEducation Data System (IPEDS) “FallStaff Data”
collected in 1993 and 1997.The percentages of minority andfemale
students enrolled inuniversities were obtained from IPEDS
“Fall Enrollment Data” for 1990 and1997.32 The percentage of
minorities inthe region was taken from the 2000 U.S.Census. Data
were collected by stateand then classified into the followingnine
categories: New England, MiddleAtlantic, East North Central,
WestNorth Central, South Atlantic, EastSouth Central, West South
Central,Mountain and Pacific.33
In addition, case studies wereconducted of six journalism and
masscommunication programs, three ofwhich had achieved above
averagediversification from 1989 to 1998, andthree, similar in
relevant respects, thathad not.34 Each of the successfulprograms
had gained at least fourfemale and four minority facultymembers
from 1989 to 1998,representing a change of more than 9%in the
faculty characteristic in eachcategory. The three ”control”
programshad gained two minority facultymembers among them and four
women.
Researchers spent two daysvisiting each of the selected
sixprograms and asked administrators andfaculty to discuss how they
hadachieved diversification. Some of thediscussions were in group
settings.Many were one-on-one. Theadministrators of all six
programsallowed free reign during the visits.The visits were in
2001 and 2002.
Following the visits to the threesuccessful programs,
telephoneinterviews were conducted with forty-seven female and
minority facultymembers from the three successfulinstitutions. For
each university, thefaculty interviewed represented morethan half
of the female and minorityfaculty members. The interviewsfocused on
faculty members’experiences while they were being
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 32
recruited to the universities and in theyears after when they
actually servedas faculty members. The interviewsalso asked about
faculty members’backgrounds, their experiences insearching for
jobs, and the jobinterviews that brought them to thethree
successful universities. Inaddition, the faculty members alsowere
asked about their personalexperiences on the job.
What the Numbers ShowThe number of full-time faculty
members teaching journalism and masscommunication across the
countryincreased from 4,126 in 1989 to 5,038in 1998, representing a
growth of22.1%. During that time, the numberof part-time faculty
went from 3,028 to3,771 — or a growth of 24.5%. Thesefigures are
estimates based on actualcounts of faculty size and
theprojections.
In 1989, the average journalismand mass communication faculty
had10.4 full-time members. In 1998, it was11.2 faculty members.
Becauseenrollments grew by only 3,407undergraduate students during
thisperiod, the gross student/faculty ratiowas considerably lower
in 1998 at 29.6students to 1 faculty member than itwas at 35.3 to 1
in 1989.
The figures on faculty growth arein one sense misleading. The
increasein the total number of nearly athousand full-time
journalism andmass communication faculty membersover this time
period can be attributedto the increase in the number ofprograms in
the country, from 395 in1989 to 451 in 1998.
The growth rate is probably muchcloser to 2.9%, the rate of
increase in
faculty size for the 263 programs in theAnnual Survey of
Journalism & MassCommunication Enrollments thatreported faculty
data in 1989 and 1998.The amount of change between 1989and 1998 in
full-time faculty at the 263journalism and mass
communicationprograms averaged a third of a person(.34).35 This
change resulted from theaddition of just more than three-quarters
of a woman (.81), half aminority (.55) (sometimes also awoman), and
a decrease of three-fourths of a white male (-.79).
Between 1989 and 1998, thepercentage of journalism and
masscommunication faculty members whowere female increased from
28.7 to 35.5(Figure 1). In 1998, 61.3% of theundergraduate students
in theseprograms were women!36 Growth in thepercentage of female
faculty was about2 percentage points in each of the lastthree-year
periods, meaning that it willbe 2035 before parity is reached if
thecurrent percentages for studentsremain relatively stable.37
Between 1989 and 1998, thepercentage of journalism and
masscommunication faculty members whowere members of racial or
ethnicminorities increased from 9.6 to 15.3(Figure 1). In 1998,
27.1% of theundergraduate students enrolled injournalism and mass
communicationprograms around the country weremembers of racial or
ethnic minorities.Growth in the percentage of minorityfaculty
members averaged about .33percentage points per year in the lastsix
years, meaning it would beapproximately 2035 before parity withthe
1998 figures is reached.38 Thenumber of minority students can
beexpected to increase to an estimated41% by that time.39
-
SPRING’ 0333
Journalism and masscommunication faculty lookremarkably like
faculty for theuniversities as a whole, and changeappears to be at
about the same rate.40
Journalism and mass communicationdoes no worse than average, and
nobetter.
Across the nine-year period of1989 to 1998, the journalism and
masscommunication faculty has becomemore senior. In 1998, 27.1% of
thefaculty held the rank of professor. In1989, the figure was
24.2%.Conversely, the percentage of thefaculty that held the rank
of assistantprofessor dropped from 32.3% in 1989to 26.6% in
1998.
Gender and RankWomen are not equally
represented at the various faculty
ranks. In 1989, only 11.0% of the fullprofessors were women
(Figure 2). Thatfigure grew to only 14.7% in 1992,19.1% in 1995 and
22.1% in 1998.Women come closest to parity at theinstructor and
assistant professorranks. Instructors and assistantprofessors
usually do not have tenureand have much less control overteaching
assignments and depart-mental governance than do associateand full
professors.
Race/Ethnicity and RankThe largest ethnic group
represented on journalism and masscommunication faculties is
AfricanAmericans, who made up 9.1% of thefaculty nationally in 1998
(Figure 3).Hispanics made up 2.4%, and AsianPacific Islanders made
up 2.3%. NativeAmericans made up less than 1% of the
Figure 1GENDER AND RACE/ETHNICITY OF JOURNALISM FACULTY
MEMBERS
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 34
faculty nationally, or only about fortyindividuals. Only African
Americansshow consistent, if small, increasesacross the nine years
for which data areavailable.
Diversity is not evenly visibleacross the various faculty ranks.
Onlyabout one in ten of the full professorsare members of a racial
or ethnicminority, while nearly two of ten of theassistant
professors are minorities(Figure 4). Power in the universityusually
rests with faculty in the higherranks, who often have more
controlover teaching assignments,departmental service assignments,
andpromotion and hiring decisions.
While the upper ranks havebecome more diverse in recent
years,reflecting a sharing of faculty power,the lowest two ranks
(assistantprofessor and instructor) were slightly
less diverse in 1998 than three yearsearlier. The differences
are small, butthey suggest a weakening of thediversification effort
in journalism andmass communication programs, asmost new hires at
universities are atthe lowest ranks.
External Predictors ofDiversification
To say that there was no change inthe composition of journalism
facultiesin terms of gender and race is notcorrect. But the change
was far fromdramatic. On average, journalism andmass communication
units gainedabout three quarters of a woman(average unit increase =
.81) and a halfa minority (average unit increase = .55).They also
lost three-fourths of a whitemale (mean = - .79). These
estimates
Figure 2FULL-TIME FACULTY: PERCENT FEMALE
-
SPRING’ 0335
Figure 3RACE/ETHNICITY OF FULL-TIME FACULTY
Figure 4RACIAL/ETHNIC MINORITY FULL-TIME FACULTY
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 36
are based on the 263 programs thatreported data in 1989 and
1998.41
Of course, there was variabilityaround these means. The
University ofAlabama’s College of Communicationand Information
Sciences, for example,gained four minority members andeight female
members over the period.The University of Florida’s College
ofJournalism and Communicationsshowed a gain of six minority
facultymembers and ten female facultymembers during the period.
TheUniversity of Missouri netted fiveminority faculty members and
thirteenfemale faculty members. The standarddeviation for the unit
change score forwomen across the 263 programs was3.2, while the
standard deviation forthe unit change score for minoritieswas
3.0.
Why were some programs moresuccessful in recruiting
minorityfaculty members than others? Whatexplains this variability
around themean?
A number of factors that lie“outside” the journalism unit
mightaccount for the success or failure of aunit in recruiting
female or minorityfaculty members. For example, auniversity that
has increased minorityor female faculty representation inother
units might have broughtjournalism along with it or held it
back,without the unit having invested agreat deal of its own
energies. Auniversity that has increased thenumber of female or
minority studentsmight have also increased thepercentage of faculty
as part of ageneral shift in the university notexplained by local
unit efforts.
The presence of graduate programscould impede diversification
efforts,since graduate faculty usually require
more certification (higher degrees),thereby restricting the
labor pool forfaculty recruitment. Public institutionsmight feel
more pressure fordiversification to represent thegovernmental units
that fund them.Journalism programs that are in smalltowns might
have more difficultyrecruiting women and minorities, sincesuch
towns rarely provide a diversecultural experience. Area of
thecountry might be a factor as well, sincesome regions, such as
the upper plainsstates, have relatively few minoritygroups in their
populations, whileothers, such as the south, have more.
It also could be the case that unitsgrowing in size in terms of
studentenrollments might have moreopportunity to diversify their
facultythan units not growing, as facultyresources often follow,
thoughimperfectly and slowly, after studentenrollment growth.
Also, journalism units accreditedby the Accrediting Council
onEducation in Journalism and MassCommunication (ACEJMC),
whichplaces much emphasis ondiversification as one of its
goals,should have experienced more successin faculty
diversification than units notaccredited by ACEJMC.
The answer to the question of suchvariable success in
diversification isthat most of these factors matter verylittle.
An increase in the percentage offemale faculty members
university-wide in the 1993-97 period was onlyweakly related to
journalism unitfaculty diversification in terms ofgender (Table
1).42 The correlationcoefficient (Pearson Product Moment)was +.09.
(The range of possible valuesis from -1 to +1.)
-
SPRING’ 0337
An increase in the percentage offemale students at the
university wasunrelated to an increase in the numberof female
faculty in the journalism unit(r=-.04).43 Presence of a master’s
degreeprogram (in the journalism unit) is veryslightly positively
(not negatively)related to female faculty diversificationin the
journalism unit.
Public institutions are very slightlymore likely to have
experienceddiversification in terms of gender. Units
that experienced growth in journalismenrollments were a bit more
likely tohave increased the representation ofwomen on the faculty.
In fact, this isthe only correlation shown in Table 1of any note.
All three of these measures(existence of graduate programs,private
versus public status, andenrollments) are measured in theAnnual
Survey of Journalism & MassCommunication Enrollments.
Table 1CORRELATIONS BETWEEN CHANGE IN FACULTY DIVERSITY AND
INSTITUTIONAL
CHARACTERISTICS FROM 1989 TO 1998
Note: Entries are Pearson Product Moment Correlation
Coefficients. The number ofcases is 263 except in the cases of
Location, where there are 262, and increase injournalism students,
where there are 254.
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 38
An increase in the percent ofminority students at the university
isassociated very slightly with anincrease in the number of
minorityfaculty in the journalism and masscommunication programs
(r=.12).44
The presence of a master’s degreeprogram also is slightly linked
to theincrease in minority faculty. Publicinstitutions are just
barely more likelyto have increased minority faculty. Thepercentage
of minority residents in theregion is slightly related to an
increasein minority faculty, as is growth in thenumber of students
in the journalismunit.45
Strikingly absent is evidence thataccreditation had any impact
on thehiring of female or minority facultymembers by journalism and
masscommunication programs during thetime of the study (Table 2).46
The 88accredited programs available for theanalysis had a mean
increase of 1.0female faculty members from 1989 to1998, while the
175 non-accreditedprograms had a mean increase of .7female faculty
members. Theaccredited journalism programs had amean increase of .5
minority facultymembers, while the non-accreditedprograms had a
mean increase of .6minority faculty members.
Accreditation clearly had no impact ondiversification of
faculties during theperiod.
Accredited programs prior to1989–the reference year for the
analysisabove–were more diverse than non-accredited programs. Only
3.0% of theaccredited programs in 1989 had nowomen on the faculty,
while 19.2% ofthe non-accredited programs had nowomen at that time.
In 1989, 38.4% ofthe accredited programs had nominorities on their
faculty in 1989,while 62.6% of the nonaccreditedprograms had no
minorities. In termsof change from 1989 to 1998,
however,accreditation was not a factor.
Removing Historically BlackColleges and Universities (HBCUs)from
the analysis does offer someevidence of impact of
accreditationafter 1989. Accredited units that are notHBCUs gained
1.2 women during the1989-1998 period and 0.7
minorities.Non-accredited units that are notHBCUs gained 0.7 women
and 0.4minorities.47
All of the variables shown in Table1 were used in a regression
analysis tocheck on any hidden effects for a singlevariable that
might emerge if the effectof the other variables were
controlled.That did not happen.
Table 2CHANGE IN FACULTY DIVERSITY FROM 1989 TO 1998:
ACCREDITED AND NON-ACCREDITED PROGRAMS
Note: Entries are mean change scores for the journalism units
from 1989 to 1998.
-
SPRING’ 0339
Unit Predictors ofDiversification
If the characteristics of theuniversity do not predict to
success indiversification, what does? What canexplain the
variability in thediversification experiences of thejournalism and
mass communicationunits across the 1989 to 1998 period?
The case studies provide someanswers.
Three Successful ProgramsThe three successful programs
were selected because they met sixcriteria: they had provided
data acrossthe four years of the study; they hadnot changed
administratively duringthat period; they had gained at leastfour
female faculty members during theperiod; the gain in female
facultymembers represented at least a 10percent change; they had
gained at leastfour minority faculty members, and thepercentage of
gain represented at leasta change of 9%. Only three programsmet
these qualifications.
The programs are allcomprehensive, have journalismeducation as
their core, are accreditedby ACEJMC, and are state institutions.All
three universities dominate thesmall towns in which they are
located.
The interviews and observations atthe three universities were
surprisinglyconsistent. These can be summarizedby nine specific
observations.
I. It was clear that change comesabout only when there is
strongcommitment to diversification on thepart of the unit
leader.
A willing faculty also is essential.In fact, the leaders
downplayed theirown role in bringing aboutdiversification, saying
they could have
accomplished what was accomplishedonly with the support of the
faculty.The faculty said the directive camefrom the top, and it
seems unlikely itwould have come from the faculty.
“It starts with the leadership,” adepartmental administrator at
one ofthe universities said. “There is a realcommitment by (the
dean) to do this.(The dean) has walked the talk.”
While the involvement of thedeans in actual searches varied at
thethree universities, there wasinvolvement at all three. In some
cases,it was clear, the dean’s hand was verystrong.
“I feel it important for the dean tobe involved and to help set
theagenda,” one of the deans said. “I admitI’ve tried to change the
culture.”
II. At least some level of supportfor diversification and the
initiativesof the unit administration from centraladministration is
extremelyimportant.
Each of the three programs hadbeen able to use targeted hiring
toincrease the representation ofminorities on the faculties. In
somecases, the unit was able to hire evenwithout an opening if it
identified aqualified minority. In other cases, extrasupport was
provided for hiring aminority identified in the normalrecruitment
process. These programscreated an incentive for the unit toproduce
change.
One of the administrators said thecentral administration used
promisesof incentives to encourage minorityhiring, but the promises
weren’t alwaysmet. The promises, the administratorsacknowledged,
had produced action,undertaken with the hope the
centraladministration would live up to thepromises.
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 40
III. Each of the units enjoyedflexibility in its hiring in part
becauseof its size, and flexibility led todiversification.
Because the units had largefaculties, they didn’t have to hire
aperson to fit a very narrow teachingslot. Other faculty could
cover. It wastherefore possible to hire a woman ora minority with
strong credentials butwho didn’t fit a narrow definition ofthe job
description.
“You need to be flexible in termsof the slot being filled,” one
dean said.“The classic mistake is ‘We’re hiringsomeone to replace
Joe Smith. Joetaught feature writing and copyediting. We need
someone to teachfeature writing and copy editing.’ Youneed to think
of people, not slots.”
Another dean put it simply. “Sizeis important. It gives you more
degreesof freedom.”
IV. Curricular diversity can beused as a recruiting tool in
hiring.
Female and minority faculty wantto be hired because of their
expertise,not because of their gender or color.Courses in race and
gender issues wereused to interest and entice female andminority
faculty. Having these courseson the curriculum before
recruitmentbegan was a big help in hiring.
“There are lots of minorities incritical cultural studies,” one
seniorfaculty member said. “If that is not partof your curriculum,
you are screeningpeople out.”
V. Successful recruitmentresulted from networking.
Minorities and women want to seethe administrators at meetings
andelsewhere even when there are no jobsbeing offered. Because
suchnetworking is so important, it is easierto recruit minorities
and women once
the faculty is diverse than beforediversification. Getting the
first hiresis the hardest part.
“There are all kinds of networksthat people who really want
todiversify their faculty become a partof,” one senior faculty
member said.“You cannot just send forms to blackand women’s groups.
You need to knowthese people. These are the kinds ofpersonal
contacts that pay off in thefuture.”
VI. The difficulty of gettingminorities and women to the
threeuniversities, located in southern,conservative college towns,
seemed tocreate an added incentive.
The units worked hard toovercome the barriers. Almosteveryone
interviewed said theircommunity was a hard sell, but theyfound ways
of making the sell. Theyfocused on housing costs, theeducation
system, and even thereligious community as ways to recruit.
“People have more than auniversity life,” one
centraladministrator who collaborated withthe journalism dean on
recruitmentsaid. The university got thecommunity, particularly the
ministers,involved in recruiting to help promotepositive
characteristics of thecommunity.
VII. In all three universities,considerable emphasis was placed
onthe need to diversify doctoralprograms, since they provide
theprimary pool for hiring.
Each of the units has a doctoralprogram, and each felt more
needed tobe done both locally and nationally toget minorities in
particular interestedin the doctoral program. As oneadministrator
said, this has to be donevery early. Minorities and women need
-
SPRING’ 0341
to be told about academic careers asundergraduates or before if
doctoralprograms are to become more diverse.
“If we are serious aboutdiversifying faculty, we have got to
getmore diversity into doctoral programs,”one senior faculty member
said. “Thisstarts with our undergraduates. We’vegot to tell them
about graduate school.”
VIII. Hiring wasn’t enough;considerable effort had to be placed
onretention.
The administrators made it clearthey could not rest once they
had hiredminorities and women. They had to doeverything they could
to mentor andassist them. But even so, they knewthey were going to
lose people, so theyhad to double their efforts to makeprogress.
None of the administratorsand few of the faculty interviewed
feltthey had achieved the level of diversityin the faculty that
they wanted. Theydid not consider their programs to bemodels or
that they had enjoyedenough success.
“The key is mentoring,” one of thecentral administrators we
spoke withsaid. “When you bring people in whoare different from
you, it is not as easyto mentor. But the faculty who havebeen
successful have had goodmentors.”
IX. Students were used asrecruiters.
The old notion that a diversefaculty leads to a diverse student
bodywas turned around at theseuniversities. They used the diversity
ofthe student body as a recruitment toolfor faculty. Prospective
facultymembers were made aware that theywould be teaching students
like them.
“It made it more appealing to methat minority students were
here,” saidone minority faculty member. “But it
also is important for minority studentsto see people of color as
authorityfigures.”
Comments from FacultyMinority and female faculty could
have had different points of view fromthose of the
administrators, who weredisproportionately male andinfrequently
members of minoritygroups. Interviews with the female andminority
faculty members at the threesuccessful institutions were
conductedto test this possibility.
The idea that change comes aboutonly when there is a
strongcommitment to diversification on thepart of the unit leader
was reinforcedin these interviews. A majority of thepeople
interviewed mentioned that theideas, values and level of
commitmentto diversity held by the dean wereinstrumental factors in
theirrecruitment process. The faculty alsosaid that it was
important tocommunicate this commitment “downthe chain” and at
every level.
“You have to have totallycommitted leaders,” one facultymember
said. “Someone alwayspushing. We try in our faculty meetingsand
elsewhere to spend timearticulating how important diversity
is.Everyone knows that we will be betterwith people unlike us.”
“You have to have a pro-activeeffort to create a culture that
valuesdiversity in every sense of the word,”another interviewee
told us.
Characteristics of the universitywere taken into consideration
byminorities and women when theymade their decision about jobs to
applyfor, places to visit, and offers to accept.
Prospective faculty are interestedin how the jobs will affect
their
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 42
families, in the presence of a diversecommunity, and in
lifestyle in general.The three universities observed did abetter
job of marketing the structuresin place in their communities than
didothers.
“Environmentally, it is a goodplace to live,” one faculty member
said.“But there isn’t really a blackprofessional community here.
Mostlythere are blue-collar workers. But it isa safe place.”
Faculty members we spoke to saidthat involvement with the
students wasvery important to them, and theyplaced a high value on
teaching adiverse group of students. In additionto being a tool for
recruitment,diversity of the student body seemslikely to be
important for retention.
The faculty members also said thatit is important to attract
minoritystudents into doctoral programs. Somesaid that the pool is
simply too smallat the university level and thatuniversities need
to make efforts tocommunicate with high schoolstudents about the
potential ofacademic careers.
“Look at whom you have in yourgraduate programs,” one of
thoseinterviewed said. “If it (diversity) is notthere, it may not
be anywhere else.”
Many of the faculty interviewedsuggested journalism and
masscommunication programs should turnto the professions for
faculty, ratherthan rely on the doctoral programfeeder system. In
fact, this had beendone at the three programs we visited,with
varying degrees of success.
“We need to look at how to findpeople who are established in
theindustry,” one faculty member said.“We should look for
leadingjournalists, perhaps at mid-career, who
are looking for a change.”Each of the three programs we
visited had used targeted hiring toincrease representation of
minoritiesand women on the faculty. The facultywe interviewed said
this practicecommunicated that the administrationwas willing to go
the “extra mile” tobring about change.
“In searching and advertising ofjobs, you have to be cognizant
of thefact that the departments are usuallywhite and especially
white male andthey don’t give a very welcomingfeeling,” one faculty
member said.“This university came and found me.That is a positive
step — taking a pro-active stance to find diversity.”
The negative side of such a focuson hiring diversity is that
some facultysaid that they sometimes felt they werehired merely to
“fill a slot” to completeaccreditation requirements. “I think Iwas
selected to fill a slot for a female,”one faculty member said.
Anotherfaculty member said simply, “I did notwant to be hired when
people had anexpectation I would be the diversityelement.”
The faculty said curriculardiversity was an indicator of
theflexible nature of the program and ofan interest in topics other
than thoseof concern to white males.
A frequent suggestion was to workwith alumni and to involve them
in therecruitment process. “Keep the alumnias a functional part of
the program,”one faculty member. “Help them stayclose to the
college and allow them togive back to the college. Professionalscan
give a lot back.”
The faculty said it is important tofocus on retention.
Inadequatementoring was cited as a problem.Some also felt there was
an imbalance
-
SPRING’ 0343
in teaching loads. With a fewexceptions, the faculty
interviewedreported a high level of satisfactionwith the job and
life outside the workenvironment.
“I feel very supported by mycolleagues and the
administration,”one faculty member said. “They wereaccommodating in
terms of benefitsand salaries and the like. It has beenjust
fabulous.”
“This is a great job,” anotherfaculty member said. “I’m
teachingexactly what I want to teach. Thefaculty has been great,
and the programhas a nice reputation.”
Institutional Change at the ThreeSuccessful Universities
Central administrators at the threesuccessful universities
identified thejournalism programs there asexemplary in terms of
facultydiversification efforts and praised theefforts and
dedication of the unitadministrators. They also said the unitswere
exceptions on campus, havingachieved more success than
otherprograms.
In fact, the College ofCommunication at the University ofAlabama
increased the percentage offemales on its faculty from 7.1% in1989
to 30 percent in 1998, or a changeof 22.9 percentage points.48 For
theuniversity overall, the change was from30.7% to 36.4%, or a
change of 5.7percentage points. The College wasbehind the overall
university figure. In1989, the Communication College hadno minority
faculty members, while12.2% were minority in 1998. At theUniversity
of Alabama Tuscaloosacampus overall, the percentage of thefaculty
that was minority was 7.0 in
1989 and 9.1 in 1998. The College ofCommunication had a larger
amountof change and exceeded the universityfigure in 1998.
At the University of Florida, thefaculty of the College of
Journalism andCommunications was 22.6% female in1989, while in 1998
it was 39.3%female. At the University of Florida,the faculty was
23.6% female in 1989and 27.2% in 1998. The faculty of theCollege of
Journalism andCommunications was 9.4% minority in1989 and 19.6%
minority in 1998. Thefaculty of the University of Floridaoverall
was 8.9% minority in 1989 and12.9% minority in 1998.
At the University of Missouri, thefaculty in the School of
Journalism was20.6% female in 1989 but 40.8%female in 1998. At the
University ofMissouri Columbia campus, 21.8% ofthe faculty were
female in 1989 and27.5% were female in 1989. Thefaculty of the
School of Journalism was2.9% minority in 1989 and 12.2%minority in
1998. For the university,the figures were 10 percent minorityin
1989 and 13.8% minority in 1998.
Clearly, the three journalism unitsled their campuses, not
followed them,in terms of the amount of gender andracial/ethnic
diversification of theirfaculties in the study period.
Three Unsuccessful ProgramsThe three programs selected to
serve as a “control” group for thesuccessful programs were
similar inkey aspects but decidedly different interms of outcome.
Two of the programshad gained two female facultymembers, while the
other had notincreased the number of women on thefaculty. Two of
the programs hadgained one minority faculty member in
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 44
the 1989 to 1990 period, while theother had shown no change.
Theprogram that had not shown a gain infemale faculty also was the
one thathad not shown a gain in terms ofminority faculty.
The programs were comparable tothe successful programs in terms
ofsize, accreditation status and generalmission. Each was a public
institutionin a community it dominated, though,in one case, the
community was notwhat one would normally call a“college town.” One
was in a southernstate; the other two were in areas withsmall
minority populations.
The visits underscored theimportance of leadership in
bringingabout diversification. At one of theprograms, leadership
had changedrecently, and, in fact, six women andfour minorities had
been added to thefaculty after 1998. One of those whoobserved both
administratorsexplained the difference. Bothadministrators were
committed todiversification, the observer said, butthe new
administrator had the politicalskill and understanding of
universityprocedures to bring it about. Theformer administrator did
not.
At all three universities, there wasstated support for
diversification incentral administration, with targetedhiring
possible. In one case, however,there was confusion on the part
ofthose in central administrationinterviewed about what actually
waspossible. The journalism and masscommunication administrator did
notbelieve the program actually operated.
Among the three programs, theone that had enjoyed the most
successin recent years clearly was the one withthe most flexibility
in its hiring anddiversity in its curriculum. The least
successful program was severelyconstrained by significant
budgetdifficulties. The other program had thenarrowest curriculum
of the sixinstitutions studied. It hired for fixedslots, and this
seemed to be an obstacleto diversification.
The importance of understandingthe network for minority faculty
wasstressed by a senior faculty member atone of the programs.
“Minorities makeup a separate labor market,” the facultymember
said. “It has its own rules andits own incentives. The
universitydoesn’t understand that.”
Administrators and faculty at allthree of these programs said
their owncommunity was an obstacle to thehiring of women and
minorities. Onlyat the program that had recently hadsome success
under the newadministrator was there a sense that thecommunity
could be overcome as anobstacle by careful recruitment.
All three of the units had doctoralprograms. The program that
hadrecently enjoyed some success underthe new administrator had
begun torecruit minorities from outside the statein a very targeted
way. The others madeno special effort to accomplish this. Atthe
recently successful program,minority students were singled out
andused to market the program foroutsiders.
Considerable tension was presentat one of the visited programs
over theissue of expectations of new facultybeing considered for
promotion andtenure. The tension seemed to colormany of the
discussions about hiringof minorities and women.
“The standards here for promotionand tenure have been raised,”
theadministrator said. “More of the newhires are women and
minorities. This
-
SPRING’ 0345
means that they are being held to ahigher standard than those of
us whocame before, and we’re mostly whitemales.”
ConclusionsThe journalism and mass
communication faculty has changedsince 1989. The direction of
change istoward diversity, but the amount ofchange is small.
Students today still aredifferent from those who are supposedto be
their role models. Students areless likely to be white and more
likelyto be female than those at the front ofthe classroom. Those
at the front of theclassroom who are female and areAfrican American
or Hispanic orNative American or Asian Americanare less likely to
be senior faculty thanare the white, male professors
studentsencounter.
Something can be done about this.Some journalism and
masscommunication programs have beatenthe norm, that is, added more
than afraction of a woman and a fraction of aminority to their
faculties. They havedone this because they engaged instrategies
that produce results.
Specifically, the administrators ofthose programs provided
strongleadership and unambiguousinstructions in hiring. The
facultymembers accepted the goal of hiringnew faculty members who
did not looklike them. The central universityadministration
provided incentives tomake this outcome more likely.
These conclusions are based onthe case studies of the six
universities,three of which were successful in
diversification and three of which werenot. These case studies
showed thatflexibility in hiring is important, thatnetworking makes
a difference, andthat negative features of communitiescan be
overcome. They also showedthat a diverse student body can be usedto
recruit a diverse faculty.
Which of the factors or strategiesis most important is difficult
to say.What does seem to be clear is thatstrong leadership is
essential, and thatfaculty acceptance of the diversity goalis
crucial. Rigidity in hiring also islikely to work against
diversity.Advertisements that call for a left-handed copy editor
with experience ona newspaper with more than 100,000circulation
located in a specific regionof the country are not likely to
producea diverse pool of applicants.Advertisements that recruit
talentedpeople with diverse research andteaching experiences
are.
Universities in the United Statesgenerally have not enjoyed
muchsuccess in diversifying their faculties.It would be easy for
journalism andmass communication educators to usethat as an excuse
for the limitedsuccess of the field. The example of thethree
successful programs suggests analternative. The University of
Alabamahas adopted a phrase, “Beating theOdds,” as a motivation
tool in itsdiversification efforts. Journalism andmass
communication educationnationally would do well to do thesame. Mass
communication — andmass communication education — istoo important
an enterprise in societyto do otherwise.
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 46
Endnotes1 Carmen L. Manning-Miller and Karen B.
Dunlap, “The Move Toward Pluralism inJournalism and Mass
CommunicationEducation,” Journalism & MassCommunication
Educator, 57(spring2002):35-48.
2 William G. Bowen and Derek Bok, The Shapeof the River:
Long-Term Consequences ofConsidering Race in College and
UniversityAdmissions (Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress,
1998).
3 Stephen Cole and Elinor Barber, IncreasingFaculty Diversity:
The Occupational Choicesof High-Achieving Minority
Students(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003).
4 Marta Tienda, Kevin T. Leicht, Teresa Sullivan,Michael Maltese
and Kim Lloyd, Closing theGap: Admissions & Enrollments at the
TexasPublic Flagships Before and After AffirmativeAction. (24
January2003).
5 K. Edward Renner, “Racial Equity and HigherEducation,” Academe
89 (January-February2003): 38-43.
6 James E. Blackwell, Mainstreaming Outsiders(Bayside, NY:
General Hall, Inc., 1981).
7 Anquantia Kaigler-Love, “Women MentoringMinority Women in
Universities: RetentionStrategies for Female Minority
Students”(Ph.D. diss., University of Oklahoma, 2001).
8 Cole and Barber, Increasing Faculty Diversity.9 Barbara F.
Reskin, The Realities of Affirmative
Action in Employment (Washington, DC:American Sociological
Association, 1998).
10 Lawrence A. Miller, “Affirmative Action andDiversity as
Public Policy Issues in HigherEducation: A Case Study of
AffirmativeAction and Diversity in Faculty HiringPractices at
Queens College” (Ph.D. diss., TheUnion Institute, 1998).
11 Miller, “Affirmative Action and Diversity,” andReskin, The
Realities of Affirmative Action inEmployment.
12 Douglas M. Hill, “Affirmative Action, EqualOpportunity
Employer: Perception andImplementation of the Term by
SearchCommittees at Two Public Universities”(Ph.D. diss.,
University of Maryland, CollegePark, 1987).
13 Daryl G. Smith, “How to Diversify theFaculty,” Academe 86
(September-October2000):48-52.
14 Michael A. Hitt, Barbara W. Keats, and SusanPurdum,
“Affirmative Action EffectivenessCriteria in Institutions of Higher
Education,”
Research in Higher Education 18 (1983): 391-398.
15 Reskin, The Realities of Affirmative Action inEmployment.
16 Reskin, The Realities of Affirmative Action inEmployment.
17 Smith, “How to Diversify the Faculty.”18 Roslyn A. Mickelson
and Melvin L. Oliver,
“Making the Short List: Black Candidates andthe Faculty
Recruitment Process,” in TheRacial Crisis in American Higher
Education,ed. Philip G. Altbach and Kofi Lomotey(Albany, NY: State
University of New YorkPress, 1991), 149-166.
19 Marjorie F. Knowles and Bernard W. Harleston,Achieving
Diversity in the Professoriate:Challenges and Opportunities, A
Report forthe American Council on Education(Washington, DC:American
Council onEducation, 1997).
20 Smith, “How to Diversify the Faculty”.21 Smith, “How to
Diversify the Faculty”.22 Lisa K. Burroughs, “Female Faculty of
the
Organizational Culture at a Major ResearchUniversity” (Ph.D.
diss., Texas A&MUniversity, 2000).
23 Caroline S. V. Turner and Samuel L. Myers, Jr.“Faculty
Diversity and Affirmative Action,” inAffirmative Action’s Testament
of Hope, ed.Mildred Garcia (Albany, NY: State Universityof New York
Press, 1997), 131-148.
24 Nadya Aisenberg and Mona Harrington,Women of Academe:
Outsiders in the SacredGrove (Amherst, MA: University
ofMassachusetts Press, 1988).
25 Carla M. Iacona, “A Study of Women andMinority Faculty of
EducationalAdministration” (Ph.D. diss., IndianaUniversity,
1987).
26 Mary A. Mason and Marc Goulden, “Do BabiesMatter?: The Effect
of Family Formation onthe Lifelong Careers of Academic Men
andWomen,” Academe 88 (November-December,2002): 21-8.
27 S. Karie Nabinet, “A Comparison of MobilityPatterns of
Minority Faculty (Male andFemale) and White Female Faculty
inSelected State Schools of Higher Education”(Ph.D. diss., Adelphi
University, 1985).
28 Knowles and Harleston, Achieving Diversity inthe
Professoriate.
29 Kul B. Rai and John W. Critzer, AffirmativeAction and the
University: Race, Ethnicityand Gender in Higher Education
Employment(Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2000).
30 Funding for the Annual Surveys of Journalism& Mass
Communication Enrollments in 2000
-
SPRING’ 0347
was provided by the American Society ofNewspaper Editors, the
Association forEducation in Journalism and MassCommunication, the
Association of Schools ofJournalism and Mass Communication,
CoxNewspapers Inc., The Freedom Forum(Sustaining Sponsor), Gannett,
the HearstCorporation, Jane Pauley and NBC, theMagazine Association
of Georgia, the NationalAssociation of Broadcasters, the Newsletter
&Electronic Publishers Foundation, theNewspaper Association of
AmericaFoundation, the Radio-Television NewsDirectors Association,
the Scripps HowardFoundation, and the Henry W. Grady Collegeof
Journalism and Mass Communication at theUniversity of Georgia. The
John S. and JamesL. Knight Foundation became a SustainingSponsor
beginning in 2001.
31 Among those in the Cox Center providingassistance with data
collection for andproduction of this report were: graduatestudents
George Daniels, Todd Drake, JoellePrine, Aswin Punathambekar and
KinetraSmith, and undergraduate research clerksRaushanah Boney,
Leslie Buschbom, KeertiHasija, Anna-Elisa Mackowiak and
KrystinPatterson.
32 Both datasets are available from the IPEDSwebsite at
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/data.html.
33 The data were taken manually for each statefrom the Census
Bureau website at http://www.census.gov/.
34 The successful programs were at the Universityof Alabama, the
University of Florida, and theUniversity of Missouri. The
unsuccessfulprograms, by agreement, cannot be identified.The
assistance of the administrators, facultyand staff at all six
programs is gratefullyacknowledged.
35 The number of full-time university facultymembers overall
increased from 1989 to 1999by 12.8%. The actual increase was
fromroughly 524,000 full-time faculty membersnationally to 591,000.
See U.S. Department ofEducation. National Center for
EducationStatistics. Digest of Educational Statistics,2001, Table
228. Washington, D.C. 2002.
36 Lee B. Becker, Gerald M. Kosicki, HeatherHammatt, Wilson
Lowrey, S.C. Shin andJeffery M. Wilson, “Enrollment and
DegreesGranted Continue 5-year Growth Trend,”Journalism & Mass
Communication Educator54 (1999): 5-22,100-110.
37 The average change over the last nine yearswas .755. Using
that rate, rather than 2% overthree years (.667), produces an
estimate ofyear 2032 for parity. The figure of 2% wasused because
change was exactly 2% from1992 to 1995 and 1.8% from 1995 to
1998.
Either 2032 or 2035 is only a gross estimate.In fact, the
percentage of women enrolled injournalism and mass
communicationprograms does seem to be growing slight. Inthe autumn
of 2001, women made up anestimated 63.4% of the undergraduates
injournalism and mass communicationprograms, in comparison with the
figure of61.3% in 1998. See Lee B. Becker, Tudor Vlad,Jisu Huh and
George L. Daniels, “AnnualEnrollment Report: Growth in Number
ofStudents Studying Journalism and MassCommunication Slows,”
Journalism & MassCommunication Educator 57 (2002): 184-212.
38 The rate of .33 percentage points for the last sixyears
actually produces an estimate of 2034. Ifgrowth rate for the whole
nine year period isused, parity with the 1998 figure would
bereached in 2017. If the growth rate for the lastthree years is
used, parity with the 1998figures would be reached in 2086!
39 U.S. Census Bureau. Statistical Abstract of theUnited States:
2000 (120th Edition). Table No.16. Washington, D.C. 2000. The
projection isan extrapolation of projections for thepopulation of
the U.S. for 2030 and 2040,rather than for the population of
collegestudents. At present, minorities are under-represented at
universities, but that situationcould improve by 2035. In the
autumn of2001, an estimated 26.3% of the enrolledundergraduate
students in journalism andmass communication programs were racial
orethnic minorities. See Lee B. Becker, TudorVlad, Jisu Huh and
George L. Daniels,“Annual Enrollment Report: Growth inNumber of
Students Studying Journalism andMass Communication Slows.”
40 U.S. Department of Education. National Centerfor Education
Statistics. Digest of EducationalStatistics 1992 (Table 212),
Digest ofEducational Statistics 1994 (Table 220),Digest of
Educational Statistics 1996 (Table221), Digest of Educational
Statistics 1999(Table 226), Digest of Educational Statistics2000
(Table 230) Washington, D.C., 1993,1995, 1997, 2000, 2001.
41 Accredited programs were much more likely tobe represented in
this data base than in theoverall population of schools. One clear
effectof accreditation is the production of andwillingness to
report statistics monitored inthe enrollment survey. Of the 104
accreditedprograms in 1998, 88 (84.6%) had reportedcomplete data on
faculty characteristics for1989 and 1998. For the remaining 347,
only175 (50.4%) had complete data files.
42 The data are taken from the National Center forEducation
Statistics IPEDS data file. The 1993to 1997 period was the only one
available foranalysis.
-
JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION EDUCATOR 48
43 The data come from IPEDS and cover the 1990to 1997
period.
44 The period covered, using the IPEDS data file,is 1990 to
1997.
45 The data come for the 2000 U.S. Census.Region was divided
into nine categories (NewEngland, Middle Atlantic, East North
Central,West North Central, South Atlantic, EastSouth Central, West
South Central, Mountain,Pacific).
46 Accreditation is measured as part of theenrollment survey.
Accreditation status in1998 is used in these analyses.
47 The authors thank Dr. Lionel C. Barrow,emeritus professor at
Howard University, forhis comments on an earlier version of
thispaper suggesting this analysis.
48 The Information Sciences Department wasadded to the College
after 1998.