Were you rejected in one of the University of California job searches utilizing the unlawful "diversity statements"? (UPDATED)

MOVING TO FRONT FROM JANUARY 23--UPDATED

Pro bono legal representation may be available--read on.

As we've noted on several occasions, schools in the UC System have begun requiring applicants for faculty positions to submit a diversity statement. In most searches, these statements have been evaluated holistically as part of an overall application. However, several UC schools have participated in Advancing Faculty Diversity Pilot Programs where contribution to diversity statements have been evaluated as a threshold requirement. In other words, for these searches, if you didn’t get a passing score on your diversity statement, you were not considered further.

This methodology has had an enormous impact. As we discussed last month, for a 2018-2019 search in the Life Sciences, UC Berkeley rejected 76% of the applicants without even considering their research, teaching skills, or academic merits (out of 893 qualified applicants, 679 were eliminated solely because their diversity statements were deemed inadequate). This methodology has also resulted in extreme racial and gender disparities. In 2018-2019 UC Davis ran eight open discipline searches using this methodology. With all the other searches conducted at UC Davis in 2018-2019, under 10% of the applicant pool were minorities, just above 5% of the finalists, and 2.3% of hires. But in the pilot searches nearly a third of the applicants were minorities, over 80% of the finalists, and a full 100% of those hired were minorities. The results for female hires was similarly sharp, with 87.5% of those hired through the pilot program being women compared to 45.5% campus wide.

This is a list of all of the searches that have utilized or plan to utilize this methodology.

UC Berkeley

• Engineering 2017-2018
• Life Sciences 2018-2019

UC Davis

• Eight open discipline hires (one in each college/school) 2018-2019
• School of Medicine 2019-2020 or 2020-2021
• The College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences 2019-2020 or 2020-2021
• The College of Engineering 2019-2020 or 2020-2021

UC Riverside

• Mathematics 2018-2019
• Physical Sciences 2019-2020 or 2020-2021

UC San Francisco

• Biomedical Sciences 2017-2018

UC Santa Cruz

• Arts 2019-2020 or 2020-2021
• Engineering 2019-2020 or 2020-2021
• Global and Community Health Program in the divisions of Physical and Biological Sciences and Social Sciences 2019-2020 or 2020-2021

If you applied to and were rejected to one of these searches, or are planning to apply to one of the upcoming searches, you can help to challenge UC’s unlawful policies. Daniel Ortner from the Pacific Legal Foundation is looking for individuals who were impacted by these searches to potentially offer free pro bono representation. You can reach him at [email protected].

UPDATE:   A physics professor at UC San Diego reports that they too have been using these "diversity" statements:

 

The Division of Physical Sciences, that includes the Departments of Mathematics and Chemistry, in addition to Physics, has the following among its guidelines "Excellence​ ​Search​ ​Process​ ​and​ ​Procedures​ ​2017-2020” (Excellence” here is short for “Excellence through diversity”):

The​ ​Dean​ ​will​ ​establish​ ​an​ ​Excellence​ ​Committee​ ​at​ ​the​ ​division​ ​level​ ​to​ ​review​ ​and score​ ​diversity​ ​statements​ ​for​ ​proposed​ ​candidates​ ​for​ ​each​ ​search.​ ​This​ ​committee​ ​is composed​ ​of​ ​the​ ​FEA​ ​and​ ​3​ ​faculty​ ​members​ ​from​ ​each​ ​department.​ ​Departments​ ​will only​ ​be​ ​allowed​ ​to​ ​interview​ ​a​ ​candidate​ ​once​ ​the​ ​Contributions​ ​to​ ​Diversity​ ​statement​ ​is reviewed,​ ​ranked,​ ​and​ ​approved​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Excellence​ ​Committee​ ​using​ ​the​ ​revised​ ​criteria for​ ​evaluating​ ​Contributions​ ​to​ ​Diversity.

              - A​ ​specific​ ​rating​ ​system​ ​for​ ​evaluating​ ​Contributions​ ​to​ ​Diversity​ ​statements​ ​will be​ ​created​ ​and​ ​approved​ ​by​ ​the​ ​divisional​ ​Excellence​ ​Committee,​ ​and​ ​shared with​ ​departmental​ ​committees​ ​for​ ​use​ ​in​ ​candidate​ ​evaluation.​ ​​ ​The​ ​Committee will​ ​define​ ​and​ ​communicate​ ​thresholds​ ​for​ ​candidate​ ​consideration​ ​based​ ​upon this​ ​rating​ ​system.         

              - Departments​ ​should​ ​create​ ​a​ ​list​ ​of​ ​qualified​ ​candidates​ ​based​ ​upon​ ​this​ ​rating system.​ ​​ ​Candidates​ ​that​ ​are​ ​below​ ​the​ ​minimum​ ​threshold​ ​should​ ​not​ ​be​ ​given further​ ​consideration​ ​for​ ​Excellence​ ​positions.

              - For​ ​all​ ​departments​ ​in​ ​the​ ​division,​ ​the​ ​Divisional​ ​Excellence​ ​Committee​ ​will review​ ​the​ ​department’s​ ​long​ ​list​ ​(roughly​ ​twice​ ​as​ ​long​ ​as​ ​their​ ​short​ ​list)​ ​to ensure​ ​all​ ​candidates​ ​meet​ ​minimum​ ​standards.

              - Once​ ​approved​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Divisional​ ​Committee,​ ​candidates​ ​may​ ​be​ ​invited​ ​for interview.

It also states that

- During​ ​the​ ​2017-2020​ ​faculty​ ​growth​ ​period,​ ​departments​ ​are​ ​expected​ ​to​ ​make​ ​major progress​ ​in​ ​increasing​ ​faculty​ ​from​ ​underrepresented​ ​groups.​ ​Progress​ ​of​ ​the departments​ ​in​ ​this​ ​regard​ ​will​ ​be​ ​evaluated​ ​annually,​ ​and​ ​FTEs​ ​will​ ​be​ ​allocated preferentially​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​Excellence​ ​Searches​ ​while​ ​the​ ​departments​ ​are​ ​moving towards​ ​meeting​ ​faculty​ ​diversity​ ​goals​ ​set​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Dean’s​ ​office.