An Analysis of Academic Hiring Research and Practice and a Lens for the Future: How Labor Justice Can Make a Better Academy

Abstract

Colleges and universities are formidable knowledge-producing spaces in society. At the heart of these knowledge producing spaces are academics who carry out teaching, research, and service amid other education activities. Accordingly, academic hiring, which includes hiring into any instructional and/or research position in a college or university, is a significant opportunity to shape the kinds of knowledge(s) that are generated, taught, and shared with society. Hiring-related research has recently boomed, making it an opportune time to assess what has been learned and how it has been learned. Thus, the purpose of this chapter is threefold. First, we review hiring literature published between 2000 and 2023 to describe how academic hiring unfolds across diverse appointment types. Second, we use frame theory to analyze how academic hiring has been conceptualized, studied, and practiced. Third, we introduce a novel conceptual lens, which we describe as labor justice, to illuminate how hiring research and practice might be conducted in ways that remediate historical legacies of exclusion while highlighting how the collective fates and interests of all academic workers, from postdoctoral scholars to tenure-track professors are intertwined. This chapter will be of interest to scholars who study academic hiring, academic labor, labor organizers working within higher education, and academic administrators.

Ann E. Austin was the Associate Editor for this chapter.

Appendices

Appendix A: Scopus and Targeted Journal Search Results

Search phrases	Scopus	ADVANCE Journala	Equity and excellencea	The Journal of the Professoriatea	Post-screening results
Academic hiring	1368	0	1	4	61
Adjunct hiring	36	0	0	0	3
Adjunct faculty hiring	32	0	0	0	0
Contingent hiring	89	0	0	0	1
Contingent faculty hiring	7	0	0	0	0
Faculty hiring	1013	0	1	4	89
Faculty recruitment	2659	0	0	2	17
Non-tenure-track faculty hiring	25	0	0	0	3
Postdoctoral hiring	0	0	0	0	0
Postdoctoral scholar recruitment	3	0	0	0	0
Tenure-track faculty hiring	84	0	0	0	8
Total, after eliminating duplicates					182

1. ^aNote: We conducted searches in the journals listed here because they are not indexed in Scopus. Search conducted January 2023

Appendix B: Notable Discipline-specific Findings

Field/discipline	Notable findings
Academic dentistry	Relies on adjunct faculty; dentists increasingly do not want to serve in these roles (Howe et al., 2017)
Academic libraries	Bias exists in hiring (Tokarz & Mesfin, 2021) Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Zhu & Yan, 2017; Zhu et al., 2016) Qualifications sought by hiring committees. Traditional career pathways are favored (Antúnez, 2018; Gaspar & Brown 2015; Hodge & Spoor 2012; Thielen & Neeser, 2020; Wang & Guarria, 2009)
Academic medicine	Predictive variables known at the time of hire connected to whom an institution retains (being a woman, being from the United States) (Elias et al., 2022) Bias and exclusionary practices exist in academic medicine (Khan et al., 2023; Meer et al., 2021; Valsangkar et al., 2016; Sella et al., 2022) Interventions can mitigate bias in hiring (Braileanu et al., 2020; Harris et al., 2018, 2022; Lin et al., 2016; Morgan et al., 2022b; Peek et al., 2013; Pitts et al., 2020; Shubeck et al., 2020; Villablanca et al., 2017) Qualifications sought by hiring departments (Irwin et al., 2021; Ragavan et al., 2021; Shubeck et al., 2020; Smith et al., 2015)
Anthropology	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Kawa et al., 2019) Gap between number of degrees produced and number of tenure-track jobs (Speakman et al., 2018)
Archeology	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Shott, 2022)
Biology	Gender and racial bias exists in hiring (Eaton et al., 2020) Qualifications sought by hiring committees (Fleet et al., 2006; Marshall et al., 2009)
Business	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Baldo et al., 2020; Bair and Bair 2001, 2002; Bundy et al., 2022; Hadani et al., 2012; Hadlock & Pierce, 2021; Stammerjohan et al., 2009; Wang & Kardes, 2015) Recruitment processes exclude Faculty of Color (Grier & Poole, 2020; Miller et al., 2021) Interventions can promote more diversity in hiring (Moshiri & Cardon, 2016, 2019). Innovative hiring practices more likely at non-elite schools (Finch et al., 2016) Competition among faculty candidates is fierce (Butler & Crack, 2022) Qualifications sought by hiring departments (Wang & Kardes, 2015). Mismatch between what candidates want and what institutions desire in terms of qualifications (Basil & Basil, 2008; Pagani et al., 2008) Contingent faculty are increasingly prevalent (Callie & Cheslock, 2008)
Chemistry	Career patterns of women across stages show recruitment obstacles (Kuck, 2006; Kuck et al., 2007) Bias exists in letters of recommendation (Schmader et al., 2007) Interventions that mitigate bias exist (Stockard et al., 2008)
Communication	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Barnett et al., 2010; Barnett & Feeley, 2011; Mai et al., 2015); some evidence that the networks are growing more diverse (Feeley & Tutzauer, 2021)
Computer science	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Way et al., 2016)
Criminology	Qualifications sought by hiring departments (Applegate et al., 2009; Sitren & Applegate, 2012) Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Fabianic, 2011)
Economics	Qualifications sought by hiring departments vary by institutional type (Allgood et al., 2018) Market conditions shape the prevalence of elitism in hiring (Gallet et al. 2005)
Education	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (DiRamio et al., 2009; Tomlinson & Freeman, 2018) Hiring practices in schools of education exclude Faculty of Color (Gasman et al., 2013) Campus interviews are a prime place where candidates experience bias (Cartwright et al., 2018) Increasingly clinical faculty are being hired (Mayes, 2000)
Engineering	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Ermagun & Erinne, 2022; Saigal & Saigal, 2012) Bias is present in the hiring process (Blair-Loy et al., 2017; Constant & Bird, 2009), including pertaining to pipeline perceptions (Rios et al., 2020), but strategies exist to expand diversity and mitigate bias (Bates et al., 2017; Blair-Loy et al., 2017; Somerton, 2002) Qualifications sought by hiring departments have changed to emphasize innovation (Harichandran, 2007), credentialism (Hildebrant et al., 2018), and applied focus (Hill et al., 2014). Some departments now emphasize teaching more (Pilcher et al., 2021)
Geography	The Great Recession significantly lowered the availability of academic jobs (Coomes et al., 2022; Franklin & Ketchum, 2013) Bias and exclusionary practices in who is encouraged to apply for graduate school and faculty positions limit the representation of women (Kobayashi, 2006)
International relations	Faculty trained in US institutions are most likely to be employed in this field, but there is more epistemic diversity/openness (Maliniak et al., 2018)
Kinesiology	Implicit bias among academic leadership and faculty has negative impacts on the hiring, retention, and promotion of faculty from underrepresented backgrounds, contributing to the lack of faculty diversity in kinesiology (Russell et al., 2019)
Law	Clinical faculty experience challenges in terms of hiring and promotion (Adamson et al., 2012) Affirmative action applies to the hiring of Faculty of Color (Lai, 2015) Low pay drives lawyers away from the faculty (Pjesky & Sutter, 2011)
Mathematics	More women are being hired into TTK and contingent positions in mathematics (Jahan et al., 2022)
Neuroscience	Qualifications sought by hiring committees and what candidates think they need to be successful (Hsu et al., 2021)
Nursing	Bias can infiltrate multiple aspects of the search process for nursing faculty, but there are strategies that can be used across the process (Bradford et al., 2022; Salvucci & Lawless, 2016) Qualifications sought by hiring committees (Agger et al., 2014; Oermann et al., 2016). Credentialism is present in hiring in nursing education though all nursing faculty are primarily teaching (Agger et al., 2014; Oermann et al., 2016)
Physics	Gender and racial bias exist in hiring (Eaton et al., 2020)
Political science	Interventions can mitigate the role of bias and increase diversity in hiring (Thies & Hinojosa, 2023; King, 2023; Michelson & Wilkington, 2023)
Psychology	Gender bias exists in hiring (Steinpreis et al., 1999) Qualifications sought by hiring committees. Some qualifications are universal, but teaching and research skills are prioritized differently across institutional types (Boysen et al., 2019)
Public affairs	Qualifications sought by hiring committees. Credentialism is a barrier (Slage et al., 2022)
Public health	Most clinical faculty are at the lowest rank and have contracts that are less than 2 years (August et al., 2022) Qualifications sought by hiring committees (Rojas-Guyler et al., 2004), dependent on program emphasis/institutional type (Rojas-Guyler et al., 2004)
Recreation and leisure	Qualifications sought by hiring committees. Teaching, research, and service skills desired across institutional types (Elkins & Ross, 2004)
Religion	Stereotypes are reproduced in job ads (Fuerst, 2020)
Social work	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Bair & Bair, 2002) Qualifications sought by hiring committees. Hiring departments want practical experience (Barsky et al., 2014). Credentialism is an issue (Barsky et al., 2014; Mackie, 2013)
Sociology	Elitism in networks does not change over time (Burris, 2004; Weakliem et al., 2012). Highly productive women are employed at lower prestige institutions (Wilder & Walters, 2021)
Urban planning	Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Lee, 2022)
Veterinary medicine	Efforts have been made to increase diversity in hiring (Burkhard et al., 2022; Greenhill, 2009)
STEM	Gender (Casad et al., 2021; Eaton et al., 2020; Glass & Minnotte, 2010; McNeely & Vlaicu, 2010; Mosley & Hargrove, 2014; Moss-Rascusin et al., 2012; O’Connell et al., 2015; Sheltzer & Smith, 2014; Roper, 2019), racial (Gibbs et al., 2016; Mosley et al., 2016), and sexual orientation (Nadeau, 2005) bias exclusion exists in recruitment and hiring. There is some evidence that gender bias is not as prevalent as is commonly thought to be the case (Ceci & Williams 2015; Williams & Ceci, 2015) Interventions can mitigate the role of bias and increase diversity in hiring (Blair-Loy et al., 2022; Boyle et al., 2020; Constant 2011; Cresiski et al., 2022; Devine et al., 2017; Fortino et al., 2020; Golubchik & Redel, 2018; Laube, 2021; Lord et al., 2015; Moher et al., 2018; Shea et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2015; Su et al., 2015) Elitism and prestige networks shape job placement (Rosser et al., 2006; Sandekian et al., 2022)

Appendix C: Special Vocabulary (i.e., Jargon) Used in Academic Hiring

Term	Definition
Adjunct faculty member	A faculty member hired on a part-time contractual basis who is not eligible for tenure; often called contingent faculty
Assistant professor	A tenure-eligible (e.g., tenure-track) entry-level appointment held by individuals. Assistant professors are typically eligible for tenure and promotion after a period of 6 or 7 years. Granting of tenure and promotion involves several layers of peer review, including peer review internal to the employing institution and peer review external to the institution
Associate professor	The associate professor rank is typically the second “step” or “rank” in the tenure-track ladder. Individuals are typically promoted from the assistant professor rank to the associate level and granted tenure simultaneously. In some cases, faculty might be granted a promotion to associate but not tenured
Campus visits	Campus visits are a stage of the selection process, spanning 1–2 days, where “job finalists” are invited to campus. These visits typically include job talks, a teaching demonstration, various interviews, as well as social interactions (e.g., shared meals, campus tours)
Clinical faculty	Clinical faculty are non-tenure-eligible professors who teach and/or supervise students in some of clinical setting (i.e., in the treatment of patients), sometimes called professors of practice
Contingent faculty	A contingent faculty member refers to faculty who either teach part-time or teach full-time but are not on the tenure-track and thus not eligible for tenure. Often referred to as non-tenure-track faculty
Diversity, equity, and inclusion statement	A statement candidates submit as a part of their application to demonstrate their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as how it relates to their scholarly work, teaching, and service
Dual couple accommodations	Dual-career academic couples are couples wherein partners are faculty members. Dual-career accommodations are hiring policies that facilitate the hiring of both members of the couple to the institution
Equity officer or equity advocate	Equity officers and advocates are administrators (sometimes faculty with administrative appointments) who oversee compliance with fair employment practices in the hiring process and/or are faculty members who are assigned to help search committees think about making hiring decisions more equitable and inclusive
Failed search	A failed search occurs when a candidate(s) declines an offer and the position remains vacant
Full professor	A tenure-eligible, likely tenured professor of the highest rank. Full professors are often referred to as senior scholars; in the context of academic hiring, a job notice might call for “senior faculty” or “advanced career faculty” to signal interest in a full or advanced associate professor
Job talk (or chalk talk)	The job talk or chalk talk, as it is called in some disciplines, is an opportunity for candidates to present prior and future research to students and potential colleagues
Long-short list	After narrowing down the initial applicant pool based on standard evaluation criteria, the screening committee develops a long-short list of applicants. These applicants undergo “first-round” phone or online interviews
Non-tenure-track faculty member	A non-tenure-track faculty member refers to faculty who either teach part-time or teach full-time but are not on the tenure-track and thus not eligible for tenure. Often referred to as contingent faculty
Open search	Refers to a search wherein a job advertisement is posted and any candidate can apply
Search or screening committee	Because most faculty search committees do not possess hiring authority, they are referred to as search or screening committees. Accordingly, their charge includes recruitment, reviewing and screening applicants, identifying a list of finalists to be invited to campus, developing interview and campus visit protocols, and collecting feedback to draft recommendations
Search waiver	A search waiver is formal approval to hire an individual directly into a faculty position without conducting an open search
Short list or finalist list	The finalist candidates in a search; typically, these candidates are brought for on-campus interviews
Target-of-opportunity hiring	In contrast to open search, target-of-opportunity hiring occurs when departments do not have an active job posting wherein anyone could apply but, rather, make a bid to hire a specific candidate outside of the normal search process
Tenure	An indefinite academic appointment that can only be terminated under extraordinary circumstances. Tenure safeguards academic freedom
Tenure-track faculty member	Faculty members who, after completing a probationary period, are eligible for tenure or the guarantee of lifelong employment (typically assistant professors)
Tenured faculty member	Faculty members who have completed the probationary period and been deemed by the colleagues and institutions as meriting lifelong employment (typically, associate and full professors)