A Conversation
Join us on March 11, 2021, 1 to 2 pm ET [Zoom], as we delve into how Education for All will advance equity on our campuses and in our communities.
Existing processes for assessing the potential or the contributions of academic staff members may disadvantage individuals who have followed non-traditional career paths or experienced career interruptions.
While peer review, rather than quantitative metrics, must continue to govern academic decisions, including those relating to hiring, tenure, and promotion, there is increasing evidence that bias within the peer review process may contribute to persistent inequities within the academy.
Some measures for evaluating scholarly activity may also disadvantage members of equity seeking groups. The use of performance metrics is a particular area of concern.
There is growing evidence that student opinion surveys of teaching not only fail to measure teaching effectiveness, but are significantly biased against women, members of racialized groups, and academic staff teaching in a language other than their first language.41 In addition, such s
Some evaluation processes commonly used in Canadian post-secondary education institutions have been demonstrated to discriminate against members of Indigenous and equity-seeking groups. Academic staff associations should work to eliminate such discriminatory mechanisms.
Criteria for the appointment, renewal, and advancement of academic staff must not undervalue the contributions and potential of Indigenous and equity-seeking academic staff, and should not disadvantage applicants with non-traditional career paths or community-based scholarship and pedagogy.
The language used in job postings should be designed to welcome all qualified applicants and encourage members of Indigenous and equity-seeking groups to apply.