By James H. Johnson, Jr., Ph.D., and Donna-Marie Winn, Ph.D.

CHAPEL HILL – The previous two essays in this series offered personal reflections on systemic racism in higher education and recommendations to ensure equitable access and treatment of Blacks and other people of color, especially students, moving forward.

In this essay, we offer the leadership of predominantly White institutions (PWIs) two recommendations regarding how to expand Black faculty access and successful matriculation through the professorial ranks and administrative hierarchy of their universities.

First, develop policies that address systemic racism in faculty recruitment, hiring, and tenure and promotion procedures. 

Failure to recognize that research interests of Black scholars often do not align with established paradigms of inquiry—and may not “fit” within designated lists of “A” level publications — is a manifestation of racism. This erects a barrier to both access and advancement for Black scholars. 

• Move away from trying to find Black scholars who “fit” into existing research paradigms of White faculty and pursue cluster hiring around “shared” research interests of Black scholars. 

• Select peer reviewers who can evaluate Black scholarship on the merits of the research questions, theoretical underpinnings, and methodological sophistication of research designs, as well as contributions to knowledge, rather than on citation counts or the rank of external reviewers’ institutional affiliation.

• Give adequate credit in tenure and promotion decisions to the hundreds of hours a year Black faculty spend helping students of color cope with practices of systemic racism that continue to be perpetrated by some White faculty under the guise of academic freedom.

• When a Black candidate does not receive a position or promotion, appoint an independent review committee of faculty from other parts of the campus, relevant community members, and students, to review the case for evidence of bias.¹ Typical signs include downgrading Black candidates’ qualifications because they do not include White subjects in their research, selecting lesser-qualified White candidates because of irrelevant “fit” criteria, or adding White candidates after the application period has closed. To ensure the process is fair, appoint a diverse team of administrators, faculty, staff, and students to develop criteria for such reviews.

Second, increase the penalty for engaging in racially biased or bigoted recruitment, hiring, and promotion practices. 

• Amend university policies to make it clear to all faculty that a finding of a pattern of anti-Black racism is grounds for termination, no matter their tenure status.

• Publish data on department-level recruitment, matriculation, and promotions by race.

• Use data to discover patterns of Black student unsuccessful completions or premature departures from courses and departments to launch inquiries into disparate patterns and practices. 

By embracing these recommendations, PWI leaders will begin to tackle head-on the deeply engrained institutional barriers in the culture as well as within the human resource policies and practices that are major obstacles to Black faculty, staff, and students realizing their full potential.

Holding everyone accountable with specificity will be a start to making PWI campuses safe and affirming spaces.

---

James H. Johnson, Jr. is William Rand Kenan, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Strategy and Entrepreneurship at the University of North Carolina Kenan-Flagler Business School.  Donna-Marie Winn, a licensed clinical psychologist, researcher, strategist, and trainer, is President and CEO of Kaleidoscope Pathways, LLC. This is the third of a three-part series on Systemic Racism and Higher Education. 

¹ Some may view this as adding another level of bureaucracy, but such a system of checks and balances is needed until policy and procedures are in place to ensure standing committees are operating without bias.