This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 21 November 2014, At: 19:24Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Peabody Journal of EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hpje20

Why Teaching Faculty Diversity (Still)MattersAsabe W. Polomaa

a Institute for Recruitment of Teachers, Phillips Academy AndoverPublished online: 18 Jun 2014.

To cite this article: Asabe W. Poloma (2014) Why Teaching Faculty Diversity (Still) Matters, PeabodyJournal of Education, 89:3, 336-346, DOI: 10.1080/0161956X.2014.913447

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2014.913447

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

PEABODY JOURNAL OF EDUCATION, 89: 336–346, 2014Copyright C© Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0161-956X print / 1532-7930 onlineDOI: 10.1080/0161956X.2014.913447

Why Teaching Faculty Diversity (Still) Matters

Asabe W. PolomaInstitute for Recruitment of Teachers, Phillips Academy Andover

Students in schools, colleges, and universities are rapidly becoming more diverse while the teachingworkforce has failed to keep pace. The underrepresentation of minority teachers on school facultiespersists despite efforts by successful national teacher recruitment programs, such as the Institute forRecruitment of Teachers, to redress this persistent gap. Several factors influencing this gap, includingretention, job satisfaction, and working conditions of teachers of color, are briefly summarized.However, the current economic conditions and academic job market retrenchment as well as thedramatic and ever-rising costs of graduate education in the United States threatens to affect theenrollment and aspirations of students of color interested in careers in education, despite the long-standing efforts and successes of these programs.

In the fall of 2010, during the commemorative launch of the federal Teach.gov initiative to recruitthe “next generation” of teachers, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated,

I’m very concerned that increasingly, our teachers don’t reflect the great diversity of our nation’syoung people, and so making sure we have more teachers of color and particularly more men, moreblack and Latino men, coming into education is going to be a significant part of this Teach Campaign.(Bireda & Chait, 2011, p. 1)

He is right to be concerned.In the past decade, the percentages of historically underrepresented racial groups have in-

creased significantly as a proportion of the total population growth (Humes & Ramirez, 2011;Kelly, 2005). Of the 308.7 million people currently residing in the United States, 36% identify asnon-White or multiracial (Humes, Jones, & Ramirez, 2011). This reflects a reported increase of43% in the Hispanic population, 12% among Blacks, 18% among Native Americans and AlaskaNatives, and a 43% increase in the population of Asians since the last census in 2000 (Humes &Ramirez, 2011). By 2023, it is projected that more than half of all children in the United Stateswill be from historically underrepresented ethnic and racial groups, and by 2050 that figure isexpected to exceed 60% (American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 2010, p. 8;U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, 2008).

Whereas the student population at the nation’s P-12 schools is increasingly becoming morediverse, the diversity among educators in the United States has not kept pace. Currently, morethan 6 million teachers are employed in preschool through 12th-grade schools in the United

Correspondence should be sent to Asabe W. Poloma, Institute for Recruitment of Teachers, Phillips Academy,Andover, MA 01810. E-mail: apoloma@andover.edu

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHING FACULTY DIVERSITY 337

States (Toldson, 2011). Approximately 80% are White, 9.6% are Black, 7.4% are Hispanic, 2.4%are Asian, and 1.2% identified as belonging to other races (Toldson, 2011; U.S. Departmentof Education, 2009). In stark contrast, the P-12 student demographic composition comprises56.5% White, 14.4% Black, 21.2% Hispanic, 4.3% Asian, and 3.6% other races (Toldson, 2011;U.S. Department of Education, 2009). Authors Saba Bireda and Robin Chait (2011) reportedthat in more than 40% of public schools in the United States, there is a not a single teacher ofcolor.

In addition, male teachers of all races are underrepresented in preschools through secondaryschools even as dropout rates for Black and Hispanic male students have reached critical levels(AACTE, 2010). Today, 80% of all teachers are female (Toldson, 2011). When disaggregated byrace and gender (Toldson, 2011), White women comprise 63% of the teaching force but 27%of the student body, whereas the number of White male students (29%) is twice that of Whitemale teachers (16.5%; Toldson, 2011). Nationally, fewer than 2% of teachers are Black maleteachers for a national preschool through 12th-grade student body that is 7% black male, a gapof more than 3 times (Toldson, 2011). Comparatively, the number of Asian male students (2.2%)is 4 times that of Asian male teachers (0.5%; Toldson, 2011). The percentage of Hispanic malestudents (10.9%) is 7 times that of Hispanic male teachers (1.6%), whereas there is one Hispanicfemale teacher (5.8%) for every two Hispanic female students (10.3%; Toldson, 2011).

Likewise, faculty diversity in colleges and universities continues to lag behind minority stu-dents’ enrollment. In higher education, the low and disproportionate representation of faculty ofcolor is ascribed to the insufficient numbers of Ph.D.s awarded to qualified students of color.According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in 2009, 7% of college and uni-versity faculty identified as Black, 6% as Asian/Pacific Islander, 4% as Hispanic, and 1% asAmerican Indian/Alaska Native. In contrast, approximately 79% of higher education faculty iswhite, including 37% White females (Snyder & Dillow, 2011; U.S. Department of Education,2011).

According to the American Council on Education’s Minorities in Higher Education 2010status report, minority faculty as a percentage of full-time faculty in higher education have madegreat gains between 1997 and 2007. However, the greatest gains in representation were madeearly on in the decade and the trend since 2005 has tended toward leveling out (Ryu, 2010). Theminority faculty gains made were largely in nontenure instructor and lecturer ranks (109%) versusthe tenure track (only 37%), with fewer gains made proportionate to a rise in faculty rank fromassistant to associate to full professorships (Ryu, 2010; U.S. Department of Education, 2011).Similar to the P-12 data, minority women accounted for the greatest gains of full-time minorityfaculty at all levels in higher education (82 vs. 46% for minority men; Ryu, 2010). Notably,the number of foreign faculty, including male faculty, in the same period increased at almost3 times the rate of underrepresented faculty during the same decade (Ryu, 2010). Paradoxically,the presence of foreign black, Latino/a, and Asian faculty can serve to mask the problem anddelegitimize the persistent need to recruit and promote the success of underrepresented minoritiesin the faculty ranks.

In higher education, minorities have made greater gains in the administrative, executive, andmanagerial positions than in the teaching ranks (Ryu, 2010). Again, the gains were greatestearly in the decade and are now tending to level out. Among college and university presidents,gains in minority representation have been paltry (Ryu, 2010). Between 1986 and 2006, minoritycollege and university presidents were more highly represented at associate-degree-granting

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

338 A. W. POLOMA

and special-focus institutions than at primarily White, doctorate-granting institutions (Ryu,2010).

Notwithstanding the discourse, policies, and practices aimed at redressing the dearth of facultyof color in P-12 and higher education, issues of racial and gender inequities persist. Despite theseefforts, the teaching workforce has remained largely homogeneous due in part to the fact thatthe gains made in the decades following desegregation have been incrementally leveling outor reversing (Madkins, 2011; Ryu, 2010, Toldson, 2011). The U.S. teaching workforce needsto change drastically to meet the future demands of an increasingly diverse student populationand multicultural American society. However, these complicated issues will not be effectivelyredressed as long as educational leaders continue to frame institutional diversity initiatives ina cultural climate of race neutrality, antiaffirmative action, and postracialism that deems racialinequity a problem of the past.

WHY TEACHING FACULTY DIVERSITY (STILL) MATTERS

Relative to the changing national student body composition in American schools, the P-16and higher education teaching force lacks adequate racial, ethnic, and gender representation.This disparity is problematic for several reasons. First, it does not allow students of color tosee themselves’ reflected in the professional realm of education as teachers, principals, collegeprofessors, and university deans and administrators. Teachers of color can have a tremendousinfluence as role models on students of color.1 It is vitally important to have teachers who can berole models and share similar experiences with the students they teach. Whereas all students canbenefit from the mentorship and cultural knowledge a teacher of color can bring to the classroom,teachers of color are more likely to share the cultural, linguistic, and other forms of culturalcapital wealth familiar to students of color from similar backgrounds (Madkins, 2011; Yosso,2005).

Perhaps most damaging, the lack of teacher diversity implies that people of color do not havewhat it takes to succeed in academic professions, further reinforcing the normative standard ofan educator as White and middle class. Passionate and committed educators, including teachersof color, should encourage and direct students eager to continue learning and to consider careersin P-12 or higher education. Most undergraduate students of color are eager to work in diversesettings where their ideas about leading transformative change through socially just activities areencouraged. Unfortunately, their idealism is often chilled over the course of their educationalexperience. Many times, students of color are unaware of the possibilities to continue theireducation in graduate school, and have no one in their families or extended network to help guidethem through the graduate school application process. Further compounding this malaise, muchof the support for programs targeting minority students and educators has dried up because themomentum gained in the 1990s has been tempered by the political backlash against affirmativeaction, the souring of the economy, and large-scale teacher recruitment movements that focus onthe overall teacher shortage.

1The term “teachers of color” is used to refer to educators in both P-12 and higher education.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHING FACULTY DIVERSITY 339

BARRIERS TO ACHIEVING DIVERSITY IN TEACHING

The issue of minority teacher representation in P-12 and higher education cannot be addressedwithout also examining the dual issues of attrition and retention. In their study of the K-12minority teacher shortage, Richard Ingersoll and Henry May (2011) argued that the gains madein minority teacher recruitment are outpaced by the disproportionately high rates of turnoveramong teachers of color. According to their findings, this is especially true for minority maleteachers (Ingersoll & May, 2011). They cite several reasons for high turnover rates among teachersof color, including retirement, family or personal reasons (such as relocation or temporaryleave), school staffing action, pursuit of another job or career, or dissatisfaction with the job(Ingersoll & May, 2011). The most commonly cited reason by minority teachers in Ingersolland May’s study was dissatisfaction with some aspect of their school or job (Ingersoll & May,2011).

In higher education, not surprisingly, the lack of faculty diversity mirrors the underrepresen-tation of students of color among doctoral candidates. In fact, doctoral programs are the leastdiverse compared to all other educational levels in the United States (Woodrow Wilson NationalFellowship Foundation, 2005). In September 2010, the Chronicle of Higher Education reportedthat the number of doctorate degrees granted to all U.S. citizens has been flat for more than10 years (“Doctoral Diversity,” 2010). In 2008, only 15% of all Ph.D.s awarded in the humanitieswent to Blacks, Asians, Native Americans, and Hispanics combined (“Doctoral Diversity,” 2010).For the social sciences and education, the statistics stand at 20% and 24%, respectively (“DoctoralDiversity,” 2010). In her article “Doctoral Diversity in the Humanities Won’t Be Achieved byChance,” Paula Krebs (2010) argued that

if we worked with only 12 students a year to help them to be better candidates for doctoral programs,to prepare better applications, and to have a sense of what graduate school would be like, we stood agood chance of making almost a 50-percent improvement in the numbers. (p. B28)

Myers and Turner (2001) observed that one of the persistent explanations offered for theshortage of minority faculty in higher education is an insufficient supply of qualified candidatesfor teaching positions in the professoriate. However, there is a need for a more nuanced explo-ration of the structural and institutional barriers along the educational trajectory that contributeto the continuing lack of diversity among college and university teaching faculty (Leonard,Horvat, & Riley-Tillman, 2002). For example, the disproportionate drop-out and completionrates for students of color (Orfield, Losen, Wald, & Swanson, 2004), particularly at the under-graduate level, as well as the opportunities to pursue careers in other fields (Madkins, 2011)severely impede the pipeline of qualified and interested candidates of color pursuing graduateeducation.

Many students of color have inadequate access to quality educational opportunities and men-torship during their P-12 and undergraduate educational experiences, leaving them underpreparedto pursue graduate education and teaching careers in academia. Minority students are more likelyto be educated in low-performing, underresourced schools as the public educational systembecomes more segregated in the United States (Orfield et al., 2004). Furthermore, students ofcolor are more likely to be retained, tracked into special education, and otherwise excluded fromadvanced-level courses than White students due to racial profiling (Orfield et al., 2004). The crisis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

340 A. W. POLOMA

in school drop-out and completion rates for students of color further contributes to the cycle ofunderachievement and underpreparation.

Furthermore, national attention on recruiting graduate students of color to pursue careers inlaw, medicine, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields, though warranted, hasled to the devaluation of the continued critical importance of recruiting talented students of colorto doctoral fields in the humanities and social sciences. In addition, many students of color at thetop of their college classes report to the Institute for Recruitment of Teachers (IRT) that they areoften steered by faculty mentors toward law, medical school, or careers in business and industry,and actively discouraged from careers in academia and teaching. Understandably, many studentsof color opt for industry and business paths in order to have more lucrative careers that allowthem to give back to their families and communities (Madkins, 2011). Faculty, student-affairspersonnel, and undergraduate mentors could do more to make students aware of the vast arrayof career possibilities available in the field of education. In addition, graduate programs can bebetter aligned with P-12 schools and undergraduate colleges to ensure that students of color areaware of opportunities for advanced education.

Last, institutional barriers to the recruitment, retention, and promotion of doctoral candidatesand junior faculty in higher education (Kulis, Chong, & Shaw, 1999; Leonard et al., 2002) con-tribute to the lack of diversity in the professoriate. Several scholars have discussed the impactof institutional climate on minority graduate students recruitment and retention (Johnson-Bailey,2004; Lovitts, 2001; Williams, 2000). They argued that key predictors to the retention of graduatestudents of color are the level of integration into social and academic communities, support frompeers and advisors, and understanding the culture of their departments (Johnson-Bailey, 2004;Lovitts, 2001; Williams, 2000). Faculty mentorship can be instrumental in facilitating this byhelping steer graduate students of color toward opportunities for academic, professional, and per-sonal engagement within the institution and in surrounding communities. Emerging frameworkson peer-to-peer and reciprocal mentorship are promising in developing additional and supple-mentary avenues for community development and engagement as well as professional identitydevelopment for graduate students and future educators (McLoughlin, Brady, Lee, & Russell,2007).

Institutional practices in graduate admissions can also impede organizational diversity goalsby serving as barriers to prospective graduate students of color. The increased competitivenessin graduate school admissions as well as the retrenchment in doctoral funding in the humanities,social sciences, and education, particularly at public colleges and universities, have contributedto more barriers to entry for doctoral candidates of color. As more undergraduate students aregraduating with higher levels of loan indebtedness, most report that graduate education, if notfully funded, is out of reach for them. Once doctoral candidates surmount these odds to entryand completion and join the teaching faculty ranks, adverse organizational climates can impedetheir success or, worse, lead to their attrition from the profession. Among factors that contributeto their job dissatisfaction, tenure-track and tenured minority faculty report a lack of support forminority concerns, lack of an inclusive and diverse working environment, a paternalistic rewardssystem that favors White male professors, an unclear promotion and tenure system, and acts ofracist microaggression (Myers & Turner, 2001). In addition, lack of mentorship can increase jobdissatisfaction and severely impinge on broader institutional efforts to diversity faculty ranks(Leonard et al., 2002).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHING FACULTY DIVERSITY 341

RESPONDING TO THE MINORITY TEACHER SHORTAGE: THEINSTITUTE FOR RECRUITMENT OF TEACHERS

Founded in 1990, the IRT seeks to address the dearth of educators and administrators of colorin American schools, colleges, and universities by recruiting and mentoring talented and com-mitted undergraduates and recent college graduates committed to diversity and careers in P-12and higher education. The Institute’s philosophy emerged from a concern with the critical un-derrepresentation of faculty of color at all levels. Therefore, its initial mission statement focusedon the targeted recruitment and mentorship of Black, Native American, and Latina/o studentsinterested in careers in education. Today, the IRT accepts students from all ethnic groups whoare committed to its ideals of advancing equity and access as well as promoting diversity in theteaching workforce.

The IRT consists of two programs, (a) the residential Summer Workshop for 30 college ju-niors and seniors and (b) the Associate Program for an additional 70 undergraduates and recentcollege graduates. All participants are extensively mentored and comprehensively counseledthroughout the graduate school selection, application, and admission processes within the IRTconsortium of graduate institutions. The networking and relationship building that students cul-tivate through their experience is an integral part of IRT’s mission to build a national communityof transformative educational leaders. In addition, participants in the summer workshop receiveacademic preparation in an intensive graduate-level, 4-week residential workshop taught by afaculty comprising university professors, secondary school educators, and advanced doctoralcandidates.

At the end of the year, IRT participants matriculate to a graduate school program of theirchoosing, most within the IRT consortium, to pursue a master’s or doctoral degree in the human-ities, social sciences, education, or mathematics. The Institute strongly urges its participants tofirst pursue their advanced degrees before beginning their educational careers in order to gain thenecessary pedagogical and research skills as well as to earn the credentials often necessary tofacilitate their future career development.

Speaking about the conceptual model of the program, former IRT Executive Director andFounder Dr. Kelly Wise stated,

Too many kids are defeated by a system they don’t understand. Therefore, the IRT seeks to demystifythe graduate school application process and to nullify many of the barriers for students, particularlystudents of color, seeking entry into graduate school and subsequently, careers in education (personalcommunication, February 21, 2012).

The IRT’s emphasis on mitigating both the practical and psychological barriers to enteringgraduate school is unique. The program’s summer workshop curriculum addresses those barriersby uniquely supporting students in developing their critical and analytical skills, which helps todistinguish them as competitive graduate students. By wrestling with theoretical and policy issuesthrough a rigorous and provocative summer curriculum, students learn ways to engage and utilizetheory in framing their research questions and develop their teaching pedagogies and philosophiesthrough student-led, graduate-style seminars. In addition, the IRT lowers the financial barriers forstudents as they apply to graduate school. Institutional members of the IRT university consortiumagree to waive application fees for IRT applicants. This results in an average cost savings of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

342 A. W. POLOMA

$1,000 to each participant. Last, each IRT fellow is assigned an advisor and counselor who helpsto demystify the application process through extensive one-on-one mentorship and counselingsupport, including discussion of the statement of purpose, the supplemental essays, resume, andwriting sample.

There is a demonstrable need for programs such as the IRT. In its 1st year, the Instituteadmitted 17 students from an applicant pool of 29, supported by an annual operating budgetof $88,000 and two staff members. There were six participating universities in the consortium.Today, the IRT annually assists more than 100 students from a competitive pool of more than 270applicants representing approximately 65 colleges and universities. With an operating budget ofapproximately $750,000 and a growing endowment, it has established a brand reputation amongtop schools of education and doctoral programs in the humanities and social sciences. To date,43 colleges’ and universities’ graduate programs participate as consortium partners. The IRT’sFounder Dr. Kelly Wise stated,

The early mission of the Institute has changed little. Most of all, I think IRT will be around for along time, expanding the pool of talented students of color going into our schools and universities.More than twenty years since I founded IRT, there continues to be a need to identify these students,to nurture them, and to help them get into graduate school and into American classrooms (personalcommunication, February 21, 2012).

The successes of the Institute demonstrate that consistent gains can be made in the recruit-ment and retention of students of color to graduate programs and careers in education throughdetermined commitment and effective mentorship. In 23 years, the IRT has worked with morethan 2,000 participants and now boasts 247 Ph.D.s, more than 80 ABD Ph.D. candidates, and 21alumni currently tenured, as well as an additional 97 tenure-track alumni on teaching faculties.An additional 200 IRT alumni are reportedly working on their doctoral degrees in the humanities,social sciences, and education. Furthermore, approximately 824 IRT alumni have been awardeda terminal master’s degree, including 125 K-12 teachers and 95 school administrators. In a longi-tudinal study of a sample of 614 IRT alumni (based on a 59% response rate), 99% of respondentsidentified as belonging to a racially underrepresented group. Thirty-eight percent reportedly arefirst-generation college students, whereas a total of 61% reported to be the first in their fam-ilies to attain an advanced degree. Based on the survey, 87% of IRT alumni received fundingfor graduate study with 70% of those respondents indicating a fully-funded package for up to5 years of study. Approximately 40% of IRT participants pursue a degree in the field of education(largely, a master’s in teaching), whereas 60% embark on doctoral programs in the humanitiesand social sciences, with English, History, and American Studies reported as top fields of choice.Finally, IRT alumni have high staying power in the profession. Approximately 69% report tohave been teaching for 3 years or more including 14% who have been teaching for more than 10years.

The IRT’s unique conceptual model seeks to demystify the graduate school and educationprofession for its participants, and the Institute seeks aspiring reform-minded teachers who arecommitted to carving out their careers in P-12 and university teaching. Beyond demystifyingthe graduate school application process, however, the IRT makes graduate schools accessible tostudents, particularly students of color, by providing ongoing mentorship and lowering financialbarriers, thus creating a venue where participants can gain the tacit knowledge required for

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHING FACULTY DIVERSITY 343

successfully navigating their graduate experience. But perhaps most significantly, the IRT teachesfuture educators to regard themselves as thinkers, intellectuals, and tomorrow’s problem solvers.

OTHER CHALLENGES TO DIVERSIFICATION

Despite the successful initiatives aimed at recruiting talented students of color to the teachingworkforce, such as the IRT, more demonstrable commitment is needed at the local, state, andfederal levels to recruit, support, and retain qualified teachers of color. Of newly recruited teachersworking in urban public schools in America, one in five leave after their 1st year, and nearly 50%of new teachers leave the profession after only 5 years (National Commission on Teaching andAmerica’s Future, 2011). Teachers quit the profession because they are insufficiently paid andoften cannot afford to live in the communities where they work. In our society, teachers are notafforded the respect and status that they deserve. Hargreaves (2009) suggested that teachers enjoyhigh occupational prestige among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Developmentnations such as Finland, Japan, and Taiwan, but low levels of occupational status and prestigeare reported in countries where teacher compensation is low, such as the United Kingdom andUnited States. Hargreaves (2009) argued that a critical factor for the teaching profession’s highprestige and status in these countries was the academic quality of those recruited to the profession.In such cases, Hargreaves noted, teachers were recruited from the top ranks of their graduatingclass. For example, in Taiwan and other Confucian societies, teachers are especially privilegedand are recruited from the top 10% of the graduating class, enjoyed competitive salaries 25%“higher than other graduates,” and retirement pension benefits equivalent to 75% to 95% oftheir salaries (Hargreaves, 2009, pp. 222–223). In addition, an increasingly negative mainstreammedia influences the pessimistic public image of American educators. Hargreaves wrote that im-ages and public perceptions of teacher (in)competencies inform occupational prestige and statusof the teaching profession Furthermore, teachers are stifled by legislated curriculum regimen-tation or unimaginative methodologies that bore their students. Consequently, the high-stakesassessment culture, now prevalent in U.S. educational system, is counter not only to pedagogicalinnovation but also to reclaiming the prestige and status of this professional class (Hargreaves,2009).

Another challenge to diverse teachers’ retention is burnout. Most notably, teachers burn out inpart because they do not receive the essential lifeline of administrative support and opportunityfor growth. School budgets are being slashed even as the prediction of future teacher shortage(AACTE, 2010) is forecast, and the need for more mentors, coaches, and master teachers isdeclared repeatedly across the nation. Sadly, urban public schools, where Black and Hispanicteachers are most highly represented among all institutional types, are disproportionately impactedby these budgetary cuts (ACCTE, 2010).

These trends also affect students considering careers in education. Despite the longstandingefforts of several innovative teacher recruitment and retention pipeline programs, including theIRT, the current economic conditions, academic job market retrenchment, and the dramatic andever-rising costs of teacher education and higher education programs in the United States threatento affect the enrollment and aspirations of students of color interested in careers in education(ACCTE, 2010). Given these challenges, urban schools committed to reform in the coming

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

344 A. W. POLOMA

decade will have to institute key changes in recruitment, management, teacher and administrativedevelopment, and curriculum reform in order to retain promising and talented teachers—includingteachers of color.

CONCLUSION

America is immersed in a well-documented educational crisis. In this current climate of austerity,where news of slashed budgets and school and university layoffs is commonplace, there are severaleducational issues brewing. In graduate education, a number of universities have announced theirinability to fund as many students for graduate study as in the past. Administrators are alsotrimming the number and size of various departments in the humanities, social sciences, andeducation. Workloads and stipends for graduate assistants have become an issue of contention onseveral campuses. One of the greatest issues relates to the skyrocketing college tuition, especiallyfor out-of-state students.

Similarly, in public K-12 education, the persisting challenges of the racial and ethnic achieve-ment gaps as well as dropout rates continue to plague teachers, principals, and administrators.Curriculum is another crucial topic in today’s debate. What is the place of art and music, crit-ical thinking, reading, and writing in public education? Why do students of color graduatinghigh school have higher rates of remediation upon matriculation to college (Alliance for Ex-cellent Education, 2012)? At what point does testing and school-choice stratification underminestudent-learning outcomes?

Among the restive clamor, the IRT continues to identify, recruit, and counsel participants whoare committed to reforming the American educational landscape. The efforts of programs suchas the IRT have begun to bear fruit, although progress has not caught up with the need. At theInstitute, the principle belief is that the best way to challenge racial and ethnic achievementand opportunity gaps and improve the retention of faculty of color in American schools anduniversities is to pour into the teaching pool numbers of not only highly trained and potentiallygreat educators but also individuals who are committed to diversity in education and energized bytransformative and reform-minded teaching. The goal of greater diversity in school and universityfaculties and administrations will be a national issue for the foreseeable future.

AUTHOR BIO

Asabe W. Poloma is a doctoral student in the Higher Education program of the Departmentof Leadership in Education at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. Since 2008, she hasserved as the Director of Phillips Academy’s Institute for Recruitment of Teachers in Andover,Massachusetts.

REFERENCES

Alliance for Excellent Education. (2012, January). Caught in the crisis: Students of color and native students in U.S. highschools. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/files/CaughtCrisisSOC.pdf

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

TEACHING FACULTY DIVERSITY 345

American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. (2010, April). An emerging picture of the teacher preparationpipeline. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://aacte.org/index.php?/Research-Policy/AACTE-Research-and-Policy-Statements/an-emerging-picture-of-the-teacher-preparation-pipeline.html

Bireda, S., & Chait, R. (2011, November). Increasing teacher diversity: Strategies to improve the teacher workforce.Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. Retrieved from http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/11/pdf/chait diversity.pdf

Doctoral diversity: More degrees for Blacks, Hispanics. (2010, September 24). Chronicle of Higher Education, Diversityin Academe, p. B47.

Hargreaves, L. (2009). The status and prestige of teachers and teaching. In L. J. Saha & A. G. Dworkin (Eds.), Theinternational handbook of research on teachers and teaching (pp. 217–229). New York, NY: Springer.

Humes, K., Jones, N., & Ramirez, R. (2011, March). Overview of race and Hispanic origin: 2010. Washington, DC: U.S.Census Bureau. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-02.pdf

Ingersoll, R. M., & May, H. (2011, September 1). Recruitment, retention and the minority teacher shortage (CPREResearch Report #RR-69). Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

Johnson-Bailey, J. (2004). Hitting and climbing the proverbial wall: Participation and retention issues for Black graduatewoman. Race Ethnicity and Education, 7, 331–349.

Kelly, P. (2005, November). As America becomes more diverse: The impact of state higher education inequality. Boulder,CO: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.

Krebs, P. (2010, September 24). Doctoral diversity in the humanities won’t be achieved by chance. The Chronicle ofHigher Education, Diversity in Academe, p. B28.

Kulis, S., Chong, Y., & Shaw, H. (1999). Discriminatory organizational contexts and black scientists on postsecondaryfaculties. Research in Higher Education, 40, 115–148.

Leonard, J., Horvat, E. M., & Riley-Tillman, T. C. (2002, April). Achieving diversity in academia: A dream deferred?Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of AERA, New Orleans, LA.

Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Lanham,MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Madkins, T. (2011). The Black teacher shortage: A literature review of historical and contemporary trends. Journal ofNegro Education, 80, 417–427.

McLoughlin, C., Brady, J., Lee, M. J. W., & Russell, R. (2007, November). Peer-to-peer: An e-mentoring approach tofacilitating reflection on professional experience for novice teachers. Paper presented at the Australian Associationfor Research in Education Conference, Fremantle, WA.

Myers, S. L., Jr., & Turner, C. S. (2001). Affirmative action retrenchment and labor market outcomes for African-Americanfaculty. In B. Lindsay & M. Justiz (Eds.), The quest for equity in higher education: Towards new paradigms in anevolving affirmative action era (pp. 63–98). Albany: State University of New York Press.

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (2011, June 24). Nation’s schools facing largest teacherretirement wave in history. Retrieved from http://nctaf.org/announcements/nations-schools-facing-largest-teacher-retirement-wave-in-history/

Orfield, G., Losen, D., Wald, J., & Swanson, C. (2004). Losing our future: How minority youth are being left behindby the graduation rate crisis. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Retrieved fromhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/410936 LosingOurFuture.pdf

Ryu, M. (2010). Minorities in higher education 2010: Twenty-fourth status report. Washington, DC: American Councilon Education.

Snyder, T. D., & Dillow, S. A. (2011, April). Digest of education statistics 2010 (NCES 2011–015). Washington, DC:National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Toldson, I. (2011). Diversifying the United States’ teaching force: Where are we now? Where do we need to go? How dowe get there? Journal of Negro Education, 80, 183–186.

U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. (2008, August 14). An older and more diverse nation by mid-century [Press release]. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb08–123.html

U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Digest of education statistics. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d09/

U.S. Department of Education. (2011). Digest of education statistics, 2010. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved fromhttp://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011015 3a.pdf

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014

346 A. W. POLOMA

Williams, K. B. (2000). Perceptions of social support in doctoral programs among minority students. PsychologicalReports, 86, 1003–1010.

Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. (2005, May). Diversity and the Ph.D.: A review of efforts to broadenrace & ethnicity in U.S. doctoral education. Princeton, NJ: Author. Retrieved from http://www.woodrow.org/images/pdf/resphd/WW Diversity PhD web.pdf

Yosso, T. (2005, March). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth.Race, Ethnicity and Education, 8, 69–91.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

19:

24 2

1 N

ovem

ber

2014