Epistemic Exclusion of Women Faculty and Faculty of Color: Understanding Scholar(ly) Devaluation as a Predictor of Turnover Intentions

Faculty diversity has received increased attention from researchers and institutions of higher education, yet faculty demographics have not changed substantially for many underrepresented groups. Several barriers to the retention of women and faculty of color have been offered, including a lack of b...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of higher education (Columbus) 2022-01, Vol.93 (1), p.31-55
Hauptverfasser: Settles, Isis H., Jones, Martinque K., Buchanan, NiCole T., Brassel, Sheila T.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 55
container_issue 1
container_start_page 31
container_title The Journal of higher education (Columbus)
container_volume 93
creator Settles, Isis H.
Jones, Martinque K.
Buchanan, NiCole T.
Brassel, Sheila T.
description Faculty diversity has received increased attention from researchers and institutions of higher education, yet faculty demographics have not changed substantially for many underrepresented groups. Several barriers to the retention of women and faculty of color have been offered, including a lack of belonging, discrimination, social exclusion, and tokenism. Epistemic exclusion, scholarly marginalization rooted in disciplinary and identity-based biases, is theorized to act as another barrier to the retention of these faculty. The present study examines the effect of scholarly devaluation, a primary component of epistemic exclusion, on faculty workplace outcomes using data from 1,341 tenure-track faculty from a predominantly White, research-intensive institution. We found that women and underrepresented faculty of color reported higher perceptions of scholarly devaluation. Further, scholarly devaluation was associated with higher intentions to leave the university and this relationship was mediated by lower job satisfaction and poorer perceptions of the workplace climate. Notably, the negative consequences of perceiving scholarly devaluation were found for all faculty, not just women and faculty of color. We discuss the implications of these findings for retaining marginalized faculty and for institutions of higher education more broadly.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/00221546.2021.1914494
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2615863001</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1327000</ericid><sourcerecordid>2615863001</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5c9eab4862b3a93c12d8026d8ff3d92d65f2da392b6624f105b8f5202e40e3603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtKJDEUhoOMYI_6CEJgNs6i2tytcjVDT3tDUFBxGdK5OJHqpCdJOfYL-NymaHXp2eTAfznhA-AAoylGLTpCiBDMmZgSRPAUd5ixjm2BCea0bZhg6BuYjJ5mNO2A7zk_oToY8wl4na98LnbpNZy_6H7IPgYYHXyISxvgqdJDX9ZQBfO5V3EW-5hO4H0wNuVSRR8e4a3-G3uVDvv1T_jHPqt-UGUsUxkqeJOs8brENMbvhhTis03wIhQbRlPeA9tO9dnuv7-74P50fjc7b66uzy5mv68aTQUqDdedVQvWCrKgqqMaE9MiIkzrHDUdMYI7YhTtyEIIwhxGfNE6XrFYhmxtoLvgx6Z3leK_weYin2L9TT0picC8FbRyqS6-cekUc07WyVXyS5XWEiM5IpcfyOWIXL4jr7mDTc4mrz8z80tMyXEFXvVfG90HF9NS_Y-pN7KodcXpkgraZ0m_PvEGUZWR9Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2615863001</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Epistemic Exclusion of Women Faculty and Faculty of Color: Understanding Scholar(ly) Devaluation as a Predictor of Turnover Intentions</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><creator>Settles, Isis H. ; Jones, Martinque K. ; Buchanan, NiCole T. ; Brassel, Sheila T.</creator><creatorcontrib>Settles, Isis H. ; Jones, Martinque K. ; Buchanan, NiCole T. ; Brassel, Sheila T.</creatorcontrib><description>Faculty diversity has received increased attention from researchers and institutions of higher education, yet faculty demographics have not changed substantially for many underrepresented groups. Several barriers to the retention of women and faculty of color have been offered, including a lack of belonging, discrimination, social exclusion, and tokenism. Epistemic exclusion, scholarly marginalization rooted in disciplinary and identity-based biases, is theorized to act as another barrier to the retention of these faculty. The present study examines the effect of scholarly devaluation, a primary component of epistemic exclusion, on faculty workplace outcomes using data from 1,341 tenure-track faculty from a predominantly White, research-intensive institution. We found that women and underrepresented faculty of color reported higher perceptions of scholarly devaluation. Further, scholarly devaluation was associated with higher intentions to leave the university and this relationship was mediated by lower job satisfaction and poorer perceptions of the workplace climate. Notably, the negative consequences of perceiving scholarly devaluation were found for all faculty, not just women and faculty of color. We discuss the implications of these findings for retaining marginalized faculty and for institutions of higher education more broadly.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-1546</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-4640</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2021.1914494</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Columbus: Routledge</publisher><subject>Academic tenure ; Barriers ; College Faculty ; Color ; Credibility ; Demography ; Discrimination ; Disproportionate Representation ; diversity ; Diversity (Faculty) ; Epistemic exclusion ; Epistemology ; faculty of color ; gender ; Gender Bias ; Gender Differences ; Higher education ; Institutions ; Intention ; Job Satisfaction ; Labor Turnover ; Marginality ; Minority Group Teachers ; Racial Bias ; Racial Differences ; scholarly devaluation ; Social Attitudes ; Social exclusion ; Social Influences ; Teacher Attitudes ; Teacher Persistence ; Teaching Conditions ; Tokenism ; turnover ; White Teachers ; Women ; Women Faculty ; Workplaces</subject><ispartof>The Journal of higher education (Columbus), 2022-01, Vol.93 (1), p.31-55</ispartof><rights>2021 The Ohio State University 2021</rights><rights>2021 The Ohio State University</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5c9eab4862b3a93c12d8026d8ff3d92d65f2da392b6624f105b8f5202e40e3603</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5c9eab4862b3a93c12d8026d8ff3d92d65f2da392b6624f105b8f5202e40e3603</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5015-7231 ; 0000-0003-1683-1717 ; 0000-0002-6406-237X ; 0000-0001-9288-5245</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,33773</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1327000$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Settles, Isis H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Martinque K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchanan, NiCole T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brassel, Sheila T.</creatorcontrib><title>Epistemic Exclusion of Women Faculty and Faculty of Color: Understanding Scholar(ly) Devaluation as a Predictor of Turnover Intentions</title><title>The Journal of higher education (Columbus)</title><description>Faculty diversity has received increased attention from researchers and institutions of higher education, yet faculty demographics have not changed substantially for many underrepresented groups. Several barriers to the retention of women and faculty of color have been offered, including a lack of belonging, discrimination, social exclusion, and tokenism. Epistemic exclusion, scholarly marginalization rooted in disciplinary and identity-based biases, is theorized to act as another barrier to the retention of these faculty. The present study examines the effect of scholarly devaluation, a primary component of epistemic exclusion, on faculty workplace outcomes using data from 1,341 tenure-track faculty from a predominantly White, research-intensive institution. We found that women and underrepresented faculty of color reported higher perceptions of scholarly devaluation. Further, scholarly devaluation was associated with higher intentions to leave the university and this relationship was mediated by lower job satisfaction and poorer perceptions of the workplace climate. Notably, the negative consequences of perceiving scholarly devaluation were found for all faculty, not just women and faculty of color. We discuss the implications of these findings for retaining marginalized faculty and for institutions of higher education more broadly.</description><subject>Academic tenure</subject><subject>Barriers</subject><subject>College Faculty</subject><subject>Color</subject><subject>Credibility</subject><subject>Demography</subject><subject>Discrimination</subject><subject>Disproportionate Representation</subject><subject>diversity</subject><subject>Diversity (Faculty)</subject><subject>Epistemic exclusion</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>faculty of color</subject><subject>gender</subject><subject>Gender Bias</subject><subject>Gender Differences</subject><subject>Higher education</subject><subject>Institutions</subject><subject>Intention</subject><subject>Job Satisfaction</subject><subject>Labor Turnover</subject><subject>Marginality</subject><subject>Minority Group Teachers</subject><subject>Racial Bias</subject><subject>Racial Differences</subject><subject>scholarly devaluation</subject><subject>Social Attitudes</subject><subject>Social exclusion</subject><subject>Social Influences</subject><subject>Teacher Attitudes</subject><subject>Teacher Persistence</subject><subject>Teaching Conditions</subject><subject>Tokenism</subject><subject>turnover</subject><subject>White Teachers</subject><subject>Women</subject><subject>Women Faculty</subject><subject>Workplaces</subject><issn>0022-1546</issn><issn>1538-4640</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMtKJDEUhoOMYI_6CEJgNs6i2tytcjVDT3tDUFBxGdK5OJHqpCdJOfYL-NymaHXp2eTAfznhA-AAoylGLTpCiBDMmZgSRPAUd5ixjm2BCea0bZhg6BuYjJ5mNO2A7zk_oToY8wl4na98LnbpNZy_6H7IPgYYHXyISxvgqdJDX9ZQBfO5V3EW-5hO4H0wNuVSRR8e4a3-G3uVDvv1T_jHPqt-UGUsUxkqeJOs8brENMbvhhTis03wIhQbRlPeA9tO9dnuv7-74P50fjc7b66uzy5mv68aTQUqDdedVQvWCrKgqqMaE9MiIkzrHDUdMYI7YhTtyEIIwhxGfNE6XrFYhmxtoLvgx6Z3leK_weYin2L9TT0picC8FbRyqS6-cekUc07WyVXyS5XWEiM5IpcfyOWIXL4jr7mDTc4mrz8z80tMyXEFXvVfG90HF9NS_Y-pN7KodcXpkgraZ0m_PvEGUZWR9Q</recordid><startdate>20220102</startdate><enddate>20220102</enddate><creator>Settles, Isis H.</creator><creator>Jones, Martinque K.</creator><creator>Buchanan, NiCole T.</creator><creator>Brassel, Sheila T.</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5015-7231</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1683-1717</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6406-237X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9288-5245</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220102</creationdate><title>Epistemic Exclusion of Women Faculty and Faculty of Color: Understanding Scholar(ly) Devaluation as a Predictor of Turnover Intentions</title><author>Settles, Isis H. ; Jones, Martinque K. ; Buchanan, NiCole T. ; Brassel, Sheila T.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-5c9eab4862b3a93c12d8026d8ff3d92d65f2da392b6624f105b8f5202e40e3603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Academic tenure</topic><topic>Barriers</topic><topic>College Faculty</topic><topic>Color</topic><topic>Credibility</topic><topic>Demography</topic><topic>Discrimination</topic><topic>Disproportionate Representation</topic><topic>diversity</topic><topic>Diversity (Faculty)</topic><topic>Epistemic exclusion</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>faculty of color</topic><topic>gender</topic><topic>Gender Bias</topic><topic>Gender Differences</topic><topic>Higher education</topic><topic>Institutions</topic><topic>Intention</topic><topic>Job Satisfaction</topic><topic>Labor Turnover</topic><topic>Marginality</topic><topic>Minority Group Teachers</topic><topic>Racial Bias</topic><topic>Racial Differences</topic><topic>scholarly devaluation</topic><topic>Social Attitudes</topic><topic>Social exclusion</topic><topic>Social Influences</topic><topic>Teacher Attitudes</topic><topic>Teacher Persistence</topic><topic>Teaching Conditions</topic><topic>Tokenism</topic><topic>turnover</topic><topic>White Teachers</topic><topic>Women</topic><topic>Women Faculty</topic><topic>Workplaces</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Settles, Isis H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Martinque K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Buchanan, NiCole T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brassel, Sheila T.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>The Journal of higher education (Columbus)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Settles, Isis H.</au><au>Jones, Martinque K.</au><au>Buchanan, NiCole T.</au><au>Brassel, Sheila T.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1327000</ericid><atitle>Epistemic Exclusion of Women Faculty and Faculty of Color: Understanding Scholar(ly) Devaluation as a Predictor of Turnover Intentions</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of higher education (Columbus)</jtitle><date>2022-01-02</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>93</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>31</spage><epage>55</epage><pages>31-55</pages><issn>0022-1546</issn><eissn>1538-4640</eissn><abstract>Faculty diversity has received increased attention from researchers and institutions of higher education, yet faculty demographics have not changed substantially for many underrepresented groups. Several barriers to the retention of women and faculty of color have been offered, including a lack of belonging, discrimination, social exclusion, and tokenism. Epistemic exclusion, scholarly marginalization rooted in disciplinary and identity-based biases, is theorized to act as another barrier to the retention of these faculty. The present study examines the effect of scholarly devaluation, a primary component of epistemic exclusion, on faculty workplace outcomes using data from 1,341 tenure-track faculty from a predominantly White, research-intensive institution. We found that women and underrepresented faculty of color reported higher perceptions of scholarly devaluation. Further, scholarly devaluation was associated with higher intentions to leave the university and this relationship was mediated by lower job satisfaction and poorer perceptions of the workplace climate. Notably, the negative consequences of perceiving scholarly devaluation were found for all faculty, not just women and faculty of color. We discuss the implications of these findings for retaining marginalized faculty and for institutions of higher education more broadly.</abstract><cop>Columbus</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/00221546.2021.1914494</doi><tpages>25</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5015-7231</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1683-1717</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6406-237X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9288-5245</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-1546
ispartof The Journal of higher education (Columbus), 2022-01, Vol.93 (1), p.31-55
issn 0022-1546
1538-4640
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2615863001
source Sociological Abstracts; EBSCOhost Education Source
subjects Academic tenure
Barriers
College Faculty
Color
Credibility
Demography
Discrimination
Disproportionate Representation
diversity
Diversity (Faculty)
Epistemic exclusion
Epistemology
faculty of color
gender
Gender Bias
Gender Differences
Higher education
Institutions
Intention
Job Satisfaction
Labor Turnover
Marginality
Minority Group Teachers
Racial Bias
Racial Differences
scholarly devaluation
Social Attitudes
Social exclusion
Social Influences
Teacher Attitudes
Teacher Persistence
Teaching Conditions
Tokenism
turnover
White Teachers
Women
Women Faculty
Workplaces
title Epistemic Exclusion of Women Faculty and Faculty of Color: Understanding Scholar(ly) Devaluation as a Predictor of Turnover Intentions
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T01%3A29%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Epistemic%20Exclusion%20of%20Women%20Faculty%20and%20Faculty%20of%20Color:%20Understanding%20Scholar(ly)%20Devaluation%20as%20a%20Predictor%20of%20Turnover%20Intentions&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20higher%20education%20(Columbus)&rft.au=Settles,%20Isis%20H.&rft.date=2022-01-02&rft.volume=93&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=31&rft.epage=55&rft.pages=31-55&rft.issn=0022-1546&rft.eissn=1538-4640&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/00221546.2021.1914494&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2615863001%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2615863001&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1327000&rfr_iscdi=true