To the Editor:
At the faculty meeting Tuesday, President Christina Paxson initiated a very important and welcome discussion about increasing efforts here at Brown to diversify the faculty. The Herald article (“Paxson aims to double underrepresented minorities on the faculty,” Nov. 5) reports that I suggested “compromise” may be necessary to achieve our diversity goals, but the way in which my comment is paraphrased in the article does not accurately reflect the point I made at the meeting, or indeed my views. I appreciate the opportunity to continue this important discussion and to clarify my point.
We all agree on the need to diversify our faculty, and ultimately the academic mission and vision of Brown require the collective contributions of a diverse faculty. We are also keenly aware that, in certain disciplines, progress toward this goal has been slow. There are myriad contributing factors, but it is the responsibility of each of us to consider what we can do to affect positive change.
Both Paxson and Provost Vicki Colvin pointed out the need for conversations at all levels of the University. I raised the point that we cannot compromise on quality. Hiring the most outstanding scholars and educators to Brown is paramount. However, I believe there are conversations that should happen within departments at the start of the hiring process that place diversity as a priority.
Often, when a faculty line opens in a department, there are many competing needs, including teaching, academic priorities and building a critical mass of scholars in specific fields. These needs are real. But the more narrowly defined the faculty position within a given subfield, the smaller the applicant pool. Whenever possible, we need to consider conducting searches that are less narrowly defined by specific subfields, to ensure a deep, diverse and academically strong applicant pool.
Diane Lipscombe
Professor of Neuroscience
ADVERTISEMENT
