I never thought that the use of one three letter word could change my outlook on academia — and the world. But in one of the first lectures I attended at Princeton, my Politics professor referred to a hypothetical person as “she,” and my world turned upside down.
It was so simple, and she did it so effortlessly. I was astonished that she cast each and every hypothetical powerful and interesting political leader whose ethical dilemma we grappled with as a woman.
This transformed my experience in the course, and although the action could have been taken by a male professor, her gender undoubtedly made the small radical act feel important, and grounded in the gendered reality of our politics. I was just beginning my freshman year, taking classes in a department that can at times feel male-dominated, and where one’s grade often hinges on intense precept discussion. The casual inclusion and small radical act taken by my female professor made the intimidation fall away, and drew me into the department that I will likely declare as my major this spring. But, looking at the faculty in the politics department currently, only about 30 percent are women.
This year’s faculty diversity report goes to show that the importance of experiences like mine — having your worldview expanded by a professor with a historically disenfranchised perspective — is not fully being taken into account within Princeton’s hiring and tenure-track processes. In order to serve all students in the way that this professor was able to inspire me, Princeton must prioritize diversity in new tenure-track faculty hiring. There are enough brilliant female intellectuals and intellectuals of color for Princeton to maintain a permanently, vibrantly diverse academic sphere.
Discussions about diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in college admissions have been a hot topic recently. There is constant debate in mainstream media, high school hallways, and college admissions boards about the importance of DEI efforts in admissions, all of which has been heightened by the banning of affirmative action in college admissions by the U.S. Supreme Court in June 2023. “Diversity and excellence go hand in hand,” as President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 (and I) have written.
But the conversation can, at times, be incomplete. There’s not nearly as much discourse surrounding faculty diversity. Diversity among the faculty is important for many of the same reasons that student diversity is — diverse identities bring varied perspectives that enrich an academic environment, and are especially important to make all students feel welcome.
The enlightening experience with my female politics professor came to the top of my mind when I read last year’s faculty diversity report. I was disheartened to see the extreme difference in diversity between tenure-track/tenured and non-tenure-track faculty, and confused as to why experiences like mine were not seen as valuable enough to preserve in our community.
While the Princeton faculty is made up of a variety of ranks and professorships, there is a key distinction between tenure-track/tenured and non-tenure-track faculty. Tenure-track and tenured faculty consist of assistant, associate and full professors, while lecturers make up the majority of the non-tenure-track faculty. There are several distinctions between the two tracks, but in general, non-tenure-track faculty do not have research responsibilities and accordingly tend to enjoy less job security and institutional benefits more generally.
In the Fall 2023 semester, the non-tenure-track was made up of nearly 54 percent women whereas only 33 percent of the tenured/tenure-track track were women. This may be due to older generations of faculty, who were overwhelmingly male and received tenure many decades ago. But, even among postdocs, a much younger group with a lot more turnover, only 33 percent to 35 percent have been female over the last five years. This trend aligns with patterns in academia across the country — women are consistently underrepresented in tenure-track programs.
Maintaining gender diversity in our faculty via the tenure track is essential for the quality of the Princeton academic experience. Psychological studies show that women have generally been found to uplift those around them at astonishing rates when given these positions. This can be especially true for female students, who have found a higher likelihood of pursuing post-graduate degrees and lucrative careers in STEM fields when taught by female professors.
Additionally, exposure to gender diversity in positions of power creates a more well-rounded educational experience that positively prepares students for life after graduation, where they will likely encounter women in positions of power. This is useful for students of any gender, but would particularly impact male students by helping to break down the gendered “authority gap.”
So, why doesn’t Princeton have more female professors? It could be that they’re not looking for enough female talent. But it could also be because of the well-documented “leaky pipeline” phenomenon of women leaving academia at a higher rate than men.
While in the popular consciousness this is often attributed to women having a harder time finding work-life balance, a recent study found that workplace culture contributes significantly to women’s propensity to leave, concluding that “the dominant incongruences for women arise from workplace climate, including dysfunctional leadership, feelings of not belonging to the department or university, harassment and discrimination.” If this is Princeton’s problem, they must fix it, and soon.
And lagging faculty diversity isn’t limited to gender. The faculty diversity report shows a similar, though less significant, disparity along racial lines: 53 percent of non-tenure-track faculty are white, but this number increases to nearly 68 percent when it comes to tenured/tenure track faculty. Even worse, this data may undersell just how lacking diversity is in certain academic spaces of campus. If professors of color are solely concentrated in departments like African American or East Asian studies, then there is not true integration of diverse backgrounds and ideological diversity into the academic experience at Princeton. It is important that professors from underrepresented groups are not siloed only into academic fields that study their respective identities.
Having gender and racially diverse perspectives in all departments is necessary. Including diverse perspectives in every conversation is the essential mechanism for the “diversity and excellence go hand in hand” argument that President Eisgruber makes. And since they acknowledge the importance of diversity, the University should also publicize their progress on diversifying: It is not enough for the University to publish that percentages of BIPOC professors that teach here, or are tenured, are comparable to national demographics. We need to know which departments they are teaching in.
Regardless of department or subject matter, exposure to diverse perspectives and learning from people with different backgrounds creates a richer learning environment for all Princeton students. Racial and gender dynamics influence every aspect of our lives — we need to honor the nuance they bring to academia and work to cultivate departments that are more reflective of our society’s demographics.
Ava Johnson is a sophomore columnist and prospective Politics major from Washington, D.C. Her column “The New Nassau” publishes every three weeks on Mondays. She can be reached by email at aj9432@princeton.edu.
Read More
Why postdocs are demanding open bargaining
Guest Contributors"Princeton’s resistance to the presence of observers is a break from many academic union negotiations. At Harvard, Weill Cornell, Mt Sinai, Columbia University, and the University of Washington, there are no limits on observers."
"Princeton’s resistance to the presence of observers is a break from many academic union negotiations. At Harvard, Weill Cornell, Mt Sinai, Columbia University, and the University of Washington, there are no limits on observers."
Mineral extraction is destroying the Congo. Princeton must source sustainably.
Luqmaan Bamba“As an important and influential institution in the global green energy transition, Princeton’s role is to commit, and commit actively, to that vision of ethical sourcing for its climate infrastructure.”
“As an important and influential institution in the global green energy transition, Princeton’s role is to commit, and commit actively, to that vision of ethical sourcing for its climate infrastructure.”
Vote ‘No’ on Referendum No. 5. Here’s why.
Judah Guggenheim“Referendum No. 5 calls on the University to divest from American defense companies including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, RTX (formerly Raytheon), and General Dynamics. The referendum ignores the necessary role that these companies play in defending democracy in American allies across the world.’’
“Referendum No. 5 calls on the University to divest from American defense companies including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, RTX (formerly Raytheon), and General Dynamics. The referendum ignores the necessary role that these companies play in defending democracy in American allies across the world.’’
