Gender and race disparities in the evaluation of COVID-19 impact statements for tenure and promotion candidates
研究调查了美国大学晋升委员会在评估终身教职候选人的COVID-19影响陈述时，是否因候选人的性别和种族而存在差异。结果显示女性候选人获得更有利评价，但种族间无显著差异。
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted research productivity for many faculty members. As a result, many US universities began asking promotion and tenure candidates to create COVID-19 impact statements in hopes of mitigating the negative impact of these disruptions on tenure decisions. However, little is known about how such impact statements might be evaluated by promotion and tenure committees. This study examined whether such statements might be evaluated differently based on the gender and racial/ethnic categories of the faculty that submit them. Specifically, current US faculty were asked to evaluate hypothetical tenure dossiers that varied in race/ethnicity (Black/Latinx/White) and binary gender (Male/Female). Results indicated that female candidates were evaluated more favorably than male candidates. Specifically, participants thought that female candidate’s disruptions were more understandable, that their COVID-19 impact statements should be given more weight, and that they were more likely to vote to promote female candidates. There were no significant differences across candidates by race/ethnicity. The unexpected pattern of results suggests more research is needed to understand why such patterns emerged.