Since every future improvement in Hispanic access to the University is inevitably tied to increased representation of Hispanics in the faculties, the discussion begins here. The number of Hispanic women faculty is even lower than that of Hispanic men. Considering the insignificant number of Hispanic faculty at the University, the tiny number of Hispanic women is an additional cause for concern. The Committee believes that even greater efforts must be made to recruit Hispanic women, particularly Chicanas. Thus, while this report relies on the generic term Hispanic, it should be understood that the problems related to Hispanic women are even more acute than those pertaining to Hispanic men.
The problem of faculty underrepresentation is the most critical for the University because it is the faculty who are central to its education and research mission and who govern the University the Academic Senate and through the upper echelons of administration. Indeed, the highest administrators, the president, vice president, chancellors, vice chancellors, provosts, deans, associate deans, directors of research centers, and department chairs, must be either faculty members eligible for faculty appointment to hold those positions. Thus, unless and until faculty, both minority and majority, are directly involved in programs to diversify the University, all such efforts are doomed to failure.
The faculty, more than any other component of the University of California, personify its greatness. Up to now, UC faculty have included among their members only small numbers of Hispanics. The University is in a unique position to rectify this situation because of the faculty renewal that will occur in the next ten years when about 40% of UC faculty will retire. Unfortunately, at a time when faculty renewal is a reality, the number of Hispanics in the "pipeline" in graduate schools across the country is at an all-time low. This means that if the status quo is maintained, the next generation of UC faculty will include less Hispanic faculty than it does today.
Such an outcome is unacceptable at a time when the numbers of Hispanic students in the undergraduate population are increasing dramatically. At our two largest campuses, the Hispanic enrollment for fall 1988 approached 20%. How do such students view a university which has so few of their representatives among their professors? We lament the small numbers of Hispanics in the potential pool of faculty, but how do these new students perceive their opportunities for an academic career when there is such stark absence of Hispanics in the faculty circle?
Administrators systemwide know that the pool of available Hispanic faculty is limited. But this should not be an excuse either to delay or to accept the status quo. An analogy to this problem exists in every department Suppose, for example, that a physics department decides to become the best in theoretical physics at the level of grand unifying theories.
Although there are only a handful of scientists who could come together in such a department, that is, the "pool" is incredibly small, UC could build such a department if it chose. Certainly, no one would abandon the enterprise simply because the "pool" was small. Similarly, the paucity of Hispanic faculty cannot be a hindrance to the University's ability to attract those necessary to achieve excellence in this area, even if it must go to extraordinary lengths to accomplish that goal. After all, that is what the University often does in selected "priority" areas.
The task can be accomplished only if the President and the Chancellors are truly committed to such an enterprise. In fact, the University could immediately take a quantum leap forward if it sought aggressively to hire distinguished Hispanic faculty from other institutions and provided faculty positions for outstanding academics now employed as researchers at our own and other research centers. By building a concentration of outstanding Hispanic faculty, the University of California would establish the "critical mass" necessary to attract and educate the finest Hispanic students, particularly graduate students. Then the University would be uniquely qualified to "produce" its own Hispanic faculty and to place its graduates throughout the nation. We should not be concerned about hiring our graduates; after all, Ivy League institutions, such as Harvard, Yale, Princeton' and Columbia, have neither lost distinction nor declined because they have been "inbreeding" for decades.
The University should expand also its very small President's Postdoctoral Fellowship program for minorities, at the same time decentralizing its administration and selection process. Departments should propose potential fellows, recognizing a departmental obligation for the training and preparation of postdoctorals for academic careers as faculty.
It is clear that current affirmative action mechanisms will not solve the problem of faculty underrepresentation and in fact they may sometimes facilitate perpetuation of the problem.
The numbers of Hispanic faculty at UC campuses and the present hiring patterns are eloquent indications of this reality. The Committee's visits both to the campuses and to the Office of the President revealed few innovative strategies to resolve this crisis. At one campus, a high academic official indicated that he was allocating 50% of the institution's new hires to underrepresented groups. Minority faculty at that campus remain skeptical, but they agreed that if the academic administrator had the courage to enforce his decision, substantial progress could be made rapidly. The critical question, of course, is whether or not the program will be carried out.
A strategy currently utilized by the University to attract faculty who are in short supply and for whom it must compete with other institutions should be applied to Hispanics. The strategy is to make such faculty a more competitive offer. Some faculty are offered endowed chairs, special equipment, clerical help, and/or research assistance. The University must offer outstanding Hispanic faculty increased resources if it hopes to meet its obligations in the next 10-15 years. (Other institutions are already doing this; the few Hispanics who possess endowed chairs, for example, are not found in the UC system.) Innovative approaches to recruiting and retaining outstanding Hispanic faculty cannot be limited to traditional means; these should include opportunities for spouses, support for ties with Latin American and particularly Mexican institutions, and more research opportunities. The point is that the University should consider outstanding Hispanic faculty in the same way that it considers other outstanding scholars for which there is a need or who enhance the University's programs. It should spare no expense or effort to attract and retain them.
There is also the problem of generating departmental interest in hiring Hispanic faculty. Departments often respond to their own parochial interests and not to the needs of society. Structures have to be developed at each campus to alleviate this problem. It seems clear that academic administrators must adopt policies that reward departments which hire underrepresented faculty (and given the demographics, Hispanics are chief among these). The program that currently appears to address this issue best is the "Targets of Opportunity Program." Yet the Committee often heard that departments do not respond to this program because they believe that the "free" FTE will be counted against them later. Commitments must be clarified in ways which alleviate that concern, such as extending the period for relinquishment of the TOP position for ten years or more. Further, programs must be developed to sensitize administrators and to prepare them to respond to the University's need to hire new Hispanic faculty. (Unfortunately, too many academic administrators, drawn from other parts of the country, have little understanding of Hispanic issues, and no effort is made to educate them concerning UC's needs in this critical area.)
The absence of high ranking Hispanic academic administrators contributes to the crisis. Although in the past there was a Hispanic chancellor and although there have been a few Hispanic vice chancellors, provosts and deans, only a couple remain in office. Yet, high ranking Hispanic academic administrators are important if the changes we are suggesting are to be implemented. Their leadership in these and other areas is necessary to the University. Past experience indicates that appointments of Hispanic academic administrators have been exceptional. There has been little or no advancement in their ranks. Actions must be taken to change that pattern. Excellent Hispanic administrators must be sought in the same manner that outstanding faculty are recruited.
The Committee found little reason for optimism about the current and future state of Hispanic representation on the faculty of the University of California. The University is urged to redouble its current efforts to hire Hispanic faculty and to consider "radical" programs to ensure sufficient representation to assure the survival and success of the University in the coming years.