From: merolajs@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (JOSEPH S. MEROLA DEPT OF CHEMISTRY VPI&SU)
Newsgroups: sci.research.careers
Subject: Re: Hiring quotas and faculty positions (Repost #2)
Date: 11 Sep 92 13:54:00 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Sep11.115309.22499@aber.ac.uk>, hcw0@aber.ac.uk (Howard Charles Windsor) writes...
>As of yet I am still a student and have not yet had to apply for posts but as 
>far as I see it, what should happen is that the job should be given on the 
>basis of ability. If there has been discrimination in the past against minority
>groups (which I am quite prepared to believe), should a lower standard 
>applicant be given the job when there is a more suitable applicant who happens 
>to be of the wrong race. That is racism as well .
> 
>Howard


     There have been a lot of interesting posts on this topic, but a number of
them seem to have a distorted view of affirmative action.  While I can't
speak for every institution or even any other individual, the interpretation
that has been applied in job searches in which I have been involved is NOt
the one stated above (i.e.  we will settle for someone of lower quality if
they are from an underrepresented group).  Rather, affirmative action means 
that extra efforts will be made to ensure that qualified women and minority
applicants apply for the position so that we have a large pool of all
representations to evaluate.  So, we may make a special effort to contact
minority institutions to make them aware of our position.  Or, we may 
use personal contacts to identify female or minority candidates and 
encourage them to apply.  

     A previous poster also touched on a very important point:  the concept
of "the best person" is not a valid one since there are dozens of 
parameters that define best.  Let me try to give an example from my own
field of chemistry.  When we advertise a position, it is  genereally more
specific than just chemistry.  So, the "best" person may be a physical
chemist (in terms of intellect, letters of recommendation, research
ideas, lecturing ability, etc), but the department may not need someone
with that background.  Okay, that's a little extreme, so let's look at a
sub-discipline.  Last year, we had a position for an Inorganic chemist.
The question is again:  what makes the "best" person for the job?  Is
it their pedigree?  Does someone with a Ph.D. from MIT automatically rank
over someone with a Ph.D. from Ohio State?  Is it their research plan?
What about teaching ability?  And what about research interests?  
Personality?  You can see that someone could be deemed best on any 
one or number of these traits and we would come up with more than one
"best" person for the job.

     Let me get a little more specific with my example.  Suppos we have an
opening for an Inorganic chemist and the ad reads that way.  But we 
already have some folks on staff in various inorganic resarch areas.  Do
we want another organometallic chemist?  Maybe.  Or do we want someone
in a different area such as solid state chemistry?  Again, maybe.  So,
from some perspective, the "best" person may be an organometallic
chemist, but we decide we want someone with research interests that are
not currently being done by someone on staff.  In addition, the "best"
candidate from a research proposal point of view may be an absolute
disaster from a teaching point of view.  The converse may also be
true.  So, we pick someone who is a little less than "best" in both
areas to get a more valuable over-all individual.  

    I hope you see from the above how complicated the evaluation can be 
and I have only touched on a few areas that are considered.  Ultimately,
you get the idea that there is no such thing as a "best" candidate.
Back to the idea of affirmative action, the "qualities" of gender or
ethnic background can indeed be a valid consideration.  Let's take the
case of gender.  Last year, my department had more female senior
chemistry majors than male ( 34 vs 18)  and our graduate program has
a large percentage of female students (38 out of 130 total).  The concept
that female faculty members will play an important role in mentoring
these students to their full potential is a valid one in my opinion.

    Will we accept a "poor" candidate just because they are female?
I guess I have the same problem concerning "poor" as I do with "best",
but the answer is no.  But, I am trying to say that this is just one
more of the factors that enter into the very complicated equation
and it is no less valid than any of the others.

Joseph S. Merola
Department of Chemistry
Virginia Tech (aka VPI&SU)

Newsgroups: sci.research.careers