Asia InstituteWorkforce Diversity
in Higher Education
The Experiences of Asian Academics
in Australian Universities

Nana Oishi
Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 1

Contents
Acknowledgements

4

Foreword
Executive Summary
Introduction
Cultural Diversity in Australia:
An Overview
Asians in Australia:
A Demographic Overview
Asian-born Academics inAustralian Universities
The Representation andInclusion of Asian AustralianAcademics
Strategies for More Inclusion
and Equity
Conclusion: Toward
More Inclusive University
Communities for Ethnic andCultural Minorities
Appendix:
Data and Methodology
References

5
6
8
10
12
15
35

43
48

51
53

This report is embargoed until 3pm AEST 1 November
ISBN: 978-0-646-97758-4
Cover photos: Professor Rajiv Khanna at QIMR Berghofer Medical ResearchInstitute (top right), Dr. Ken Setiawan at the University of Melbourne(bottom right) and two anonymous individuals from GettyImages.
© Nana Oishi 2017
Asia Institute
The University of Melbourne
Parkville 3010, Australia

2 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 3

Acknowledgements

This research project was made possible by a grant from Mr Jason Yeap, OAM, a member of
the University of Melbourne’s Believe Campaign Board. On behalf of the Asia Institute, I would
like to express my gratitude to Mr Yeap for his generous financial support. I am also grateful to
Emeritus Professor Kwong Lee Dow, former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Melbourne, who
has provided encouragement for the study, valuable comments on the draft and a foreword forthe final report. I thank Professor Pookong Kee, Director of the Asia Institute, for giving me theopportunity to work on this project and offering advice at different stages. My thanks are also due
to Professor Yusaku Horiuchi at Dartmouth College, who offered advice on data analyses, andEmeritus Professor Yoshio Sugimoto at La Trobe University, who provided valuable comments on
the earlier version of this manuscript. I gratefully acknowledge the advice and support of the lateProfessor Don Nakanishi, former Director of the Center for Asian American Studies, University ofCalifornia Los Angeles.
I also wish to thank the two individuals who provided assistance throughout the project:
Dr Mayuko Itoh assisted me with the survey and data compilations; and Ms Heather Kelly provided
excellent professional editorial assistance.
Lastly, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to all the survey respondents andinterviewees for participating in this research. This study would never have been possible without
their inputs and insights.
I would like to dedicate this report to all minority academics and aspiring postgraduate students
with minority backgrounds. It is my sincere hope that this research will help Australian universities
create a more inclusive work environment for all.

November 2017

Associate Professor Nana Oishi
Asia Institute
The University of Melbourne

4 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Foreword
Emeritus Professor Kwong Lee Dow, AO

As a long-standing Australian academic of Asian ancestry,
I am particularly pleased to commend this substantial
pioneering study of the experiences of Asian academics inAustralian universities.
Since the 1970s, Australian universities have increasingly
proclaimed a commitment to continuing to build genderequality and cultural diversity within their communities ofstudents and staff. Considerable progress has been achievedon some fronts. Among students, gender balance is now
demonstrable at postgraduate as well as undergraduatelevels in most fields of study, and comparable female staff
representation exists in the junior and middle ranks ofboth academic and professional appointments. Cultural
diversity has increased in the student body due both to thelarger numbers and proportions of international students
and to the increases in Australian students whose parents
were born overseas. There has always been a significant
proportion of UK-born academics in Australian universities,
and there is now a smaller but significant staff component ofNorth American background.
But what is the situation for Asian academics in Australian
universities? Are they equitably represented, and do theyexert an appropriate influence?
These are timely questions for three specific reasons.
First, our population now has a substantial proportionof Asian-born immigrants. Second, in recent years thehighest levels of migrants have come from China andIndia, with the Philippines, Pakistan, Vietnam, Nepal
and Malaysia also within the top 10 source countries.
Third, especially important for universities, the student
body contains very large numbers who are born andschooled in Asian countries as well as proportionately
high numbers of Australians whose parents and/or
grandparents come from Asian countries.
Leading universities in the UK and the USA have recently
made explicit commitments to promoting cultural andethnic diversity among their academic staff, and now
collect data that is publicly available in order to monitor
the extent of the achievement of this policy objective.
By comparison, the collection of parallel Australian datais shown to be patchy and the prominence given to any
similar commitment is muted.
This first study of the issues has involved collation of Census
data alongside unpublished statistics made available by

the Australian Department of Education and Training fromwhat has been collected and reported from the individual
universities. A survey of Asian Australian academics has
been undertaken, though the identification of precisely whoconstitute “Asian Australian academics” has not proved to
be straightforward, given data limitations. From the online
survey, a small group was identified for in-depth face-toface interviews. Not all universities have been involved – thestudy encompassed the Group of Eight across Australia andall the universities in Victoria.
The findings from this work have been carefully reported
to ensure that readers understand the data limitations,and the qualifications around the conclusions have beenclearly stated. While some findings and recommendations
for policy are predictable in that they follow parallel workon other aspects for promoting diversity and inclusion,
there is much of considerable interest and a sense ofurgency in addressing many issues the study has raised.
There is, for example, evidence of “subtle racism, ethnic
stereotyping and limited social inclusion”, where one (of anumber of) quoted respondents “feels I am non-existent inmeetings – people don’t even see my face or talk to me”, andthe difficulty of breaking into social and cultural networks ishighlighted especially for some professional fields.
That fewer Asian academics reach more senior levelsof appointment may not surprise overall. There areperceptions among the Asian academic community that
representation on committees and groups of influence is
low at the department level, at the faculty level, and evenmore at the level of institution-wide management.
A number of strategies are suggested: developing andpromulgating institution-wide policies, drawing issues tothe attention of recruitment and promotion committees,
being more transparent in selecting people for particularroles, including more open advertisement of internal
opportunities, and providing mentoring and support
programs and leadership training.
As I think of the situation in the committees, boards andstatutory bodies of influence at senior institutional levels,
for me the most relevant of all suggestions is to increaseawareness among our leaders of the strong tendency we
all have to make appointments of people who are most
like ourselves. For Asians in Australia, that remains thestumbling block at the top.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 5

Executive Summary

Asian Australians are the fastest growing minority groupin Australia, constituting 14.4% of the population in 2016
(ABS 2017). Asian Australian academics have been making
significant contributions to the internationalisation ofAustralian higher education and research developments.
Despite their major roles, however, research on theseacademics has been relatively scarce.
This study aimed to provide an overview of therepresentation and experiences of Asian Australianacademics who consist of (1) Asian-born academics and(2) Australian-born academics with Asian ancestry. With
the Australian Censuses, the unpublished national datafrom the Department of Education and Training, thesurvey data and in-depth interviews, the broad pictureof this emerging group was captured. The major findings
were the following.

Overall Trends
1. Asian-born academics made up 15.4% of teaching andresearch staff at Australian universities in 2015, whichis comparable to their overall education attainment,
as they comprise 16.8% of PhD holders in Australia.
Their overall share of positions in Australian universities
increased by 5.4% between 2005 and 2015. The mostcommon countries of birth were China (32.1%), India(15.8%), Malaysia (8.5%) and Sri Lanka (6.3%).
2. The gender gap in academic employment has been
more pronounced for Asian-born academics over thelast 10 years. The proportion of Asian-born female
academics increased only by 2.3% compared with a
3.1% increase of their male counterparts. This was instark contrast with Australian-born academics, whose
gender gap was not only closed but reversed in 2014.
3. The vast majority of Asian Australian academics(90.4%) felt that they were making uniquecontributions to Australian higher education becauseof their cultural assets. Over three-quarters of them
(76.1%) have collaborated with scholars in Asian
countries; 66.3% have worked on joint research
projects; and 34.6% have assisted in exchange
programs with their countries of origin.

6 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Representation in Universities
1. Asian-born academics were highly represented inIT (34.4%), Engineering (33.3%) and Management
and Commerce (26.6%). They were severely underrepresented in Creative Arts (5.3%) and Education (5.3%).
2. Female Asian-born academics occupied only 1.8%of academic staff positions in Agricultural andEnvironmental Studies and 2.9% in Education. They
were most highly represented in Management andCommerce, but their share was still 11.4%. The gender
gap was the widest in Engineering (male 28.5% vsfemale 4.8%) and IT (male 25.1% vs female 9.4%).
3. While Asian-born academics were well represented inlower ranks of academic positions, they were severely
under-represented in the most senior management
positions in Australian universities. Only 3.4% of
Deputy Vice-Chancellors were Asian-born in 2015.
Currently, there is no Asian-born Vice-Chancellor at
any Australian university. This was in stark contrast
to the fact that other overseas-born academics hadmuch higher representation (33% in Deputy ViceChancellors and 25% in Vice-Chancellors). The data
indicate that the under-representation of Asian-bornacademics in senior ranks was not due to a pipeline
problem.
4. The majority of Asian Australians (63.0%) believedthat they were not appropriately represented in
the university management. Several senior Asian
Australian academics stated that they held little hopeof advancing to management and/or the Chancellery
positions because of the existing procedural
constraints and institutional cultures.

Limited Inclusion of Asian Australian Academics
in the Workplace
1. The majority (54.3%) of Asian Australian academics
felt their ethnic and cultural background was adisadvantage in their workplace. Similarly, 58.6%
of Asian-born academics felt that their immigrantbackground was a disadvantage.
2. More Asian female academics felt disadvantaged: 62.1%of them stated that their ethnic and cultural background
was a disadvantage in their workplace, compared with
49.4% of Asian male academics. Furthermore, 67.9%
of Asian-born female academics felt their immigrantbackground worked to their disadvantage, comparedwith 52.7% of their male counterparts. The percentageof those who indicated that their immigrant backgroundhad “no impact” was much higher among males (45.1%)
than females (27.5%).
3. Among those who perceived their background as
a disadvantage, 42.0% experienced racism, ethnic
stereotyping and/or marginalisation. Furthermore,
35.2% felt a disadvantage in getting promotion,
leadership positions and/or general recognition.
Female respondents reported their disadvantage wasdue to their gender and minority status.

Future Strategies for More Inclusion and Equity
1. To develop a more inclusive workplace, more efforts
need to be made at the institutional levels. Cultural
sensitivity training would be necessary for all thestaff, particularly for those in management positions.
The training materials should be carefully reviewed,
since some contents of the existing training materials
were found problematic. The comments and inputs
from minority academics should be reflected in thecontent. Leadership training programs could also help
minority academics develop more aspirations in theirworkplace.

3. To achieve better representation and inclusion at
all ranks in universities, recruitment and promotion
committees should be diversified and the processes
should be more transparent. Ensuring diversity andinclusion in all ranks should be codified in university
policies. Just as the world’s leading universities are
doing, Australian universities could also monitor
their campus diversity data and the progress on aregular basis.
“Diversity and inclusion” have emerged as the key agenda
across the world because studies have suggested thatdiversity alone might not necessarily yield positive
outcomes unless inclusive environment is provided.
To fully maximise its potential, many organisations,
including the world’s leading universities and academic
associations, have begun to promote diversity in tandemwith inclusion policies and programs, while ensuring
appropriate representation of minorities.
This research suggests that levelling the playing field
through institutional reforms – by diversifying recruitment
and promotion committees, addressing ethnic diversity inhuman resources policies, improving mentoring programs
and increasing the transparency of hiring and selection
processes – could greatly improve the representationof academics with diverse backgrounds. Nurturing an
inclusive community would also help build a stronger
and more cohesive institution, as all members could feelincluded and thus more easily develop a stronger sense of
belonging.

2. Senior academics should be encouraged to take theinitiative in creating a more inclusive and welcoming
workplace environment. Inviting newly appointed
minority academics to informal gatherings or academic
events could be the first step. University-wide supportand mentoring programs would also be necessary tobetter integrate minority staff in the campus as a whole.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 7

Introduction

Background: Diversity and Inclusion“Diversity and inclusion” have emerged as the major key
agenda for many organisations across the world (Ferdman
and Deane 2014). While diversity has already beencelebrated for many years as a source of innovation andsocio-economic benefits, more studies have suggested
that it might not necessarily yield positive outcomes
unless inclusive environment is provided. To fully
maximise its potential, many organisations have begun
to promote diversity in tandem with inclusion policies
and programs. This trend has been particularly salientin the field of higher education, where the student bodyhas become increasingly diverse. Numerous studies havebeen conducted on student diversity and inclusion for thelast decade (Basit and Tomlinson 2012; Carroll and Ryan
2007; Ramburuth and McCormick 2001; Milem 2003).
In recent years, more focus of diversity research has
been extended to faculty. Faculty diversity has beenrecognised as a source of innovation in research. One
large-scale study based on the National Academy of
Sciences rankings data in the United States showed that
more faculty diversity led to higher program rankings(Henderson and Herring 2013). Faculty diversity also
fulfils an important mission of preparing students
for an increasingly diverse workplace in the nationaland global labour market. Partly in relation to thesefactors, internationalisation of faculty has generated
one of the indicators that constitute some of the major
world university ranking systems, such as Times Higher
Education and QS.
Furthermore, students have been paying much more
attention to faculty diversity as part of their concerns
for equity and equality. In the United States, where
universities have been experiencing the biggest upsurge
in student activism since the 1960s, faculty diversity istheir primary concern and was the most widely shareddemand that student unions submitted to the university
management in 2015 (ACE 2016).
A broader academic community also began to recognise
the importance of faculty diversity and inclusion. The
US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, andMedicine, for instance, established the committee on theunder-representation of minorities and the expansion

8 Workforce Diversity in Higher Educationof the science and engineering workforce pipeline, andpublished its report in 2011 (NASEM 2011). In 2016, theUnited Kingdom’s Royal Academy of Engineering andScience Council launched a major initiative to improvediversity and inclusion – to assess and monitor the
progress of increasing the representation of women andethnic groups (RAE 2016).

Project Overview
To respond to the growing need for better understandingof diversity and inclusion in academia, this study will
examine the representation and workplace experiences ofacademics of minority backgrounds by focusing on Asian
Australian academics (AAAs) in Australian universities. In
this study, “Asian Australian academics” refers to a broadgroup including Asian-born immigrants, Australian-born
individuals with Asian ancestry (the second, third orlater generations) and those who have mixed roots but
identified themselves as at least partly Asian.
Asian Australians are the fastest growing minority groupin Australia, constituting 14.4% of the population (ABS2017). Particularly since the Australian government has
encouraged and promoted closer institutional linkages
with universities in Asia, AAAs have been making major
contributions to the internationalisation of Australianhigher education and research developments. Despite
their major roles, research on AAAs has been relatively
scarce. Existing diversity research in Australian
universities has been primarily on women and students(Yu 2013; Arkoudis et al. 2012; Sawir et al. 2015).
Some Australian scholars have begun to shed light on
the situation of international academics in recent years,
although mostly through small-scale studies (Greenand Myatt 2011; Maadad and Tight 2014; Mason and
Rawlings-Sanaei 2014). Green and Myatt (2011) foundthat the value of international academic staff has notbeen fully recognised within their work units or thewider university. Balasooriya et al. (2014) highlighted thesuccess of international academic staff, but also identified
the challenges that they faced, such as taking up lower
positions and going through psychological adjustment.
They pointed out several migration-related stressorsthat impinged upon their ability to adapt to their new
institutional environment. Maadad (2014) argued thatlack of cultural awareness among some non-English
speaking background academics, due in part to nothaving a cultural training program in place, created abarrier between international academics and their local
colleagues. While these studies are valuable contributions
to our understanding of international academics, thevast majority of them are small-scale studies and also do
not address the issues of representation. This study will
fill the gap in research on international and cultural andlinguistic minority academics in Australia.

Project Objectives
This project aims to provide an overview of therepresentation and experiences of academics with Asianbackgrounds in Australian universities. More specifically,it endeavours to:
1. analyse the overall demographic and sectoral
representations of AAAs;
2. examine the experiences of AAAs and theirrepresentations in universities;
3. promote an inclusive environment where academicsof ethnically and culturally diverse backgrounds
could realise their full potentials and make further
contributions to Australian higher education, andsociety more broadly.

Data and Methodology
This study adopted a mixed-methods approach, involving
the analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data. Whilequantitative data enable us to examine broad demographic
trends and representations at the macro level, qualitative
data are better suited in highlighting experiences andperspectives of AAAs at the individual or group level.
The quantitative part of the study analysed information
from: (1) the Australian Censuses; (2) unpublishedstatistics requested from the federal Department of
Education and Training (DET) (2005–2015 for staff data,
1989–2015 for student data); and (3) results from an online
survey designed for and sent out to AAAs working inGroup of Eight (Go8 hereafter) universities as well as six
universities in Victoria.
When Census and DET data were analysed, the Standard
Australian Classification of Countries was used for thedefinition of origin countries and ancestries. The online
survey focused on a narrower set of Asian countries due tothe resource constraints. The category “Asia” in the online
survey consisted of countries Afghanistan, Bangladesh,
Bhutan, Brunei, Cambodia, China (including Taiwan, Hong
Kong and Macau), India, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Malaysia,
Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines,
Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Viet Nam.

The online survey involved sending email invitations
to 2,812 potential respondents, who were identified
by examining staff profiles publicly available on thewebsites of Go8 universities and six other universities
located in Victoria. Academics with Asian names andAsia-related information in their profiles were presumed
to be of Asian background and included in the survey.Q
The questionnaire contained a screening question
at the beginning to exclude academics who did not
identify themselves as of Asian background. In total, 418
responses were received.
It should be noted that the survey respondents do notconstitute a representative sample of all academics
with Asian backgrounds in Australian universities.
Because it was clear to respondents at the outset thatthe survey would be used to examine workforce diversity
and representation, it is probable that academics who
responded were likely to have been negatively affectedby workplace diversity issues, or were more concerned
about such issues. As there is currently no comprehensive
national dataset on ethnic minority academics, theresults of this survey represent a meaningful step forwardin this regard.
Responses to the open-ended questions in the survey
offer a rich source of qualitative or experiential
information. Additionally, the study included 42 indepth interviews with AAAs, using a semi-structured
questionnaire. The interviewees were from 11 national
backgrounds working across a diverse range of
disciplines, including Humanities, Social Sciences, Natural
Science, Medicine, Information Science, Engineering,Law, Management, Accounting and Design. More detailed
information on data and methodology is discussed in
the Appendix.

The Structure of the Report
This report consists of seven sections. The next two
sections will provide a brief history of Asian immigration
to Australia and a demographic overview of Asian
immigrants, as well as Australian-born Asians. Their
population size, countries of origin and educational
attainment will be presented. The fourth and fifth
sections will examine the representation of Asian
Australians in academia at the national level and theirown perceptions and actual experiences in Australian
universities. The concluding sections will discuss various
measures that could be taken to tackle the challenges
that AAAs and other ethnic minority academics are facing.
Drawing on the initiatives taken by the world’s leading
universities, it will present some possible strategies that
Australian universities could adopt to enhance further
diversity and inclusion.

Q Please see Appendix for the detailed explanations of the ways in which potential respondents were identified.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 9

Cultural Diversity in Australia:
An Overview

Historical Overview of Immigration in Australia
Australia is one of the world’s largest immigrant countries– over 7.5 million settlers have arrived since 1945 (DIBP
2016). In 2015, its immigrant population constituted
28.0% of the national total, a proportion that surpasses
those of other major immigrant countries such as theUnited States (13.5%), Canada (20.3%) and New Zealand(24.5%) (OECD 2017). Australia is now the third-largest
immigration country in the OECD after Luxembourg(45.9%) and Switzerland (29.1%).
Australia has relied on immigrants as a source of
population and workforce growth since the lateeighteenth century (Teicher, Shah and Griffin 2002). The
scale and pattern of immigration, however, have variedin accordance with the nation’s political and economic
priorities. The planned, large-scale, national migration
program that commenced after World War II, for instance,
initially favoured settlers from Britain, followed bymigrants from Continental Europe. This race-based
selection policy was, however, relaxed somewhat fromthe late 1960s and was eventually abolished in 1973
(Jayasuriya and Kee 1999).
Accordingly, the number of immigrants from nonEuropean countries, particularly from Asia, increased
steadily, with occasional fluctuations, between the late1960s and the late 1990s. By the mid-1980s, migrants
from Asian countries had begun to outnumber thosefrom European countries, including the United Kingdom,
Australia’s traditional source of immigration (DIBP 2016).
Since the late 1980s, Australia’s immigration programs
have focused on recruiting immigrants via the skilledmigration schemes in a bid to strengthen a skilled labour
force and enhance the nation’s productivity (Hugo 2014a).
A significant portion of them are from Asian countries
and arrived in the last two decades. Recently, the annual
intake of Asian immigrants has grown to more than triplethat of European immigrants in certain years (DIBP 2017).
In an era of globalisation in which goods, information,
financial resources and people have become increasingly
mobile beyond national borders, immigration programs
have become significant tools in managing and planning
the nation’s socio-economic future. They have also cometo be viewed as important vehicles for furthering the

10 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

nation’s foreign policy aims. The recent growth of Asian
immigrants, for instance, reflects in part Australia’s
political aspiration to build close connections with Asia.
Such aspirations are perhaps most clearly articulated
in the Commonwealth Government’s 2012 White Paper,
Australia in the Asian Century.

The Asian Century
In Australia in the Asian Century, the recent growth in
the Asian Australian population was seen as providing
Australia with a unique opportunity to unlock economic
and social rewards in the most dynamic region in theworld. Among the White Paper’s key recommendations
was the fostering of Asia-related capabilities, including
Asian language skills and cultural knowledge.
It further recommended that the top 200 Australian Stock
Exchange registered companies aim to ensure that a thirdof their board members have “deep experience in andknowledge of Asia” and that the Australian Public Service
ensure that a third of its workers were similarly equippedwith Asia-related experience (Henry et al. 2012: 18).
In relation to the Australian higher education sector,
the White Paper made recommendations to increase
Australian students’ interest in Asian studies, including
languages; increase Australian universities’ presencein Asia; and develop institutional links across countries
in the region (Henri et al. 2012: 16). By highlighting thesignificant role that Australia’s higher education sector
has played and will play in fostering Asian Australianrelations, the White Paper offered a reminder of the
myriad ways in which Asian academics are vital toAustralia’s economic and political aspirations in Asia.
The importance of people-to-people links between
Australia and its dynamic Asian neighbours, in part forgedby the nation’s growing Asian Australian communities,
is further highlighted in major reports produced by
the Australian Council of Learned Academies (ACOLA).
Noting the steep rise in expenditure on research anddevelopment and the output of scientific publicationsin the Asia Pacific region, the report Smart Engagementwith Asia: Leveraging Language, Research and Culture(ACOLA 2015) highlighted the value of Asian cultural andlinguistic resources in helping Australia to build stronger

translational research links and diaspora diplomacy in theregion. Its second report, Australia’s Diaspora Advantage:
Realising the Potential for Building Transnational BusinessNetworks with Asia (ACOLA 2016), examined Australia’s
growing Asian diaspora populations, particularly the
Chinese and Indian. It highlighted the role of Asian
diasporas in fostering the new economy, innovation,enterprise and transitional business activities.

Cultural Diversity in Australian Universities:
An Overview
The Australian higher education sector has become
highly diversified in the country origins of its academic
staff in the last few decades. In 2015, 34,997 academic
staff worked for Australian universities under full-time
contracts, approximately 45% of whom were bornoverseas (DET 2016). This figure was significantly higher
than the percentage of overseas-born individuals in the
total population (26.8%) (OECD 2013). While academics
and researchers have traditionally been very mobile,the recent global trend of seeking brainpower beyond
national borders has further boosted academic mobility(Hugo 2014b).
In Australia, universities have historically relied heavily oninternational academics to fulfil their workforce needs. In the
1960s and 1970s, for instance, when the Australian university
sector underwent considerable expansion, a large number ofyoung academics were employed from overseas, particularly
from the United Kingdom (Hugo 2008; 2014b). The number ofoverseas-born academics working at Australian universities
has continued to grow, as has Australia’s focus on recruiting
skilled migrants.

However, despite greater political recognition of the roleof the Australian higher education sector in furthering
national aims to develop closer relationships with Asia,
researchers have shown a lack of interest in the roleof Asian academics in Australian universities. While
the workplace experiences of academics have been
investigated (Coates et al. 2009), their cultural or ethnic
backgrounds, and the ways in which these could impact
on their workplace experiences, have rarely been
examined. Although research on immigrant academics,
including those from Asia, has begun to emerge in recent
years, the scope of most of these studies has been limited
to the experiences of academics at a single university(Maadad and Tight 2014; Mason and Rawlings-Sanaei2014). Overall, there has been little research on culturaland linguistic diversity within the higher education
workforce at both the national and international levels.
There are, however, signs of change, as demonstrated
by the release of the recent ACOLA reports cited earlier.
The 2015 report, Smart Engagement with Asia: Leveraging
Language, Research and Culture, in particular, signifies
the importance of conducting empirical research into
the experiences and contributions of Asian academics
in Australia. Such research promises to benefit not only
the Australian higher education sector, but also ourincreasingly diverse Australian society.

Asian countries, especially India and China, had alreadyestablished themselves as important source nations ofacademics for Australian universities by the 1980s (Hugo
2010; Baker, Sloan and Robertson 1993). Nonetheless,between 2005 and 2015 the proportion of academics
born in Asia among full-time academics in Australian
universities grew substantially, from 10% to 15.4% (DET2016). Furthermore, the proportion of these academics who
had undertaken their doctoral training in Australia increased
from 39.8% in 2005 to 50.8% in 2015 (DET 2016).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 11

Asians in Australia:
A Demographic Overview

According to the 2016 Census (ABS 2017), approximately
3.4 million individuals identified themselves as having atleast one Asian ancestry – this represents approximately
14.4% of the total population of Australian residents(Figure 3.1). Among these individuals are second-, thirdand fourth-generation Asian Australians. The 2016 Census
also revealed that the most common Asian backgrounds
listed by individuals in this category were Chinese, Indian,
Vietnamese and Filipino. Approximately one third of themwere born in Australia (ABS 2017).

In addition to the growing number of Australian residents
with Asian ancestry, the number of first-generation
immigrants from Asian countries has also been steadily
increasing from 856,144 to 2,445,232 between 1991 and 2016
(ABS 2017). In 2016, Australian residents who were born in
Asian countries constituted 11.2% of the total populationin that year. Their percentage share of the population
almost tripled between 1991 and 2016 (Figure 3.2). These
demographic trends indicate that Asia is the location ofimportant ethnic and cultural roots for local-born residents,
as well as a major source of immigrants in Australia.

Figure 3.1: Australian residents by ancestry, 2016 W\
Figure 3.1
60%

EuropeOceania

55.6%

Asia

50%

North Africa & Middle East
Americas40%

Sub-Saharan Africa
37.0%

30%

20%

14.4%
10%

2.8%

1.1%

1.1%

0%

Note: Due to multiple ancestries, the total percentages exceed 100%. Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics 2016.
W Oceanians include categories such as “Australian”, “New Zealander”, “Melanesian and Papuan”, “Micronesian” and “Polynesian”. The sub-category “Australian”

includes “Australian Aboriginal”, “Australian South Sea Islander”, “Torres Strait Islander”, “Australian” and “Australian peoples”.

12 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

One of the most notable demographic characteristicsof the overseas-born population is its high level of
educational attainment. While the 2016 Census dataon education levels were not available at the time ofwriting this report, the 2011 Census data show thatthe educational levels of those born outside Australia,
especially in the Asian region, were significantly higher
than those of the local-born population. Some 24.3% ofAsian-born and 13.2% of other overseas-born populations
were Bachelor’s degree holders, while less than 10% ofAustralian-born residents had completed that level of
education (Figure 3.3).E

Figure 3.3 reveals that a significant proportion of theimmigrant population had completed some form of
postgraduate education. The 2011 Census data showthat the percentage of Asian-born residents who have a
Master’s degree (9.2%) was particularly notable in 2011
– the comparable percentages for the non-Asian
overseas-born and Australian-born populations were3.3% and 1.4% respectively. Doctoral degree holders
comprised 1.1% of the Asian-born and other overseasborn populations, higher than the comparable figure for
their Australian-born counterparts (0.4%).
The Asian-born population occupies significant shares
among tertiary degree holders: 18.2% of Bachelor’s,
32.4% of Master’s, and 16.8% of Doctoral degree holders
in Australia were born in Asia (Figure 3.4). This is quite
high, considering that they comprise only 8.6% of the total
population. The human resource benefit of Australia’s
immigration program is reflected in these outcomes.

The high levels of educational achievement observed in
the immigrant population stem in part from Australia’s
strong focus on taking in highly skilled immigrants inorder to meet the nation’s workforce demands, as manyof these jobs increasingly call for individuals with atleast one Bachelor’s degree (Hugo 2014b). Furthermore,
the Asian region has been the major source of skilled
immigrants in Australia in recent years (DIBP 2016).

Figure 3.2: Australian residents by birth region, 1991-2016
Figure 3.2
100%

90%

3.8%

4.1%

4.6%

6.5%

8.6%

19.0%

18.7%

18.5%

17.3%

17.4%

11.2%

Australian-born
Overseas-born (non-Asia)

17.1%

Asian-born

80%

70%

77.2%

77.2%

76.9%

76.2%

74.0%

1991

1996

2001

2006

2011

71.7%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

2016

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1992; 1997; 2002; 2007; 2012, 2017
E It should be noted that the population of “Australian residents” is defined in the Census by “place of usual residence” and thus includes those with temporary

residential visas such as international students.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 13

Figure 3.3: Levels of educational attainment by birthplace group, 2011
25%

24.3%

Figure 3.3
Bachelor’s degree
Master’s degree
Doctoral degree

20%

15%
13.2%

10%

10.9%

9.5%
9.2%

5%
3.3%

1.4%

2.3%
1.1%

1.1%

0.4%

0%

Australian-born

Overseas-born(non-Asia)

Asian-born

0.6%

Total Australian
Population

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012.

Figure 3.4: Composition of tertiary degree holders by birth region, 2011
Figure 3.4
100%

18.2%

32.4%

16.8%

Australian-born
Overseas-born (non-Asia)

90%

Asian-born
80%

32.5%

20.2%

70%
23.8%
60%

61.6%

50%

50.7%
43.7%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Bachelor’s Degree

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012.

14 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Master’s Degree

Doctoral Degree

Asian-born Academics inAustralian Universities
R

Overall Trends and Characteristics
The presence of Asian-born academics (hereinafter ABAs)
in Australia has become significant in the last 10 years.
Indeed, their numbers more than doubled from 2,228 to
5,396 between 2005 and 2015 (Figure 4.1). Nonetheless,while the rate at which the ABA population has increased
is remarkable, their numerical gain (3,168) was small
compared with increases in the numbers of Australianborn (5,418) and other overseas-born academics (4,213) inAustralia during the same period.
Of all ABAs, academics from mainland China constitutethe largest group (32.1%), and their number almost tripledfrom 613 in 2005 to 1,733 in 2015 (see Figures 4.2 and 4.3).
Numerically, the second-largest group was those from

India (15.8%) and their number also more than doubled
between 2005 and 2015. In 2015, other major places oforigin were Malaysia (8.5%), Sri Lanka (6.3%), Hong Kong
SAR (5.2%) and Singapore (4.6%).
While ABAs were spread across different disciplines,
84% were found in five academic fields (Figure 4.4).
These fields were Management and Commerce (20.7%),
Engineering (19.5%), Health (17.2%), Society and Culture(15.5%), and Natural and Physical Science (11.1%).
Only a small percentage of ABAs were working in thefields of Agricultural and Environmental Studies (0.7%),
Architecture and Building (1.9%), Education (2.6%),
Creative Arts (3.0%) and Information Technology (7.9%).

Figure 4.1: Overall trends of academics in Australia by region of birth, 2005–2015
20,00019,164

Figure 4.1
Australian-born
Overseas-born (non-Asia)

18,000Asian-born
16,00014,00013,746

12,00010,437
10,000

8000
6,224
5,396

6000

4000
2,228
2000

0%

2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (compiled from unpublished data).
R As we noted earlier, the Department of Education and Training does not collect ancestry-based data. While it collects data on languages spoken at home, almost

50% of the data for each year consisted of the category “unknown”, which prevented a sound analysis on linguistic diversity. Hence, no analysis was made ofAustralian-born academics with Asian ancestry in this section. All the data in this section refer to Asian-born academics only. The analyses in the later sections
based on the survey will include Australian-born academics with Asian ancestry.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 15

Figure 4.2: Asian-born academics by place of birth, 2015
Figure 4.2

Other
12.5%

South Korea
3.0%
Indonesia
3.3%

China
32.1%

Bangladesh
4.2%
Vietnam
4.5%
Singapore
4.6%

Hong Kong
5.2%

India
15.8%

Sri Lanka
6.3%
Malaysia
8.5%

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (compiled from unpublished data).

Figure 4.3: Asian-born academics by place of birth, 2005 and 2015
Figure 4.3
613

China

1,733

2005
2015

361

India

852
236

Malaysia457
165

Hong Kong

282
153

Sri Lanka

340
119

Singapore

247
101
140

Japan

94

Vietnam241
67

Indonesia

179
63

Bangladesh

226
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

16

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

1400

1600

1800

Regardless of the disciplines, academics with Asianbackgrounds have been actively engaged in linking
Australian higher education institutions more closely
to Asia. My survey data revealed that the vast majorityof them (90.4%) felt that they were making uniquecontributions to Australian higher education becauseof their cultural assets. More than three-quarters ofthem (76.1%) have collaborated with scholars in Asian
countries; 66.3% have worked on joint research projects;
49.0% have been visiting fellows in Asian universities; and34.6% have assisted in exchange programs with Asianuniversities. Even second-generation Asian academics
have been engaged in teaching and research activities
in their heritage countries. Clearly, Asian academics aremaking tangible contributions to internationalisation anddiversity of Australian higher education.

The Representation of Asian-born
Academics in Australian Universities
Overall, ABAs are relatively well represented in termsof numbers. They comprised 15.4% of the total number(headcount) of academics in Australian universities in 2015
(Figure 4.5). According to the 2011 Census, ABAs constituted
16.8% of all PhD holders in Australia. Compared withthis figure, their share within the academic workforce

seems slightly lower. Overall, however, the share of
ABAs among academics in Australia has increased by
5.4% between 2005 and 2015 (Figure 4.6). The declineof percentage among Australian-born academics partly
reflects the percentage decline of Australian-born PhD
student enrolment from 82.9% in 2005 to 68.3% in 2015
(DET 2016), and is also due to the retirement of Australianborn academics. Hugo predicted in 2006 that the ageing
effect will necessitate Australian universities to take on amajor recruitment task over the coming years, including
recruiting of staff from overseas as well as attracting highquality postgraduates and retaining them, particularly inthe fields of science (Hugo 2006).
It is noteworthy that the overall gender gap has widened
for ABAs for the last 10 years (Figure 4.6). The share offemale ABAs increased only by 2.3% compared withmale ABAs (3.1%). The gender gap has increased by 0.8%
between 2005 and 2015. In contrast, the proportion ofAustralian-born female academics now exceeds that ofAustralian-born male academics (27.9% vs 26.8%). Evenamong overseas-born (non-Asian) academics, the gender
gap has been gradually closed from 7% in 2005 to 5.6%
in 2015. It is not clear why ABAs are the only group that isstill experiencing a widening gender gap. This issue will be
examined under my sub-project in the coming months.

Figure 4.4: Asian-born academics by disciplines, 2015
Architecture & Building - 1.9%
Education - 2.6%

Agriculture &Env. Studies - 0.7%

Figure 4.4

Creative Arts - 3.0%

Information
Technology
7.9%Management & Commerce
20.7%

Natural & Physical Sciences
11.1%

Engineering
19.5%
Society & Culture
15.5%

Health17.2%

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).
T This DET data excludes research-only staff and those who were “uncategorised”.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 17

Figure 4.5: Academics in Australia by region of birth, 2015
Figure 4.5

Asian-born
15.4%

Australian-born
54.8%

Overseas-born (non-Asia)
29.8%

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (compiled from unpublished data).

Figure 4.6: Proportion of academics at Australian universities by birthplace and gender
Figure 4.640%
Australian-born male

35%

Australian-born female

34.7%

Overseas-born maleOverseas-born female

30%
27.3%
25%

27.9%

Asia-born male

26.8%

Asia-born female

20%
17.5%

17.7%

15%
12.1%
10.5%
10%
9.8%

6.7%
5%

5.7%
3.4%

0%

2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (compiled from unpublished data).

18

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Disciplinary Differences
While ABAs are well represented in terms of their overall
number in comparison to their share among PhD holders,
they are not necessarily well represented across all fields(Figure 4.7). While ABAs have a very strong presence inthe fields of Information Technology (34.4%), Engineering(33.3%) and Management and Commerce (26.6%),
they are under-represented in all other fields. ABAs are
particularly under-represented in the fields of Agriculturaland Environmental Studies (5.6%), Creative Arts (5.3%)
and Education (5.3%). It is surprising that ABAs had sucha small presence even in the field of Education where
cultural diversity is promoted and advocated.

There were some notable gender differences in ABAs’
representation across disciplines. The proportion of
female ABAs slightly outweighed that of male ABAs onlyin Education and Creative Arts, while still being at thelevel of 2.9%. In all other fields, male ABAs outnumbered
female ABAs. The fields of Engineering and Information
Technology (IT) particularly showed wide gaps in theirlevels of gender representation. The gender gap inEngineering was as wide as 23.7%: female ABAs madeup only 4.8% of academics compared with male ABAs
(28.5%). The field of IT also had a gender gap of 15.7%(25.1% male ABAs vs 9.4% female ABAs). In some fields,
the gender gap has been gradually closed (Agriculture
and Environmental Studies, Architecture and Building andManagement and Commerce), but in other fields, the gap
has been slightly widened (Health, Sciences and Society
and Culture).

In terms of overall trends, the representation of ABAs
improved in most fields between 2005 and 2015 (Figure4.8). However, the rate at which ABAs increased theirpresence across disciplines during this time span varied
quite significantly. Information Technology showed
the highest increase of ABAs (+13.4%), followed by
Management and Commerce (+11.7%) and Engineering(+11.0%). In other fields, the increase of ABAs was
relatively small. There was only a 1.9% increase in thenumbers of ABAs in the Creative Arts, 2.0% in Society andCulture, 3.2% in Architecture and Building and 3.5% in
Education. Agriculture and Environmental Studies was the
only field in which the percentage of ABAs declined overthe last 10 years, dropping from 8.1% to 5.6%.

Figure 4.7: The representation of academics by disciplines, 2015
Figure 4.7
IT

38.6%

Engineering

34.3%

26.8%

34.4%

32.4%

33.3%

Australian-born
Overseas-born (non-Asia)
Asian-born

Mng. & Commerce

47.1%

Arch. & Building

26.3%

53.0%

Society & Culture

33.5%

55.7%

Health

63.4%

Sciences*

26.6%

55.1%

33.8%

10.5%

26.2%

10.4%

34.5%

10.4%

62.6%

Agri & Env. Studies

Education

31.8%

71.8%

69.6%

Creative Arts
0

20

40

60

13.3%

80

5.6%

22.8%

5.3%

25.1%

5.3%
100

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data). Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding.
*Natural and Physical Sciences

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 19

Figure 4.8: The representation of Asian-born academics by gender and discipline
Agriculture and Environmental Studies

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%
8.1%
6.8%

5.6%

5%

3.8%
1.3%
0%

1.8%
2005

2010

2015

Architecture and Building

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

13.3%
10.1%
7.9%

7.3%

5.3%
5%
2.8%
0%

2005

2010

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

20

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

2015

Figure 4.8: The representation of Asian-born academics by gender and discipline (cont.)
Creative Arts

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5.3%

5%
3.4%
2.0%
1.5%
0%
2005

2.9%
2.3%
2010

2015

Education

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%
1.8%
1.1%
0.7%
0%

5.3%
2.9%
2.4%
2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 21

Figure 4.8: The representation of Asian-born academics by gender and discipline (cont.)
Engineering

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total
33.3%
30%
28.5%
25%
22.3%

20%
20.0%

15%

10%

4.8%

5%
2.3%
0%

2005

2010

2015

HealthFigure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

25%

20%

15%

10.4%

10%

6.2%
5%
3.4%
2.8%
0%

5.7%
4.7%

2005

2010

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

22

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

2015

Figure 4.8: The representation of Asian-born academics by gender and discipline (cont.)
Information Technology

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
34.4%

Total

30%

25%
21.0%

25.1%

20%

15%

16.0%

10%
9.4%
5%
5.0%
0%

2005

2010

2015

Management and Commerce

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

26.6%

25%

20%

15%

10%

15.2%

14.9%

10.1%

11.4%

5%
4.7%

0%

2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 23

Figure 4.8: The representation of Asian-born academics by gender and discipline (cont.)
Sciences*

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

25%

20%

15%

10.4%
10%
6.1%
5%

7.0%

4.8%
3.4%

1.3%
0%

2005

2010

2015

Society and Culture

Figure 4.8

40%Asian-born male
Asian-born female

35%
Total

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

10.5%

8.5%

5.5%

4.3%

5.0%

4.2%
0%

2005

2010

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).
*

Natural and Physical Sciences

24 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education2015

Differences across Universities
The presence of ABAs also increased in most Go8
universities between 2005 and 2015 (Figure 4.9).Y ABAs
are most highly represented in the University of New
South Wales (22.5%), followed by Monash University(20.3%), and the University of Queensland (18.3%). The
University of Melbourne had the smallest percentage
of ABAs (3.8%) among its academic staff. In terms of
the overall trends, the Australian National University
experienced the most significant increase in its share of
ABAs: from 5.9% to 17.5% between 2005 and 2015. The
University of Adelaide has also seen a rapid increase of
ABA staff, particularly from 2013 to 2015. The University of
Melbourne is the only university where the share of ABAs
has declined over the last 10 years, from 7.3% to 3.8%.
It should be noted that gender disparities were quite
significant. Female ABAs constituted a smaller sharethan male ABAs at all Go8 universities. Their shares of thetotal academic population were particularly small at the
University of Melbourne (1.5%), the University of Adelaide(5.1%) and the University of Western Australia (6.3%). On
the other hand, the Australian National University and the
University of Queensland had very high rates of growth infemale ABAs between 2005 and 2015, showing an increaseof 5.3 % and 3.7% respectively. Again, the Universityof Melbourne was the only university at which share offemale ABAs has declined over the last 10 years.

Y It should be noted that the headcount data of academics working for Go8 universities by their birth regions includes a significant number of“No Information” responses.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 25

Figure 4.9: The representation of Asian-born academics at Go8 universities
Australian National University
25%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

20%

17.5%
15%

10%

10.6%
6.9%

5.9%
5%
4.3%
1.6%

0%

2005

2010

2015

Monash University

Figure 4.925%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

20%
20.3%

15%

12.8%
10%

11.4%
7.5%
7.4%

5%
4.0%

0%

2005

2010

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

26 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

2015

Figure 4.9: The representation of Asian-born academics at Go8 universities (cont.)
The University of Adelaide

Figure 4.925%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

20%

15%
14.9%

10%
8.2%

9.8%

5%
4.3%
3.9%

5.1%

0%

2005

2010

2015

The University of Melbourne

Figure 4.925%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

20%

15%

10%
7.3%

5%

0%

4.4%

3.8%

3.0%

2.3%
1.5%

2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 27

Figure 4.9: The representation of Asian-born academics at Go8 universities (cont.)
The University of New South Wales

Figure 4.925%

Asian-born male
22.5%

Asian-born female
Total

20%

15.9%
14.5%

15%

10%

10.2%
8.0%

5.7%
5%

0%

2005

2010

2015

The University of Queensland

Figure 4.925%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

20%
18.3%

15%

11.5%
10.5%
10%

6.8%
7.4%
5%

3.1%

0%

2005

2010

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

28 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

2015

Figure 4.9: The representation of Asian-born academics at Go8 universities (cont.)
The University of Sydney

Figure 4.925%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

20%

15.5%
15%

13.2%

10%

8.8%

8.4%

6.7%
4.8%
5%

0%

2005

2010

2015

The University of Western Australia

Figure 4.925%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

20%

14.5%

15%

11.3%
10%
8.2%
6.3%

7.3%
5%
4.0%

0%

2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (unpublished data).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 29

Differences across Academic Ranks
The ABAs’ levels of representation among all Australian
universities vary greatly across academic ranks (Figure4.10). ABAs are most heavily concentrated in low-level
academic ranks, particularly at Level A – 25.1% of themwere in this rank in 2015. The more senior the rank, thelower the level of representation of ABAs. They are also
severely under-represented in university management.
Only 3.4% of Deputy Vice-Chancellors are Asian born, andcurrently there is no Asian-born Vice-Chancellor at any
Australian university. The figures are in stark contrast
to those for European-born academics, who constitute
33.0% of Deputy Vice-Chancellors and 25.0% of ViceChancellors.

While the proportion of ABA females among academics
has increased, gender disparities in the representation ofmale and female ABAs working at Australian universities
have widened over the last 10 years. At Level A, the gender
gap increase was particularly salient: the percentage
difference between ABA males and females rose by
4.1% from 2.4% in 2005 to 6.5% in 2015. At Level D, thegender gap was the highest among all ranks (6.7%)
in 2015, increasing by 1.7% from 2005. At the level of
Chancelleries, the gender gap slightly declined from 2.5%
to 0.9%. However, female ABA comprised only 0.9% in all
Chancellery positions – up from 0% in 2005.

The representation of ABAs has increased in all academic
ranks between 2005 and 2015, except for Chancelleries(Figure 4.11).U The rate of increase was particularlyhigh at Level A, where it increased from 14.8% to 25.1%(+10.3%), followed by Level D (+6.3%), Level B (+5.9%),
Level C (+5.8%), and Level E (+5.4%).

Figure 4.10: Birthplace representation by academic ranks, 2015
Figure 4.10
Level A

44.7%

30.2%

25.1%

Australian-born
Overseas-born (non-Asia)

Level B

52.0%

29.7%

Asian-Born

18.3%
26.6%

Level C

53.4%

Level D

53.8%

Level E

52.6%

DeputyVice-Chancellor

33.0%

40

60

10.6%

33.0%

75.0%

Vice-Chancellor
20

13.2%

36.8%

63.6%

0

15.7%

30.9%

3.4%

25.0% 0%80

100

Source: Department of Education and Training 2016 (compiled from unpublished data).
U It should be noted that the number of “unspecified” on country of birth is large (43.3%) among academics in Chancelleries.

30

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Figure 4.11: The representation of Asian-born academics by academic rank
Level A

Figure 4.11

30%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female

25%

25.1%

Total

20%

14.8%
15%

15.8%

10%

9.3%

8.6%
6.2%
5%

0%

2005

2010

2015

Level B

Figure 4.11

30%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

25%

20%
18.3%

15%

12.4%

11.0%

10%

7.3%

7.8%
5%
4.6%

0%

2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training, 2016 (compiled from unpublished data).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 31

Figure 4.11: The representation of Asian-born academics by academic ranks (cont.)
Level C

Figure 4.11

30%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

25%

20%

15.7%

15%

10.4%

10%
9.9%
7.5%

5.3%

5%

2.4%
0%

2005

2010

2015

Level D

Figure 4.11

30%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

25%

20%

15%
13.2%
10.0%

10%
6.9%

5%

5.9%
3.3%
0.9%

0%

2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training, 2016 (compiled from unpublished data)

32

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Figure 4.11: The representation of Asian-born academics by academic ranks (cont.)
Level E

Figure 4.11

30%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

25%

20%

15%

10.6%

10%

8.4%

5.2%
5%
4.6%
2.2%

0.6%
0%

2005

2010

2015

Chancelleries

Figure 4.11

30%

Asian-born male
Asian-born female
Total

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%
2.5%

0%

2.7%
1.8%
0.9%

2.5%
0%
2005

2010

2015

Source: Department of Education and Training, 2016 (compiled from unpublished data)

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 33

Overall, ABAs constitute only a small presence,
particularly in the higher academic ranks, relative tothe proportion of Asian-born PhD holders within the
population. This is in stark contrast to the situation forother overseas-born academics, who make up 37% ofLevel E positions, 33.3% of Deputy Vice-Chancellors and27.3% of Vice-Chancellors.
This is not a so-called “pipeline problem”, which is often
highlighted in discussions of gender and ethnic equity inacademia. In fact, the share of Asian-born students has
consistently exceeded that of European-born students
for the last 28 years. As early as 1989 (the earliest data
available from DET), 70.2% of international students in
PhD programs were from Asia and the Middle EastI andonly a small minority of them were from Europe (9.7%)
and the Americas (7.1%). While the relative proportionof Asian students in PhD enrolment declined to 58.4%
in 2015, Asian students still constitute the majority ofinternational students in PhD programs, and 18.5% of all
PhD students in Australian universities. In other words,
the pipeline of ABAs has been more than adequate for thelast two decades, and thus cannot explain the problem.
Some scholars suggest that pipelines can be “leaky” andhigher enrolment numbers do not always lead to higher
proportions of women and minorities being employed
as faculty (Pell 1996; Barr et al. 2008; Carr et al. 2015).
What makes pipelines leaky? Why is it that ABAs are sounder-represented in senior positions and in university
management? The next section will identify and discuss
what many ABAs perceive to be potential obstacles totheir employment and career advancement, as well as
potential strategies to aid their greater inclusion.

I From 1989 to 1999, DET used “Asia and the Middle East” as one region of origin of PhD students. Judging by the 2001–2015 data, the vast majority of students inthis regional category were from Asia. DET separately identified Asia from the Middle East in 2000, when 66.2% of international students in PhD programs werefrom Asia.

34 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

The Representation andInclusion of Asian AustralianAcademics
The Perceived Impacts of Ethnic, Cultural and Immigrant Backgrounds
While faculty diversity has become widely recognised inuniversities, numerous studies have revealed that theacademic workplace is a challenging environment for
women and ethnic and cultural minorities. A review of 317
studies on minority faculty found that major issues suchas negative stereotypes, tokenism and marginalisation
have not changed for ethnic minority scholars for the lasttwo decades (Aguirre 2000; Lee 2011; Turner et al. 2008).
Overall, this research corroborated these findings inthat the majority (54.3%) of Asian Australian academics(AAAs) felt that their ethnic and cultural backgroundworked to their disadvantage (Figure 5.1). AAAs’ senseof disadvantage was the highest in Humanities andSocial Sciences (62.5%); followed by Architecture, Design
and Arts (60.0%); IT and Engineering (56.3%); Business,
Economics and Management (54.0%); Health (52.6%);
Sciences (51.0%); and Law (36.8%).O

These perceptions varied across gender. Women felt
more disadvantaged than men: 62.1% of female AAAs
stated that their ethnic and cultural background was adisadvantage in their workplace, compared with 49.4% of
male AAAs (Figure 5.2). This result was largely consistent
with the findings of Diversity Council Australia’s report(2017) that culturally diverse women face a “glass-culturalceiling”. In the report, one in four culturally diverse
women (26%) in Australian organisations agreed that
cultural barriers in the workplace had caused themto scale back at work. Only 10% of culturally diverse
women strongly agreed that their leadership traits
were recognised or that their opinions were valued andrespected (Diversity Council Australia 2017).

Figure 5.1: The perceived impact of ethnic/cultural background in the workplace*
Figure 5.1
Disadvantage
Advantage
54.3%

No Impact

30.4%

42.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Source: The author’s own survey in 2016. *The total exceeds 100% since respondents could choose“both advantage and disadvantage” for their answer.
O It should be noted that the size of samples for Architecture, Design and Arts, and Law was quite small (10 and 19 respectively).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 35

An immigrant background put Asian-born academics
in a slightly more difficult situation (Figure 5.3). To thequestion as to whether being an immigrant had affected
them in the workplace, 58.6% of Asian-born academics
felt that it worked to their disadvantage, which was 4.3%
higher than the answer on the impact of ethnic/cultural
background. Only 34.4% of them found their immigrantbackground an advantage. The sense of disadvantage
was the highest among those in Humanities and Social
Sciences (64.4%), followed by IT and Engineering (63.6%),
Health (59.0%), Architecture, Design and Arts (57.1%),
Sciences (55.6%), Law (53.3%) and Business, Economics,
and Management (53.0%).

The percentage of those who felt their immigrantbackground had “no impact” was much higher among
males (45.1%) than females (27.5%). Overall, thesedata indicate that Asian women in academia feel moredisadvantaged than Asian men.
Why do the majority of AAAs perceive their ethnic, culturaland immigrant background as a disadvantage in theworkplace? In the course of taking part in the survey andinterviews, AAAs addressed several issues. The following
sections will present some of the challenges that they facein their workplace.

The gender differences in the impact of immigrantbackground were more significant than those in ethnic
and cultural background. As seen in Figure 5.4, 67.9%
of Asian-born female academics felt their immigrantbackground was a disadvantage in their workplace,compared with 52.7% of their male counterparts.

Figure 5.2: Gender differences in perceived impacts of ethnic/cultural background in the workplace
Figure 5.2
Disadvantage - Women
Disadvantage - Men
62.1%

Advantage - Women
Advantage - Men

49.4%

No Impact - WomenNo Impact - Men

38.6%
25.3%

33.3%
47.8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Source: The author’s own survey in 2016.
*The total exceeds 100% since respondents could choose “both advantage and disadvantage” for their answer.

36 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Figure 5.3: The perceived impact of immigrant background in the workplace*

Disadvantage
Advantage
58.6%

No Impact

34.4%

38.3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Source: The author’s own survey in 2016.
*The total exceeds 100% since respondents could choose “both advantage and disadvantage” for their answer.

Figure 5.4: Gender differences in perceived impacts of immigrant background in the workplace

Disadvantage - Women
Disadvantage - Men
67.9%

Advantage - Women
Advantage - Men

52.7%

No Impact - WomenNo Impact - Men

43.5%
28.8%

27.5%
45.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Source: The author’s own survey in 2016.
*The total exceeds 100% since respondents could choose “both advantage and disadvantage” for their answer.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 37

Perceived Challenges in the Workplace
Limited Workplace Inclusion
This study corroborated the findings of existing researchthat minority academics suffer from subtle racism, ethnic
stereotyping and limited social inclusion through everyday
interactions (Bhopal and Jackson 2013; ECU 2015; Bhopal2016). While overall the extent of this issue in Australian
universities appears to be less severe than it is in the UK, a
substantial portion (41.8%) of the survey respondents statedthat they had experienced racism, micro aggressions, ethnic,
racial or cultural stereotyping, and marginalisation in theirworkplaces. The ways in which subtle racism manifested
itself, according to this research, were very similar to thoseoutlined in studies from the UK, including Gibney’s article
published in the Nature magazine in 2015 (Gibney 2015).
This Australian study suggests that some respondents
were often ignored in meetings, not given eye contact, or
had their opinions undervalued. Respondents felt a lackof inclusiveness and supportive environment due to theirethnic background and not being a “mainstream Australian”.
Some respondents outlined their experiences as follows:
I often feel that I am non-existent in meetings. People
don’t even see my face or talk to me.
The silent treatment... You can feel this sometimes – howthey talk to you versus how they talk to other people...
When you go to meetings, it’s interesting to see how the
dynamics work... They want to talk with non-Asian people.
Although I am second generation, I still feel that I am
treated differently from most other colleagues within mydepartment. In particular, I am often forgotten or left off
email chains, not invited to social functions.
[I have been] treated as a second-class citizen not only
by my colleagues and also by professional staff.
Some even received discouraging or hostile comments ina more direct manner. One senior full professor in Science
recalls being told when she was still a postgraduate studentthat she would never get a job in Australia. Another female
academic confessed that she received the following comment
from her colleague after appearing in the mainstream media:
Another one [comment she received from her colleague]
was, “With a name like yours, you will never be famous”.
Gender Stereotypes
Many female interviewees struggled with a triple
disadvantage as women, minorities and individuals
possessing an ethnic minority background. This study
corroborates many other research findings that Asian
women face difficulty in academia because of the existing
stereotypes against them (Aguirre 2000; Li and Beckett
2006; Pittman 2010; Shrake 2006). One senior female
academic stated her voice was not being heard fully
because of the stereotypes:

38 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Being a short Asian female... there are some stereotypes
that persist about your nature that you’re notnecessarily an outspoken person. People speak overyou... I find it hard... There have been times in meetings
where I’ve had to literally raise my voice to a reallystupidly high level [to be heard]. It just didn’t [work] eventhough I’m saying, “Can I...”
That’s where I’ve noticed those kinds of negative
stereotypes coming into play.
Other female AAAs also referred to their experiences
struggling against overt stereotypes that intersectedwith both their gender and their ethnicity. One such
respondent recalled the biases against Asian women that
affected her:
There are a lot of things under the surface and people
feel okay to say, “small Asian girl”, you know. They would
not say, “You’re a small white guy”... There’s a lot of
indirect and direct discrimination still... It has definitely
affected me in a sense that there’s a lot of implicit
biases that people have towards Asian females. That’s
manifested by other comments that I’ve received over
the years... “Oh yeah, [you are] so small, I can’t imagine
you standing up to all these hard judges”... So, I thinkit has had a negative impact. If I were a white male, I
would have gotten much further than I have now.
Existing research suggests women and minorities also
have a more difficult time in classrooms, receiving lower
teaching evaluations (Flaherty 2016; Huston 2005; Lilienfeld2016). In particular, the stereotype of being consideredsoft and feminine devalued Asian women’s authority in theclassroom. This study also found that female AAAs often
felt that students challenged their authority and/or did notshow respect for them in their classrooms. Among their
responses were the following comments:
If I had the look of being an older woman, I don’t know
if I would get it [negative treatment from students] asmuch. I think being short really compounds it... Now
I’ve learnt... You have to make sure that you claim yourauthority up front.
There may be some very subtle undercurrents which
you analyse and think, “What’s going on here? Is thisbecause I have an exotic name or because people knowwhat my background is?” There’s sometimes this sort ofunsettling moment.
Limited Social and Cultural CapitalSocial and cultural capital has long been recognised as
crucial for individuals’ employment and career success(Bourdieu 1985; Portes 1998; Metz and Tharenou 2001).
Some studies indicate that social and cultural capitalis particularly important for women and minorities,
playing an equal or sometimes even more important rolein advancing their careers than educational credentials(Metz and Tharenou 2001; Friesen 2011).

This research found that it is also true of the situation inAustralian higher education. AAAs surveyed and interviewed
for this study were aware of the importance of developing
local professional networks and research partners inAustralia, but some experienced difficulties in doing so. Thiswas particularly true for AAAs who immigrated to Australia
for employment. One AAA commented:[I felt like] a fish out of the water, not being able toeasily get truly within “closed circles” of groups. Dueto the weaker “Australian network”, I have to work
much harder to achieve certain outcomes comparedto local colleagues. It takes time to get familiar withthe academic environment and also to get to know thecolleagues in the new academic environment. Whenyou move here, nobody knows you. Nobody knows yourwork. So initially it is quite hard.
Some AAAs who immigrated to Australia for employment
particularly found it challenging in terms of securing
research grants. Their unfamiliarity with grant application
procedures is one challenge, but what adds to this islack of networks. They were concerned about the tacitadvantage given to the research team that includes asenior colleague with a grant track record. With limited
local connections, it is not easy for immigrant AAAs to
identify scholars with grant track records who are willingto work with them on the same projects.
AAAs who were educated in Australia tended to have lessdifficulty in this particular regard as they tended to havealready developed social capital and were often able toaccess help from their former supervisors and peers moreeasily. Nevertheless, some still experience difficulties
in their workplaces, which they also attribute to limited
cultural capital and different cultural orientations. They
felt that implicit cultural and social expectations played arole in shaping the nature of their personal relationships
and bonds with their colleagues. Some AAAs, for instance,
felt that the drinking culture in Australia was an obstaclein their networking efforts and to their full incorporation
into their workplaces. One AAA stated:
Networking... can be a challenge and there is still adrinking culture even in [Australian] academia. I don’t
drink... So I didn’t go to single one of those [regulardrinks in his school]. Certainly, it means that I was a little
bit on the “outer” .
Others found more generic cultural syntax such as jokes
and one’s sense of humour to be a barrier.
My background may exclude me from the informal networkat my workplace because I may not share the same
humour or cultural background. These informal networks
are important in obtaining information and opportunities
to progress in my career.

TokenismAAAs appeared to develop particular anxiety andexperienced more overt tokenism in disciplines where
Asians were under-represented. One interviewee was the
only Asian and the only person from an ethnic minority in
his faculty, though almost half of its students were Asians.
The fact that there is no full professor with an ethnic
minority background in his faculty has made him worry
whether he can secure enough support for his promotionsin the future. The situation was similar in other fields. One
interviewee in legal studies explained as follows:
When you go into the big law firms, there may be ahandful [of Asians]. Maybe five out of 200 will be Asian.
There are very few people [who] get through the systemin the first place, even Australian-born Asians. It’s mainly
the old boys’ club... I think there are a lot of issues... It’s
very, very pronounced in the Asian representation of
female barristers, female lawyers in top-tier law firms
and female partners. There are very few [females]
compared to males. I think the system sets it up that way
and that translates to law schools as well. There are very
few Asians in law schools as lecturers and academics.
It is also important to note that AAAs are a diverse
group, and different groups experience different
challenges. Some of the AAAs from smaller countries
in Asia, for instance, stated that they felt they were in amore disadvantaged position than Chinese and Indianscholars who are more “mainstream minorities” andhave developed their own forms of cultural and social
capital in their own communities. They were worried thatthey might remain disadvantaged even if the number of“Asians” were to rise in academia, since they would still
remain a minority among minorities and could not formtightly knit communities to help each other.

Employment and Career Advancement
As a result of the challenges they have faced in theireveryday interactions and forms of networking as
discussed above, some AAAs perceive there to be a numberof difficulties in advancing their careers. The existing
literature has revealed that women and minority faculty
are often disadvantaged in workplaces, including inacademia (Turner et al. 2008) and tend to be perceived asless competent than white male faculty (ERIC 2000). They
are also more concentrated in the lower academic ranks
and progress more slowly than their white male colleagues
toward senior ranking (Menges and Exum 1983; Misra etal. 1999). Recent research in the UK also revealed that the
majority of minority faculty felt they had to work “doubly
hard” compared to their white colleagues – publishing
more, submitting more grant applications and getting
more international recognition – in order to be considered
for promotion (Gibney 2013).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 39

The same issues are clearly recognised and experienced byAAAs in Australia. Among those in the survey who felt theirbackground was a disadvantage, 35.2% stated that theyexperienced difficulties in getting recognition, promotion andleadership positions. Some AAA interviewees also revealed
that they had to make extra efforts to gain recognition andpromotion. Their comments included the following:
I have to work much harder to prove my competence
because I look and sound different.
One of the things I’ve always told my students is “If you
are an Asian in Australia, you had better make surethat you are better than anyone else to get the same
treatment as the locals”.
I struggled quite a bit to get into a position where I thought
it would be very easy. For example, there are people that I
mentored and so I knew their background. I’ve also beenreferees for them, so I’ve seen their resumes. It was not very
difficult for them to go from Level B [Lecturer] to Level C[Senior Lecturer]. But when the time came for me, I had tojump a lot of hoops... I have to tick all the boxes and evenmore. Whereas, my other colleagues would tick half of theboxes and would be easily promoted, and there would not
be any sort of surprises about it.
Some respondents mentioned that “assumed benefits
for students” have been used as a reason for not hiring
scholars from Asia and the Middle East. For Asians,
their accents represent a potential obstacle to gaining
employment because hiring panels are often concernedthat students might not easily understand them when
they teach. For Muslim job applicants, their cultural
practices constituted another potential hindrance. Someinterviewees, for instance, made the following remarks:
I have encountered where Middle Eastern people have notbeen hired, not because of language, because they were
Middle Eastern – [for] clothing and stuff like that. There
were concerns that they [students] would have bias against
them. So when you’re on the committee and you’re hiring
people, you make the least offensive choice for students...
I’ve seen that once before and – not very good.
The problem is that people tend to hire people who look
like themselves. I think that’s what they do. They hirepeople who they feel can get along. And a really good
example is recently we had hiring for a Level B position.
The person who I thought was the most creative,
innovative candidate has a Middle Eastern name andthe others didn’t. They rejected him.
Even when AAAs do reach senior management positions
and then take part in important decision-making
processes, they may continue to face more challenges
because of their linguistic minority background. As one
interviewee recounted:

I served quite a few senior [management] positions.
However, [in] the politics of bargaining discussions at
the university level, [and] faculty level... you have toreally talk well, [and] speak well. If you are not a native,
sometimes you feel a little bit of negativity. I sometimes
wished I were a native speaker... Sometimes people
are not really willing to listen to you. They say, “I think I
understand you”, “I don’t want to listen to you further”...
That sometimes happens. You really have to argue,
saying, “Look, listen, listen”.
The majority (75%) of AAA interviewees felt that thecomposition of university management should be morediverse. While some felt that this would happen in due
course, others felt that it would be quite difficult to reachequity in the near future. A few interviewees commented
on the limited transparency of selection processes for
managerial and leadership positions. They claimed thatsome leadership positions are not openly advertised, andselections are internally made. In such environments,
they argued, personal networks inevitably play key rolesin the selection of candidates and ethnic minorities are
therefore often at a disadvantage.
Several AAAs stated that they held little hope ofadvancing to management and/or the Chancellery
positions because of these procedural constraints andinstitutional cultures. There was a view that Australia’s
ties with Europe, especially the UK, also constitute part ofthe institutional cultures. One commented as follows:
I think... all the universities in Australia have a problem
in terms of the university boards being able to value
talent which is outside – basically England. Either you
are Australian, or you are somebody from the UK. So,
there hasn’t been much of an openness to bring in[others].
Since many of those holding Chancellery positions do
not report their countries of origin to DET, it is difficult
to assess the precise composition of Chancelleries inAustralia. However, as far as the DET data show, at least
16 European-born individuals held Chancellery positions
in Australian universities in 2015 (among whom 13 werespeaking English at home), in contrast to one from theAmericas,P one from Asia and two from Africa. One
senior academic mentioned that a source of this skew insenior management profile might be attributable to thefact that recruiting firms, which universities rely upon
for attracting global talent to senior and management
positions, often lack cultural diversity. In his view, thelack of diversity of recruiting firms, some of which areheadquartered in the UK and US, might affect the pool ofpotential candidates who are contacted, leading to the“reproduction” of existing professorial profiles.

P This regional category of DET refers to North America, Central America and South America.

40

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Perceptions of Asian Australian Academics’
Representation in Higher Education
In this survey, respondents were asked to indicate
whether they felt AAAs were appropriately represented
within their department, faculty and university
management, as well as what they believed would
constitute the “appropriate representation” of scholars inthese areas.
As seen in Figure 5.5, 48.8% indicated that AAAs wereadequately represented in their school or department,
while 33.6% felt they were not. The percentage slightly
changed for the representation at the faculty level, where
only 35.2% felt AAAs were adequately represented and31.4% answered they were not.
As for the appropriate level of representation, 31.3%
of respondents chose the answer “No ethnic/culturalrepresentation should be necessary” for their department
and 29.1% for faculty. On the other hand, the majority(approximately 60%) of AAAs believed that there should
be some measure of securing Asian representation at
all levels. Among them, the most appropriate level ofrepresentation was “equal or close to the percentage of
Asians and Asian Australian PhD holders in the relevant
academic fields in Australia”, followed by the proportional
percentage composition in the national population andthe university’s study body.
With regard to senior university management, their
responses were significantly different. A much higher
proportion (63%) of respondents felt that AAAs were notappropriately represented at this level (Figure 5.6). As for“appropriate representation”, by far the most common
answer was “equal or close to the percentage of Asianor Asian Australian scholars among all senior scholars in
the university”. Only 15.2% responded that “No ethnic or
cultural representation should be necessary” in university
management (Figure 5.7).
This strong support for more diverse representation in
university management reflects Asian Australians’ notably
low representation in senior management of Australian
universities as discussed earlier. More AAAs recognised
the need for diverse ethnic and cultural representationin university management than at the faculty, schoolor department levels. Only 10.1% of respondents werecomfortable with the current level of AAA representationin senior university management. It suggests that AAAs
saw a distinctive role of ethnic and cultural representationin senior university management. Several interviewees
commented that greater diversity among leaders would
enhance a stronger sense of inclusion and belonging in a
culturally diverse workforce.
University management symbolises the “showcase” ofinstitutional commitment to diversity and inclusion. It
epitomises the ways in which the institutions project
their image to the general public in their country and theworld, particularly with regard to future students and
top academic talent that we would like to attract fromoverseas. The next section will discuss the potential
strategies to bring in more ethnic and cultural diversity insenior and managerial positions in universities.

Figure 5.5: Do you feel that academics with Asian backgrounds are appropriately
represented in your school/department and faculty?
Figure 5.5

Don’t know
17.7%

Don’t know
33.4%
Yes
35.2%
Yes
48.8%

No
33.6%

No
31.4%

SCHOOL / DEPARTMENT

FACULTY

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 41

Figure 5.6: Do you feel that Asian Australian academics are appropriately represented in the
management of your university?
Figure 5.6

Yes
10.1%

Don’t know
27.0%

No
63.0%

Figure 5.7: In your view, what should be the “appropriate representation”
of scholars with Asian backgrounds in the management of your university?
Figure 5.7
At least a few scholars with
Asian background19.4%

Equal or close to the % of Asians
and Asian Australians in all seniorscholars in the university

30.8%

Equal or close to the % of
Asians and Australians in thenational population

19.0%

Equal or close to the % of
Asians and Asian Australians
in the university’s student body

8.0%

No ethnic/culturalrepresentation shouldbe necessary

15.2%

7.6%

Other
0%

42 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Strategies for More Inclusion
and Equity

Survey respondents and interview research participants
provided numerous suggestions and strategies forincreasing diversity in senior positions and university
management. This section will highlight some of theirrecommendations.

More Diverse Committees for Recruitment
and Promotion
There is a growing body of research indicating that
unconscious bias against women and minorities does
exist in the labour market, both in recruitment andpromotion. For instance, researchers at the Australian
National University showed that identical CVs with
Chinese names and Anglo-Saxon names had significantly
different interview rates. To get as many interviews as anapplicant with an Anglo-Saxon name, a Chinese person
had to submit 68% more job applications and a Middle
Eastern person 64% more applications (Perkins 2016).
In an effort to tackle such unconscious bias and bringin more workforce diversity, various efforts have beenmade. For instance, an increasing number of companies
are introducing “blind applications” by removing personal
details – including name, gender, age and location –during a job application process (Perkins 2016).
While blind applications are not likely to be useful inacademia, many universities and academic associations
have taken steps to tackle this problem. In the UnitedStates, affirmative action programs have helped increase
the number of women and minorities in state universities.
Some universities keep track of the data in the academic
labour market, particularly the data on recent PhD
graduates, and can advise faculty search committees to reexamine the list of finalists when no candidate from underrepresented ethnic minority groups is included in the list.{
This research has found, however, that Australian
universities have not specifically addressed the issuesof ethnic and cultural diversity so far. When asked about
the processes of recruitment and promotion of academic
staff, only 16.9% of the survey respondents answered that
their schools and/or faculties had paid attention to ethnic
and cultural representation in the process of hiring and/or
promotion.

Some research participants advocated for the need todiversify selection panels in charge of recruitment andpromotion. As one interviewee described it, the problem
lies in the fact that “people tend to hire people who arelike themselves”. In fact, existing research does indicatethat the composition of decision-making committees
matters, as employers do tend to hire those who have
similar characteristics and backgrounds (Aslund et al.
2014; Cornell and Welch 1996; Nielsen 2009).
Professor Marybeth Gasman, a prominent professor inhigher education at the University of Pennsylvania, clearlystated the problem as follows:
The reason we don’t have more faculty of colour amongcollege faculty is that we don’t want them. We simply
don’t want them. (Gasman 2016)
One of the barriers she pointed out was indeed thediversity of panel. She argued:
Faculty search committees are part of the problem.
They are not trained in recruitment, are rarely diverse in
makeup, and are often more interested in hiring people
just like them rather than expanding the diversity of
their department. They reach out to those they know
for recommendations... How many books, articles, ortraining sessions have you attended on how to recruit
faculty of colour? How many times have you reached
out to departments with great diversity in your field andasked them how they attract and retain a diverse faculty?
According to one study that investigated 267 faculty
searches in three leading public universities in the
United States, having more diversity in selection panels
resulted in more diversity among finalist pools (Smith etal. 2004). It also revealed that 70% of under-represented
minority faculty were hired with a diversity indicator in
the job description or via a special hire intervention. The
authors concluded that a specific approach to diverse
recruitment, coupled with the use of position description
diversity indicators, proved to be a powerful strategy inthe hiring of faculty from all racial/ethnic backgrounds(Smith et al. 2004).

{ Personal communication with a senior academic at a leading university in the United States.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 43

It should be noted that such diversity-driven recruitment
strategies must be carefully balanced with post-recruitment
policies and programs, including workloads. For instance,
North American studies have shown that minority academics
tend to assume a greater administrative workload thanwhite academics (Baez 2000; Laden and Hagedorn 2000;
Turner 2002). Ironically, this disparity is partly due to someinstitutional desire for diversity on committees (Tierney andBensimon 1996). A more recent study (Porter 2007) points
out that the difference in administrative workload tends tobe fairly small, but still acknowledged that minority facultyin major universities (those that offer doctoral degrees) tend
to shoulder more administrative work. Thus, while ensuringethnic and gender representations is important, measures
must also be put in place so that achieving this goal does notcome at the expense of the workload of minority academics.

Open Advertisement and Transparency of
Selection Processes
With regard to the under-representation of AAAs in
university management, some interviewees pointed outthat the limited transparency of selection processes for
managerial and leadership positions made it difficult
to advance to that level. According to them, somemanagerial and leadership positions are not publicly
advertised and selection processes are often nottransparent. In such cases, personal networks often
end up playing a key role in determining successful
candidates, leaving ethnic minorities at a disadvantage– indeed, they may not even be privy to the manner inwhich such decisions are made. Some AAAs described
these challenges in the following ways:[For senior and management positions], you have to know
the management and up there, it’s all white people. So,
there are likely fewer opportunities for Asians.
One of the problems in Z University and perhaps in most
universities here is that leadership positions are often
not advertised. There are no very strict criteria. For
example, to get a grant... you need to have an H index,
and you’ve got to have so many publications [and] somany citations. But for leadership [positions], there areno such criteria. As a result, you can give it to someone
whom you are more comfortable with... If I am the Dean,
and if I’m comfortable with you, I don’t have to justify
giving it – calling you and saying you take over this role.
Transparency in tandem with the monitoring of culturaland linguistic representations could be the key. One
senior academic commented as follows:
If you do want equity, I think equity has to be matchedwith the numbers. They go hand in hand, rather
than the university saying, “Yes, we have a beautiful
environment. Everything is equal. Trust us”. Trust usually
goes hand in hand with transparency. If we do have

44

Workforce Diversity in Higher Educationthat transparency and we can show how things areprogressing for all those involved maybe that’s a goodstep forward and it’s a more defendable position rather
than saying that the university will guarantee that wewill have 25 per cent ethnicity at level E by year 2020
because sometimes that’s not the right answer.
As discussed earlier, female AAAs are more severely
under-represented in university management than theirmale counterparts and other overseas-born groups.
Increasing the presence of minority women – even if not
Asian women – in senior management who could serveas role models for young minority academics should beconsidered an important goal.

Ensuring Diversity and Inclusion through
University-wide Policies
Many survey respondents and the interviewees believedthat the current situation would improve if university
management adopted official policies for diversity
and inclusion. There were diverse views in terms ofapproaches, however. Some felt that the quotas would
not be helpful. One was strongly opposed to affirmative
action, stating:I don’t think in the long term that’s the best way of
doing things... Sometimes you end up with people inhigher positions who aren’t good enough. That’s not agood thing. I think the key thing is to make sure that thepeople who are good enough get equal opportunity. I
think to ensure equal opportunity is the way to go. It’s
the fairer way to do it, and if you know that your basehas a high ethnic mix, and we do, and if you do provide
equal opportunity and do it in a transparent mannerthen by default over a period of time it will happen,
nothing will get in the way.
On the other hand, some questioned the objectivity ofcompetency and meritocracy, and thus advocated formore official measures.
Because of your Asian ethnic background or otherfactors, you may not be strongly established or seenprominent. It may make it very difficult for you tocompete for those positions. So, I guess it’s complex. I’m
not really sure whether anything can be done, unless
you enforce certain quotas, or where you say at least
one person who is being interviewed needs to be of
background A, B or C.
I think it’s also about... who is perceived as being
competent and who is perceived as not being competent.
Maybe there are negative perceptions about Asians andcompetency at that [management] level... I think having
mentors that explicitly recognise these constraints that
we face as minority faculty [would be helpful].

Indeed, some studies have challenged the objectivityof meritocracy. As discussed earlier, ethnic minorities
with identical qualifications tend to have more difficulty
securing interview opportunities than mainstream groups(Booth et al. 2012). It is the case in academia as well.
Ethnic minorities and women tend to have more difficulty
in securing employment and tend to progress more slowly
than their white male counterparts (Fang et al. 2000;
Menges and Exum 1983; Misra et al. 1999). It is especiallynotable that certain types of research that ethnic minority
scholars are often engaged in tend to be marginalised andnot to be as highly regarded as other types of research.
Research on ethnicity and racial inequality is not always
rewarded in academia and its rigor and worthiness areoften questioned (Bernal and Villalpando 2002; Stanley2006). Language barriers pose another challenge, as
academic publications in top journals or books publishedin non-English speaking countries do not count as major
academic outputs in English-speaking academia.

Mentoring and Support Programs for
Minority Academics
Research has demonstrated that women and minority
academics progress more slowly partly because theytend to have limited access to informal networks thatcan promote professional socialisation (Aguirre 1987;
Johnsrud 1993; ERIC 2000: 4). These networks areimportant, as they confer a variety of instrumental
resources that are critical for career development andsocial support (Ibarra 1993).
Mentoring and support systems can therefore playvital roles in assisting academics with ethnic minority
backgrounds in the workplace and in advancing theircareers. A number of faculties and schools in Australian
universities have begun to introduce various mentoring
programs in recent years. Nevertheless, most of theinterviewees indicated that there were limited universitywide official mentoring programs available in their
institutions. Only 10 interviewees out of 42 stated that they
had a formal mentor.
Even where mentors were available, their quality varied.
The effectiveness of mentoring programs depended
heavily on the availability of mentors and their willingness
to devote time and effort to such activities. While fourinterviewees said they greatly benefited from the formal
mentoring program, two of them had their former
thesis supervisors as mentors. Others confessed that
their mentors were too busy to help them. One female
academic argued that the success of mentoring programs
depends on the commitment of leaders (Deans, Heads
of Schools and Department Chairs) in terms of resource
allocations or workload adjustments, since very few
senior scholars would be willing to spare their time on
mentoring without receiving any rewards in terms ofworkload points or formal recognition. Asked how thecurrent mentoring programs could function better, shegave the following answer:
The management team needs to be aware of theimportance of mentoring and needs to have expertisein how to design a mentoring program. You also have tosecure resources as well for funding people who work as
a mentor. You can’t just ask people to do mentoring workwithout any recognition or reward.
Due to the lack of formal mentors or the difficulty ingetting advice from formal mentors, 15 respondents
sought unofficial mentors inside or outside theirworkplace. In the cases of those who received
postgraduate education in Australia, their former
supervisors filled the role of mentor outside theirworkplace. Academics who came to Australia for
employment, on the other hand, found it difficult to
identify unofficial mentors due to their limited social andcultural capital in Australia.
AAAs with no mentors faced difficulties when thetime came for them to put in promotion applications
for review. One interviewee suggested that limited
institutional knowledge and lack of mentoring affected
his promotion process. He found it difficult to identify
someone who was willing to offer him help and support
him when he was preparing his application for promotion.
He explained that situation as follows:
I’ve been to some senior people to gain that support
within the university and senior HR people. But... theonly help I got was Professor X whom I know from mywork here. Professor X gave me the contact for anindividual who had been through the same process. It
took me a long time to get to that person.
Studies show that mentor-mentee matching in terms ofgender, ethnicity and shared experience can significantly
improve outcomes for mentees. According to a US survey
on 2,000 medical school fellows, 49.5% of women feltthat their supervisors displayed a more condescending
attitude toward women physicians, and non-white
residents also stated they received less positive
mentoring during their training, which created a barrier
to their consideration of academic careers (Cain et al.
2001). While one study cautioned that not all raciallyhomogenous relationships produce substantive benefits(Behr 2000), Allen and Butler (2014) suggest that matching
individuals who have similar backgrounds (race/ethnicity
and gender) and shared experiences can produce positive
outcomes for minority academics.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 45

In this interview research, only two AAAs had mentors
with an Asian ethnic background, but they found theirco-ethnic mentors extremely valuable. Those mentors
had lived through similar situations, and thus could guidethese AAAs through their various institutional transitions
and cultural adjustments to their new environment. One
interviewee stated:
Having a mentoring program that almost really closely
resembles this faculty diversity helps you to navigate someof these issues. I think that could be a start. I think we’re
excellent on gender diversity. We have all these programs for
women – I think that’s great. But that – we’re academics so
I’ll use that word, intersectionalities – the intersectionality ofgender and ethnicity isn’t really addressed at all. So, I thinkthat’s what we need to start doing.
It is important that you have some colleagues witha similar background. They can help me – they can
introduce us certainly to other colleagues and help us to
get used to the environment here. Also, it is important
we have a good personal relationship to understand theculture and also the academic community here.
Even though matching mentors and mentees withsimilar backgrounds is a time-consuming task,
carefully considered mentor-mentee relationships
could significantly improve the retention and careeradvancement of AAAs and other minority academics.
Some universities established various other support
programs that could be further tailored to more diverse
needs, such as the program for early career researchersand single parents. Nevertheless, no programs appeared
to have been established for ethnic minority academics or
newly arrived international academics. One interviewee
offered the following comment:
There is an early career researchers’ network. And there
are mentoring things for women, single mothers, andsingle parents. For some reason, I seem to have missed
all of the formal programs, because, for example, I don’t
have caring responsibilities. So, I don’t fit into that. The
accelerator programs I wasn’t able to take on becauseof my teaching load... So, in terms of a formal structured
mentoring program, I haven’t been able to tap into it here.
Helping ethnic minority academics cope with stress andmaintain their well-being is another important issue toaddress. Studies indicate that ethnic minority academics
experience higher levels of occupational stress thanwhite academics (Bronstein 1993; Ruffins 1997; Smithand Witt 1996; Smith et al. 2004). They feel they have to“work twice as hard to be treated as equal” (Laden and
Hagedorn 2000). As discussed earlier, the majority of the
respondents have also felt that their backgrounds as an
ethnic minority and migrants had worked negatively intheir workplace.

46 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Some respondents strongly advocated for cultural
sensitivity training for all academic and professional
staff. While most universities have introduced online
programs to develop cultural competency and awareness,the respondents found the content of these programs
problematic, as they included material that could
reinforce the existing ethnic biases and stereotypes.
Re-examining such online training programs andsoliciting comments from ethnic minority academics
and professional staff on the training materials would
be the first step. The cultural sensitivity training should
also be made compulsory for students, since some Asian
academics reported receiving racist remarks from them.
Minority academics tend to be more isolated in theirworkplaces, and being “one of a kind” or even “two ofa kind” in a workplace can be a lonely and demanding
experience (Pell 1996). Pell (1996) argued that even though
the exclusion usually is unintentional, an explicit invitation
to join a social gathering and intentional inclusion efforts
in tandem with good mentoring programs would ease thetransition from outsider to insider.

Leadership Training for Asian AustralianAcademics and Networking among Minority
Academics
Diversity Council Australia’s recent report showed that88% of culturally and linguistically diverse women inAustralian organisations were ambitious, planning toadvance to a very senior role. However, some argue that
Asians might not be as ambitious as other groups or even
if they are, they might not possess sufficient cultural
capital to fulfil their ambitions. According to Hyun (2005),
Asian Americans’ limited career advancement in the US
could be not only the outcome of institutional factors, but
can also be intimately intertwined with cultural factors(Hyun 2005). Some interviewees indeed echoed that
Asians tend not to be good at promoting themselves,
reflecting traditional cultural values that emphasisemodesty and humility. The comments from the research
participants include the following:
My culture does not breed assertiveness. Consequently, I
have been perceived as a “quiet achiever” and often myachievements are not easily recognised.
For a long time, it [promotion] was a big problem. I
still think it is not too nice to show off [his academic
achievements to his colleagues]. And the whole
Australian [promotion] system is based on you talking
about how wonderful you are. I can help people bytalking about how wonderful they are, but I struggledwith talking about myself. After having been in all theseyears in Australia, I still struggle with that... It is culturalvalues – not to stand out and blow your own trumpet.

Mentoring can play a pivotal role in such cases, however.
One respondent emphasised the importance of
having senior colleagues who understand the culturalenvironment where AAAs are in this situation.
One of my mentors supports Asians. Although he’s awhite man, he’s told me, “Be careful with the ‘bamboo
ceiling’. He said he had a friend who is a Chinese man.
He was producing and doing well, [but] just keeping hishead down, and people just overlooked him all the time
for promotion. I don’t know whether it’s partly culturalthat we don’t sell ourselves, or we’re not aggressive
enough compared to others.
Some senior AAAs are aware that AAAs tend not tobe particularly skilled at promoting themselves, andhave attempted to encourage junior AAA colleagues toovercome such cultural obstacles by speaking out more
and promoting themselves further. They noted, however,that even if AAAs get promoted to senior academic
ranks, they may not be willing to take up further senior
management positions. Some argued that not many
AAA colleagues in senior positions in their schools wereinterested in those positions, partly because of theirperceived cultural disadvantage. One academic in science
commented:
Asian-background professors or scientists do not havethe ambitions to take management roles due to somedisadvantage with their cultural background or the
language background.
Certain Asian cultural values and practices, such as thepractice of deference towards individuals of senior rank,
can work to discourage younger, competent individuals
from taking up leadership positions. Indeed, one female
AAA initially declined an offer of a leadership position outof concern for senior colleagues who had more experiencein the university. She reflected on her experience asfollows:
I was offered quite a big leadership role, which I said
“No” to, at first... One of the reasons why I turned it
down was because part of that job was managing mycolleagues. And a lot of them have been at Y University
longer than I have, and also more senior than me interms of age. I felt uncomfortable in terms of how theymight respond, particularly because I’m fairly new – notonly to Y University, but also as an academic. So, I had
some reservations about that.

While developing cohesive support networks seems
challenging for minorities, some AAAs have begun
to take some initiatives. One of them is the Asian
Australian Studies Research Network (AASRN), which
was established to promote research on issues relating
to Asian Australians. This network is comprised ofmostly academics in the humanities and, to a lesser
extent, social sciences. However, for AAAs in science,engineering, architecture and design, cross-disciplinary
networking opportunities still appear to be very limited.
The Movement of Asian Australian Academics (MAAA) wasestablished in New South Wales in January 2016 to raiseissues concerning AAAs, including their representationin decision-making processes within higher education
institutions. Similar networking opportunities could befurther promoted and developed elsewhere.
It is equally important to provide leadership training
for AAAs and all other minority groups who tend tofeel less capable or more disadvantaged for higher
positions because of their backgrounds. Developing
the culture for aspiration is an important first step. As
institutional support and mentoring helped female
academics advance in senior positions and university
management during the past few decades, similar
opportunities could be provided for minority academics– particularly minority female academics, who appeared
especially under-represented. Aspirations are not solely
attributed to individual wills, but are also shaped by their
institutional culture. A supportive environment whereminority academics can receive sufficient mentoring
would be crucial for fostering higher aspirations amongthem.
This research suggests that levelling the playing fieldwould require various institutional reforms, including
diversifying recruitment and promotion committees,increasing the transparency of recruitment/promotion
processes, addressing ethnic diversity in humanresources policies and improving mentoring programs.
These measures could help increase the representation ofminorities in Australian universities. A more diverse andinclusive academic workplace will lead to a more cohesive
institution, as all members will feel part of the communityand can thus develop a stronger sense of belonging.

} The legal basis for filing the report lies in section 709(c), Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1967 and Title 29, Chapter XIV Code of Federal Regulations(http://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/legalbasis.cfm).

q Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/11/chapter/1).

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 47

Conclusion: Toward More
Inclusive University
Communities for Ethnic andCultural Minorities
Institutional Initiatives

Evidence-based “Inclusion Strategies”

During the last decade, leading universities across theworld have been paying more attention to diversity,
inclusion and equality among their staff as well as
students. All top 20 universities in Times Higher
Education’s world rankings have a Chief Diversity Officer(CDO) and office specifically in charge of tackling diversity
and inclusion issues among staff and students. They also
have dedicated websites that disseminate the informationon their efforts to promote diversity and inclusion.

Another important development in these top-ranked
universities has been that they not only openly
acknowledged the existing reality of under-representationof women and minority staff, but also set up concrete
action plans based on the data and empirical evidence.
Some leading universities, such as University of Oxford andUniversity of Cambridge, compile and analyse voluntarily
submitted data from staff and students with minority ethnicor cultural backgrounds, in some cases including sexual
orientations, and publish their findings. It may be argued
that the provision of such information should be voluntary.
However, as universities are committed to utilising theinformation to tackle existing problems, many respondents
seem to be willing to offer the information.

These top-ranked universities have demonstrated theircommitment to increase the representations not only of
women, but also of ethnic and cultural minorities. In the
United Kingdom, the University of Oxford established
the Race Equality Charter Action Plan and is committing
itself to targets for the recruitment and representation ofBlack and Minority Ethnic (BME) staff in 2017. Its Strategic
Plan also includes the “specific commitments to increase
the proportion of women and minority groups in areas
where they are currently under-represented” (Universityof Oxford 2016).
The University of Cambridge also sets its “Equality
Objectives”, which specifically commit to developing “arace equality strategy focusing on key issues and actionsfor 2012–16” to improve BME representation (Universityof Cambridge 2016). The university’s latest report (2017)
also acknowledges the severe under-representation ofminority faculty members and commits itself to improving
the situation. Most notably, Cambridge’s “InterConnect
Initiative” attempts to identify barriers faced by minority
ethnic groups and non-British white staff to facilitate andpromote internal research and policy-based initiatives
on diversity and inclusion. The InterConnect Action Planfocuses on increasing senior level representation of BMEs
and non-British white staff, benchmarking in the sector
and nationally, and improving institutional interculturalawareness. Cambridge’s Vice-Chancellor also hosts theuniversity’s Annual Race Equality Lecture series to raiseawareness of diversity on campus.

As the Australian Human Rights Commission (2016)
rightfully advocated, it will be difficult to make progresson cultural diversity without data collection and progress
monitoring. Australia’s Workplace Gender Equality Agency
requires the collection and reporting of gender equality
data from all companies with 100 or more staff. However,currently there is no such requirement on ethnic or
cultural diversity. This is in stark contrast with the US and
UK. In the US, all employers of more than 100 staff are
required to file a report on racial and ethnic compositionof their workplace with the US Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (US EEOC 1972).} The UK’s
anti-discrimination law requires public authorities toadvance equality of opportunity, which has led to the datacollection on the staff’s racial and ethnic backgroundsq(DCMS 2017). The UK’s Equality Act 2010 also requires
universities to publish equality objectives at least every
four years, as well as information to demonstrate theircompliance with the equality duty, at least annually.
Australia could take similar legislative initiatives to ensure
fairer representation of all groups in higher education
institutions.

} The legal basis for filing the report lies in section 709(c), Title VII, Civil Rights Act of 1967 and Title 29, Chapter XIV Code of Federal Regulations(http://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/legalbasis.cfm).

q Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/11/chapter/1).

48 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

At present, Australian universities do not seem to collectdata on ethnic and cultural backgrounds of their students
and staff. Or at least they do not reveal the diversity
data on their websites. Even at the national level, dataon ethnic diversity do not exist. This was one of the
difficulties that the author encountered in this research.
The federal Department of Education and Training (DET)
collects data on academics who were born in Asia, but not
those with Asian ancestry. Therefore, it was not possible
for us to figure out how well academics with Asianancestry fare in institutional hierarchies. This presents aprominent gap in bench-marking Australian universities
against universities in other countries in the promotion ofdiversity and inclusion. The survey on 418 Asian Australianacademics showed that Australian-born Asian academics
also experienced challenges in their workplaces becauseof their ethnic or cultural backgrounds. This suggests theneed to go beyond collection of birthplace data at theDET. An ancestry question is already included in recent
Australian censuses, and ethnic identification and racequestions have been in the Canadian and US censuses
and other data for many years. Collecting ancestry and/or ethnic identification data at the university and national
levels will be an important first step to grasping thedemographic composition of campus community.
The collection of data could provide us with a specificgoal for future progress. Many leading universities inculturally diverse countries report on their progress insuch endeavours, revealing detailed statistics, trends,
and their leaders’ vision and strategies for improvement.
Harvard University, for example, involved not only
academic staff but also professional staff and students
in its Working Group on Diversity and Inclusion. These
constituencies jointly draft the report of the situationand present recommendations for the central university
administration.

Some universities have taken further steps in this drive.
Dartmouth College, for instance, has established an
action plan that included a “diversity promotion section”
in its staff’s annual performance evaluation document.
Staff in all ranks, including senior management teams, areasked to report their tangible contributions to campus
diversity, inclusion and equity. This inclusion has not
only made all staff aware of the importance of diversity,
inclusion and equity, but also provided the incentives for
all to do more in these areas.
Public and non-profit sectors have been even more actively
engaged in these issues in recent years in the US and UK. In
the US, the Education Resources Information Centre, whichis sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences of theUnited States Department of Education, has publisheda review report on women and minority faculty in theacademic workplace (ERIC 2000). In the UK, the University
and College Union conducted a major survey on its black
members in 2015 to find out the detailed experiences andchallenges that they face in universities (UCU 2016). The
effort was followed by the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU),
an independent non-profit organisation specialisingin diversity and inclusion. The ECU conducted an evenmore comprehensive study on black and ethnic minority
academics in the UK. Both studies point to subtle forms ofracism that exist in academia and need to be more openly
addressed and tackled. These multi-tiered approaches
inside and outside universities help in identifying problems
and exploring innovative approaches to tackling diversity
and inclusion issues.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 49

Toward More Inclusive Higher Education for
Minority Academics
The realities of the daily struggles of ethnic and cultural
minorities are often neglected in ongoing multiculturalism
discourses in Australian media, government and higher
education. This research has demonstrated that AAAs in
Australian universities have encountered experiences andchallenges very similar to those of minority academics inthe UK and US. The majority of them felt that their ethnicor cultural background affected them negatively in theirworkplace, and many of them sensed the lack of inclusionin everyday interactions and communications. Their lackof representation and ongoing role models in university
management also prevented them from pursuing
higher career aspirations. In particular, female AAAs
have faced additional stereotypes and discrimination
because of their gender. Their accounts highlighted
constant struggles with persistent stereotypes against
and expectations for Asian women in their workplaces
and in the opportunities for further career advancement.
The voices arguing for racial and ethnic diversity among
faculty, and better representation in decision-making
processes, have been almost non-existent thus far. This
research presents small but valuable voices of AAAs who
have broken their silence. Their experiences have shedlight on broader national patterns and trends revealed
by statistics on Asian Australian representation from the
Department of Education and Training.
An examination of the academic workplace and its
inclusion of ethnic minority faculty is imperative inAustralian universities, as their student and staff
population are becoming increasingly diverse.
Australian universities should address staff diversity andrepresentation issues more openly, especially if they wantto succeed in attracting academics of higher calibre in thecompetitive global talent market. International students
are also increasingly paying attention to an inclusive
community environment and seeking successful rolemodels. Furthermore, students need diverse faculties so
as to better prepare themselves for a diverse workforce inthe local and global work place.

50 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Australian universities should join major international
universities’ efforts to address and tackle diversity
and inclusion issues by (1) setting up specific units,(2) collecting information on the representation of allminority groups across different academic ranks,(3) identifying challenges faced by women and minority
groups, and (4) establishing strategies to overcome
those challenges and provide more inclusive university
communities for all, including those with minority status
in terms of Indigeneity, gender, sexual orientation anddisabilities. Institutional vision and commitment withinsenior university management hold the key to advancing
the situation of all minority groups on campuses, but any
bottom-up initiatives would be helpful as well.
Research and practice suggest that diversity will result in
positive benefits only if appropriate inclusion practices
are incorporated. That is why “diversity and inclusion”
now constitute the major platform of human resources
policies in major organisations in the world (Ferdman
and Deane 2014). This research presented the first major
overview of the situation of ethnic minorities in academia
by focusing on academics with Asian background topromote “diversity and inclusion” in Australian academia.
It is my hope that more academics will join the efforts
in promoting research on diversity and inclusion inAustralian universities, and that there will be more open
discussions on successful roadmaps in making university
communities fully global and inclusive.

Appendix:
Data and Methodology

This report is based on analysis of: (1) the Australian Census for 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006
2011 and 2016; (2) unpublished statistics on academics in Australian universities requested
from the Department of Education and Training (DET 2016); (3) results of an online survey
conducted among Asian Australian academics in selected universities; and (4) interviews
with Asian Australian academics sourced from respondents of the online survey.
In analysing data from the Australian Census for 2006, 2011 and 2016, the “Counting
Persons, Place of Usual Residence” datasets were used. Full details of these censuses areaccessible through the Australian Bureau of Statistics website. For the 1991, 1996 and2001 censuses, a more limited range of data is available. Only “Place of Enumeration”
data is accessible for the 1991 and 1996 censuses.
In the analyses of the Department of Education and Training (DET), “Not Stated” or “No
Information” categories were excluded. DET statistics on birth countries of academics
in Australian universities contained a large number of “No Information” responses.
For example, the total headcount of academics in 2015 contained “No Information” for52,974 individuals. The total headcount of academics in 2015 excluding the figure of “NoInformation” was 34,997 (DET 2016).
The unpublished data that the author obtained from the DET refers solely to academic
staff working for Australian universities on full-time contracts. The disciplinary data,
meanwhile, also excludes “research only” staff due to the DET’s data collection method.
The author requested statistical information that dealt specifically with academics
working for Go8 universities, as well as aggregated data to provide national totals. The
information that the author obtained includes: the gender breakdown of the target
population; place of birth; academic rank; academic discipline; state of their institutions;and language spoken at home.
The DET provided me with both headcount and Full-time Equivalent (FTE) data. This
study used headcount data, as it captures employee numbers more precisely and isgenerally recognised as a better measurement of diversity than FTE. However, theauthor was obliged to rely on FTE data in cases in which there were less than five
responses in a given data category, as the DET did not disclose detailed headcount data
for these categories.
The online survey was conducted among academics at Go8 universities (the Australian
National University, Monash University, the University of Adelaide, the University of
Melbourne, the University of New South Wales, the University of Queensland, theUniversity of Sydney and the University of Western Australia) as well as six universities inVictoria. Go8 universities are among the oldest, best established and internationalised
and share a number of uniform academic and administrative requirements andbenchmarking. The survey questionnaires were also sent to Federation University
Australia, Deakin University, La Trobe University, RMIT University, Swinburne University
and Victoria University. The focus only on these universities in Victoria was due to theproject’s funding and other resource constraints.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 51

The potential respondents were identified through publicly available staff profiles on theuniversities’ websites. It should be noted that the staff profiles posted on these websites
typically do not specify staff members’ ethnic backgrounds. Therefore surnames, public
photographs and other information had to be used to find out which academics might
possess Asian ethnic backgrounds. The possible cultural origins of these academics’
surnames were researched via online surname databases. As user-friendly and large asthese databases proved to be, however, it was nonetheless impossible to conclusively
determine if all the academics identified for the survey did indeed possess Asian ethnic
backgrounds. The author attempted to minimise this problem by asking potential
respondents to participate in the survey only if they identified themselves as having
Asian ethnic background. However, the author is fully aware that this was not a perfectsolution and that this survey has its limitations, as do similar online surveys.
In total, 2,812 academics were invited to take part in the online survey in February
2016, and 418 responses were received. The response rate of 14.9% exceeded theaverage response rate of 13% for general online surveys (Hamilton 2009). The author
subsequently coded their responses to the open-ended questions and analysed them toidentify common themes in the respondents’ experiences and collective opinions.
This survey contained 35 questions relating to: respondents’ cultural, migratory,
educational and professional backgrounds; their workplace experiences; theirperceptions of the level of ethnic diversity at their workplaces; their connections with
Asian countries; and their interest in taking part in in-depth qualitative interviews at alater stage. The questions tended to make the aim of investigating ethnic diversity of
the Australian higher education sector explicit, and the author was thus aware that thesurvey design may have unduly influenced whether and which respondents chose to
take part in this study.
Survey respondents as well as other academics were invited to participate in in-depth
interviews. In total, 42 interviews were conducted between March 2016 and August 2017,using a semi-structured questionnaire. The average duration of each interview wasapproximately 45 minutes. All interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, codedusing the qualitative software NVivo 11 and analysed. The interview questions mainly
explored the types of support available at interviewees’ institutions, such as mentoring
and career development services; the nature of their experiences in the Australian higher
education sector as ethnic and cultural minorities; and their perceptions of the levels of
ethnic diversity at their workplaces and within management.

52 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

References

Aguirre, Adalberto, Jr. 1987. “An Interpretative Analysis of Chicano Faculty in Academe.” Social Science Journal 24(1): 71-81.
———. 2000. Women and Minority Faculty in the Academic Workplace: Recruitment, Retention, and Academic Culture. San
Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
Allen, Ayana, and Bettie Ray Butler. 2014. “African American Women Faculty: Towards a Model of Coethnic Mentorshipin the Academe.” Journal of Progressive Policy & Practice 2(1): 111-122.
American Council on Education (ACE). 2016. “What Are Students Demanding?” Higher Education Today. 13 January.
http://www.higheredtoday.org/2016/01/13/what-are-students-demanding/
Arkoudis, Sophie, Chi Baik, Simon Marginson, and Elizabeth Cassidy. 2012. Internationalising the Student Experience in Australian
Tertiary Education: Developing Criteria and Indicators. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for the Study of Higher Education.
Åslund, Olof, Lena Hensvik and Oskar Nordström Skans. 2014. “Seeking Similarity: How Immigrants and Natives
Manage in the Labor Market.” Journal of Labor Economics 32(3): 405-41.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). 1991. Australian Census 1991.
———. 1997. Australian Census 1996.
———. 2002. Australian Census 2001.
———. 2007. Australian Census 2006.
———. 2012. Australian Census 2011.
———. 2017. Australian Census 2016.
Australian Council of Learned Academies (ACOLA). 2015. Smart Engagement with Asia: Leveraging Language, Researchand Culture. Australian Council of Learned Academies. http://acola.org.au/wp/PDF/SAF03/SAF03%20SMART%20
ENGAGEMENT%20WITH%20ASIA%20-%20FINAL%20lo%20res.pdf.
———. 2016. Australia’s Diaspora Advantage: Realising the Potential for Building Transnational Business Networks with
Asia. http://acola.org.au/wp/PDF/SAF11/SAF11%20full%20report.pdf.
Australian Human Rights Commission. 2016. Leading for Change: A Blueprint for Cultural Diversity and Inclusive
Leadership Congress. Australian Human Rights Commission. http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/
document/publication/2016_AHRC%20Leading%20for%20change.pdf.
Baez, Benjamin. 2000. “Race-related Service and Faculty of Color: Conceptualizing Critical Agency in Academe.”
Higher Education 39(3): 363-391.
Baker, Meredith, Judy Sloan, and Frances Robertson. 1993. The Role of Immigration in the Australian Higher Education
Labour Market. Australian Government Public Service.
Balasooriya, Chinthaka, Augustine Asante, Ranmalie Jayasinha and Husna Razee. 2014. “Academic Mobility and
Migration: Reflections of International Academics in Australia.” In Nina Maadad and Malcolm Tight (eds), Academic
Mobility. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Pp. 117-35.
Barr, Donald A., Maria Elena Gonzalez, and Stanley F. Wanat. 2008. “The Leaky Pipeline: Factors Associated with Early
Decline in Interest in Premedical Studies among Underrepresented Minority Undergraduate Students.” Academic
Medicine 83(5): 503-11.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 53

Basit, Tehmina N., and Sally Tomlinson. 2012. Social Inclusion and Higher Education. Bristol: Policy Press.
Behr, Joshua G. 2000. “Black and female municipal employment: A substantive benefit of minority political
incorporation?” Journal of Urban Affairs 22(3): 243-264.
Bernal, Dolores Delgado, and Octavio Villalpando. 2002. “An Apartheid of Knowledge in Academia:
The Struggle Over the ‘Legitimate’ Knowledge of Faculty of Color.” Equity & Excellence in Education 35(2): 169-180.
Bhopal, Kalwant. 2016. The Experiences of Black and Minority Ethnic Academics: A Comparative Study of the Unequal
Academy. Routledge: New York.
Bhopal, Kalwant and June Jackson. 2013. The Experiences of Black and Minority Ethnic Academics: Multiple Identities andCareer Progression. University of Southampton: Engineering and Physical Science Research (ESPRC).
Booth, Alison L, Andrew Leigh and Elena Varganova. 2012. “Does Ethnic Discrimination Vary across Minority Groups?
Evidence from a Field Experiment.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics 74(4): 547-73.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1985. “The Forms of Capital.” In John G. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for theSociology of Education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Bronstein, Phyllis. 1993. “Challenges, Rewards, and Costs for Feminist and Ethnic Minority Scholars.”New Directions for
Teaching and Learning 53: 61-70.
Cain, Joanna M., Jay Schulkin, Valerie Parisi, Michael L. Power, Gerald B. Holzman, and Sterling Williams. 2001.
“Effects of Perceptions and Mentorship on Pursuing a Career in Academic Medicine in Obstetrics and Gynecology.”
Academic Medicine 76(6): 628-634.
Carr, Phyllis L., Christine M. Gunn, Samantha A Kaplan, Anita Raj, and Karen M Freund. 2015. “Inadequate Progress for
Women in Academic Medicine: Findings from the National Faculty Study.” Journal of Women’s Health 24(3): 190-99.
Carroll, Judith, and Janette Ryan (eds). 2007. Teaching International Students: Improving Learning for All. Abingdon,
Oxon: Routledge.
Coates, Hamish, Ian Dobson, Daniel Edwards, Tim Friedman, Leo Goedegebuure, and Lynn Meek. 2009.
The Attractiveness of the Australian Academic Profession: A Comparative Analysis. Hawthorn, Victoria: ACER.
Cornell, Bradford, and Ivo Welch. 1996. “Culture, Information, and Screening Discrimination.” Journal of Political Economy
104(3): 542-71.
Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS, United Kingdom). 2017. Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/11/chapter/1
Department of Education and Training (DET). 2016. Unpublished national statistics (Staff data). Canberra.
Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP). 2016. Australia’s Migration Trends 2014–15.
http://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/statistics/migration-trends-14-15-full.pdf———2017. “Fact Sheet: Key Facts about Immigration.” http://www.border.gov.au/about/corporate/information/facts
Diversity Council Australia (O’Leary, J., Groutsis, D. and D’Almada-Remedios, R.). 2017. Cracking the Glass-Cultural
Ceiling: Future Proofing Your Business in the 21st Century. Sydney: Diversity Council Australia.
Equality Challenge Unit (ECU). 2015. Equality in Higher Education: Statistical Report 2015.
ERIC (Education Resources Information Centre). 2000. Women and Minority Faculty in the Academic Workplace:
Recruitment, Retention, and Academic Culture. ERIC Clearing House on Higher Education. Washington, DC.
Fang, Di, Ernest Moy, Lois Colburn, and Jeanne Hurley. 2000. “Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Faculty Promotion in
Academic Medicine.” Journal of the American Medical Association 284(9): 1085-1092.
Ferdman, Bernardo M., and Barbara Deane (eds). 2014. Diversity at Work: The Practice of Inclusion. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

54

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Flaherty, Colleen. 2016. “Bias Against Female Instructors.” Inside Higher Education. January 11. https://www.
insidehighered.com/news/2016/01/11/new-analysis-offers-more-evidence-againststudent-evaluationsteaching.
Friesen, Marcia R. 2011. “Immigrants’ Integration and Career Development in the Professional Engineering Workplace in
the Context of Social and Cultural Capital.” Engineering Studies 3(2): 79-100.
Gasman, Marybeth. 2016. “An Ivy League Professor on Why Colleges Don’t Hire More Faculty of Color: ‘We Don’t Want
Them.’” The Washington Post. 26 September. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/09/26/
an-ivy-league-professor-on-why-colleges-dont-hire-more-faculty-of-color-we-dont-want-them/?utm_term=.
d9be16538953
Gibney, Elizabeth. 2013. “Report Finds Lingering Racism in British Higher Education.” Inside Higher Education.
April 11. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/04/11/report-finds-lingering-racism-british-higher-education.
——. 2015. “How to Tackle Racism in UK Universities.” Nature. April 2. http://www.nature.com/news/how-to-tackleracism-in-uk-universities-1.17239.
Green, Wendy, and Paula Myatt. 2011. “Telling Tales: A Narrative Research Study of the Experiences of New
International Academic Staff at an Australian University.” International Journal for Academic Development 16(1): 33-44.
Hamilton, Michael Braun. 2009. “Online Survey Response Rates and Times: Background and Guidance for Industry.”
Super Survey. http://www.supersurvey.com/papers/supersurvey_white_paper_response_rates.pdf.
Henderson, Loren, and Cedric Herring. 2013. “Does Critical Diversity Pay in Higher Education? Race, Gender, andDepartmental Rankings in Research Universities.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 1(3): 299-310.
Henry, Ken, Peter Drysdale, Catherine Livingstone, John W.H. Denton, Gordon de Brouwer, David Gruen, and Heather
Smith. 2012. Australia in the Asian Century White Paper. Canberra: The Commonwealth Government of Australia.
Hugo, Graeme. 2006. “Globalization and Changes in Australian International Migration.” Journal of Population Research23(2): 107-134.
———. 2008. “The Demographic Outlook for Australian Universities’ Academic Staff.” Occasional Paper no.6 for the Council of
Humanities and Social Sciences. http://www.chass.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PAP20081101GH2.pdf———. 2010. “The Indian and Chinese Academic Diaspora in Australia: A Comparison.” Asian and Pacific Migration
Journal 19(1): 87-116.
———. 2014a. “Change and Continuity in Australian International Migration Policy.” International Migration Review
48(3): 868-890.
———. 2014b. “The Role of International Migration in Australia’s Research Workforce.” Asian and Pacific Migration
Journal 23(1): 27-54.
Huston, Therese A. 2005. “Race and Gender Bias in Higher Education: Could Faculty Course Evaluations Impede Further
Progress Toward Parity?” Seattle Journal of Social Justice 4(2): 591-611.
Hyun, Jane. 2005. Breaking the Bamboo Ceiling: Career Strategies for Asians. New York: Harper Collins.
Ibarra, Herminia. 1993. “Personal Networks of Women and Minorities in Management: A Conceptual Framework.”
Academy of Management Review 18(1): 56-87.
Jayasuriya, Dharmasoka Laksiri, and Pookong Kee. 1999. The Asianisation of Australia?: Some Facts About the Myths.
Carlton, Victoria: Melbourne University Press.
Johnsrud, Linda K. 1993. “Women and Minority Faculty Experiences: Defining and Responding to Diverse Realities.”
New Directions for Teaching and Learning 1993(53): 3-16.
Laden, Berta Vigil, and Linda Serra Hagedorn. 2000. “Job Satisfaction Among Faculty of Color in Academe: Individual
Survivors or Institutional Transformers?” New Directions for Institutional Research 105: 57-66.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 55

Lee, Jenny J. 2011. “Part III Faculty.” In Shaun R. Harper and Sylvia Hurtado (eds), Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Higher
Education. ASHE Reader Series. Pearson Learning Solutions. Pp. 269-271.
Li, Guofang, and Gulbahar H. Beckett. 2006. “Strangers” of the Academy: Asian Women Scholars in Higher Education.
Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Lilienfeld, Eva. 2016. “How Student Evaluations are Skewed Against Women and Minority Professors.” The Century
Foundation. June 10. https://tcf.org/content/commentary/student-evaluations-skewed-women-minority-professors/.
Maadad, Nina. 2014. “Global Academics Moving Down Under: Living and Learning a New Academic Culture.” In Nina
Maadad and Malcolm Tight (eds), Academic Mobility. Pp. 137-152. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
Maadad, Nina, and Malcolm Tight (eds). 2014. Academic Mobility. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.
Mason, Colina and Felicity Rawlings-Sanaei. 2014. Academic Migration, Discipline Knowledge and Pedagogical Practice. Springer.
Menges, Robert J., and William H. Exum. 1983. “Barriers to the Progress of Women and Minority Faculty.” The Journal ofHigher Education 54(2): 123-44.
Metz, Isabel, and Phyllis Tharenou. 2001. “Women’s Career Advancement: The Relative Contribution of Human andSocial Capital.” Group & Organization Management 26(3): 312-342.
Milem, Jeffrey F. 2003. “The Educational Benefits of Diversity: Evidence from Multiple Sectors.” In Mitchell J. Chang,
Daria Witt, James Jones, and Kenji Hakuta (eds), Compelling Interest: Examining the Evidence on Racial Dynamics inHigher Education, 126-129. Stanford, CA: Stanford Education.
Misra, Joya, Ivy Kennelly, and Marina Karides. 1999. “Employment Chances in the Academic Job Market in Sociology:
Do Race and Gender Matter?” Sociological Perspectives 42(2): 215-247.
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine (NASEM). 2011. Expanding
Underrepresented Minority Participation: America’s Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads. Washington, DC: The
National Academies Press.
Nielsen, Sabina. 2009. “Why Do Top Management Teams Look the Way They Do? A Multilevel Exploration of the
Antecedents of TMT Heterogeneity.” Strategic Organization 7(3): 277-305.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2017. International Migration Outlook 2017. Paris.
Pell, Alice N. 1996. “Fixing the Leaky Pipeline: Women Scientists in Academia.” Journal of Animal Science 74(11): 2843-48.
Perkins, Miki. 2016. “Victorian Government Trials Blind Job Applications to Overcome Hiring Bias.” The Age. 20 May.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/victorian-government-trials-blind-job-applications-to-overcome-hiring-bias20160519-goz8pf.html.
Pittman, Chavella T. 2010. “Race and Gender Oppression in the Classroom: The Experiences of Women Faculty of Color
with White Male Students.” Teaching Sociology 38(3): 183-196.
Porter, Stephen R. 2007. “A Closer Look at Faculty Service: What Affects Participation on Committees?” The Journal ofHigher Education 78(5): 523-541.
Portes, Alejandro. 1998. “Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology.” Annual Review of Sociology
24(1): 1-24.
Ramburuth, Prem, and John McCormick. 2001. “Learning Diversity in Higher Education: A Comparative Study of AsianInternational and Australian Students.” Higher Education 42(3): 333-50.
Royal Academy of Engineering and Science Council. 2016. “Royal Academy of Engineering and Science Council
Launch Major Initiative to Improve Diversity and Inclusion.” 15 December. http://www.raeng.org.uk/news/newsreleases/2016/december/royal-academy-of-engineering-and-science-council-l.
Ruffins, Paul. 1997. “Between a Rock and a Hard Place.” Diverse Issues in Higher Education 14(17): 20-23.

56 Workforce Diversity in Higher Education

Sawir, Erlenawati, Simon Marginson, Ana Deument, Chris Nyland, and Gaby Ramia. 2015. “Loneliness and International
Students: An Australian Study.” Journal of Studies in International Education 12 (2): 148-180.
Shrake, Eunai Kim. 2006. “Unmasking the Self: Struggling with the Model Minority Stereotype and Lotus Blossom Image.” In
Guofang Li, Gulbahar H. Beckett and Shirley Geok-Lin Lim (eds), Strangers of the Academy: Asian Women Scholars in Higher
Education. Pp. 178-94. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Smith, Daryl G., Caroline S. Turner, Nana Osei-Kofi and Sandra Richards. 2004. “Interrupting the Usual: Successful
Strategies for Hiring Diverse Faculty.” The Journal of Higher Education 75 (2): 133-160.
Smith, Earl, and Stephanie L. Witt. 1996. “A Comparative Study of Occupational Stress Among African American andWhite University Faculty: A Research Note.” Research in Higher Education 34 (2): 229-241.
Stanley, Christine A. 2006. “Coloring the Academic Landscape: Faculty of Color Breaking the Silence in Predominantly
White Colleges and Universities.” American Educational Research Journal 43(4): 701-736.
Teicher, Julian, Chandra Shah, and Gerard Griffin. 2002. “Australian Immigration: The Triumph of Economics Over
Prejudice?” International Journal of Manpower 23(3): 209-236.
Tierney, William G., and Estela Mara Bensimon. 1996. Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. New York:SUNY Press.
Turner, Caroline and Sotello Viernes. 2002. “Women of Color in Academe: Living with Multiple Marginality.” The Journalof Higher Education 73(1): 74-93.
Turner, Caroline, Sotello Viernes, Juan Carlos González, and J Luke Wood. 2008. “Faculty of Color in Academe: What 20
Years of Literature Tells Us.” Journal of Diversity in Higher Education 1(3): 139-68.
United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (US EEOC). 1972. “EEO-1: Legal Basis for Requirements.
Section 709(C), Title VII, Civil Rights Act Of 1967.” http://www.eeoc.gov/employers/eeo1survey/legalbasis.cfm
University and College Union (UCU). 2016. “The Experiences of Black and Minority Ethnic Staff in Further and Higher
Education.” BME Survey Report. February. http://www.ucu.org.uk/media/7861/The-experiences-of-black-andminority-ethnic-staff-in-further-and-higher-education-Feb-16/pdf/BME_survey_report_Feb161.pdf.
University of Cambridge. 2016. “University of Cambridge Equality Objectives 2012-2016.” http://www.equality.admin.
cam.ac.uk/files/objectives_201216_large.pdf———. 2017. Equality and Diversity Information Report. http://www.equality.admin.cam.ac.uk/files/information_
report_2015-16_draft_-_final.pdf
University of Oxford. 2016. “Oxford’s Equality Objectives 2016-2020.” http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/eop/policy/
equalityobjectives/
Yu, Baohua. 2013. “Asian International Students at an Australian University: Mapping the Paths Between Integrative
Motivation, Competence in L2 Communication, Cross-cultural Adaptation and Persistence with Structural Equation
Modelling.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 34(7): 727-742.

Workforce Diversity in Higher Education 57

unimelb.edu.auStatement on Privacy Policy
When dealing with personal or health information
about individuals, the University of Melbourne is
obliged to comply with the Information Privacy Act
2000 and the Health Records Act 2001.
For further information, refer to:unimelb.edu.au/governance/compliance/privacy
CRICOS Provider Code: 00116K
Printed on paper from responsible sources.