In 1996, two Kenyan scholars were awarded Fulbright Scholarships — honors the U.S. Department of State grants to promising young academics worldwide.

Fred Muyia Nafukho, who joined the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý earlier this year as the vice provost for academic personnel, vividly remembers the day he was called to the U.S. embassy in Nairobi.

Nafukho learned he would attend Louisiana State University, but his colleague, the other Kenyan awardee that year, was going to “the finest and best university in the United States,” Nafukho remembers an attaché saying.

“She said, ‘The ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý, not in D.C., but in Seattle.’ That’s the first time I heard about the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý,” Nafukho recalled in a recent interview.

Decades later, his colleague has returned to Kenya and is a preeminent scientist there. Nafukho stayed in the U.S., where he’s built a reputation of advancing equity and inclusion, most recently as the senior associate dean for faculty affairs at Texas A&M University.

Since February, Nafukho has been on a tour of the UW, listening, observing and learning.

“I have seen the mission threads of inclusive excellence, including diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging, not only emphasized by the leadership at the UW, but also practiced,” Nafukho said.

According to a report by the Office of the Vice Provost for Academic Personnel, the UW had more than 4,800 professorial faculty members in 2022. Of those members,3,092 whose race was reported were white and 2,592 were male, roughly 54%. Of the remaining faculty, 881 were Asian, 247 were Hispanic, 137 were Black, 23 were American Indian, and seven were Pacific Islander.

While more work remains, Nafukho said the success in hiring diverse faculty is a result of multiple programs the UW has in place and of a comprehensive approach from university leaders, what he calls “Shared Equity Leadership.”

“It requires all of us leaders across the university in our tri-campus system to work together,” Nafukho said.

While encouraging, faculty-hiring figures fluctuate year to year and are dependent on a variety of factors, including retirements. As a result, Nafukho said, the UW instead should measure success by focusing on a supportive learning and working environment that builds a sense of belonging. In that way, he aims to transform the Office of Academic Personnel into what he calls the office of “Faculty Success.”

That begins with intentional faculty recruitment, development, and retention, Nafukho said, and by scaling existing successful programs.

Chadwick Allen, the associate vice provost for faculty advancement, works with hiring teams across the university to implement practices that interrupt bias.

“Everyone thinks they know how to do this well, and then they really start doing it and realize the complexity,” he said. “Particularly if people are trying to diversify their hiring pools of applicants.”

Allen said much of his work is about intentionally changing the culture and redefining how various fields define excellence.

Because various disciplines have different entrenched cultures, no one approach to diversification is effective across the board.

The UW’s ADVANCE Center for Institutional Change has been advocating for women faculty in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields since 2001. Originally funded by the National Science Foundation, the center’s work today is supported by academic units including the College of Engineering, the College of Arts & Sciences, the College of the Environment, and the Office of the Provost.

In 2004, more than a decade before ascending to her role as UW President, Ana Mari Cauce was a principal investigator for ADVANCE. Today, Joyce Yen is the center’s full-time director.

“We can see over the course of those 20-plus years increases in not only the number of women faculty, but also the diversity of those women faculty in terms of race and ethnicity,” Yen said.

It’s more than just hiring. It’s also about creating a professional development ecosystem that supports faculty at different stages throughout their career, she said. Because the UW must compete with well-resourced industry jobs and higher salaries at private universities, fostering community on campus is key to retention.

“Multiple people have told me that part of the reason they stay at the UW is because of the community that they found through our resources,” Yen said. “We’re not the only thing, but we’re part of the equation that contributes to their sense of belonging, their sense of connection, and feeling valued at the university.”

Different efforts have taken shape across the UW, including the Faculty Development Program, led by Alexes Harris, a UW Faculty Regent and a professor of sociology.

At UW Medicine, creating an environment where all professionals can thrive is vital to the success of delivering quality health care, said Paula Houston, UW Medicine’s chief equity officer and an affiliate professor of family medicine.

That includes a variety of opportunities for early career faculty, such as the . Now run by Dr. Michelle Terry, a clinical professor in the Department of Pediatrics and the assistant dean for Underrepresented in Medicine and Science (URMS) Career Development, SURF creates community and help foster skills to succeed in academia.

Another program, , is a cohort of mid-career professionals, many of whom identify as URMS, with the aim of diversifying leadership.

People on the outside of the organization can peer in and see faculty who represent the communities we serve who are successful and being tapped for senior roles, Houston said.

“As they get into leadership positions, they have the opportunity to create pathways for other underrepresented or systemically marginalized people to come into the organization,” she said.

While UW Medicine has made strides forward in the past several years, it’s important to continue to reach out to young people from diverse communities to pursue higher education and medicine. The Office of Healthcare Equity, led by Houston, does this through the programs in the the . Through focused community outreach and advocacy, these programs develop the ecosystem from which we can engage young people to pursue careers in healthcare and thus become our future leaders.

Across the university, too, there’s more work that needs to be done, Nafukho said. He’s hopeful that academic departments will use their discretionary budgets to fund collaborative efforts that build camaraderie.

In 2021, then-Provost Mark Richards announced a multimillion-dollar effort to diversify UW’s faculty. This year, Tricia Serio begins her work as provost, including an intentional effort to build on the programs Richards initiated.

For now, Nafukho said he’s confirmed what he heard many years ago at the U.S. embassy in Nairobi.

“The UW is one of the finest and best universities in the United States,” he said. “So in the Office of Academic Personnel we are committed to becoming the office of faculty success.”

He called for ongoing cooperation, working across academic units, colleges, schools and campuses.

“We have to work collaboratively with others across the university. Working in silos cannot take us far,” Nafukho said. “I strongly believe that when our faculty are successful, they in turn ensure that our students are successful.”

Joyce Yen honored with the Presidential Award for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring

On Feb. 8, President Joe Biden Joyce Yen and 14 other individuals and organizations as recipients of the (PAESMEM). is the director of the UW’s , a program that works to eliminate underrepresentation of women faculty in STEM at the UW and beyond.

Established in 1995, PAESMEM recognizes the critical roles mentors play outside the traditional classroom in the academic and professional development of the future STEM workforce.

“This award not only validates the importance of mentoring, but it also elevates the intersection of excellence and diversity and those pushing the STEM ecosystem to be better,” Yen said. “I truly love the work I do fostering communities and cultures in STEM that support and advance inclusion and belonging.”

In March, Yen was about the award, the work of the ADVANCE Center and the challenges of increasing women’s participation in STEM academic fields. Launched in 2001 with funding from the National Science Foundation, the center partners with faculty, chairs and leadership across campus to remove barriers for women faculty and develop accountability for institutional change.

Yen is following in the footsteps of two of her mentors, and , as PAESMEM awardees. Denton, the original principal investigator of the ADVANCE IT grant, was honored in 2003, and Riskin, the faculty director of the center, was honored in 2020.

Riskin nominated Yen for the award.

“Joyce’s impact on the careers of so many faculty in STEM at UW and across the country has been profound,” Riskin said. “So many people are in rewarding careers thanks to Joyce’s efforts and support. I am so thrilled she was selected for this honor.”

The National Science Foundation, which manages PAESMEM on behalf of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, provides each recipient $10,000.  Award recipients also receive a certificate signed by President Joe Biden.

The White House has invited the awardees from 2020 and 2021 to Washington, D.C. from May 24 to 26 for events that will include professional development activities as well as an awards ceremony and dinner. Both Yen and Riskin are planning to attend.

Professor Nathan Kutz elected SIAM fellow

, UW professor of applied mathematics, has been elected as a 2022 fellow of the (SIAM). Fellows are chosen for their exemplary and outstanding service to the community.

Kutz was recognized for his innovative contributions across many disciplines of applied mathematics. Most recently, he has pioneered contributions that integrate modern machine learning methods with traditional dynamical systems modeling. These innovations have paved the way for emerging methods to be applied to complex systems where many traditional applied mathematical methods have failed.

“I believe this award ultimately is a reflection of the exceptional graduate students and postdocs I have mentored in my time at the UW,” Kutz said. “They have been the driving force and inspiration behind all the years of progressive developments leading to new paradigms and innovations in applied mathematics. I am truly thankful for the time I have had with each one of them in my journey of exploration.”

Kutz joins the UW’s Anne Greenbaum, Randy LeVeque, Robert O’Malley and Fred Wan as SIAM fellows.

“The department is honored to welcome a fifth SIAM Fellow among its ranks with the recent recognition of Professor Nathan Kutz,” said , professor and chair of the Applied Math department. “Recognitions like these reflect the outstanding quality present in the department, in these and many other areas of research.”

Alexina Kublu wins 2022 Inuit Language Recognition Award

, an instructor in the UW , is one of three people to receive the 2022 . Kublu teaches Inuktitut, the Inuit language of Canada.

The award is given out by the Inuit Uqausinginnik Taiguusiliuqtiit board, the language authority created by the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut. Nunavut is a territory of northern Canada that stretches across 4 million square kilometers of the Canadian Arctic, and Inuktitut is one of its official languages.

Kublu, the former Languages Commissioner of Nunavut, teaches at the Nunavut Arctic College and the UW remotely from her home in Iqaluit, the capital of the territory. In December 2021, she taught classes to aspiring teachers as part of the Nunavut Arctic College’s teacher education program, which prepares students to become classroom teachers in the territory’s schools. The students in those classes nominated her for the award.

Kublu once lost her native language, so teaching it to others is personally meaningful for her.
Starting in the early 20th century, the Canadian government established racially segregated hospitals to treat Indigenous people for infections like tuberculosis. Children and adults received treatment, , for months or years at a time. Sent to one of these hospitals as a child, Kublu forgot how to speak Inuktitut while she was away.

But she learned her language again, thanks to her grandmother. That experience shaped how she teaches the language.

“I think I’m more able to see my language from an analytical point of view,” Kublu said, “rather than just something I speak.”

Kublu teaches Inuktitut for the UW as a part of the , offered through the Canadian Studies Center. The fellowship supports students as they acquire a foreign language and conduct research related to Canada. In 2004, the Canadian Studies Center got its first fellowship application to learn Inuktitut. Since then, they’ve awarded 38 of these fellowships to 17 students. Many of the students are conducting research in the Arctic, where the language is spoken.

The UW is the only institution in the U.S. offering students the chance to learn Canadian Inuit languages and the only institution in the U.S. awarding the Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellowship in Indigenous languages.

Nadine Fabbi, managing director of the Canadian Studies Center, says that Kublu’s award shows the high caliber of training fellows are receiving.

“This award just proves that Kublu is not only one of the foremost linguists in Inuktitut in Canada, but she’s also a good teacher,” Fabbi said. “I’m just proud that this is a caliber of teaching that’s occurring for these fellowships. It’s a boon to the program to see that our language teachers are also the top of their field.”

A ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý-based program to support underrepresented scholars in neuroscience got its start when three faculty members responded to a call for proposals by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, or NINDS.

The resulting program is called — but has a striking acronym: BRAINS. The program, designed to accelerate career advancement for postdoctoral researchers and assistant professors, offers professional development, mentoring and networking for participating scholars from underrepresented populations.

UW Notebook talked with , UW professor of psychology and principal investigator of the BRAINS Program, which is now seeking its third five-year grant of $250,000 annually from the NINDS.

What need does the BRAINS program seek to address?

Retaining a diverse faculty and building diverse leadership are critical aims of BRAINS, Mizumori said.

“When you look across the country, there has been significant effort to increase diversity in science, and in particular neuroscience. But we are concerned because statistics show that the needle just hasn’t moved very much over time.

“It’s kind of surprising. When you look to see at what career stage we are losing people, it ends up that there’s a huge drop-off between the postdoctoral years and the early faculty years — disproportionately so for underrepresented minorities. And so we homed in on that particular career stage, thinking that that’s a career stage where the country needs focused intervention.”

She said it can be difficult being the “only” — the only person of color, of a cultural background, or with a particular ability status: “One of reasons it is difficult is that the spotlight is put more directly on you, so anything you do is amplified, with everybody watching. I’ve experienced this as well.

“Also, when you are one of — maybe the only one, or one of very few from underrepresented minorities — then you tend to be asked more often to be on a committee because they want some particular type of person. This is true for women as well; if (the committee) is all men, they need a woman. And if you are junior faculty it’s really hard to say no. After a while, many junior scientists just don’t want to deal with the constant extra pressure and scrutiny anymore and so they leave science.”

How did the program come about at the UW?

Mizumori said that her interest in working to increase diversity in neuroscience grew with meeting , director of Center for Institutional Change and was further piqued when the NINDS put out a call for proposals aimed at the same goal.

She said Yen and colleague previously ran a that was quite successful.

“We all wondered if the biology model could work also for neuroscientists. We researched the request for proposals, talked to the program officers and submitted our first grant application. And it was funded!”

What is the process like for applicants?

A requirement for BRAINS, Mizumori said, is that each participant must already be successful in research as demonstrated by having a postdoctoral or early career position in the neurosciences. Those interested fill out a set of questions and write an essay on why the program would be helpful to them, she said.

“With guidance from the BRAINS program evaluator, Cara Margherio, we have a way of assessing the applicants’ responses. Based on this assessment, we prioritize high-potential individuals for whom the program could have the largest impact. The program chooses about 30 participants who attend a four-day symposium held every other year on Bainbridge Island.

“Crucially, the grant covers their transportation and housing costs, making it possible for them to attend. Additional applicants participate in a web-based BRAINS program so that the program can be available to as many people as possible. Alternate years bring what they call a cross-cohort meeting where BRAINS alumni gather to enhance networking and to build on prior career advancement training in BRAINS.”

What does the symposium involve?

The sessions, she said, include training in leadership, teamwork, time management, saying no diplomatically, dealing with harassment and “thriving as an only,” among other topics.

“It’s really about building a sense of community that most of our participants have never experienced before,” she said. “There is a lot of cross-fertilization that happens. Past participants tells us that they leave the symposium empowered and ready to take charge of their careers.”

Symposium sessions, she said, are led not only by the BRAINS co-directors but also by senior neuroscience leaders from around the country. These sessions marked the first time that several of the early and advanced career neuroscientists, including Mizumori, had ever openly discussed their experiences.

“In the past, there was no way to talk about issues unique to being of underrepresented status because people think you are weak, or complaining,” she said.

What has been the effect?

“I’d say one of the most common phrases that we hear — because we are continually doing surveys to collect data for our evaluation and research, is ‘Transformative.’ And ‘life changing.’

“Now, all of a sudden, our participants have people who believe in them, who give them tips about how to deal with particular situations that might arise uniquely for underrepresented scientists.

“Since we now have about 150 BRAINS alumni, they can network among themselves — and we teach them how to do this. So now they have lots of mentors that look like them, that are at their current and next career stage, and they have a nationwide community that they can talk to.”

The work is being noticed, Mizumori said, with the UW now being recognized in the national neuroscience community as an institution that is working hard to increase the diversity and inclusion of neuroscience faculty.

How do you know it’s working?

“We continue to collect longitudinal evaluation data. BRAINS participants have reported statistically significant improvements in mentoring relationships, networking activities, their sense of belonging in neuroscience, and their satisfaction with their career progression. The influence of the BRAINS program extends beyond these direct positive impacts, as participants also report improvements in their ability to mentor other neuroscientists.”

How is the BRAINS Program involved at the UW?

Mizumori said a number of UW faculty and postdocs have participated in and benefited directly from the BRAINS program. Program members also are working with the Neuroscience Program Seminar Committee to bring BRAINS alumni to the university to give research talks. Mizumori advises the Neuroscience Program Diversity Committee as well, bringing the BRAINS philosophy to discussions of faculty recruitment and retention.

What is follow-up like for participants?

BRAINS is the only professional development program for early career neuroscientists that offers career-long advice and community, she said.

“We follow our participants long after the initial symposium to make sure that they understand how to implement our tips and tools. The long-term follow-up is a feature that is really different about BRAINS. Also our ability to continually grow their community over time is different.

“In our program there are structures that help participants to continue to communicate, and to take control over that communication so we don’t always have to be the mediators. And that carries on, then, independently.”

Other ongoing help, Mizumori said, is provided online and through video calls, and the program helps participants attend the annual meeting for the Society for Neuroscience. “For those who can’t afford to go, part of our grant is to help them get there.”

“We have a saying: ‘Once in BRAINS, always in BRAINS.”

In 2017, the Heising-Simons Foundation — a family foundation that works in climate and clean energy, science, education, and human rights — established the to support early-career astronomers engaged in planetary research. Just over a year later, the Foundation that it would overhaul the selection process for the program because, out of 12 fellowships awarded in the program’s first two years, only two — one each year — went to female scientists.

“Even with our good intentions, we find ourselves part of a system that drives to less rather than more diversity,” said the Foundation in . “We commit to working to change our Fellowship and that system for the better.”

Over the next year, the Foundation worked with — director of the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý’s , an NSF-funded body to promote female STEM faculty on campus — to modify the application and evaluation process for the 51 Pegasi b Fellowship based on social science research. The goal: to put male and female scientists on a more equal footing.

The Heising-Simons Foundation used the revised method to choose its next class of fellows. In March of this year, the Foundation that six scientists would receive 51 Pegasi b Fellowships in 2019, four of them women.

In published Dec. 6 in the journal Nature Astronomy, Yen shared the changes that the Heising-Simons Foundation implemented, and how its lessons could inform changes in academia, education and philanthropy to boost diversity, equity and inclusion in all STEM fields. Yen sat down with UW News to discuss this unique case study.

This is just one postdoctoral fellowship that researchers in astronomy can apply for. Why is this case so important?

These fellowships have a large impact on career trajectory. When postdoctoral researchers apply for faculty positions, grants or other opportunities, they’ll be evaluated in part based on research they’ve already done and fellowships they’ve previously earned. So, when the process to award things like postdoctoral fellowships already treats male and female candidates differently, it has an impact not just in regard to diversity, equity and inclusion, but also the demographic makeup of faculty, senior researchers, administrators and mentors.

What prompted the Heising-Simons Foundation to change the way that this fellowship was awarded?

With just two fellowships going to female scientists in its first two years, there were strong reactions from the astronomy and philanthropic communities, all essentially asking: Why is the gender diversity so skewed in these fellowships while we’re having these conversations about diversity, equity and inclusion?

The Heising-Simons Foundation listened, and asked, “How can we make this better?” They reached out to experts and began a year-long process to change the way that they solicit applications and evaluate candidates.

How did you approach working with the Foundation for this fellowship?

I worked with them to evaluate the application process and as a facilitator during the evaluation and review process. Our goal was to bring changes to the fellowship application and evaluation process that reflected effective practices for diversity, equity and inclusion.

What are some of those best practices?

First, don’t narrow the applicant pool any earlier than you need to. That makes it more likely that fellowships will be awarded in a way that addresses diversity, equity and inclusion. Second, ensure that the information collected from applicants actually captures what we want to know about them, and also create an evaluation rubric for reviewers. This avoids situations in which evaluators might “fill in the blanks,” read between the lines or make assumptions about applicants that might introduce bias into the selection process. Also, we just want to ensure that we’re aware and acknowledge that bias happens to all of us.

So what are some of the changes that the Heising-Simons Foundation put in place to reflect those best practices?

Previously, postdoctoral researchers would apply through the universities that they wanted to work at. The universities would then pick which applications to send to the Heising-Simons Foundation. We changed the process so that postdoctoral researchers would apply directly to the Foundation, which would then forward those applications to the relevant universities. This keeps the universities involved in the selection process, which the Foundation wanted, but also increased the percentage of female applicants from less than 25% under the old system to more than 30%.

What about changes to the information given by applicants?

Research has shown that we’re not as good as we think we are in evaluating applications without bias coming into play. This is true even in science. Part of overhauling the process involved changes to the application itself — the information we’re requesting from the applicant. This involved stepping back and asking, “What do we really want?” Do we want someone innovative, for example? If so, how do we collect information that will let us identify innovation, for example, among the pool of applicants? And what criteria will reviewers use to evaluate and score the applications?

By starting from those types of goal-oriented questions, we made changes to the application, such as asking for an open-ended statement from the applicants about diversity, equity and inclusion. We also improved the rubric for reviewers to use in evaluating and scoring applications, including justifications for their score.

What about steps to reduce bias in the evaluation and selection process?

We did quite a lot. To provide a common context among the reviewers, I provided background research about bias — that it happens, often in counterintuitive ways, and can affect outcomes like who receives a fellowship. They reviewed applications in-person, and we took concrete steps to avoid introducing bias through things like “decision fatigue.” This is a well-documented phenomenon, and happens when you just “plow through” a list of cases with no breaks. Here, we handled the applications in randomized bundles of six, followed by a brief break. This randomized discussion also helped with anchoring bias where we latch onto a first impression — like an ordinal score or ranking — that influences our future thinking about that application.

On paper, these might look like lots of changes, but they really aren’t. They’re small changes that required a modest investment in time and resources to come up with and implement. But that investment had a large effect on reducing bias and ensuring that the evaluation and selection process is sensitive to diversity, equity and inclusion. These changes support the overall goal of scientific excellence, noting that excellence has many dimensions.

These changes don’t seem specific to astronomy.

That is correct. They’re widely applicable to STEM fields, academia and funding organizations. Many types of organizations have made commitments to diversity, equity and inclusion in STEM fields. But it takes a lot of leadership to actually make it happen. The Heising-Simons Foundation said that it wants to make the investment — caring enough to not just say, “We want to do better,” but to actually do better. And even after a change like this, the work is not over. This is an ongoing conversation, and the work must continue.

How would you like to see conversations about diversity, equity and inclusion evolve?

I would like people to consider diversity as part of excellence. People right now want to know what the value of diversity is in an organization. But let’s put it another way: What’s the value — or the cost — of being homogenous?

For more information, contact Yen at 206-543-4605 or joyceyen@uw.edu.

Late last year, the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý’s quietly marked its 15th birthday. But now, with thriving programs for early-career faculty and record numbers of female faculty in STEM fields, the center is ready for a party.

On March 31, ADVANCE will hold a belated celebration of its work and achievements since it was founded in 2001. With workshops, new resources and mentoring services the center has strived to remake the faculty recruitment and retention process to emphasize diversity in the sciences and develop resources to support early-career faculty.

“Our work through ADVANCE is to build successful and productive faculty, because their success is the university’s success,” said , UW associate dean of engineering for diversity and access, professor of electrical engineering and faculty director of ADVANCE.

There’s a lot to celebrate. Since ADVANCE opened its doors, the UW has nearly doubled the number of female faculty in 19 STEM departments across three UW colleges, from 60 in 2000 to 112 in 2015. In addition to this 93 percent increase, more than half of the female faculty in those departments are now full professors with tenure, countering the stereotype that female faculty don’t achieve full professorship as often as their male colleagues.

The UW also boasts the among the top 50 engineering schools in the country.

ADVANCE has worked to both increase the number of female faculty members in the STEM fields where they are historically underrepresented and establish support networks for faculty in the early stages of their careers.

“At UW, the early-career stage for faculty is very different today than it was when ADVANCE started,” said center director . “Today in our STEM departments there is awareness of the critical importance of addressing faculty professional development, supporting faculty success at all levels and supporting our female faculty.”

The bulk of the center’s work currently focuses on three endeavors to promote faculty recruitment and retention:

• Career development workshops for pre-tenure faculty
• Workshops on effective leadership for department chairs and college deans
• A “Mentoring-for-Leadership” lunch and speaker series for female faculty

ADVANCE designed its workshops for early-career faculty to address subjects that are important for faculty success, but which are often lacking in traditional doctoral and postdoctoral training.

“Our workshops cover topics that faculty have asked for help with, such as time management, personnel management, student mentoring and work-life balance,” said Yen. “Faculty want and need professional development. They know they can come to ADVANCE with questions and for help and resources. You don’t have to make it up as you go along or reinvent the wheel.”

Nine universities were in the first cohort of National Science Foundation ADVANCE grantees in 2001, each of whom was awarded a five-year grant. Each university’s ADVANCE program piloted a different approach. The UW center’s flagship innovation was to focus on leadership development at the university, particularly of department chairs and deans.

“A huge part of our success has been engagement with department chairs, because they have a significant impact on the success of early-career faculty,” said Riskin. “And since ADVANCE started working with chairs and deans back in 2002, we’ve found them terrific partners for recruiting and retaining diverse faculty, providing resources and addressing the problems and concerns of early-career faculty.”

Another endeavor is to help female faculty across the UW consider leadership opportunities as part of their career plans, such as becoming department chairs. This led to the “Mentoring-for-Leadership” lunch and speaker series, which is the only ADVANCE program open only to female faculty. One past speaker at this event was UW President , who was principal investigator for ADVANCE during much of its tenure.

Looking forward, Yen and Riskin said they want ADVANCE to continue these current projects, but also expand the center’s focus to include increasing female faculty from underrepresented minority groups and creating new programs to support mid-career faculty.

For its first six years, UW ADVANCE was supported by the National Science Foundation. The UW center continued thanks to additional grants and support from the UW, NSF and the National Institutes of Health.

###

For more information, contact Yen at 206-543-4605 or joyceyen@uw.edu and Riskin at 206-685-2313 or riskin@uw.edu.

Among the nation’s top 50 engineering schools, the ����Ӱ�Ӵ�ý has the highest percentage of women in tenure-track engineering faculty positions: 22.4 percent.

Nationally, the figure is 14.5 percent, and that gap didn’t grow by accident.

Over the past 14 years, UW has worked on everything from highlighting how unconscious bias can affect hiring practices to ensuring junior faculty feel comfortable extending tenure clocks to have children to providing leadership support.

The UW chose early on to focus on one thing that can have an outsized influence on faculty members’ well-being — especially for women and other underrepresented groups in science, math and engineering. They created to help department chairs acquire skills to create equitable and inclusive environments that work well for all faculty members.

Now, the UW is developing an online toolkit — called — that other universities can use to design and host their own department-focused workshops to advance STEM faculty diversity at their home institutions.

The UW is hosting a special train-the-trainer workshop in Seattle in October 2015 that will give participants an early look at the coming online toolkit and the opportunity to get help planning a workshop on faculty recruitment for their own department chairs. until June 22.

“The departmental culture is the front line of how people experience a university — it’s where evaluations take place, where people are assigned to teaching, where decisions about salaries are made,” said , program and research manager for the that developed the LEAD workshops.

“Department chairs really influence that microclimate. But often they move into these positions after having been research superstars or individual investigators, and then they become managers of people. And they maybe have no formal education around how to do that well,” Yen said.

The full version of the open-source toolkit — which will allow users to share, upload, add to and rate materials — will be available in 2016. The online resources will include everything from sample budgets and invitational emails that are helpful in planning a workshop to content such as case studies, handouts and sample presentations.

The LEAD materials cover a wide range of topics, including how to effectively communicate, recruit faculty from nontraditional sources, recognize how unconscious biases perpetuate the status quo, manage up and down, effectively mentor a faculty member whose background may be different than one’s own and be cognizant of data that show, for instance, that women aren’t likely to negotiate as hard as men.

“We tell the chairs that if they’re hiring a man and a woman at the same time, make sure that when she says ‘thank you’ and he says ‘is that all?’ that she gets an equal amount,” said , an electrical engineering professor and associate dean of diversity and access for the UW College of Engineering. “On the other hand, sometimes the woman may be offered a higher salary, and we tell the chair to make sure the man gets the higher salary, too.”

The UW’s original campus workshops grew out of an NSF ADVANCE Institutional Transformation Grant in 2001 to advance women faculty in science, engineering and mathematics and help create a diverse climate where all faculty in these disciplines receive support and recognition. These workshops continue today on the UW campus. Additionally, three national LEAD workshops hosted by the UW in 2007, 2008 and 2009 and the online toolkit have been funded by follow-up .

Since the first grant, the UW has seen a 78 percent increase in the number of tenured or tenure-track women faculty in all ADVANCE departments, including an 100 percent increase in engineering departments and a 59 percent increase in science and math departments.

“One of the big reasons we’ve been doing so well with our women faculty hires is our history with this program and these workshops,” said Riskin. “Our chairs have really signed on and have worked hard to recruit women and do the right thing. And once you have a critical mass of female faculty in a department, it makes it so much easier to attract more.”

For more information, contact Yen at joyceyen@uw.edu or 206-543-4605 or Riskin at riskin@uw.edu or 206-685-2313.