Hello #AcademicMastodon @academicchatter ! I am part of a jury that selects students for our master program (application review + interviews). What are your tips for reducing #genderbias and all forms of #discriminations to a minimum? (@jesswade maybe?)
@leovarnet Our committee put together a list of tips on this here (section "You are on a selection committee and want to avoid bias in your admission/hiring procedure"): https://equalityanddiversity.dec.ens.fr/en/am-i-biased-15020
@tengelen fantastic, thanks Tahnée. I looked up in the DEC E&D website, but not in the right section apparently...!
@leovarnet @academicchatter @jesswade I’d focus on the interviews— I feel this is where a lot of unintentional bias and subjectivity creeps in to selection processes. In particular, the different conversational styles and mores of women, neurodivergents, immigrants and those from different cultural backgrounds may be disadvantaged when they are judged as less confident/engaged/forthright/knowledgeable or just not “clicking” with the prevailing culture.
@leovarnet My tip for reducing #genderbias consist in just doing everything normal but with the restriction of seeing everyone as humans instead of using labels as man or woman, girl or boy: to see people as folks' consciousness, you know? Thinkers with expectations...
@danielyuksek Unfortunately, I am afraid that these biases and stereotypes are deeply rooted and that you cannot just decide to be gender-blind or color-blind... Worse, this approach may have the opposite effect, because it makes you less aware of your own biases...
@leovarnet I agree with you on the idea that -indeed- we do have unaware personal biases, which are defined by our prejudices that are restricted by the subconscious decisions of our true nature: do you know why you prefer chocolate over vanilla? Said that, I think it is easy to deal with personal biases when you understand who you are and where you come from. In real-life situations, seeing people disliking people because of natural differences is normal in an anthropological fashion or sense, understanding this when you are the weak leads you to the point where you have to be stronger and defend what you are. But there is a trick: you cannot get angry because you can understand that someone else sees what you see normal as something different, and it is normal, because nothing is really normal when you take serious assumptions such as time or matter. Wanna invalidate gender bias? Make people care about things that are more valuable and that they haven't noticed yet, and make it something profitable because if something does not have profit no one gives it a try, so give people new reasons to care over common senses interactions so that natural prejudices lose importance in everyone psiques
@danielyuksek Thank you for reviving this topic! One limit I see to this line of reasonning is that it assumes that biases are related to the perspective of the individual, and not to that of society itself. If you think of gender biases as a difference in individual values/point of view, how would you explain that, in a jury, female faculty exhibit a bias against female applicants? (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1211286109). This being said, I agree with you that being aware of its own bias plays an important role in dealing with them! (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-019-0686-3)
@leovarnet yeah friend, I agree with you. You know when something fair is said it develops something that later appears. I think is a good start to recommend checking personal biases before checking on the social biases that change from region to region, maybe nobody is right and that is the fair thing that nobody says
@leovarnet @academicchatter ironically enough, I think that the “greater potential” argument may go other way then intended, where people may think that those with greater potential are those who have certain characteristics… that is to say, it would be very hard to make a system 100% fair using judgment.
@tamar_sofer @academicchatter very good point! So you would say there is no way to make this "potential-based evaluation" an objective thing, e.g., by using predefined criteria as in the case of achievements?
@leovarnet @academicchatter not being an expert yet being an optimistic — in the sense that I believe that many people growing with low-resources have higher potential compared to where they reach— I think this is challenging, and likely too challenging.
@leovarnet @academicchatter @jesswade all jury members need mandatory training on what gender bias and discrimination looks like and sounds like. Train on what specifically you are looking for and what to ignore. I’m on interview committees and we train before opening up the interviews. It’s been extremely helpful.
@leovarnet Happy to chat on a zoom RE: this. ?
To continue on the issue of #discrimination in selection committees, it seems to me that there are two levels on which to act. First, to reduce the influence of biases in the decision, for example by choosing the selection criteria before looking at the applications. However, this kind of tools is not enough: even if we manage to eliminate judgment biases, blindly basing the decision on merit is unfair for candidates facing discrimination or coming from countries where research is less developed, and who did not have the same opportunities as others. Complementary tools are therefore proposed, for example, considering the potential of candidates and not their achievements. I think this aspect is important, but more difficult to implement: Given that not all members of the jury are sensitive to the issue of discrimination, it can be tricky to argue that we want to put forward a candidate with a lesser CV because we think he or she has greater potential... assessing achievements is a bit like "counting points", whereas assessing potential seems more subjective. Do any of you have a concrete experience of how to deal with this in a jury? @academicchatter #AcademicMastodon #genderbias