Anti-Racism Policies

Our commitment to Antiracist Policies led to a policy review conducted by the Anti-Racism Task Force and Executive Director Jen Brydges from 2020-2021. In this review, the following changes were recommended to the Executive Committee in December 2021:

Changes to SRA’s Leadership Policy Manual and By-laws 

For more transparency and equity in the committee assignment, we recommended that committee assignments recommendations made to the Executive Committee be selected by a joint committee of the President, Vice-President of Programming and either the Chair of the Inclusion, Equity, and Social Justice Committee or a Diversity Officer appointed by the Executive Committee.

We have also recommended that the Inclusion, Equity, and Social Justice and the International Committees be made standing committees of SRA.  

We added definitions of antiracism and equity into SRA’s leadership manual, and ask that all SRA committees enact these practices including ensuring that all voices are heard, work is distributed equitably (e.g., across rank, gender, race/ethnicity), and decisions are made collectively. 

We have asked the Executive Committee to review the compensation and recognition practices of SRA in 2022, to ensure a fair and equitable distribution of resources relative to labor.  

If you'd like to share any additional feedback with SRA on the by-laws and/or policies, please contact us. 

Anti-racism in Academia

Early on, the anti-racist task force recognized the need to work towards anti-racism within the academic structures and institutions that many SRA members call their professional home. School rankings such as the “Best Developmental Psychology Programs” in U.S. News & World Report are easily digestible indicators of “prestige” and used by academic institutions to attract students, faculty and dollars. These rankings pay minimal or no attention to justice, diversity, and inclusion. Instead, they are based primarily on peer nominations and criteria such as research income (grants), publications in academic journals, number of citations, staff to student ratio, and institutional income.

We proposed the creation of an alternative ranking system - tentatively termed the SRA Equity Ranking -  based on criteria indicating that the academic unit fosters anti-racism and values justice, diversity, inclusion and representation. Indicators assess these dimensions in the areas of representation and inclusion, curriculum and training, research and scholarship and program/departmental practices and policies. Such a ranking system would allow academic units and institutions to evaluate and radically reimagine conditions so that students, faculty, and staff can thrive. The SRA Equity Ranking is one visible way to prompt an institutional change in addressing inequity in representation and inclusion in developmental science in academia. We are currently are engaging in a pilot process to develop the SRA Equity Ranking and use it to assess the top 10 Best Developmental Psychology Programs according to the U.S. News & World Report. We will also identify positive role model programs that exemplify what an anti-racist academic unit looks like. We actively seek feedback from fellow SRA members and scholars, especially BIPOC colleagues, throughout the development of the equity indicators and piloting process so that the equity rank centers the voices and experiences of BIPOC scholars in academia. 

See below for some examples of indicators that would be important to understand anti-racism in academia. To share additional suggestions, please complete this form. 

Representation/Inclusion* Curriculum/Training Research/Scholarship Program Practices and Policies**
Proportion of faculty in program by minoritized indicator(s) Proportion of courses dedicated to the unique experiences of “minoritized” groups Proportion of faculty studying issues relevant to structural marginalization by “minoritized” indicators Anti-racist, diversity and inclusion training provided to incoming faculty
Proportion faculty in tenure/tenure track lines in program by minoritized indicator(s) Proportion of courses with content on the unique experiences of “minoritized” groups Proportion of faculty studying issues the unique experiences of “minoritized” groups by “minoritized” indicators  Safe and inclusive norms discussed and established in program settings (e.g. talks, program meetings, classes)
Proportion faculty in non tenure/track roles (visiting, clinical, adjunct, etc.) in program by minoritized indicators Proportion of courses dedicated to critical race, gender, LGBTQ, intersectional theories, decolonial and other critical  perspectives.   Proportion of faculty using critical race, gender, LGBTQ, intersectional theories, decolonial and other critical  perspectives in their scholarship by “minoritized” indicators Presence of policies and procedures to respond to instances of racism, bias and microaggression
Number and type (open ended - to capture amount of work and power/prestige/visibility) of faculty committee service by minoritized indicators Proportion of courses with content on critical race, gender, LGBTQ, intersectional theories, decolonial and other critical perspectives.  

Proportion of faculty using non-positivist methodologies (e.g. qualitative, mixed-methods, PAR) by “minoritized” indicators

 Presence of clear guidelines and checklists in recruitment and hiring policies and practices considering minoritized indicators
Average hours/week spent mentoring students (BA, MA & PhD) by minoritized indicators Proportion of courses dedicated to non-positivist methodologies (e.g. qualitative, mixed-methods, PAR) Proportion of faculty engaged in research with local community / community-based partners Presence of clear guidelines and checklists in tenure and promotion policies and practices considering minoritized indicators
Average hours/week spent advising students (BA, MA & PhD) on issues related to diversity and inclusion by minoritized indicators Proportion of courses with content on non-positivist methodologies (e.g. qualitative, mixed-methods, PAR) Proportion of PhD students studying issues relevant to structural marginalization in their dissertation by “minoritized” indicators Proportion of recruitment and hiring committee members by “minoritized” indicators
Proportion of faculty who achieve tenure by minoritized  indicators Proportion of courses dedicated to the role of structural marginalization in development   Proportion of PhD students studying issues the unique experiences of “minoritized” groups in their dissertation by “minoritized” indicators  Proportion of promotion and tenure committee members by “minoritized” indicators
Number of years to full professor by minoritized indicators Proportion of courses with content on the role of structural marginalization in development  Proportion of PhD students using critical race, gender, LGBTQ, intersectional theories, decolonial and other critical  perspective in their dissertation by “minoritized” indicators Presence of retention/promotion supports for early career faculty of color
Number of program faculty in department/school/university leadership roles, by minoritized indicator(s) Comprehensive exams include knowledge of structural marginalization and/or unique experiences of minoritized groups 

Proportion of PhD students using non-positivist methodologies (e.g. qualitative, mixed-methods, PAR) in their dissertation by “minoritized” indicators

 Program involvement in pipeline or other initiatives to increase diversity in academia
Average teaching load for program faculty, by minortized indicator(s) Comprehensive exams include knowledge of critical race, gender, LGBTQ, intersectional theories, decolonial and other critical  perspectives Proportion of PhD students engaged in research with local community / community-based partners Program engaged in any kind of conversations about anti-racism in program practices, scholarship and teaching since summer 2020?
Proportion of PhD students in program by minoritized indicator(s) Comprehensive exams include knowledge of non-positivist methodologies (e.g. qualitative, mixed-methods, PAR) Program/school grant opportunities/resources granted to faculty by minoritized indicators  Program engaged in any kind of activities (committee work, curricular reviews, needs assessments, workships) about anti-racism in program practices, scholarship and teaching since summer 2020?
Proportion of PhD students who attain PhD by minoritized  indicator(s) Presence of a funded mentoring/training programs for traditionally excluded students Program/school grant opportunities/resources granted to PhD students by minoritized indicators  Programs to recruit or enhance the readiness of students, faculty and staff from under-represented groups 
Average number of years to PhD for students in program by minoritized indicator(s) Students evaluated on extent to which their scholarship contributes local community needs / partners with local community   Existence of a diversity and equity committee, office or officer
Post graduation job type (open ended and coded for themes) by minoritized indicator(s) Are students evaluated on multiple criteria besides publications (i.e., engagement in community, department service, science communication)?   Mentoring, counseling or peer support programs aimed at students, faculty and staff from under-represented groups
Faculty members’ sense of belonging and inclusion in program, by minoritized indicator(s)  Proportion of program talks from minoritized speakers   Equitable policies (e.g., promotion, work load, leadership roles) between tenure-track and non-tenure track faculty and staff
PhD student’s sense of belonging and inclusion in program, by minoritized indicator(s)  Proportion of program talks on issues specific to minoritized groups    Equitable service policies and practices to address disproportionate service asks for minoritized faculty 
Extent to which faculty race/ethnicity represents local community  Extent to which scholarship and teaching in the program is rooted in community partnerships, impact of work in ways that are prioritize community voices and perspectives    
Extent to which PhD student race/ethnicity represents local community

Extent to which scholarly impact is defined in ways that prioritize community impact, voices and perspectives

    
Faculty salaries by minoritized indicators      

Notes:
*Throughout the table we have used the term “minoritized” to refer to people from groups that are traditionally excluded in developmental science. We tentatively define this further as people from racially/ethnically minoritized groups, specifically Black, Latinx, Asian, Indigenous, MENA peoples.
**Indicators will also ask when these programs and policies were implemented