Affirmative action to employ more women and minorities at Harvard consists mainly in efforts to increase the number who apply for jobs. Since the first affirmative action plan was prepared in 1973, the proportion of women employees has risen markedly, especially in nonfaculty positions, but the proportion of black and Hispanic faculty has changed little. The record of the Medical School is particularly poor. Affirmative action is hampered by a lack of vigorous support from Harvard leaders, the decentralized university organization, the often unjustified perception of candidates' weak quality, the opposition of some women and minority faculty, and the shortages of qualified candidates.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Conducted by examining institutional reports and records in the OFCCP regional offices.
2.
2. As major research universities receive many contracts of $1 million or more, they complained that they were audited constantly. When notified of a $1 million award, OFCCP now conducts an audit only if none has been conducted for two years.
3.
3. When one editor of this Annals issue visited the OFCCP Washington headquarters in November 1991, he was told that the New England group was a good example of liaison groups and that John Williams, the Harvard affirmative action officer, was its chairman.
4.
4. See John E. Fleming, Gerald R. Gill, and David Swinton, The Case for Affirmative Action (Washington, DC: Howard University Press, 1978), pp. 158-177.
5.
5. Deborah Carter and Reginald Wilson, Ninth Annual Status Report: Minorities in Higher Education (Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 1991), p. 34.
