Voices of Black Faculty at Predominantly White Institutions: Coping Strategies and Institutional Interventions

Abstract

Black faculty are underrepresented in the academy, and it is critical to clarify an understanding of how racism and privilege influence people of color working in academia. The aim of this paper is to examine the experiences of Black full-time faculty with racial microaggressions at predominantly White institutions (PWIs). Seven Black faculty members were interviewed using in-depth, semi-structured interviews. The results revealed the following themes of how microaggressions are experienced: ignored input; challenged credibility; cultural exclusion; encouraged to look away from discrimination; and stereotypes and intersection challenges. Furthermore, themes on coping strategies are found: overworking, outside support and self-care, and denial versus confrontation. It was found that faith, family, and extra university community support improved coping. Additionally, changing cultural mindsets and institutional support were noted as key to navigating the normal course of inquiry in higher education.

People of color (POC) are disproportionately underrepresented in the professoriate with Whites being normalized. The trends in research highlight the small numbers of faculty of color (FOC) and their diverse professional struggles in higher education (Dancy and Jean-Marie 2014). Blacks make up 13.4 percent of the United States population and only 6 percent of the professors, and Hispanics make up 18.3 percent of the population and 5 percent of the professors (Davis and Fry 2019). The recruitment, retention, and advancement of underrepresented minorities, including Black Americans, Hispanics, and Native American or Pacific Islanders, is a significant issue throughout academia (Whittaker, Montgomery, and Martinez Acosta 2015).

Although the challenges and experiences for FOC are documented in theoretical, empirical, and narrative studies (Dancy and Jean-Marie 2014; Edwards and Ross 2018; Sue et al. 2011), in this study, I chose to focus exclusively on Black faculty because racial microaggressions occur more frequently among Black Americans than any other ethnic minority groups (O’Keefe et al. 2015). For this reason, the research questions this study seeks to address are: (1) how microaggressions are experienced by Black faculty and (2) how Black faculty cope with those microaggressions. This study seeks to close an apparent gap in the literature on racial microaggressions in institutes of higher education. Furthermore, this study provides an examination of racism in the workplace through the narratives of professors at predominantly White institutions (PWIs). The purpose of this paper is to clarify an understanding of how racial microaggressions influence the beliefs, understanding, and experiences of Black professors at PWIs and to provide recommended interventions. PWIs, administrators, and faculty can then use these findings to guide them in supporting FOC in the academy.

This study examines the experiences of seven self-identified Black professors with racial microaggressions at PWIs located in the Northeastern United States. Narrative analysis was used due to its unique ability to understand human experiences through stories, to find meaning, and to elicit implications of those experiences. Not only that, but it may be used as a means to increase cultural awareness and may represent the participant’s life story using their own voice (Crenshaw et al. 1995).

Prior Research

The term “racial microaggressions” was coined by Pierce in 1970 (Sue et al. 2007). Racial microaggressions are a form of systemic everyday racism. They are verbal and nonverbal assaults directed toward POC, often carried out in subtle, automatic, or unconscious forms. These are layered, cumulative assaults that take an emotional, physical, and academic toll on POC (Pérez Huber and Solorzano 2015). Racial microaggressions are oftentimes delivered in the form of disdain; for example, snobbish looks, body language, inflection, or condescending remarks (Rollock 2012). Campbell and Manning (2014) assert that racial microaggressions are a form of social control, and other scholars characterize racial microaggressions as reminders of the target group’s second-class status, and symbolic of past governmental injustices directed toward POC (Sue et al. 2019).

Racial microaggressions are a form of racism (Fleras 2016) and have been shown to be extremely harmful to POC. Black faculty experience unique challenges with racial microaggressions, and recognition of racial microaggressions is important to their existence at PWIs. Coupled with that, uplifting the voices of Black faculty is necessary to legitimize their plight while illuminating the need for PWIs to consider racial microaggression as a threat to the survival of Black faculty in the campus environment (Louis et al. 2016). Existing research examining racial microaggressions in the workplace argues that managers and employees consciously support equal treatment for all while unconsciously harboring negative feelings toward POC (Freeman and Stewart 2018; Hollingsworth et al. 2017; Sue et al. 2011).

Literature Review

In most places in the world, university professors are drawn from the predominant culture and racial majority and do not necessarily represent the racial and cultural diversity of the students they teach (Lander and Santoro 2017). In U.S. colleges and universities, Black faculty are underrepresented in comparison with Black undergraduate students. In 2017, only 6 percent of U.S. postsecondary faculty were Black, compared with 14 percent of undergraduate students (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 2020). Additionally, from 1981 to 2007 in the United States, there has only been a slight increase (from 4.2 to 5.4 percent) in Black full-time faculty. At the present rate of advancement, “it will take almost 150 years for the proportion of African American college faculty to resemble the proportion of Blacks in the U.S. population” (“The Snail-Like Progress of Blacks in Faculty Ranks of Higher Education” 2008).

Impact of Racial Microaggressions

Many scholars have found that racial microaggressions are a common barrier for Black faculty in U.S. colleges and universities, and Black faculty constantly negotiate multiple visible and invisible barriers in the college classroom (Dancy and Jean-Marie 2014; Lloyd-Jones 2014; McGowan 2022). Additionally, they are more scrutinized by White students, and their expertise is often questioned. By the same token, Pittman (2012) relates that White students interacted in ways that challenged the intelligence of Black faculty. That is, they frequently did not believe that Black faculty deserved their status as faculty. These faculty members also reported being harassed and threatened by White students. Other scholars (Sue et al. 2007; Torres, Driscoll, and Burrow 2010) posited that Black Americans who have successfully entered or completed graduate studies experienced a variety of race-related barriers, including being treated like a criminal or a second-class citizen, having their personal abilities underestimated or ignored, and feelings of isolation.

Racial Microaggressions and Whiteness

Racial microaggressions negatively impact POC and their retention at PWIs. Pittman (2012) argues that racial microaggressions are common in Black faculty experiences with White colleagues and White students, and racial microaggressions reinforce that Blacks are different and apart from the “Norm of Whiteness.” Hooks et al. (1997) characterize Whiteness as a location of race privilege, a place where White people look at themselves, at others, and at society, through a set of cultural practices. Whiteness is a social-political and cultural construct that underpins the operation and existence of everyday racism and microaggressions. Whiteness is associated with a position of power that maintains the interest of Whites which produces inequity and results in the reproduction of power for White groups (Lander and Santoro 2017; Levinson et al. 2011). Other researchers concur that Whiteness is normative, and it sets the standard of what is acceptable in many social situations (Delgado and Stefancic 2017). Whiteness is frequently associated with privilege, and contrarily POC are associated with oppression, particularly Blacks. White privilege helps to maintain racist narratives and it is important to acknowledge the power of White privilege in constructing stories about race (Solorzano and Yosso 2002).

Implications for FOC

McGowan (2022) noted that the benefits of having FOC at U.S. colleges and universities are well documented. First, they may serve as positive role models and mentors for minority students. Second, not only do FOC promote the success of students of color, but they also serve as mentors to junior FOC, helping to promote healthy representative environments for them at higher education institutions. Furthermore, they improve the recruitment, retention, and success of junior faculty and students of color, hence improving campus diversity and supporting pipeline efforts (Hassouneh et al. 2014). Third, POC promote diversity and academic excellence that advances student outcomes in cultural competence and professionalism. Finally, diversity in college has long-term benefits as students who graduate from a diverse institution are more likely to seek diverse environments after completing college (McGowan 2022).

Theoretical Framework

Critical race theory (CRT) is the framework for this study. CRT was developed by a group of legal scholars including Bell and Delgado in the 1970s, who focused on how laws could transform racial discrimination and make a difference in the lives of POC. The goal of CRT is to acknowledge, analyze, and undo the structures of racism. CRT uses the U.S. history of African Americans, through the institution of slavery and the discriminatory and government-sanctioned racist policies, for the notion that racism is still present and remains an essential part of society (Dade et al. 2015). CRT is an explanatory framework and is grounded in the lived experiences of POC (Kim 2016).

The five elements that form CRT in education are: (1) the intercentricity of race and racism with other forms of subordination: CRT recognizes how race and other forms of oppression intersect with life experiences and events; (2) the challenge of dominant ideology: CRT defies the claim that colleges and universities make toward objectivity, meritocracy, and equal opportunity; (3) the commitment to social justice: CRT challenges racism and acknowledges the potential to oppress and marginalize others as a response to race and gender and class; (4) the centrality of experiential knowledge: CRT recognizes the experiential knowledge of POC as legitimate, a strength, and critical to understanding racial subordination; and (5) the transdisciplinary perspective: CRT names racist indignities and identifies their source recognizing that those injured by racism and oppression are not alone in the margins, and they become empowered by hearing their stories and the stories of others and learn how to defend themselves. CRT recognizes how race and other forms of oppression intersect with life experiences and events. CRT is a framework that seeks to examine and reconstruct organizational and cultural aspects of education that maintain, dominate, and subordinate POC (Pérez Huber and Solorzano 2015; Solorzano and Yosso 2002).

Methodology

The overall design of the study was qualitative. Qualitative research methodology was used because it involves what is talked about as giving voice to the abundant experiences of people’s lives (Braun and Clark 2013), reducing societal alienation, effecting social change, and exposing conditions of injustice (Gergen 2014). In general, the methods for this study are founded on a framework of CRT. Such a view posits that well-told stories describing the lived experiences of Blacks can help to link their world and others (Delgado and Stefancic 2017).

This qualitative research focused on studying the lived experiences of seven tenured and nontenured Black professors at public and private PWIs. The participants were recruited by the researcher. Email invitations were sent to known Black faculty. Respondents were asked to provide contact information for other Black faculty who may be interested in the study. The data were collected from May 2020 to October 2020. Purposive criterion and snowball sampling were used. The seven faculty members were two full professors, two associate professors, and three assistant professors with a minimum of five years of teaching experience (see Supplemental Appendix A).

Institutional review board approval was obtained prior to the collection of the data. Confidentiality is being upheld. An informed consent form and the interview guide were sent electronically prior to the interview, and written informed consent was obtained prior to the interview. In-depth, semi-structured qualitative interview data were collected. The interview guide (see Supplemental Appendix B) was based on a review of the literature on racial microaggressions (Louis et al. 2016). The interview guide was used to explore the meaningfulness of their experiences and to build the narratives on what are the experiences of Black faculty with racial microaggressions at PWIs.

Individual interviews lasting approximately 90 minutes were conducted. The interviews were videotaped and a verbatim transcript was provided by Zoom. The verbatim transcript was checked three times for accuracy by the interviewer and corrections were made to the transcripts. Interview transcripts were read and re-read multiple times, analyzed, and cross-analyzed. During cross-analysis, the interview transcripts were subjected to intense scrutiny. Multiple codes were identified and listed in the margins of the transcript hardcopy. The codes were placed on an Excel spreadsheet, color-coded, counted, scrutinized, and condensed with multiple codes recoded. The first cycle, second cycle, and postcoding were used (Saldaña 2016), and the codes were collapsed into a few categories. The final set of codes was used to identify longer-phrased themes. A detailed content analysis of interview responses using an iterative coding process was used.

In this paper, I present data that highlights the nature of the experiences of the participants. I do not intend to generalize the findings of this study; however, the experiences of these Black faculty members are noteworthy and may reverberate with other faculty in similar situations. Anthym and Tuitt (2019) assert the primary intent of the narrative is to illuminate. The intent of the counter-narrative is to offer an alternative explanation in hopes that exposure can lead to new realities (Delgado 1989). The counter-narrative is one of the central tools used by CRT to give precedence to the experiences of minority groups and to highlight the many faces of racism in everyday educational practices. CRT scholars posit the stories that POC tell come from a frame of reference different from the dominant culture and challenge the status quo and the stories of POC speak from an experience framed by racism, and they must be able to give voice to their distinct experiences (Levinson et al. 2011). Considering this, the counter-narrative is offered in the presentation of the data.

Results

The narrative analysis revealed five themes of how microaggressions are experienced by Black faculty: ignored input; challenged credibility; in-group exclusion; encouraged to look away from discrimination; and stereotypes and intersection challenges. Furthermore, three themes emerged related to how Black faculty cope with microaggressions, which were overworking; outside support and self-care; and denial or confrontation. I will discuss each theme and provide supporting participants’ quotes.

How Microaggressions Are Experienced

Theme 1: Ignored input

Black faculty described experiences in which they believed their input was ignored. For example, Elizabeth stated:

I felt like I’ve been ignored [. . .] I don’t say anything because [. . .] I’ve been silenced. I feel like faculty of color are just a checkpoint [. . .] something that they have to do [. . .] we’re on the sidelines looking in [. . .] I don’t talk anymore because what I have to say is not important. I’ve had to stop, this is me controlling my sanity [. . .] What I have to say is ignored and dismissed. I felt like I was in a toxic environment. We’re having a meeting and I provided a suggestion to help. But it was as if no, you’re not allowed in these activities, in these conversations and or anything of that nature. I would be in my office crying [. . .] It’s like they pick and choose and when they choose it is never a faculty of color that they try to acknowledge and support. They would go to meetings together, over to each other’s house, and I just felt invisible, and it was so hurtful.

Elizabeth believed that she was intentionally and frequently excluded and ignored. Similarly, these seemingly insignificant and cumulative slights may take a heavy psychological and physical toll on the targets of the behaviors. These are experiences that marginalized group members experience continually (Torino et al. 2019), and the failure to engage POC, and to promote idea sharing, as well as placing value on their contributions are factors that impact retention (Whittaker et al. 2015). Similarly, Paris experienced the following:

After a while, I made decisions to stop going to meetings. I made decisions to just stop being the token black person. Suggestions were made, and they were ignored. That’s where there’s a lack of support. I was heartbroken because that was actually my first real experience with racism. [. . .] I didn’t go to meetings for an entire year, and no one even noticed.

Unequal treatment may be manifested as exclusion and result in feelings of otherness. Paris may believe her exclusionary treatment is the result of being in the out-group. There is a normativeness associated with being White compared with being nonwhite and being a part of the in-group in contrast to being part of the out-group. In a similar fashion, Debra explained:

I think it took me a year to even go back to faculty meetings. In this arena with people who obviously don’t want me [. . .] You would think they are progressive but I am just having to deal with some really cliquish issues [. . .] you’re either in the group or, or you’re not. You know, sometimes feeling like there are decisions made and conversations that happen and it’s just a small group of people that always seem to kind of spearhead [. . .] They’re like mean girls. [. . .] They are aggressive with mostly faculty of color and will just say sometimes the most inappropriate things. [. . .] Snide remarks, offhand remarks. They feel that it’s okay for them to publicly berate anyone, but they only do it to African Americans. When you bring things up, nothing changes.

Theme 2: Challenged credibility

Many participants believed they do not fit into higher education due to the interactions of whiteness and white privilege. Many white students questioned their intelligence, knowledge, and their right to be there. Robert shared the following experience of how the faculty and students questioned his credibility:

I feel dismissed, at times [. . .] I feel as if this sort of imposter syndrome, kind of feeling like you must prove your legitimacy. It feels like you’re still trying to validate your right to be here [. . .] your right to speak [. . .]. Individuals, both students and staff, will ask questions to verify my potential, my suitability for the role. I‘ve had multiple times where people have wondered out loud, do you really have a PhD or where did you study?

While recalling this interchange, Robert noted that White students implied that Black faculty are intellectually inferior. Likewise, Caroline shared that she was questioned and felt disrespected by White students:

I often get questioned about things by students, usually they’re white males, anytime I say something that goes against any of their personal beliefs or personal experiences, [. . .] literally after one class, I had five students come up to me and at one point I was in the middle and they’re surrounding me. One person is trying to give me articles, others are showing me articles on his computer. Saying why some of the things I said was inaccurate, another guy is asking for me to prove certain things and I just sat there, and I said, if I was a white male would we be here right now?

This exchange may appear to be an example of incivility, however, the professor may view this as a microaggression because of the possibility that the professor’s race and gender contributed to the negative interaction. This underscores how microaggressions can manifest on a continuum from intentional to unintentional (Torino et al. 2019). Students may have believed the professor was providing inaccurate information; however, how they handled the situation appears inappropriate, and the professor may feel challenged, isolated, and unsupported by the institution regarding this disagreement of course content.

Theme 3: In-group exclusion

Feelings of exclusion, self-doubt, and insecurity were experienced by Black respondents when they interacted with other faculty. Robert said,

These people have been nice to me in other arenas. So, they certainly couldn’t be engaging in, you know, anything racially [. . .] I used to question what I was feeling gut-wise, about what had just been said, like that didn’t sound right [. . .] Maybe I’m just being too critical, you know [. . .] I’ve come to the point of kind of accepting the fact that when I feel like something is not right, it might not be, and it’s okay to trust that feeling. It would make me a little bit more reluctant and maybe create a little bit more apprehension early on in terms of whether I could really do this.

Similarly, Sue (2010) acknowledges that victims of microaggressions often struggle to determine if prejudice is at play or whether to dismiss the situation by blaming themselves for reading too much into the situation or by being too sensitive and assuming malintent when none was intended.

Many participants observed that their experiences with white faculty were challenging. Debra shared that she frequently experienced exclusion from white colleagues:

You’re either in the group or you’re not [. . .] It’s almost like a cultural thing that’s passed down to the in-group [...] they’re all white [. . .] and I noticed the Whites publicly berate faculty of color.

Edgar indicated similar feelings of exclusion:

I didn’t get invited to their parties [. . .] They were all old white women, older white females [. . .] And so then I knew. I’m not getting anything. I’m not going to be asking because it’s been made very, very clear that I’m not a part of that country club set. [. . .] I thought that if I modulate my voice a little lower and had a different kind of discourse with them that things might change. When I spoke up about microaggressions, they blamed me and blamed it on cultural differences. And so, you know it was suggested that there was a culture thing going on here, but that I would have to adapt to that culture. Microaggressions are manifestations of racism. They’re not points of etiquette. If you look at them as a form of racism, oh yeah, then you can call it what it is.

Two respondents described experiencing a duality that exists when working at PWIs. Robert states, “How we survive in the larger society and how we survive in the institutional environment is different.” Daphne echoed a similar response by saying, “There is the duality to survival at a PWI with being in the institutional environment and of POC coming together.”

The narrative of in-group exclusion is stated repeatedly by the respondents. Participants reported there is a need for respect from faculty and students at PWIs. In addition, almost every participant described feeling like an outsider in the workplace, and most participants described feeling ignored, silenced, excluded, and rejected. Unequal treatment affects faculty members, delineating them to outsider status and placing them at a disadvantage. Microaggressions imply cultural differences and social inferiorities that put the recipient’s nonbelongingness as a key issue with feelings of uneasiness and calling into question their rightful place and magnifying their differences in alienating ways (Fleras 2016). I argue that these types of practices serve as microaggressions, and institutional support is needed to help POC to be successful at PWIs.

Theme 4: Encouraged to look away from discrimination

This theme consisted of personal reactions by the participants to power relationships and being encouraged to look away when discrimination occurred. Five out of seven faculty said they experienced systemic racism, and a lack of support for POC at their institutions. They described their reactions to perceived discriminatory hiring and bias at PWIs. For example, Debra reported:

When on the hiring committee, they had already decided that they were going to hire this White guy for the position. Do you know how illegal it is? [. . .] It has nothing to do with qualifications [. . .] Decisions are being made behind closed doors. These things have happened before. [. . .] They’re just some cultural institutional things. This is just the way they are. [. . .] I don’t think that they really understand what it’s like to have to survive at these predominantly white institutions. As a person of color and see the things that you know that go on, that you know personally affect you. Each and every one of us.

The respondent in this example was aware of bias in hiring; however, she believed she lacked the power to influence the decisions made by the hiring committee. Most of the participants expressed feeling a sense of powerlessness as well as a lack of support from administrators. Likewise, Pérez Huber and Solorzano (2015) voiced that any theory of microaggression is linked to power as well as injustice and is mediated by institutional barriers that support the dominant power structure of a systemic White society and strengthen White privilege. Paris experienced the following:

I was filing a formal complaint. And he looked at me and said, so what’s wrong with you that this is such a big deal? [. . .] and I stopped the complaint [. . .] I was done because that let me know the expectation is that I’m going to have to deal with it and be strong [. . .] when complaints are made, they don’t do anything about it.

Discriminatory practices at PWIs clearly take an emotional toll on the faculty in this study. This example demonstrates how White privilege is supported by institutional racism and cultivates an environment where microaggressions are normative. The emotional nature of this issue is taxing on productivity and assuredly affects retention, tenure, and promotion (Zambrana et al. 2017). Caroline shared the following experience that demonstrated bias in the hiring process:

In its efforts to be inclusive . . . It always comes at the negligence of black people. Specifically, it came down to two candidates in hiring, a black male and a white female. We had to talk about it before we voted . . . I confronted my White colleague [. . .] so if you feel this way about him, how do you feel about me? He put out rumors about the black candidate. They hired the white candidate.

Likewise, Caroline described bias in hiring as exhibited by this quote:

Truthfully speaking, deep down in my heart. I really believe that they hired me to show diversity, not that they thought that I can do it. I’m not satisfied with how they deal with culture. I’m not satisfied with how they deal with racial microaggression. They don’t want to deal with it. I really feel like the only reason they reached out to me was because they didn’t want to lose the faculty. Not because you cared about my experience, but because we need a certain amount of full-time faculty in order to keep accreditation.

Bias in hearing appears evident, and when Black faculty are hired, they may feel that they were hired to fill a systemic need and not necessarily because the institution wanted to hire them.

In addition to the evidence of bias at PWIs, Black faculty also described experiencing a lack of trust and support from the institution and this oftentimes instills a sense of powerlessness among minority faculty that quickens their departure from PWIs (Whittaker et al. 2015). Pérez Huber and Solorzano (2015) referenced microaggressions as reflective and mediated by institutional racism and systemic barriers that bolster the dominant power structures of a systemic White society. Institutional and systemic barriers may hinder those in power from responding to POC who have experienced microaggressions, in a manner that is just and supportive as described by respondents in this study.

Theme 5: Stereotypes and intersection challenges

Intersectionality refers to a person coming up against many forms of oppression and discrimination based on overlaying minority identities (Torino et al. 2019). Professors of color narrated what they believed comprises intersectionality, albeit four out of seven respondents stated they believed a combination of their race and gender impacted how they were treated. Some of the participants described how stereotypes such as the criminalization of Black men and the angry Black woman were lived experiences of theirs at PWIs. For example, Paris stated, “I’ve had students say she’s nice, she’s not rude, but we’re intimidated by her. I knew that had to do with me being a woman of color.” This supports critical race theorists’ assertion that individuals like these operate at an intersection of recognized sites of oppression and most of us experience the world in different ways because of who we are (Delgado and Stefancic 2017). Furthermore, Caroline spoke about being viewed as an oversexualized black female:

“I had a racial trolling put on my dry erase board [. . .] I snapped a picture of it (she showed me a picture of a male genitalia being inserted into female genitalia). You know how microaggressions work, you get used to them. So, you move on.”

Black male professors shared different types of experiences with microaggressions. Robert described the following:

I had a pager on me at the time that I was teaching because I was on call. [. . .] That first day the pager went off. It was inside my suit jacket pocket, and I put my hand in the pocket to stop it. [. . .] A couple of students saw me put my hand in the pocket and they proceeded to walk out the class. They came back after the break. They came up to me and inquired, can you tell me a little bit about what was stuck in your pocket or what you were doing? [. . .] I pulled it out, and they said, oh, we weren’t sure if that was a gun. We weren’t sure what kind of weapon [. . .] I was like a WEAPON [. . .] Why a gun or some sort of weapon. [. . .] I represent a black male professor, and it requires me to [. . .] represent those categories well.

Many respondents felt that their experiences with White students and faculty demonstrated racial biases toward them. It was noted that fear and racial stereotypes were evident in the manner that White students interacted with Black professors. The experiences of Black males and females appear to be different, however, they both experienced microaggressions but in a manner unique to their gender identity. One Black male (Edgar) professor recalled:

There was the double burden that a lot of my female colleagues experience, you know, being black and female [. . .] So, it was still black first and then female second [. . .] There was also a real gender bias at the university in terms of who got promoted and who didn’t, and black women for the most part were stuck at associate professor and that’s about it.

These counternarratives support CRT scholars’ acknowledgment of intersectionality and the multiple layers of subordination based on gender, class, and sexuality, and people who belong to more than one demographic or ethnic group are affected by inequality in more than one way (Levinson et al. 2011; Yosso et al. 2004). In this study, race and gender appear to co-exist as oppressive factors that impact the experiences of POC, and these factors may have contributed to the participants having experienced more racial microaggressions. Similarly, critical race scholars are critical of any analysis that focuses solely on race and fails to consider other marginalized and oppressed identities (Levinson et al. 2011).

Coping Strategies

Coping with racial microaggressions can take a toll on POC, and Black faculty cope with racial microaggressions in various ways. All the participants discussed their personal reactions to having experienced microaggressions in and outside of the classroom and three distinct themes became apparent from the collected data.

Theme 1: Overworking

Four out of seven participants said they coped with the stress of microaggressions by overworking. Robert shared the following about his reaction to microaggressions:

It has elevated my quality of work and the way that I present. I go in extra prepared. I think sometimes that being extra prepared could also be negative [. . .] you add a lot of stress. [. . .] It forces me to present in the most excellent manner. [. . .] I scrutinize things that I present. [. . .] The mission is to present in a way that is credible.

Caroline also shared that she frequently worked harder having experienced microaggressions from students:

I must justify everything I say, so I must work harder. [. . .] I must over-prepare [. . .] My teaching days are more tiring because of the mental fortitude that’s needed to get through this. [. . .] I think there is a lack of respect from the students for faculty of color. And I feel like we must work harder to be heard.

Many of the respondents described how they were resilient working at PWIs. Many participants expressed how they felt the need to work harder. Many respondents coped with the added stress of experiencing microaggressions by working harder to protect themselves in a taxing work environment. Debra acknowledged her experience with coping as the following:

I’ve proven my worth. My work ethic. [. . .] I don’t have a mentor and every time they try to give me one, it’s a middle-aged white woman who gives me advice. She is not helpful. As a black woman I have learned, when you don’t know, you just do it all. You just work hard, right. But that’s added stress that no one needs. So, I’m trying to balance that. We’re used to it. I almost ignore it. I do think I have to work harder [. . .] I have to be prepared for the comments. Like racism doesn’t exist because of Obama. [. . .] So, it takes more time, and it takes more mental energy, I guess strength. I also want to maintain respect in the classroom. For the person at the front of the room [. . .] I’m proud of myself when I’m able to turn students around.

Theme 2: Outside support and self-care

This study found a theme among its participants of seeking outside support and practicing self-care in order to cope with racial microaggressions. Robert described how he copes with microaggressions in the following way:

Being able to open up and share these experiences with other faculty of color has helped me [. . .] So I have a very strong spiritual component [. . .] using prayer and drawing on the support of my wife and those connected to my religious group and social group. I have a good social support group outside of the faculty. Outside of the academic environment. Exercise, running, distractions [. . .] I use these examples in class that I teach to ultimately help people. [. . .] When you can bring your lived experience to the table and pair it to the textbook stuff. [This has] helped me to kind of at least make some sense of what I’m going through and help people going forward.

Debra experienced racial microaggressions in the classroom and she coped with it in the following manner:

I’m really good at compartmentalizing things so that I can move forward. [. . .] I’m a big proponent of self-care. I get monthly massages. I love to read, and watch shows that don’t require my mind to work. I love to cook and to spend time with the kids.

Three out of seven participants said being involved with religion and with family helped them to be resilient and able to cope in PWIs. Elizabeth noted:

I would literally have to put on earphones to listen to Rev. TD Jakes, just to be encouraged throughout the day, so what was happening around me wasn’t affecting me. [. . .] Because of my faith in God [. . .] It keeps my focus. My performance is to God, to show God how grateful I am for my job [. . .] and to aspire to be a good teacher. I would encourage myself.

Two out of seven participants sought professional help counseling and social support outside of the academy. They perceived a lack of support at PWIs. Paris reported:

The support pretty much came from outside of the university. I spoke with other black leaders. [. . .] I was crying, and my mother said you need to stop crying, you’re in a place where people don’t want you, suck it up. From that day forward, I began to suck it up. [. . .] I have a counselor. [. . .] I’ve tried to use my experiences as a learning platform [. . .] I talk about the black experience in the classroom. [. . .] I prayed, and I fasted.

Theme 3: Denial versus confrontation

Victims of microaggressions often struggle to determine if bias has occurred or whether to dismiss microaggressions. The victim may believe they are reading too much into the situation or by being offended when none was intended (Sue 2010). Robert shared his experience of coping and whether he approaches the instigators when he experiences racial microaggressions: “sometimes I don’t . . . For two reasons [. . .] I did a lot of excusing them and just kind of maybe minimizing the response. I didn’t confront because I’m always concerned about the reactions and what will happen.” Microaggressions are made more problematic when the comments or behaviors are not acknowledged as microaggressions, as this lack of acceptance places the recipient in the unusual situation of questioning whether a microaggression has taken place (Young, Anderson, and Stewart 2015).

Debra experienced racial microaggressions in the classroom and she coped with it in the following manner:

When microaggressions occur, I typically approach people. So, in the classroom if they raise their hand, I address it [. . .] if they come to me with it, I address it right then and there. Sometimes I have to take deep breaths before the words come out of my mouth. Or I’m comfortable with silence. So, if I must have silence there first, before I speak, it is because I’m gathering my thoughts and my emotions. I let silence stay there. But I will confront [. . .] So knowing how to handle them, I think from a place of you know respect.

Relationship of current findings to existing literature

The prevalence of the routine exposure of POC to racial microaggressions and its complex relationship with systematic discrimination and institutional racism was prevalent among the findings in this study. These common occurrences of workplace racism are consistent with the experiences of other Black faculty members within the academy (Pérez Huber and Solorzano 2015; Young et al. 2015). These narratives are a compelling reminder that microaggressions are part of the everyday experiences of underrepresented faculty in academia (Zambrana et al. 2015), and racial microaggressions are more than just everyday routine disparaging remarks. Racial microaggressions are meaningful because they may reinforce white privilege and may contribute to the systematic oppression of POC. Critical race theorists assert that structural reform measures and legislation are needed to undo racist policies and practices that promote the marginalization of the oppressed, and this constant rain of microaggressions on the job appears systemic, deeply ingrained, and is a pervasive form of racism (Delgado and Stefancic 2017), and Whiteness underpins microaggressions (Zambrana et al. 2015) which can negatively affect workplace retention (Hassouneh et al. 2014).

W. E. B. Du Bois (1897) asked the question of how it feels to be a problem: How does it feel to exist in a world that “only lets people see themselves through the revelation of the other world.” Otherness refers to a racial position (in the United States) that people view themselves as either White or nonwhite (Ladson-Billings and Tate 1995). Whiteness is viewed as a position of privilege and of ultimate power in a system of dominance in which Blacks and POC have been prohibited from possessing. Racial otherness is a form of inferiority that negatively contributes to the circumstances of many non-Whites (Crenshaw 1989); and Blacks may be experiencing a double consciousness of being an American (with all its privileges) and being Black, which may result in an added weight of diminished human opportunities (Du Bois 1897). Human opportunity may include faculty appointments for POC and they may be denied advancement opportunities. Whites are the majority and have the power and privilege in PWIs and racism continues to exist in the academy (Dancy and Jean-Marie 2014). It is my contention that, due to institutional and systemic racism, POC (particularly Blacks) have limited opportunities for success at PWIs and institutional support is needed.

My findings confirm the existing literature; however, this study is specific to Black faculty and uncovers themes and extends the literature to include how FOC experience and cope with racial microaggressions. The major themes developed from the participants’ narratives are in-group exclusion, ignored input, and challenged credibility. It is not surprising that Black faculty may feel excluded and ignored in the workplace with diminished legitimacy since these findings are like those found by other scholars who identified similar categories, such as underestimation of personal ability, questioning of expertise and intelligence, and assumptions of inferiority (Houshmand, Spanierman, and De Stefano 2017; Lander and Santoro 2017; McGowan 2022; Pittman 2012; Torres et al. 2010). In addition, studies have been conducted where participants spoke about exclusion from the in-group and making it difficult to feel a sense of belonging in the academy (Sue et al. 2011). Crenshaw et al. (1995) denote that we who encounter the experience of belonging and not belonging knowingly have different struggles that are oppressive and disquieting for POC in the White academy.

In previous studies, scholars depict how FOC in academia may be hesitant to speak with administrators and senior faculty because they feared negative consequences that could be reflected in their evaluation and could hamper their career trajectory for tenure and promotion (Harris et al. 2019). There is support by other theorists that the intentional lack of support and commitment from the institution’s leadership often instills a sense of powerlessness among underrepresented minority faculty that routinely hastens their departure and impacts retention at PWIs (Whittaker et al. 2015). This study extends the knowledge base to include how faculty copes by looking away from discrimination and bias in hiring. Many institutions have statements of nonbias and inclusion; however, bias in hiring remains an apparent issue. Oftentimes, the hiring committee may choose to hire people who look like, and are perceived to be like, themselves, and this may be a factor in the systematic elimination of POC at PWIs, or at least sustaining the dismal number of POC being hired as professors at PWIs. Additionally, this study found that Black faculty believe they may be hired to make the university look good, and not to incorporate FOC into the campus and take their new ideas seriously. Next, I will discuss the additional themes that emerged in this study.

Although other scholars (Harris et al. 2019) identify intersections including race, gender, sexual orientation, and ability, in this study, the participants only identified race and gender as identity markers (Fleras 2016; Herbert 2012). Participants identified that stereotypes of being a Black male or Black female negatively impacted how they were treated by students at PWIs. Crenshaw et al. (1995) argue that the combination of race and gender shapes experiences in various ways that cannot be viewed separately and emphasize the need for multiple views of identity when considering how the social world is constructed. Additionally, the intersection of race and gender cannot be captured in its entirety by looking independently at the magnitude of these phenomena. As has been noted in this study, race and gender intersect with identity and may be just one aspect of intersectionality.

In previously published research, other scholars have findings in agreement with those of this study pertaining to how Black faculty cope with racial microaggressions at PWIs (Louis et al. 2016). Notably, Tummala-Narra (2007) defined resilience as a positive adaptation to challenging circumstances. From the analysis of the content, the participants of this study identified coping strategies such as working harder and religion as means of coping with racial microaggressions at PWIs. As has been noted in the research, Black faculty use increased productivity to cope with racial microaggressions in the workplace (Louis et al. 2016). Overworking as a coping mechanism aligns with the concepts of John Henryism, that is, through a combination of hard work and dedication, tension can be controlled when confronting behavioral stressors (James et al. 1984). By the same token, other scholars demonstrated that religiosity buffered the potential harmful effects of racism, such that persons who reported higher levels of religiosity reported fewer symptoms of depression, and people with high levels of stress experienced relief in supportive religious settings (Walker et al. 2014). My findings support these previous studies; however, this study is an extension of the literature on coping to include a greater emphasis on the importance of religiosity, and the addition of seeking the support of other FOC for reality checking, and family and community support. Individuals may be resilient; however, Unger (2011) posits that resilience is more likely to occur when there is an environment that facilitates access to resources and a willingness by those who control the resources to provide support and what individuals need to thrive in a culturally sensitive manner.

Conclusion

Prior research has shown that FOC experience microaggressions more frequently than any other ethnic group, and they are more damaging to the careers and psyches of Black faculty due to their cultural isolation. However, this study has extended existing literature by assessing how microaggressions are experienced by Black faculty and how they cope with microaggressions. According to the results of this study, Black faculty experienced racial microaggressions from students, faculty, administrators, human resources (HR), and while on hiring committees. Black faculty frequently experienced having their input ignored and their credibility challenged in addition to experiencing in-group exclusion, being encouraged to look away from discrimination, and stereotypes and intersection challenges. Black faculty cope with racial microaggressions by overworking, using outside support and self-care, and oftentimes using denial and with limited use of confrontation. This study is important because it makes a unique contribution in helping to understand how microaggressions are experienced by Black faculty and how they cope with them at PWIs. Additional research to further examine more information on specific manifestation of racial microaggressions and coping strategies is needed.

This study is essential to assist university leadership in becoming aware of the support needed and how racial microaggressions are a threat to the performance, retention, promotion, and tenure of POC at PWIs. The findings may be used to inform administrators, faculty, and staff on ways to support Black faculty in the academy. Furthermore, this study is needed as it is essential for university leadership to become aware of the assistance needed for Black faculty as they navigate their way at PWIs. The findings of this study pointed to several interventions. Despite universities and colleges having statements of nonbias in hiring, the number of FOC remains abysmal in higher education. To change this trend, I recommend a cultural shift in the campus environment making it more welcoming to FOC. Specific steps include leadership development, a cultural mindset change, and antiracist microinterventions.

Cultivating the development of administrative leaders who are committed to ensuring fair treatment in hiring, retention, tenure promotion, and service expectancy will help to promote more desirable workplace practices. Verbal commitments and written policy must be made both within the university and in public view to ensure fair and just treatment is not just what is talked about, but it is put in practice to ensure equitable treatment of all faculty (Zambrana et al. 2017). I recommend a cultural mindset change that includes support for religious, spiritual, and cultural differences. Johnston (2017) describes creating a growth mindset that involves creating an experience where people recognize how their fixed mindset restricts their capability to perform or causes an unwelcome affective state or outcome. According to Johnston, creating a growth mindset involves the following:

• Purposeful leadership and personal change. HR professionals must be sensitive to this and ensure that everyone is pulled into the same fold. HR and the CEO must be the example of what they would like to see in others. Do provide a clear purpose and give feedback to people in how they are doing.

• Critical mass and momentum. HR must move quickly because the faster you move and engage, the quicker you overwhelm the opposition in the organization.

• A focus on sustainability. How you hire and fire and how you promote and communicate are all part of this. HR leadership must be central to and highly active to drive this process of change.

HR leaders are pivotal and dynamic players in ensuring cultural change within a business. Alongside the CEO, they need to be the early champions of change and ensure an unrelenting drive to take the business to a new and sustainable level of performance.

In this study, it was also found that Black faculty frequently have their input ignored in faculty meetings. To address this problem, I recommend that administrators do the following:

• Provide verbal and nonverbal support (by demonstrating positive body language that includes nodding, saying aha, yes, asking relevant questions, etc.)

• Communicate (verbally and in practice) that this is a safe space for all faculty to feel free to speak.

• Provide positive acknowledgment of ideas.

• Allow all faculty time to fully discuss and provide input into departmental decision making.

• Seek input from all faculty members and not allowing one or two faculty members to dominate the discussion by respectfully limiting the monopolizing of departmental time and encouraging input from all faculty members.

• Encourage faculty members to be respectful and open to the input of all faculty.

• Acknowledge all faculty who want to provide input and provide a safe space for discussion of ideas.

• Implement policies and practices that reflect the input of diverse faculty members.

Additionally, I suggest that administrators, HR, and all people on the hiring committee are trained in nonbiased hiring and have conversations about prejudicial hiring practices as well as advertising and recruiting in urban areas. Furthermore, diverse individuals should be included on hiring committees. Hiring processes should use standardized interview questions and blind resumes and include diversity, equity, and inclusion in the hiring process. I would propose that the members of the hiring committee are diverse and remain open to the feedback of others (HR, administrators, and other members of the hiring committee) regarding nonbias in hiring. I propose that universities offer support groups for new faculty and remain open to and supportive of minority faculty groups that seek to provide encouragement and successful navigation of nonmajority faculty members at PWIs. I also recommend that universities hire a minority chief diversity officer and give faculty permission to anonymously (without fear of retribution) report discriminatory practices and hiring processes. In addition to having the diversity officer, periodically hold meetings with minority faculty to discuss how it feels to be a minority faculty person on campus and seek suggestions on how to improve the campus climate. These suggestions could be used to help improve the campus environment.

I recommend the development of antiracist microinterventions. Microinterventions are defined here as everyday words or deeds that communicate to the receiver of microaggressions the validation of their experiences, affirmation of their racial identity, and support and reassurance that they are not alone. Microinterventions serve to provide the targets of microaggressions with the tools to be brave in the face of adversity, to feel dignified, to see beyond the obvious, and to be able to interpret the double meanings of microaggressions. Although microinterventions are short-term actions that deal with the immediacy of expressed racism, they have major potential positive benefits for the targets of microaggressions, White allies, bystanders, and ultimately our society (Sue et al. 2019). Universities can mitigate the adverse effects of microaggression through holding management and leadership accountable and by supporting mentorship initiatives for faculty. McIntosh (2020) describes what works for teachers is a “staff development that is more inclusive of the participants’ own lives and offers new areas that have not been part of their schooling or life experiences.” Additionally, choosing a senior faculty mentor who is culturally competent and selecting experienced mentors outside of one’s institution since mentoring for FOC is critical in higher education. FOC might also seek the support of allies who “got your back” with deliberate words of advice and encouragement (Dade et al. 2015).

The results of this study must take into consideration its limitations. First, most participants in this study were women. Having more men in the study would have allowed more diversity of voices. Second, we recognize that the concerns of the Black faculty participating in this study may differ from Black faculty at other universities. Third, the study is limited to American institutions in one region and to seven Black-identifying respondents. Finally, this study illuminates the voices of a specific group of Black professors at PWIs. Their responses to racial microaggressions may differ from the ways the general population experiences this phenomenon.

This study was designed to propose a base for additional studies on how racial microaggressions are experienced by FOC and how they cope with racial microaggressions. Furthermore, as the body of research on racial microaggressions continues to develop, it is imperative to continue detailing and examining how diverse populations experience microaggressions (Nadal et al. 2014). It is recommended that future researchers build on the body of knowledge by focusing more on the specific manifestations of racial microaggressions and coping strategies.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-jax-10.1177_19367244231209272 – Supplemental material for Voices of Black Faculty at Predominantly White Institutions: Coping Strategies and Institutional Interventions

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-jax-10.1177_19367244231209272 for Voices of Black Faculty at Predominantly White Institutions: Coping Strategies and Institutional Interventions by Leona Mickles-Burns in Journal of Applied Social Science

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-jax-10.1177_19367244231209272 – Supplemental material for Voices of Black Faculty at Predominantly White Institutions: Coping Strategies and Institutional Interventions

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-jax-10.1177_19367244231209272 for Voices of Black Faculty at Predominantly White Institutions: Coping Strategies and Institutional Interventions by Leona Mickles-Burns in Journal of Applied Social Science

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-3-jax-10.1177_19367244231209272 – Supplemental material for Voices of Black Faculty at Predominantly White Institutions: Coping Strategies and Institutional Interventions

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-jax-10.1177_19367244231209272 for Voices of Black Faculty at Predominantly White Institutions: Coping Strategies and Institutional Interventions by Leona Mickles-Burns in Journal of Applied Social Science