ABSTRACT Various concerns regarding the vitality and racial/ethnic composition of the academic profession have prompted new study of faculty search committees and hiring paradigms, most notably examining the term “fit” in candidate appraisals. Yet no study utilizes a candidate evaluation framework to investigate whether or not faculty members truly assess for fit, or if these assessments stifle diversification processes, especially in light of pervasive institutional efforts to reform faculty hiring. This study uses a critical person-environment fit framework and multiple case study methods to investigate how faculty search committee members individually evaluate and collectively select prospective early-career faculty. Results indicate that fit, as system of assumptions, practices, and tactics designed to evaluate and select candidates based on organizational needs, was minimal in faculty searches. Instead, faculty relied heavily on idiosyncratic preferences to evaluate research, teaching, and service credentials, which also contained criterion that directly and indirectly averted diversity. Findings reveal how the review and selection of candidates is as much, if not more, about individual committee preferences than organizational demands or congruence.

中文翻译：

---

教师搜索过程中的适合外观

摘要 关于学术职业活力和种族/民族构成的各种担忧促使对教师搜索委员会和招聘范式进行了新的研究，最显着的是检查候选人评估中的“适合”一词。然而，没有一项研究利用候选人评估框架来调查教职员工是否真正进行了适合性评估，或者这些评估是否扼杀了多元化进程，尤其是考虑到改革教职员工招聘的普遍机构努力。本研究使用关键的人与环境匹配框架和多个案例研究方法来调查教师搜索委员会成员如何单独评估和集体选择有前途的早期职业教师。结果表明，作为假设、实践的系统，和旨在根据组织需求评估和选择候选人的策略在教师搜索中很少见。相反，教师严重依赖特殊偏好来评估研究、教学和服务证书，其中也包含直接和间接避免多样性的标准。调查结果揭示了候选人的审查和选择与组织要求或一致性相比，更多地（如果不是更多的话）是关于个别委员会的偏好。