Peer Comparison
| Group | Fall 2010 | Fall 2011 | Fall 2012 | Fall 2013 | Fall 2014 | Fall 2015 | Fall 2016 | Fall 2017 | Fall 2018 | Rate of Change since 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Faculty Members - Miami | null | null | 13.8% | 14.8% | 16.7% | 16.3% | 16.7% | 16.9% | 16.7% | 2% |
| Faculty Members - Peers | null | null | 14.0% | 14.0% | 14.6% | 14.7% | 15.4% | 15.9% | 16.6% | 13% |
| Graduate Students - Miami | 7.8% | 8.3% | 8.4% | 10.1% | 10.7% | 11.6% | 13.6% | 15.5% | 14.7% | 27% |
| Graduate Students - Peers | 10.9% | 11.3% | 11.9% | 11.8% | 11.8% | 12.6% | 13.2% | 13.5% | 14.3% | 13% |
| Staff Members - Miami | null | null | 8.0% | 8.4% | 8.1% | 8.2% | 8.5% | 9.0% | 9.6% | 17% |
| Staff Members - Peers | null | null | 14.6% | 15.5% | 15.4% | 15.9% | 16.2% | 16.5% | 16.7% | 5% |
| Undergraduate Students - Miami | 12.0% | 12.5% | 12.7% | 12.7% | 12.8% | 12.9% | 13.3% | 13.8% | 14.7% | 14% |
| Undergraduate Students - Peers | 13.4% | 13.8% | 14.3% | 15.0% | 15.5% | 16.3% | 16.8% | 16.9% | 17.3% | 6% |
Many thanks to one of our CODI members (Dr. Tetsuya Ishiu; Math Dept) for completing the calculations and updating the table.
Notes
- Rate of change was determined based on calculating the difference between the raw scores at given time points stipulated in the given category. Year 2015 was chosen as the baseline as this was the year prior to the start of President Crawford’s term at Miami, and the implementation of inclusive excellence as a model for guiding DEI efforts.
- Shaded box indicates which group, Miami or comparable peer institution, had a higher rate of change in terms of diversity in the given group.
- Faculty: over the long-term Miami’s rate of change was greater than peer institutions, but peer institutions’ rate of change exceeded Miami’s in the short term (i.e., since instituting inclusive excellence).
- Grad Students: Miami’s rate of change outpaced peer institution’s for both the short and long term.
- Staff: Miami’s rate of change outpaced peer institution’s for both the short and long term, but raw percentages were higher at the peer institutions.