When I Care More Than the Department Does: Research Value (In)Congruence and Faculty Epistemic Exclusion Experiences

Academia values research that is quantitative, generalizable, or viewed as “objective” (centered research values), while research that is qualitative, concerned with marginalized groups, or social justice focused (marginalized research values) is often dismissed as subjective or less rigorous. We examined the relationship between faculty research values and the values they believe their departments prioritize, using survey data from 526 tenure-track faculty. We found that, for centered values, faculty–department research value incongruence did not differ by faculty race–gender, and both higher and lower endorsement of the values than the department were associated with greater epistemic exclusion. In contrast, incongruence in marginalized values varied by race–gender, with women of color faculty reporting the largest gap. Further, faculty endorsing more marginalized values than their department reported higher epistemic exclusion, whereas those endorsing less did not. In light of these results, we discuss how faculty–department research value incongruence shapes faculty’s academic experiences.