Lisa K . Hanasono
Dr. Lisa K. Hanasono (Ph.D., Purdue University) is an associate professor in the School of Media and Communication at Bowling Green State University. Her research focuses primarily on how people communication biases, shatter stigma, and stop discrimination.
Dr. Hanasono is passionate about diversity, equity, inclusion, and faculty development. She is currently a Co-PI of a nearly million dollar NSF ADVANCE Adaptation Grant that focuses on faculty allyship, anti-hate bystander intervention, and inclusive leadership. As one of the National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity's (NCFDD) Certified Campus Workshop Facilitators and Faculty Success Program Coaches, Dr. Hanasono works closely with faculty and academic leaders to support their professional development and career advancement.
Dr. Hanasono is a
Supervisors: Dr. Steve Wilson
Address: Department of Communication
School of Media and Communication
311 Kuhlin Center
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH 43403
Dr. Hanasono is passionate about diversity, equity, inclusion, and faculty development. She is currently a Co-PI of a nearly million dollar NSF ADVANCE Adaptation Grant that focuses on faculty allyship, anti-hate bystander intervention, and inclusive leadership. As one of the National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity's (NCFDD) Certified Campus Workshop Facilitators and Faculty Success Program Coaches, Dr. Hanasono works closely with faculty and academic leaders to support their professional development and career advancement.
Dr. Hanasono is a
Supervisors: Dr. Steve Wilson
Address: Department of Communication
School of Media and Communication
311 Kuhlin Center
Bowling Green State University
Bowling Green, OH 43403
less
InterestsView All (14)
Uploads
Papers by Lisa K . Hanasono
lens by framing diversity as a celebration of individual differences or a commodity that
students can gain by attending their institution. In communication courses, diversity has
been conceptualized through both neoliberal and critical lenses, but limited research has
investigated how communication students define and explain diversity. The focus of this
study was to understand how communication students define diversity. We performed
thematic analyses on open-ended survey responses to investigate how communication
students define diversity. Four themes emerged from our analyses: (a) diversity is
a mechanism for unifying communities, (b) diversity is an affirmation of individual
differences, (c) diversity is a harbinger of acceptance and equality, and (d) diversity is
a disruptive force that re-centers the voices of traditionally marginalized people. Our
findings indicate most communication students define diversity through a neoliberal lens.
However, 3% of our participants conceptualized diversity through a critical lens by
explaining that diversity should create space for those who are marginalized to have
their voices heard. We conclude by providing recommendations for communication
instructors to incorporate more critical conversations about diversity into their classrooms
and foster diverging discourses about diversity across communication curricula.
shared equitably among tenure-track faculty (Guarino & Borden, 2017; Pyke, 2011). Women faculty tend
to spend more time on service activities than men, and they tend to perform important yet less
institutionally recognized forms of service like mentoring, committee work, emotional labor, and
organizational climate control (Babcock, Recalde, Vesterlund, & Weingart, 2017; Misra, Lundquist,
Holmes, & Agiomavritis, 2011). Drawing from the theory of gendered organizations (Acker, 1990), this
interview study examined how institutional gender biases impact the visibility and evaluation of faculty
service across the tenure-track career trajectory. Our findings reveal how task-oriented forms of service
tend to be more visible and valued than relationally oriented service. In addition to addressing a gap in
the literature, our study presents practical recommendations to make service more visible, valuable, and
equitable across faculty ranks and gender identities.
lens by framing diversity as a celebration of individual differences or a commodity that
students can gain by attending their institution. In communication courses, diversity has
been conceptualized through both neoliberal and critical lenses, but limited research has
investigated how communication students define and explain diversity. The focus of this
study was to understand how communication students define diversity. We performed
thematic analyses on open-ended survey responses to investigate how communication
students define diversity. Four themes emerged from our analyses: (a) diversity is
a mechanism for unifying communities, (b) diversity is an affirmation of individual
differences, (c) diversity is a harbinger of acceptance and equality, and (d) diversity is
a disruptive force that re-centers the voices of traditionally marginalized people. Our
findings indicate most communication students define diversity through a neoliberal lens.
However, 3% of our participants conceptualized diversity through a critical lens by
explaining that diversity should create space for those who are marginalized to have
their voices heard. We conclude by providing recommendations for communication
instructors to incorporate more critical conversations about diversity into their classrooms
and foster diverging discourses about diversity across communication curricula.
shared equitably among tenure-track faculty (Guarino & Borden, 2017; Pyke, 2011). Women faculty tend
to spend more time on service activities than men, and they tend to perform important yet less
institutionally recognized forms of service like mentoring, committee work, emotional labor, and
organizational climate control (Babcock, Recalde, Vesterlund, & Weingart, 2017; Misra, Lundquist,
Holmes, & Agiomavritis, 2011). Drawing from the theory of gendered organizations (Acker, 1990), this
interview study examined how institutional gender biases impact the visibility and evaluation of faculty
service across the tenure-track career trajectory. Our findings reveal how task-oriented forms of service
tend to be more visible and valued than relationally oriented service. In addition to addressing a gap in
the literature, our study presents practical recommendations to make service more visible, valuable, and
equitable across faculty ranks and gender identities.