|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 141
PREPUBLICATION COPY
6
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The surveys of academic departments and faculty have yielded interesting and sometimes
surprising findings. For the most part, men and women faculty in science, engineering, and
mathematics have enjoyed comparable opportunities within the university, and gender
does not appear to have been a factor in a number of important career transitions and
outcomes. Where these findings document real changes in university policies, such as the clock-
stopping policy for family care, this is good news. It suggests that universities can change long-
established policies that might have prevented one group of scientists and engineers from
advancing to permanent careers within the institution. It also opens the door to considering other
established university policies that may hinder our country’s ability to profit from creativity of
all trained scientists, both male and female. For example, one policy that might be opened for
reexamination is the usual requirement that all assistant professor appointments be full-time.
Part-time appointments would allow both women and men the opportunity to better balance
family and career over time. This chapter presents the key findings from each of the preceding
chapters, followed by recommendations and questions for future research.
KEY FINDINGS
As a foundation for understanding the survey findings, it is important to remember that
although women represent an increasing share of science, mathematics, and engineering
faculty, they continue to be underrepresented in many of those disciplines. While the percent
of women among faculty in scientific and engineering overall increased significantly from 1995
through 2003, the degree of representation varied substantially by discipline, and there remained
disciplines where the proportion of women was significantly lower than the proportion of men.
Table 6-1 shows the percent of women faculty in selected scientific and engineering disciplines
during this time period at the assistant, associate, and full professor levels.
TABLE 6-1 Representation of Women in Faculty Positions at Research I Institutions by Rank
and Field (%) 1995–2003.
Assistant Professor Associate Professor Full Professor
1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003
Agriculture 17.8 18.6 19.6 18.1 27.2 12.7 12.5 10.7 17.6 13.9 4.9 5.2 6.1 6.6 8.0
Biology 35.6 38.2 36.0 37.0 38.8 26.0 24.3 26.3 30.2 31.2 14.0 14.7 15.8 18.0 20.8
Engineering 14.2 12.7 12.8 14.8 16.6 4.8 6.4 9.6 9.3 11.7 1.8 1.4 2.3 2.7 3.8
Health
Sciences 69.1 66.9 64 64.7 66.5 65.6 65.1 64.9 64.5 59.1 35.1 38.9 45.3 48.0 59.0
Mathematics 18.7 22.0 26.5 25.2 26.6 10.4 14.4 14.9 15.8 16.3 7.6 5.9 9.9 10.0 9.7
Physics 25.1 25.6 24.6 25.4 24.1 9.5 13.4 14.8 16.7 19.5 4.3 4.6 5.9 6.8 7.6
SOURCE: National Science Foundation, Survey of Doctoral Recipients, 1995-2003. Tabulated
by NRC.
141
OCR for page 142
142 GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN CAREERS
In 2003, women comprised 20 percent of the full-time employed S&E workforce and had
slowly gained ground compared to men in the full-time academic workforce; by 2003, they
represented about 25 percent of academics. Women’s representation in the academic workforce,
of course, varied by discipline: in the health sciences, women were the majority of full-time,
employed doctorates, while in engineering they were less than 10 percent. The greatest
concentration of women among full-time academics was at medical schools; the lowest was at
Research II institutions.
Chapter 3 – Academic Hiring
The findings on academic hiring suggest that many women fared well in the hiring
process at Research I institutions, which contradicts some commonly held perceptions of
research intensive universities. If women applied for positions at RI institutions, they had a better
chance of being interviewed and receiving offers than male job candidates had. Many
departments at Research I institutions, both public and private, have made an effort to increase
the numbers and proportions of female faculty in the sciences, engineering and mathematics.
Having women play a visible role in the hiring process, for example, has clearly made a
difference. Unfortunately, women continue to be underrepresented in the applicant pool, relative
to their representation among the pool of recent Ph.D.s. Institutions may not have effective
recruitment plans, as departmental efforts targeted at women were not strong predictors in these
surveys of an increased proportion of women applicants.
Applications
Finding 3-1: Women account for about 17 percent of applications for both tenure-track
and tenured positions in the departments surveyed.
There was wide variation by field and by department in the number and proportion of female
applicants for faculty positions. In general, the higher the percentage of women in the Ph.D.
pool, the higher the percentage of women applying for each position in that field, though the
fields with lower percentages of women in the Ph.D. pool had a higher propensity for those
women to apply (see Table 6-2). The proportion of applicant pools that included at least one
woman was substantially higher than would be expected by chance. However, there were no
female applicants (only men applied) for 32 (6 percent) of the available tenure-track positions
and 16 (16.5 percent) of the tenured positions.
TABLE 6-2 Transitions from Ph.D. to tenure-track positions by field at the Research I
Institutions Surveyed (%)
Doctoral Pool Pools for Tenure-Track Positions
Mean % of interviewed
% women Ph.D.s Mean % of applicants Mean % of offers that go
applicants who are
(1999-2003) who are women to women
women
45 26 28 34
Biology
32 18 25 29
Chemistry
18 16 30 32
Civil Engineering
Electrical 12 11 19 32
Engineering
25 20 28 32
Mathematics
14 12 19 20
Physics
SOURCE: Survey of departments; Ph.D. data is from NSF, WebCASPAR.
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 143
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENIDATIONS 143
Finding 3-3: In each of the six disciplines, the proportion of applications from women for
tenure-track positions was lower than the percentage of Ph.D.s awarded to women.
Table 6-2 shows the percentage of women in the pool at each of several key transition points in
academic careers: award of Ph.D., application for position, interview, and job offer. In each
discipline, the proportion of applications from women was lower than the percentage of doctoral
degrees awarded to women. This was particularly the case in chemistry and biology, the two
disciplines in the study with the highest proportion of female Ph.D.s. The mean proportion of
female applicants for tenure-track positions in chemistry was 18 percent, but women earned 32
percent of the Ph.D.s in chemistry from Research I institutions from 1999-2003. Biology (24
percent in the tenure-track pool and 45 percent in the doctoral pool) also showed a significant
difference. Electrical engineering (10 percent in the tenure-track pool and 12 percent in the
doctoral pool), mathematics, and physics had modest decreases in the applicant pool.
Recruitment
Finding 3-7: Most institutional and departmental strategies proposed for increasing the
proportion of women in the applicant pool were not strong predictors of the percentage of
women applying. Most steps (such as targeted advertising and recruiting at conferences)
were done in isolation, with almost two-thirds of the departments in our sample reporting
that they took either no steps or one step designed to increase the gender diversity of the
applicant pool.
Finding 3-8: The proportion of females on the search committee and whether a woman
chaired the committee were both significantly and positively associated with the proportion
of women in the applicant pool (p = 0.01 and p= 0.02 respectively).
Interviews
Finding 3-10: The proportion of women who were interviewed for tenure-track or tenured
positions was higher than the percentage of women who apply. For each of the six disciplines
in this study the mean percentage of females interviewed for tenure-track and tenured positions
exceeded the mean percentage of female applicants. For example, the female applicant pool for
tenure-track positions in electrical engineering was 11 percent, and the corresponding interview
pool was 19 percent.
Finding 3-11: Although the proportion of females in interview pools across the six
disciplines exceeded the proportion of females in applicant pools, no women were
interviewed for 28 percent of the tenure-track (155 positions) and 42 percent of the tenured
jobs (42 positions). These figures are substantially higher than for the men. However, the
proportion of male applicants was much higher than the proportion of female applicants and part
of this number was comprised of cases where there were no female applicants.
Job Offers
Finding 3-13: The proportion of women who received the first job offer was higher than
the percentage who were invited to interview. Women received the first offer in 29 percent of
the tenure-track and 31 tenured positions surveyed. Tenure-track women in all of these
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 144
144 GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN CAREERS
disciplines received a greater proportion of first offers than their proportion in the interview pool.
For example, women were 21 percent of the interview pool for tenure-track electrical
engineering positions and received 32 percent of the first offers. This finding is also true for
tenured positions with the notable exception of biology, where the interview pool was 33 percent
and women received 22 percent of the first offers.
Finding 3-14: In 95 percent of the tenure-track and 100 percent of the tenured positions
where a man was the first choice for a position, a man was ultimately hired. In contrast, in
cases where a woman was the first choice, a woman was ultimately hired in only 70 percent
of the tenure-track and 77 percent of the tenured positions. When faculty surveyed were
asked what factors were considered for selecting their current position, the effect of gender was
statistically significantly for only one factor, and that was “family-related reasons.”
Chapter 4 – Professional Activities, Institutional Resources, Climate and Outcomes
The survey findings with regard to climate and resources demonstrate two critical points.
First, discipline matters, as indicated by the difference in the amount of grant funding held by
men and women faculty in biology, but not in other disciplines. Second, institutions have been
doing well in addressing most of the aspects of climate that they can control, such as start-up
packages and reduced teaching loads. Where the challenge may remain is in the climate at the
departmental level. Interaction and collegial engagement with one’s colleagues is an important
part of scientific discovery and collaboration, and here women faculty were not as connected.
Professional Activities
Finding 4-1: There is little evidence overall that men and women spent different
proportions of their time on teaching, research, and service. There is some indication that
men spent a larger proportion of their time on research and fundraising than women do (42.1
percent for men versus 40 percent for women). However, the difference only approaches
significance, and the actual percentages of time that male and female faculty reported spending
on research were not very different, with the exception of chemistry, where men spent a
significantly greater percentage of their time on research and fundraising (45.7 percent) than
women do (39 percent) and mathematics (44.2 percent for men versus 38.2 percent for women).
Finding 4-2: Male and female faculty appeared to have taught the same amount (41.4
percent for men versus 42.6 percent for women). There were no gender differences in the
number of undergraduate or graduate courses men and women taught; 0.83 undergraduate
courses for men versus 0.82 undergraduate courses for women. The percentage of men not
teaching graduate courses was 50.8 percent versus 54.9 percent for women.
Institutional Resources
Male and female faculty appeared to have similar access to many kinds of institutional resources,
although there were some where male faculty seemed to have an advantage.
Finding 4-3: Men and women seem to have been treated equally when they were hired. The
overall size of start-up packages and the specific resources of reduced initial teaching load,
travel funds and summer salary did not differ between male and female faculty.
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 145
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENIDATIONS 145
Finding 4-4: Male and female faculty supervised about the same number of research
assistants and postdocs.
Finding 4-5: There were some resources where male faculty appeared to have an
advantage. These included: the amount of laboratory space (considering both faculty
overall and only those who do experimental research); access to equipment needed for
research; and access to clerical support. However, the difference in lab space disappeared
when other variables were added in a regression analysis, where there were no differences
in lab space as a function of gender or the interaction between gender and any of the other
variables.
The apparent gender differences in access to these resources may reflect differences in access
based on discipline or rank, since some disciplines and ranks have a higher proportion of male
faculty, and those disciplines and ranks could also have more lab space and equipment.
Climate
Professional climate may be somewhat different for male and female faculty.
Finding 4-6: Female tenure-track and tenured faculty reported that they were more likely
to have mentors than male faculty. In the case of tenure-track faculty, 57 percent of women
had mentors compared to 49 percent of men.
Finding 4-7: Female faculty reported that they were less likely to engage in conversation
with their colleagues on a wide range of professional topics. These topics included research,
salary, and benefits (and, to some extent, interaction with other faculty members and
departmental climate). This distance may prevent women from accessing important information
and may make them feel less included and more marginalized in their professional lives. Men
and women faculty surveyed did not differ in their reports of discussions with colleagues on
teaching, funding, interaction with administration, and personal life.
Finding 4-8: There were no differences between male and female faculty on two measures
of inclusion: chairing committees (39 percent for men and 34 percent for women) and being
part of a research team (62 percent for men and 65 percent for women).
Outcomes
There is little evidence across the six disciplines that men and women have exhibited
different outcomes on most key measures (including publications, grant funding, nominations
for international and national honors and awards, salary, and offers of positions in other
institutions). On all measures, there were significant differences among disciplines.
Finding 4-9: Overall, male faculty had published marginally more refereed articles and
papers in the last three years than female faculty, except in electrical engineering, where
the reverse was true. Men had published significantly more papers than women in chemistry
(men, 15.8; women, 9.4) and mathematics (men, 12.4; women, 10.4). In electrical engineering,
women had published marginally more papers than men (7.5 for women compared with 5.8 for
men). The differences in number of publications between men and women were not significant
in biology, civil engineering, and physics. All of the other variables related to the number of
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 146
146 GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN CAREERS
published articles and papers (discipline, rank, prestige of institution, access to mentors, and time
on research) show the same effects for male and female faculty.
Finding 4-10: Although men were somewhat less likely to be a principal investigator or co-
principal investigator on a grant proposal than women, this difference disappeared when
other variables were added in a regression analysis, where male and female faculty did not
differ on the probability of having grant funding. Furthermore, because the effect of gender
was confounded with the effect or rank and whether the person had a mentor, it is essentially
impossible to isolate the effect of gender. The variables that appear to be associated with the
probability of having a grant (discipline, faculty rank, being at a high or medium prestige
university, and spending more time on research) do so in the same way for male and female
faculty
Finding 4-11: Male faculty had significantly more research funding than female faculty in
biology; in the other disciplines, the differences between male and female faculty were not
significant. There was no overall difference in the amount of grant funding received by male and
female faculty, but there was a significant interaction between gender and discipline. The other
variables related to the amount of grant funding (faculty rank, whether a faculty member is at a
private university, whether a faculty member is at a university of higher prestige, having a
mentor, and publishing more) were related in the same way for male and female faculty.
Finding 4-12: Female assistant professors who had a mentor had a higher probability of
receiving grants than those who did not have a mentor. In chemistry female assistant
professors with mentors had a 95 percent probability of having grant funding versus 77 percent
for female assistant professors in chemistry without mentors. A similar but weaker pattern is
exhibited for female associate professors. Over all six fields surveyed female assistant professors
with no mentors had a 68 percent probability of having grant funding versus 93 percent of
women with mentors. This contrasts with the pattern for male assistant professors; those with no
mentor had an 86 percent probability of having grant funding versus 83 percent for those with
mentors.
Finding 4-13: Overall male and female faculty were equally likely to be nominated for
international and national honors and awards, but the results varied significantly by
discipline, making interpretation challenging. The other variables affecting the likelihood of
being nominated for honors and awards (discipline, faculty rank, prestige of university, number
of publications) affected this likelihood in the same way for male and female faculty.
Finding 4-14: Gender was a significant determinant of salary, but only among full
professors. Male full professors made, on the average, about 8 percent more than females,
once we controlled for discipline. At the associate and assistant professor ranks, the
differences in salaries of men and women disappeared.
Finding 4-15: Differences in the probability of receiving an outside offer for male and
female faculty depended on discipline. In electrical engineering and in mathematics
women were more likely to have received an outside offer, while the trend was reversed in
chemistry and physics.
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 147
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENIDATIONS 147
Chapter 5 – Tenure and Promotion
The findings related to tenure and promotion indicate the importance of addressing the
retention of women faculty in the early stages of their academy careers; not as many were
considered for tenure as would be expected, based on the number of women assistant professors.
Retention was particularly problematic given the increased duration of time in rank for all
faculty. Both male and female faculty utilized stopping the tenure clock policies--spending a
longer time in the uncertainty of securing tenure--but women used these policies more. Women
faculty who did come up for tenure were as successful or more successful than men, so one of
the most important challenges may be increasing the pool of women faculty who make it to that
point.
Award of Tenure
Finding 5-1: In every field, women were underrepresented among candidates for tenure
relative to the number of women assistant professors. Most strikingly, women were most
likely to be underrepresented in the fields in which they accounted for the largest share of
the faculty – biology and chemistry. In biology and chemistry, the differences were statistically
significant. In biology, 27 percent of the faculty considered for tenure were female, while
women represented 36 percent of the assistant professor pool. In chemistry those numbers were
15 percent and 22 percent respectively. This difference may suggest that women assistant
professors were more likely to leave before being considered for tenure than men were. It might
also reflect increased hiring of women assistant professors in recent years (compared with hiring
6 to 8 years ago).
Finding 5-2: Given that the interaction between the gender of the candidate and the
proportion of females in the tenure-track pool was statistically significant (p = 0.012),
women appeared to be more likely to be promoted when there was a smaller proportion of
females among the tenure-track faculty, resulting in a greater difference between men and
women in their tenure success in departments with fewer women assistant professors.
Finding 5-3: Women were more likely than men to receive tenure when they came up for
tenure review. When controlling only for field and gender of the candidate, we found that
women were marginally more likely than men to receive tenure (p =.0567). Women received
tenure in 92 percent of the cases (115 out of 125) versus 87 percent of the cases for men (548 out
of 633).
Finding 5-4: Discipline, stop-the-clock policies, and departmental size were not associated
with the probability of a positive tenure decision for either male or female faculty members
who were considered for tenure. Both male and female assistant professors were
significantly more likely to receive tenure at public institutions (92 percent) versus private
institutions (85 percent; p = 0.029).
Finding 5-5: Eighty-eight percent of both male and female survey respondents stated that
they knew their institution’s policy on tenure. Eighty-one percent of male faculty knew
their institution’s policies on promotion. However, only 75 percent of female faculty
respondents knew their institution’s policy on promotion, which is statistically significant
(p = 0.02).
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 148
148 GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN CAREERS
Promotion to Full Professor
No significant gender disparity was found at the stage of promotion to full professor.
Finding 5-6: For the six disciplines surveyed, 90 percent of the men and 88 percent of the
women proposed for full professor were promoted—a difference that was not statistically
significant. There were no significant differences in the probability of promotion to full
professor due to gender of the candidate, after accounting for other potentially important factors
such as disciplinary differences, departmental size, and use of stopping-the-clock policies. Once
proposed for promotion to full professor, women and men appeared to have fared about the same
across all types of institutions and departments.
Finding 5-7: Women were proposed for promotion to full professor at approximately the
same rates as they were represented among associate professors. Female faculty in biology
were considered for promotion in 24 percent of the cases (28 percent of the associate professor
pool); 14 percent of the cases in chemistry (18 percent of the pool); 18 percent of the cases in
civil engineering (14 percent of the pool); 17 percent of cases in electrical engineering (13
percent of the pool); 9 percent of cases in mathematics (15 percent of the pool); and 7 percent of
the cases in physics (8 percent of the pool).
Time in Rank
Women spent significantly longer time in rank as assistant professors than men did.
Finding 5-8: Time in rank as an assistant professor has grown over time for both male and
female faculty. Men who were full professors at the time of the survey had spent the least
amount of time in rank as assistant professors. This was true across all disciplines.
Finding 5-9: Women who were associate professors at the time of the survey had averaged
a significantly longer time in rank as assistant professors in all fields except electrical
engineering, where women’s shorter time in rank was not significantly different.
It is difficult to determine whether these apparent differences persist once we control for
individual and departmental characteristics such as length of postdoctoral experience and
stopping-the-clock for family leave. While women did appear to remain at the rank of assistant
professor longer than men, the differences between genders depended upon factors like the
prestige of the institution, the time elapsed since the completion of the doctoral degree, and the
current rank of the individual. Both male and female faculty spent longer in assistant professor
ranks at institutions of higher prestige.
Finding 5-10: Male and female faculty who stopped the tenure clock spent significantly
longer as assistant professors than those who did not (an average of 74 months versus 57
months). They had a lower chance of promotion to associate professor (about 80 percent)
at any time (given that they had not been promoted until then) than those who did not stop
the clock. Everything else being equal, however, stopping-the-clock did not affect the
probability of promotion and tenure; it just delayed it by about a year and a half.
It is unclear how that delay affected women faculty, who were more likely than men to avail
themselves of this policy. Although the effect of stopping-the-clock on the probability of
promotion and tenure was similar for both men and women faculty, 19.7 percent of women
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 149
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENIDATIONS 149
assistant professors in the survey sample availed themselves of this policy compared to 7.4
percent of male assistant professors. At the associate professor level, 10.2 percent of female
faculty versus 6.4 percent of male faculty stopped the tenure clock.
Time from Receipt of Ph.D.
Finding 5-12: Overall, it appears that women faculty took significantly longer from receipt
of Ph.D. to promotion to associate professor with tenure, but this gender effect was
confounded with current rank, discipline, and other factors. It is difficult to determine
whether these apparent differences persist once we control for individual and departmental
characteristics such as length of postdoctoral experience and stopping-the-clock for family leave.
While women did appear to remain at the rank of assistant professor longer than men, the
differences between gender depended on factors including the prestige of the institution, the time
elapsed since completion of the doctoral degree, and the current rank of the individual.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The survey data suggest that positive changes have taken place and continue to occur. At
the same time, the data should not be mistakenly interpreted as indicating that men and women
faculty in math, science, and engineering have reached full equality and representation, and we
caution against premature complacency. Women remain underrepresented among science and
engineering faculty and in the tenure-track applicant pool for faculty positions in all disciplinary
areas examined. Furthermore, few departments surveyed reported extensive efforts to increase
gender diversity of the applicant pool. Much work remains to be done by institutions and
professional disciplinary societies to accomplish full representation of men and women in
academic departments. And much additional research is needed to understand the full career
paths of women academics, from receipt of Ph.D. to retirement, and to document gender
differences in other disciplines, other types of institutions, and other types of faculty positions.
Recommendations for Institutions
Research I institutions should:
1. Design and implement new programs and policies to increase the number of
women applying for tenure-track or tenured positions and evaluate existing
programs for effectiveness. This includes enhancing institutional efforts to encourage
female graduates and postdocs to consider careers at RI institutions. In each of the six
disciplines studied, women were underrepresented in the applicant pool relative to
their representation in the pool of recent Ph.D.s (Finding 3-3). This critical gap must
be narrowed in any hopes to expand the number of women faculty in research
intensive institutions. Most departments reported using a very small arsenal of
recruitment strategies (targeted advertising was the most cited), and 43 percent
reported using only one strategy (see Finding 3-7). Significant change in the applicant
pool will not come from such minimal efforts.
2. Involve current female faculty in faculty searches, with appropriate release time.
The proportion of females on the search committee and whether a woman chairs the
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 150
150 GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN CAREERS
committee are both significantly and positively associated with the proportion of
women in the applicant pool (see Finding 3-8). Such engagement may signal to
prospective hires that the institutional climate is supportive and inclusive.
3. Investigate why female faculty, compared to their male counterparts, appear to
continue to experience some sense of isolation in subtle and intangible ways.
Finding 4-7, for example, reports that women faculty are less likely to engage with
other faculty in conversations about research or salary. Creating informal
opportunities for faculty to engage within a department or across an institution might
help address this issue.
4. Explore gender differences in the obligations outside of professional
responsibilities (particularly family-related obligations) and how these differences
may affect the professional outcomes of their faculty. Our findings focused only on
the climate within academic institutions, but factors outside the institutional
environment may be equally important (see Findings 4-6 through 4-8).
5. Initiate mentoring programs for all newly hired faculty, especially at the assistant
professor level. As described in Finding 4-12, the mentoring of female faculty had a
striking impact on their ability to secure grant funding. Institutional mentoring
programs could help ensure that female faculty acquire grant funding which in turn
should have a positive effect on their promotion rates.
6. Make tenure and promotion procedures as transparent as possible and ensure
that policies are routinely and effectively communicated to all faculty. While 81
percent of male faculty know their institution’s policies on promotion, only 75 percent
of female faculty do (see Finding 5-5). Departments in particular need to review their
communication strategies, as only 49 percent of all faculty surveyed reported that their
department had written procedures. And only 78 percent of departments reported that
they had written tenure and promotion policies.
7. Monitor and evaluate stop-the-clock policies and their impact on faculty retention
and advancement. Where such policies are not already in place, adopt them and
ensure effective dissemination to faculty members. Only 78 percent of assistant
professors reported that their department or university had a formal family or personal
leave policy that allows stopping or extending the tenure clock. At those institutions
that do, 19.7 percent of female and 7.4 percent of male assistant professors avail
themselves of these policies, as well as 10.2 percent of female and 6.4 percent of male
associate professors (see Finding 5-10). As use of these policies will likely grow,
institutions need to review the careers of faculty who use these policies to understand
their impact on career progress.
8. Collect data encompassed in this study (including applications, interviews, first
offers, hires, time in rank, tenure award, and promotion) disaggregated by race,
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 151
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENIDATIONS 151
ethnicity and gender. Many of the departments surveyed have made significant gains
in their numbers of female faculty at many of these critical junctures, yet these results
are not well known. The collection of data can allow departments and institutions to
focus their scare resources on transitions that need the most attention. Also, our
findings do not address race and ethnicity, but this information is essential as
institutions work to increase diversity.
Recommendations for Professional Societies
Professional societies in science and engineering disciplines should:
9. Collect data on the career tracks of their members. This study identified many
differences among disciplines that warrant investigation. Why, for example, do biology
and chemistry have disproportionately smaller applicant pools of women for faculty
positions (Finding 3-3)? And why are women faculty in electrical engineering and
mathematics more likely than men to receive outside job offers, while the reverse is
true for chemistry and physics (Finding 4-15)?
10. Disseminate successful strategies to increase the gender diversity of the applicant
pools for tenure-track and tenured faculty positions. Only 10 percent of
departments reported relying on three or more strategies for recruitment (See Table 3-
10).
11. Conduct in-depth surveys of their members at regular intervals on the climate for
professional success and the role of mentoring in their discipline (see Findings 4-6,
4-7, and 4-12).
Questions for Future Research
This study raises many unanswered questions about the status of women in academia. As
noted at the onset of this report, the surveys did not capture the experiences of PhDs who never
apply for academic positions, nor of women faculty who have left at various points in their
academic careers. We also recognize that there are important, nonacademic issues affecting men
and women differentially that impact career choices at critical junctures. Fuller examination of
these issues (for example, topics relating to family, children, home life, care of elderly parents)
will shed greater light on career choices by women and men and should yield suggestions on the
types of support needed to encourage retention of women in academic careers. Below are
suggestions for future research:
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 152
152 GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN CAREERS
A Deeper Understanding of Career Paths
1. Using longitudinal data what are the academic career paths of women in different
science and engineering disciplines from receipt of their Ph.D. to retirement? Most
important, where do women Ph.D.s go who do not apply for academic positions, and
where do women faculty go who leave the university before tenure consideration?
2. Why are women underrepresented in the applicant pools and among those who are
considered for tenure? How can we understand more fully the subtle but powerful
influences of climate and family life on career decisions? While it is true that the lives of
women faculty have become more similar to that of men in recent years, the
discrepancies remain very large, which may be a major reason why women don’t
consider careers in R1 institutions. The demands of family life are also a large deterrent.
Universities can do a lot in mentoring of women graduate students that it is possible to
have a career at an R1 institution and still have a family life.
.
3. Why aren’t more women in fields such as biology and chemistry applying to RI
tenure-track positions, as discussed in Finding 3-3? Such a study might examine the
career preferences of graduate students and postdocs (and what factors shape those
preferences) as well as the efforts of departments and institutions to recruit faculty in
these disciplines.
4. Why do female faculty, compared to their male counterparts, appear to continue to
experience some sense of isolation in more subtle and intangible areas? The findings
on institutional climate indicate several areas that still need to be examined to facilitate
the full participation of all faculty. Finding 4-7, for example, reports that women faculty
are less likely to engage with other faculty in conversations about research or salary.
5. What is the impact of stop-the-clock policies on faculty careers? Given the significant
increases in the number of faculty invoking stop-the-clock policies there is a need to
collect longitudinal data on the career patterns of these faculty including data on time in
rank, tenure and promotion statistics. Does this extension of uncertainty regarding tenure
for assistant professors who utilize their institutions’ stop-the-clock policies deter a
certain fraction of women (and men) from applying or have a negative effect on the
promotion and retention of faculty who utilize these policies?
6. What are the causes for the attrition of women and men prior to tenure decisions, if
indeed attrition does take place? This is particularly relevant given Finding 5–9, which
indicates that women faculty spend significantly longer in time in rank as assistant
professors, and this may have an impact on retention of women faculty.
7. To what extent are women faculty rewarded beyond promotion to full professor?
There are career milestones beyond promotion to full professor in academia. A future
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 153
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENIDATIONS 153
study that looks at chaired professorships, salary increments, and continued access to
institutional resources would be useful.
8. What important, nonacademic issues affect men and women differentially that
impact their career choices at critical junctures? While the committee was not able to
investigate them in this study, a fuller examination--for example, of issues relating to
family, children, home life, care of elderly parents, etc.--might shed light on career
choices by men and women and offer suggestions on the nature and types of supports to
encourage retention of women pursuing academic careers in science, engineering and
mathematics.
Expanding the Scope
9. How important are differences among fields? Future studies should examine additional
engineering and scientific fields because as the data in this report demonstrates fields
differ a lot from each other. Certain engineering fields, including chemical engineering
and bioengineering, may look very different from the two engineering fields--civil and
electrical--examined here.
10. What are the experiences of faculty at Research II institutions? There would be value
in expanding the scope of this study. Conduct further research to understand the hiring
efforts and results at Research II (RII) universities (which also conduct research and train
doctorates). Past research suggests that women faculty in science and engineering are the
least well-represented at RII institutions, with an average percentage of 15 percent.
11. What are the experiences of part-time and non-tenure track faculty? A significant
but necessary limitation of this study is that it focused on full-time tenure-track and
tenured faculty. Given the growing population of non tenure-track and part-time faculty
and that a good portion of these faculty are female, it would be very valuable to have data
and information on the careers of these faculty.
PREPUBLICATION COPY
OCR for page 154
