National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$48.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty (2010)
Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine (CWSEM)
Committee on National Statistics (CNSTAT)

Citation Manager

. "2 Status of Women in Academic Science and Engineering in 2004 and 2005." Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2010.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
36
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty

Data for faculty at a wider range of institutions were consistent with Nelson’s findings (NAS, NAE, and IOM, 2007). For tenured or tenure-track engineering faculty in general in 2005, women comprised 6.3 percent of full professors, 13.2 percent of associate professors, and 19.5 percent of assistant professors (Gibbons, 2007).16 In physics, women comprised 6 percent of full professors, 14 percent of associate professors, and 17 percent of assistant professors (Dresselhaus, 2007).

The explanation that female faculty on average tended to be younger and so were more likely to be at lower ranks did not completely explain their lower ranks according to the National Research Council (2001a:172), which found “that at any given career age men are more likely to be in a higher rank [emphasis in original].” For example, in 1995, in the 10th year since receiving a Ph.D., 8 percent of women and 12 percent of men were full professors; in the 15th year, 33 percent of women and 45 percent of men were full professors; and in the 20th year, 64 percent of women and 73 percent of men were full professors (pp. 172-173). Something other than career age appeared to be causing part of the observed gender differences in rank attainment.

PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES AND CLIMATE

In addition to the underrepresentation of female faculty, concerns persisted regarding gender differences in the treatment of faculty. Several studies suggested women were evaluated more harshly and were less likely to be hired into academic positions (Lewin and Duchan, 1971; Steinpreis et al., 1999; Trix and Psenka, 2003; Wenneras and Wold, 1997). The literature also suggested that once hired, women were treated differently than men. Women were less likely to receive tenure or a promotion—the major career milestones for academics—or they spent more time in a lower rank before tenure or a promotion, with negative consequences for their salaries (Long et al., 1993; NRC, 2001; NSF, 2004a). Ginther (2001) found women scientists, in general, were 12 percent less likely than men to be promoted. Long et al. (1993) reached a similar conclusion for women in biochemistry.17

Some writers suggested that female faculty received fewer resources than male faculty, with academic salaries being an obvious, much studied, example. Data from the Department of Education revealed that during the 2003 to 2004 academic year, male “faculty with 9/10-month contracts earned an average salary

data are available in chemistry. See Marasco (2006) for percentage of female faculty at the nation’s top 50 chemistry departments from 2000 to 2006. See NAS, NAE, and IOM (2007) for numbers of male and female faculty in chemistry from 1966-1999.

16

This is a general trend. According to data collected by the AAUP, about 40 percent of men were full professors, compared to about 20 percent of women. In addition, a greater percentage of women were instructors, lecturers, or had no rank (Curtis, 2004).

17

Recent data have cast doubt on this position, suggesting significant differences might not occur (Ginther and Kahn, 2006).

Page
36
Front Matter (R1-R18)
Summary (1-14)
1 Introduction (15-30)
2 Status of Women in Academic Science and Engineering in 2004 and 2005 (31-38)
3 Gender Differences in Academic Hiring (39-69)
4 Professional Activities, Institutional Resources, Climate, and Outcomes (70-115)
5 Gender Differences in Tenure and Promotion (116-152)
6 Key Findings and Recommendations (153-168)
Appendixes (169-170)
Appendix 1-1: Biographical Information on Committee Members (171-177)
Appendix 1-2: List of Research I Institutions (178-178)
Appendix 1-3: Committee Meeting Agenda (179-180)
Appendix 1-4: The Surveys (181-188)
Appendix 1-5: Survey Instruments (189-215)
Appendix 1-6: Departments in Survey (216-248)
Appendix 2-1: Review of Literature and Relevant Research (249-266)
Appendix 2-2: Previous Research on Factors Contributing to Gender Differences Among Faculty (267-274)
Appendix 3-1: Review of Literature and Research on Factors Associated with a Higher Proportion of Female Applicants (275-283)
Appendix 3-2: Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences for the Probability That There Are No Female Applicants (284-284)
Appendix 3-3: Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences Based on the Modeled Probability of the Percentage of Applicants That Are Female (285-286)
Appendix 3-4: Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences Based on the Modeled Probability of at Least One Female Candidate Interviewed (287-288)
Appendix 3-5: Doctoral Degrees Awarded by All Doctoral-Granting Institutions, by Field, Gender, and Year (289-289)
Appendix 3-6: Doctoral Degrees Awarded by Discipline and Gender for Research I Institutions, 1999-2003 (290-290)
Appendix 3-7: Marginal Mean and Variance of Transformed Response Variables (291-294)
Appendix 3-8: Main Considerations for Taking a Position by Number of Respondents Saying "Yes" (295-295)
Appendix 4-1: Distribution of Undergraduate Course Load for Faculty by Gender and Discipline (296-297)
Appendix 4-2: Percentage of Faculty Members Who Do No Graduate Teaching (298-298)
Appendix 4-3: Percentage of Faculty Members Receiving a Reduced Teaching Load When Hired (299-299)
Appendix 4-4: Percentage of Faculty Members Who Served on an Undergraduate Thesis or Honors Committee (300-300)
Appendix 4-5: Percentage of Faculty Members Who Served on and Chaired an Undergraduate Thesis or Honors Committee (301-301)
Appendix 4-6: Distribution of Number of Graduate Thesis or Honors Committees for Research I Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty: Men/Women (302-302)
Appendix 4-7: Percentage of Time Spent in Administration or Committee Work on Campus and Service to the Profession Outside the University for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions: Men/Women (303-303)
Appendix 4-8: Distribution of Number of Service Committees for Research I Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty: Men/Women (304-304)
Appendix 4-9: Mean Salary by Gender and Professorial Rank for Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (305-305)
Appendix 4-10: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Summer Support (306-306)
Appendix 4-11: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Travel Funds (307-307)
Appendix 4-12: Median Square Footage of Lab Space of Faculty Who Report Doing Experimental Work (308-308)
Appendix 4-13: Faculty Who Have Received More Lab Space Since Hire (Values Are Percentages) (309-309)
Appendix 4-14: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Sufficient Equipment (310-310)
Appendix 4-15: Number of Postdoctorate Students for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (presented by Men and Women) (311-311)
Appendix 4-16: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Sufficient Clerical Support (312-312)
Appendix 4-17: Percentage of Faculty Members Stating That They Had a Mentor (313-313)
Appendix 4-18: Distribution of the Number of Graduate Students for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (presented by Men and Women) (314-314)
Appendix 4-19: Mean Number of Articles Published in Refereed Journals (sole and co-authored) Over the Past 3 Years for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions (315-315)
Appendix 4-20a: Estimated Probability of Having Grant Funding by Discipline, Gender, and Whether the Faculty Member Has an Assigned Mentor - Assistant Professors Only (316-316)
Appendix 4-20b: Estimated Probability of Having Grant Funding by Discipline, Gender, and Whether the Faculty Member Has an Assigned Mentor - Associate Professors Only (317-317)
Appendix 4-21: Percentage of Faculty Missing Salary Data by Gender and Discipline (318-318)
Appendix 4-22: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions That Were Nominated for at Least One Award (319-319)
Appendix 4-23: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Research I Faculty with Offers to Leave (320-320)
Appendix 4-24: Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions Planning to Leave or Retire (321-321)
Appendix 5-1: Knowledge of Tenure Procedures by Gender, Rank, and Presence of a Mentor (322-323)
Appendix 5-2: Detailed Tenure Information from Departmental Survey (324-324)
Appendix 5-3: Time Spent in Both Assistant and Associate Professorships (325-325)
Appendix 5-4: Years Between Starting Employment and Achieving Associate Professor Status, by Gender (326-326)
Appendix 5-5: Years Between Starting Employment and Achieving Full Professor Status, by Gender (327-327)
Appendix 5-6: Patterns of Nonresponse for Tenure Decisions (328-328)
Appendix 5-7: Patterns of Nonresponse for Promotion Decisions (329-329)
Bibliography (330-352)
Index (353-366)