Cover Image

HARDBACK
$48.95



View/Hide Left Panel

GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN THE CAREERS OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS FACULTY

Committee on Gender Differences in Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty

Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine

Policy and Global Affairs

Committee on National Statistics

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © 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 R1
GENDER DIFFERENCES AT CRITICAL TRANSITIONS IN THE CAREERS OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS FACULTY Committee on Gender Differences in Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine Policy and Global Affairs Committee on National Statistics Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This project was supported by the National Science Foundation, Grant No. 0336796. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gender differences at critical transitions in the careers of science, engineering, and mathematics faculty / Committee on Gender Differences in Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty, Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine [of] Policy and Global Affairs [and] Committee on National Statistics, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, the National Research Council of the National Academies. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN-13: 978-0-309-11463-9 (hardcover) ISBN-10: 0-309-11463-2 (hardcover) ISBN-13: 978-0-309-11464-6 (pdf) ISBN-10: 0-309-11464-0 (pdf) 1. Universities and colleges—Faculty—Employment—Sex differences—United States— Statistics. 2. Sex discrimination in employment—United States. 3. Sex discrimination in higher education—United States. 4. Women in science—United States. 5. Women in technology—United States. 6. Women in mathematics—United States. 7. Educational surveys—United States. I. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Gender Differences in Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty. II. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine. III. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on National Statistics. Q148.G46 2009 331.4’133—dc22 2009037397 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2010 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibil- ity given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scien- tific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON GENDER DIFFERENCES IN CAREERS OF SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS FACuLTy1 Claude R. Canizares, Co-Chair, Vice President for Research and Associate Provost and Bruno Rossi Professor of Experimental Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sally E. Shaywitz, Co-Chair, Audrey G. Ratner Professor in Learning Development and Co-Director, Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity, School of Medicine, Yale University Linda Abriola, Dean of Engineering, Tufts University Jane Buikstra, Regents’ Professor, Arizona State University School of Human Evolution and Social Change Alicia Carriquiry, Professor of Statistics, Iowa State University Ronald Ehrenberg, Director, Cornell Higher Education Research Institute and Irving M. Ives Professor of Industrial and Labor Relations and Economics, Cornell University Joan Girgus, Professor of Psychology and Special Assistant to the Dean of the Faculty, Princeton University Arleen Leibowitz, Professor of Public Policy, School of Public Affairs, University of California at Los Angeles Thomas N. Taylor, Distinguished Professor, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and Biodiversity Research Institute, University of Kansas Lilian Wu, Program Executive, Global University Relations, IBM Technology Strategy and Innovation Study Staff Catherine Didion, Study Director (from September 1, 2007) Peter Henderson, Study Director (from October 15, 2005 until August 31, 2007) Jong-on Hahm, Study Director (through October 14, 2005) Constance F. Citro, Director, Committee on National Statistics Michael L. Cohen, Senior Program Officer John Sislin, Program Officer Elizabeth Briggs, Senior Program Associate Elizabeth Scott, Project Assistant Jessica Buono, Research Associate Jacqueline Martin, Senior Program Assistant 1 Cathleen Synge Morawetz, Professor Emerita, the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York University and Yu Xie, Frederick G. L. Huetwell Professor of Sociology, University of Michigan resigned their committee appointments in 2004. iv

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON WOMEN IN SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE 2007-2009 Lilian Shiao-yen Wu, Chair, Program Executive, Global University Relations, IBM Technology Strategy and Innovation Alice M. Agogino, Roscoe and Elizabeth Hughes Professor of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Florence B. Bonner, Senior Vice President for Research and Compliance, Howard University Allan Fisher, Senior Vice President, Product Strategy and Development, Laureate Higher Education Group June E. Osborn, President Emerita, Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation Vivian Pinn, Associate Director for Research on Women’s Health and Director, Office of Research on Women’s Health, National Institutes of Health Pardis Sabeti, Assistant Professor, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University Lydia Villa-Komaroff, Board Member and Chief Scientific Officer, CytonomeST, LLC Warren Washington, Senior Scientist & Section Head, National Center for Atmospheric Research Susan Wessler, University of Georgia Foundation Chair in Biology, Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia Staff Catherine Didion, Director (from March 1, 2007) Peter Henderson, Director (October 15, 2005-March 1, 2007) Jong-on Hahm, Director (until October 14, 2005) John Sislin, Program Officer Elizabeth Briggs, Senior Program Associate Jessica Buono, Research Associate Jacqueline Martin, Senior Program Assistant v

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL STATISTICS 2008-2009 William F. Eddy, Chair, Department of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University Katharine Abraham, Department of Economics and Joint Program in Survey Methodology, University of Maryland Alicia Carriquiry, Department of Statistics, Iowa State University William DuMouchel, Lincoln Technologies, Inc., Waltham, Massachusetts John Haltiwanger, Department of Economics, University of Maryland V. Joseph Hotz, Department of Economics, Duke University Karen Kafadar, Department of Statistics, Indiana University Douglas Massey, Department of Sociology, Princeton University Sally Morton, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina Joseph Newhouse, Division of Health Policy Research and Education, Harvard University Samuel H. Preston, Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania Hal Stern, Department of Statistics, University of California, Irvine Roger Tourangeau, Joint Program in Survey Methodology, University of Maryland, and Survey Research Center, University of Michigan Alan Zaslavsky, Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard University Medical School Constance F. Citro, Director, Committee on National Statistics vi

OCR for page R1
Preface Difficult tasks are often very simply stated. This committee was asked by Congress to “conduct a study to assess gender differences in the careers of science, engineering, and mathematics (SEM) faculty, focusing on four-year institutions of higher education that award bachelor’s and graduate degrees. The study will build on the National Academies’ previous work and examine issues such as faculty hiring, promotion, tenure, and allocation of institutional resources including (but not limited to) laboratory space.” That such an assessment would be daunting was well understood by the committee. The importance of the study provided more than ample motivation to keep the committee engaged and focused on crafting an objective report that would advance our knowledge on the status of women academics in science and engineering at the nation’s top universities. To address its charge, the committee drew on a large number of scholarly studies, survey data collected by federal agencies and professional societies among others, self-assessments conducted by universities—as well as a number of experts brought in to meet with the committee. After reviewing the above information, the committee determined to conduct two comprehensive surveys. These surveys were sent to the major research universities across the United States during 2004-2005. The surveys focused on biology, chemistry, civil and electrical engineering, mathematics, and physics. One focused on almost 500 departments in these disciplines, and the other was sent to more than 1,800 faculty. These surveys bring much needed additional information to the table. The survey of departments collected information on departmental characteristics, hiring, tenure and promo- tion decisions, and related policies. The survey of faculty focused on demographic characteristics, employment history, and institutional resources received. The committee was delighted with the response to the surveys. The departmental vii

OCR for page R1
viii PREFACE survey had about an 85 percent response rate, and the faculty survey had about a 77 percent response rate. The committee extends its thanks to everyone who filled out the questionnaires, which were undoubtedly time consuming. Respondents were very open with their information, as they were promised confidentiality. While the data must remain restricted to maintain that confidentiality, we believe these data could be used in further studies for the benefit of the scientific com- munity without violating the confidentiality of respondents. A related point is that while the committee examined a tremendous amount of information, a comprehensive and conclusive assessment of faculty careers remains in the future. The committee has done all it can given its resources to advance our understanding of this important issue, but additional research and study remain. If it could, this committee would have continued expanding, refin- ing, and enhancing its analysis. The committee trusts that others will be encour- aged to pursue further some of the avenues that the committee has started down and to answer some of the questions that arose in this report, drawing on their own innovative approaches to examining the trajectory of academic careers of men and women. Claude R. Canizares Co-Chair Sally E. Shaywitz Co-Chair

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgments This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Academies’ Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Robert Birgeneau, University of California, Berkeley; Claudia Goldin, Harvard University; Susan Graham, University of California, Berkeley; Jo Handelsman, University of Wisconsin; Maria Klawe, Harvey Mudd College; J. Scott Long, Indiana University; Colm O’Muircheartaigh, University of Chicago; Barbara Reskin, University of Washington; Johanna Levelt Sengers, National Institute of Standards and Technology; and Richard Zare, Stanford University. Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive com- ments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or rec- ommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Stephen Fienberg, Carnegie Mellon University and Mildred Dresselhaus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Appointed by the National Academies, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. ix

OCR for page R1
x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank all the faculty and departments who took the time to complete our surveys. We greatly appreciate the effort, and the report could not have been a success without their help. In addition, the committee would like to thank staff of the project for their assistance, including Charlotte Kuh, deputy executive director of the Policy and Global Affairs Division; Catherine Didion, the current director of the Committee on Women in Science, Engineering and Medicine (CWSEM); Michael Cohen, senior program officer of the Committee on National Statistics; Marilyn Baker, director for reports and communications for the Policy and Global Affairs Division; Jong-on Hahm, who managed the project as the former director of CWSEM; Peter Henderson, who took over as study director and interim director of CWSEM; John Sislin, program officer; Jim Voytuk, senior program officer and George Reinhart, former senior program offi- cer for their assistance with data and surveys; Elizabeth Briggs; Jessica Buono; Jacqueline Martin; Amber Carrier; Melissa McCartney; Norman Bradburn, who consulted on the surveys and data; John Tsapogas for assistance with Survey of Doctorate Recipients data; Dan Heffron for assistance with National Survey of Postsecondary Faculty data; and Rachel Ivie, Roman Czujko, and everyone at the American Institute of Physics, who implemented the surveys.

OCR for page R1
Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 15 Why Disparities Matter, 16 The Committee’s Charge, 19 Approach and Scope, 19 Outline of Report, 29 2 Status of Women in Academic Science and Engineering in 2004 and 2005 31 Degrees Earned, 32 Faculty Representation, 33 Professional Activities and Climate, 36 3 Gender Differences in Academic Hiring 39 The Hiring Process, 40 Applications for Faculty Positions, 43 Selection for Interviews for S&E Jobs, 50 Offers Made, 56 Hires, 59 Faculty Perspective on Hiring, 61 Institutional Policies for Increasing the Diversity of Applicant Pools, 61 Summary of Findings, 64 xi

OCR for page R1
xii CONTENTS 4 Professional Activities, Institutional Resources, Climate, and Outcomes 70 Professional Activities, 73 Institutional Resources, 77 Climate, 84 Outcomes, 88 Summary of Findings, 110 5 Gender Differences in Tenure and Promotion 116 Tenure and Promotion Processes, 118 Equity in Tenure and Promotion Decisions, 121 Tenure and Promotion Awards, 124 Time in Rank, 134 Summary of Findings, 148 6 Key Findings and Recommendations 153 Appendixes 1-1 Biographical Information on Committee Members, 171 1-2 List of Research I Institutions, 178 1-3 Committee Meeting Agenda, 179 1-4 The Surveys, 181 1-5 Survey Instruments, 189 1-6 Departments in Survey, 216 2-1 Review of Literature and Relevant Research, 249 2-2 Previous Research on Factors Contributing to Gender Differences Among Faculty, 267 3-1 Review of Literature and Research on Factors Associated with a Higher Proportion of Female Applicants, 275 3-2 Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences for the Probability That There Are No Female Applicants, 284 3-3 Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences Based on the Modeled Probability of the Percentage of Applicants That Are Female, 285 3-4 Estimated Adjusted Mean Effects and Differences Based on the Modeled Probability of at Least One Female Candidate Interviewed, 287 3-5 Doctoral Degrees Awarded by All Doctoral-Granting Institutions, by Field, Gender, and Year, 289 3-6 Doctoral Degrees Awarded by Discipline and Gender for Research I Institutions, 1999-2003, 290 3-7 Marginal Mean and Variance of Transformed Response Variables, 291

OCR for page R1
xiii CONTENTS 3-8 Main Considerations for Taking a Position by Number of Respondents Saying “Yes”, 295 4-1 Distribution of Undergraduate Course Load for Faculty by Gender and Discipline, 296 4-2 Percentage of Faculty Members Who Do No Graduate Teaching, 298 4-3 Percentage of Faculty Members Receiving a Reduced Teaching Load When Hired, 299 4-4 Percentage of Faculty Members Who Served on an Undergraduate Thesis or Honors Committee, 300 4-5 Percentage of Faculty Members Who Served on and Chaired an Undergraduate Thesis or Honors Committee, 301 4-6 Distribution of Number of Graduate Thesis or Honors Committees for Research I Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty, 302 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, 303 4-8 Distribution of Number of Service Committees for Research I Tenure and Tenure-Track Faculty, 304 4-9 Mean Salary by Gender and Professorial Rank for Tenure and Tenure- Track Faculty in Research I Institutions, 305 4-10 Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Summer Support, 306 4-11 Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Travel Funds, 307 4-12 Median Square Footage of Lab Space of Faculty Who Report Doing Experimental Work, 308 4-13 Faculty Who Have Received More Lab Space Since Hire, 309 4-14 Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Sufficient Equipment, 310 4-15 Number of Postdoctorate Students for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions, 311 4-16 Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions Receiving Sufficient Clerical Support, 312 4-17 Percentage of Faculty Members Stating That They Had a Mentor, 313 4-18 Distribution of the Number of Graduate Students for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions, 314 4-19 Mean Number of Articles Published in Refereed Journals Over the Past 3 Years for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty in Research I Institutions, 315 4-20a Estimated Probability of Having Grant Funding by Discipline, Gender, and Whether the Faculty Member Has an Assigned Mentor—Assistant Professors Only, 316

OCR for page R1
xiv CONTENTS 4-20b Estimated Probability of Having Grant Funding by Discipline, Gender, and Whether the Faculty Member Has an Assigned Mentor—Associate Professors Only, 317 4-21 Percentage Faculty Missing Salary Data by Gender and Discipline, 318 4-22 Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions That Were Nominated for at Least One Award, 319 4-23 Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Research I Faculty with Offers to Leave, 320 4-24 Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty at Research I Institutions Planning to Leave or Retire, 321 5-1 Knowledge of Tenure Procedures by Gender, Rank, and Presence of a Mentor, 322 5-2 Detailed Tenure Information from Departmental Survey, 324 5-3 Time Spent in Both Assistant and Associate Professorships, 325 5-4 Years Between Starting Employment and Achieving Associate Professor Status, by Gender, 326 5-5 Years Between Starting Employment and Achieving Full Professor Status, by Gender, 327 5-6 Patterns of Nonresponse for Tenure Decisions, 328 5-7 Patterns of Nonresponse for Promotion Decisions, 329 Bibliography 330 Index 353

OCR for page R1
List of Tables and Figures TABLES S-1 Representation of Women in Faculty Positions at Research I Institutions, by Rank and Field, (percent), 1995–2003, 6 S-2 Transitions From Ph.D. to Tenure-Track Positions, by Field at the Research I Institutions Surveyed, 7 2-1 Science and Engineering Doctorate Holders Employed in Academia as Full-time Senior Faculty, by Sex and Degree Field, 2003, 34 2-2 Science and Engineering Doctorate Holders Employed in Academia as Full-time Junior Faculty, by Sex and Degree Field, 2003, 34 3-1 Number of Tenured and Tenure-Track Positions with Complete Information About the Gender of Applicants, by Discipline, 46 3-2 Percentage of Women in the Doctoral Pool and Distribution of the Percentage of Women Among Job Applicants for Tenure-Track Positions, by Discipline, 47 3-3 Mean Percentage of Females Among Applicants and Among Interviewees in Each Discipline, 52 3-4 Percent of Positions For Which No Women Were Interviewed, by Type of Position, 53 3-5 Percent of First Offers, by Gender and Type of Position, 56 3-6 Distribution of Percentage of Female Interviews and Offers, by Discipline, 58 3-7 Percent of Candidates of Each Gender Who Received the First Offer and Gender of Candidates of Each Gender Who Eventually Accepted Each Tenure-Track Position, 60 xv

OCR for page R1
xvi LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES 3-8 First Offer and Person Hired for Tenured Position, Percent by Gender, 60 3-9 Steps Taken to Increase the Gender Diversity of the Candidate Pool, 64 3-10 Number of Policy Steps Taken by Departments, 65 4-1 Average Measures of Recent Research Productivity, by Gender, 92 4-2 Percentage of People Who Received Grant Funding by Gender, Rank of Faculty, and Mentor Status, 97 4-3 Satisfaction of Faculty with Employment, by Gender, 109 5-1 Percentage of Responding Departments that Decide Tenure and Promotion Together, by Discipline, 119 5-2 Number of Years Between Hiring and Tenure Decision, 120 5-3 Female Participation in Tenure and Promotion Committees, 122 5-4 Tenure Award Rates, by Gender and Discipline, 126 5-5 Promotion to Full Professor by Gender and Discipline, 128 5-6 Tracking Cohorts Entering the Tenure Track Through 7 Years: Pennsylvania State University, 135 5-7 Results of Faculty Reviews at 2, 4, and 6 Years Following Hire: Pennsylvania State University, 2004-2005, 136 5-8 Mean Number of Years Between Rank Achieved and First Faculty or Instructional Staff Job, by Gender, for Full-time Faculty at Research I Institutions, Fall 2003, 137 5-9 Mean Number of Months Spent as an Assistant Professor, 139 5-10 Mean Number of Months Between Receipt of Ph.D. and Promotion to Associate Professor, 140 5-11 Mean Number of Months Spent as an Associate Professor, 141 5-12 Results Obtained from a Cox Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis of 351 Cases That Had Complete Promotion and Covariate Information, 141 5-13 Number of Faculty by Gender and Rank Who Reported Stopping or Not Stopping the Tenure Clock or Who Did Not Respond to the Survey Question, 145 6-1 Representation of Women in Faculty Positions at Research I Institutions by Rank and Field (percent) 1995-2003, 155 6-2 Transitions from Ph.D. to Tenure-Track Positions by Field at the Research I Institution Surveyed, 156

OCR for page R1
xvii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES FIGuRES 3-1 (a-c) Proportion of females among applicants to all tenured and tenure-track positions in Research I institutions, 44-45 3-2 Main considerations for selecting current position, by gender, 62 4-1 Mean percentage of time faculty spent on research and fund-raising, by gender, 74 4-2 Mean lab space reported by respondents, by gender and field, 82 4-3 Percentage of men and women reporting having access to the equipment they need to conduct their research, 83 4-4 Percentage of faculty reporting having access to the clerical support they need, by gender and field, 85 4-5 Inclusion in unit processes and culture, by gender and discipline, 86 4-6 Percentage of faculty responding that they had a mentor, by gender and field, 87 4-7 Mean number of sole or co-authored articles in refereed journals, by gender and discipline, 91 4-8 Percentage of faculty reporting having at least one research grant on which they served as a PI or Co-PI, by gender and field, 95 4-9 Histogram of the logarithm of grant amount, 98 4-10 Histogram of the logarithm of lab space, 100 5-1 Probability of tenure for male and female candidates as a function of the proportion of tenure-eligible women in the department, 132 5-2 Probability of tenure for male and female candidates as a function of the proportion of women in the department, 133 5-3 (a-d) Survival curves for male faculty who are currently full professors or associate professors and for female faculty who are currently full professors or associate professors, 142-144 5-4 (a-b) One minus the probability of promotion to full professor for males and females in biology and electrical engineering, 147-148

OCR for page R1