Florence Bonner and Vernese Edgeh, Policy and Praxis: Advancing Women in Higher Education and Influencing Outcomes
Miguel R. Olivas-Luján, Ann Gregory, John Miller, JoAnn Duffy, Suzy Fox, Terri Lituchy, Silvia Inés Monserrat, Betty Jane Punnett, and Neusa María Bastos F. Santos, Successful Academic Women in the Americas: Human and Social Capital Descriptors
Gloria Scott, Science is Foundation for Leadership
Roberta Spalter-Roth, Work-Family Policies in Academia as Resources or Rewards
Monica Young, Case Studies from the Female Engineering Professoriate
Amber Barnato and Pamela Peele, The Role of Informal Organizational Structures on Women in the Health Sciences
Diana Bilimoria, Susan R. Perry, Xiangfen Liang, Patricia Higgins, Eleanor P. Stoller, and Cyrus C. Taylor, How Do Female and Male Faculty Members Construct Job Satisfaction?
Diana Bilimoria, C. Greer Jordan, and Susan R. Perry, A Good Place to do Science: Creating and Sustaining a Productive, Inclusive Work Environment for Female and Male Scientists
Diana Bilimoria, Margaret M. Hopkins, Deborah A. O’Neil, and Susan R. Perry, An Integrated Coaching and Mentoring Program for University Transformation
Cheryl Geisler, Deborah Kaminski, Robyn Berkley, and Linda Layne, Up Against the Glass: Gender and Promotion at a Technological University
Rachel Ivie, Women in Academic Physics and Astronomy
Mary Ellen Jackson, Phyllis Robinson, Sarah Conolly Hokenmaier, and J. Lynn Zimmer, Faculty Horizons: Recruiting a Diverse Faculty
Delia Saenz and Allecia Reid, Diversity in STEM Disciplines: The Case of Faculty Women of Color
Ruth Dyer and Beth A. Montelone, Initiatives to Increase Recruitment, Retention and Advancement of Women in Science and Engineering Disciplines at Kansas State University
Lisa Frehill, Mary O’Connell, Elba Serrano, and Cecily Jeser-Cannavale, Effective Practices for STEM Faculty Diversity
Jo Handelsman, Molly Carnes, Jennifer Sheridan, Eve Fine, and Christine Pribbenow, NSF ADVANCE at the UW-Madison: Three Success Stories
Peggy Layne, Patricia Hyer, and Elizabeth Creamer, Institutional Transformation at Virginia Tech
Janet Malley, Pamela Raymond, and Abigail Stewart, Institutional Transformation at the University of Michigan
Nancy Martin, Beth Mitchneck, and William McCallum, Scientifically Correct: Speaking to Scientists about Diversity
Geraldine L. Richmond, Working to Increase the Success of Women Scientists in Academia
Eve A. Riskin, Kate Quinn, Joyce W. Yen, Sheila Edwards Lange, Suzanne Brainard, Ana Mari Cauce, and Denice D. Denton, Leadership Workshops to Effect Cultural Change
Tammy Smecker-Hane, Lisa Frehill, Priscilla Kehoe, Susan V. Bryant, Herb Killackey, and Debra Richardson, ADVANCE: Successful Recruitment of Women to STEM at UCI
Policy and Praxis: Advancing Women in Higher Education and Influencing Outcomes
Florence Bonner and Vernese Edgeh, Howard University
Women in all parts of the world experience unequal playing fields in their quest for education, employment, occupational prestige, income and resources in nearly every discipline and field. Women remain heavily concentrated in the service fields in higher education and work. When we find more integration by gender men still occupy the positions with higher prestige, greater income and more resources. This is painfully so in the sciences. For example, in European Union (EU) countries such as Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia, women represent the most students in service disciplines, education (74%), humanities and arts (66%), and health and welfare (72%). Men, on the other hand, comprise 77% of all students in the engineering, manufacturing, and construction fields (European Commission on Education, 2002). In South Africa, women graduates account for only 9% in engineering, 28% in agriculture, 38% in medicine, and 47% in the sciences. The most severe inequalities in South African higher education exist among African women (Government of South Africa, 1997).
In the U.S. as in many other countries of Europe, like France and the United Kingdom, women outnumber men in most institutions of higher education (Bonner, 2002), have higher grades upon entry and graduate faster; but men enter with more resources, more confidence (Allen 2005). On average men still outnumber women in most science fields and if they do not in the academy they do in the workplace. For example, data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2002) show that although women (14,621,158) outnumbered men (11,577,535) overall in the labor force, men held 2,218,400 positions in computer and mathematical occupations compared to 950,047 for women. Men held 86,343 positions in mathematical science occupations compared to women’s 67,663. They dominated the architectural subcategories (2,301,953 men to 357,345 women) and in engineering fields (1,522,655 men to 179,800 women). These gender disparities prevail even in the academy in positions of power and authority; and in key places where mentoring routinely takes place.
We examine this problem within the context of the argument that— the presence of women in the academy in greater number than men, often with higher
grades, faster time to graduation and success in graduation rates—women are just fine, it’s men who are in trouble. Two questions focus the examination.
Does a numerical majority in higher education entry and graduation rates constitute gender equality for women and does this numerical majority alone represent institutional change?
Does an increased acquisition of advanced degrees translate into equity in outcomes such as employment, status, salary or resources?
Data compiled from the sources mentioned reveals that, for women, higher education achievement has not translated into gender equality within the academy or outside of it; rather, it has fueled an illusion and fostered a false premise of overwhelming success. Women still face many challenges inside institutions of higher education and learning as well as entry into nontraditional careers and professions; they have not reached parity with men nor have they surpassed them. Disproving the fallacy and debunking the myth that women have conquered all of the problems (or most) requires examination of at least the two questions above. We examine higher education success and outcomes, such as career choices of women and men; location (status and pay) in the occupational hierarchy and labor force to reflect on the questions in an effort to point to needed policy and support in the academy to remedy rather than exacerbate the conditions. We pay particular attention to African-American women.
Successful Academic Women in the Americas: Human and Social Capital Descriptors
A complex interplay of personal and cultural characteristics enables some women, and not others, to overcome barriers to professional success. High-achieving women may share certain personal characteristics, beliefs, and experiences,
regardless of the countries in which they live. However, every individual is socialized within a particular national culture, and may be expected to share certain values and expectations with other members of that culture. The main goal of this research project was to identify similarities and differences across occupations (academic, professional, and managerial) of “successful” women in terms of personality, background and support structures, in various countries.
At the outset of the project, many facets of “success” were considered. For the purposes of this study, it was agreed to operationally define “success” as professional success, specifically “reaching a relatively high level in one’s occupation or profession.” The following criteria were used for participation in the study—private sector managers of managers, academic tenured, full professors or senior university administrators, entrepreneurial women who have owned a business at least three years, government ministers/officials, and legal and medical professionals, as well as engineers.
Surveys and interviews were used to collect data on the following three sets of variables: National/Cultural (Collectivism/Individualism, Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance), Personal (Self-efficacy, Locus of Control, Need for Achievement), and Social-Experiential (Psychosocial and Career Mentoring). National/Cultural variables were measured using Dorfman & Howell’s (1988) scales inspired by three of Hofstede’s (1980) work dimensions. To measure personal variables, we used the following scales: Self efficacy was measured using an instrument developed by Sherer, Maddix, Mercandante, Prentice, Dunn, Jacobs, & Rogers (1982). A work related locus of control scale derived by Spector (1988) from Rotter’s (1960) work was used to measure the extent to which one perceives being in control of events in one’s life. Need for achievement scale was drawn from the Jackson’s (1989) Personality Research Form. Finally, Psychosocial and Career Mentoring was measured with a scale by Tepper, Shaffer, & Tepper (1996).
Over 1,100 professionally successful women and 531 undergraduate business students completed the above surveys. In addition, researchers completed semi-structured interviews with a minimum of 25 participants in each of the countries. The international team, led by eight researchers from diverse academic perspectives (management, strategy, history, women’s studies, human resources, and organization behavior) focused on the following countries or regions: United States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, and the English-speaking Caribbean.
This presentation will compare the subset of academic women in the sample with other sub-samples from the study. Findings will be discussed in the context of the Convocation.
Science is Foundation for Leadership
Gloria Scott, Jarvis Christian College
In academia, science is one of the major “subject matter areas”—humanities, social sciences, science representing the basic educational core of knowledge. Science students must internalize and utilize the “scientific method” which is fundamental. One of the basic reasons that science is required as a part of the educational core, is that the exposure to knowledge acquisition and utilization within a methodology forms a foundation for all intellectual interchange and exploration. As one reviews the data on women leaders in the United States, especially African American women, significant numbers were science majors and worked in teaching, and research. Hundreds of them lead in the broad non-profit sector, in the educational non non-profit sector as well as in the profit sector. They are present as executive and volunteer leaders at local, state national and international levels. This relationship is essential to communicate intergenerationally to current and future college women to help them understand the professional foundation and implementation that science provides as an occupational area, but also to know that science foundation knowledge and experience provides a complex interplay with creating self assured, high performance leadership ability. Science represents the most important fundamental source of knowledge, analysis, strategy and understanding to facilitate human achievement in organizational frames. The poster presents this relationship as essential and foundational in the production of leaders.
Work-Family Policies in Academia as Resources or Rewards
Roberta Spalter-Roth, American Sociological Association
There is a growing broad-based, social movement to ameliorate the time conflict between work and family by increasing the availability of work family-policies to academic faculty. This movement responds to the growing numbers of women PhDs in the sciences and other disciplines, and the failure of these women to attain the highest ranks at research universities. Pressure from this movement has expanded the range of institutions of higher education have begun to offer at least minimal work-family policy options so that women (and men) can reconcile the demands of two “greedy institutions.” Two sorts of arguments are made to bring about change: (1) needs based or resources policy and (2) “best and the brightest” or rewards policy. To test these arguments, we analyze evidence from a survey of sociology PhDs, 6 years after they obtained their PhDs. We find that academic mothers who use of at least one work-family policy significantly increase their scholarly productivity, in the form of peer-reviewed publications,
without increasing their time spent at work. These findings suggest that over-all, work-family policies may be effective in meeting the demands of both greedy institutions. Yet, these policies, including family leave, extending the tenure clock, modified teaching loads, and part-time tenure track positions do not appear to be distributed as resources to all academic mothers with young children. Rather they appear to be distributed as rewards on the basis of the predicted productivity of faculty mothers. Predicted productivity is measured by the prestige of the graduate school attended and the publications completed in graduate school. These findings suggest that chairs and other administrators may be less willing to distribute resources to mothers who are not perceived as the “best and the brightest.” To make these policies more universal, needs-based policies, chairs need to inform themselves about the entitlement to work-family policies, deans need to hold chairs accountable for their distribution, and provosts need to hold deans accountable. The broad-based, multi-organizational social movement supporting work-family policies needs to continue to monitor institutions of higher education.
Case Studies from the Female Engineering Professoriate
Monica Young, Syracuse University
This research study focused on a desire to understand the reasons why women enter the engineering profession, as well as how they succeed in this profession and ultimately become members of the engineering professoriate. As a female engineer who changed fields, I had a range of experiences both good and bad that contributed to my decision. I am passionate about my current field, science education, and I wish to recruit more females into science and engineering by working in this field. The goal for this study was to find women who have found success in engineering, and question them about the aspects of their lives that helped them succeed. Two women in academia who hold doctoral degrees in engineering were the cases for this study. The women were selected based on differences in their backgrounds, both academically and personally. Each woman was interviewed extensively to garner information about her experiences in elementary and secondary school, college, graduate school, and life in general. Some of the general themes that emerged throughout these interviews were: how to make science memorable, the role of mentoring, the importance of questioning, and social norms. The women discussed experiences they had throughout their academic career that contributed to their current success as assistant professor and senior administrator. Though much information was gleaned from analyzing the interviews, there is a great deal more to learn from these women. Future research will further question the participants in this study and expand the number of participants.
The Role of Informal Organizational Structures on Women in the Health Sciences
Amber Barnato and Pamela Peele, University of Pittsburgh
Women in academic science careers often confront organizational structures developed to foster success among men. While these organizational structures may function well for men, they do not necessarily serve well the objectives of recruiting, hiring, retaining, and promoting the careers of women in science careers. Ample social research documents that women and men differ along many domains including their risk preferences, their career choices, and social interactions. Given this, it should not be surprising that the formal organizational structures developed to promote the success of men in academia are not optimal structures for women. We report on the impact of overlaying of informal organizational structures onto the standard organizational structure of academia on the recruitment, hiring, retention, success, and well-being of professional women in the health sciences. We implemented an informal structure that consisted of a core group of junior women health services research faculty at the University of Pittsburgh. This started with a group of three junior women faculty in 1997. From that group, it has grown to over 20 women in the health sciences across the University, most hired after the implementation of the core group. The informal structures in place provide women with a feeling of belonging and friendship which is an important aspect for the recruiting of new women. There is a robust information exchange over such topics as diverse as childcare resources and contract negotiations that allows women to easily observe the experiences of other women and to avoid common pitfalls facing junior women in health sciences. The core group provides several important functions including the endowment of new members with professional capital. An important development of this informal structure is a snowball effect that has produced several new auxiliary social groups that specialize in a variety of topics such as cooking clubs, book clubs, working mom clubs, etc. Each group is informally attached to the core group of research women and while the groups overlap to some extend, they are closed sets. The result is that as the informal structure evolves and expands, it creates mutations to serve the current needs of women in the health sciences while still preserving the core group. The informal structure has served to recruit, hire, and retain women in the health sciences, an effect that grows with the increasing robustness of the structure itself. Two of the most important elements of the informal structure include the rapid access to information and the championing of each other’s work. With a single e-mail request, women can activate the informal group to find necessary information from a nanny to accompany them to a conference so they can present their work to information on how someone negotiated their last contract. By the
same mechanism, women in the group seem to have a high propensity to promote the work of others in the group. We are now beginning to apply some qualitative methods to investigate what the core elements are that allowed this mechanism to be successful when attempts by others to this have failed.
How Do Female and Male Faculty Members Construct Job Satisfaction?
Diana Bilimoria, Susan R. Perry, Xiangfen Liang, Patricia Higgins, Eleanor P. Stoller, and Cyrus C. Taylor, Case Western Reserve University
In this study we examine how a sample of 248 male and female professors at a Midwestern private research university construct their academic job satisfaction. Our findings indicate that both women and men perceive that their job satisfaction is influenced by the institutional leadership and mentoring they receive, but only as mediated by the two key academic processes of access to internal academic resources (including research-supportive workloads) and internal relational supports from a collegial and inclusive immediate work environment. Gender differences emerged in the strengths of the perceived paths leading to satisfaction: women’s job satisfaction derived more from their perceptions of the internal relational supports than the academic resources they received whereas men’s job satisfaction resulted equally from their perceptions of internal academic resources and internal relational supports received. Implications for leadership and institutional practices are drawn from the findings.
A Good Place to Do Science: Creating and Sustaining a Productive, Inclusive Work Environment for Female and Male Scientists
Diana Bilimoria, C. Greer Jordan, and Susan R. Perry, Case Western Reserve University
The purpose of our study was to identify and better understand the work environment factors that lead to the development, retention, and advancement of women faculty in a university setting. Thus, we conducted a case study of a top-ranked science department in a Tier 1 research university. The department, whose primary faculty consisted of three female and thirteen male scientists, had achieved a reputation for cooperation, advancement of women, and productive outcomes. Over a six-month period, we collected data using multiple qualitative methods including interviews, direct observation, and archival research. Inductive analysis of this data revealed five overarching factors and 12 subfactors that contributed to the cooperative, inclusive, productive work culture. The five overarching factors include a shared scientific identity; constructive interactions;
participative department activities, inclusive department subprocesses and integrative leadership practices. We tapped existing literature to synthesize these factors into a process model of an inclusive, productive work culture. This study integrates several theoretical approaches to creating effective, diverse work groups into one model. Our work also highlights the role of member identity and types of interactions in building inclusive, high performing work groups across demographic differences. The findings also have implications for intervening in groups, departments, or teams as part of efforts to attract and retain a broader range of high quality scientists, including women and minorities.
An Integrated Coaching and Mentoring Program for University Transformation
Diana Bilimoria, Margaret M. Hopkins, Deborah A. O’Neil, and Susan R. Perry, Case Western Reserve University and University of Toledo
Higher education researchers and university administrators alike are increasingly concerned about the persistent dearth of women faculty, the overall glacial advancement of women, and the existence of a glass ceiling in academic science and engineering fields. The sources of these problems may be traced to individual psychological processes (gender schemas) and systematic institutional barriers, resulting in perceptions of a chilly climate for women scientists and engineers in academia (Sandler and Hall, 1986), the experience of subtle discrimination by women faculty (Blakemore, Switzer, DiLorio, and Fairchild, 1997), the slow but steady accumulation of disadvantage over the course of women’s academic careers (Valian, 1999), and the flight from academia by women scientists and engineers at every step in the educational pipeline.
Today, leading universities are beginning to undertake comprehensive remedies to address these problematic attitudinal and structural issues. Prominent within the approaches being implemented are a variety of coaching and mentoring initiatives aimed at helping women faculty succeed, particularly in the early and middle stages of their careers, and at helping key upper- and mid-level university leaders (deans and chairs) in changing the culture of their academic units. We believe that the combined focus of short term coaching targeted at empowering personal and professional development together with long term mentoring and sponsorship can help women faculty succeed in academia. Targeted coaching initiatives designed to assist academic decision makers such as deans and department chairs in understanding their roles in creating inclusive, supportive environments can also help curb the leaky pipeline of faculty women in sciences and engineering. In this report we describe the activities, challenges, and successes of a unique multi-level, integrated coaching and mentoring initiative at our university.
Up Against the Glass: Gender and Promotion at a Technological University
Cheryl Geisler, Deborah Kaminski, Robyn Berkley, and Linda Layne, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Despite increasing access to faculty ranks, women faculty members continue to encounter a glass ceiling when it comes to achieving the rank of full professor. At Rensselaer, we have been engaged in a research program aimed at documenting, understanding, and changing such differential patterns of advancement. Our work began with the development of a low-cost metric, the 13+ Club Index that can be used to monitor advancement in institutions and organizations. The 13+ Club Index examines the ratio between the percentage of women are 13 or more years past degree and have not yet been promoted to full professor and the percentage of men in the same situation. If the women and men at an institution in the 13+ Club are being promoted at the same rate, this index will be 1.
Our first project showed how this index can be used to monitor and change patterns of differential advancement. In particular, a study of the promotion patterns at Rensselaer completed in 2002 showed that women with 13 or more years since highest degree were 2.2 times than men more likely to remain unpromoted to the rank of full professor. Subsequent to the distribution of the results of this study, numerous changes, both institutional and individual, took place. As a consequence, by the time of our next analysis, two and one-half years later, 5 of the 11 women who had not been promoted in the original analysis had gone up for and received promotion. Overall, the rate of promotion for women at Rensselaer was more than three times the rate for men and the number of women full professors on the faculty doubled.
Our second project sought to understand the processes underlying differential patterns of advancement. A stratified sample of associate and full professors matched by school and gender were surveyed. Based on this data, we developed six profiles, and found that the distribution of men and women over these profiles was quite distinct. First, looking just at those who had been promoted to full professor, we found that women were more likely to fit Profile III (promoted to full after denial and with no advice or encouragement), while men were more likely to fit either Profile I or II (promoted on first try). Second, looking at those who had not been promoted, we found men were more likely to fit Profile IV (not seeking a promotion to full despite advice and encouragement), while women were more likely to fit Profile V (not seeking promotion nor were they advised or encouraged). Finally, we broke down the entire sample in the 13+ group based on advice and encouragement and found 8 of 11 males were advised and/or encouraged to go up for promotion, however, only 4 of 12 women were so advised.
Our research suggests three forces combine to challenge institutions working to improve women’s advancement. To begin with, it appears that whenever the
climate at an institution improves with respect to advancement, men will benefit as well as women. Inequities between men and women can thus remain despite improvements in women’s situations. Next, pipeline issues are notoriously difficult to ameliorate. While it may be possible to reduce the rate of nonpromotion among women relatively quickly, reducing the flow of the pipeline into the ranks of the nonpromoted may be a longer term project. And finally, achieving equity in senior hires is particularly difficult. While processes can be put into place to insure a diverse pool of applicants, the pool of available women applicants at the senior rank is still limited.
Women in Academic Physics and Astronomy
Rachel Ivie, American Institute of Physics
One characteristic of the structure of physics and astronomy departments is that the representation of women decreases with each step up the academic ladder. Although women are about half of high school physics students, they make up less than one-fourth of physics bachelor’s degree recipients. Women earn about 18% of PhDs in physics, but comprise only 10% of the faculty. At stand-alone astronomy departments, 14% of the faculty members are women, even though women earn 26% of astronomy PhDs. In spite of this apparent leak in the pipeline, our data show that women are represented on physics and astronomy faculties at levels consistent with degree production in the past. In addition, there are only small differences in the dropout rate for male and female physics graduate students. Our data show that there are a few physics departments that have done an outstanding job in recruiting and retaining women faculty and students. There are also serious problems related to the structure of academic employment. For example, women physicists are hired as instructors and adjuncts at rates greater than they are hired into ranked faculty positions. The reasons for this disparity are unknown, but should be investigated.
Faculty Horizons: Recruiting a Diverse Faculty
Mary Ellen Jackson, Phyllis Robinson, Sarah Conolly Hokenmaier, and J. Lynn Zimmer
ADVANCE Program, University of Maryland, Baltimore County
The underrepresentation of women faculty in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields is a longstanding national problem. A 2005 study shows that female faculty in the top 50 research universities are underrepresented at all ranks, especially as full professors. The study also points out
that underrepresented minority women “are almost nonexistent in science and engineering departments at research universities” and are less likely than Caucasian women or men of any race to be awarded tenure or reach full professor status (Nelson and Rogers, 2005). The University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC), a research university committed to excellence and inclusiveness, received an Institutional Transformation Award from the National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE Program to address these issues. As part of this program, UMBC created Faculty Horizons, a two-day workshop focused on postdoctoral research fellows and upper level graduate students, particularly women in STEM fields, to provide these future faculty with the knowledge and tools necessary to build a successful career. In recognizing the national problem of the severe shortage of women from underrepresented groups in STEM, special attention is paid to including African American and Hispanic women.
Diversity in STEM Disciplines: The Case of Faculty Women of Color
Delia Saenz and Allecia Reid, Arizona State University
Structural, dynamic, and social factors preclude women from equal status, representation, and empowerment in STEM disciplines across the country. The confluence of racial/ethnic minority status and gender, and their concomitant impact, further exacerbate the lack of full participation and recognition of underrepresented women of color in these fields. The presentation will elucidate social psychological factors such as tokenism, stereotypy, and confirmation bias that play a role in inhibiting capacity among women scientists, in general, and women of color scientists, in particular. Research findings from an ongoing cohort study, funded by the Ford Foundation, will be presented. The research involved interviews, focus groups, and Web surveys at approximately 20 of the top PhD-producing, public, research extensive universities in our nation. Specifically, the research questions focused on institutional climate as perceived by both women faculty themselves and by institutional officials (provost, general counsel, affirmative action officers). In addition to providing comparative analyses of these varied institutional citizen perspectives, the data include examples of factors, initiatives, and practices that facilitate/inhibit inclusive excellence. The presentation will further identify critical forces at different levels of university functioning (individual, unit, institutional culture) that affect outcomes for STEM faculty. Some of these factors parallel those faced by underrepresented members of the academy across non-STEM disciplinary fields. Other factors appear to be unique to the STEM disciplines. Challenges and opportunities associated with differential levels of institutional diversification will be addressed. Finally, recommendations for ‘best practices’ that can be implemented at different levels of institutional functioning will be suggested. Among these are strategies that women belonging
to both mainstream and minority populations can engage to promote their own success; cultural adaptations that can be implemented within departments and colleges; and policies and procedures, along with leadership imperatives that must be in place to achieve transformational outcomes. A model of interdependence will be invoked to conceptualize the current gaps in the academy, potential interventions (including educational programs for all faculty, staff, and administrators), and identification of critical goals for institutions of higher education, particularly in their role of inspiring knowledge acquisition and dissemination in the service of producing an educated citizenry. The significance of these needed changes stems not only from a current capacity perspective within STEM fields, but also from the reality of the student and workforce pipelines, and from the critical need to ensure national and global technological progress.
Initiatives to Increase Recruitment, Retention and Advancement of Women in Science and Engineering Disciplines at Kansas State University
Ruth Dyer and Beth A. Montelone, Kansas State University
Kansas State University (K-State) has implemented a number of programs over the last ten years designed to increase the success of women in science and engineering (S&E) disciplines. These programs address issues pertinent to beginning, mid-career, and senior faculty members. One of these is the KSU Mentoring Program for Women and Minorities in the Sciences and Engineering. It has been in existence since 1993, supported by funding from the Sloan Foundation and the K-State Office of the Provost. It is a competitive program that pairs untenured faculty members with mentors in their research areas and provides small awards (up to $6000) that can be used in a variety of ways. To date, 52 individuals have received awards; ten of these individuals are women of color and five are men of color. The tenure success rate of the 28 individuals who have become eligible for tenure is 79%, higher than the average rate for both men and women in S&E departments and university-wide. 18 of the 22 faculty members receiving tenure are still at K-State, and five women are already full professors. An analysis conducted in 2002 of 31 recipients of the Mentoring Awards indicated that these faculty members had at that time generated over 500 publications, 15 other pieces of intellectual property, and over $39 million in extramural grant funds.
In 2003, K-State received an ADVANCE Institutional Transformation Award from the National Science Foundation. Our project includes initiatives for individual departments and colleges, as well as project-wide programs, to improve recruitment, retention, and advancement of women in S&E. In the first two years
of our project, we have made sixty professional development awards to women faculty members to facilitate their participation in professional conferences, collaboration with colleagues at other institutions, and initiation of research projects. Six tenured women faculty members have received awards to enhance their research activities or undertake administrative projects through interaction with senior mentors. Eighteen untenured women have hosted leaders in their disciplines as part of the ADVANCE Distinguished Lecture Series. Furthermore, 20 men and women faculty members in the College of Veterinary Medicine have established two peer mentoring groups that provide a series of activities to enhance professional development. Departments in the College of Engineering may propose novel strategies for effective recruitment of women; two departments received funding for this purpose in 2004-2005 and successfully hired three women faculty members. Moreover, eight additional women were hired into tenure-track positions in other S&E departments in 2004-2005. This is more than double the average number of women hired in S&E departments over the last 6 years. Further, six women scientists or engineers have been appointed to administrative positions (Department Head, Associate Dean, Associate Provost) since the start of the project. We believe that these recent hires and administrative appointments reflect an increased commitment to the inclusion and advancement of women in S&E at K-State. We are encouraged by the success of these programs but recognize that continued progress requires constant scrutiny and sustained diligence.
Effective Practices for STEM Faculty Diversity
Lisa Frehill, Mary O’Connell, Elba Serrano, and Cecily Jeser-Cannavale University of California, Irvine and New Mexico State University
What role do department chairs and deans play in ensuring diversity within academe? This presentation is the culmination of a year of work by a diverse group of 40 deans, department chairs/heads, and senior faculty. After attending conferences with programming about diversity in the professoriate program participants attended a three-day writing retreat. The culmination of this effort are several products on one CD: the Dean’s Guide to Diversity, the Department Chair’s/Head’s Guide to Diversity, and a set of PowerPoint presentation slides that could be used by faculty and academic administrators to convince their peers of the merits of engaging in various “best practices” to increase faculty diversity. While many other excellent guides to diversity have been published, these products feature the “voice” of faculty and academic administrators who have actually implemented and worked with the practices suggested by others. Elements of the publications will be presented on the poster.
NSF ADVANCE at the UW-Madison: Three Success Stories
Jo Handelsman, Molly Carnes, Jennifer Sheridan, Eve Fine, and Christine Pribbenow
University of Wisconsin-Madison
In this poster, we highlight—the hiring process, work/life balance, and departmental climate. We introduce three new initiatives funded by the NSF ADVANCE Institutional Transformation award designed to address these problem areas on the UW-Madison campus. We describe our efforts to raise awareness of how unconscious biases might impact hiring by training chairs of hiring committees; we outline our Life Cycle Research Grant program which provides research funds to faculty who are experiencing a life event that impacts their research productivity; and we outline our workshops for department chairs and the process we use to help them improve the climate in their departments. We present evaluation data indicating the effectiveness of the programs, and show progress of institutionalization and dissemination of the programs.
Institutional Transformation at Virginia Tech
Peggy Layne, Patricia Hyer, and Elizabeth Creamer, Virginia Tech
Virginia Tech is one of 19 recipients of a five-year, $3.5 million, institutional transformation grant from the National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE program to increase the participation and success of women faculty in science and engineering. Now in its third year, AdvanceVT is taking a multifaceted approach to change at Virginia Tech. Activities include preparing women graduate students in science and engineering for faculty careers, working with search committees to help them understand and address unintended bias in the hiring process and to develop diverse candidate pools for faculty positions, providing untenured women faculty with research seed money to help them develop more competitive proposals for external funding, developing leadership skills to enable tenured women faculty to take on leadership roles in the university, building community among women across departments and colleges, raising awareness of gender issues among university leaders, and reviewing, revising, and overseeing implementation of university policies that disproportionately impact women faculty. Throughout the program, AdvanceVT is collecting data on career aspirations and job satisfaction of both male and female faculty at Virginia Tech and tracking statistics on the numbers of women at all levels at the institution. This poster will highlight AdvanceVT program activities, impacts, and plans for sustainability beyond the grant period.
Institutional Transformation at the University of Michigan
Janet Malley, Pamela Raymond, and Abigail Stewart, University of Michigan
The NSF ADVANCE Project at the University of Michigan (UM ADVANCE), housed within the Institute for Research on Women and Gender, is a five-year, grant funded project to promote institutional transformation in science and engineering fields by increasing the participation, success, and leadership of women faculty in academic science and engineering.
Initiatives to support individual women scientists and engineers include faculty career advising, research funds, and a network of women scientists and engineers. The Elizabeth C. Crosby and Lydia A. DeWitt Research Funds were established to help meet career-relevant needs of individual instructional track faculty and research track faculty, respectively, if meeting those needs will help increase the retention or promotion of women scientists and engineers. The Network of Women Scientists and Engineers, which is composed of tenure-track women faculty in science and engineering departments across the entire campus, meets several times each year to socialize, to talk about issues the members have in common, and to develop plans for the future. A number of UM ADVANCE activities—many of the leadership development activities, the mentoring initiatives, the annual report to the campus about our progress—have emerged from Network discussions.
UM ADVANCE also provides support to departments aiming to improve their climates through transformation grants, self-studies, and reviews. It encompasses initiatives at all levels of the University, including data-based workshops presented by the Science and Technology Recruiting to Improve Diversity and Excellence Committee (STRIDE) and interactive theater performances by the CRLT Players. More specifically, the STRIDE Committee provides information and advice about practices that will maximize the likelihood that well-qualified female and minority candidates for faculty positions will be identified, and, if selected for offers, recruited, retained, and promoted at the University of Michigan. The committee works with departments by meeting with department chairs, faculty search committees, and other departmental leaders involved with recruitment and retention. The CRLT Players have developed three ADVANCE sketches focusing on mentoring, faculty hiring, and the tenure decision process. These performances are based on faculty interviews and focus groups conducted at the University of Michigan. The performances demonstrate the challenges female faculty may encounter in interactions with other faculty and provide a foundation for dialogue about climate and collegiality.
The President and Provost set in motion a comprehensive review of University policies that affect women scientists and engineers. As co-chairs of the Gender in Science and Engineering Committee (GSE), the President and Provost charged three subcommittees (in turn chaired by three deans), to examine policies
in three areas: faculty evaluation and development; recruitment, retention and leadership; and family policies and faculty tracks. This initiative began a process of institutionalizing practices that will be useful for both male and female faculty, while focusing on the policies that research shows affect women more, such as family-related policies, the tenure clock, and the criteria for evaluation and promotion.
Scientifically Correct: Speaking to Scientists about Diversity
Nancy Martin, Beth Mitchneck, and William McCallum, University of Arizona
The University of Arizona is currently developing a program to train trainers to orient search committees about scientific research on how unconscious bias can influence the search and hiring processes. This effort is part of a larger National Sciences Foundation ADVANCE proposal (currently under review). Other ADVANCE institutions (University of Michigan, University or Wisconsin at Madison, and others) have used search training and recruitment teams successfully. We extend this by tailoring the orientation materials to specific colleges and developing a cohort of male and female faculty to deliver the message. Our strategy is to reach scientists by sharing the latest and best social science research on unconscious bias. This evidence comes primarily from the field of social psychology, and includes both laboratory and field experiments. Our training provides research evidence of bias on the part of well-intentioned actors. Importantly, unconscious gender bias occurs in both women and men. We provide practical strategies supported by additional research evidence for overcoming the problem of unconscious bias. Also under development are toolkits for interviewing and conducting hiring negotiations.
Working to Increase the Success of Women Scientists in Academia
Geraldine L. Richmond, University of Oregon
As scientists, we leave graduate school with a toolbox full of skills to help us to design and conduct scientific experiments, analyze data, publish papers, and to communicate scientific concepts to others. Unfortunately, this toolbox often does not include skills that enable us to communicate effectively in a variety of professional settings or negotiate for what we need in order to successfully achieve our career goals.
In this poster I describe some of the workshops available to women graduate students, postdocs and faculty around the country that teach such skills. These workshops have been developed by COACh (Committee on the Advancement of
Women Chemists) and have been shown to be highly effective in helping women to advance in their careers and reduce the stress in their personal lives (Richmond, 2005) The full day workshops have been designed to (1) enhance communication and negotiation skills needed for effective teaching and career development, (2) teach leadership techniques that are effective for women scientists in an academic setting (3) provide a forum for networking with other academic women scientists and engineers and (4) develop effective strategies for making institutional and departmental change that improves the climate, recruiting and retention of underrepresented groups. Case studies, theatre, role-playing and lively debate contribute to the learning experience for the 15-20 participants in each session. COACh also offers workshops for minority women scientists and engineers that address these above described issues while also providing a forum for discussion of how these methods can be effectively used to address problems of a racial nature that are faced by women in these populations. The workshop facilitators are experienced professional women in human resources, leadership training, teaching, and higher education administration, with extensive experiences in many professional venues.
Over 1000 women scientists and engineers from academic institutions across the country have thus far participated in these workshops. Our research on the impact of these workshops on participants shows that they are significantly enhancing their career progress. New workshops and forums are being launched that are specifically targeted towards institutional transformation. Descriptions of these workshops and information on how to bring them to your professional meeting or institution can be found on the COACh Web site: http://coach.uoregon.edu/.
COACh was formed in 1998 by a group of women professors in the chemical sciences concerned about the slow progress of women in their profession and its impact the ability to attract and retain younger female talent into the field. Details about other COACh activities can be found on the Web site. COACh is grateful for funding from the National Science Foundation (Chemistry and the ADVANCE program), the National Institutes of Health, and Basic Energy Sciences from the Department of Energy.
Leadership Workshops to Effect Cultural Change
Eve A. Riskin, Kate Quinn, Joyce W. Yen, Sheila Edwards Lange, Suzanne Brainard, Ana Mari Cauce, and Denice D. Denton, University of Washington, ADVANCE Center for Institutional Change
Institutional transformation as intended by the NSF ADVANCE program requires a significant amount of change in attitudes, practices and policies throughout the university community. The success of institutional change hinges largely on the extent to which change occurs at the academic department level
(Bennett and Figuli, 1990; Lucas, 2000). Yet, academic department chairs are not often prepared to be change agents or administrative managers (Lucas, 2000; Gmelch and Miskin, 1995; Wolverton, Gmelch, Montez, and Nies, 2001). Faculty who have risen to the department chair position are usually recognized leaders in their scholarly fields and have been trained to be scholars, not managers. Most come to the department chair position with little leadership training beyond leading departmental committees (Seagren, Cresswell, and Wheeler, 1993). Department chair orientation and training, if provided, is often once a year and limited to administrative and fiscal responsibilities which represent the tip of the iceberg of a department chair’s responsibilities. Often, the more challenging and rewarding experiences of department chairs relate to mentoring faculty and managing their concerns. Gmelch & Miskin found that the responsibilities that chairs rate as most important (i.e. the recruitment and selection of faculty, the evaluation of faculty performance, conflict resolution and leadership) are absent from orientations and campus-based training programs. And while department chairs may seek guidance from online and printed resources targeted at department chairs, such resources are generally not campus-specific enough to be sufficient.
As part of its institutional change efforts, the UW ADVANCE program sought to provide department chairs with ongoing opportunities to draw from the experience and wisdom of their department chair colleagues and to conscientiously explore topics relevant to equity in science and engineering and the success of their faculty and departments. Each academic quarter, the CIC hosts a half-day leadership workshop for department chairs, deans, and emerging leaders. These workshops serve as a forum for cross-college networking and professional development for chairs and emerging leaders and are designed to engage academic leaders as critical actors in changing institutional culture. Prior to this program, department chairs received little or no professional development beyond their initial orientation to the department chair position. Evaluations of these workshops have been uniformly high, and department chairs have stated these workshops are the “boot camp” they never got. This poster provides an overview of the quarterly leadership workshop program, offers recommendations for replication, and discusses results from two national workshops modeled after the quarterly workshop program.
ADVANCE: Successful Recruitment of Women to STEM at UCI
Tammy Smecker-Hane, Lisa Frehill, Priscilla, Kehoe, Susan V. Bryant, Herb Killackey and Debra Richardson, University of California, Irvine
The NSF-funded ADVANCE: Institutional Transformation Program at the University of California at Irvine has two significant and lasting innovations
related to increasing faculty diversity, which will be covered in the presentation. First, since September 2002 each of the university’s ten schools has had at least one “Equity Advisor,” who serves as a faculty advisor to the school’s dean on issues related to gender equity. Equity Advisors meet with the dean, search committees, department chairs and other faculty in their respective schools to raise awareness and use of more proactive search strategies to increase recruitment of women to the tenure-track faculty ranks. Equity Advisors also a run faculty mentoring programs for newly hired assistant professors. A related innovation is the use of a series of three university forms in the faculty search process that documents the use of proactive strategies and ensures the transparency of search processes. These forms are titled “Search Plan and Advertisement for Regular Ranks Faculty,” “Interim Search Activities Statement,” and “Final Search Activities Statement.” The second of these three forms is new for the 2005-2006 academic year. All three of these forms require an Equity Advisor signature, which increases search transparency and oversight related to equity issues in each search at the UCI.