Advertisement

Women’s Uneven Progress in Academia

Problems and Solutions
  • Marianne A. Ferber
Chapter
  • 66 Downloads
Part of the Innovations in Science Education and Technology book series (ISET, volume 15)

Abstract

In order to better understand the present situation of women at research universities and to develop more effective strategies for increasing their representation as well as improving their status, it is useful to very briefly examine the history of women in academia. Recently more women than men have been earning B.A. and M.A. degrees, and they have also been earning a rapidly growing proportion of professional and Ph.D. degrees. Their representation among faculties at institutions of higher learning has also been increasing for several decades, and this is true at research institutions as well, although their numbers there have been growing less rapidly (see Table 1). Further, while the gender earnings gap in academia persists, it appears to have been declining. At the same time, however, favorable trends do not always continue.

Keywords

Faculty Member Female Faculty Woman Faculty Tenure Track Senior Faculty Member 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Astin, Helen. 1992. Academic women 1989–1990. Paper presented at the February 1992 Sustaining Faculty Diversity in the Research University conference, University of Tucson.Google Scholar
  2. -, and Alan E. Bayer. 1979. Pervasive sex differences in the academic reward system: Scholarship, marriage, and what else? In Academic rewards in higher education, eds. Darrell R. Lewis and William E. Becker, Jr. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. -, and Diane E. Davis. 1985. Research productivity across the life and career cycle: Facilitators and barriers for women. In Scholarly writing and publishing: Issues, problems, and solutions, ed. Mary F. Fox. Boulder, Colo.: Westwiew Press.Google Scholar
  4. -, and Jeffrey F. Milem. 1997. The status of academic couples in U.S. academic institutions. In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bellas, Marcia L. 1994. Comparable worth in academia: The effects on faculty salaries of the sex composition and labor market conditions of academic disciplines. American Sociological Review 59: 807–21.Google Scholar
  6. -. 1997. The scholarly productivity of academic couples. In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bentley, Richard J., and Robert T. Blackburn. 1992. Two decades of gains for female faculty? Teachers College Record 93: 697–709.Google Scholar
  8. Berg, Helen M., and Marianne A. Ferber. 1983. Men and women graduate students: Who succeeds and why? Journal of Higher Education 54: 629–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bielby, Denise D., and William T. Bielby. 1992. I will follow him: Family ties, gender role beliefs, and reluctance to relocate for a better job. American Journal of Sociology 97: 1241–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blau, Francine D. 1977. Equal pay in the office. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
  11. -, Marianne A. Ferber, and Anne E. Winkler, eds. Forthcoming. The economics of women, men, and work, 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Cabral, Robert, Marianne A. Ferber, and Carole A. Green. 1981. Men and women in fiduciary institutions: A study of sex differences in career development. Review of Economics and Statistics 63: 573–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clark, Shirley M., and Mary Corcoran. 1986. Perspectives on the professional socialization of women faculty. Journal of Higher Education 57: 20–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Etaugh, Claire, and Helen C. Kasley. 1981. Evaluating competence: Effects of sex, marital status and parental status. Psychology of Women Quarterly 6: 196–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ferber, Marianne A. 1986. Citations: Are they an objective measure of scholarly merit? Signs, Journal of Women in Culture and Society 11: 381–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. -. 1988. Citations and networking. Gender and Society 2: 82–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. -, and Brigid O’Farrell, eds., in collaboration with LaRue Allen. 1991. Work and family: Policies for a changing work force, Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  18. -, and Jane W. Loeb. 1973. Performance, rewards and perceptions of sex discrimination of male and female faculty members. American Journal of Sociology 78: 995–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. -, and Jane W. Loeb. 1997. Introduction. In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  20. , and Jane Waldfogel. 1998. The long-term consequences of nontraditional work. Monthly Labor Review 121: 3–12.Google Scholar
  21. -, and Joan A. Huber. 1975. Sex of student and instructor: A study of student bias. American Journal of Sociology 80: 949–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. -, and Joan A. Huber, and Glenna Spitze. 1980. Preference for men as bosses and professionals. Social Forces 58: 466–76.Google Scholar
  23. -, and Michelle L. Teiman. 1980. Are women economists at a disadvantage in publishing journal articles? Eastern Economic Journal 6: 89–94.Google Scholar
  24. Fidell, L. S. 1970. Empirical verification of sex discrimination in hiring practices in psychology. American Psychologist 25: 1094–98.Google Scholar
  25. Finkel, Susan K, and Steven G. Olswang. 1995. Child rearing as a career impediment to women assistant professors. Review of Higher Education 19: 123–39.Google Scholar
  26. Fox, Mary Frank. 1989. Women and higher education: Gender differences in the status of students and scholars. In Women: A feminist perspective, ed. Jo Freeman. Moimtain View, Gal.: Mayfield Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  27. Fried, Linda P. et al. 1996. Career development for women in academic medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association 276: 898–905.Google Scholar
  28. Goldin, Claudia. 1990. Understanding the gender gap. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. -, and Cecilia Rouse. 1997. Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of blind auditions on female musicians. NBER Paper No. 5903.Google Scholar
  30. Graves, Philip E., Jarnes R. Marchand, and Randall Thompson. 1982. Economics department rankings: Research incentives, constraints, and efficiency. American Economic Review 72: 1131–31.Google Scholar
  31. Heilman, M. E. 1980. The impact of situational factors on personnel decisions concerning women: Varying the sex composition of the applicant pool. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 26: 386–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Helmreich, Robert, Janet T. Spence, W. Beane, G. W. Lucker, and K. Matthews. 1980. Making it in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39: 896–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. HoUenshead, Carol S. 2002. Components of successful change. This volume.Google Scholar
  34. Hornig, Lilli S. 1997. Academic couples: The view from the administration. In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  35. -. 2002. Chapter Two, this volume.Google Scholar
  36. Kanter, Rosabeth. 1977. Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  37. Kaschak, Ellyn. 1979. Sex bias in student evaluations of college professors. Psychology of Women Quarterly 2: 236–44.Google Scholar
  38. Kolpin, Van W., and Larry D. Singell, Jr. 1996. The gender composition and scholarly performance of economics departments: A test for employment discrimination. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 49: 408–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lester, Richard A. 1974. Antibias regulation of universities: Faculty problems and their solutions. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  40. Loeb, Jane W. 1997. Programs for academic partners: How well can they work? In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  41. Long, J. Scott. 1978. Productivity and academic position in the scientific career. American Sociological Review 43: 889–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. -. 1992. Measures of sex differences in scientific productivity. Social Forces 7: 159–78.Google Scholar
  43. McDowell, John M., and Janet Kiholm Smith. 1992. The effect of gender-sorting on propensity to co-author: Implications for academic promotion. Economic Inquiry 30: 68–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. O’Neill, June, and Nachum Sicherman. 1990. Is the gender gap in economics declining? Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  45. Perkins, Linda M. 1997. For the good of the race: Married Afiican-American academics: A historical perspective. In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  46. Polachek, Solomon W. 1978. Sex differences in college major. Industrial and Labor Relations Review 31: 498–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Raabe, Phyllis H. 1997. Work-family policies for faculty: How career and family-friendly is academe? In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  48. Reskin, Barbara F. 1976. Sex differences in status attainment in science: The case of the postdoctoral fellowship. American Sociological Review 41: 597–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. -. 1998. The realities of affirmative action in employment. Washington, D.C: American Sociological Association.Google Scholar
  50. Shauman, Kimberlee A., and Yu Xie. 2002. Explaining sex differences in publication productivity among postsecondary faculty. This volume.Google Scholar
  51. Shoben, Elaine W. 1997. From anti-nepotism to programs for partners: Legal issues. In Academic couples: Problems and promises, eds. Marianne A. Ferber and Jane W. Loeb. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  52. Smart, John C. 1991. Gender equity in academic rank and salary. Review of Higher Education 14: 511–26.Google Scholar
  53. Sonnert, Gerhard, and Gerald Holton. 1995. Gender differences in science careers: The Project Access study. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Sowell, Thomas. 1975. Affirmative action reconsidered: Was it necessary in academia? Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
  55. Spencer, Mary L., and Eva F. Bradford. 1982. Status and needs of women scholars, in Handbook for women scholars: Strategies for success, eds. Mary L. Spencer, Monika Kehoe, and Karen Speece. San Francisco: Center for Women Scholars, Americas Behaviorial Research Corp.Google Scholar
  56. Stack, S. 1994. The effects of gender on publishing: The case of sociology. Sociological Focus 27, no. 1 (February): 81–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stanford University. 1998. The status of women at Stanford: An update of the 1993 report on the recruitment and retention of women faculty. Background data for presentation to faculty senate. Palo Alto: Stanford University.Google Scholar
  58. Tilly, Chris. 1991. Reasons for the continuing growth of part-time employment. Monthly Labor Review 114: 10–18.Google Scholar
  59. Toutkoushian, Robert K. 1998. Racial and marital status differences in faculty pay. The Journal of Higher Education 69: 513–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 1994, 1997. Digest for Education Statistics, Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.Google Scholar
  61. University of Michigan. 1994. Draft announcement for a career development fund for women faculty. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  62. Valian, Virginia. 1998. Why so slow? Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  63. Wennerås, Christine, and Agnes Wold. 1997. Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature 387: 341–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zernike, Kate. 1999. MIT women win a fight against bias; in rare move, school admits discrimination. The Boston Globe March 21.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marianne A. Ferber

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations