Report Calls Universities and Federal Agencies to Mend Leaky Sciences Pipeline

In November 2009, the University of California–Berkeley and the Center for American Progress published a new report from researchers Marc Goulden, Karie Frasch, and Mary Ann Mason on the sources of attrition in the academic science workforce. Titled “Staying Competitive: Patching America’s Leaky Pipeline in the Sciences,” the report examines the connection between the loss of potential talent and the lack of family-friendly policies in scientific fields.

Drawing its analysis from several extensive surveys, the report suggests that leaks in the academic pipeline are tied to actual and perceived chilly climates for researchers with families. The authors note that married women with young children are 35 percent less likely than married men with young children to enter the tenure track and 27 percent less likely to achieve tenure. The report points to the perception that research careers lack work–family balance as a reason that women, in particular, exit the pipeline (3). In fact, the study found, policies like paid parental leave are not uniformly available and often carry restrictive limitations on the number of eligible employees or length of available time. Women with children, who spend more time on caregiving duties than their same-aged male peers until age sixty (31), are particularly affected by these policy shortcomings.

The report indicates that research universities and fund-granting federal agencies can play a dual role in improving family-friendly policies to retain women in scientific careers. It provides specific recommendations for both universities and government agencies to improve gender equity, including providing childcare, flexible scheduling, extension of academic timelines, and grant extensions. To download the full report, visit www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/11/pdf/women_and_sciences.pdf.

Case Study Suggests Ways to Remediate Gender Pay Gap in Faculty Salaries

In a recent article for the Psychology of Women Quarterly, authors Cheryl B. Travis, Louis J. Gross, and Bruce A. Johnson, all of the University of Tennessee–Knoxville, explore two statistical models for analyzing the gender pay gap: multiple regression and resampling simulation. In a case study of faculty salaries at an unnamed regional university, they determine that both methods reveal a gender pay gap that cannot be attributed to variables such as rank, field, and years of service.

According to the study’s findings, women make between $3,278 and $2,986 less than their male counterparts (depending on the method of analysis), even after controlling for the variables mentioned above. These differences persist across academic sectors (415). Although the authors admit that their methods cannot account for the role of subjective measures like “merit,” they stress the unlikelihood that women, who are consistently paid less than men, are consistently less deserving (417).

The authors recommend using both multiple regression and resampling simulations to analyze institutional salary data for evidence of gender discrimination. They suggest several options for remediating salary differences, including across-the-board salary adjustments and adjustments to within the range of variance that would arise randomly. To download the article, visit www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122675142/abstract. 

Gender of Leadership Affects Gender of Faculty

In December 2009, the Cornell Higher Education Research Institute (CHERI) published the results of its study on the relationship between the gender of trustees and administrators and the gender of faculty hires. The working paper expands on CHERI’s recent findings related to women’s increased representation on boards of trustees and asks how these increases might have affected faculty hiring.

Analyzing data collected using CHERI surveys and from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, the authors find that the share of female faculty increased more quickly at schools where the board chair, the president or chancellor, or the provost or academic vice president were female (8). These effects are more pronounced at smaller institutions (where the authors speculate that boards have more influence on hiring decisions) (9). The share of the board that is female also affects the rate of faculty gender diversification, and the authors find that boards with a “critical share” of at least 25 percent female or “critical number” of at least five female members have significantly more female faculty hires (15). The authors conclude by calling for more research on how the gender of lower-ranking administrators (deans and department chairs) affects hiring, as well as a better understanding of why administrators’ gender matters.

The paper, titled “Do Trustees and Administrators Matter?: Diversifying the Faculty Across Gender Lines,” was written by Ronald G. Ehrenberg, George H. Jakubson, Mirinda L. Martin, Joyce B. Main, and Thomas Eisenberg. Copies are available at www.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/upload/cheri_wp127.pdf.

2009 Global Gender Gap Report Highlights Status of Girls’ Education

The World Economic Forum released its annual Global Gender Gap Report in October 2009. Along with data on gender equity in the areas of economic opportunity, health, and political engagement, the report presents an updated snapshot of the comparative status of girls’ education across 134 countries.

In primary educational enrollment, the United States ranks twenty-sixth with a female-to-male ratio of 1.01 (41). In secondary education, the country ranks fifty-fifth with a ratio of 1.02; and in tertiary education, the country ranks thirty-second with a ratio of 1.41 (42-43). The female-to-male ratio at the primary level ranges from 1.10 (Iran) to 0.70 (Chad) (41). At the secondary level, the ratio ranges from 1.55 (Lesotho) to 0.33 (Chad); at the tertiary level, it ranges from 2.87 (Qatar) to 0.14 (Chad) (42-43). Overall, 82 of the 134 countries have at least as many girls as boys enrolled in primary education (39). However, the report notes that these statistics fail to include “invisible” (unreported) girls or reflect gender gaps in educational quality (39).

The report underscores that girls’ and women’s education is tied to economic development and improved health. It notes that ongoing barriers to girls’ education include infrastructural limitations (such as unclean water and unsafe journeys to school), cost, and early marriage. To download the full report, visit www.weforum.org/pdf/gendergap/report2009.pdf.

Women’s Representation in Graduate School Increases

The Council of Graduate Schools and the Graduate Record Examinations Board recently published their annual report on Graduate Enrollment and Degrees, focused on the years 1998 to 2008. The report gives a comprehensive overview of gender ratios among graduate students and degree recipients.

Among first-time graduate students in 2008, 58.6 percent were women and 41.4 percent were men (7), representing a 4.3 percent growth in enrollment for women and a 3.4 percent growth for men over the ten-year period (51). The percentage of first-time enrollees who were female was highest in health sciences, public administration and services, and education; it was lowest in engineering, physical sciences, and business (7).

Among all graduate students, 58.9 percent were women and 41.1 percent were men (11), representing a 3.8 percent growth in enrollment for women and a 2.3 percent growth for men over the ten year period (57). The percentage of graduate students who were female was highest in health sciences, education, and public administration and services; it was lowest in engineering, physical sciences, and business (12).

Among graduate degree recipients, women were 65.4 percent of graduate certificate recipients, 60.3 percent of master’s degree recipients, and 49.1 percent of doctoral degree recipients (17). Women earned more than half of doctoral degrees awarded in health sciences, education, public administration and services, social and behavioral sciences, and arts and humanities (18).

The report includes data on race and ethnicity, full-time vs. part-time enrollment, and enrollment by institutional type. The full report is available for download at www.cgsnet.org/Default.aspx?tabid=168.