Title: Sex comparisons among science faculty at Hunter College
1Sex comparisons among science faculty at
Hunter College
Department perceptions, social networks, and
procedural knowledge
- Hunter College Gender Equity Project
- Provosts Office
- 2007 Science Faculty Survey
2Background
- Hunter does well in gender equity with respect to
major outcomes - Female and male faculty in the sciences fare
similarly in - salary
- tenure and promotion
- awarding of distinguished professorships and
named chairs
3Background
- But outcome fairness is not the primary predictor
of how people perceive fairness overall in their
institutions - Two other types of fairness play more important
roles - interactional fairness1 how respectfully people
are treated on a day-to-day basis - procedural fairness2 clear and well-justified
policies
1. Bies, R.J. Shapiro, D.L. (1988).
Interactional fairness judgments The influence
of causal accounts. Social Justice Research,
1(2), 199-218 2. Lind, E.A Tyler, T.R. (1988).
The social psychology of procedural justice. NY
Plenum
4Purpose of Science Faculty Survey
- Examine subtle measures of interactional and
procedural fairness - college life
- department life
- professional networks
- resource allocation and responsibility
5Demographics
- 52 of science faculty completed the consent form
(101/195) - 46 of science faculty provided information about
their sex (89/195) - 49 of science faculty who responded were women
(38/77) and 35 were men (41/118)
6Demographics (Cont.)
Women Women Women Men Men Men Men
Assist. Assoc. Full Assist. Assoc. Full Full
Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science Natural Science
Pop. N SFS N 11 6 4 2 24 10 10 7 16 6 45 8
in SFS sample 55 50 42 70 38 18
Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science
Pop. N SFS N 10 5 12 7 16 8 6 3 13 5 28 12
in SFS sample 50 58 50 50 38 43
Biology Chemistry Computer Sci. Geography Math
Stat. Physics Astro
Anthropology Economics Political Sci. Psychology
Sociology
7Results
- College Life
- Department Life
- Professional Networks
- Resource Allocation and Responsibility
8College Life Importance of teaching
9College Life Importance of research
10College Life Importance of committee work
11College Life
- Male and female science faculty
- equally find a great deal of personal meaning in
their work - Women4.72 (.44) Men4.62 (.50)
- are equally identified with Hunter College
- Women3.52 (.94) Men3.86 (.85)
1 Strongly Disagree 3 Neutral 5 Strongly
Agree
12College Life
- Male and female science faculty have
- similar judgments about their
- ability to spend enough time on the aspects of
work that they find most important - Women2.63 (.98) Men2.68 (1.02)
- satisfaction with the Offices of Facilities
Management Planning - Women2.89 (.85) Men3.18 (.80)
1 Strongly Disagree 3 Neutral 5 Strongly
Agree
13 College Life Satisfaction with tenure and
promotion
t(1,66) 2.29, p 0.03
Example I receive/d enough feedback on my
progress toward tenure/promotion.
14College Life Job Satisfaction
t(1,75) 1.84, p 0.07
Example Generally speaking, I am very satisfied
with my current job.
15College Life Summary
- Compared to men, women are less
- satisfied with tenure and promotion processes
- satisfied with their jobs
16Department Life
- Male and female science faculty
- are similarly neutral about their department
chairs - Women 2.89 (.85) Men 3.18 (.80)
- equally report feeling respected in department
meetings - Women 3.74 (.70) Men 3.93 (.44)
- report having similar influence over what happens
in their departments - Women 3.28 (.73) Men 3.22 (.85)
1 Strongly Disagree 3 Neutral 5 Strongly
Agree
17Department Life Inclusion Belonging
t(1,69) 2.89, p lt 0.01
Example I feel like I fit in my department.
18Department Life Collegiality
t(1,76) 3.10, p lt 0.01
Example Communication is good among the people
in my department.
19Department Life Support
t(1,69) 1.78, p 0.08
Example There are people in your department who
have used influence to support your advancement.
20Department Life Evaluation of Department Staff
t (1,67) 3.14, p lt 0.01
Example When I make a request it is completed in
full.
21Department Life Summary
- Men report more and women report less
- sense of inclusion and belonging
- collegiality
- support from colleagues
- satisfaction with department staff
22Professional NetworksTalk to chairs
- 72 of men and 84 of women report talking
almost never about teaching - 75 of men and 82 of women report talking
almost never about research - 92 of men and 95 of women report talking
almost never about tenure and promotion
23Professional NetworksTalk to faculty outside
Hunter College
- 39 of men and 35 of women report talking at
least once a week about research - 65 of men and 73 of women report talking
almost never about teaching - 89 of men and 95 of women report talking
almost never about tenure and promotion
24Professional NetworksTalk to undergraduate
students
- 45 of men and 49 of women report talking at
least once a week about teaching - 56 of men and 41 of women report talking at
least once a week about research
25Professional NetworksHow often do you talk
about teaching with Hunter faculty?
?2 11.43, p lt 0.01
26Professional NetworksHow often do you talk
about research with Hunter faculty?
?2 5.21, p 0.07
27Professional Networks
- Collaborate on grants or research with chairs
- 66 of men and 80 of women report having never
been asked by their chair to collaborate - 91 of men and 90 of women report never asking
their chair to collaborate - Collaborate on grants and research with
colleagues - 61 of men and 56 of women report having been
asked to collaborate with colleagues more than
once - 39 of men and 53 of women report having asked
colleagues to collaborate more than once
28Professional NetworksHow much recognition do
you get for teaching?
29Professional NetworksHow much recognition do
you get for research?
30Professional NetworksHow much recognition do
you get for committee work?
31Professional Networks Summary
- Compared to men, women
- talk about teaching and research with colleagues
less often - equally ask and are asked to collaborate on
grants and research with chairs and colleagues - report less recognition for teaching, research
and committee work
32Resource Allocation and Responsibility
33Resource Allocation and Responsibility
34Rules and Procedures Summary
- Men and women are equally satisfied with the
office and lab space they receive and are equally
dissatisfied with the amount of TAs and course
load they receive - Rules and procedures for distributing resources
and responsibilities in departments are more
transparent to men than to women
35Overall SummaryAreas of equal satisfaction
- Male and female science faculty equally
- find teaching, research and committee work to be
important - find a great deal of personal meaning in their
work - identify with Hunter College
- feel respected in department meetings
- influence what happens in their departments
- ask and are asked to collaborate on grants and
research with chairs and colleagues
36Overall SummaryAreas of unequal satisfaction
- Compared to men, women
- are less satisfied with tenure and promotion
- are less satisfied with their jobs in general
- report less inclusion, collegiality, and support
in their departments - have less discussion with Hunter faculty about
teaching, research, and committee work - report less recognition for teaching, research,
and committee work
37Recommendations
- Administrators, chairs, and senior faculty
- should
- solicit and listen equally to everyones views
and opinions - create settings that encourage colleagues and
department chairs to interact with each other - justify, clarify, and codify department rules and
procedures for the distribution of resources and
responsibilities - nominate faculty for awards and prizes and
publicize faculty achievements
38Soliciting views and opinions
- At all meetings, make sure that all ideas
- are solicited and are equally carefully
- considered
- circulate agendas before department meetings and
ask faculty for additions - consider having facilitators, on a rotating
basis, to ensure that all voices are heard - if someone tries to express an idea in a meeting
and is interrupted or ignored, make sure that
that persons opinion is given time
39Create opportunities for professional networks
- Hold brown bags and luncheons in which faculty
can discuss their research, teaching, and service - Assign space so that faculty with similar
interests can easily interact - Have a chair or a senior colleague reach out to
faculty who seem alienated or marginalized
40Why it matters
- People need the components of interactional
fairness - a sense of inclusion
- influence
- a voice which is heard
- People perceive organizations to be more fair
when the components of interactional fairness are
in place
41Clarify rules and procedures
- Spell out policies and procedures in clear,
unambiguous terms - Chairs, senior faculty, and administrators should
be approachable, available, and willing to answer
questions about policies and procedures - Create and distribute specific written guidelines
to all faculty regarding tenure and promotion and
rules and procedures for distributing resources
and responsibilities
42Why it matters
- People need the components of procedural fairness
- knowledge about how resources and
responsibilities are distributed and the
justifications - knowledge about how the tenure and promotion
process works and the justifications
43Awards and achievements
- Nominate faculty for awards and prizes
- Publicize faculty awards, prizes, grants, and
other achievements - to other faculty within department
- to dean, provost, and president
44Why it matters
- Recognition by colleagues improves
- individuals' attachment to institution
45