1 / 39

May 20 th , 2016

IDEAL-N Leadership Enhancement Program - Session 2 Contact Information for additional questions: http://www.case.edu/ideal-n Heather Burton 216-368-0086 Heather.burton@case.edu. May 20 th , 2016. Agenda. 1:00-1:30 Welcome & 3-minute Check-In 1:30-2:15 Gender Bias in STEM

candaces
Download Presentation

May 20 th , 2016

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IDEAL-N Leadership Enhancement Program - Session 2Contact Information for additional questions:http://www.case.edu/ideal-nHeather Burton 216-368-0086Heather.burton@case.edu May 20th, 2016

  2. Agenda 1:00-1:30 Welcome & 3-minute Check-In 1:30-2:15 Gender Bias in STEM 2:15-2:30 University Change Team Discussion: Implications 2:30 – 2:45 BREAK 2:45 – 3:15 Cross University Discussions (groups of 3-4 people): Building Alliances across Campus 3:15 – 4:00 Action Learning (University Change Team): Progress on Change Project Template 4:00 – 4:45 Reports-Out and Discussion 4:45 – 5:00 Logistics and Next Session CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  3. 3 Minute Change Team Check-in • Overview of your institutional change theme and project • Brief overview of meetings conducted since last session • Any publicity generated about IDEAL-N on your campus CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  4. Barriers facing Women and Minority Faculty in STEM 4

  5. Why Women STEM Faculty Matter • Having a female professor has a positive effect on female students' : • performance in math and science classes • their likelihood of taking future math and science courses • their likelihood of graduating with a math, science or engineering degree • These effects are largest for female students whose SAT math scores are in the top 5% Carrell, Page, & West, Sex and Science: How Professor Gender Perpetuates the Gender Gap, NBER Research Papers, 2009 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  6. Why So Few? Why So Slow? Solvay Physics Conference, 1911.  Solvay Physics Conference, 2011 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  7. An Intersectionality Approach CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  8. An Intersectionality Approach • Black feminist scholars realized focus on “women’sexperiences” left out black women’s experiences • Experiences of African-Americans assumed no within category differences like gender • The problem with “women and minorities”: they are notmutually exclusive • AACU: remake the academy in a way that fundamentally values what intersectional groups bringto the tableMack, Kelly, Orlando Taylor, Nancy Cantor and Patrice McDermott. 2014. “If Not Now, When? The Promise of STEM Intersectionality in the Twenty-First Century.” peerReview 16(2). Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  9. Complex Factors Influencing Women in STEMM CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  10. Social Psychology of Gender • Second Generation (Implicit) Bias – Various Manifestations • Schemas about parenthood • Accumulation of disadvantage CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  11. What are Gender Schemas? • Non-conscious hypotheses about sex differences that guide everyone’s perceptions and behaviors • Schemas are expectations or stereotypes that define “average” members of a group. For example, • Men are instrumental, task-oriented, competent • Women are nurturing, emotional, and care about relationships • Both men and women have the same schemas Source: Virgina Valian, 1998, Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women, MIT Press CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  12. Second Generation Gender Bias “The powerful yet often invisible barriers to women’s advancement that arise from cultural beliefs about gender, as well as workplace structures, practices, and patterns of interaction that inadvertently favor men” 1st Generation Gender Bias: Deliberate barriers, overt discrimination 2nd Generation Gender Bias: Unconscious, subtle, invisible, and inadvertent barriers Herminia Ibarra, Robin Ely, & Deborah Kolb, Women Rising: The Unseen Barriers, Harvard Business Review, 2013 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  13. Implicit Bias Example Source: U Michigan ADVANCE STRIDE CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  14. Competence Attributions and Hireability of Lab Manager 127 science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male (n=63) or female (n=64) name—for a laboratory manager position. All student gender differences are significant (P < 0.01). The scales range from 1 to 7. The student gender difference is significant (P < 0.01). The scale ranges from $15,000 to $50,000. Moss-Racusin, et al. 2012. Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students, Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, 109:16474-16479 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  15. Applicant Packages Brian • When evaluating identical application packages, male and female University psychology professors preferred 2:1 to hire “Brian” over “Karen” as an assistant professor. • When evaluating a more experienced record (at the point of promotion to tenure), reservations were expressed four times more often when the name was female Karen Other Similar Findings: • Goldin & Rouse, 2000. Orchestrating Impartiality: The Impact of “Blind” Auditions on Female Musicians, American Economic Review, 90, 4: 715-741. • Numerous other experiments using the “Goldberg paradigm”. Steinpreis, Anders, & Ritzke, 1999. The Impact of Gender on the Review of the Curricula Vitae of Job Applicants and Tenure Candidates: A National Empirical Study, Sex Roles, Vol. 41, Nos. 7/8, 509-528. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  16. First Authorships After Behavioral Ecology instituted double-blind reviews in 2000, the proportion of female first authors increased significantly during 2002-07 as compared with 1995-2000 No such shiftsoccurred over the same time period in another journal with a similar subject matter and impact factor - Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, or with 4 out 5 other ecology and evolutionary biology journals Budden, A. E., Tregenza, T., Aarssen, L., et al.2008. Double-blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 23: 4–6. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  17. Postdoc Fellowship Applications Women applying for a post- doctoral fellowship had to be 2.5 times more productive to receive the same reviewer rating asthe average male applicant. Wenneras & Wold, 1997, Nepotism and sexism in peer-review, Nature, 387, 341-343 Other Similar findings: • USA/GAO report on Peer Review in Federal Agency Grant Selection (1994) • European Molecular Biology Organization Reports (2001) • NIH Pioneer Awards: Journal of Women’s Health (2005) & Nature (August 2006) CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  18. Recommendation Letters for Medical School Faculty Applicants Letters of recommendation for male successful medical school faculty applicants • were longer and • had more references to their CV, publications, patients and colleague Letters for women successful medical school faculty applicants • were shorter, and • had more references to personal life • had more “doubt-raisers”- hedges, qualifiers, and faint praise Trix, Frances. & Psenka, Carolyn. (2003). Exploring the color of glass: Letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse & Society, 14(2), 191–220. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  19. Content of Psych Faculty Recommendation Letters Letters of recommendation for female Psychology faculty applicants written by both male and female recommenders (as compared with letters for males to the same department) contained: Significantly more words that were communal (affectionate, helpful, kind, sympathetic, sensitive, nurturing, agreeable, caring) Significantly less words that were agentic (assertive, confident, aggressive, ambitious, dominant, forceful, intellectual) Significantly more words that were social-communal (related to family relationships) Significantly more words that were related to the physical body (arms, breast, eyes, face, hips, hair, muscle, nails, pregnancy, mouth) All results significant at P<0.01; results of MANCOVA controlling for years in graduate school, N of publications, honors, N of postdoc years, N of courses taught, and type of position Madera, Juan M., Hebl, Michelle R. & Martin, Randi C. 2009. Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences, Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1591–1599. See also, 2008 NSF ADVANCE PI meeting presentation, Washington D.C. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  20. Critical Mass • If women are more than 30% of the applicant pool they are judged more positively than if they are 25% or less of the pool • When women make up more than a third of a work group they are judged more positively Heilman & Stopeck (1985) Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 379-388; Heilman (1980) Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26, 386-395 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  21. Schemas about Parenthood When evaluating identical applications: • Experimental study: – Mothers were less likely to be recommended for hire, promotion, and management, and were offered lower starting salaries than non-mothers – Evaluators rated mothers as less competent and committed to paid work than non-mothers – Fathers were seen as more committed to paid work and offered higherstarting salaries than non-fathers • Workplace study: – Prospective employers called mothers back about half as often as non-mothers – Fathers were not disadvantaged in the hiring process Correll, Benard and Paik (2007) Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?American Journal of Sociology, 112 (5), 1297-1338. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  22. Different Family Situations of Women and Men STEM Faculty Source: Joan Herbers, President, AWIS, 2010 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  23. Leaks in the Pipeline for STEM Women Faculty Goulden, Frasch & Mason, Staying Competitive: Patching America’s Leaky Pipeline in the Sciences, 2009. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  24. The Four Patterns Women Face at Work • Prove it Again, and again, and again… • The Tightrope • The Maternal Wall • Tug of War CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  25. Intersectionalities Prove-It-Again is more common for Black women than for the other three groups of women studied (Latinas, Asian-American and White women). Asian-Americans were more likely than other women to report workplace pressures to fulfill traditionally feminine roles—and pushback if they didn’t. Latinas who behave assertively risk being seen as “angry” or “emotional”—and they shoulder large loads of office housework. Black women are allowed to behave in more dominant ways than women—so long as they aren’t seen as “angry Black women.” The Maternal Wall affects mothers of all races. When asked whether women support each other, most respondents (75.5%) said yes, but only 56.0% of Black women agreed. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  26. Bias Avoidance Academic women marry at lower rates Academic women are childless at higher rates Academic women report having fewer children than they would like Academic women do not take advantage of policies (such as tenure clock extension) Drago, Robert W. Striking a Balance: Work, Family, Life, 2007 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  27. Accumulation of Disadvantage • Very small differences in treatment can have major consequences as they accumulate • Like interest on capital, advantages accrue. Like interest on debt, disadvantages accrue • “Mountains are molehills piled one on top of the other” Valian, Virginia, Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women, 1998 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  28. Lowered success rate Accumulation of disadvantage Performance is underestimated Solo status/Lack of critical mass Evaluation bias Schemas If We Do Not Actively Intervene, The Cycle Reproduces Itself Inertia Source: U of Michigan ADVANCE STRIDE CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  29. Need for Institutional Remedies Myth: Since many of the problems encountered by female faculty are minor and individual, emphasis on institutional actions to improve diversity and inclusion is an over-reaction. Fact: Over time, small individual disadvantages accumulate into significant collective disadvantages that have large impacts on productivity and career success. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  30. Aspects of Gender Equity Climate • ComplianceConformity in fulfilling federal, state or local government requirements and university policies • DiversityIncreasing the representation of diverse groups • EquityRemoving systematic barriers to access and opportunity, thus allowing people who are “different” to compete equitably. • InclusionLeveraging the unique backgrounds and experience of all employees to achieve organizational goals and objectives. In an inclusive organization climate, employees’ skills and talents are recognized, used effectively, valued, and help drive organizational success Modified from The Minority Corporate Counsel Association’s Creating Pathways to Diversity, 2006 CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  31. Characteristics of Environments That Enable Gender Diversity, Equity and Inclusion A critical mass of women at all levels and in leadership Freedom from stereotyping about women’s and men’s roles and occupations Work conditions (e.g., job titles, work schedules, policies, physical environment) that include and value both men and women Opportunities for reward and advancement based on qualifications, performance and talent, not gender Work structures and cultural norms that support positive relations between men and women Work policies and structures that support work-life integration Modified from McLean, D. (2003) CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  32. Study of Departmental Climate at CWRU IntegrativeLeadership ParticipativeDepartmental Activities Inclusive Science Identity Open Information & Decision Processes Productive and Inclusive Science Culture Constructive Interactions Bilimoria & Jordan (2005). Full report available at: http://www.case.edu/provost/ideal/doc/AGoodPlaceToDoScience.pdf CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  33. A Study of Academic Job Satisfaction at CWRU Path Coefficients for Female Faculty Members (n=100) Selected Findings • Female faculty perceive that institutional leadership is more strongly related to providing internal relational supports than academic resources. Male faculty perceive that institutional leadership is more strongly related to providing academic resources. • The path from institutional mentoring to relational supports was significant for both men and women, but the strength of the relationship was almost double for women. • While job satisfaction for male faculty arises equally from academic resources and relational supports, job satisfaction for female faculty derives twice as much from internal relational supports Path Coefficients for Male Faculty Members (n=148) Bilimoria, Perry, Liang, Stoller, Higgins, & Taylor (2006). Journal of Technology Transfer, 32, 3: 355-365. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016 33

  34. Conclusions Gender bias arises from a complex interplay of cultural, occupational, organizational, relational and individual factors. Gender bias in science and medicine is long-standing, pervasive, and systematic (embedded into structures, routines and practices). Simplistic or piecemeal solutions will not eradicate systematic gender bias. Institutions that implement simultaneous, multi-level, and multi-faceted change initiatives, systematically transforming their structures, cultures and work practices, can engender improved diversity, equity and inclusion. In the process of such transformation, the academic workplace improves for all. Bilimoria & Liang, Gender Equity in Science and Engineering: Advancing Change in Higher Education, Routledge: 2012. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  35. Change Team Discussion What are the implications of the research presented for your campus? CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  36. Agenda 2:30 – 2:45 BREAK 2:45 – 3:15 Cross University Discussions (groups of 3-4 people): Building Alliances across Campus 3:15 – 4:00 Action Learning (each University Change Team): Progress on Change Project Template 4:00 – 4:45 Reports-Out and Discussion 4:45 – 5:00 Logistics and Next Session CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  37. Cross-University Discussion: Building Alliances across Campus Who are the key people/offices who can help implement your project? Who should be involved in implementation and future institutionalization? What resources and supports would help? What are the barriers? How can you publicize your project? What preparation needs to be done for successful outcomes? CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  38. Action Learning: Change Project Template Report out at 3:45 p.m. CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

  39. Logistics and Next Session Reimbursements & Stipends Session #3 - Friday, September 23rd, 2016 1:00-5:00pm Session #4 - Friday, December 2, 2016 9:00am-12pm Plenary Conference - Friday, April 14, 2017, 9:00am-2:00 pm CWRU IDEAL-N 2016

More Related