Advertisement

Higher Education

, Volume 66, Issue 2, pp 173–188 | Cite as

The different worlds of academia: a horizontal analysis of gender equality in Swedish higher education

  • Charlotte SilanderEmail author
  • Ulrika Haake
  • Leif Lindberg
Article

Abstract

Women are underrepresented in advanced positions in higher education in Europe. This study takes a horizontal perspective and focuses on the relationship between gender and discipline in order to combine research on gender in higher education with theories of disciplinary differences in academic cultures. The study points out substantial differences between disciplines in gender composition, specifically, the probability of a person leaving academia after earning a doctor’s degree and various attitudes towards gender equality work. Our approach, which is based on quantitative longitudinal as well as qualitative research methods, has yielded a more complex and contradictory picture of gender equality in higher education than have vertical cross-sectional studies.

Keywords

Gender equality Horizontal analysis Academia Higher education Discipline 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was made possible through a grant from the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research.

References

  1. Academy of Finland. (1998). Women in academia. Helsingfors: Academy of Finland.Google Scholar
  2. Aisenberg, N., & Harrington, M. (1988). Women of academe: Outsiders in the sacred grove. London: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
  3. Askling, B. (2001). Higher education and academic staff in a period of policy and system change. Higher Education, 41(1–2), 157–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. August, L., & Waltman, J. (2004). Culture, climate and contribution: Career satisfaction among female faculty. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bagilhole, B. (1993). How to keep a good woman down: An investigation of the role of institutional factors in the process of discrimination against women academics. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 14(3), 261–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Becker, G. S. (1985). Human capital, effort and the sexual division of labour. Journal of Labour Economics, 3, 33–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berggren, C. (2011). Gender equality policies and higher education careers. Journal of Education and Work, 24, 141–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berryman, S. (1983). Who will do science? Minority and female attainment of science and mathematics degrees: Trends and causes. New York: Rockefeller Foundation.Google Scholar
  10. Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different scientific areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blackaby, D., Booth, A., & Frank, J. (2005). Outside offers and the gender pay gap: Empirical evidence from the UK academic labour market. The Economic Journal, 115(501), 81–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Blackmore, J. (2006). Deconstructing diversity discourses in the field of educational management and leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 34(2), 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Booth, A., Francesconi, M., & Frank, J. (2003). A sticky floors model of promotion, pay and gender. European Economic Review, 47(2), 295–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Male domination. UK: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Brint, S., Cantwell, A. M., & Hanneman, R. A. (2008). The two cultures of undergraduate academic engagement. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 383–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chrapkowska, C. (2006). Akademins anriktning av män. En studie av svensk utbildningsstatistik 1957–2002. Uppsala: Uppsala universitet.Google Scholar
  17. Cole, J. R. (1979). Fair science: Women in the scientific community. A morningside book. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1984). The productivity puzzle: Persistence and change in patterns of publications of men and women scientists. Advances in Motivations and Achievements, 2, 217–258.Google Scholar
  19. Committee on Maximizing the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (U.S.). (2006). Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  20. Conrad, L., & Phillips, E. (1995). From isolation to collaboration: A positive change for postgraduate women. Higher Education, 30, 313–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Deem, R., & Brehony, K. (2000). Doctoral students’ access to research cultures-are some more unequal than others? Studies in Higher Education, 25(2), 149–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. European Commission. (2009). Women and science—Statistics and indicators. She figures. Google Scholar
  23. Fridner, A. (2004). Karriärvägar och karriärmönster bland disputerande läkare och medicinare. Studia psychologica upsaliensia (Vol. 21). Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
  24. Government Bill. (1991). Jämställdhetslag.Google Scholar
  25. Haake, U. (2009). Doing leadership in higher education: The gendering process of leader identity development. Tertiary Education and Management, 15(4), 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Haake, U. (2011). Contradictory values in doctoral education—A study of gender composition in disciplines in Swedish academia. Higher Education, 62(1), 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hakim, C. (1996). Key issues in women’s work: Female heterogeneity and the polarisation of women’s employment. Conflict and change in Britain series (Vol. 4). London: Athlone.Google Scholar
  28. Hemlin, E. (1997). Det har ändå hänt fantastiskt mycket. Stockholm: Riksbankens jubiléumsfond.Google Scholar
  29. Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Högskolelagen. (1994). Nya högskolelagen: Nya högskoleförordningen.Ufb-nytt, 1993:26. Stockholm: Fritzes offentliga publikationer.Google Scholar
  31. Högskoleverket. (1997). De första 20 åren utvecklingen vid de mindre och medelstora högskolorna sedan 1977.Google Scholar
  32. Högskoleverket. (2003). Doktorandspegeln 2003. Högskoleverkets rapportserie, 2003:28 r. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.Google Scholar
  33. Högskoleverket. (2004). Intäkter för forskning och forskarutbildning 1997–2002.Google Scholar
  34. Högskoleverket. (2006). Forskarutbildning och forskarkarriär: Betydelsen av kön och socialt ursprung. Högskoleverkets rapportserie, 2006:2 R. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.Google Scholar
  35. Högskoleverket. (2007). Förskarutbildades etablering på arbetsmarknaden. Rapport 2007:56 R.Google Scholar
  36. Högskoleverket. (2008). Kvinnor och män i högskolan. Rapport 2008:20 R. Google Scholar
  37. Högskoleverket. (2010). Doktorsexaminerades etablering på arbetsmarknaden. Rapport 2010:21 R. Google Scholar
  38. Högskoleverket. (2011a). Forskarkarriär för både kvinnor och män?—Statistisk uppföljning och kunskapsöversikt. 2011: 6 R, no.Google Scholar
  39. Högskoleverket. (2011b). Universitet och högskolor. Högskoleverkets årsrapport.Google Scholar
  40. Husu, L. (2001a). On metaphors on the position of women in academia and science. Nora, 9(3), 172–181.Google Scholar
  41. Husu, L. (2001b). Sexism, support and survival in academia: Academic women and hidden discrimination in Finland. Social psychological studies (Vol. 6). Helsinki: Department of Social Psychology.Google Scholar
  42. Husu, L. (2005). Dold könsdiskriminering på akademiska arenor: Osynligt, synligt, subtilt.Högskoleverkets rapportserie, 2005:41 r. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.Google Scholar
  43. Jenkins, R. (1996). Social identity. Key ideas. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Kahn, S. (1993). Gender differences in academic career paths of economists. The American Economic Review, 83(2), 52–56.Google Scholar
  45. Kantola, J. (2008). Why do all the women disappear? Gendering processes in a political science department. Gender, Work & Organization, 15(1–2), 202–225.Google Scholar
  46. Kim, L. (2002). Lika olika: En jämförande studie av högre utbildning och forskning i de nordiska länderna. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.Google Scholar
  47. King, C. (1998). Through the glass ceiling: Networking by women managers in higher education. In H. Eggins (Ed.), Women as leaders and managers in higher education. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Kyndel, D., Lindberg, L., & Riis, U. (2003). Jämställdhet inom universitet och högskolor: En bibliografi med kommentarer. Högskoleverkets rapportserie, 2003:22 r. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.Google Scholar
  49. Lindberg, L., Riis, U., & Silander, C. (2005). Akademins olika världar Högskoleverkets rapportserie, 2005:53 r. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.Google Scholar
  50. Lindberg, L., Riis, U., & Silander, C. (2011). Gender equality in Swedish higher education—Some crucial issues. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 165–179.Google Scholar
  51. Madden, M. E. (2005). 2004 division 35 presidential address: Gender and leadership in higher education. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Marini, M., & Mary, B. (1984). Sex typing in occupational socialization. In B. Reskin (Ed.), Sex segregation in the workplace. Trends, expectations, remedies. Washington: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  53. Martinez, E., Botos, J., Dohoney, K. M., Geiman, T. M., Kolla, S. S., Olivera, A., et al. (2007). Falling off the academic bandwagon. EMBO Reports, 8, 977–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Moi, T. (2002). Å tilegne seg bourdieu. Feministisk teori og pierre bourdieus kultursosiologi. In I. Iversen (Ed.), Feministisk litteraturteori (pp. 252–279). Oslo: Pax Forlag A/S.Google Scholar
  55. Monroe, K. R., & Chiu, W. (2010). Gender equality in the academy: The pipeline problem. The Profession, April 2010.Google Scholar
  56. Neumann, R. (2001). Disciplinary differences and university teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Neumann, R., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Polachek, S. W., & Siebert, W. S. (1993). The economics of earning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Preston, A. (2004). Leaving science. Occupational exit from scientific careers. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  60. Rees, T. (2001). Mainstreaming gender equality in science in the european union: The etan report. Gender and Education, 13(3), 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Regeringens Proposition.(1978/79). Med förslag till lag om jämställdhet mellan kvinnor och män i arbetslivet. Regeringens proposition, 1978/79:175. Google Scholar
  62. Sandqvist, K. (1995). Verbal boys and mathematical girls—Family background and educational careers. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 39(1), 5–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Seagram, B. C., Gould, J., & Pyke, S. W. (1998). An investigation of gender and other variables on time to completion of doctoral degrees. Research in Higher Education, 39(3), 319–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Siemenska, R. (2000).Women in academe in Poland: Winners among losers. Higher Education in Europe, XXV(2), 171.Google Scholar
  65. Silander, C. (2010). Pyramider och pipelines: Om högskolesystemets påverkan på jämställdhet i högskolan. Växjö: Linnaeus University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Skolöverstyrelsen. (1969). Läroplan för grundskola. Stockholm: Svenska utbildningsförlaget Liber.Google Scholar
  67. Smeby, J. C. (2000). Disciplinary differences in Norwegian graduate education. Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sonnert, G., & Holton, G. J. (1995). Gender differences in scientific careers. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Ståhle, B. (1997). Universiteten och forskarna: Från stagnation till förnyelse: Universitetsforskare, forskarutbildning och forskarrekrytering i norden. København: Nordisk ministerråd.Google Scholar
  70. Statistic Sweden. (2011a). Universitet och högskolor. Doktorander och examina på forskarnivå 2010.Google Scholar
  71. Statistic Sweden. (2011b). Universitet och högskolor. Personal vid universitet och högskolor.Google Scholar
  72. Statistic Sweden. (2011c). Universitet och högskolor. Studenter och examina på grundnivå och avancerad nivå 2009/10.Google Scholar
  73. Statistic Sweden. (2011d). Universitet och högskolor. Personal vid universitet och högskolor 2011.Uf 23 SM 0101. Stockholm: SCB.Google Scholar
  74. Stolte-Heiskanen, V. (1991). Women in science: Token women or gender equality?. New York: Berg.Google Scholar
  75. Tancred, P., & Czarnocki, S. (1998). The revolving door: Faculty women who exit academia. In J. Stalker & S. Prentice (Eds.), The illusion of inclusion : women in post secondary education. Halofax: Fernwood Publishing.Google Scholar
  76. Timmers, T. M., Willemsem, T. M., & Tijdens, K. G. (2010). Gender diversity policies in universities: a multi-perspective framework of policy measures. Higher Education, 59, 719–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Umbach, P. D. (2007). Gender equity in the academic labor market: An analysis of academic disciplines. Research in Higher Education, 48(2), 169–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Viefers, S. F., Christie, M. F., & Ferdos, F. (2006). Gender equity in higher education: Why and how. A case study of gender issues in a science faculty. European Journal of Engineering Education, 31(1), 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wall, S. (2008). Of heads and hearts: Women in doctoral education at a Canadian University. Women’s Studies International Forum, 31(3), 219–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science: Career processes and outcomes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Zuckerman, H., Cole, J. R., & Bruer, J. T. (1991). The outer circle: Women in the scientific community. New York: Norton.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charlotte Silander
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ulrika Haake
    • 2
  • Leif Lindberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Linnaeus UniversityVäxjöSweden
  2. 2.Umeå UniversityUmeåSweden

Personalised recommendations