Gender Issues

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 24–42 | Cite as

As balancing act and as game: How women and men science faculty experience the promotion process

  • Ramona Gunter
  • Amy Stambach
Articles

Abstract

Studies on the division of domestic labor find that women take on a greater proportion of domestic responsibilities; this has implications for both women and men who work in demanding jobs. In this study of women and men science faculty at a major research university, the authors find that women tend to relate their experiences of the promotion process to both their domestic and faculty roles, whereas men tend not to consider thant their domestic roles have any bearing on their experiences of the promotion process. Women view the promotion process in terms of the components that make demands on their time, and they suggest ways that the process could (and should) be changed. Men view the process as a challenging game, and they describe the promotion process, as it currently exists, as necessary and acceptable. The authors find that there are compelling reasons to reconsider the structure of the promotion process and to strengthen and expand the programmatic supports that address the needs of women.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barnett, Rosalind C. and Brace Baruch. 1987. “Determinants of Fathers' Participation in Family Work”. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 49: 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bielby, William T. 1991. “Sex Differences in Careers: Is Science a Special Case?” In The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community. ed. Zuckerman, Cole, and Bruer, New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  3. Connell, R. W. 1995. Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  4. Cole, Jonathan R. and Harriet Zuckerman. 1991. “Marriage, Motherhood, and Research Performance in Science.” In The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community. ed. Zuckerman, Cole, and Bruer. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  5. Eisenhart, M. and E. Finkel. 1998. Women's Science: Learning and Succeeding from the Margins. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Fiss, Owen M. 1991. “An Uncertain Inheritance.” In The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community. ed. Zuckerman, Cole, and Bruer. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  7. Fox, Mary Frank. 2000. “Women, Science, and Academia: Graduate Education and Careers.” Gender & Society. 15(5): 654–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goffman, Erving. 1963. Stigma. NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  9. Hays, Sharon. 1996. The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Long, J. Scott and Mary Frank Fox. 1995. “Scientific Careers: Universalism and Particularism.” Annual Review of Sociology. 21: 45–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McFarlane, Seth, Roderic Beaujot, and Tony Haddad. 2000. “Time Constraints and Relative Resources as Determinants of the Sexual Division of Domestic Work.” Canadian Journal of Sociology. 25(1): 61–82.Google Scholar
  12. Peterson, Richard R. and Kathleen Gerson. 1992. “Determinants of Responsibility for Child Care Arrangements Among Dual-Earner Couples.” Journal of Marriage and the Family. 54: 527–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Phillips, P. 1990. The Scientific Lady: A Social History of Women's Scientific Interests 1520–1918. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
  14. Press, Julie E. and Eleanor Townsley. 1998. “Wives' and Husbands' Housework Reporting: Gender, Class, and Social Desirability.” Gender and Society. 12(2): 188–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Risman, Barbara. 1998. Gender Vertigo: American Families in Transition. Yale UP.Google Scholar
  16. Sanchez, Laura and Elizabeth Thomson. 1997. “Becoming Mothers and Fathers: Parenthood, Gender, and the Division of Labor.” Gender and Society. 11(6): 747–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schiebinger, Londa. 1999. Has Feminism Changed Science? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Schleef, Debra. 2001. “Thinking Like a Lawyer: Gender Differences in the Production of Professional Knowledge.” Gender Issues. 19(2):69–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sonnert, Gerhard. 1995 “Gender Equity in Science: Still an Elusive Goal.” Issues in Science and Technology. Winter 1995–96: 53–58.Google Scholar
  20. Suitor, J. Jill, Dorothy Mecom, and Ilana S. Feld. 2001. “Gender, Household Labor, and Scholarly Productivity Among University Professors.” Gender Issues. 19(4): 50–67.Google Scholar
  21. Walby, Sylvia. 2001. “Against Epistemological Chasms: The Science Question in Feminism Revisited.” Signs 26(2): 485–509.Google Scholar
  22. Wasserman, Elga. 2000. The Door in the Dream: Conversations with Eminent Women in Science. Washington, D.C.: Joseph Henry Press.Google Scholar
  23. Wilkie, Jane, et al. 1998. “Gender and Fairness: Marital Satisfaction in Two-Earner Couples.” Journal of Marriage & Family. 60(3).Google Scholar
  24. Zuckerman, Harriet. 1991. “The Careers of Men and Women Scientists: A Review of Current Research.” In The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community. ed. Zuckerman, Cole, and Bruer. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Transaction Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ramona Gunter
  • Amy Stambach

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations