Why the Academic Pipeline Leaks: Fewer Men than Women Perceive Barriers to Becoming Professors

Abstract

Women are underrepresented in the professoriate compared to men; this study was designed to examine whether systemic barriers associated with parenting discourage women from pursuing academic careers. Data from 468 female and male graduate students were collected through an online questionnaire. More men than women intend to pursue academic careers. Parenting and mobility issues—but not research or teaching issues—were more negatively associated with entering the professoriate for women than for men. However, women were not more interested in having children than men were. Results support the hypothesis that women self-select away from academia in response to perceived systemic barriers related to parenthood. To ensure quality and equity in academia, universities should enact policy that addresses the realities of childbearing and childrearing women.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

REFERENCES

  1. Aisenberg, N., & Harrington, M. (1988). Women of academe: Outsiders in the sacred grove. {plAmherst: The University of Massachusetts Press}.

  2. American Association of University Professors [AAUP]. (2001). Statement of principles on family responsibilities and academic work. Retrieved January 5, 2004, from http:// www.aaup.org/statements/REPORTS/re01fam.htm

  3. Armenti, C. (2004). May babies and posttenure babies: Maternal decisions of women professors. Review of Higher Education, 27, 211–231.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Biernat, M., & Wortman, C. B. (1991). Sharing of home responsibilities between professionally employed women and their husbands. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 844–860.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Blackwell, D. L., & Lichter, D. T. (2000). Mate selection among married and cohabiting couples. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 275–302.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Buunk, B. P., Dijkstra, P., Fetchenhauer, D., & Kenrick, D. T. (2002). Age and gender differences in mate selection criteria for various involvement levels. Personal Relationships, 9, 271–278.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Canadian Association of University Teachers [CAUT]. (2002). Ivory towers: Feminist audits. Year 2002 figures. Retrieved October 10, 2003, from http://www.caut.ca/english/issues/ women/Audit2002.asp

  8. Canadian Association of University Teachers [CAUT]. (2003). CAUT almanac of post-secondary education in Canada.Retrieved October 10, 2003, from http://www.caut.ca/english/publications/cautalmanac/CAUTAlmanac2003.pdf

  9. Caplan, P. J. (1993). Lifting a ton of feathers: A woman's guide to surviving in the academic world.Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Collins, L. H., Chrisler, J. C., & Quina, K. (Eds.). (1998). Arming Athena: Career strategies for women in academe.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Committee on Women Faculty, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1999). A study on the status of women faculty in science at MIT. Retrieved January 6, 2004, from http:// web.mit.edu/fnl/women/women.pdf

  12. Cook, S. G. (2001). Students give failing grade to PhD programs. Women in Higher Education Newsletter, 10, 27–28. Retrieved December vn10, 2003, from http://hau www.phd-survey.org/news/ wihe%20article.htm

    Google Scholar 

  13. Equal Rights Advocates. (2003). Creating gender equity in academia. Retrieved December 25, 2003, from http:// universitywomen.stanford.edu/reports/Creating gender equity academia.pdf

  14. European Technology Assessment Network [ETAN]. (2002). Science policies in the European Union: Promoting excellence through mainstreaming gender equality. Retrieved October 10, 2003, from ftp://ftp.cordis.lu/pub/etan/docs/women.pdf

  15. Golde, C. M., & Dore, T. M. (2001). At cross purposes: What the experiences of doctoral students reveal about doctoral education (www.phd-survey.org). Philadelphia: Pew Charitable Trusts.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Graham, P. A. (1970, September 25). Women in Academe. Science, 169, 1284–1290.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Irvine, A. D. (1996). Jack and Jill and employment equity. Dialogue, XXXV, 255–291.

  18. Kimura, D. (1997). Affirmative action policies are demeaning to women in academia. Canadian Psychology, 38, 238–243.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kimura, D. (1999, November 4). Best person not always hired under affirmative action [Opinion]. Simon Fraser News, 16. Retrieved December 15, 2003, from http://www. sfu.ca/ mediapr/ sfnews/1999/nov4/kimura.html

  20. Kimura, D. (2002, January 10). Researcher thanks preferential hiring survey participants [Letter to the editor].UBC Reports, 48. Retrieved December 15, 2003, from http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/ubcreports/2002/02jan10/02jan 10let.html

  21. Kite, M. E., Russo, N. F., Brehm, S. S., Fouad, N. A., Hall, C. C. I., Hyde, J. S., et al. (2001). Women psychologists in academe: Mixed progress, unwarranted complacency. American Psychologist, 56, 1080–1098.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kling, K. C., Hyde, J. S., Showers, C. J., & Buswell, B. N. (1999). Gender differences in self-esteem: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 470–500.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mason, M., & Goulden, M. (2002). Do babies matter? The effect of family formation on the lifelong careers of academic men and women. Academe, 88, 21–27.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Miller, J., & Chamberlin, M. (2000). Women are teachers, men are professors: A study of student perceptions. Teaching Sociol-ogy, 28, 283–299.

    Google Scholar 

  25. National Center for Education Statistics [NCES]. (2002). Table 171, Chapter 3: Post-secondary education. In Digest of education statistics. Retrieved October 10, 2003, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid =2002130.

  26. O'Reilly, A. (Ed.). (2003). Mothering in the academy. Journal of the Association for Research on Mothering, 5(2).

  27. Pittman, J. F., Teng, W., Kerpelman, J. L., & Solheim, C. A. (1999). Satisfaction with performance of housework: The roles of time spent, quality assessment, and stress. Journal of Family Issues, 20, 746–770.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Roth, S. (2003). Report of the steering committee for the women's initiative at Duke University. Retrieved December 25, 2003, from http://www.duke.edu/womens initiative/report report.htms

  29. Ruble, D. N., Fleming, A. S., Hackel, L. S., & Stangor, C. (1988). Changes in the marital relationship during the transition to first time motherhood: Effects of violated assumptions concerning division of household labour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 78–87.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Simeone, A. (1987). Academic women: Working towards equality. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Steinpreis, R. E., Anders, K. A., & Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roless, 41, 509–528.

    Google Scholar 

  32. The Chilly Collective (Eds.). (1995). Breaking anonymity: The chilly climate for women faculty. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfred Laurier University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Valian, V. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2004). Academic motherhood: Managing complex roles in research universities. The Review of Higher Education, 27, 233–257.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wilkie, J. R., Ferree, M. M., & Ratcliff, K. S. (1998). Gender and fairness: Marital satisfaction in two-earner couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 557–594.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wilson, R. (1999, June 25). Timing is everything: Academe's annual baby boom. Chronicle of Higher Education, 45, A14.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Anders, S.M.v. Why the Academic Pipeline Leaks: Fewer Men than Women Perceive Barriers to Becoming Professors. Sex Roles 51, 511–521 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-004-5461-9

Download citation

  • gender
  • higher education
  • graduate study
  • family
  • academia