Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Faculty Members’ Perceptions of How Academic Work is Evaluated: Similarities and Differences by Gender

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A questionnaire about how academic performance is evaluated and the importance of teaching and research was completed by 265 faculty at a UK research university. Factor analysis followed by t-tests showed that male faculty had a more realistic understanding of how their research is evaluated, rate the importance of research to their careers more highly, and are more likely than women to work over hours through choice. Women faculty are more likely than men to work over hours because of teaching workload and rate the importance of a teaching qualification more highly, despite giving similar ratings as men to the importance of teaching to their career. The implications for differential rates of promotion are discussed.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asmar, C. (1999). Is there a gendered agenda in academia? The research experience of female and male Ph.D. graduates in Australian universities. Higher Education, 38, 255–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Athena Project (2004) ASSET 2003: The Athena survey of science engineering and technology in higher education. Athena report 26. Retrieved April 24 2007 from http://www.athenaproject.org.uk/reports/Report26.pdf

  • Bagilhove, B., & Goode, J. (2001). The contradiction of the myth of individual merit and the reality of a patriarchal support system in academic careers. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 8, 161–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bett, M. (1999). Independent review of higher education pay and conditions: an independent committee chaired by Sir Michael Bett. London: Stationary Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, M. M., & Holden, E. W. (1998). The impact of gender on productivity and satisfaction among medical school psychologists. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 5, 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17, 369–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronstein, P., & Farnsworth, L. (1998). Gender differences in faculty experiences of interpersonal climate and processes of advancement. Research in Higher Education, 39, 557–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. L., Ash, A. S., Friedman, R. H., Scaramucci, A., Barnett, R. C., Szalacha, L., et al. (1998). Relation of family responsibilities and gender to the productivity and career satisfaction of medical faculty. Annals of Internal Medicine, 129, 532–538.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. L., Ash, A. S., Friedman, R. H., Szalacha, L., Barnett, R. C., Palepu, A., et al. (2000). Faculty perceptions of gender discrimination and sexual harassment in academic medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine, 132, 889–896.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, J. E., & Nojima, S. E. (2002). Teaching: academic white-water rafting. In J. E. Cooper, & D. D. Stevens (Eds.), Tenure in the Sacred Grove (pp. 163–177). New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Draznin, J. (2004). The ‘mommy tenure track’. Academic Medicine, 79, 289–290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harley, S. (2003). Research selectivity and female academics in UK universities: from gentleman’s club and barrack yard to smart macho? Gender and Education, 15, 377–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HESA (2005/2006). Higher education statistics for the United Kingdom 2005/6. Cheltenham, UK: Higher Education Statistics Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzig, A. H. (2004). ‘Slaughtering this beautiful math’: graduate women choosing and leaving Mathematics. Gender and Education, 16, 379–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knights, D., & Richards, W. (2003). Sex discrimination in UK academia. Gender, Work and Organization, 10, 213–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawler, A. (1999). Tenured women battle to make it less lonely at the top. Science, 286, 1272–1278.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Long, J. S., & Fox, M. F. (1995). Scientific careers: universalism and particularism. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 45–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, M. A., & Goulden, M. (2004). Marriage and baby blues: redefining gender equity in the academy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 596, 86–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, W. J., Newman, R. J., & Turnbull, G. K. (2003). Reputational capital and academic pay. Economic Inquiry, 39, 663–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, S. (1996). Research, teaching and service: why shouldn’t women’s work count? The Journal of Higher Education, 67, 46–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penas, C. S., & Willett, P. (2006). Gender differences in publication and citation counts in librarianship and information science research. Journal of Information Science, 32, 480–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posen, M., Templer, D. I., Forward, V., Stokes, S., & Stephens, J. (2005). Publication rates of male and female academic clinical psychologists in California. Psychological Reports, 97, 898–902.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Probert, B. (2005). ‘I just couldn’t fit it in’: gender and unequal outcomes in academic success. Gender, Work and Organization, 12, 50–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prpić, K. (2002). Gender and productivity differentials in science. Scientometrics, 55, 27–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reskin, B. F. (1978). Scientific productivity, sex, and location in the institution of science. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 1235–1243.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers, R. C., & Maranto, C. L. (1989). Causal models of publishing productivity in psychology. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 636–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sax, L. J., Hagedorn, L. S., Arredondo, M., & Dicrisi III., F. A. (2002). Faculty research productivity: Exploring the role of gender and family-related factors. Research in Higher Education, 43, 423–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott Long, J., Allison, P. D., & McGinnis, R. (1993). Rank advancement in academic careers: sex differences and the effects of productivity. American Sociological Review, 58, 703–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonnert, G. (1995). Gender equity in science: still an elusive goal. Issues in Science and Technology, 12, 53–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS Inc. (2000). Advance techniques: ANOVA. Chicago, IL: SPSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stack, S. (2002). Gender and scholarly productivity: the case of criminal justice. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 175–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stack, S. (2004). Gender, children and research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 45, 891–920.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toren, N., & Moore, D. (1998). The academic ‘hurdle race’: a case study. Higher Education, 35, 267–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trix, F. & Psenka, C. (2003). Exploring the color of glass: letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse and Society, 14, 191–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trower, C. A., & Bleak, J. L. (2004). The Study of New Scholars tenure-track faculty job satisfaction survey. Gender: statistical report. Retrieved April 24 2007 from http://www.gse.harvard.edu/~newscholars/newscholars/downloads/genderreport.pdf.

  • van Anders, S. M. (2004). Why the academic pipeline leaks: few men than women perceive barriers to becoming professors. Sex Roles, 51, 511–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vydareny, K. H., Waldrop, S. M., Jackson, V. P., Manaster, B. J., Nazarian, G. K., Reich, C. A., et al. (2000). Career advancement of men and women in academic radiology: is the playing field level? Academic Radiology, 7, 493–501.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, M. E. (2001a). The gender salary gap in British academia. Applied Economics, 33, 1669–1681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, M. E. (2001b). Gender and promotion in the academic profession. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 48, 283–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, I. O., & Cable, D. M. (2003). Predicting early career research productivity: the case of management faculty. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkler, J. A. (2000). Faculty reappointment, tenure, and promotion: barriers for women. The Professional Geographer, 52, 737–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (1998). Sex differences in research productivity: new evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review, 63, 847–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dave Horton for his invaluable assistance in putting the questionnaire on the web, and senior members of HR at the university where the project took place for enabling this research, and for assistance with access to participants. Finally, we are indebted to our participants for taking the time to complete the questionnaire.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Psychological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

    Zazie Todd & Anna Madill

  2. Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Maurice Keyworth Building, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK

    Nicky Shaw & Nicola Bown

Authors
  1. Zazie Todd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna Madill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicky Shaw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nicola Bown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zazie Todd.

Appendix

Appendix

The following variables were examined:

 

Influence of factors on career:

Influence of personal reputation

 

Influence of departmental support

 

Influence of department priorities

 

Influence of other individuals

 

Influence of government policies

 

Influence of home circumstances

 

Influence of gender

 

Influence of health

 

Influence of age

Equality and diversity policies:

Awareness of EDP

 

EDP working in dept generally

 

EDP working personally

 

Where to get help with EDP

 

More training on E&D offered generally

 

More training on E&D personally

 

RAE impact on EDP

 

QAA impact on EDP

Research activities:

Research important to dept

 

Research important to my career

 

RAE: teaching and research unfairly allocated

 

RAE: research takes priority over teaching

 

RAE: research topics influenced

 

RAE: grant proposals encouraged

 

RAE: co-authoring within dept encouraged

 

RAE: co-authoring within dept discouraged

Teaching activities:

Teaching important to dept

 

Teaching important to my career

 

QAA: involved with inspection

 

QAA: teaching research unfairly allocated

 

QAA: teaching take priority over research

 

QAA: pressure to join ILT

 

Undertaking PGCLTHE

 

Pressure to do PGCLTHE

 

PGCLTHE positive for career

Evaluation of research:

Research evaluated by grant income

 

Research evaluated by no of grant proposals

 

Research evaluated by no of peer rev pubs

 

Research evaluated by no of other pubs

 

Research evaluated by no of conf presentations

 

Research evaluated by reviews of others grants

 

Research evaluated by reviews of others journal

 

Research evaluated by invitations to speak

 

Research evaluated by no of doctoral students

Working hours:

No of days working from home

 

Working over hours through choice

 

Working over hours through marking workload

 

Working over hours through teaching workload

 

Working over hours through research workload

 

Working over hours through admin workload

Impact of children

Impact of having/having had children on career

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Todd, Z., Madill, A., Shaw, N. et al. Faculty Members’ Perceptions of How Academic Work is Evaluated: Similarities and Differences by Gender. Sex Roles 59, 765–775 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9480-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9480-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation