Advertisement

The Higher the Fewer

  • Carmel Diezmann
  • Susan Grieshaber
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines the notion of “the higher the fewer” in academic women’s career progression internationally, explains why the academic pipeline is an ineffective explanation for women’s lack of career progression, and discusses cultural influences on career progression and the effect of cumulative disadvantages. The chapter concludes with new directions for understanding academic women’s career progression.

References

  1. Ahmad, S. (2017). Family or future in the academy? Review of Educational Research, 87(1), 203–239.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316631626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander, C. & Arday, J. (Eds.). (2015). Aiming higher: Race, inequality and diversity in the academy. London: AHRC: Runnymede Trust, (Runnymede Perspectives). London, Common Creative: Runnymede Trust, (Runnymede Perspectives). Retrieved from http://www.runnymedetrust.org/uploads/Aiming%20Higher.pdf.
  3. American Association of University Professors (AAUP). (2015). List of tables and figures for Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2014–15. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/list-tables-and-figures-annual-report-economic-status-profession-2014-15.
  4. American Council on Education. (2016). Pipelines, pathways, and institutional leadership: An update on the status of women in higher education. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/Higher-Ed-Spotlight-Pipelines-Pathways-and-Institutional-Leadership-Status-of-Women.pdf.
  5. Baker, M. (2012). Academic careers and the gender gap. Vancouver, Canada: UCB Press.Google Scholar
  6. Beattie, G., & Johnson, P. (2012). Possible unconscious bias in recruitment and promotion and the need to promote equality. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 16(1), 7–13.Google Scholar
  7. Bennett, C. (2011). Beyond the leaky pipeline: Consolidating understanding and incorporating new research about women’s science careers in the UK. Brussels Economic Review, 54(2/3), 149–176.Google Scholar
  8. Bergman, S. (2013). The Nordic region – A step closer to gender balance in research? Copenhagen, Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers. Retrieved from http://kjonnsforskning.no/sites/kilden.forskningsradet.no/files/rapporter/The%20Nordic%20region%20-%20a%20step%20closer%20to%20gender%20balance%20in%20research.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bhopal, K. (2014). The experiences of BME academics in higher education: Aspirations in the face of inequality: Stimulus paper. London, UK: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. Retrieved from https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/364309/1/__soton.ac.uk_ude_personalfiles_users_kb4_mydocuments_Leadership%2520foundation%2520paper_Bhopal%2520stimuls%2520paper%2520final.pdf.Google Scholar
  10. Carrington, K., & Pratt, A. (2003). How far have we come? Gender disparities in the Australian higher education system (Current issues brief no. 31). Canberra, Australia: Department of the Parliamentary Library. Retrieved from http://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/cib/2002-03/03cib31.pdf.Google Scholar
  11. Connell, R. (1995). Masculinities. St. Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  12. Connell, R. (2000). The men and the boys. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Connell, R. (2002). Gender. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  14. Connell, R. (2011). Confronting equality: Gender, knowledge and global change. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  15. Department of Education and Training. (2016, January 27). 2015 staff numbers. Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/node/38385.
  16. Department of Education and Training. (2018a). 2017 First half year student data summary tables: Table 1.1: Summary of first half year student numbers, 2016 to 2017(a). Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/node/50236.
  17. Department of Education and Training. (2018b). 2017 Staff full-time equivalence: Table 1.7 FTE for Full-time and Fractional Full-time Staff by State, Higher Education Institution, Current Duties Classification and Gender, 2017. Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/node/46136.
  18. Ederer, P., Schuller, P., & Willms, S. (2008). University systems ranking: Citizens and society in the age of knowledge. Brussels, Belgium: The Lisbon Council. Retrieved from http://www.lisboncouncil.net/publication/publication/38.html.Google Scholar
  19. Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) (2015). Equality in higher education: Statistical report, staff and students. Retrieved from http://www.ecu.ac.uk/publications/equality-higher-education-statistical-report-2015/.
  20. European Commission. (2013). She figures 2012: Gender in research and innovation: Statistics and indicators. Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/she-figures-2012_en.pdf.Google Scholar
  21. European Commission. (2016a). She figures 2015: Gender in research and innovation. Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/she_figures_2015-final.pdf.Google Scholar
  22. European Commission. (2016b). Meta-analysis of gender and science research: Synthesis report. Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/meta-analysis-of-gender-and-science-research-synthesis-report.pdf.Google Scholar
  23. European University Institute. (2015, July 30). United Kingdom, academic career structure. Retrieved from http://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/UnitedKingdom.aspx.
  24. European University Institute. (2016). Careers by country. Retrieved from http://www.eui.eu/ProgrammesAndFellowships/AcademicCareersObservatory/AcademicCareersbyCountry/Index.aspx.
  25. Fenner, J. N. (2005). Cross-cultural estimation of the human generation interval for use in genetics-based population divergence studies. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 128(2), 415–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Feteris, S. (2012). The role of women academics in Australian universities. 2012 Australian Institute of Physics Congress Deakin University, Geelong. Retrieved from http://www.aip.org.au//info/sites/default/files/Congress2012/35._FETERIS_AIP2012.pdf.
  27. Gasser, C. E., & Shaffer, K. S. (2014). Career development of women in academia: Traversing the leaky pipeline. The Professional Counselor, 4(4), 332–352.  https://doi.org/10.15241/ceg.4.4.332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hancock, K. J., Baum, M. A., & Breuning, M. (2013). Women and pre-tenure scholarly productivity in international studies: An investigation into the leaky career pipeline. International Studies Perspectives, 14(4), 507–527.  https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). (2015). Staff employed at HEFCE-funded HEIs: Trends and profiles. Retrieved from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/analysis/staff/job/.
  30. Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2017). Introduction – Staff in higher education 2015/16. Retrieved from https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/publications/staff-2015-16/introduction.
  31. Keohane, N. (2003). Introduction to report of the steering committee for the women’s initiative at Duke University. Durham, NC: Duke University. Retrieved from www.duke.edu/womens_initiative/report_report.htm.Google Scholar
  32. Lumby, J. (2012). What do we know about leadership in higher education? London, UK: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.Google Scholar
  33. Martin, J. (2011). Education reconfigured: Culture, encounter, and change. New York, NY/London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Monroe, K., & Chiu, W. (2010). Gender equality in the academy: The pipeline problem. Political Science and Politics, 43(2), 303–308.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651000017X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Morley, L. (2013, January). Women and higher education leadership: Absences and aspirations. Stimulus paper. London, UK: Leadership Foundation for Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www2.hull.ac.uk/pws4/pdf/LFHE_%20Morley_SP_v3.pdf.
  36. Nordic Information on Gender. (2015, October 15). Facts and statistics for Iceland. Retrieved from http://www.nikk.no/en/facts/nations/facts-and-statistics-for-iceland/.
  37. Pilkington, A. (2013). The interacting dynamics of institutional racism in higher education. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 16(2), 225–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ringrose, J. (2013). Postfeminist education? Girls and the sexual politics of schooling. New York, NY/London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Savigny, H. (2014). Women, know your limits: Cultural sexism in academia. Gender and Education, 26(7), 794–809.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2014.970977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shaw, A. K., & Stanton, D. E. (2012). Leaks in the pipeline: Separating demographic inertia from ongoing gender differences in academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 279, 3736-3741. Retrieved from file:///C:/Users/Admin/Documents/Literature/NWP/shaw&stanton%202012%20Leaks%20in%20the%20pipeline.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Spivak, G. C. (1993). Outside in the teaching machine. New York, NY/London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. The Forum for Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Equality in Post-School Education. (2016). Pride and prejudice in education: An exploration of experiences and perceptions of sexual orientation and gender identity among post school education learners and staff. Retrieved from https://www.ucu.org.uk/media/7929/Pride-and-Prejudice-in-Education-Feb-16/pdf/ucu_prideandprejudiceineducation_feb16.pdf.
  43. The glass-ceiling index. (2015, March 5). The economist (Online). Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/03/daily-chart-1.
  44. Thornton, M. (1990). The liberal promise: Anti-discrimination legislation in Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Thornton, M. (2013). The mirage of merit: Reconstituting the ‘ideal academic’. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(76), 127–143.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08164649.2013.789584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. United Nations. (1979). 8. Convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women. Retrieved from https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=IV-8&chapter=4&lang=en.
  47. Universities Australia. (2014, November). Selected inter-institutional gender equity statistics – Australia wide – 2011. Retrieved from https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/ArticleDocuments/637/REVISED%20Selected%20Inter-Institutional%20Gender%20Equity%20Statistics%20-%202011-Final.pdf.aspx.
  48. Universities Australia. (2015, November). 2014 selected inter-institutional gender equity statistics. Retrieved from https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/ArticleDocuments/637/2014%20UA%20Selected%20Inter-Institutional%20Gender%20Equity%20Statistics.PDF.aspx.
  49. University and College Union (UCU). (2012, November). The position of women and BME staff in professorial roles in UK. Retrieved from http://www.ucu.org.uk/media/pdf/9/6/The_position_of_women_and_BME_staff_in_professorial_roles_in_UK_HEIs.pdf.
  50. Valian, V. (1999). Why so slow? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  51. van Anders, S. (2004). Why the academic pipeline leaks: Fewer men than women perceive barriers to becoming professors. Sex Roles, 51(9–10), 511–521.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-004-5461-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. van Balen, B., van Arensbergen, P., van der Weijden, I., & van den Besselaar, P. (2012). Determinants of success in academic careers. Higher Education Policy, 25(3), 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. van den Brink, M., & Benschop, Y. (2012). Slaying the seven-headed dragon: The quest for gender change in academia. Gender, Work and Organization, 19(1), 71–92.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2011.00566.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wane, N. (2009). Black Canadian feminist thought: Perspectives on equity and diversity in the academy. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 12(1), 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. West, M., & Curtis, J. (2006). AAUP faculty gender equity indicators 2006. Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors. Retrieved from http://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/63396944-44BE-4ABA-9815-5792D93856F1/0/AAUPGenderEquityIndicators2006.pdf.Google Scholar
  56. White, K. (2003). Women and leadership in higher education in Australia. Tertiary Education and Management, 9(1), 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. White, K. (2005). The leaking pipeline: Women postgraduate and early career researchers in Australia. Tertiary Education and Management, 10(3), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wilson, J., Marks, G., Noone, L., & Hamilton-Mackenzie, J. (2010). Retaining a foothold on the slippery paths of academia: University women, indirect discrimination, and the academic marketplace. Gender and Education, 22(5), 535–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Winchester, H., Lorenzo, S., Browning, L., & Chesterman, C. (2006). Academic women’s promotions in Australian universities. Employee Relations, 28(6), 505–522.  https://doi.org/10.1108/01425450610704461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carmel Diezmann
    • 1
  • Susan Grieshaber
    • 2
  1. 1.Queensland University of TechnologyKelvin GroveAustralia
  2. 2.La Trobe UniversityBundooraAustralia

Personalised recommendations