Page images
PDF
EPUB

Antibias regulation of universities 38

women in the age group 25 to 35 who had children under six years of age also increased markedly (see Bowen & Finegan, pp. 202-203 and Appendix Table 7-B, p. 586). Those developments helped to cause the labor force participation rates of these women to decline appreciably and to limit their career ambitions. A result was that in the 1950s and early 1960s a much smaller percentage of women both prepared themselves with Ph.D. training and drove hard to reach the top in their profession.

By the late 1960s and early 1970s, the demographic trends had changed. The proportion of women who were married had declined slightly, the percentage of married women with children under six years of age had dropped sharply, and the labor force participation of women aged 25 to 35 had risen. A new career-oriented drive was in full swing. There was more sharing of household duties among young couples, and stress was being put on the importance of married women having time to pursue academic careers. Generational changes in women's ambitions and the possibilities of fulfilling them through professional careers need to be taken into account, along with factors on the demand side, in any assessment of responsibility for "underrepresentation" of women among tenured faculty, especially in major universities.

Studies and statistics indicate that, in the past, the most serious obstacle to female faculty members progressing in their careers is marriage and children. That is the case even though about half of the female faculty in universities are not married," and surveys indicate that female Ph.D.'s who are married are twice as likely to be childless as women in the same age group in the general population and that they are likely to have a smaller family if they do have children. 12

11In a 1972-73 survey, 48 percent of the women in universities and the same percentage in all institutions of higher education had “no spouse" at the time (Bayer, 1973, p. 31).

In a survey of women who received Ph.D. degrees in the calendar years 1957 and 1958, it was found that seven or eight years later (December 1965 or early 1966), 55 percent were married or had been married, compared with a figure of 94 percent for women of comparable age in the general population (Astin, 1969, p. 27).

12 The survey reported in Astin (1969, pp. 29–30) showed that 28 percent of the married women who had doctorates were childless at that time (that is, generally in their early forties) and that those with children had an average of 2.0 compared with 2.6 children for the women in their early forties in the general population. A survey of college and university faculty in 1968-69 showed that 40 percent of the women in university faculties had not married and that 67 percent had no children (Bayer, 1970, p. 12).

Discrimination and qualified supply 39

In a questionnaire survey sent out at the end of 1965, the women who received Ph.D. degrees in the calendar years 1957 and 1958 were asked about the problems they "encounter in developing [their] careers fully."13 Eighty percent of them were then employed in academic institutions. The respondents were asked to indicate whether each item considered to be a career obstacle was a "major problem" or a "minor problem." In reply, 18 percent said that "finding adequate help at home" was a major problem, and 22 percent more said that it was a minor problem. Half of the respondents used some sort of outside help for household work and child care. Nevertheless the female doctorates, as a group, spent an average of 10 hours a week on child care plus 18 hours a week on household tasks such as cooking, cleaning, and marketing, which meant a very large claim on the time and energy of half of the female Ph.D.'s who were married (Astin, 1969, pp. 97, 101102, 147, and 178-179).

"Employer discrimination" was considered a major problem by 12 percent of the women who held doctorates and a minor problem for an additional 24 percent. "Husband's job mobility” and “husband's negative attitudes toward my working" were considered a major problem by 6 and 2 percent, and a minor problem by 8 and 4 percent, respectively, of all respondents. Since only half of the respondents had husbands, those figures would need to be doubled for married women. Almost half of the female Ph.D.'s (45 percent) had been with the same employer during the seven or eight years since receiving their degrees, and half of the married women reported their husbands also had Ph.D. degrees (ibid., pp. 28, 102-103, and 179). If the husband moves to a new position that necessitates a change of employment for the wife, her employment opportunity and progress in her career can be adversely affected.

With respect to discrimination in employment, the female Ph.D.'s were asked: "If you have [presumably at any time] experienced any employment discrimination practices indicate which kind," with the choices listed in order of frequency of respondent designation, as follows: "differential salaries for men and women with the same training and experience" (40 percent of respondents); "differential sex policies regarding tenure, seniority, and promotions" (33 percent); "unwillingness and reservation on the part of employer to

13 Astin (1969). A total of 1,547 complete questionnaires were returned for an 83 percent response.

Antibias regulation of universities 40

designate administrative responsibility and authority to professional women employees" (33 percent); "employer prejudices against hiring a woman" (25 percent), and "other" (12 percent). 14

With male faculty outnumbering female faculty in universities 6 to 1, many women cannot help but feel that their interests and problems are not given proper consideration by their departmental colleagues, by university appointments committees, and by the administration. With such a sex ratio, faculty personnel policies could be expected to be oriented toward the normal career patterns of males and to neglect, to some extent at least, the interests of women pursuing careers in academe. Until sex discrimination in employment was banned by federal Executive orders and legislation, and women's groups pressured for policies oriented toward women's needs, universities generally paid little attention to possible sex bias in their hiring and employment policies. For example, antinepotism policies, either stated or assumed, served to reduce married women's employment opportunities by making it difficult for a female Ph.D. to obtain appropriate employment in the same university faculty as her husband, or to obtain part-time employment in regular faculty ranks, with all the leave-of-absence, benefit, and tenure rights and privileges that males on part-time status would have. Female faculty especially need those provisions for periods when pregnancy and child-rearing may make part-time employment necessary and desirable. Undoubtedly, scholars who aim at freedom from bias in their scholarly and scientific work should be reminded of the need to have fairness and equality of opportunity in the content and administration of university personnel policies.

It is interesting that statistics indicate that single women on university faculties seem notably less disadvantaged than married women. Undoubtedly that is due in large part to the handicaps that married women have in running a home and in adjusting to their husband's job mobility, both of which have already been discussed. 15

14 Ibid. (p. 179). Since male faculty members may also consider themselves discriminated against in salary, promotion, and distribution of administrative responsibility and authority, it would be interesting to have the response of a similar cohort of male Ph.D.'s to the same questions.

15 As indicated in the text, the December 1965 survey of women receiving Ph.D.'s in 1957 and 1958 showed that about one-fourth of the married women considered their husband's job mobility a hindrance to their own career development, and for a sixth of them their husband's attitude toward their working was

Discrimination and qualified supply 41

Some studies indicate that marital status is perhaps the most significant factor in explaining differences in salary and in promotion rates between women and men. An analysis of the faculty status of women and men in the cohort who received Ph.D. degrees in 1940 and remained in academic employment shows that 20 years later (in 1960) some 85 percent of the males and 70 percent of the unmarried women had attained the rank full professor, whereas only 46 percent of the married women had done so. It was concluded that about three-fifths of the promotion differential between women and men academics in that sample could be explained by comparing single women with men. 16

A questionnaire survey in 1967 of women who received their Ph.D.'s in the arts and sciences and education between 1958 and 1963, and who were employed full-time in faculty positions, had similar results. Among the unmarried women in 1966-67, the ratio of instructors and assistant professors combined (the first rungs on the promotional ladder) to associate and full professors combined was as follows: for single women, 1.1 full and associate professors for each instructor-assistant professor; for men, 1.3 full and associate professors per instructor-assistant professor; and for married women, 0.4 of a full and associate professor per instructor-assistant professor (Simon, Clark, & Galway, 1967, p. 226).17 The figures for percentages on tenure were much the same: 44 percent for single women, 46 percent for men, 26 percent for married women with children, and 22 percent for married women without children (ibid., p. 229). The view has been expressed that radical reform in sex roles and in responsibilities for household functions and child-rearing will be necessary to provide married women an equal opportunity with men to advance in their professional careers. As already noted, a significant increase in the sharing of such duties has occurred among some young couples in academic life in recent years.

regarded as a hindrance. The married women were presumably spending an average of around 20 hours a week on the care of children (the 10-hour figure was an average for all women) plus the 18-hour-a-week average for all women spent on household duties.

16 See Johnson and Stafford (forthcoming). This part of the paper is based on data from National Academy of Sciences (1968, pp. 21, 71, and 85). See also Malkiel and Malkiel (1973).

17 Completed questionnaires were received from about 60 percent of the women and men (a sample one-third the size of the women's list), leaving an academicemployed sample of 670 single women, 148 married women, 234 married women with children, and 354 men.

Antibias regulation of universities 42

Since World War II there has been a secular rise in the emphasis on research in faculty careers, especially in major universities. At the same time in many disciplines the rate of creation of new knowledge has been accelerating. Those developments require more preparation to keep abreast of changes and the allocation of more faculty time to research activity. It becomes increasingly difficult for a woman with heavy household responsibilities to make an outstanding record as a scholar or even to keep abreast of developments in her field.

Data on teaching faculty in universities show that women generally devote much less time to research activities and do less graduate teaching than men. To some extent the figures are biased against female faculty because of the high proportion of female Ph.D.'s in education and home economics, where research is likely to receive less stress. Even allowing for that fact, the male-female differences are significant.

A survey for 1972-73 reveals the following facts concerning teaching faculty in universities: the highest degree held is the Ph.D. or Ed.D. for 19 percent of the women and 48 percent of the men; while the M.A. is the highest degree for 60 percent of the women and 25 percent of the men; 18 42 percent of the women and 19 percent of the men spend no time in research and scholarly writing (or did not answer the question); at the other extreme, 9 percent of the women and 24 percent of the men spend 17 hours a week or more in such research activities. Ten percent of the women and 39 percent of the men had published 11 or more journal articles, and 11 percent of the women and 24 percent of the men had published three or more books, manuals, or monographs. Concerning published writings in the most recent two years, 14 percent of the women and 40 percent of the men had three or more publications during that period. Thirteen percent of the women and 25 percent of the men considered that their single most outstanding accomplishment was in research and writing. With respect to graduate students, 49 percent of the female faculty and 31 percent of the men currently were not teaching any graduate students. 19

18 Bayer (1973, p. 26). Of the remainder, 5 percent of the women and 9 percent of the men have professional law or medical degrees.

19 Ibid. (pp. 24, 28-29, and 32). The category of "none" for teaching of graduate students includes respondents not marking that part of the question but pro

43-979 75 pt. 2B 21

« PreviousContinue »