Posts tagged as:

women

Photo by Josh Reynolds for APHow’s this for an attention-grabbing headline? “Family is the number one reason for women leaving academia.” You can get the full report here, but it turns out that even though women now obtain more than 50% of all PhDs in the life sciences in the U.S. (!), they leave before getting tenure. Take this jaw-dropping snippet:

Our findings indicate that women in the sciences who are married with children are 35 percent less likely to enter a tenure track position after receiving a Ph.D. than married men with children. And they are 27 percent less likely than their male counterparts to achieve tenure upon entering a tenure-track job. By contrast, single women without young children are roughly as successful as married men with children in attaining a tenure-track job, and a little more successful than married women with children in achieving tenure. Married women without children also do not fare quite as well as men.

Though I can’t say this is too surprising:

In unparalleled surveys of doctoral students and postdoctoral scholars at the University of California, we found that both men and women report a shifting away from the career goal of research professor, with women’s move being more pronounced. Among doctoral students, career-life issues populate four of the top-five most commonly cited reasons why students changed their minds, with women more likely than men to cite these issues as very important, and more than twice as likely as men to cite issues related to children.

Then there is some really maddening stuff about the lack of mat leave provisions, which makes this Canadian go a little crazy (full-time workers in Canada are entitled up to 52 weeks of maternity leave for bio moms–with a bit of an income paid by our employment insurance system–and up to 9 months of mat leave for adoptive parents, to be split up in whatever way you like between the two parents).

But this really made me flip:

The time pressures of academia are unrelenting for most faculty in the sciences, who work on average about 50 hours a week up through age 62. When combined with caregiving hours and house work, UC women faculty with children, ages 30 to 50, report a weekly average of over 100 hours of combined activities (—compared to 86 hours for men with children). And women faculty with children provide an average of more than 30 hours a week of caregiving up through age 50, while family responsive policies rarely address this long-term career-life issue. Evidence indicates that the collision course between career timing and family timing may be worsening—the average age for tenure receipt among tenure-track faculty in the sciences was 36 in 1985, and extended out past age 39 by 2003.

Wow. That sheds some serious light, doesn’t it?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

{ 2 comments }

Here’s just a quick hit: a link to a PhD who left academia when she rediscovered her love of art. Sounds like all that time you spent watching Forbidden Love during your women’s studies BA could actually pay off!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

{ 0 comments }

women - men by roensWell, this just goes to show that we really are connected. Yesterday, commenter RFYL noted that most of the people I’ve interviewed for my podcast are women, and a fifth of the fans of the Facebook page are women. I can also tell you that most of my clients are women and most of the people who send me “Yay!” or “Can you blog about this?” type of emails are from women.

As it happens, I was actually just discussing this fact with a friend of mine the night before RFYL left his/her comment. I’ve been aware, ever since I started this project, that I am in contact with far more women who are thinking of and who have left academia. I’ve been wanting to post about this for a long time, but the reason why I haven’t is because I don’t have any strong theories to explain this phenomenon. For someone who spent most of her time in university studying theories of gender, this is a real stumper.

On the most systemic level, you could look at the ways in which academia is hostile for women. There are overt instances of sexual harassment and sexual assault, of course. But as the book title suggests, women academics can and do feel the weight of a ton of feathers, teeny individual moments of exclusion, oppression, rejection, objectification, hostility and so on. Moreover, in Canada, more women are enrolled in undergrad programs than men, but by the time you look at enrollments for Ph.D. programs, there are fewer women than men overall (though of course, this varies wildly by degree program in much the ways you’d expect).

There are also particular pressures on women of colour in the academy (though I’ve read more data about women of colour and their completion rates in the U.S. than in Canada). There are particular pressures on feminists in the academy. And although I never experienced being a mom while in grad school, but I think we’ve all heard the dire news about the rates at which moms get tenure. Fact is, they generally don’t.

You might wonder how much my own biases skew my choice of podcast interviewees (since I run another website addressing women’s issues and can easily say that some of my best friends are women). I can’t tell you how much my sub- or unconscious plays a role here, but I can tell you there is no deliberate intention on my part to only speak with women. My interview subjects are gleaned from a variety of sources. Sometimes I just happen to stumble upon information about someone that I find intriguing (like Rebecca Steinitz). Sometimes it’s a friend of a friend (like Krista Scott-Dixon). Sometimes it’s a former colleague (like Michelle Lowry, who left her Ph.D. program to do a Master’s of Social Work instead). Sometimes it’s someone that someone has alerted me to (like Sharon Blady).

I have interviewed men–most recently, I interviewed a former colleague, Fred Ho, who is a union organizer here in Toronto. My interview before that was with Kenny Mostern, who penned the On Being Postacademic article I’ve got posted here. A while back, I interviewed Michael Anderson, another entrepreneur who helps entrepreneurs. I’ve also done off-the-record interviews with men who didn’t want their accounts to be public (one because he didn’t think much of his accomplishments; the other because he was still dealing with a lot of negative feelings from the whole Ph.D. experience).

Still, that’s comparatively few. Yet I don’t purposely seek out women–but it seems that women readers (commenters, clients, Facebook folks) do seek me out.

On a micro-level, there could be something about me being a woman that draws women to my work. Conversely, there could be something about me being a women that makes men uninterested (which is not to render you male readers invisible! I know you’re out there, ye who lurk and email me confidentially!).

And then there could be something in between, something about gender formation more generally that informs how men and women make decisions about their education and their careers. I mean, we do know that women systematically make choices about their careers that often leave them in pink-collar ghettos, or reliant on their (often male) spouse’s income.

There is also data to indicate that women are voracious users of online communities, though I think that data skews towards moms. But perhaps women more generally turn to the internet for community and for help than men do. Perhaps men who are making the decision to leave academia would be more likely to turn to their traditional (i.e. real-world) networks. I have no idea.

I honestly have no good theories (and for a former theorist, it kinda hurts to say that!) and very little evidence to explain why this is the case. But you KNOW that I would love to hear your ideas about why my work draws more women (which proves absolutely nothing about how frequently men and women leave academe).

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

{ 6 comments }

Working Like a Dog by KM PhotographyLast Wednesday, there was a piece in the Chronicle with some pretty shocking (and yet not surprising) numbers about how much contingent labour is used in the American university system. Now, I am too cheap to buy a web subscription to the Chronicle, so I chose not to pay to read the full article. But here’s part of the free bit:

At community colleges, four out of five instructors worked outside the tenure track in 2007. At public research institutions, graduate students made up 41 percent of the instructional staff that year. And at all institutions, the proportion of instructors working part time continued to grow.

The report, “The State of the Higher Education Workforce, 1997-2007,” shows that the proportion of instructional staff members not on the tenure track — including graduate students — increased from two-thirds to 73 percent over that period.

These numbers are pretty astonishing and are a confirmation of what a lot of people have been observing anecdotally for a while. I haven’t searched out equivalent numbers of Canada, but I would be surprised if they were much different.

But there was another really interesting aspect to this, too, that I found out when I checked out the report itself, conducted by the American Federation of Teachers. There is a rise in contingent labour in the university sector, and guess what correlates with that? A rise in the number of women in that pool of contingent labour!

Historically, men have represented the majority of higher education’s instructional workforce.  However, the number of women in the instructional workforce grew at a faster rate than men between 1997 and 2007; the number of women grew 48 percent compared with 21 percent for men (Table 3).  By 2007, women accounted for nearly one-half—46 percent—of faculty and instructor positions.  However, the growth was disproportionately in the area of contingent faculty positions, as both men and women saw an erosion of full-time tenured and tenure-track positions.

Like Marx’s reserve army of labour, women have been taking on a greater share of the exploited labour in academe. How surprising (note sarcasm).

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • TwitThis
  • Yahoo! Buzz

{ 2 comments }