Search News


Browse Archives

News

Poli Sci and Gender

August 1, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Does political science have a gender problem?

A new report from the American Political Science Association suggests that it does. The report notes an "alarming stall" in the progress of women up through the faculty ranks, despite advances toward gender equity when it comes to awarding Ph.D.'s in the field. And the report -- a compilation of numerous studies on a range of topics -- notes that in Britain, women in political science seem similarly stalled. And in the United States, some social science fields have shown much more progress.

Psychology and sociology outpace political science in terms of gender equity, while economics is further behind.

A comparison of political science and sociology in doctoral granting institutions illustrates the concerns in the report:

Share of Faculty Ranks Held by Women, 2001

Rank Percentage in Political Science Percentage in Sociology
Lecturer/instructor 67% 61%
Assistant professor 37% 52%
Associate professor 26% 42%
Full professor 18% 26%

The report says that these data are particular disturbing because the proportion of new Ph.D. recipients in political science has reached 42 percent, while the percentage of women who are assistant professors has been stagnant for five years and the only growth has come in the lecturer/instructor rank -- off the tenure track.

Women appear to be less happy in political science than are men at all levels of the discipline. In graduate school, men tend to drop out because they aren't happy about their employment prospects, but women leave because of unfriendly or unsupportive environments, the report says. Among tenured faculty members, 88 percent of men and 80 percent of women were happy with their jobs.

A number of the problems cited in the report are similar to problems faced by women in many disciplines. For example, the political scientists note -- as a group from the American Historical Association recently did in regard to that discipline -- that family responsibilities tend to fall more on women than on men.

But the report also suggests that political science may have a "one size fits all" approach to research -- and that such an approach may discourage women. Political science has been relatively slow, compared to other fields, to embrace feminist research, the report says.

Beyond subject matter, the report also raises an issue of style. "A culture and style of research in the discipline that is traditionally based more on lone-wolf scholarly production of single-authored pieces than on collaborative research" may hinder the advancement of women, the report says, urging that scholars consider ways to expand collaboration.

Progress for women in publishing in key journals has been uneven, the study adds. In the American Journal of Political Science Review, for example, the report notes that the percentage of articles with at least one female author increased from 29 percent to 52 percent between 1993 and 1998 -- and in the five years that followed dropped right back down to 29 percent.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on Poli Sci and Gender

  • Posted by john on August 1, 2005 at 2:15pm EDT
  • Maybe women are simply happier in non Tenure Track jobs? It's time to realize that academia is not as family friendly as people make it out to be. Nor should it be. Top notch academics should expect to work at least as much as junior attorneys in leading firms. Like it or not, such places are not for women looking for a job where they can have flexible hours for childrearing

  • Posted by Atticus on August 1, 2005 at 3:32pm EDT
  • right, and be paid the $150,000 per year first-year attorneys make? and receive the intense supervision and professional development junior attorneys receive?

  • Posted by john on August 1, 2005 at 8:06pm EDT
  • Look, nobody said academia was a simple or well paying profession. I went into it knowing that I'd have to work long hours and be (comparatively) poorly compensated. What kills me is that we have women who believe they can go into the academy and not have to spend 80 hours a week on-campus, in the lab, or in front of the computer screen writing. Then women are shocked, shocked, that they are having a tough time both keeping up and raising kids.

    FYI, men with kids are joining the women who whine and cry about how tough it is. I have little sympathy for them too! Let's reduce the Ph.D. glut by admitting that academia is not and cannot be a hospitable place to anyone male or female who is unwilling to devote their lives to higher learning.

  • Posted by Larry on August 2, 2005 at 11:49am EDT
  • Of course, people complain that BIGLAW isn’t too hospitable to women who wish to work less hours and raise kids. In large law firms this “devotion” requirement can be explained in terms of billable hours and what the lawyer is doing for their firm in relatively non-sexist terms. (And even then, there are still some lawsuits.) That said, although I don’t think that many of you will listen to me, if a man or woman wants to live the “life of the mind” they should consider going to law school, clerking, and working at least a few years in a large firm where they will be financially rewarded, do interesting things, and “receive the intense supervision and professional development junior attorneys receive.” After that, they can have babies and play with Barney all they want.

    In academe, economic pressures are not as apparent, people assume that it is some hatred of women that woman not advance with the same speed and frequency as men.

    I also agree that the number of PhDs should be reduced to the point at which first-year academics are paid within 15% of what first year associates at large firms are getting paid, and this class of perpetual involuntary adjunctions is eliminated.

  • Posted by anonymous on August 2, 2005 at 5:41pm EDT
  • Clearly it doesn't seem like any of you are in political science. (or women :). So as a woman graduate student in a top 10 polisci department, this report just confirms what I and other women in the department already know. Women are often excluded from seemingly 'meaningless' social activities (the department's rec basketball team, which happens to be in a male only league). Meaningless you say? Well when young grad students get to interact with older faculty, knowlege is passed on, and potential relationships are created which will benefit them down the line. This is just one example This may be a 'small' event but many more add up to an environment that is not welcoming. So should it really be surprising that women are more likely to leave? When women have left my department (both faculty and grad students) its not to have babies. It has been because of this 'chilly climate'. Where have these women gone? Law school, medical school, other graduate departments (sociology, education,etc) and other polisci departments that have higher % of women faculty.

  • I can be a victim, too
  • Posted by Larry on August 3, 2005 at 7:54am EDT
  • Anonymous, Correct. I am not a woman. I am proud to be a man. I worked hard at it.

    I have, on the other hand, been a victim of gender discrimination by women who have excluded me from their “meaningless” social activities consisting of nail-painting and shopping. As a result, when I was an undergrad many lesser-qualified undergraduates got references. (The joke is on them, as most of them never have gotten tenure-track positions, anyway, and I actually get to deal with the issues that they write vague articles about.) Whether “knowledge” is passed on at your girls’ nights out or not is anyone’s guess.

  • Posted by Anonymous 2 on August 5, 2005 at 12:53pm EDT
  • Poor John! I feel for ya if you're really working at the lab 80 hours a week or sitting in front of the computer for 60.

    I'm a female tenured political science professor, working at a research university, and I DON'T sit in front of my computer for 60 hours a week. Plus, I had all three of my kids while on the tenure track, and have managed to pick them up at daycare/school at 3:30 pm most days. Academia CAN be family-friendly, if you are willing to make some sacrifices and if you have a supportive spouse (husband is also a tenured political science professor).

    Good luck, John, and to anonymous as well. John, don't kill yourself -- it's quality not quantity that matters in the long run!

  • Variation
  • Posted by Jim , Associate Professor on August 7, 2005 at 6:46pm EDT
  • John and Larry are just like the men in my department. The problem could not POSSIBLY be that our department is inhospitable for women faculty or graduate students! We are shocked, shocked, that you would consider such a thing!

    Well, last year the placement director in our department put together a nice little "fact sheet" on the various candidates we had on the job market. I looked it over and immediately noticed a funny thing. Ten students. Six men and four women. And each of the men had published or had under review a paper co-authored with a faculty member. Exactly none of the women did. Becuase the women grad students were not as smart or as hard-working as the men? Because they were not as well trained? You've got to be kidding! No it was because the (predominantly male) faculty favored the boys. And unsurprisingly none of my colleagues noticed the pattern I did. And when I e-mailed the faulty to point it out none thought it could concievably be a problem we might try to remedy.

    My (top ten) department has precisely one tenured female faculty member out of roughly 25 FTEs and to the best of my knowledge had (until the year before last) never made a tenured offer to a woman. Never. And this is the twenty first century!

    The thing John and Larry seem unable to grasp (are they poorly trained?) is the varation between disciplines that this study reveals. It IS possible for womken to advance and be relatively happy -ask the sociologists!

    By the way, I am male, tenured in a top political science department and couldn't ask for a better career, even if most of my colleagues could not see a gender-inhospitable pattern if it slapped them with a law suit. Love my career choice, don't much care for my department.

    PS: Law firms as a locus for the life of the mind? You've got a really weird sense of humor Larry!

  • Posted by Larry on August 8, 2005 at 11:49am EDT
  • Jim, Having had my fill of graduate departments on a personal level, I left to go to law school before I got my PhD. But, I don’t think that sexism is the cause of an apparent lack of performance on behalf of women, or, if it is, there are things that balance it out.

    Your argument that somehow the women work less hard is just wrong – “You’ve got to be kidding!” to be precise – doesn’t advance the conversation because there really is no way to know whether the women are working harder than the men. It might be that the women were less prepared by their undergraduate institutions, for example, to do graduate-level work with the faculty. It might be that the women were less assertive than the men. (If this is the case, I am not sure that the faculty should provide a remedy or not.) It might be that department attracts women who do not mesh with the faculty, and the faculty would just rather spend time with the particular men in your department.

    If women are advancing in your university in the sociology department at a faster rate, perhaps you could provide some insight as to why. (I am genuinely curious.) In my personal experience, our sociology department seemed to be dominated by women who actually discriminated against men! But this might be different at your school. As much as it pains me to say it, some universities seem to have departments that have been “captured” by cliques of men or women.

    Law firms are, indeed, a refuge for many scholars. Indeed, at my firm, most people have seriously contemplated (or attained) a PhD, and enjoy the intellectual challenges of legal work, while still publishing ! How is it that you get to accuse others of not knowing how your department works, and then you dismiss legal intellectual activity, claiming that it is my "sense of humor"?

    I would advise any women who feels that she is the subject of sexual discrimination in her department to get thee to law school. The only downside is three years of pain, humiliation, and stuff, but the rewards seem a lot greater than having to put up with sex discrimination for twice that amount of time.

  • Variation two
  • Posted by JIm on August 9, 2005 at 4:36am EDT
  • Larry,

    When I did graduate admissions several years ago the women I accepted were unifromly better qualified than the men. This was true on nearly any relevant dimension - undergrad gpa, GRE scores, quality of undergraduate institution, class rank, etc. I know all that because several of my colleagues insisted that the large percentage of offers to women reflected my "liberal" bias. So I "did the numbers" for them. I was tired of hearing that we had no female graduate students because we are a highly technical department and women cannot do math. One admitted the women passed through the same highly structured training program, doing lots of modelling and methods. Their grad school performance was not notably different from their male peers. I know because I sat through the end-of-yeat faculty meeting where we discuss each student in detail

    The reason I paid attention to the "fact sheet" on our palcement candidates was because many of them were from the class I admitted. So your suspicions on that score are just false in this case. Neither undgrad performance nor grad school training/perofrmance is a plausible explanation for what I noted in my department. And of course nothing you say addresses the complete failure to make tenured offers to women faculty.

    As for law firms and publishing - if the publications in are in law reviews we are talking a wholly different ballgame than in any academic discipline I know (social sciences and philosophy). The law reviews are edited by law students not peers; they allow for multiple submission with the attendant bargaining between journals over "hot" essays or authors; and I believe mostly the review process is not double-blind either. So on this score at least I agree here with Richard Posner's dim view of legal scholarship.

    My claim is not that lawyers are not smart. It is that the law is not an intellectual enterprise. It is advocacy which is valuable but not the same. (And I apologize for the wise-crack; sometimes I can't help myself!)

  • Posted by Larry on August 9, 2005 at 8:56am EDT
  • To begin, Professor/Judge Posner has his view on this subject and I have mine, and it has been debated ad nauseam, and in the end I agree with him somewhat and disagree with him somewhat, but now is not the place to debate which is more "intellectual." (And some in the legal profession contribute to this inferiority complex, which academics, like you, take as a sign of concession that it is somehow not an "intellectual enterprise" whatever that means. In the end, I think it is a close call.)

    But, assuming that legal publication is a free-for-all, it perhaps demonstrates what is wrong with "academic" publication. While academics constantly talk about the benefits of "peer-review" and "anonymous referees" everyone knows that this is not the case. Nothing is really anonymous, because everyone knows the importance of associating with someone who "matters." Indeed, in my experience, there will be a long way to go until journals are really "double-blind." (Perhaps if there was a zero-tolerance policy for authors or journals which failed to adhere to their own standards, things would be a bit better, but everyone likes getting a little break, it seems.) The result may be, as you seem to speculate, that those who are less able to "relate" to "stars" in a field are less able to publish.

    Anyway, a few things seem strange. How is it that a department is able to admit men that are uniformly WORSE than women, yet the women somehow “do” worse? Are men's credentials somehow deflated? (Personally, I don't put much stock in "quality" of undergraduate institution, and I rarely play the "name game" (except when it benefits me), undergraduate GPA is a generally a function of social skills and ability to take classes on will do well in, and class rank is virtually meaningless since many undergraduate schools do not rank, anyway.) So, I guess we are just left with GRE scores.

    Obviously I can't address failures to make tenured offers to women as I am not privy to each committee's discussions. Assuming what you say is true about a department's failure to "encourage" female students by co-authoring pieces with them, two conclusions might be drawn: 1) your department is a bunch of sexists; or 2) there is something seriously wrong with academic publication if the mark of "good scholarship" is co-authorship with someone that "matters."

  • Variation 3
  • Posted by Jim on August 10, 2005 at 4:21am EDT
  • Larry,

    We are pretty far off the track here. I actually have edited journals and think your notion that "nothing is ever anonymous" is simply false. Pretty much evey time a referee claims that she "knows" who wrote a paper I've asked her to read she is wrong. Sometimes a potential referee admits to having read it in draft or for a conference or whatever and recuses themselves. I have rejected many paper from pooh-bahs in the dicispline and published many by relatively unknown junior faculty. SO it is not anything like the "its who you know" pattern you suggest. Sorry. But the bottom line is that at least academic journals aim at the ideal of anonymity and law reivews simply give up at any pretense.

    As for the class I admitted. It actually was quite easy to find more qualified women. You were the one who raised the possibility that the female grad students had been less well prepared as undergrads. I simply suggested some commonly used measures of that. And in the class I admitted the women simply dominated the men on the dimensions I mentioned. (By the way GRE scores typically predicet little more than first year performance.) So given that the women generally do as well in classes and on comprehensive exams as the men, the explanation for why the women on the list of placement candidates had no publications with faculty is just "odd" isn't it? I thought that is where we started - with you suggesting that it simply couldn't be systematic bias.

    It been nice talking to you! Thanks.

  • Posted by Anonymous 3 on September 7, 2005 at 10:29am EDT
  • I admit to having only skimmed these responses. As a tenured faculty member in another field (and parent to a pre-schooler), I don't have time to debate this at length. But I DO have to wonder whether Larry is spending his 60 hours per week at the computer as productively as he claims...

  • Poli Sci and gender
  • Posted by Pam on September 17, 2005 at 5:30pm EDT
  • I am an attorney who majored in poltical science as an undergraduate at a top women's college. I just came across this website when one of my employment law colleagues posted a link to an article. I was curious about this "poli sci and gender" discussion and, after reading the comments, am extremely disheartened but happy that I elected NOT to go to graduate school in political science. For those women students in the department who did not publish with male faculty, they might consider making a complaint to the Department of Education and to the Office of Federal Contract Compliance at the Dept. of Labor. Federally funded programs are required to be non-discriminatory or funding can be withdrawn. That includes any program of the university that receives any kind of federal funding.
    Happily at my college, women students get serious attention and the faculty is 50% male and 50% female. Anyone who thinks women's colleges are not needed and a relic of the 19th century ought to read the comments on this website.
    Incidentally, for the readership who do not interact with lawyers often, the law is an extremely intellectual profession. It requires one to employ analytic skills that require the ability to not only learn the law but also the minutiae of any other business or profession in which a client may be engaged. As an attorney I have learned more science and math than I ever did in any poltical science class.