News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Sept. 26, 2006
No one expects earning tenure to be easy. But while revising a course, or trying to finish up that book or grant application, should a junior professor at least know what it will take to grab academe’s brass ring?
A new study of four-year colleges and universities — one of the most ambitious ever of the attitudes of young professors — finds that there is a notable gap between female and male academics in their confidence that tenure rules are clear, with men feeling more confident. The study also looked at many other issues — and found numerous instances (some consistent with previous studies) suggesting that female faculty members are less satisfied than their male counterparts with certain college policies and the climate of their workplaces.
In a number of cases where there is a gender gap on attitudes, there is not a notable race gap.
Attitudes on various issues such as collegiality may also be more important than previously thought, according to the study. While participants were not asked to rank the relative importance of various factors in determining their overall job satisfaction, researchers did regression analyses looking at overall satisfaction and answers on various questions. Those analyses suggested that young professors care more about climate, the nature of their work, and tenure systems than they do about compensation.
The data released Monday come from the Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education, or COACHE, which is run by the Harvard University Graduate School of Education. For its study, the project surveyed 4,500 faculty members at 51 colleges and universities in the United States. Only national averages were released to the public Monday, but participating colleges are also receiving institutional averages, and the averages for selected peer institutions (without learning which average correlates to which peer institution). The idea is that colleges can then evaluate their results and identify areas for improvement.
The results on tenure clarity surprised several experts, and the researchers who did the study said that they didn’t know exactly what the gap meant. “I think we’re seeing things that in some cases we’ve seen before, and we’re finding that problems haven’t been fixed,” said Cathy Trower, director of the study. “The notion that women are less clear on tenure raises all kinds of questions. What does this mean? Are they not getting information? Are they more insecure about their knowledge? We just don’t know.”
On clarity, participants were asked to evaluate policies on a scale of 1 to 5 (very unclear to very clear).
Clarity of Tenure Policies
|
Clarity of |
Female |
Male |
|
Process |
3.58 |
3.67 |
|
Criteria |
3.51 |
3.55 |
|
Standards |
3.16 |
3.23 |
|
Body of evidence |
3.41 |
3.50 |
All of those differences meet the test for statistical significance. But when comparisons were done for white and minority faculty members, only one category had a statistically significant difference: Minority faculty members felt standards were more clear than did white faculty members.
When the study got more detailed, it appears that the gap in clarity is focused entirely on one issue: research. When asked if the process and policies were clear with regard to other factors (teaching, advising, being a colleague), there were not statistical differences. But on research, the men were more confident that they understood what was expected of them. And in answers to other questions, men were more likely than women to consider tenure expectations to be reasonable.
Beyond issues of gender, there is also the question of why such an important test for young faculty members as earning tenure isn’t entirely clear. A score of 4 would mean “fairly clear” and averages were below that.
Georgia Nugent, president of Kenyon College, said that the data reinforce her view that there is wide variation on how specific different colleges get in helping junior professors navigate the tenure process. Nugent’s career until she moved to Kenyon was largely at Brown and Princeton Universities. “I was incredibly struck when I came here by the difference between what I was familiar with at Princeton and Brown and the clarity of written standards here. My feeling was that at Princeton and Brown, both of which had tenure processes I went through myself, it was ‘Do as much as you possibly can and I’ll let you know,’ ” she said.
At Kenyon, she said, departments have some leeway in setting priorities for tenure — how teaching should be weighted vs. research and so forth, but they are very specific on what those weights are. Some departments, she said, care about whether research involves students, and they say so. Others are more concerned about how research is presented and received in national disciplinary groups, and they say so.
Mary McKinney, a clinical psychologist who coaches professors on their careers, said that she was surprised by the gender gap on clarity issues because “I talk to men who feel like they are floundering around over these issues, too.”
McKinney said that the gap (and mid-level rankings over all) should worry people who care about young professors’ well-being. “So many rules aren’t explicitly stated, such as that one lukewarm recommendation can kill your chances,” she said. Assistant professors need to know these rules, to make sure everything is as favorable as possible to their chances.
As to the gender difference, she said that some trends she sees may be more pronounced among women than men. “I often find that some junior professors are hesitant to ask people directly for information: What do I have to do to get tenure? May I see your tenure packet? There is a sense from some that one should already know this and it would be an embarrassing to ask,” she said.
McKinney also noted that in departments where there are relatively few women, many report difficulty in finding good mentors. “If men get the mentors, it’s those mentors who would tell them, ‘The guidelines are vague, but here’s what you really have to do. Here’s how many articles you need to publish. Here’s the grants you’re going to need to have.’ “
One person who was not surprised at all by the gender gap was Jeffrey M. Duban, a New York lawyer whose specialty is suing colleges for discrimination in tenure and other employment disputes. “This is new confirmation of the bias against women in academe,” he said.
Duban said that a very large share of his cases deal in part with lack of clarity over expectations. The most common way this comes up, he said, is when a woman receives great annual reviews, and a great three-year review, and then comes up for tenure and — all of the sudden — the reviews get critical. In the absence of clear guidelines, people will rely on their interim reviews, he said, and sudden changes suggest a problem in defining the rules.
On Monday, while being interviewed for this article, Duban said he was negotiating a settlement on behalf of a female faculty member in just such a situation. The lack of clarity about tenure, he acknowledged, does get him more customers.
Others cautioned that some uncertainty — and perhaps more uncertainty that many would like — is inevitable in the tenure process. “It’s never so simple as a checklist that you can look at and say ‘Yes, I did it’ or ‘No I didn’t.’ It’s an interpretive one, by peers. So your peers are looking at your performance in multiple categories,” said Susan Carlson, interim provost of Iowa State University.
Carlson said she worried that the data suggest that colleges aren’t doing well enough at communicating with junior faculty members. But she stressed, “We’d all like to say it’s X number of publications and X number of scores on teaching evaluations, and that doesn’t do it.”
Satisfaction With Policies and Culture
The survey also asked faculty members for their views on a number of institutional policies and the climate. Consistent with other surveys, women reported lower satisfaction levels than did men on such matters as balancing family and professional responsibilities.
On satisfaction with policies, there was only one category — the availability of formal mentoring programs — on which there was a statistically significant difference in the ratings of white and minority professors. White professors were less likely to see the policies as effective.
When policies were compared by gender, female professors were less satisfied than men with the availability of child care, upper limits set on committee work, and upper limits on teaching loads. Men were less satisfied than women with “stop the clock” tenure provisions.
Nugent of Kenyon said that data like this can reinforce college efforts. For example, she said that the one area where Kenyon scored poorly was on child care. But she said that — after years of discussion — the college has started setting up a child care facility for employees.
On overall culture, men reported being more satisfied than did women, while there was no statistical difference between white and minority faculty members. On “global satisfaction” with their jobs (based on combining responses to questions), the study found that men were slightly more satisfied than women, and that white faculty members were more satisfied than minority faculty members. But she added that black and white scores were quite close and that scores of Asian faculty members — who were less happy — brought down the overall minority satisfaction level.
Taken as a whole, faculty members indicated that they are pleased with their jobs, with 78 percent saying that they would accept their current position again. Nearly half rate their work place as “good,” while only 8 percent say their institution is a “bad” or “awful” place to work.
Trower, the project director, said she hoped that colleges would pay attention to the finding that satisfaction was determined more by non-salary items than by salary.
“One of the results is that you can increase faculty members’ compensation and you may not make them more satisfied,” Trower said. “If you can fix where junior faculty members spend their time and work — in their departments — you are a lot farther down this path of keeping your talent.”
That’s an encouraging message to colleges that may not be able to compete with the wealthiest with regard to salaries, but can do other things for employees. Nugent said that her board has set a goal of having faculty salaries in the top quintile nationally, and that the college is able to do that, but sometimes must struggle to do so.
Other things are easier to do. She said that the college made the time between Christmas and New Year’s Day a paid holiday for employees, started the child care facility, and has added funds for faculty research and international travel, among other things. It’s not surprising, she said, that professors would find such policies important, given that faculty members have already made an against-the-grain choice to pursue careers in which advanced education isn’t rewarded with society’s highest salaries.
“If faculty were people who really cared primarily about money,” she said, “they wouldn’t be in this business.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
It just occurred to me that this study may measure *perceived* clarity about tenure requirements. The results indicate that men *feel* more confident that women about what they need to do to get tenure. Are we certain that this translates into greater knowledge about the actual requirements?Perhaps we should ask both male and female junior faculty members to write down what they think they need to do to get tenure and then have senior colleagues to rate the responses for accuracy. Is it possible that we are measuring greater male confidence?
I always recommend that my coaching clients ask many senior faculty about exactly what is needed to get tenure. The requirements are generally implicit rather than explicit and getting a wide sample of views can be critical. It is also essential to get the actual tenure packets of previous successful candidates. Gathering this information needs to be done early in the t-t process.
Mary McKinney, Ph.D., Clinical Psychologist & Academic Coach at http://www.SuccessfulAcademic.com, at 8:35 am EDT on September 26, 2006
How did Jeffrey M. Duban, conclude that, “This is new confirmation of the bias against women in academe"? That is one possible interpretation of the data, but clearly not the only interpretation. Perhaps standards for women are less clear because college standards are actually being relaxed for women in order to promote gender diversity in certain fields. It would be difficult for women to know what is actually expected for tenure if female colleagues have been promoted without meeting well-published requirements. I do not know that this is the case, but the point is that this is also a possible interpretation of the data... and seems, to me, much more believable than some mass conspiracy to keep information from women. Clearly, colleges have gone to great lengths to recruit women. Why would they not want to see them succeed? I think the most logical explanation is that men are more confident (perhaps overconfident?) about their work.
kelly232, at 8:45 am EDT on September 26, 2006
What evidence does Kelly have that women are experiencing ‘relaxed’ standards? Has she examined any statistics/research on this issue? The fact that the total number of women PhDs has risen considerably, while women remain underrepresented in the upper ranks of academia, certainly does not suggest that female academics are experiencing ‘relaxed’ standards. Quite the contrary. And the multitude of law suits women academics have won, as well as various statistical studies, certainly do not suggest that women are being favored. If anything a number of these studies find that while research productivity can explain most wage and promotion patterns, a bias against women remains.Anyway, this article says less about actual standards than it does about the kind of mentoring junior academics receive. I have observed that the diffference between succeeding and failing in academia is often linked to good mentoring. While I have been fortunate to have had some wonderful male mentors, many male faculty, either deliberately or without meaning to, reinforce biases, by provide better mentoring to male graduate students and other male faculty than to females in their department. As long as certain disciplines are dominated by men who favor other men, the gender gap will be self-perpetuating.
JCO, Assoc. prof., at 10:00 am EDT on September 26, 2006
Females less confident about how to get the tenure? Well, if in every previous step they gained tremendous successes with the help of special policies in high school, in admission to college and in faculty hiring, why should anyone abandon our female in her drive for tenure? Her confusion about what to do for tenure is the sad result of the lack of help at this very important stage. Where are the much needed recommendations following from this study? Is it not clear that abandoning a female at any stage whatsoever will result in tremendous inequality and turning the clock back?
Michael Pyshnov, at 10:25 am EDT on September 26, 2006
Honestly, couldn’t they just have asked? We’re talking about people who have had do endure defenses of their dissertations and present and defend papers at seminars and symposia. This seems implausible.
SCL, at 11:00 am EDT on September 26, 2006
I am currently trying to mentor a junior colleague who, by behavior and attitude, conveys absolute confidence that he will get tenure. He is seriously over confident, and nothing I can say seems to dent that confidence. He thinks he knows what is going on and he is wrong.
NoName, at 11:00 am EDT on September 26, 2006
“O, Fraud! How many benefited from it and can now make a decent living!” Alice O. in Wonderland
Michael Pyshnov, at 11:30 am EDT on September 26, 2006
NoName hit the nail on the head. This interpretation fits with a wealth of self esteem data showing, young boys, adolescent males, young men and mature men all have inflated confidence in their abilities and their worth. It makes sense that these same differences in would appear in this data.
FauxName, at 12:20 pm EDT on September 26, 2006
Looking at the data from the survey presented in this article it doesn’t look like there is much difference between the responses of men and women.
The notion of statistical significance is simply that there have been enough samples to say that there is say a 95% chance that the average score of males on a question is higher than the average score of females. But if the difference is 3.55 versus 3.51 on a scale of 1 to 5 as it is on the question of clarity, it means the two groups are pretty much in agreement. If the scores were 3.55 to 3.54 and you took enough samples you could say it is statistically significant but it wouldn’t mean there was a dimes worth of difference between the two views.
That there is a “clarity gap” I’m sure would come as no surprise to marriage counsellors or divorce lawyers. Women tend to like clearly defined rules because it creates more certainty in their lives and men tend to not like them because they see it as limiting their freedom. Obviously this is a ridiculous generalization but my experience tells me there is some truth to it. In a way what is most surprising about the survey is how little difference there is between the views of male and female faculty.
The reality is that the tenure process is always going to be uncertain and will always be subject to individual issues and personalities. While the stakes for the applicant are very great, the stakes for the department are also high. Granting tenure to someone means you will be listening to that person at department meetings for the next thirty years. While you can formalize the procedure, you can’t escape the fact that it still comes down to a matter of individual judgment and thus to some level of subjectivity. And that is not necessarily bad.
It is important for tenure applicants to understand their institutions. Finding support among senior faculty can be crucial in the process. Also getting some idea of how much research is expected and what level of student approval is required are important guidelines for untenured faculty. The process of figuring these things out is part of the learning process of becoming a professor. Faculty handbooks can offer guidelines of a sort as can individual departments.
But I think it would be a mistake for universities to go too far in formalizing the process. We will know we have gone too far when the first step in the tenure process is hiring a lawyer.
Jonathan Cohen, Mathematics Professor at DePaul University, at 12:55 pm EDT on September 26, 2006
McKinney and NoName are right that’s what being picked up in the survey could be several things. (We should also remember that while the differences are statistically significant they’re not huge in absolute terms.) But to start with SCL’s question, you can’t “just ask” because what you will get back at a lot of places is precisely what Gloria Nugent reported: “Do as much as you possibly can and I’ll let you know.” Or you’ll get responses saying you must be excellent or outstanding. Tenure is never a matter of mechanically ticking off boxes and then you’re done. Ultimately it’s the institution making up its mind whether it wants to keep you or not, and one interpretation is that at some places men feel better socially plugged-in and able to interpret the subtler signals of senior colleagues. This also shows that you don’t need the “mass conspiracy to keep information from women” that kelly232 foolishly imagines a structural argument implies. All you need is a little deliberate opacity in the process. This interpretation would seem to be confirmed by the breakdowns by type of institution.
q, at 1:35 pm EDT on September 26, 2006
My PhD is nearly complete; I returned to school after a ten years in engineering research. I am considering teaching or returning to industry. Clearly, this article is of significance to me.
Unwritten rules are a problem. Tenure has been around long enough that example packets and guidelines stated as clearly as possible (even though some criteria are subjective) should be publicly available.
Being open should mitigate abuses of the process — it shouldn’t be ‘a secret’. A university, above all other institutions, should be a model for showing consideration of objective and subjective criteria.
Most professors that have interest and demonstrated ability in ideas, research, and teaching are less likely to display bias against minorities and women. These are the professors that tenure, ideally, should select.
However, a few understand ‘the system’ and obtain tenure; assuming this gives them permission to behave in non-productive ways since they ‘can’t be fired’. I have observed their careers faltering.
I struggle with the tenure concept. If tenure was designed to protect intellectuals with ‘radical ideas’ like ‘the earth isn’t universal center’, that’s good — but the Middle Ages are long past.
Is tenure outmoded? Few professions or activities in contemporary society are ‘guaranteed for life’. Analogously, should the driver’s license granted to an 18 year old serve that driver until they are 98?
We should take our cue from medicine, not the DMV. The criteria are well known, preparation is made, individuals are tested. Afterwards, recertification is made based upon stated criteria.
Professorships are an esteemed position. To enrich the entire educational community (professors and students) professors should be recertified. An outmoded tenure system is subject to abuses and belongs in the middle ages.
A Graduate Student, at 1:35 pm EDT on September 26, 2006
I am baffled. From reading the comments I might imagine that getting tenure is as difficult as a camel passing through the eye of a needle. My 40+ years of experience suggests that most candidates for tenure get it. Why not? In the disciplines with which I am familiar search committees have been able for many years to hire very good people, defining very good in the context of the particular institution. In most instances the crucial decision, as I see it, has been hiring and not subsequent tenuring.
semi-retired prof, at 7:05 pm EDT on September 26, 2006
Many thought provoking comments -
Here is an opportunity for insidehighered.com to take a leadership position and provide a valuable resource to the academic community. I propose that tenured faculty email them a summary of their tenure packets, which insidehighered.com can publish in an article. The person can remain anonymous, but the academic field and university should be shared (alternatively, the universities could be grouped into categories such as “northeast private, enrollment of over 20,000″ etc.
Publish the tenure packet summaries — this would bring more fairness and equity to the process.
Sue Denim, at 9:05 am EDT on September 27, 2006
JCO — Please respond to what people actually write. I specifically state that I do not know that women are getting any sort of special treatment and that I suspect the confidence explanation is more likely the issue. The point was that when there are multiple POSSIBLE interpretations of the data (as there are in this case), one can not simply assume that the interpretation that most supports one’s own victimology is the correct one. Also, of course the large number of new women Ph.D.s has not translated into more women in top positions — yet. There is a lag effect. Assistant professors don’t become Deans. While this might be evidence of past discrimination, it does not support your assumption that this still exists. I have sat on multiple search committees and have heard many discussions about how to recruit, attract, and retain more women. I find it a bit telling how quick we all are to accept the “men are arrogant” explanation without data to support it. Apparently, we apply different standards of evidence to arguments that reflect negatively on men. My point was only that the data could be interpreted in multiple ways and I presented a fairly radical example to make the point. Apparently, the mere suggestion of an advantage for women is something that people find offensive.
kelly232, at 9:35 am EDT on September 30, 2006
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Hofstra University seeks a Dean of University Advisement to provide leadership, vision and oversight of the Center for ... see job
Nursing Clinical Instructors Part-time, Day (D) & Evening/Weekend (E/W) Howard Community College is seeking nursing clinical ... see job
Angelo State University is an equal opportunity employer and seeks to build a diverse workforce community. see job
UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School is seeking to fill one or more tenure track, tenured, or fixed term faculty positions in ... see job
Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job
The Department of Management invites applications for a full-time position in the area of Strategic Management and/ or ... see job
Undergraduate Program Manager, Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies — University of Notre Dame. see job
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE. The Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science invites applications for a tenured ... see job
Angelo State University is an equal opportunity employer and seeks to build a diverse workforce community. see job
I would imagine the ‘lack of clarity’ experienced by many assistant professors over tenure expectations is because of the high levels of politicization of the tenure decision that can occur (as reported in articles on this site, recently). Thus, the advice to ‘work as hard as you can and then we will let you know’ permits candidates to be shafted by the system i.e. by colleagues, Deans or managers. Get rid of this system, that is not working, and follow the rest of the world by adopting permanent contracts.
SP, at 6:45 am EDT on September 26, 2006