Search News


Browse Archives

News

Women Turning Down Harvard's Offers

October 23, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

While the proportion of women receiving tenure-track offers to join Harvard University’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences rose for the third straight year in 2005-6, the share of women who accepted positions declined dramatically, according to an internal report.

In what the report's author calls a "troubling reversal," slightly more than 20 percent of those who accepted tenure-track offers in Harvard's main undergraduate college last year were women, down from 40 percent in 2004-5. Thirty-nine percent of tenure-track offers were to women last year.

Women have tended to accept Harvard’s offers at a higher rate than men over the past few years, according to the report, but not so last year.

“It's surprising that at the tenure-track level, we had a hard time recruiting women last year," said Lisa L. Martin, the report's author and a professor of international affairs.

A year ago, Martin was named senior adviser to the arts and sciences dean on diversity issues. The findings on women's offers and acceptances come from her first annual report, delivered to the college's faculty last week.

The report does not specify exactly how many women accepted Harvard's offers last year but sheds light on a university that has publicly dealt with the issue of female faculty. Early last year, then-president Lawrence H. Summers suggested in a speech that one reason there are relatively few women in top positions in science may be “issues of intrinsic aptitude." The comments created considerable controversy that many say contributed to Summers's downfall.

Martin said it is hard to say what kind of effect the Summers controversy had on the recruitment of women at Harvard.  

The report shows that Harvard continues to have trouble recruiting female faculty members in the humanities. Roughly 35 percent of humanities tenure-track faculty are women, even though the proportion of Ph.D. earners in those fields who are women is well over 50 percent.

Since female faculty recruitment at Harvard generally improved in the 1990s, Martin said complacency has probably been a factor. "A lot of people thought there wasn't a problem anymore," she said. “What this report drives home is that the hiring of women is an issue that requires constant attention."

Regular factors such as cost of living and family obligations might have deterred some women from accepting tenure-track offers last year, Martin said. The report shows that a growing number of faculty members live outside of Cambridge, and that women said having to leave early from faculty meetings to commute home was an issue. Martin said it is unlikely that faculty members decided to accept jobs at other Ivy League universities en masse, because the competitors see similar numbers.

She added that the data are from early summer, meaning that some female faculty members were still making up their minds. "It's just one year, and it's too early to call it a trend, but this is something I want to flag," Martin said.

Added Jane Mansbridge, a professor at the Kennedy School of Government: "It's too early to tell if the failure of more women than usual to agree to come to Harvard last year was the result of specific historical circumstances, continuing problems (e.g., finding jobs for spouses), or a statistical random blip in the data. If the trend continues, we will have fairly good evidence that the cause is some combination of continuing structural problems. But at the same time the faculty and deans of the schools will be taking steps to try to resolve those continuing problems. So we may never have a precise analysis of the cause."

Harvard has already announced efforts designed to turn around the female acceptance numbers. Among them is a new policy that allows mothers in the arts and sciences college an eight-week maternity leave coincident with giving birth -- which exceeds the guidelines for maternity-parental leave announced by the senior vice provost this year. Academic departments are also taking part in a mentorship program that pairs tenured female faculty with women in tenure-track positions.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Women Turning Down Harvard's Offers

  • Posted by N.T on October 23, 2006 at 8:50am EDT
  • Perhaps women are just smarter than men. Harvard is a very prestigeous university, but in the social sciences and humanities it is known for nothing more than treating untenured faculty like dirt. Last year I talked my niece out of going to Harvard telling here that it has become nothing more than an academic fortress in which the power elite meet to share intellectual treats. She's far happier at the university she selected, and I dare say she's learning more than I ever did at Harvard.

  • Tenure track not real a track
  • Posted by Nancy on October 23, 2006 at 10:45am EDT
  • I don't know whether things have changed there, but Harvard has been notorious for not tenuring any "tenure track" assistant professors. They are expected to work hard then leave. Only already tenured individuals with a national name have been hired with tenure at Harvard. If women have decided that working temporarily at Harvard is a waste of time in the face of real job opportunities elsewhere, perhaps Harvard's chickens are coming home to roost.

  • Posted by DH on October 23, 2006 at 11:05am EDT
  • Harvard and a few comparable schools have long been notorious for turning down almost everyone who comes up for tenure--the running joke is that a tenure-track assistant professorship at Harvard is the world's most prestigious postdoc. Maybe more women prefer to go elsewhere where they have a decent chance at getting tenure and building a stable life.

  • Genetic Ideology not Reason and Science at Harvard
  • Posted by AB on October 23, 2006 at 11:05am EDT
  • Harvard has become the bastion of some white males in several fields who champion genetic ideology to explain all things related to social inequality. Their views are not based upon reason and science but upon their beliefs about the inferiority of women and non-whites.

    These biased individuals are prominently placed within both faculty ranks as well as the administration, making the Harvard environment one in which it is a struggle for any woman faculty member to be respected as a person, let alone a professional academic. It is no wonder that women are not inclined to accept tenured positions there but look elsewhere.

  • What's happening, Harvard?
  • Posted by Rob on October 23, 2006 at 11:05am EDT
  • Just what is going on at America's reputedly premiere university? Before hearing of the former president absurd suggestion that women are somehow congenitally incapable of scientific thought, I learned of the controversy surrounding Summers' confrontation with Dr. Cornel West, a learned gentleman whom I've known for some time. (West relates his side of the conflict in his book DEMOCRACY MATTERS).
    But in addition to (or interconnected with) problems of gender or race, it may be that there is a fundamental flaw in Harvard's (and not only Harvard's) self-understanding as a university.
    Perhaps, West stated it as well as anyone:
    "For Summers, the role of the professor is to engage in an elite and comfortable that is pleasing to a market-driven university management and imperial America. His vision puts a premium on accumulating academic trophies and generating in the form of government contracts, foundation grants, and business partnerships that seucre the prestige of the university."

    Perhaps sensitivity to women faculty is secondary to that prestige and the Almighty bottom line.

    What's also sad is that this myopia is not peculiar to Summers or to Harvard--just more pronounced there.

  • Motherhood and academia
  • Posted by SB on October 23, 2006 at 12:00pm EDT
  • Harvard is congratulating itself on allowing new mothers an eight-week leave of absence? And this policy *exceeds* the vice provost's recommendations? If this is evidence of the new, family-friendly Harvard, no wonder women are turning down offers.

  • Posted by Melocoton on October 23, 2006 at 12:16pm EDT
  • The comments above have done a good job at filling in the enormous blanks of this uniformative article, but beyond the issue of Ivy League tenure in general is the particular issue of how disproportionately rarely women get tenure at those schools. Future IHE articles might do a little bit of research and deal with this central issue, instead of finding every Harvard administrator and dean who can repeat some version of the "Gee whiz, I'm stumped by these stats" quote we get here.

  • Losing the smart women
  • Posted by Anonymous , Assistant Professor on October 23, 2006 at 4:55pm EDT
  • Undeniably, the women interviewing for these jobs are very smart. They realize that by taking a job at Harvard, there will be no available family friendly future ahead of them. I am a woman trying to make the decision whether the ivy league is worth sacrificing a good family life and my own sanity - I should not have to make such a choice. There will need to be a true revolution in the way academia 'does business' if they want to ensure they can still capture the smart women...

  • impossible choices
  • Posted by anonymous on October 23, 2006 at 5:55pm EDT
  • As I understand it, L. Summers revamped the tenure-track system to actually allow the possibility of tenure, but the typical humanities requirement is for 1 book out and 1 book manuscript in 9-10 years. According to a typical time line, this would mean a woman had between the ages 30 and 40 to write two books. Given that many women put off starting a family until after they have established some professional stability, this sets up an almost impossible situation. Many women may prefer the possibility of a balanced, less pressured, more secure life--but Harvard should be smart enough to think of a way not to force them to make that choice.

  • Posted by Nancy on October 23, 2006 at 11:20pm EDT
  • It hasn't been the prospect of pressure that deters women from Harvard, but the prospect of impossibility of achieving tenure no matter what one accomplishes. Pressure is not a deterrent to women taking jobs or doing well in them. Women can handle pressure. It is a rigged system that women are avoiding. Harvard isn't the only place that does this, among top research universities. These places get a reputation. Some women think that they will be the exception -- because they are good whereas all those other women weren't really first rate. They are setting themselves up for a rude awakening because this treatment has nothing to do with your quality or productivity. In fields where evaluation is essentially subjective, bias can and does flourish, more so in bastions of male dominance and power. There is no mystery about this.