Quelle: World Women in Mathematics 2018. Carolina Araujo (Hrsg.), Georgia Benkart (Hrsg.) Cheryl E. Praeger (Hrsg.), Betül Tanbay (Hrsg.), Cham: Springer International Publishing. 2019, S 111–128
Inhalt: The International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM), inaugurated in 1897, is the greatest effort of the mathematical community to strengthen international communication and connections across all mathematical fields. Meetings of the ICM have historically hosted some of the most prominent mathematicians of their time. Receiving an invitation to present a talk at an ICM signals the high international reputation of the recipient, and is akin to entering a ‘hall of fame for mathematics’. Women mathematicians attended the ICMs from the start. With the invitation of Laura Pisati to present a lecture in 1908 in Rome and the plenary talk of Emmy Noether in 1932 in Zurich, they entered the grand international stage of their field. At the congress in 2014 in Seoul, Maryam Mirzakhani became the first woman to be awarded the Fields Medal, the most prestigious award in mathematics. In this article, we dive into assorted data sources to follow the footprints of women among the ICM invited speakers, analyzing their demographics and topic distributions, and providing glimpses into their diverse biographies.
Unravelling the gender productivity gap in science: a meta-analytical review
Autor/in:
Astegiano, Julia; Sebastián-González, Esther; Castanho, Camila de Toledo
Quelle: Royal Society open science, 6 (2019) 6
Inhalt: Women underrepresentation in science has frequently been associated with women being less productive than men (i.e. the gender productivity gap), which may be explained by women having lower success rates, producing science of lower impact and/or suffering gender bias. By performing global meta-analyses, we show that there is a gender productivity gap mostly supported by a larger scientific production ascribed to men. However, women and men show similar success rates when the researchers' work is directly evaluated (i.e. publishing articles). Men's success rate is higher only in productivity proxies involving peer recognition (e.g. evaluation committees, academic positions). Men's articles showed a tendency to have higher global impact but only if studies include self-citations. We detected gender bias against women in research fields where women are underrepresented (i.e. those different from Psychology). Historical numerical unbalance, socio-psychological aspects and cultural factors may influence differences in success rate, science impact and gender bias. Thus, the maintenance of a women-unfriendly academic and non-academic environment may perpetuate the gender productivity gap. New policies to build a more egalitarian and heterogeneous scientific community and society are needed to close the gender gap in science.
Homophily, Biased Attention, and the Gender Gap in Science
Autor/in:
Lerchenmueller, Marc; Hoisl, Karin; Schmallenbach, Leo
Quelle: Proceedings (Academy of Management Proceedings), 2019 (2019) 1
Inhalt: How does homophilous collaboration influence women's early career progress? To answer this question, we turn to a granular dataset of 3,233 highly qualified junior life scientists who receive mentored, early career sponsorship from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and analyze their publication trajectories as careers unfold. Employing a matched sample approach that exploits variance in the sets of research contacts the junior scientists start out with, we distinguish sex differences in collaboration choices from potential differences in collaboration opportunities. We document that outsized gender homophily among women exists and primarily stems from how female leaders of scientific projects assemble their teams. Women continue same-sex collaborations as lead authors at twice the rate compared to men, on average, and in particular when the mentor is part of the author team or when the focal junior scientist leads the team. As such, systematic gender homophily among female scientists may engender the sponsorship and resources needed to motivate young women to join and pursue an academic career. On the flip side, we show that author teams led by women receive 11% less citations, on average, and up to 29% less citations for work of comparable caliber published in the most influential journals. Taken together, while women's propensity to working with other women may support early career researchers, biased attention to women's work may harm careers and, in particular, women who publish in the highest-impact journals and who would otherwise be poised to narrowing gender gaps at more senior career stages.
Secret service : Revealing gender biases in the visibility and value of faculty service
Autor/in:
Hanasono, Lisa K.; Broido, Ellen M.; Yacobucci, Margaret M.; Root, Karen V.; Peña, Susana; O'Neil, Deborah A.
Quelle: Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 12 (2019) 1, S 85–98
Inhalt: Although the demand for faculty service has increased substantially in recent years, the workload is not shared equitably among tenure-track faculty (Guarino & Borden, 2017; Pyke, 2011). Women faculty tend to spend more time on service activities than men, and they tend to perform important yet less institutionally recognized forms of service like mentoring, committee work, emotional labor, and organizational climate control (Babcock, Recalde, Vesterlund, & Weingart, 2017; Misra, Lundquist, Holmes, & Agiomavritis, 2011). Drawing from the theory of gendered organizations (Acker, 1990), this interview study examined how institutional gender biases impact the visibility and evaluation of faculty service across the tenure-track career trajectory. Our findings reveal how task-oriented forms of service tend to be more visible and valued than relationally oriented service. In addition to addressing a gap in the literature, our study presents practical recommendations to make service more visible, valuable, and equitable across faculty ranks and gender identities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
Gendered management in Spanish universities : Functional segregation among vice-rectors
Autor/in:
Castaño, Cecilia; Vázquez-Cupeiro, Susana; Martínez-Cantos, José Luis
Quelle: Gender and Education, 31 (2019) 8, S 966–985
Inhalt: The reorganisation of higher education according to the marketplace logic ? and framed within the process of Europeanisation and globalisation ? has run parallel to a significant rise in the number of women in senior management positions at Spanish universities. This would seem to be a step to more gender equality. However, the analysis of the situation used thus far, based on conventional indicators, may be harbouring a not-so-egalitarian reality. Our approach studies the gender distribution of vice-rectors according to assigned functions in all forty-eight Spanish public universities offering both graduate and postgraduate studies. It does so by creating a typology to exemplify gendered divisions of labour within those positions. The results confirm an uneven gender distribution: women, although mostly in charge of caregiving and housekeeping functions, are underrepresented across the board in areas where strategic power resides and the future of university is decided and where, eventually, gender norms could be changed.
The domestic labour of academic governance and the loss of academic voice
Autor/in:
Rowlands, Julie
Quelle: Gender and Education, 31 (2019) 7, S 793–810
Inhalt: While academic governance does not produce teaching and research, it provides the conditions that enable them to take place. The principal academic governance body within universities, the academic board (also known as the academic senate or faculty senate), therefore plays a key role in enabling universities to conduct their core business. However, at the same time as doing things that are necessary, the role of academic boards has come to be seen as unimportant. This development is considered in light of empirical data from universities in the US, UK and Australia. The paper argues that university governance represents gendered relations and that the role of academic boards is now largely procedural ? the equivalent of housework ? invisible unless not done well. Moreover, ?done well? is defined not by academic boards themselves but by university executives, whose masculine, managerial roles both replicate and control traditional academic board functions.
Schlagwörter:Arbeitsteilung; gender bias; Gremien; Hausarbeit; Hochschulleitung; Hochschulmanagement; Management; USA
CEWS Kategorie:Wissenschaft als Beruf, Geschlechterverhältnis
Quelle: Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 49 (2019) 2, S 1–16
Inhalt: The university reward structure has traditionally placed greater value on individual research excellence for tenure and promotion, influencing faculty’s allocation of time and definition of worthwhile labour. We find gender differences in Canadian natural sciences and engineering faculty’s opinions of the traditional criteria for measuring academic success that are consistent with an implicit gender bias devaluing service and teamwork. Most women recommend significant changes to the traditional model and its foundation, while a substantial minority of men support the status quo. However, this comparative qualitative analysis finds more cross-gender similarities than differences, as most men also want a more modern definition of success, perceiving the traditional model to be disproportionately supportive of one type of narrow research scholarship that does not align with the realities of most faculty’s efforts. Thus, this study suggests a discrepancy between traditional success criteria and faculty’s understanding of worthwhile labour.
More Than a Pipeline Problem : Evaluating the Gender Pay Gap in Canadian Academia from 1996 to 2016
Autor/in:
Momani, Bessma; Dreher, Emma; Williams, Kira
Quelle: Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 49 (2019) 1, S 1–21
Inhalt: This article measures gender pay gaps in Ontario’s public post-secondary education sector from 1996 to 2016 using the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Data. We find gaps widening among all faculty ranks. Men were paid on average 2.06%, 2.14%, and 5.26% more than their women colleagues for all employees, university teaching staff, and deans, respectively. We also conduct a Blinder- Oaxaca decomposition to measure the source of gendered salary differentials. Pay gaps persist during this time period despite controlling for the literature’s most common explanations, including the “pipeline effect.” Our results additionally imply that women’s years of experience in academia do not mitigate the observed pay gaps. Suggestions for future research include increasing the scope of our study to factor in finer details such as labour productivity.