Sex comparisons among science
faculty at Hunter College
Department perceptions, social
networks, and procedural knowledge
Hunter College Gender Equity Project
& Provost’s Office
2007 Science Faculty Survey
Background


Hunter does well in gender equity
with respect to major outcomes
Female and male faculty in the
sciences fare similarly in



salary
tenure and promotion
awarding of distinguished
professorships and named chairs
Background


But outcome fairness is not the primary
predictor of how people perceive fairness
overall in their institutions
Two other types of fairness play more
important roles
 interactional fairness1 – how respectfully
people are treated on a day-to-day basis

procedural fairness2 – clear and welljustified policies
1. Bies, R.J. & Shapiro, D.L. (1988). Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of
causal accounts. Social Justice Research, 1(2), 199-218
2. Lind, E.A & Tyler, T.R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. NY: Plenum
Purpose of Science Faculty Survey

Examine subtle measures of
interactional and procedural fairness

college life

department life

professional networks

resource allocation and responsibility
Demographics



52% of science faculty completed the
consent form (101/195)
46% of science faculty provided
information about their sex (89/195)
49% of science faculty who responded
were women (38/77) and 35% were men
(41/118)
Demographics (Cont.)
Women
Assist.
Assoc.
Men
Full
Assist.
Assoc.
Full
Natural Science
Pop. N
SFS N
% in SFS
sample
11
6
4
2
24
10
10
7
16
6
45
8
55
50
42
70
38
18
Biology
Chemistry
Computer Sci.
Geography
Math & Stat.
Physics & Astro
Social Science
Pop. N
SFS N
% in SFS
sample
10
5
12
7
16
8
6
3
13
5
28
12
50
58
50
50
38
43
Anthropology
Economics
Political Sci.
Psychology
Sociology
Results

College Life

Department Life

Professional Networks

Resource Allocation and
Responsibility
College Life:
Importance of teaching
Men (N=34)
Women (N=34)
Endorsement
5
4
3
2
1
Self
Colleagues
Chair
Administration
College Life:
Importance of research
Men (N=36)
Women (N=39)
Endorsement
5
4
3
2
1
Self
Colleagues
Chair
Administration
College Life:
Importance of committee work
Men (N=31)
Women (N=32)
Endorsement
5
4
3
2
1
Self
Colleagues
Chair
Administration
College Life
Male and female science faculty

equally find a great deal of personal
meaning in their work


Women=4.72 (.44); Men=4.62 (.50)
are equally identified with Hunter
College

Women=3.52 (.94); Men=3.86 (.85)
1 = Strongly Disagree; 3 = Neutral; 5 = Strongly Agree
College Life
Male and female science faculty have
similar judgments about their

ability to spend enough time on the
aspects of work that they find most
important


Women=2.63 (.98); Men=2.68 (1.02)
satisfaction with the Offices of Facilities
Management & Planning

Women=2.89 (.85); Men=3.18 (.80)
1 = Strongly Disagree; 3 = Neutral; 5 = Strongly Agree
College Life:
Satisfaction with tenure and promotion
5
Endorsement
4
3
2
1
Men (N=33)
t(1,66) = 2.29, p = 0.03
Women (N=35)
Sex
Example: I receive/d enough feedback on my progress
toward tenure/promotion.
College Life:
Job Satisfaction
Endorsement
5
4
3
2
1
Men (N=38)
t(1,75) = 1.84, p = 0.07
Women (N=39)
Sex
Example: Generally speaking, I am very satisfied with my
current job.
College Life Summary
Compared to men, women are less

satisfied with tenure and promotion
processes

satisfied with their jobs
Department Life
Male and female science faculty

are similarly neutral about their department chairs


equally report feeling respected in department
meetings


Women = 2.89 (.85); Men =3.18 (.80)
Women = 3.74 (.70); Men = 3.93 (.44)
report having similar influence over what happens
in their departments

Women = 3.28 (.73); Men = 3.22 (.85)
1 = Strongly Disagree; 3 = Neutral; 5 = Strongly Agree
Department Life:
Inclusion & Belonging
Endorsement
5
4
3
2
1
Men (N=35)
t(1,69) = 2.89, p < 0.01
Women (N=36)
Sex
Example: I feel like I “fit” in my department.
Department Life:
Collegiality
Endorsement
5
4
3
2
1
Men (N=39)
t(1,76) = 3.10, p < 0.01
Women (N=39)
Sex
Example: Communication is good among the people in my
department.
Department Life:
Support
5
Endorsement
4
3
2
1
Men (N=33)
t(1,69) = 1.78, p = 0.08
Women (N=38)
Sex
Example: There are people in your department who have used
influence to support your advancement.
Department Life:
Evaluation of Department Staff
Endorsement
5
4
3
2
1
Men (N=35)
t (1,67) = 3.14, p < 0.01
Women (N=34)
Sex
Example: When I make a request it is completed in full.
Department Life Summary
Men report more and women report less

sense of inclusion and belonging

collegiality

support from colleagues

satisfaction with department staff
Professional Networks:
Talk to chairs



72% of men and 84% of women report
talking “almost never” about teaching
75% of men and 82% of women report
talking “almost never” about research
92% of men and 95% of women report
talking “almost never” about tenure and
promotion
Professional Networks:
Talk to faculty outside Hunter College



39% of men and 35% of women report
talking “at least once a week” about
research
65% of men and 73% of women report
talking “almost never” about teaching
89% of men and 95% of women report
talking “almost never” about tenure and
promotion
Professional Networks:
Talk to undergraduate students


45% of men and 49% of women report
talking “at least once a week” about
teaching
56% of men and 41% of women report
talking “at least once a week” about
research
Professional Networks:
How often do you talk about teaching with
Hunter faculty?
Almost never/ Once or twice a semester
Once or twice a month
At least once a week/ Almost every day
100
% Agree
80
60
40
20
0
Men (N=40)
χ2 = 11.43, p < 0.01
Women (N=39)
Sex
Professional Networks:
How often do you talk about research with
Hunter faculty?
Almost never/ Once or twice a semester
Once or twice a month
A tleast once a week/ Almost every day
100
% Agree
80
60
40
20
0
Men (N=40)
χ2 = 5.21, p = 0.07
Women (N=40)
Sex
Professional Networks


Collaborate on grants or research with
chairs

66% of men and 80% of women report having
never been asked by their chair to collaborate

91% of men and 90% of women report never
asking their chair to collaborate
Collaborate on grants and research with
colleagues


61% of men and 56% of women report having been
asked to collaborate with colleagues more than
once
39% of men and 53% of women report having
asked colleagues to collaborate more than once
Professional Networks:
How much recognition do you get for
teaching?
Men (N=32)
Women (N=32)
Recognition
5
4
3
2
1
From Administration
From Chair
From Colleagues
Professional Networks:
How much recognition do you get for
research?
Men (N=34)
Women (N=32)
Recognition
5
4
3
2
1
From Administration
From Chair
From Colleagues
Professional Networks:
How much recognition do you get for
committee work?
Men (N=33)
Women (N=31)
Recognition
5
4
3
2
1
From Administration
From Chair
From Colleagues
Professional Networks Summary
Compared to men, women



talk about teaching and research with
colleagues less often
equally ask and are asked to
collaborate on grants and research with
chairs and colleagues
report less recognition for teaching,
research and committee work
Resource Allocation and Responsibility
I receive the amount I need to advance my work.
Endorsement
5
4
Men
3
Women
2
1
Office Space
Lab Space
TAs
Course load
Resource Allocation and Responsibility
I learned about rules and procedures from...
100
% Agree
80
60
Men
Women
40
20
0
Colleagues
Chair
On own
I still don't
understand
What rules
and
procedures?
Rules and Procedures Summary


Men and women are equally satisfied
with the office and lab space they
receive and are equally dissatisfied with
the amount of TAs and course load they
receive
Rules and procedures for distributing
resources and responsibilities in
departments are more transparent to
men than to women
Overall Summary:
Areas of equal satisfaction
Male and female science faculty equally


find teaching, research and committee work
to be important
find a great deal of personal meaning in their
work

identify with Hunter College

feel respected in department meetings

influence what happens in their departments

ask and are asked to collaborate on grants
and research with chairs and colleagues
Overall Summary:
Areas of unequal satisfaction
Compared to men, women

are less satisfied with tenure and promotion

are less satisfied with their jobs in general



report less inclusion, collegiality, and support
in their departments
have less discussion with Hunter faculty
about teaching, research, and committee
work
report less recognition for teaching, research,
and committee work
Recommendations
Administrators, chairs, and senior faculty
should:




solicit and listen equally to everyone’s views
and opinions
create settings that encourage colleagues and
department chairs to interact with each other
justify, clarify, and codify department rules and
procedures for the distribution of resources and
responsibilities
nominate faculty for awards and prizes and
publicize faculty achievements
Soliciting views and opinions
At all meetings, make sure that all ideas
are solicited and are equally carefully
considered:



circulate agendas before department
meetings and ask faculty for additions
consider having facilitators, on a rotating
basis, to ensure that all voices are heard
if someone tries to express an idea in a
meeting and is interrupted or ignored, make
sure that that person’s opinion is given time
Create opportunities for professional
networks



Hold brown bags and luncheons in which
faculty can discuss their research, teaching,
and service
Assign space so that faculty with similar
interests can easily interact
Have a chair or a senior colleague reach out
to faculty who seem alienated or
marginalized
Why it matters

People need the components of
interactional fairness




a sense of inclusion
influence
a voice which is heard
People perceive organizations to be more
fair when the components of interactional
fairness are in place
Clarify rules and procedures



Spell out policies and procedures in clear,
unambiguous terms
Chairs, senior faculty, and administrators
should be approachable, available, and
willing to answer questions about policies
and procedures
Create and distribute specific written
guidelines to all faculty regarding tenure
and promotion and rules and procedures
for distributing resources and
responsibilities
Why it matters

People need the components of
procedural fairness


knowledge about how resources and
responsibilities are distributed and the
justifications
knowledge about how the tenure and
promotion process works and the
justifications
Awards and achievements


Nominate faculty for awards and prizes
Publicize faculty awards, prizes, grants,
and other achievements

to other faculty within department

to dean, provost, and president
Why it matters

Recognition by colleagues improves
individuals' attachment to institution
End