Running head: GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
Graduate Women in Philosophy:
An I-E-O Model to Increase Women Faculty Members in Philosophy
Elizabeth Brown, Katherine Curley & Dylan Howser
The Pennsylvania State University
1
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
2
Graduate Women in Philosophy:
An I-E-O Model to Increase Women Faculty Members in Philosophy
Introduction
This summer, a star male faculty member, Colin McGinn at the University of Miami
resigned in response to sexual harassment allegations and, as The New York Times reported, “a
debate over sexism is set off” (Schuessler, 2013). Although the Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields have gained significant attention surrounding the
unequal representation of women in the field, women in philosophy are just recently entering the
conversation. The percentage of women full-time philosophy professors in 2000 was only 21.9
percent (Division APAP, 2011). The estimated percentage of women in STEM is 27 percent
(Kaminski & Geisler, 2012). Not being a gender-specific field, the unequal representation of
women in philosophy appears significant. Even popular culture has taken an interest in the issue.
One look at the selection of articles tagged “women in philosophy” in Stone, The New York
Times’ philosophy blog, leads the reader to endless articles also tagged “discrimination” and
“sexual harassment.” Many of the articles talk about the lack of diversity and respect towards
women in the field. Furthermore, in 2010, an entire blog was started to anonymously report
instances of sexual harassment in philosophy departments (What is it like to be a women in
philosophy?, 2013). Once an entirely male-dominated field, philosophy is still developing and
defining the pipeline for women to attain tenured faculty status. Today, philosophy remains as
one of the most male-dominated disciplines in the humanities, and highly skilled women exit at
all stages of the pipeline (Norlock, 2009).
The conversation has recently begun and the inputs and environments fostering
persistence in the field are newly being explored and researched. In an effort to explore the
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
3
different factors leading up to getting a full-time faculty position, we will use Astin’s InputsEnvironments-Outputs (I-E-O) model (Astin, 1970a, 1970b, 1991) as a framework to explore the
outcome of attaining a full-time faculty position in philosophy as a woman. First, we will
explore the different components of what incoming students bring with them that contributes to
persistence. Then, in order to analyze the environmental factors that encourage and discourage
women to pursue a full-time faculty position, we describe and break down the different
components in a graduate philosophy program that influence this decision. Lastly in the model,
we will articulate the model’s desired outcomes. The proposed model is developed through a
series of interviews with current faculty and graduate students in philosophy and thorough
research on women in philosophy, drawing some parallels with the body of research regarding
women in STEM and other I-E-O models used in higher education. This model attempts to
synthesize the current research regarding the persistence of underrepresented groups in majoritydominated fields and explore how we can support more women to get involved in philosophy
and succeed. Finally, we will discuss the research and how the model contributes to the current
discussions surrounding women in philosophy.
The Model
In this paper, we discuss an original I-E-O model designed to help current philosophers,
academic and student affairs administrators, and other interested parties better understand the
challenges faced by graduate women in philosophy as they progress through their journey to earn
PhD’s in philosophy and secure full-time, tenure-track positions in philosophy. Although the
terms have very different definitions, in our paper, persistence and attainment of faculty position
can be used interchangeably. We see persistence as a prerequisite of faculty attainment and
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
4
faculty attainment as the final accumulation of the persistence in philosophical study. The full
model with this outcome that will be discussed in this paper can be seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1. I-E-O Model for Graduate Women in Philosophy. This model illustrates the I-E-O
model for graduate women in philosophy that we discuss throughout this paper.
Inputs
The first part of the I-E-O model is inputs. The inputs are divided into four categories:
prior education experience, internal characteristics, family background and demographics, and
admission and institutional choice.
Prior Education Experience
The first and most formative input contributing to the decision of getting a PhD with the
intention of gaining a full-time faculty position is prior education experience. Research shows
that the biggest drop in the pipeline for women persisting in philosophy is from introductory
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
5
philosophy classes to a philosophy major or minor in undergraduate (Calhoun, 2009; Paxton,
Figdor, & Tiberius, 2012). Therefore, the quality of the first intro class in one’s undergraduate
institution – or even high school – is crucial to further persistence.
Not mentioned in the research, but brought up as an important factor in each interview we
conducted, is the existence of diverse classes and positive role models (anonymous graduate
student, personal communication, November 1, 2013; C. Griffin, personal communication,
November 4, 2013; D. Valentine, personal communication, October 30, 2013). In a related field,
the existence of role models in one’s undergraduate has been seen to increase persistence of
women in STEM (Mason, 2009). In this research and the interviews, having role models that are
at least either similar to the student demographically or teach the field of study the student is
interested in during one’s undergraduate demonstrates influence on further persistence and
motivation to stay in philosophy.
Finally, taken from Weidman’s (1989) study on undergraduate socialization, research
suggests a certain level of aptitude and pre-professional preparation needed to succeed in
graduate school. All of the students interviewed had extensive exposure with philosophy in
undergraduate and self-reported that they were well prepared for the graduate level classes
(anonymous graduate student, personal communication, November 1, 2013; C. Griffin, personal
communication, November 4, 2013; D. Valentine, personal communication, October 30, 2013).
One graduate student, for example, uses her undergraduate experience as the model for which
she hopes to emulate in the future (C. Griffin, personal communication, November 4, 2013). By
experiencing the seminar style philosophy classes as a student, Griffin felt apt and determined to
emulate this quality of discussion where everyone has a voice again.
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
6
Taken together, this characteristic of prior education experience can be described by:
quality of first philosophy class, existence of positive role models, and one’s aptitude.
Internal Characteristics
Outside of these more external experiences, inputs into the graduate experience also
include internal and personal characteristics. Recently, the most influential work in the field
discusses the inability for many students to develop compatible schemas surrounding both
“philosopher” and “woman” so that they coalesce (Haslinger, 2008). While these can be further
developed in graduate school, initial schemas need to be at least overlapping enough to envision
them attaining a PhD in the first place. Each current graduate student interviewed mentioned
that sorting out their identity as it related to philosophy was an important part of the process even
prior to graduate school. One student said, “I am not so tied to the field or the institution, but
what it can help me do” (D. Valentine, personal communication, October 30, 2013). Being able
to dissociate herself from field, Valentine is able to cope with the components of the
environment that are hostile or that she does not like. By doing this, she has the internal
capability of self-selecting her environment and ignoring any discouraging factors. Similarly,
but with a different conclusion, another student said, “Philosophy is the best venue to work on
change and be a product of that change…I have defined myself by this.” (Anonymous graduate
student, personal communication, November 1, 2013). This graduate student coped in a very
different way, but is still able to see herself congruent to the field because it is so ingrained in her
self-definition.
The last graduate student we interviewed had a similar experience. Due to her very
positive undergraduate experience in philosophy, Griffin states, “I try to recreate the
environment of St. John’s and have faith that things can be better” (C. Griffin, personal
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
7
communication, November 4, 2013). More than just seeing oneself in the field, Griffin and the
anonymous graduate student both are committed and motivated to be change agents within the
field. This ability to envision oneself in the field, thus, encapsulates the pre-college inputs of
commitment, motivation, and goals taken from Tinto’s (2012) retention model and also
aspirations, values, and career goals taken from Weidman’s (1989) model of undergraduate
socialization. In order to persist, students must have the internal commitment, motivation, and
goals to be a tenured track professor which requires the clear ability to envision this same
achievement.
Family Background and Demographics
Another personal characteristic that appears to affect the graduate experience and future
outcomes is family background and demographics. Women of color, for example were totaled at
zero due to insufficient data in the latest census of full-time philosophy faculty professors in
2003 (U.S. Department of Education, 2011). People of color have been found to face added
barriers in philosophy such as combating stereotypes and implicit race biases (Armodio &
Devine, 2006; Pearson, Dovidio, & Gaertner, 2009). While race has been most heavily studied
and seen as a compounding factor in retention, other issues such as class and nationality also
play a role according to a current anonymous graduate student applying for tenure-track faculty
positions (personal communication, November 1, 2013). This is consistent with research on
undergraduate socialization by Weidman (1989) which includes socioeconomic status as an
important pre-college characteristic. Family background and demographics certainly are
important inputs, but more research needs to be done to explore the breakdown of this category,
particularly with women in philosophy. In general, though, family background including socio-
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
8
economic status, ethnicity, and race has been proven to have significant impact on admission,
retention, and college choice (Tinto, 2012).
Admission and Institutional Choice
Once a student decides to attend further schooling, another added barrier is getting in.
Studies show that reviewers favor men over women in assessing randomly assigned gender
resumes (see for example Cole, Field, & Giles, 2004; Schmader, Whitehead, & Wysocki, 2007;
Steinpreis, Anders, & Ritzke, 1999) and professors who write recommendation letters are more
likely to write more positive letters to males than females (see for example Moss-Racusin,
Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham, & Handelsman, 2012). Many admissions processes are not doubleblind meaning which has been seen to have a negative impact on female admissions (see for
example Budden et al., 2008). Simply getting into a philosophy program even after expressing
the desire to become a full-time faculty member is challenging.
In choosing which school to attend and apply, both the curriculum and commitment to
gender equity varies. The percentages of women in tenured faculty positions range from fifty
percent to zero percent in Philosophy PhD departments around the country (Van Camp, 2011).
Furthermore, what each institution’s conception of what is an acceptable field of study in
philosophy varies. According to a current philosophy PhD student, there are two general
categories of study in philosophy: the traditional Western canon and everything that critiques this
(D. Valentine, personal communication, October 30, 2013). Certain programs sell and value
one category over the other and tend to sell particular areas of study in their department for
incoming students. These foster certain expectations going into one’s chosen institution and the
weight you place on each shapes these same expectations—for example, Valentine said she
asked herself when applying: “is gender of the faculty important or not?” (D. Valentine, personal
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
9
communication, October 30, 2013). The particular weight and expectations students have of the
institutions, therefore, are additional components of the inputs students bring into their future
philosophy studies. More research needs to be done on if and how faculty demographics and the
existence of role models influence institutional choice for studying philosophy in particular. For
our model, admissions barriers and expectations surrounding institutional choice are included in
the inputs for women’s persistence in philosophy.
Environment
The second part of the I-E-O model is environment. Our analysis examines four aspects
of the environment for graduate women in philosophy: classroom experiences, sexual
harassment, implicit bias and stereotype threat, and perceived support.
No matter the field of study, graduate education experiences typically boast a wide
variety of factors that influence a student’s interest in persisting in a particular program and in
pursuing a specific type of career. As we continue in our analysis of graduate women students as
they move toward or away from a full-time faculty career, we will analyze elements of the
environment that women students are experiencing during graduate school. Research indicates
that women in philosophy programs are experiencing many factors differently than their male
peers. This section will explore some of the major environmental factors influencing graduate
women and young professionals as they consider a future career as a faculty member.
Throughout our inquiry, we found that there is a serious lack of research on the graduate
school experiences of women in philosophy (and even women in general). However, we found
many ideas circulating online throughout the blogosphere and promises of forthcoming research
on the topic. Through our research we also discovered many similarities in the environmental
factors women experience in STEM fields. Much of this section will focus on the negative
influences graduate women in philosophy face as they contemplate a career in academia. As we
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
10
will note throughout this section, current philosophers (women and men alike) and prominent
professional organizations in the field are taking note of these issues and are proactively acting to
reduce these harms and negative experiences for future members of the philosophy community.
Classroom Experiences
The classroom experiences of graduate women in philosophy can be daunting. As
discussed above, the classroom experiences of undergraduate women interested in pursuing
philosophy influence their decision whether or not to pursue a philosophy major. Similarly – in
graduate school – women in philosophy are influenced by the predominately male learning
environment. Graduate classroom experiences play a powerful role in attracting or deterring
women in careers as faculty members, as teaching is a significant component of the faculty
experience.
As is the case with other types of minority students in majority-dominated environments,
these women can experience feelings of academic and personal isolation as well as stereotype
threat, as articulated by numerous women on the popular philosophy blog for graduate and
young professionals, What is it like to be a woman in philosophy? (2013). In her research, Anne
Wilson Shaef (as cited in Rypisi, Malcom, & Kim, 2009) argues that women live and operate in
a “White Male System” that permeates educational environments for women. Shaef concludes
that women in underrepresented fields, like STEM or philosophy, are not valued as worthy
professionals because of the “logical” and “all-knowing” dominant system (Rypisi et al., 2009).
Similar phenomena regarding gender equity in the classroom were recently studied at Harvard
Business School. The year-long effort and accompanying study found that by making small
changes in how they run their classes, faculty members can actually make the classroom
environment more welcoming to women students (Kantor, 2013). Those parties interested in
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
11
increasing the academic learning environment for graduate women in philosophy should
seriously examine the body of research regarding women in STEM as well as the recent case
study at Harvard Business School for effective strategies.
Sexual Harassment
As indicated by the example we mention in the introduction of this paper, sexual
harassment in philosophy is a problem that is receiving more press, attention, and credit for the
challenge of recruiting and retaining women in the field. Sexual harassment is an important piece
of the environment to consider when examining why more women are not equally represented in
the field of philosophy, as research has shown that incidents of sexual harassment and a culture
perceived to be conducive to sexual harassment can lead to decreased educational persistence on
college and university campuses (Hill and Silvia, 2006). The recent resignation of high-profile
philosopher Colin McGinn at the University of Miami in response to sexual harassment
allegations is one of many stories that are drawing attention from the philosophy community as
well as the greater community within academia and beyond (Schuessler, 2013). While it is
difficult to get data that accurately represents the prevalence of sexual harassment in the realm of
philosophy academe, there are cues that seem to indicate that it is a significant issue. First, the
online blogosphere for women in philosophy is ripe with anonymous, personal stories of sexual
harassment (Saul, 2012; Saul, 2013). The popular blog What is it like to be a woman in
philosophy? (2013) features a collection of numerous vignettes of women graduate students and
faculty members who have experienced some form(s) of sexual harassment. The ability to post
anonymously without fear for one’s academic career or professional reputation is certainly
appealing, and women are taking advantage of the ability to build an online, supportive
community with others who share similar experiences in the field.
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
12
The recent case involving McGinn sparked a fury of online debate, raising important
questions about the actions being taken to support victims of sexual harassment. In the time since
the McGinn story broke, several women graduate students in philosophy have considered filing
complaints and have contacted sympathetic faculty members – even those at other institutions –
as well as the American Philosophical Association’s Committee on the Status of Women
(Schuessler, 2013). Recently, the APA appointed a new ad hoc committee to further investigate
sexual harassment in the discipline (American Philosophical Association, 2013).
In a March 2013 interview published online, the committee’s chairwoman stated that she
felt it was important for the philosophy community to address issues of sexual harassment as a
discipline because she believes that “the effects of harassment piggyback on the effects of a lot
of other marginalizations that are evident in philosophy” (Kukla, 2013). The chairwoman’s
quotation indicates that there is a connection between sexual harassment and the more broadly
based issues of marginalization in the field (Hill & Silva, 2006). As the ad hoc committee begins
the necessary work investigating strategies to eliminate sexual harassment in the field, it will be
interesting to observe how these issues and strategies are connected (if at all) to other issues
related to marginalization, like implicit bias and stereotype threat, for graduate and professional
women in philosophy.
Implicit Bias & Stereotype Threat
Members of the philosophy community who are concerned with the representation of
women in the field are also discussing ways in which the classroom and out of the classroom
experiences are harmful to graduate women in philosophy, specifically the issues of implicit bias
and stereotype threat. Implicit bias is the idea that people unconsciously hold negative ideas and
associations about particular groups of others in a way that influences their behavior toward a
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
13
person or group of people (Roberts, 2011). In philosophy, this implicit bias could root from a
perceived lack of women philosophers in history and a lack of women currently doing work (and
thus “proving” that they are capable) in the field. In her blog, Saul (2012) discusses the very real
possibility that implicit bias is a contributing factor to the chilly climate that women experience
throughout graduate school and as faculty members in the field. Moreover, as discussed above,
implicit bias could even be playing a role in harming women’s chances of securing faculty
positions after graduation. Researchers, including Hall and Sandler (as cited in Rypisi et al.,
2009) have confirmed that implicit bias contributes to a chilly climate which “discourages
female students from participating in class, dampens career aspirations, [and] undermines their
self-confidence,” all of which can deter women from pursuing particular academic or
professional paths with sexist overtones (Rypisi et al., 2009, p. 122). While the lack of
philosophy-specific data in this area of study makes it difficult to confirm, the wealth of
anecdotal stories learned from our interviews and online research seem to indicate that this
phenomenon is regularly occurring in philosophy graduate programs.
Similarly, women graduate students as well as professionals in philosophy are likely to
experience stereotype threat. Stereotype threat refers to feelings of risk of confirming a negative
stereotype about an identity group that can inhibit one’s ability to perform well at a particular
task or in a specific situation (Steele & Aronson, 1995). Moreover, research has shown that
environments where individuals experience repeated instances of threat and implicit bias can
actually lead to disassociation from the environment (Steele & Aronson, 1995; Steele, 1997). In
the case of graduate women students in philosophy, this could be a possible explanation as to
why there is a pronounced lack of professional women philosophers. Saul (2012) indicates that
stereotype threat in women in philosophy can be regularly triggered by a variety of factors,
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
14
including feelings of isolation in the classroom, overwhelmingly male authors on semester
reading lists, predominately male faculty members, and national conferences regularly featuring
only male keynote speakers. Stereotype threat can negatively influence the performance abilities
of the threatened population in academia, such as women in STEM or – in this case – women in
philosophy (Rypisi et al., 2009).
The issues of implicit bias and stereotype threat with respect to women in philosophy
have continued to gain traction recently, and there are currently significant efforts from
individuals and organizations to combat these issues in the field of philosophy. Saul, one of the
earliest voices to draw attention to these issues in the field, is authoring and co-authoring a
number of articles and books on the topic (Saul, 2012). Moreover, long-standing organizations
like the American Philosophical Association (APA) and newer groups like the Implicit Bias and
Philosophy Research Network and various international branches of the Society for Women in
Philosophy (SWIP) are beginning to devote significant time, research attention, and action to
marginalization issues like implicit bias and stereotype threat.
Perceived Support
Another major influence on women considering a career as a philosophy faculty member
is the support they perceive from others. Professional associations play a significant role in
shaping the academic and professional environment of the field. The APA Committee on the
Status of Women was founded in 1993 to support women in philosophy and it plays a significant
role in helping younger women who are new to the field identify professional resources and role
models (American Philosophical Association, 2013). For instance, each month the Committee’s
website features a bio and the research of a woman philosopher in an effort to inspire and
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
15
promote community. These efforts to increase the number of visible women philosophers will
also help identify role models in the field for women and other underrepresented groups.
The importance of academic and professional mentors who are women in the field of
philosophy should not be overlooked. In the similar arena of STEM fields, Belenky et al.’s
(1986) research has shown that the lack of women role models can exacerbate gender-biased
treatment and feelings of isolation. More recent research specific to the field of philosophy
indicates that mentoring women graduate students and young professional philosophers in
academia is a critical piece of understanding the persistence of women in the field (Antony &
Cudd, 2012).
As we have indirectly illustrated throughout this paper, online communities created
through blogs can have a major influence on how students experience their own graduate
education or professional career. As today’s students are more comfortable engaging with others
in an online setting (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007), online interactions between other
women students and professionals in the field can provide students with the social communities
and integration that Tinto (2012) describe as essential to educational persistence. While women
philosophers may feel isolated on their own campuses, the active and vibrant online community
provides a valuable opportunity to connect with others facing similar challenges in the field.
Moreover, some of these online communities are translating into physical action that has a direct
influence on the environment of the field for women. For example, a few years ago the Feminist
Philosophers blog launched the Gendered Conference Campaign. This campaign is a project that
tracks all-male conference lineups and explores the harms to women philosophers and the greater
community while “drawing attention to this systemic phenomenon” (Feminist Philosophers,
2009). From this example and the others provided throughout this paper, it seems that these types
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
16
of online grassroots efforts seem to hold the most promise in mobilizing the academic
community of philosophy to become more welcoming to women and other minority groups.
External Influences
Larger societal and other external influences can also affect a woman’s ability to succeed
as a graduate student in philosophy. While not the central focus of the model we present in this
paper, we recognize that a wide variety of external factors can influence choices related to a
woman’s decision to enter and persist in a graduate philosophy program. Examples of these
external factors include the perceived or projected job market in the field, support (or lack
thereof) from family and friends, or serious illness of a spouse or partner.
Outcomes
As both the incomes and environment section show, women in philosophy have a tough
road to travel in their academic career. Sally Haslanger, a philosopher at Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, argues “as recently as 2010, philosophy had a lower percentage of women
doctorates than math, chemistry, and economics” and this shows in the number of women faculty
members in highly ranked philosophy programs: 21.9 percent (Haslanger, 2008; 2013). In
opinion pieces published in the New York Times after the resignation of Colin McGinn, five
women philosophers give their perspective on what it means to be a woman in philosophy. Much
like the environment women go through during their graduate program, professional
philosophers go through the same challenges: lack of mentorship, sexual harassment,
stereotyping, and other exclusionary practices (Haslanger, 2013; Alcoff, 2013; Langton, 2013;
Antony, 2013; O’Conner, 2013). It is important for all members of the philosophy community
work to solving these challenges, since as Peg O’Conner (2013) notes,
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
17
Women can only do so much. We can teach and mentor well, open doors when we have
some institutional power, advocate for change in admission and harassment policies, for
example. But nothing will change unless and until more of our male colleagues begin to
use their male privilege in very different way.
In this section we will explore the necessary outcome of gaining tenure-track positions, but look
at the possible post-graduate school barriers towards achieving this goal. We will look at the
barriers presented to women philosophers in researching, teaching, and providing service to the
philosophy community: all important aspects of the tenure process.
Our specific outcome is to raise the level of tenure-track women philosophers in colleges
and universities. It is important to note the difference between tenure-track and adjunct positions.
Tenure-track positions are more prestigious, secure, and include health benefits. Typically these
are professors you think about when you hear the word professor. However, more research is
coming out on the role adjunct professors have in higher education. Adjunct professors are
contract employees that teach courses at a much lower rate than tenured or tenure-track
professors. They also rarely receive any benefits. The recent death of Margaret Mary Vojtko has
becoming a tipping point for the consideration of adjunct pay and benefits. Vojtko died in debt
and without health care after nearly 25 years of teaching French at Duquesne University (Ellis,
September 9, 2013). While it is important to further discuss the difference between tenured and
adjunct professors, we only note the difference to show the discrepancy between the two tracks.
It is also important to note that most of the statistics used by women philosophers on the subject
of employment only use statistics of tenured and tenure-track professors. This means that the
knowledge of the number of women adjunct professors and their working conditions are almost
non-existent.
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
18
The research shows that women and minorities are excluded from professional
philosophy. As noted earlier, only 21.9 percent of the employed philosophers are women. It is
even more shocking that less than 30 of the 11,000 American philosophers (both adjunct and
tenure-track) are black women. Much of this has to do with the pipeline issues described in
earlier sections, but it is also an issue with the environment. Haslanger (2008) muses, “Women, I
believe, want a good working environment with mutual respect. And philosophy, mostly, doesn’t
offer that” (pg. 212). The most notable examples of this are the gender dichotomy of philosophy
and ideals of philosophy: “rational/emotional, objective/subjective, mind/body… penetrating,
seminal, and rigorous…” (Haslanger, 2008, p. 213). Collectively, academic philosophy is framed
as very masculine and this contributes to the tenure process.
Barriers
Several barriers surround professional women philosophers as they work through the
tenure-track process that keeps them from securing tenure or tenure-track positions. The first,
and biggest, barrier women philosophers have to overcome in their journey to tenure is research
– the largest factor in most tenure-track positions. In the seven most prominent philosophy
journals only 12.8 percent of articles were written by women from 2002-2007. Since then the
figure has only increased to 13.5 percent (Haslinger, 2008). If being published in journals is one
of the major factors to getting tenure, then philosophy is not doing a great job of closing the gap.
Haslanger (2008) also hypothesizes that women philosophers are not being considered as
strongly by reviewers, which would lead to underrepresentation. It can also be speculated that
feminine philosophical interests, e.g. feminism, are less likely to get publication, so women
philosophers are forced into different areas of interests. Women on the Wordpress, What is it like
to be a woman philosopher?(2013), often report being forced into different areas of interest in
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
19
order to fit the woman philosopher mold. For example, one of the authors was challenged during
their senior philosophy thesis when they wanted to write on the philosophy of love. Since it did
not fit the current mold of philosophy, their professor asked if it would be philosophical enough
for a senior thesis. While this may be an undergraduate example, Kristie Dotson (2011)
contemplates the question, how is your project philosophy? It seems anything outside of the
canon of Western philosophy is taken less seriously, and it seems more women and minorities
are interested in areas outside of it. Therefore, women philosophers have a harder time fulfilling
the research aspect of tenure.
Next, teaching can also act as a barrier for women philosophers. Much like in research,
women philosophers are often expected to teach certain subject areas even if they are not experts
in that subject, e.g. feminist philosophy and the history of philosophy. Also, with the lack of
women philosophy graduate students, women philosophy professors may not have enough
interest in their subject areas to be able to teach a course on the subject. bell hooks (1994) argues
that women professors in general have an issue with male students. In an academic field with
more men than women, it may be difficult for women philosophers to feel confident in the
classroom. As Haslanger (2008) notes on being solo status, being a woman professor in a largely
masculine classroom could make one “feeling tongue-tied and stupid” even when otherwise they
would confident and collected (p. 218). Also, this could affect their course evaluations and their
results could be different than their actual performance (hooks, 1994). Collectively, this could
lead to barriers in teaching for women philosophers.
Finally, service to the university and philosophical community can be hindered by their
gender. As Jacqui Poltera (2011) writes, “Philosophy is cutthroat and ruthless” (p. 423). This
affects a woman’s ability to move up in the university and philosophical communities. Whether
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
20
it is serving on different campus committees or professional committees, service to the university
takes away from a woman philosopher’s time in other areas, i.e. researching and teaching. For
example, Poltera (2011) notes that senior women philosophers are often seen as de facto mentors
for junior women philosophers, but this is a mistake to make this presumption. If the senior
women philosophers have a rough time making strides in their community, this could push the
women students away from the profession. Mentoring also takes a lot of time and effort, which
takes away time from research and teaching. Therefore, service to their community can be
difficult when research is stressed so much and women philosophers are used to teach general
philosophy courses.
The most startling image to compare the outcome of tenure-track positions for women
philosophers is Dotson’s (2011) concrete flower analogy. Whether it is through the barriers
described earlier in this paper, throughout this section, or ones we did not touch, women entering
into professional philosophy can be seen as flowers sprouting through concrete. While “[t]hey
give the impression of being strong, survivors… On closer inspection, however, many concrete
flowers are fragile and clearly starved for basic nutrients” (pg. 408). If we want to improve the
amount of women in philosophy that eventually obtain tenure-track positions, we should start
with breaking through the concrete (i.e. barriers) to having a healthy and thriving career in
philosophy.
Discussion
This model is designed to explore why there is a lack of full-time faculty members that
are women. The ongoing conversation happening online jumpstarted the discussion, but through
our research we find that much more research needs to be done. Our goal is that this research
will help define a pipeline for women entering philosophy. Due to the research we found on
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
21
women in predominately male fields of study, particularly in STEM, we believe the model to be
highly generalizable to academic fields that share similar demographics.
Which Comes First: The Professors or the Students?
As noted earlier, the largest leak in the pipeline of securing more tenure-track women
philosophers is the enrollment of women in philosophy classes after their introductory course. It
has also been noted that the there is a lack of professional women philosophers, and retention in
academics fields is bolstered by working with academics that look like you. However, there
cannot be more women philosophers if the pipeline continues to leak them. Therefore, should we
put our attention on women philosophy students or professional women philosophers?
In order to best increase the amount of professional women philosophers we believe that
attention should be focused on both students and professors. Solely focusing on students would
possibly produce more women philosophy graduate students and Ph.D. holding women, but
without institutional support for professional women philosophers than there would be a
bottleneck in the amount of jobs for which they could apply. If we solely focused on professors,
then we would not be providing enough resources to get women students involved in philosophy.
It was also noted above that more women philosophers may not be the answer since some may
not be the best role models for women philosophy students. However, some may argue for a
trickledown effect, similar to trickledown economics, but this would depend on a large number
of factors, i.e. the environment. By focusing on both students and faculty, we could adequately
provide resources to both parties and create lines of communication between those wanting to
enter philosophy and already working (or struggling to work) in philosophy.
Applicability to Various Student Communities
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
22
Our inspiration for a model explaining the underrepresentation of women in philosophy
was largely derived from the numerous models explaining the lack of women in STEM fields. As
the body of research regarding the status of women and other underrepresented groups in
philosophy continues to grow, more intra-group differences may be observed and explained
using adaptations of this model. For instance, women of color may experience their graduate
education and professional life in philosophy differently than their white counterparts (Paxton,
2012). Moreover, examining the environment could help to explain the challenges other
populations besides women (e.g. men from low socioeconomic backgrounds) face in pursuing
full-time faculty positions in philosophy. However, we would suggest that future researchers
exercise caution in equalizing the experiences of other underrepresented groups within the field
of philosophy and outside of the discipline with those of women in philosophy. Through our
research and analysis, we believe that the similarities faced by women across academic
disciplines seem to speak to a larger, more comprehensive problem within academia and across
society. We hope that future research and efforts by campus professionals is dedicated to
determining and implementing interventions to reduce the barriers to persistence for
underrepresented groups in philosophy and beyond.
Roles of Campus Professionals
One of the overarching goals of our model is to define a pipeline for future full-time
women faculty to follow and to help faculty, campus leaders, student affairs professionals, and
policymakers to better facilitate this process through being aware of the barriers. By knowing
the barriers, policymakers can enact policies, such as sexual harassment reporting and
termination of offenders, that will better encourage a positive environment for women
philosophy graduate makers.
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
23
Knowing how well online communities have fostered support for this population, student
affairs professionals can try to foster this community in person by working in conjunction with
academic departments to connect support services and groups of other male-dominated fields
such as women in STEM. Taking what we know about engaging women in STEM this could
suggest several different practical approaches for student affairs practitioners to better engage
women in philosophy. Building this community could be done by creating women in philosophy
common areas on campus, sponsoring a female scholar in residence program, developing a
service-learning component where women teach younger women about philosophy, bringing
prominent feminist philosophers to campus, and developing a mentoring program for women
undergraduate, graduate, and professional women in philosophy (Rypisi et al., 2009).
Women in philosophy can also be better prepared for the barriers by having a more
thorough graduate orientation to talk about being a women in male-dominated fields (Rypisi et
al., 2009). By understanding the I-E-O pipeline and barriers, women can be more aware of the
external influences and maintain their internal locus of control to persist in the field.
Finally, student affairs can be specifically helpful developing and implementing
assessments based on practitioner knowledge of climate and culture assessments in the field. In
doing so, student affairs professionals can inform the department how women are experiencing
the field of philosophy and how to better foster positive engagement in the future.
Conclusion
As the termination of famous philosopher Colin McGinn in the recent sexual misconduct
case illustrates, the tide is turning for women in philosophy. However, there is still a long way to
go in order to achieve the goal of creating equitable access opportunities to the realm of
professional philosophy. Our I-E-O model provides current philosophers, academic and student
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
24
affairs administrators, and other interested parties with a more comprehensive understanding of
the challenges and current research related to the goal of increasing tenured women in
philosophy. As our model shows, there are many complex issues that exist in order to create a
reliable pipeline of women in the field, and it will require more than just philosophers to make
the change. Beginning at the undergraduate level, we must work toward building and
maintaining interest in philosophy for women students. This means that we may need to look at
how we are first introducing philosophy to students and whether we can better accommodate
women’s ways of learning and make the classroom environment more welcoming to women.
Research also shows that we must do more to ensure equitable access to professional careers in
philosophy for other subpopulations, including women of color.
Once these underrepresented groups matriculate into graduate programs, we need to
focus on creating a welcoming environment for women and other diverse student populations.
Due to significant issues like sexual harassment, implicit bias, stereotype threat, and more,
women can be perceive a forced decision between their academic passion and personal safety.
Even if women are able to secure a tenure-track faculty position in philosophy, they still fact
significant challenges in being taken seriously by their predominately male colleagues and in
actually attaining tenure. Overall, our model and the relevant research show that women need to
be better supported and provided with the tools necessary to overcome barriers and achieve
careers as professional philosophers in the realm of academia and beyond.
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
25
References
Amodio, D. M. & Devine, P. G. (2006). Stereotyping and evaluation in implicit race bias:
Evidence for independent constructs and unique effects on behavior. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 652‐661. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.652
Antony, L. & Cudd A. (2012). The mentoring project. Hypatia, 27 (2), 461-468. doi:
10.1111/j.1527-2001.2012.01267.x
Astin, A. (1970a). The methodology of research on college impact (I). Sociology of education,
43, 223-254. doi: 10.1002/aehe.3640030107
Astin, A. (1970b). The methodology of research on college impact (II). Sociology of education,
43, 437-450. doi: 10.1002/aehe.3640030107
Astin, A. (1991). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and
evaluation in higher education. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Budden, A. E., Tregenza, T., Aarssen, L. W., Koricheva, J., Leimu, R., & Lortie, C. J. (2008).
Double‐blind review favours increased representation of female authors. Trends in
Ecology & Evolution, 23(1), 4‐6.
Cole, M. S., Field, H. S. & Giles, W. F. (2004). Interaction of recruiter and applicant gender in
resume evaluation: A field study. Sex Roles, 51, 597‐608. doi: 10.1007/s11199-004-54691
Division APAP. 2011. Program review report, 2004–2011. Committee E, editor. http://apapacific.org/governance/Program_Review_Report.2004-11.pdf (accessed April 21, 2012).
Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social
capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
26
Feminist Philosophers (2009). Gendered conference campaign. Retrieved from
http://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/gendered-conference-campaign/
Haslanger, S. (2008). Changing the ideology and culture of philosophy: Not by reason (alone).
Hypatia, 23(2), 210–23. doi: 10.1111/j.1527-2001.2008.tb01195.x
Hill, C. & Silva, E. (2006). Drawing the line: Sexual harassment on campus. American
Association of University Women. Retrieved from
http://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/drawing-the-line-sexual-harassment-on-campus.pdf
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. London, UK:
Routledge.
Kaminski, D. & Geisler, C. (2012). Survival analysis of faculty retention in science and
engineering by gender. Science, 335(6070), pp. 864-866. doi: 10.1126/science.1214844
Kantor, J. (2013, September 7). Harvard business school case study: Gender equity. The New
York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/education/harvardcase-study-gender-equity.html?_r=0
Kukla, R. (2013, March 18). Chatting with Kate Norlock, Chair of the APA Committee on
Sexual Harassment. Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog. Retrieved from
http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2013/03/chatting-with-kate-norlock-chair-of-theapa-committee-on-sexual-harassment-kukla.html
Mason, M. A. (2009, March 29). Role models and mentors. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Role-ModelsMentors/44794
Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012).
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences, Early Edition, 1-6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211286109
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
27
Norlock, K.J. (2009). Love to count: arguments for inaccurately measuring the proportion of
philosophers who are women. APA Newsletters on Feminism and Philosophy, 8(2), 6-9.
Paxton, M., Figdor, C., & Tiberius, V. (2012). Quantifying the gender gap: An empirical study of
the underrepresentation of women in philosophy. Hypatia, 27(4), 949-957. doi:
10.1111/j.1527-2001.2012.01306.x
Pearson, A.R., Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L. (2009). The nature of contemporary prejudice:
Insights from aversive racism. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3(3),
314‐338. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00183.x
Rypisi, C., Malclm, L. E., & Kim, H. S. (2009). Environmental and developmental approaches to
supporting women’s success in STEM fields. In Harper, S. R., & Quaye, S. J. (Eds.).
Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical
approaches for diverse populations (pp. 117-135). New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
Roberts, H. (December 18, 2011). Implicit bias and social justice. Open Society Foundations.
Retrieved from http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/implicit-bias-and-socialjustice
Saul, J. (2012, October 16). Women in philosophy. The Philosophers Magazine. Retrieved from
http://philosophypress.co.uk/?p=1079
Saul, J. (2013, August 15). Philosophy has a sexual harassment problem. Salon. Retrieved from
http://philosophypress.co.uk/?p=1079
Schmader, T., Whitehead, J., & Wysocki, V. H. (2007). A linguistic comparison of letters of
recommendation for male and female chemistry and biochemistry job applicants. Sex
Roles, 57, 509‐514. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9291-4
Schuessler, J. (2013, August 2). A star philosopher falls, and a debate over sexism is set off. The
GRADUATE WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY
28
New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/03/arts/colinmcginn-philosopher-to-leave-his-post.html?_r=0
Steinpreis, R., Anders, K., and Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of the
curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex
Roles, 41(7/8), 509-528. doi: 10.1023/A:1018839203698
Steele, C.M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and
performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613-621. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.6.613
Steele, C.M. & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of
African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797-811.
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797
Tinto, V. (2012). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Table 270:
Study of postsecondary faculty. Digest of Education Statistics, 2011. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_270.asp
Van Camp, J. (2011). Tenured/tenure-track faculty women at 98 U.S. doctoral programs in
philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/doctoral_2004.html
Weidman, J. (1989). Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In J. Smart (Ed.),
Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 5, pp.289-322). New York,
NY: Agathon.
What is it like to be a woman in philosophy?. (2013). Retrieved from
http://beingawomaninphilosophy.wordpress.com/