Improving Recruitment of Women Faculty in

Science and Engineering at MUMizzou ADVANCE STRIDE Committee Spring 2009

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant No. 0618977. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.

MizzouMizzou ADVANCE

Women faculty in MU’s Science and Engineering Departments

Sources: National Science Foundation, 2003; 10/31/2006 HR Census Date Employee File, MU Office of Institutional Research

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Percent

Male

FemaleAssociate

Assistant

Full16% 11%

84% 89%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

35% 19%

65% 81%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Female

Male

Female

Male

29% 20%

72% 80%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

U.S. MU

1 6 %1 6 %1 5 %1 4 %1 3 %

8 4 %8 4 %8 5 %8 6 %8 7 %

0 %

2 0 %

4 0 %

6 0 %

8 0 %

1 0 0 %

2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 6

Percentage of female and male faculty inseventeen MU science and engineeringdepartments (CAFNR, A&S and CoE, Oct2006 data)

MU compared to US (NSF, 2003 data compared toMU Oct 2006 data)

Female Male

Student populations are not mirrored in the MU’s STEM faculty

Sources: National Science Foundation, 2003; 10/31/2006 HR Census Date Employee File, MU Office of Institutional Research

3 8 %3 5 %

1 7 %

6 2 %6 5 %

8 3 %

0 %

2 0 %

4 0 %

6 0 %

8 0 %

1 0 0 %

U n d e r g r a d u a t e s G r a d u a t e S t u d e n t s F a c u l t y

M a l e

F e m a l e

Strategies: Phases of a Search

1. Pre-search

2. Solicit applicants

3. Evaluate applicants

4. Select candidates to interview

5. Interview

6. Evaluate finalists

7. Make the offer

8. Close the deal

Pre-Search

• Choose a committee committed to diversity• The charge: excellence, diversity, proactive recruiting• Review past searches

– How many women applied? Interviewed?– Offered? Hired? How compare to males?

• Define the position and prepare the advertisement– As broadly as possible– Convey departmental commitment to attracting women

candidates – Emphasize ability to work with diverse students

Soliciting Applicants:Broaden the pool

• Be aware of the MU Chancellor’s Diversity Initiative• Consider candidates from wide range of institutions• Consider established, but under-placed, women

faculty from lesser-ranked institutions than MU• Place suitable value on non-traditional career paths• Help generate a diverse pool

• Attend and speak at meetings-talk to potential women candidates• Cultivate future candidates and mentors of future candidates• Use directories of recent Ph.D.s available in the MU Office of Equity.

Soliciting Applicants: Recruit actively

• Advertise for at least 30 days before deadline

• Advertise in venues that attract diverse candidates

• Personal contacts: colleagues, possible candidates

• Take advantage of rosters of female members in professional organizations, recent PhD graduates, fellowship recipients

Evaluating Applicants

• Learn about and discuss research on biases and assumptions

• Develop explicit criteria and apply consistently to all applicants

• Spend sufficient time evaluating each applicant• Evaluate each candidate’s entire application• Be able to defend every decision for eliminating or

advancing a candidate. Evaluate.

Learn about schemas

• Schemas are expectations or stereotypes that define “average” members of a group– Guide perceptions and behaviors– Influence group members’ judgments about

themselves and others

• Widely culturally shared– Both men and women have the

same schemas about gender– People are often not aware

of schemas

Fiske (2002) Current Directions in Psychological Science. 11:123-128

Schemas are...

Fiske (2002) Current Directions in Psychological Science. 11:123-128

• Applied more under circumstances of:– Ambiguity (including lack of information)– Stress from competing tasks– Time pressure– Lack of critical mass

Schemas in action: Evaluation of Identical CVs

When evaluating identical application packages …

… both male and female university psychology professors preferred 2:1 to hire “Brian” over “Karen.”

Brian

Karen

Steinpreis, Anders, & Ritzke (1999) Sex Roles, 41, 509.

Schemas in action: Evaluating Fellowship Applications

Women had to be 2.5 times more productive to receive the same reviewer rating as the average male applicant.

Similar findings:• USA/GAO report on Peer Review in Federal Agency Grant Selection (1994)• European Molecular Biology Organization Reports (2001)• NIH Pioneer Awards: Journal of Women’s Health (2005) & Nature (August 2006)

Wenneras & Wold (1997) Nature, 387, 341.

Letters of Recommendation for Successful Medical School Faculty Applicants

Letters for men:• Longer• More references to CV• Publications• Patients• Colleagues

Letters for women:• Shorter• More references to personal

life• More irrelevancies, faint

praise, and hedges“She is close to my wife.”“It’s amazing how much

she’s accomplished.”“It appears her health is

stable.”

Trix & Psenka (2003) Discourse & Society, Vol 14(2): 191-220.

Evaluating Applicants

• Periodically review your judgments– Are women subject to different expectations in terms or

publication and productivity?– Are candidates from lesser known institutions being under-

valued?– Are the accomplishments of women being under-valued or

unfairly attributed to research mentors or collaborators?– Is the ability of women to run a research group, raise funds

and supervise students being underestimated?– Are assumptions about family responsibilities negatively

influencing evaluation of merit, despite evidence of productivity?

Choosing Candidates for Visit

• Use a detailed rating system to select candidates• Develop a “medium” list from which to generate the

short list. – Are there women on the list?– If not, consider intensifying the search before moving on

to a short list.

• Consider making multiple short lists, each emphasizing different criteria.– Develop final short list by taking the top candidates

across different criteria.– Is there evidence of evaluation bias?

Choosing Candidates for Visit

• Plan to interview more than one woman.

–Research shows that interviewers evaluate women more fairly when more than one woman is in the interview pool.

• Arrange for interviews to occur over a short time frame.

Interviewing

• During the campus visit, one goal is to learn about the candidate:– Make sure candidates meet with a variety of faculty and

students in both formal and informal settings– Ask some “standardized” questions during meetings

• Focus on candidate’s ability to perform essential functions of the job

• Be sure to gather equivalent information from all candidates to make comparisons easier

– Be aware of laws regarding questions about race, ethnic background, religion, marital or familial status, age, disability, sexual orientation or veteran status

Interviewing

• During the campus visit, another goal is to allow the candidate to learn about your department and MU:– Designate a faculty member as host– ADVANCE can help networking with females, if needed.– Consider how the department represents itself in terms

of:• Serving as a place where faculty, especially women, can thrive• Having clear, public policies and procedures for evaluation and

promotion• Mentoring for junior and tenured faculty

Evaluating Finalists

• Solicit feedback from faculty and students who met the candidates

– Develop and use a form to get specific information

– Ask questions about scholarship and potential for success

• Be aware of possible biases in the evaluations

Making the Offer

• Be open and honest in negotiating the offer.• Be aware that women may have received less

mentoring than men about how to make requests in negotiation.– Consider appointing an advocate or mentor to

help candidates through the negotiation.– To ensure equality, make sure the candidate

knows what items are negotiable.

Closing the Deal

• Pay attention to non-professional aspects of the package

– If candidate has a partner who will need placement help, try to help arrange interviews / opportunities as early in hiring process as possible.

– Be ready and open to share information on other issues of concern to the candidate.

After the Search

• If you successfully hire a woman:– Consider the factors that contributed to the success– Keep a record of what worked well for future

reference

• If the applicant pool was not as large or diverse as you wanted, ask:– Could the job description have been phrased

differently to attract more candidates?– Could the department have recruited more actively?– Were there criteria that were consistently not met by

the women candidates?

After the Search

• If a woman was offered the position, but chose not to accept, what reasons did they offer?

– Consider as many factors as you can identify.

– Share those reasons with departmental decision-makers

– Re-visit those reasons as part of the initiating future searches.