1. Studying the transition between Associate and Full Professor for STEM Faculty: Preliminary Results* Dana M. Britton Professor of Sociology Kansas State University Presented at the Second Big 12 Conference on Faculty Diversity, Lawrence, Kansas, April 25-26, 2010

2. Funding note *This research is funded a National Science Foundation Award: ADVANCE Partnerships for Adaptation, Implementation, and Dissemination (PAID) Award: PROMOTE - Improving the promotion to full processes at western public universities, Principal investigators Kimberly A. Sullivan, Ann Austin, Beth A. Montelone, Dana M. Britton, Cynthia Zoski. NSF Award #: HRD-0820273. The views in this presentation are those of the author alone.

3. Gendering the academy Background and context Gendering through policy – tenure and promotion documents Barriers to promotion for all faculty Gendered barriers – work/family Preliminary implications

4. Distribution of women faculty by discipline

6. Possible barriers The pipeline explanation – but this is not sufficient Promotion to full is voluntary, not on a time clock Tenure and promotion policies vague Work/family issues Gendered cultures

7. Methodology Originally intended to be an interview study of 80 men and women STEM faculty at seven universities Document analysis, T&P documents in STEM departments (N=12)

9. Participating Campus List New Mexico State University, Utah State University, North Dakota State University, University of Kansas, Kansas State University, University of Mississippi, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Oregon State University, University of Idaho, Washington State University

10. Tenure and promotion documents Omission or obfuscation For promotion to full professor: Distinguished reputation in [discipline], such that he or she would be invited to join our faculty at the rank of Full Professor (Department A).

11. Requirements deliberately unclear No exact quotas or guidelines can exist and a combination of objective and subjective elements will enter into a final decision in the evaluation process. Decisions on acceptable performance levels must contain the individual judgments of the faculty and the administrators involved in the decision (Department B).

12. Standards for full professor Promotion to Professor is based on attainment of sustained excellence in the assigned responsibilities of the faculty member and recognition of excellence by all appropriate constituencies (Department C).

13. Most common = National and International reputation, leadership Expectations for promotion from associate professor to professor are considerably higher [than those for tenure], including leadership in scholarly research and/or instructional activities, and strong professional recognition at the national and international levels (Department D).

14. Effects of vague standards Make the informal culture very important Allows a wide range of subjectivity Makes recourse nearly impossible

15. Barriers for all faculty Junior administrative roles Other service – though this can be double- edged Heavy teaching responsibilities (or a focus on pedagogy) Health issues Non standard academic appointments

16. Gendered barriers Work/family Academic women with children more likely to be primary caregivers, spend more hours Women full professors are often primary breadwinners The salience of gender in faculty work

17. Preliminary Implications Transparency in policies would help, but is not a panacea Work/family balance issues remain very important for women faculty, regardless of rank Culture issues are much harder to tackle - but department climates are particularly crucial