Performing Women: The Gendered Dimensions of the UK New Research Economy

Abstract

This paper explores the development and maintenance of familiar gendered employment patterns and practices in UK universities, which are exemplars of new modes of knowledge production, commodification and marketisation. After discussing in detail the evidence of gender discrimination in UK higher education and the changes in the academic labour process consequent to the incorporation, at least at the policy level, of universities into the 'knowledge economy', institution-specific data is used to highlight the gendered aspects of the research economy from the three intermeshing perspectives of research culture, research capital and the research production process. This nexus is constructed in such a way as to systematically militate against women's full and equal involvement in research. Lack of transparency, increased competition and lower levels of collegiate activity coupled with networking based on homosociability are contributing to a research production process where women are marginalized.

Women and academic workloads: career slow lane or Cul-de-Sac?

“…This incomplete assessment of overall loads often requires staff to work in their own time at weekends or evenings, because the work allocated for teaching and administration duties fills the formal time available at work. Thus certain groups may find themselves disadvantaged in a work culture that favours those who are able to work for long and unsocial hours (Fletcher et al 2007). Taking this together with Parker's (2008) findings on the influence of research on promotion, one could anticipate this being especially problematic for women and their career progression.…”

“…A prospect for such development is seen for example by Ledwith and Manfredi (2000), whose research reveals there are substantial generational differences between older and younger women in their confidence in seizing opportunities. This issue of confidence is a recurring aspect (Asmar 1999;Saunderson 2002;Fletcher et al 2007). Further, as others note (Poole et al 1997;Bryson 2004), networking and mentors are not seen to be greatly available to women, but have been demonstrated in long term studies to help increase research productivity and promotion prospects (Gardiner et al 2007).…”

“…The question of research outputs, already touched on above, is complex and as Poole et al note (1997), there exists little in the way of conclusive results. This issue seems complicated by, for example, factors such as institutional demands (Carvalho and Santiago 2008), discipline differences (Poole et al 1997;Asmar 1999;Fletcher et al 2007), possibly compounded by patronage issues (Finch 2003), the evaluation of research outputs (Poole et al 1997), and routes taken into academia (Fletcher et al 2007).…”

An Overview of the Current State of Women’s Leadership in Higher Education in Saudi Arabia and a Proposal for Future Research Directions

“…Other obstacles include limited role models, mentoring and leadership training and development for women (Morley 2013a). Studies in western contexts also point to bias in performance evaluation (Fletcher et al 2007). Thus, women in the western world experience marginalization and devaluation (Fotaki 2013) in many comparable ways to women in the Middle East.…”

Women and Leadership in Higher Education in China: Discourse and the Discursive Construction of Identity

“…It is said that universities are dominated by masculine Discourse (Harley 2003;Harding et al 2010), and masculinized hegemonic structures, with the overwhelming majority of senior occupations occupied by men and definitions of excellence and merit (O'Connor 2014), and norms and values (Savigny 2014, p. 797) that benefit men but discriminate against women (Morley and Crossouard 2016). Masculinized cultures foster homosocial networks (Fletcher et al 2007). These can resemble an exclusive gentleman's club (O'Connor 2014; Thomas and Davies 2002) and appear unfriendly (Morley and Crossouard 2016;Davies and Holloway 1995), or even hostile toward women (Williams et al 2006).…”