The glass ceiling and the maternal wall in academia

Abstract

Mothers get caught between the prescriptive image of the ideal worker and the prescriptive image of the ideal mother.NEW DIRECTIONS FOR The glass ceiling in academia is well documented. Women are more likely than men to end up in non-tenure-track positions. Women on tenure track are less likely than men to be at four-year institutions. And highly ranked four-year institutions tend to employ low percentages of women (Mason and Goulden, 2002). Why?Part of the problem is gender bias, of two types. The more familiar is the glass ceiling that prevents successful women from reaching the summit of their professions. But what exactly is the glass ceiling? Typically, it is defined demographically, by documenting the dearth of women at the top. But why the dearth of women, when most academics (men as well as women) see themselves as committed to gender equality? Little information surfaces to help academic administrators who are determined to give women a fair shake.Many women never get near the glass ceiling because of a type of gender bias that has only recently been documented. In a 2003 law review article, a coauthor and I documented the "maternal wall" that inhibits women's progress once they become mothers (Williams and Segal, 2003). Mason and her team also have documented the sharp impact of having children on academic women's careers. Women who have children soon after receiving their Ph.D. are much less likely to achieve tenure than men who have children at the same point in their career. Prestigious research universities tend to grant tenure to men at a much higher rate, relegating women to secondtier teaching and adjunct positions (Mason and Goulden, 2002). The result is that most women who earn Ph.D.s never get near tenure, much less tenure at a leading institution.

Academic Excellence and Gender Bias in the Practices and Perceptions of Scientists in Leadership and Decision-making Positions

“…When women do adopt behaviours typically associated with men and seen as crucial for success, they are penalised: 3 they are perceived as bossy, too assertive, competitive, and aggressive, in short, not likeable (Valian 1999;Williams 2005). Gender-stereotypical perceptions of women's and men's capacities and roles then undermine a fair assessment of women researchers and relatedly their ability to progress to positions of authority in the research hierarchy.…”

Excelence a genderové předsudky v praktikách a vnímání přírodních vědců ve vedoucích a rozhodovacích pozicích

“…Jestliže ženy přejímají chování typicky spojované s muži a považované za rozhodující pro úspěch, přichází trest: 3 jsou vnímány jako panovačné, příliš asertivní, soutěživé a agresivní, stručně řečeno nesympatické (Valian 1999;Williams 2005). Genderově stereotypní vnímání způsobilosti žen a mužů a jejich rolí podrývá možnost spravedlivého hodnocení badatelek a v souvislosti s tím i jejich příležitosti kariérně postoupit ve výzkumné hierarchii až na pozici autority.…”

Untitled

“…When women do adopt behaviours typically associated with men and seen as crucial for success, they are penalised: 3 they are perceived as bossy, too assertive, competitive, and aggressive, in short, not likeable (Valian 1999;Williams 2005). Gender-stereotypical perceptions of women's and men's capacities and roles then undermine a fair assessment of women researchers and relatedly their ability to progress to positions of authority in the research hierarchy.…”

“…These value judgements are then used to judge the work dedication and career prospects of women and men researchers. As Williams andSegal (2003Williams &Segal (2003: 80) argue, it is this notion of 'an ideal worker who has a man's body and men's traditional immunity from family caregiving [that] discriminates against women'. Because of the supreme value attributed to women's motherhood in Czech society, professed repeatedly by the interviewed lab leaders and managers, and because of the strongly embedded notion of research as a mission and sacrifi ce, it remains particularly diffi cult to carve out a space where the issue of work-life balance can be addressed as an institutional issue.…”