[ad_1]
The nation’s top research institutions are inching toward progress in their efforts to diversify their leadership, more than doubling the number of Black college presidents over the past 18 months, according to a new report from the Eos Foundation. The problem? Only one of those presidents was a woman.
“When institutions set goals for gender and race, they often don’t disaggregate them,” says Andrea Silbert, president of the philanthropic organization that supports gender equity and diversity in leadership. “An institution may say we have 25 percent people of color among our deans, but what if all 25 percent are men?”
The foundation’s report, produced in partnership with the American Association of University Women, points to a dearth of intersectional diversity goals as one of the key factors contributing to “power gaps” at the nation’s elite colleges.
The Women’s Power Gap at Elite Universities examines the concerning lack of gender and racial diversity among the highest-paid professionals at the 130 Research 1 institutions, the Carnegie Classification of colleges with the highest level of research activity. The findings follow on research the groups published last year, highlighting the gender-based pay gaps at the same set of institutions.
Focusing on Systems
Why are women being held back?
Contrary to popular belief, the disparity isn’t the result of a “pipeline” issue — women are obtaining 55 percent of all Ph.D.s, and women of color are obtaining nearly 20 percent — it’s systemic bias, according to the report.
Approaches to closing the power gap that attempt to “fix” women by way of training programs designed to prepare underrepresented groups for advancement, to encourage women to behave more like men, or to blame the stagnation of their careers on lack of confidence, have no real footing, the researchers write. Often, women who attempt to mirror male behaviors face backlash for being “too aggressive,” the report says.
“We really want to push the conversation away from the discussion around fixing women to be better, to be more assertive. It really is the system that needs an overhaul, not women,” says Gloria Blackwell, CEO of AAUW.
Research also shows that many women are confident but also rational. They see what happens to other women who apply for positions and don’t get them. The report analyzed each president’s last three jobs and found that men were more likely to take a nontraditional path — bypassing the usual steppingstone positions of provost or dean. Only 7 percent of women presidents had made that leap, compared to 25 percent of men.
A Concerning Lack of Transparency
The Eos Foundation received diversity data from only about half of the colleges included in their study, but what was most concerning, researchers note, was the lack of transparency about board diversity.
This is in contrast to the trend in corporate America of late, with more companies making an effort to diversify leadership and making data on their efforts to do so public.
“If the board won’t disclose their data, why would anybody expect the president and the rest of the leadership to do the same?” says Silbert. “To think that our nonprofit institutions of higher education are not even keeping up with corporate America is really discouraging.”
Governing boards set institutional strategy and often make decisions about hiring college leadership.
Less than 40 percent of colleges provided board diversity data, and of those that did, women of color made up only 8 percent of board members. Among 52 percent of women board members at R1 universities, only 26 percent hold board chair positions, and only 5 percent of them are women of color.
The increase in corporate America’s board diversity came only after shareholders pushed for it. Higher ed doesn’t have the same mechanism to hold them to account, but Silbert says donors, alumni, and students can play their part. And more importantly, the U.S. Department of Education can step up and expand its reporting of this data.
“That which is measured is managed,” Silbert says.
Other key findings from the report include:
- Women and women of color are in their highest proportions in president’s cabinets, but that’s rarely a pathway to the presidency. Women, who make up nearly 40 percent of all provosts and academic deans, only account for 22 percent of presidents and 10 percent of system presidents.
- None of the 20 presidents of public university systems are women of color. White women account for 10 percent of system presidents.
- Very few colleges are gender-balanced across all leadership positions. Only 10 percent are categorized as “leaders” in gender diversity this study. The vast majority fall into the categories of “Needs Urgent Action” or “Work to Do.”
- Public universities are doing a better job of diversifying their leadership than private universities. Women account for 24 percent of public university presidents, but only 17 percent of private university presidents.
[ad_2]
Source link
