How Research, Teaching, and Leadership Roles are Recommended to Male and Female Engineering Faculty Differently

Eugene Judson, Lydia Ross, Kristi Glassmeyer

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    Across disciplines, male faculty spend more time on research than female faculty. Yet, women tend to teach and mentor students more hours than men (Misra et al. in Glob J Eng Educ 14(1):119–131, 2011). These disparities play pivotal roles in tenure and promotion decisions wherein research and leadership roles are most valued (Green in J Soc Work Educ 44(2):117–128, 2008). There is considerable evidence suggesting that implicit biases underpin some of these faculty roles differences, particularly in male-dominated disciplines, such as engineering. At the same time, there is limited evidence that, once aware of gender inequity, individuals will engage in bias correction in order to rectify prejudice. This study was designed to evaluate if implicit bias or bias correction could be detected when faculty considered the most appropriate roles for other faculty. Faculty from 50 colleges of engineering completed an activity wherein they assigned five fictitious engineering faculty characters to five assignments (one research, one leadership, and three teaching/advising roles). One version of the activity contained only male names; the other version was identical except for the change of the middle character’s name from male (Charlie) to female (Cathy). Results indicated that both men and women were significantly more likely to select Cathy for both the leadership and research positions over Charlie. Regression analysis of the Cathy Group data indicated respondents’ gender did not predict selection of Cathy to the leadership role; however, women were significantly more likely than men to select Cathy to do research.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    JournalResearch in Higher Education
    DOIs
    StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

    Fingerprint

    teaching research
    leadership
    engineering
    trend
    gender
    role play
    prejudice
    evidence
    regression analysis
    promotion
    Teaching

    Keywords

    • Bias
    • Bias correction
    • Engineering
    • Faculty
    • Gender
    • Gender equity
    • Higher education
    • Implicit bias
    • Job-sorting

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Education

    Cite this

    How Research, Teaching, and Leadership Roles are Recommended to Male and Female Engineering Faculty Differently. / Judson, Eugene; Ross, Lydia; Glassmeyer, Kristi.

    In: Research in Higher Education, 01.01.2019.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{387f7d3a814c41d890e051eccf4064fd,
    title = "How Research, Teaching, and Leadership Roles are Recommended to Male and Female Engineering Faculty Differently",
    abstract = "Across disciplines, male faculty spend more time on research than female faculty. Yet, women tend to teach and mentor students more hours than men (Misra et al. in Glob J Eng Educ 14(1):119–131, 2011). These disparities play pivotal roles in tenure and promotion decisions wherein research and leadership roles are most valued (Green in J Soc Work Educ 44(2):117–128, 2008). There is considerable evidence suggesting that implicit biases underpin some of these faculty roles differences, particularly in male-dominated disciplines, such as engineering. At the same time, there is limited evidence that, once aware of gender inequity, individuals will engage in bias correction in order to rectify prejudice. This study was designed to evaluate if implicit bias or bias correction could be detected when faculty considered the most appropriate roles for other faculty. Faculty from 50 colleges of engineering completed an activity wherein they assigned five fictitious engineering faculty characters to five assignments (one research, one leadership, and three teaching/advising roles). One version of the activity contained only male names; the other version was identical except for the change of the middle character’s name from male (Charlie) to female (Cathy). Results indicated that both men and women were significantly more likely to select Cathy for both the leadership and research positions over Charlie. Regression analysis of the Cathy Group data indicated respondents’ gender did not predict selection of Cathy to the leadership role; however, women were significantly more likely than men to select Cathy to do research.",
    keywords = "Bias, Bias correction, Engineering, Faculty, Gender, Gender equity, Higher education, Implicit bias, Job-sorting",
    author = "Eugene Judson and Lydia Ross and Kristi Glassmeyer",
    year = "2019",
    month = "1",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1007/s11162-018-09542-8",
    language = "English (US)",
    journal = "Research in Higher Education",
    issn = "0361-0365",
    publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - How Research, Teaching, and Leadership Roles are Recommended to Male and Female Engineering Faculty Differently

    AU - Judson, Eugene

    AU - Ross, Lydia

    AU - Glassmeyer, Kristi

    PY - 2019/1/1

    Y1 - 2019/1/1

    N2 - Across disciplines, male faculty spend more time on research than female faculty. Yet, women tend to teach and mentor students more hours than men (Misra et al. in Glob J Eng Educ 14(1):119–131, 2011). These disparities play pivotal roles in tenure and promotion decisions wherein research and leadership roles are most valued (Green in J Soc Work Educ 44(2):117–128, 2008). There is considerable evidence suggesting that implicit biases underpin some of these faculty roles differences, particularly in male-dominated disciplines, such as engineering. At the same time, there is limited evidence that, once aware of gender inequity, individuals will engage in bias correction in order to rectify prejudice. This study was designed to evaluate if implicit bias or bias correction could be detected when faculty considered the most appropriate roles for other faculty. Faculty from 50 colleges of engineering completed an activity wherein they assigned five fictitious engineering faculty characters to five assignments (one research, one leadership, and three teaching/advising roles). One version of the activity contained only male names; the other version was identical except for the change of the middle character’s name from male (Charlie) to female (Cathy). Results indicated that both men and women were significantly more likely to select Cathy for both the leadership and research positions over Charlie. Regression analysis of the Cathy Group data indicated respondents’ gender did not predict selection of Cathy to the leadership role; however, women were significantly more likely than men to select Cathy to do research.

    AB - Across disciplines, male faculty spend more time on research than female faculty. Yet, women tend to teach and mentor students more hours than men (Misra et al. in Glob J Eng Educ 14(1):119–131, 2011). These disparities play pivotal roles in tenure and promotion decisions wherein research and leadership roles are most valued (Green in J Soc Work Educ 44(2):117–128, 2008). There is considerable evidence suggesting that implicit biases underpin some of these faculty roles differences, particularly in male-dominated disciplines, such as engineering. At the same time, there is limited evidence that, once aware of gender inequity, individuals will engage in bias correction in order to rectify prejudice. This study was designed to evaluate if implicit bias or bias correction could be detected when faculty considered the most appropriate roles for other faculty. Faculty from 50 colleges of engineering completed an activity wherein they assigned five fictitious engineering faculty characters to five assignments (one research, one leadership, and three teaching/advising roles). One version of the activity contained only male names; the other version was identical except for the change of the middle character’s name from male (Charlie) to female (Cathy). Results indicated that both men and women were significantly more likely to select Cathy for both the leadership and research positions over Charlie. Regression analysis of the Cathy Group data indicated respondents’ gender did not predict selection of Cathy to the leadership role; however, women were significantly more likely than men to select Cathy to do research.

    KW - Bias

    KW - Bias correction

    KW - Engineering

    KW - Faculty

    KW - Gender

    KW - Gender equity

    KW - Higher education

    KW - Implicit bias

    KW - Job-sorting

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059455509&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85059455509&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1007/s11162-018-09542-8

    DO - 10.1007/s11162-018-09542-8

    M3 - Article

    JO - Research in Higher Education

    JF - Research in Higher Education

    SN - 0361-0365

    ER -