Books

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering (The National Academies Press, 2006).

Robert W. Drago, Striking a Balance: Work, Family, Life (Dollars & Sense, 2007).

Sue V. Rosser, The Science Glass Ceiling: Academic Women Scientists and the Struggle to Succeed (Routledge, 2004).

Virginia Valian, Why So Slow: The Advancement of Women (MIT Press, 1999).

Articles

American Council on Education, "An Agenda for Excellence: Creating Flexibility in Tenure-Track Faculty Careers" (2005). Executive Summary.

Joann Moody, "Demystifying the Profession: Helping Junior Faculty Succeed" (Northeast Consortium for Faculty Diversity, 2004).

Joann Moody, "Rising Above Cognitive Errors: Guidelines for Search, Tenure Review, and Other Evaluation Committees" (Northeast Consortium for Faculty Diversity, 2005).

Elizabeth Redden, "Female Faculty and the Science" (Insidehighered.com, Oct. 18, 2007).  Click here to view article.

Edyta Zielinska, "Best Places to Work in Academia, 2007" (2007). Click here to view article.

Ted Agres, "Best Places to Work 2007: PostDocs" (2007).  Click here to view article.

Statistics on Women in Science:    

NSF
This report provides data on the participation of women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering education and employment.
Report on Early Career Progress of NRSA Predoctoral Trainees and Fellows
IT Workforce: Retention of Women and Minorities

Donna Nelson, "A National Analysis of Minorities in Science and Engineering Faculties at Research Universities" (October 31, 2007),  View report here:

Donna J. Nelson, Final Report "A National Analysis of Diversity in Science and Engineering Faculties at Research Universities", a final report of our FY2002 data, revised 2007.

Dual Career:

Dual-Career Academic Couples: What Universities Need to Know, L. Schiebinger, A. Henderson, S. Gilmartin, (Stanford: Clayman Institute, 2008):
http://www.stanford.edu/group/gender/ResearchPrograms/DualCareer/DualCareerFinal.pdf

Dual-Science-Career-Couples:
http://physics.wm.edu/dualcareer.html

Report On The Dual-Career-Couple Survey:
http://www.physics.wm.edu/~sher/survey.pdf

Dual-Career Couples: Keeping Them Together, L. E. Wolf-Wendel, S. Twombly and S. Rice, The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 71, No. 3 (May - Jun., 2000), pp. 291-321. Ohio State University Press:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2649292

The Two-Body Problem: Dual-Career-Couple Hiring Practices in-Higher Education, L. Wolf-Wendel, S. B. Twombly, and S. Rice, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003 Baltimore.

Meeting the Needs of Dual Career Couples in Academia, M. Fleig-Palmer, J. Murrin, D. K. Palmer, and C. Rathert, 2003 CUPA-HR Journal, Vol. 54, No.3, pp. 12-15:
http://www.cupahr.org/newsroom/journal/archive/2003_CUPAHR_winter_spring_journal.pdf

Solving the Two-Body Problem, A. Agrawal and J, Thaler:
http://sciencecareers.sciencemag.org/career_development/previous_issues/articles/2240/solving_the_two_body_problem

Universities and the Two-Body Problem, Susan Landau (Computer Science):
http://research.sun.com/people/slandau/two_body_sigact.pdf

Spousal hiring policies various universities, a list of URLs:
www.historians.org/grads/ Spousal _Hiring_Policies.doc

 Partner Accommodation Policy at UIC:
http://www.uic.edu/depts/oaa/Docs/Partner_Accommodation_Policy_Final1.pdf

GC- HERC: The Greater Chicago Higher Education Recruitment Consortium:
http://gcherc.org/site/1684/members.cfm

the dual career section of GC- HERC has many links to articles and university dual-career pages:
http://www.gcherc.org/site/1684/res_dualcareer.cfm?site_id=1684

The National HERC links to various regional HERCs:
http://www.hercjobs.org/home/index.cfm?site_id=793

Who succeeds in science, gender differences:

Women Faculty Pursuing Grants: Gender Differences, Patricia Boyer and Irv Cockriel, 1999,:
http://www.advancingwomen.com/awl/winter99/boyer.html
Sonnert, G. and Holton, G. Who Succeeds in Science? The Gender Dimension (Rutgers University Press, 1995).

Gender-bias in evaluation:

A shorter alternative to “Why So Slow” book:
Beyond Gender Schemas: Improving the Advancement of Women in Academia , Virginia Valian, NWSA Journal 16.1 (2004) 207-220 :http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/nwsa_journal/v016/16.1valian.html

 Wenneras, C. & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature, 387, 341-343.
This study assessed gender differences in ratings applications of postdoctoral fellowships from the Swedish Medical Research Council, as well as predictors of those ratings. Overall female applicants were rated lower than male applicants, and therefore the rate of awards to females was lower than that to males. Using objective criteria of scientific productivity, the researchers found that in fact female applicants had to be 2.5 times more productive than their male counterparts in order to receive the same “competence” ratings from reviewers. Parallel findings were reported for US funding agencies in a 1994 GAO report on Peer Review: Reforms Needed to Ensure Fairness in Federal Agency Grant Selection. Related issues have been raised in the recent (2004) GAO report Gender Issues: Women’s Participation in the Sciences has increased, but Agencies Need to Do More to Ensure Compliance with Title IX.

Steinpreis, R.E., Anders, K.A. & Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles, 41, 7/8, 509-528.
The authors of this study submitted the same c.v. for consideration by academic psychologists, sometimes with a man’s name at the top, sometimes with a woman’s. In one comparison, applicants for an entry-level faculty position were evaluated. Both men and women were more likely to hire the “male” candidate than the “female” candidate, and rated his qualifications as higher, despite identical credentials. In contrast, men and women were equally likely to recommend tenure for the “male” and “female” candidates (and rated their qualifications equally), though there were signs that they were more tentative in their conclusions about the (identical) “female” candidates for tenure.

Trix, F. and C. Psenka (2003). Exploring the color of glass: letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty. Discourse & Society 14(2): 191-220.
This study compares over 300 letters of recommendation for successful candidates for medical school faculty position. Letters written for female applicants differed systematically from those written for male applicants in terms of length, in the percentages lacking basic features, in the percentages with “doubt raising” language, and in the frequency of mention of status terms. In addition, the most common possessive phrases for female and male applicants (“her teaching” and “his research”) reinforce gender schemas that emphasize women’s roles as teachers and students and men’s as researchers and professionals.

Caffrey, M . (1997, May 12). Blind auditions help women. Princeton Weekly Bulletin. Based on Goldin, C & Rouse, C. (2000). Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of “blind” auditions on female musicians. American Economic Review, 90, 715-741.
A change in the audition procedures of symphony orchestras—adoption of “blind” auditions with a “screen” to conceal the candidate’s identity from the jury—provides a test for gender bias in hiring and advancement. Using data from actual auditions for 8 orchestras over the period when screens were introduced, the authors found that auditions with screens substantially increased the probability that women were advanced (within the orchestra) and that women were hired. These results parallel those found in many studies of the impact of blind review of journal article submissions.

Bauer, C.C. & Baltes, B.B. (2002). Reducing the effects of gender stereotypes on performance evaluations. Sex Roles, 9/10, 465-476.
This study is one of many showing (1) that people vary in the degree to which they hold certain stereotypes and schemas (2) that having those schemas influences their evaluations of other people; and (3) that it is possible to reduce the impact of commonly- held stereotypes or schemas by relatively simple means. In this study college students with particularly negative stereotypes about women as college professors were more likely to rate accounts of specific incidents of college classroom teaching behavior negatively, if they were described as performed by a female. In the second phase of the study students’ reliance on their stereotypes was successfully reduced by providing them with time and instructions to recall the specific teaching behaviors of the instructors in detail. Thus, focusing attention on specific evidence of an individual’s performance eliminated the previously-demonstrated effect of gender schemas on performance ratings.

Further Suggested Reading (from University of Michigan Stirde Workshop)

A Study on the Status of Women Faculty in Science at MIT. (1999).The MIT Faculty Newsletter, Vol. XI, No. 4.

Bensimon, E.M., Ward, K., & Sanders, K. (2000). “Creating Mentoring Relationships and Fostering Collegiality.” Department chair's role in developing new faculty into teachers and scholars, 113-137. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.

Etzkowitz, H., C. Kemelgor, and B. Uzzi. (2000). "The 'Kula Ring' of Scientific Success.” Athena unbound: The advancement of women in science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Georgi, Howard . (2000). “Is There an Unconscious Discrimination Against Women in Science?” APS News Online. College Park, Maryland: American Physical Society.

Hopkins, Nancy, Lotte Bailyn, Lorna Gibson, and Evelynn Hammonds. (2002). An Overview of Reports from the Schools of Architecture and Planning; Engineering; Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences; and the Sloan School of Management. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Long, J. Scott, ed. (2001). “Executive Summary.” From Scarcity to Visibility: Gender Differences in the Careers of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers. 1-8. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

McNeil, L., and M. Sher . (1999). “The Dual-Career-Couple Problem.” Physics Today. College Park, MD: American Institute of Physics.

Mickelson, R. A. and M. L. Oliver (1991). Making the Short List: Black Faculty Candidates and the Recruitment Process. The Racial Crisis in American Higher Education. C. Kerr, SUNY Press.

Sagaria, M. A. D. (2002). "An Exploratory Model of Filtering In Administrative Searches: Toward Counter-Hegemonic Discourses." The Journal of Higher Education 73(6): 677-710.

Smith, D . (2000). "How to Diversify the Faculty.” Academe, 86, no. 5. Washington, D.C.: AAUP.

Steinpreis, R.E., Anders, K.A. & Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles, 41, 7/8, 509-528.

Trix, F. and C. Psenka (2003). "Exploring the color of glass: letters of recommendation for female and male medical faculty." Discourse & Society 14(2): 191-220.

Valian, V. (1998). "Evaluating Women and Men. " (Chapter 7.) Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Wenneras, C. & Wold, A . (1997). “Nepotism and sexism in peer-review.” Nature, 387, 341-343.

Wolf Wendel, L. E., S. B. Twombly, et al . (2000). "Dual-career couples: keeping them together." The Journal of Higher Education 71(3): 291-321.

Yoder, J. (2002). “2001 Division 35 Presidential Address: Context Matters: Understanding Tokenism Processes and Their Impact on Women’s Work.” Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26.

http://www4.od.nih.gov/axxs/annotated.html

AXXS Achieving XXcellence in Science
http://www4.od.nih.gov/axxs/default.htm

1. Austin, L. What's Holding You Back? Eight Critical Choices for Women's Success. NY: Perseus/Basic Books, 2000.
Excellent summary of several psychological barriers that inhibit women from seeking leadership.

2. Bickel, J. Women in Medicine: Getting In, Growing and Advancing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2000.
New book summarizing the current status, and strategies for achieving success.

3. Catalyst. Women of Color in Corporate Management: Opportunities and Barriers. http://www.catalystwomen.org/home.html
One of first clear studies of women of color, and the unique issues they face. Other very useful resources from Catalyst are:
Wellington, SW. Advancing Women in Business - Catalyst Guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998.
Wellington, SW. Creating Women's Networks - A How-To Guide for Women and Companies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999.

4. Edmondson Bell, ELJ and SM Nkomo. Our Separate Ways - Black and White Women and the Struggle for Professional Identity. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2001.
Detailed qualitative and quantitative study, detailing the unique differences of successful African American women leaders as compared with Euro-American women leaders. Points out that African American women should not be equated with either women, or with African American men, because of the unique backgrounds, barriers, and career strategies that they use.

5. Magretta, J. Will she fit in? Harvard Business Review. March-April 1997: 18-32.
Excellent article on the extra burden of needing to make clients and colleagues comfortable with us.

6. Mark, S, H Link, PS Morahan, L Pololi, V Reznik, and S Tropez-Sims. Innovative mentoring programs to promote gender equity in academic medicine. Acad. Medicine 2001;76:39-42.
Compares four quite different mentoring programs in academic medicine.

7. McCorduck, P and N Ramsey. The Futures of Women: Scenarios for the 21st Century, Why Won't the Official Future Take Place? NY: Warner, 1996.
SUPERB book, demonstrating in vivid detail the TREMENDOUS job ahead for ensuring equal access and success for women around the globe. Very sobering scenarios are shown of the status of women around the globe in 2015, some of which seem more plausible in this fall 2001 than they did last year.

8. McCracken, DM. Winning the talent war for women - sometimes it takes a revolution. Harvard Business Rev Nov-Dec 2000:159-167.
An excellent case history of how Deloitte Touche is working to ensure they will have a sufficient pool of talented women to meet the needs of the future.

9. McElvaine, R. Eve's Seed. NY: McGraw-Hill, 2000.
SUPERBLY researched and written book about the history of gender differences from pre-historic time to the present. Reaches similar conclusions to McCorduck and Ramsey about the magnitude of the challenge in achieving access and success for women.

10. Meyerson, DE. Tempered Radicals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2001.
EXCELLENT new book by a leader in the field, showing how sustainable cultural change seldom comes from major initiatives, but rather from small changes by those who choose to work inside the system, rocking the boat, but not enough to get thrown out.
Some of the theses in the book have been published in short articles in: Meyerson, DE and JK Fletcher. A modest manifesto for shattering the glass ceiling. Harvard Business Review. Jan-Feb 2000: 127-136. and in Meyerson, DE, Harvard Business Review. Sep-Oct, 2001.

11. Morahan, PS, ML Voytko, S Abbuhl, LJ Means, DW Wara, J Thorson and CE Cotsonas. Ensuring the success of women faculty at AMCs - lessons learned from seven schools. Acad. Medicine 2001;76:19-31.
Comparative paper describing the activities and approaches used to advance women faculty, citing common lessons learned.

12. Murrell, AJ, FJ Crosby and RJ Ely. Editors. Mentoring Dilemmas - Developmental Relationships within Multicultural Organizations. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1999.
First definitive book examining the differences in mentoring across genders and ethnicities. Very well researched.

13. Valian, V. Why So Slow? The Advancement of Women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.
Outlines the gender schemas that are subconsciously present for both sexes.