Page 103

Part B – Findings and conclusion

In the last two years there have been positive signs that this pattern may be changing with respect to academic promotions at the senior lecturer level. In 2010, application rates were still just below women’s representation in the eligible pool for SLR1 and SLR2, and in 2009, the application rate to SLR2 was higher. It is unclear yet if this is a spike or a trend. A number of respondents to the survey also commented on the tendency for women to apply less often than men. …. women tend to apply for promotion less often than men (statistically speaking), usually applying only when they think they deserve it instead of applying simply because they want it. Men are more likely to self-promote and in return promotion panels are more likely to actually promote them. Female, academic staff member Table 36: Women’s applications for promotion 2009, 2010 2009 2010 % of No. of % of those % Application women women eligible to women to who eligible to apply who who applied apply85 are women applied SLR1 49% 154 53% 52% SLR2 46% 127 42% 41% Associate 19% 47 34% 22% Professor Professor 41% 40 35% 30%

of No. women eligible apply 141 138 49 45

of % of those eligible to to apply who are women 53% 42% 34% 35%

2. Men tend to put themselves forward more for promotion This conclusion is based on the evidence above, on comments from women in the PaEE review survey, and on research literature, which indicate that men tend to ‘give it a go’ whereas women tend to wait until they think they have met all the criteria.86 3. Women perceive the promotions process to be less fair to women This view came through very strongly in the responses to question 64, the open-ended PaEE review survey question that related to academic promotions. The relevant issues most frequently mentioned (more often than 10 times) were: promotions process not fair (47 staff, women 67%), promotions process not transparent (34 staff, women 75%). In addition the following issues related to the perception that the promotions process is not fair to women: The criteria favour research over teaching, time spent with students, University committee or administration work Discriminatory/gendered practices by men towards women 85

Staff ‘eligible’ to apply, are those in the position below that which they are applying to. So the eligible staff for SLR1 applications are all lecturers, the eligible staff for SLR2 applications are all SLR1 staff, the eligible staff for applications to associate professor are all SLR2 staff, and the eligible staff for professors are associate professors. This is not to say that there will not be applications from outside these eligible pools, but they are less common. 86 See for example, Burton, C. (1991). The Promise and the Price, Sydney: Allen and Unwin, or Babcock, L. & Laschever, S. (2003). Women Don’t Ask – Negotiation and the Gender Divide. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

101

Profile for Tertiary Education Union

Massey PaEE Review Final Report  

http://teu.ac.nz/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/Massey-PaEE-Review-Report-Final-Report.pdf

Massey PaEE Review Final Report  

http://teu.ac.nz/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/Massey-PaEE-Review-Report-Final-Report.pdf

Profile for nzteu
Advertisement