-.\‘ v. w w u. . LIBRARY Michigan State University PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 6/07 D /C|RC/DateDue Indd-p1 /A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETNEEN THE SCARCITY 0F NOMEN IN HIGHER EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS AND THE MULTIPLE FACTORS NHICH INFLUENCE THE CAREER ASPIRATIONS or NOMEN PROFESSORS\\ By CharIene BurIeigh-Savage u A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partiaI fquiIIment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1979 (:) Copyright by CharIene BurIeigh-Savage I979 ABSTRACT A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE SCARCITY OF WOMEN IN HIGHER EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS AND THE MULTIPLE FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE THE CAREER ASPIRATIONS OF WOMEN PROFESSORS By CharTene BurTeigh—Savage This dissertation examines the ianuence of femaIe professor career aspiratiOO for administrative positions in higher education. AIthough discrimination and sex-typing of occupation seem to be two apparent causes for having so few women in administration, IeSS obvious factors were investigated. The research of this dissertation explored the persona] and psychoIogicaI restraints which curb women's quest for administrative jobs. Attitude-shaping factors such as the cuIture, personaT perspectives, psychoIogicaI aspects, educationaI cIimate, and the worId of work were anaIyzed. Administrative opportunities for women in higher education have, for whatever reasons, been so severeTy restricted. The fieId of administration is desperater in need of tapping the administrative taIents of women in the profession. It is hoped that the research provides at Ieast a modest contribution toward spotTighting the effect which women's own ambitions-—or Tack of them—-have on the probIem of professionaI inequaTity. CharIene BurIeigh-Savage MethodoIogy A structured questionnaire was deveIoped to gather and compare data from women and men professors in four of Michigan's puinc four-year institutions. Questionnaires were mailed to 600 professors seIected from the popuIation. Data were anaIyzed with the technicaI assistance of the Michigan Department of Education, Research, EvaTu- ation, and Assessment Services. The statistica] procedures used in the anaIysis of data from the 303 responses were the Chi square Test of Association, the t—test, and the Pearson Product—Moment CorreIation. Findings Thirty testabie hypotheses were extracted from the question- naire, 17 of which were rejected. There were significant differences between men and women respondents and their aspirations toward IeveIs of administration in higher education. Among those positions on which differences were indicated were chief academic officer, dean of a major coITege, and administrative vice—president. There were no significant differences in the aspirations between men and women for the position of university/coiiege president. AIso, there were significant dif- ferences between men's and women's age IeveI, teaching rank, and number of years teaching. Differences were reercted between maIe and femaTe responses regarding women's dependabiiity, administrative abiIity, men's professionaI advancement and know how in seeking administrative jobs, and institutionai encouragement for positions in administration. Charlene Burleigh-Savage Research Conclusions The research results seem to point to the following factors: (1) A small percentage of men and women professors compete for administrative jobs. (2) Women's aspiration levels are slightly higher than men's. (3) Women are not as confident about their administrative ability as men. (4) Not only women's, but men's aspirations decrease as the responsibilities of the administrative job increase. (5) Large majorities of professors, male or female, do not aspire to be adminis- trators in our institutions of higher learning. (6) Women seem to be rejecting the sex-stereotyping views men being superior in leadership roles. (7) Although some male bias against women seems to be perceived, it is probably decreasing and men's acceptance of women in administra- tive ranks seem to be increasing. (8) Women's perception that there are unfair odds against them, discourages them from seeking administrative positions. (9) Results from this study indicate that men today, seem to be more aware that family responsibilities are not incompatible with women's careers in higher educational administration. Recommendations are made for increasing the number of women in administration in higher education. DEDICATION To my loving parents, Mr. and Mrs. Earmey N. Burleigh, Jr., the two who gave me life and taught me the meaning and joy of working for a desired goal, To my brothers, Ronald and Lloyd Burleigh, who never doubted that their sister would successfully complete the doctoral program, and last, but not least of importance, _ I To my five-year old daughter, Courtenay Mei Kel, who always knew just what to do (and when) to keep me in touch with motherhood, . .this work is dedicated. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express appreciation to several individuals for their constant support and encouragement during the many phases of the doctoral program and throughout the writing of this dissertation. The author is deeply indebted to the guidance committee. My appreciation is expressed to Dr. Vandel Johnson, committee chairman, and Dr. Gloria Smith for their support and guidance as members of my doctoral committee. Sincere gratitude is offered to Dr. Louis Romano for his friendship, genuine interest, patience and valuable assistance in guiding the dissertation to completion. He generously Shared his time, ideas and projects with me. Perhaps, most important, he provided the moral support that is required (but rarely received) by Black women in graduate school. My greatest debt is to Dr. Robert Green, Dean of the College of Urban Development and committee member, who is a teacher, mentor and very good friend. I will always be grateful for his early encouragement and confidence in me. I appreciate the time he has given me in light of his busy schedule. Special thanks is due to Jack Moore for his technical assist- ance in analyzing the data; Pat Carter, Mary Ellen and Margit Furseth for preparing names and addresses of the sample population; Theresa Allen and Isabel Parker for typing hundreds of labels for mailing purposes; and Carol Crawford for assistance in typing the final copy. iv Lastly, the author wishes to express special acknowledgement and appreciation to Mal Payne for his assistance in extracting the data from survey instruments and recording this information onto computer statements. I'll never forget the encouragement, inspira— tion, and companionship Mal shared with me throughout this two—year study period, which proved to be a time-test of perseverance and endurance. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ......................... Chapter I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ............... 1 Introduction .................... 1 Need for the Study ................. 5 Purpose of the Study. ............... 12 Significance of the Study ............. 13 Assumptions .................... 14 Definitions . ................... 15 Research Hypotheses ................ 16 Design of the Study ................ 16 Population .................... 16 Sample ...................... 17 Procedure .................... 17 Limitations of the Study .............. 17 Summary and Overview ................ 18 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND RELATED MATERIAL . . . . 20 Introduction .................... 20 Women in the Contemporary Professions ....... 21 Historical Perspective ............... 24 Women in Education ................ 38 ~ Sex Discrimination in Higher Education and Federal Policy. . .................... 42 Sexism and Bias in Higher Education ........ 50 ‘~Women's Aspiration Levels ............. 63 Women in Higher Educational Administration ..... 79 Psychological Barriers ............... 88 Women as Educational Leaders ............ 92 A Professional Association for Women Administrators 96 Summary ...................... 99 III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY .......... . ...... 102 Introduction ........ . ........... 102 Type of Study . . . ....... . ........ 102 Population and Sampling Methods .......... 103 vi Chapter Page Identification of Institutions .......... 104 Description of Campuses .............. 104 Instrumentation .............. . . . . 108 Collection of the Data .............. 112 Treatment of the Data. . . ............ 113 Testable Hypotheses. . . ............. 114 Statistical Procedures . . . . . ......... 115 Summary. . . . ....... . .......... 116 IV. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS ........ . ........ 117 Introduction ................... 117 Perceived Aspiration Levels of Men and Women Pro— fessors for an Administrative Position—~Part I of the Questionnaire . . . ......... 119 Descriptive Demographic Characteristics Data of Males and Females-—Part II of the Questionnaire. 123 Perceived Multiple Factors Which May Be Related to Administrative Aspirations of Men and Women Re— spondents-Part III of the Questionnaire . . . . 128 Cultural Considerations .............. 128 Educational Factors ................ 131 Personal Perspectives ........ . ...... 136 Psychological Aspects. . . ............ 140 The World of Work ................ 145 Indication of Major Teaching Department and Pri- mary Academic Responsibility of Respondents—- Part III of the Questionnaire .......... 148 Summary ...................... 156 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 162 Summary ...................... 162 Findings . . . ................ 163 Part I: Perceived Aspiration Levels of Male and Female Professors for an Administrative Posi- tion in Higher Education ........... 163 Part II: Descriptive Demographic Characteris- tics of Men and Women Respondents ....... 164 Part III: Perceived Multiple Factors Which May Be Related to Administrative Aspirations of Men and Women Professors ....... . 165 Part III. Indication of Major Teaching Depart- ment and Perceived Primary Academic Responsi- bility of Respondents. . . . . ........ 167 Implications ................... 170 Administrative Aspiration Level ......... 170 Cultural Considerations ..... . ....... 170 Educational Factors ..... . ......... 172 vii Personal Perspectives. . . Psychological Aspects. . . The World of Work. . . . . Summary of Conclusions . . . Recommendations. . . . . . . . . Suggestions for Further Research 186 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . 194 viii Table 2. ##hbw 1 .10 LIST OF TABLES Page Women as Percent of Experienced Civilian Labor Force, 14 Years of Age and Over by Occupational Categories and Percent Distribution of Female Labor Force: 1970, 1960 and 1950 ...................... 34 Earnings and Occupation of Males and Females, Age 25-34, by Years of School Completed, Working 50-52 Weeks: 1970 .......................... 35 Median Earnings of the Experienced Labor Force by Occupa- tion for 50-52 Weeks Worked by Sex ........... 37 Educational Attainment of the Population 25 Years of Age and Over by Year and Sex ................ 40 Marriage and/or Career Plans of 1956—1960 Female National Merit Scholars ..................... 67 Percentages of Women Scholars with Various Marriage and/or Career Plans Who Aspire to Different Educational Degress 68 Percentages of Women Scholars with Various Marriage and/or Career Plans Who Had Initial and Final Career Field Plans .......................... 69 Percentage of Women Scholars with Various Marriage and/or Career Plans Who Have Made Different Numbers of Career Choices ......................... 71 Current Administrative Position of Respondents ...... 76 Job Satisfaction and Level of Education .......... 78 Surveyed Population Count ................. 113 Chief Academic Chief Officer ............... 119 Dean of a Major College .................. 120 Administrative Vice-President ............... 121 College President ..................... 122 ix Table 4. 4:. #h-hb-b-b-b-b-b 5 .10 .11 .12 .13 .14 .15 .16 .17 .18 .19 .20 .21 .22 .23 Results Of Tests Looking For Significant Differences Between Males And Females 0n Intent To Become An Administrator In Higher Education .......... What is your age? ................... What is your marital status? ............. How many children do you have? ............ What is your present teaching level? ......... What is your racial group? .............. What level of education have you completed? ...... How many years have you been teaching? ........ Did you actively participate in sports as a youth? . . How many years did your mother work during your grow- ing years? Either full or part-time? ........ Have you ever worked for a female administrator? . . . For Psychological And Social Reasons, Men Are More Effective Administrators Than Women ......... In General, I consider Women Not As Dependable AS Men Because Of Women's Biological And Personal Charac— teristics ...................... Results Of Tests Looking For Significant Differences Between Males And Females 0n Cultural Considerations I Feel More Comfortable Working For A Male Administra— tor Than For A Female Administrator ......... I Would Feel Uncomfortable In A Higher Education Ad- ministration Class Of All Males ........... There Have Been Female Administrators Who Have En— couraged Me To Seek An Administrative Position . . . In Our Institution, Both Men And Women Are Encouraged To Apply For Administrative Positions ........ Results Of Tests Looking For Significant Differences Between Males And Females On Educational Factors . . Page 122 123 123 124 125 125 126 126 127 127 128 129 130 132 133 134 135 136 137 Table 4.24 4.25 4.26 4.27 4.34 I Feel I Need To Know A Few Administrators Well In Order To Win Their Support For An Administrative Position . . Results Of Tests Looking For Significant Differences Be- tween Males and Females On Personal Perspectives. . . . I Have Been In My Present Position Too Long To Seek An Administrative Position Now ............... I Would Rather Not Compete For An Administrative Position Results Of Tests Looking For Significant Differences Be- tween Males and Females 0n Psychological Aspects . . . . My Present Position Provides Too Much Security For Me To Seek An Administrative Position ............ Men Advance Faster In Administration With Less Experience Simply Because They Are Men .............. I Am Willing To "Go For Broke” In My Quest For A Position In Administration ........... . ....... Results Of Tests Looking For Significant Differences Be- tween Males and Females On The World of Work ...... Major Teaching Departments ................ Perceived Primary Academic Responsibility ........ Result of Test Looking For Significant Differences Be- tween Males and Females 0n Major Teaching Departments. . Result of Test Looking For Significant Differences Be- tween Males and Females On Primary Academic Respon— sibility ........................ Aspiration Levels Of Males and Females For Administrative Positions ........ . .............. Breakdown Of Aspirers vs. Non-aspirers For Administrative Positions in Higher Education ............. Pearson Correlation Between Male and Female Respondents For Cultural Considerations .............. Pearson Correlation Between Male and Female Respondents For Educational Factors ................ xi Page 138 141 142 143 144 146 147 148 149 150 151 151 152 152 154 157 Table Page 4.41 Pearson Correlation Between Male and Female Respondents For Personal Perspectives ............... 159 4.42 Pearson Correlation Between Male and Female Respondents For Psychological Aspects ............... 160 4.43 Pearson Correlation Between Male and Female Respondents For The World of Work . . . . . . . . ......... 161 xii CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Introduction In July, 1975, the United Nations World Conference on Interna- tional Women's Year (IWY) convened in Mexico City. The implicit purpose of that gathering was to undertake a serious assessment of how effectively women were being integrated into national plans and to ascertain what educational strategies w0uld best serve the furthering of this goal. A World Action Plan was drawn up, with proposed goals for minimum achievements by 1980 concerning the roles women must play in meeting basic human needs. In addition, the United Nations General Assembly in December, 1975, declared 1976—1985 to be the Decade for Women, a proclamation taken to emphasize the critical importance and economic value of the woman's place in a modernizing society.1 The success of the National Women's Conference in Houston during November, 1977, has made it abundantly clear that the political power needed to raise women from second-class citizenship to full social and economic equality is well within the grasp of the contemporary woman. A common denominator which solidly united all the conferees was the determination to end once and for all unequal treatment of women 1W. Joyner, ”Women, Development, and the Challenge,” Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors 41—(Summer 1978) p. 157. _ — 1 under the law. AS a result of the strong campaign which the Conference has unleashed, businessmen and public officials who continue to be identified with a policy of too frequently rejecting women applicants for management positions will find themselves on the losing end of lawsuits. Enacting legislative measures will be necessary. Courts will be empowered by tougher laws to impose both civil and criminal penalties on those who discriminate against women in personnel place— ment and promotion.2 Many factors in their external environment which have long inhibited women from assuming leadership roles in U. S. Society are diminishing. Inequality under the law may all but vanish in the next decade or two. Unfortunately, legislation alone will not necessarily strengthen the will of women to seek administrative positions. Public opinion must be aroused and informed, prejudices must be surmounted, and women must be encouraged to assume responsibilities and to under- take initiatives that promote their interests and welfare. Toward this goal, viable support must be mobilized by government and private sectors alike for the widespread in education and in programs for administra- tive development. Although preliminary studies have indicated that there are many personal and psychological restraints which curb women's quest for administrative positions, much more research will be necessary to analyze these restraints, measure their impact, and determine what remedial measures can be taken to overcome them. 2"What Next for U. 5. Women," Time, December 5, l977, p. l9. This cover story provides a colorful analysis of the Houston Conference. A rash of best selling books are drawing conclusions about female attitudes which do not seem to be supported by what serious research has been done on the subject. John T. Molloy, for example, in his commercially successful Ih§_Woman's Drg§§_fg£ Success 8995, writes: "American women want to get ahead. They want to sit in the boardroom and in the president's chair. And they are heading in that direction."3 Michael Korda, in his best-selling, Success, continues the theme: "An increasing number of women today are motivated to suc- cess and more and more of them are in fact succeeding."4 These glowing descriptions of modern women's transformation from the old stereotypes may well be creating an unjustified self-confidence among women which could cause them to concentrate their proven political strength exclusively in political action campaigns. In this regard, it is noteworthy that although the National Plan of Action proposed at Houston could, if implemented, cost taxpayers in the billions of dollars, there was no publicized concern with funding research programs to identify and correct feminine attitudes about themselves which impede their progress toward economic and social equality. An enormous amount of money, time and talent has been and will continue to be devoted to winning political rights for women and educating them to what these rights are. All of this effort will be futile if women choose not to exercise their rights. 3John T. Molloy, Ihg_Woman‘s Dress fgr_Success Book (Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, T977), p. l9. 4Michael Korda, Success (New York: Random House, I977), p. l67. The high optimism with which popular writers like Molloy and Korda are influencing the outlook of millions of Americans about con- temporary women do not seem to be shared by more serious scholars. Jane Prather, for instance, writing in the American Behavioral Scientist5 in l97l, concludes that centuries of discrimination which have perpetu- ated the "woman-servant” and "sex object” image, have modified modern women's desire for professional success. As a result, she writes, many women pursue one of the following courses: (I) do not prepare for a career at all, (2) acquire a college education not as a career preparation but as an ”insurance policy” in case they cannot marry or the marriage fails, (3) prepare for a career but give up their pro- fession when they marry. In the latter instance, according to Prather, women frequently do not continue their career because they are convinced in their own minds that they cannot succeed in both marriage and a career: "Women perpetu- ate the self-fulfilling prophecy because they see few role models of women who have successfully achieved or managed a career combined with motherhood.”6 Other writers such as Florence Howe7 support the Prather con— clusion, and Gordon and Strober, in Bringing Women into Management, carry the thesis one step further: 5Jane Prather, "Why Can't Women Be More Like Men: A Summary of the Sociopsychological Factors Hindering Women's Advancement in the Professions,” American Behavioral Scientist, I5, November I97l, p. I73. 6Florence Howe, ”Sexism and the Aspirations of Women," Ehj_Delta Kappan, October I973, p. I02. 7Prather, "Why Can't Women Be More Like Men,” p. I79. What is unique about the situation of women is that almost everyone is to blame, including women themselves who have joined the conspiracy by accepting the idea that they must monitor their ambitions and goals in terms of what everybody else expects of them, including their husbands, children, fathers or bosses. Marilyn Stinson points out that although more than thirty-five million women in the United States are working, 40% are working in traditional women's jobs . . . , only a small percentage is in management.9 Need for the Study Based on the foregoing, there is a clear need for additional research on the relationship between the number of women in management and women's aspirations to be in management positions. It was in response to the need for such research that this dissertation was under- taken to explore the relationship between the scarcity of women in higher educational administrative positions and multiple factors which influence career aspirations of women professors. It is hoped that the research provides at least a modest contribution toward spotlighting the effect which women's own ambitions-—or lack of them-—have on the problem of professional inequality. The field of administration in higher education on which the dissertation focuses is an appropriate one for study. Administrative opportunities for women in education have, for whatever reason, been so severely restricted. There is widespread agreement among the informed that no other profession is more desperately 8Francine E. Gordon and Myra H. Strober, Brin in Women into Management (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, I977), pp. I7-l8. 9Marilyn Stinson, ”Women in the 70's—-Have Opportunities Really Changed?" Journal 9f Business Education, 54, November I978, p. 75. in need of tapping the administrative talents of women. In l977, more women than men were enrolled in colleges throughout the United States. Census and National Conference Series for Higher Education figures report that women account for 93% of the recent enrollment gains in colleges and universities. In I955, about 39% of the undergraduates were women; in I975, 45%; in I976, 47%. In I978, women account for over 48% of the nation's undergraduates; among Students under 22 years of age, they constitute, for the first time, a majority of 52%. Gradu- ate enrollments show even sharper gains-from 33% in I965 to about 46% in I977. Among those earning first professional degrees, only 3.7% were women in I965; in l977, the figure was still small but strikingly higher-2l%. Projections of future overall enrollments suggest a leveling-off of the proportion of women at about 47% or 48%; but such projections have almost invariably underestimated the growth of female enrollments. In I976, in fact, the number of women students increased by 7.2%, while the number of men students actually declined by 2.l%.10 Education has a direct relationship to being more informed, more in- volved, and more interested. Scholarly research has played a vital role in the long campaign for women's rights. Now, victory in that battle seems to be at hand; it is time for the universities to turn more of their attention to those attitudinal changes in women which may be necessary to the full exploitation of new opportunities. It is in conformity with such a trend that this dissertation was originally proposed. '0 Paul Lauter, "The Women's Movement: Impact on the Campus,“ Current Issues jfl_Higher Education, Paper presented at the American Association's National Conference on High Education, I978, p. I It follows from the above that before the administrative talent of women professors can be more widely employed, it is necessary to pin down the less obvious reasons why women, during the past century, lost control of the education of our young people. Although there are preliminary indications of these reasons, much more research is neces- sary to develop a logical plan to restore the talent and expertise of female educators to areas of academic administration in post-secondary institutions where it is so desperately needed. Historically and culturally, women were viewed as able and willing to manage the organizational structure and environment of America's youth. Women were considered the educational leaders. Current statistics, however, reflect a change of command. Though there are some women who hold administrative positions in American post- secondary institutions, as recently as 1970 in all colleges and univer- sities with over 10,000 students there were no women presidents and no women vice-presidents. At these institutions, 12% of the academic deans were women and 17% of the assistant and associate deans were women. Among the latter two categories were deans of schools of home economics and nursing——traditional female areas.11 At the same time, women were presidents at 13% of schools with less than 1,000 students. These colleges are most often the less prestigious, non-Ph.D. granting institutions. In looking at the status of women on college faculties, we find few women at the higher levels of education. At college and university 118. Deckard, Ih§_Women's Movement (New York: Harper and Row, 1975). levels, the faculty will tend to favor males even in those areas where women normally dominate. Proportions of women faculty are low in higher education as a whole, and extremely low or almost nonexistent in some areas. During the I975-76 academic year, only 5.6% of full professors at major Ph.D. granting institutions were women; at two—year colleges, 20.8% of full professors were women. At the other end of the rank structure, women represented 24.5% of assistant professors at the major Ph.D. granting institutions; at two-year colleges, 36.8% of assistant professors were women.12 In addition, The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) reported that in l975-76, 64% of academic men had tenure, whereas only 46% of women had tenure. AAUP also reported that an income gap existed between men and women in academic careers. This gap existed both within ranks and between ranks. There are very few women deans, vice-presidents, or presidents of educational institutions. In the I975-76 academic year, the average annual salary for men was $l7,840; for women it was $14,420 (AAUP, 1976).13 Barriers are set up by educational institutions to bar women from achieving their rightful positions in education—-predominance of males in faculty and administration in higher education, and few female teachers in engineering and technical training programs.14 12Marian Lief Palley, ”Women as Academic Administrators in the Age of Affirmative Action," Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, Egg Counselors, 42, Fall I978, p. 3. l3Ibid., p. 3. I4Stinson, "Women in the 70's—-," p. 77. The women who earn the advanced degrees required for employment in colleges and universities are too small in number to make a large impact. For instance, women earned about I5% of all Ph.D.S awarded in the l960's. Mary Ellen Verheyden-Hilliard draws an analogy between the topic of "women in administration" to "evergreen trees in the forest.” She says "to have any lasting impact, the discussion Should include not only the present condition of such trees, how they Should be treated and what best use to make of them, but also a discussion of how to plant the seeds and nurture young trees in order to grow more and better evergreens in the future.”15 The thesis is that we will get just about as many highly placed women in administration as we are willing to grow, and that growth will require two things at least: (I) people who will plant the seed of possibility in the minds of little girls and clear away the weeds of sex role stereotyping that choke the growth, and (2) people who will nurture the growth of healthy attitudes toward females in those others who are going to have to work with femaleS-i.e., little boys.16 The cliche tells us that we may soon recognize that administra— tive women are lost on the playgrounds of recess time. John says: ”Get away, we don't want any girls playing." Mary says: ”They won't let me play with them." 15Mary Ellen Verheyden-Hilliard, "Kindergarten: The Training Ground for Women in Administration,” Journal gf_National Association jg: Women Deans, Administrators, gag Counselors, 38 (Summer I975), p. l5I. l6Ib1d. l0 Educator says: "Well, that's the way boys are. They are too rough, anyway. Play with the girls.” The message conveyed to girls is that boys have a right to exclude them and that they are too weak to compete anyway. The girls retreat to the girls' games and the female careers where they have been forcefully told they belong. The educational setting has traditionally encouraged the belief that boys and girls, males and females (men and women) are natural enemies and feel antipathy for each other. The "Old Boys' Club" has its roots deep in the recess line, where the boys and girls were admonished to line up separately, and in the oft—heard threat, "John, if you don't behave you'll have to sit with the girls.”17 This sexual separatism which is the hidden agenda of schooling is the foundation for sex role stereotyping which does the most damage 18 Girls learn to accept boys' to future aspirations and expectations. definitions of where they can play and with whom they can play. Boys learn that they can, with impunity, define the boundaries of what girls can do. Girls learn that educators see them as so awful that close proximity to them in a work situation can be viewed as punishment.19 That is discrimination and that is stereotyping. And it will stick. People do not shed a ten-year habit with ease. The attitudes of school will remain at work. Female persons who absorb these sex role stereotypes and accept this discrimination are not likely to view them— selves as candidates for administering mixed-sex units, although they may see themselves as administrators of other women. I7Ibid., p. 152. 181m. 19mm. ll If society is really concerned about women in administration, then it will have to socialize women to the belief that they have a right to move and to grow and to play with the boys. And men have to be socialized to be able to handle that concept both in their personal and their professional lives. Verheyden-Hilliard concludes that "administrative women don't train in graduate school; they train in kindergarten."20 The effect of the scarcity of women in administrative roles reaches right into the classroom. Role modeling is being jeopardized. Female students who never experience women in leadership capacity are unlikely to develop career aspirations beyond stereotyped female 21 In addition, women instructors themselves have a clear need roles. to emulate successful female managers who have realized ambitions to excel in administrative careers. If a woman sees positions formerly maintained by female leadership steadily become unbalanced by the dominant influx of men, a feeling of the impossible may prevail. Academic institutions, just as health care systems, elementary schools, and social work agencies, maintain conditions in which the proportion of administrators who are female is proportionately lower 22 In other than the number of women in the field being administered. words, authority-—the power to make administrative decisions which affect other people-—has been generally denied women, especially in 201bid., p. 155. 2ISuzanne Howard, "Why Aren't Women Administering Our Schools?," —___._——__..—__———_ 22Palley, ”Women as Academic Administrators," p. 4. l2 institutions in which men work. In all-female schools or colleges, there are proportionately more women administrators than in coeduca- tional institutions. Thus, a gross inequality based on sex appears to have persisted in higher educational administration. United States education would clearly profit if better sexual balance in educational administration were achieved. Competent leader- ship should not be wasted. Colleges and universities need to reevaluate and tap evident sources of responsible administration, male and female. The root causes of the continuing obstruction to success by women achievers must be sought out by much research of the type done in con- junction with this dissertation. The consequences of failure to remedy the sexual imbalance in United States education administration is well described by one educator: In the coming years, if education does not begin using the untapped leadership abilities of women, it seems that the results will be predictable. At a time when good and perhaps great leadership is needed in education, the pool of leadership develop- ment must be expanded to include women or we must all learn to live with the mediocrity which is certain to resu}§ from a restricted source of leadership talent. W The purpose of this dissertation, then, is to investigate the relationship between the scarcity of women in higher education and the administrative career aspirations of women professors. It may be assumed that discrimination and sex-typing of occupations are two 23Charlene T. Dale, ”Women Are Still Missing Persons in Administrative and Supervisory Jobs,” Educational Leadership, 3I, November l973, p. I25. l3 apparent causes for having so few women in administrative jobs. But investigation Of less obvious factors is a worthy objective of inten- sive research. It is only through the employment of the results of such research that erroneous notions about feminine capabilities in administrative jobs can be countered. Is it, for example, that: Women don't want the responsibility, or it is assumed women don't want the responsibility? Women can't handle the job, or it is assumed women can't handle the job? Women are too emotional, or it is assumed women are too emotional?24 It is the stated purpose of the dissertation, therefore, to expand upon the research title to explore whether or not multi-factors, such as culture, educational climate, personal perspectives, psycho- logical aspects, and the world of work, may have an influence on women professors in their aspirations for a position in administration. Significance of the Study Operating on the premise that women can be married, successful, and career oriented, and that society needs a balance of human talent to maintain effective educational institutions, it is of considerable significance to research in some depth factors that act to limit female opportunities. Feminine acceptance of their limited role in education, as described in the following, can and should be reversed by proper education: 24Ibid., p. l23. l4 The pattern that emerges is that women who strive to achieve are systematically discouraged from reaching for their highest human potential. Growing numbers of women in education, as in other fields, are becoming increasingly aware that the employment options open to females are extremely limited and that if you happen to be born female, you have Igttle control over your professional life. Academic research must respond to the necessity of educating women to the connection between their awareness of the obstacle course leading to administrative hiring, and their aspirations toward administrative jobs. It is hoped that studies like this one may be significant if they gather data concerning the conditions under which more women are likely to aspire; the environments in which women are more apt to succeed in administration; and the pitfalls which can be pointed out by women who have aspired to administrative roles and failed.26 Assumptions The dissertation was based on two assumptions: l. Women, in general, are as capable and trainable as their male counterparts of discharging the responsibilities of academic administrative positions. 2. Sex should not be a consideration in selecting qualified individuals for educational administrative positions. 25Dale, ”Women Are Still Missing Persons," p. l25. 26Glenda Lee Landon, "Perceptions of Sex Roles Stereotyping and Women Teachers' Administrative Career Aspirations,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin - Madison, I975, p. I93. l5 Definition of Terms Career Management Aspirations - Active and/or passive desire for a managerial position which is characterized by movement from one to another level in a hierarchy.27 Academic Administrative Positions - Those educational positions designated as line positions of management. Includes executive, adminis- trative, and managerial assignments which require primary responsibility for organizing, planning, and directing the institution and its sub- divisions. For purposes of this study, these would include: presidency, vice-presidency, deanship of a major academic unit, chief academic officer, and department chairperson. Higher Education - Undergraduate through graduate programs, excluding junior and community colleges. Women Professors - Those who hold an academic position in public four—year institutions in the rank of assistant professor, associate professor, and full professor. Faculty - Those persons responsible for teaching and depart— mental research activities who hold faculty rank including academic department heads. Multiple Factors - Elements which may correctly or incorrectly influence career progression. They include: cultural considerations, educational factors, personal perspectives, psychological aspects, and the influence of the world of work. 27Robert J. Havinghurst and Bernice L. Neugarten, Society gpg Education (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., I967), p. 484. l6 Research Hypotheses The research hypotheses of the dissertation are: I. IS there a relationship between the sex of an individual and the intent of one to aspire to a higher educational administrative position? 2. Is there a relationship between the sex of an individual and the influence of demographic characteristics on one's aspiration to a higher educational administrative position? 3. Is there a relationship between the sex of an individual and the influence of cultural factors on one's aspiration to a higher educational administrative position? 4. IS there a relationship between the sex of an individual and the influence of educational factors on one's aspiration to a higher educational administrative position? 5. Is there a relationship between the sex of an individual and the influence of personal per- spectives on one's aspiration to a higher educational administrative position? 6. Is there a relationship between the sex of an individual and the influence of psychological considerations on one's aspiration to a higher educational administrative position? 7. Is there a relationship between the sex of an individual and the impact of the world of work on one's aspiration to a higher educational administrative position? Design of the Study Population The population of the study consisted of men and women profes- sors from four of Michigan's public four-year universities, namely, (I) Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, (2) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, (3) University of Michigan, Dearborn, 17 Michigan, and (4) University of Michigan, Flint, Michigan, all having undergraduate through graduate-professional programs. Sample A systematic random sample was taken of 600 men and women pro— fessors selected from lists of university personnel from these institutions. Procedure A structured questionnaire was designed based on the following: a review of pertinent literature pertaining to women's aspirations in higher education; and the advisement of trained personnel who have previously done formal and informal research on women in leadership positions. The questionnaire was designed to determine those multiple factors which professors perceive as barriers to obtaining positions in higher educational administration. Male professors were included in the questionnaire survey as a means of comparison and contrast with the view of female professor respondents. The questionnaire was mailed to men and women professors by the dissertation writer in order to ensure as much validity and accuracy as possible in the procedural task. Limitations of the Study I. The data collected were based on one Specific geographical Iocation—-the state of Michigan: Michigan State University, East Lansing, the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, the University of Michigan in Dearborn, and the University of Michigan in Flint. l8 2. The validity of the study was affected by the degree of sincerity and frankness of response to the instrument administered. 3. The investigation was limited to five categories of women professors' higher educational administrative aspirations: cultural considerations, educational factors, personal perspectives, psycho- logical aspects, and the world of work. These factors were treated as opposed to legal or organizational determinants. 4. The descriptive nature of the study represents a limitation inasmuch as it only describes what is perceived to be true-—not what is true. 5. The findings of the relationship between factors cited in the previous statements are viewed as correlational and not causal. Summary and Overview The general purpose of Chapter I has been to briefly introduce the nature of the problem, the rationale for, and implementation pro- cedures of the study. Most of the material in this chapter will be expanded upon in later chapters. The thrust of this in—depth examination of the attitudes of men and women professors, which is developed in later chapters, is to determine the need for professional educators to develop a broad plan of action that will more equally incorporate the services of Women in academic administration of colleges and universities throughout the country. Research questions and statements have been suggested dealing with the aspirations of women educators. The assumptions have been stated, the design of the study outlined, and the problem explained. o 19 In Chapter II a review of the literature related to the study will be explored. In Chapter III the procedures will be defined deal- ing with the basis for the selection of the population and the sample. Instrumentation and techniques of analysis will be reviewed and reported. Chapter IV will contain a summary of the statistical results. In Chapter V the study will be summarized, conclusions stated, and recom- mendations made. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE AND RELATED MATERIAL Introduction The central thrust for change in women's roles is equality of employment and opportunity. Federal legislation, relentless agitation, and shifts in public opinion have all played a part. Opportunities for the better jobs, as well as equal chances for on-the-job training and advancement, are often denied women. Many women hold jobs subordinate to their training and talent. Large numbers of women employed in clerical, sales, service, or other semi-skilled occupations have com- pleted four years of college.1 The decline in the age at which the average woman marries and completes childbearing is no doubt a contributing factor to the rise of working women; but even more significant, is the continuous increase in the level of educational achievement by women and a commensurate in— crease in their seeking employment at higher job levels. The more educated the woman, the more likely she is to be out earning a paycheck. It is believed by many that equal educational opportunities for men and women will not exist until expectations concerning appropriate life styles change. As long as little boys are encouraged to aspire 1Marilyn Stinson, "Women in the 70's-Have Opportunities Really Changed?” Journal pf Business Education, 54 (November I978), p. 75. 20 2l to careers and little girls to marriage, academically talented girls will remain the disadvantaged in college whether they make up 20% or 70% of the student body. This chapter will be devoted to reviewing some of the litera- ture and related material which is background to, or in other ways related to, the original research undertaken for purposes of this dis— sertation. A setting from the literature will be established in which to present the research and its conclusions concerning the career aspirations of women professors. Several subjects mentioned in Chapter I will be expanded upon. The following topics will be discussed: I. Women in contemporary professiohs 2. Historical perspective Women in education: #00 Sex discrimination in higher education and federal policy 5. Sexism and bias in higher education 6. Women's aspiration levels 7. Women in higher educational administration 8. Psychological barriers 9. Women as educational leaders lO. A professional association for women administrators Women in the Contemporary Professions When speaking of ”the literature” associated with scholarly pursuits, one normally refers to the written presentation of the results of formal academic research. The evolution of role of women in contemporary professions, however, has so accelerated in the late 22 l970's that it is impossible for formal research to keep pace. A front-page article in the Ngw_York Times provided a remarkable account of an instance in which the mask which normally conceals sex—bias in the professions was torn away in a most dramatic fashion.2 As indi- cated in Chapter I, the woman of the late I970's looks to the courts to secure those rights which she has won in law. If the allegations in the Times article are correct, it is ironic that the display of male bias against a professional woman was openly exhibited in a courtroom by an officer of the court, and apparently tolerated by the presiding judge. Because those events took place during a sensational murder trial, they were widely reported. This type of media reporting may reduce female aspirations to become lawyers. Because this dissertation deals with female aspirations in a related profession, it is appropriate to summarize the courtroom incident as a relevant case study. In March I978 former teacher Mrs. Sybil Moses, then a New Jersey prosecuting attorney, was found in contempt by the judge presiding over a case in which a doctor was accused of murdering five patients. The following day the prosecutor's office called on the judge to withdraw from the case. The Times seemed to support Mrs. Moses' contention that the judge harrassed her, treating her as a novice while deferring to the defense attorney. The latter, Raymond Brown, a leading criminal lawyer, openly expressed to the press his low opinion and dislike of Mrs. Moses and women lawyers in general. Mrs. Moses charged that Brown Zflgw York Times, April 3, I978. All the information and quotations concerning the trial are taken from this article. 23 taunted, insulted, and mocked her and was implicitly encouraged by the judge. The Times reported that once when Mrs. Moses was speaking, Brown "wiggled his hips in an effeminate gesture.” Brown repeatedly in court proceedings referred disparagingly to the female prosecutor as a "schoolteacher." He once interrupted her statement to the court with a sarcastic question: "IS school in session?" Brown accused her in court of not knowing legal rules and improperly phrasing questions. Throughout the trial, the judge tended to Iecutre Mrs. Moses but not Brown. At a bench conference, the judge was overheard to say to Mrs. Moses: ”We shouldn't have to teach you the basic rules here." The judge used Brown's name correctly from the outset of the trial but for weeks had trouble remembering Mrs. Moses' name. Occasionally the judge expressed anger when asked by Mrs. Moses to restrain Brown from inter- rupting her. At one point the judge snapped: "Don't you tell me what to do.” Despite Mrs. Moses' difficult situation, she told reporters that it helps a trial attorney to be a woman because people remember and relate to the few women who practice law in the courtroom. The newspaper article described the 38-year-old Mrs. Moses as wearing stylishly tailored clothes but being stiff in her movements. By way of contrast, Brown was said to wear baggy suits and to be relaxed and con- fident. He was most forthcoming with reporters about his background. Brown, a 62-year-old black man, was born in poverty in Florida. He is frequently mistaken for white. His father, whom Brown admired, was an illiterate laborer who had no use for school. He ”went to his grave at 87 clinging steadfastly to his illiteracy.” Perhaps important in shap- ing Brown's attitude toward women-—particularly professional women-—was 24 his father's belief that "reading was for women. Brown, who has been active in many civil-rights causes, is quick to inform people that he is black. It is pertinent to this study to note that a black attorney, who worked his way through college and law school and battled race- inspired prejudice, makes no secret according to press reports that he dislikes women in his profession. This Should be far from encouraging to women who aspire to leadership roles in any profession, whether it be law or education. If those who have felt the lash of prejudice them- selves are not in sympathy with women‘s campaign for equality under the law and in the legal profession, the modern woman is fighting a lonely battle. If the alleged attitude of the 64-year—old judge in this case is typical, women cannot look for support to the conservative establish- ment either. The judge was educated in Ohio, a state with a reputation for conservatism. Like Mrs. Moses, he was a New Jersey assistant prosecutor for a time before becoming a judge in the early I960's. He rejected the prosecution's request that he disqualify himself in this case and in the process was critical of the New_York Times reporting of his conduct. Historical Perspective The Women's Liberation movement which gained prominence in the I960's seemed to usher into American society a changing profile of women's place in every aspect of life.3 Women now are employed in 3Mary Ellen Reilly and Leon F. Bouvier, ”Women in American Society: A Historical and Demographic Profile,“ Population Profiles, published by the Center for Information on America, January 1977, p. I. 25 what is commonly known as non-traditional occupations. The question raised by these occurrences is whether or not expanding opportunities indicate that woman's position in America's social structure is about to undergo dramatic changes. To understand the current scene, it seems advisable to investigate the role that women played in history and throughout the various stages of America's development. Sidney Hook might be designated as representative of historical perspectives regarding women. In a study entitled The Hero in History, Hook indicates that the influence of one of the oldest of well-known women, Cleopatra, ”has been enormously exaggerated and She herself has been the subject of romantic myths that are great poetry but poor his- tory.4 Hook, however, does attribute what influence Cleopatra did have, more to intellectual qualities than to sexual appeal: Like most women who have played some role in history, Cleopatra's influence was achieved by influencing men. And like most women who have influenced eventful men, Cleopatra owed her success not so much to her beauty as to qualities of intelligence, will, personality and an obscure appeal that does not depend upon face or figure.5 And again: Cleopatra was not a great courtesan but a shrewd politician with overreaching ambitions, who fought a losing battle to preserve the independence of her empire. The preservation of her empire was the fixed principle of her policy, to which she showed a far greater constancy than to any of her royal lovers. She was willing to learn to love anybody who would save her dynasty.6 I76 4Sidney Hook, The Hero in History (Boston: Beacon Press, I934), p. . 51bid., p. I77 61bid., p. I78. 26 Although Hook gives a somewhat higher estimate of the influence on history of Theodora, he hedges his assessment by stating that she, stated in his terms, "at most must be regarded as a potentially event— making woman.‘I7 He writes that despite her successful manipulations of the military, the politicians, two popes, and Emperor Justinian himself, the heresies Theodora championed made little permanent headway, she bankrupted the imperial treasury, and shared responsibility for the crumbling of Justinian's empire. As in the case of Cleopatra, Hook attributes Theodora's historical influence more to intelligence than to beauty: In short, she showed herself the keenest statesman in the whole line of Byzantine rulers. As a woman she was attractive but her contemporaries thought her more graceful than beautiful and were more _ 8 Impressed by her spirit, Intelligence and sharp th. Only to Catherine II does Hook attribute high historical signif- icance and even this distinction is grudgingly yielded, and modified with the statement: “It is difficult to evaluate her influence. . .“9 Again, however, Hook acknowledges, as with the other two women, that Catherine's success was not due to feminine attractiveness but to her unique intelligence: She was not beautiful enough to hold her own husband whom she deposed and murdered in order to clear the way for herself. And although she never denied the needs of her passionate nature, she did not allow any of her favorites to swerve her from her fixed policy 71bid., p. 180. 9Ibid., p. 181. 81bid. 101bid., p. 152 27 In his account of these three women, Hook seems too much the revisionist. He believes that positive influences are automatically of more historical Significance than negative influences. His stress of the importance of intelligence over beauty of famous women leaders is a more important feature of his commentary. History is not devoid of women in the highest management roles. They won these positions, for the most part, by their intellectual qualities rather than by sexual appeal. This view is in contrast to one which downgrades female capa- bilities and promotes sex-bias against women in contemporary education. That the latter view is not uncommon, we shall Shortly see confirmed by the literature. In I970 in the United States there were IO4,299,734 women, who comprised 5l.3% of the population.H In the colonial period men out- numbered women. In the new settlements, life was difficult and each member of the community was expected to contribute. Historian Gerda Lerner, commenting on this period, notes: The vast majority of women worked within their homes, where their labor produced most articles needed for the family. The entire colonial production of cloth and clothing and partially that of shoes was in the hands of women. In addition to these occupations, women were found in many different kinds of employment.12 Homemaking women were maintaining households, making goods, rais- ing children, working farms, and managing estates. Women in business were cutlers, rope-makers, coachmakers, furniture-makers, turners, 1IReilly and Bouvier, "Women in American Society,” p. l 12Gerda Lerner, "The Lady and the Mill Girl: Changes in the Status of Women in the Age of Jackson,” Our American Sisters (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., I973). 28 buckskin-dressers, tanners, horse-shoers, chair-caners, mirror silverers, and wharf-owners.13 Others had more traditional businesses: sewing, embroidering, lace-making, mending, laundering, baking, nursing, and mid- wifery.14 Still others were publishers, innkeepers, and shopkeepers who sold tobacco, dry goods, groceries, seed, furniture, dishes, eyeglasses, drugs, books, and hardware. Dexter adds that almost 10% of the shop- keepers advertising in the Boston Evening Post in 1773 were women and maintains that in colonial times, "As far as general business went, women were to be found buying and selling, suing and being sued, acting as administrators and executors, and having power of attorney, with what appears to be the utmost freedom.15 Few women had formal education or owned property, but the same facts held true for men. Women acquired their skills the same way as did the men, through apprenticeship train- ing, frequently within their own family. Elizabeth Pinckney was known for experiments that made indigo- growing commercially profitable in South Carolina, Jane Colden was acclaimed as a botanist, Betsy Ross was a seamstress who ran an uphol— sterer's shop; and Phyllis Wheatley, a Black poetess, was acclaimed in both Europe and America. Ben Franklin's sister-in—law, Ann, was printer and publisher of the Newport Mercury; Mary Katherin Goddard published the Maryland Journal; and Anne Hoof Green published the Maryland Gazette from 1767 until her death in 1775. Patience Lovell Wright was praised 13Elizabeth A. Dexter, Colonial Women 9f_Affairs: A Stud 9: Women 1p Business ppg_the Professions ip_America Before 1776 Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1924776. 37. 14Ibid., pp. 37-38. 151bid., p. 185. 29 for her portraits modeled in wax and, apart from a tombstone craftsman, l6 was America's first professional sculptor. In Europe, Catherine the Great ruled Russia; Catherine Macauley was a famous English historian; and Queen Antoinette was making the American cause fashionable at the French court.17 It seems apparent from this observation that women were allowed to participate in most aspects of colonial life. Expediency, not sexual designation, appeared to be the more influential factor in the develop- ing nation.18 However, women were generally viewed as inferior—-they could not participate in higher education or be afforded many political and legal opportunities available to men. The year I776 thus seemed auspicious for Abigail to write on behalf of women to her husband John, then at the Second Continental Congress and later to become President of the United States. Abigail wrote: In the new Code of Laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make I desire that you would Remember the Ladies, and be more generous and favourable to them than your ancestors . . . If particular care and attention is not paid to the Ladies we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation. 16E. T. James, J. T. James, and P. S. Boyer, Notable American Women l607-l950: A_Biographical Dictionary (Cambridge: Harvard Univer- sity Press, I974), p. 3. 17G. Trevelyan, Ifl§_American Revolution (New York: David McKay, I964), p. 25. 18Lerner, Ihg_Lady ppg_the Mill Girl, p. 7. 19Alice S. Rossi, The Feminist Papers (New York: Bantam, I974), pp. lO-ll. 30 When John was "sausy" about her desire, Abigail described her exchange of letters with him to Mercy Warren, celebrated playwright, of the American cause, adding, "50 I have helped the Sex abundantly, but I will tell him I have only been making trial of Disinterestedness of his Virtue, and when weighed in balance have found it wanting.“20 As the country developed and industrialized, women's place in the world of work changed. Many sections of the country were settled, and jobs once performed in the home were moved into the factory. Work for women outside of the home was tabooed, especially for those families considered successful and upwardly mobile. Elizabeth Dexter observes: "The ruling sex, now lifted above the hardships of pioneer life, and accumulating some wealth, found a satisfying proof of their achieve- ments in maintaining their wives and daughters in ornamental idleness.2] Thorstein Veblen, a noted sociologist and social critic of the l9th century, insisted that a successful man would not allow his wife to be gainfully employed since her involvement in leisure reflected on the good name of the household and master. Woman's place was assumed to be in the home unless one was single, impoverished, or forced to work because of widowhood or divorce.22 Since a number of women fit into these categories, they were no strangers to participation in gainful employment. 201bid., p. ll. 2lEIizabeth A. Dexter, Career Women gf_America, I776-I840 (New Hampshire: Marshall Jones Company), I950. 22Thorstein Veblen, The Theory gf_thg_Leisure Class (New York: Funk and Wagnalls), l899. 31 With the development of the textile industry, many women left their home occupations and moved into the factories. According to Flexner, employers encouraged female laborers because they could pay them lower wages than men.23 By mid-century women constituted about 24% of the manufacturing labor force. In 1900 women made up 20% of the work force; 36% were in private household work, 28% in manual work, 19% were farm workers, 8% were in professional or technical fields, and 4% were in both clerical and sales work.24 In 1910, 31% of the working population was involved in farm work, while in 1972 the percentage had decreased to less than 4%.‘25 Therefore, any consideration of women's role in the labor force must take these changes into account. World War I brought women into the factories again in large numbers and their percentage in the labor force increased gradually through the years. In 1940, women accounted for 25.4% of the labor force, a slight increase from 1900, and 12.5% of married women were working.26 Since World War II these figures have changed markedly. Women were needed in the factories and they became involved in all types of jobs. Work which had been performed by men became the woman's domain, at least temporari— ly.27 Nevertheless, women were working and many were to remain in the labor force even after the war was over. 23Eleanor Flexner, Century 9f Struggle, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1959. 24Reilly and Bouvier, Women ip_American Society, p. 2. 25151a. 261pm. 27151a. 32 In the years following World War II, the proportion of women working has increased steadily. In I950, 29% of the women were in the labor force. By l970 this figure had increased to 4l.4%. For Black women this proportion was even greater (47.5%).28 Valerie Oppenheimer, a noted demographer, has presented various arguments to explain the increased participation of older and married women in the labor force. Primarily, demand has been rising steadily during the century for women workers and in earlier years there was a sufficient supply of single, unmarried women.29 However, with the low fertility of the I930s, the numbers of available young women and men decreased in the I940s and I950$ when demand for workers was increas— ing.30 Also, fewer women were remaining single. Therefore, employers were forced to utilize older and/or married women as the most feasible and least expensive alternative. Consequently, increasing numbers of married women are working and in all likelihood this trend will continue for economic and social reasons.31 The proportion of women working has increased substantially in this century and many women are receiving advanced education. The visibility of women in prominent positions in medicine, management, 281pm. 29Valerie Kincade Oppenheimer, ”Rising Educational Attainment, Declining Fertility and the Inadequacies of the Female Labor Market, ” in Demographic and Social Aspects of Population Growth, edited by Charles F. Westoff and Robert Parke, Jr. , Government Printing Office, I972, p. 8. 3OIbid. 3'Ibid. 33 higher education, and other fields, suggests that women are becoming more represented.32 The evidence, however, indicates that women have not made remarkable gains in the past thirty years. In fact, there is some indication that they are not doing as well as they were in 1950. For example, in 1970, women constituted 38.1% of the labor force and 40.1% of the professional category, a slight overrepresentation if we assumed a proportionate distribution of 38% in each category.33 Yet in 1950, when women were 28.1% of the force, they held 39.9% of the professional slots. Considering the general patterns reflected in Table 2.1, it is apparent that women remain overrepresented in traditionally female occupations——clerical, sales, service, and private household work, and underrepresented in managerial and laboring occupations. The tendency for women to be concentrated in particular occupa- tions that are low paying is problematic, but a comparison of median earnings for men and women within the same occupational classifications, when controlling for age and education, suggests that women are being discriminated against even when performing the same work.34 (See Table 2.2). In every case cited, women with the same education and age are receiving lower median earnings than men. One criticism commonly leveled against this type of comparison is that work experience is not 32Reilly and Bouvier, Women ip_American Society, p. 4. 33Ibid. 34Ibid. 34 .e .Q .Nan xgmzcmw .muvgme< :o cowumELomcH Low gmpcmu mcp An vocmw_n:a .mmFWCOLQ cowumpzmoa =.me$ocm owcamcmosme ucm FmowLOpme c< "prwuom cmowLmE< cw cmEoze .wa>:om use AFmez cw umucwgamm .mowumwgmpumamzo chowpmmzuoo .mpgoawm pumwnzm .msmcwo ean “mzmcmu esp to smogsm ”mogsom .mavcaoa ow was xOOF wuozk _.wm w.mm ~.mm mueou Lone; nwocmwawaxm FmpOH to & am.oo_ m.mm m.mm oww.~w¢.m_ Nn_.mmm.mm wmm.¢mm.om Pepe» m.m w.m N.o mcwpaoawm poz Lo uwzopqemcp n.m m.n m.m m.¢m m.om 0.5m memxaoz upogwmzox mpm>wga N.N— o.m_ o.o~ w.qv m.Nm w.mm v_o;mm:oz mum>wea pawoxm .mawxcoz wov>gmm m.m N.F v.0 o.m_ ¢.m_ m.np :mEmLou Egan a mewaoncu Eco; 5.0 m.o N.o w.m N.¢ _.m memmmcmz Econ ¢ meEme w.o o.o o._ o.m o.m N.w seed pamuxm .mewaonmu ¢.m_ N.o_ o.m_ v.5m P.wm m.Fm peoamcmah w mw>wumewqo o.N ~.F m._ —.m m.m m.¢ mamxeoz umcvcex w cosmumcgo m.mN _.mm ¢.¢m _.No ¢.No w.MN mamxxoz emancwx a Fmomampu m.w w.“ ¢.N ~.¢m m.om m.w¢ mcwxgoz mmme o.¢ m.m m.m N.m— m.m_ N.op Egan pamoxm .mLOHGmewcwEu< w mawmecmz o.mp m.m_ m.m_ m.mm —.wm F.0q mawxeoz cmavcwx a Fmowccowk .cho_mmmwoca ommp ooap oan ommp oom_ cum— cowpznwgpmwo moeou Loam; uwocwwaoqu acougma to pcwogwa .omm— .oom— .oan ”wagon Loam; w_mswu wo :o_u:n_gumwo pcoogma cam moweomwpmu chowu -masuoo an Lm>o use mm< mo mcmw> ¢F .mugom Lonmu :mw_w>wu uwucwwgmaxm mo pcwuawa ma :wEozrr.—.m anwh 35 uwsnmgmoemo can quwgopmw: c< m.mw m.m¢ m.¢m N.Pm m.~w m.mo n.mm m.Nm m.nm ¢.Nm o.wm m.vo o.mv m.mm w.—n N.mn o.nw Looooooo .N .m .m .m le\l\l\ upmz\mpmamu ”owoem + “ease_epo< chowpmozum :om vcm aFFwwm c? empcwgawm .mzmcwu mgp to :me3m .m.: .cprmozum use cowpm :uuo a m cvcamm .mpaoawm pomwnsm .mzmcou ONmF ”mogzom mmm.m Fww.m moo.m omm.m oqm.m mmmxw mmrnw umm.m omo.w vmm.m mam.m me.m mmo.m wmv.FP mow.r— «mm.o~ mo—.NF mmm.m wa.c_ w_m.m_ wmr.__w wrmz mcwxeoz v_o;om:oz mpm>wea memxaoz wow>cmm mgwaonmo Egan mawmccez a meELmu maweoamo mm>wpmemqo “Loamcmeh mm>rpmamno cosmpwmeu mx;m_u mcwamoxmewh a Ffioazma mewaowxxoom mam—Fob xcmm mcwxcoz _mowLmFu Ameuomv mewFu mw—mm a cosmwpmm mcmxaoz mmme AmmmFFOQV .cwsn< Foesum mama: .paoo a mammmcmz mwrmm memmwcmz mcmwoecsomh wocwwum w mcwcmwcwmcm >p_mgw>wc: w wmmFFou .mamzummk mpmVmeowam ewpzaeou Fecowmmmwocm Fou0h Ir co_pwa:ooo .okm_ ”meme: mm-om methoz .cmmeQEou Foosom mo mamm> an .vmrmm mm< .mmpmemu use mm—cz to cowumazooo new mmcvcewmnr.m.m anwh 36 controlled and women are more likely to be absent from the labor force, especially women who leave for childbearing reasons.35 This is a factor which cannot be denied, but it does not seem sufficient to explain the persistent disparities, especially among younger persons. Data on the median earnings of the experienced labor force for the period of 1950-1970 indicate that the income differential has not changed markedly in this period. (See Table 2.3). The findings suggest, therefore, that more women from every type of marital status and age category are becoming involved in gainful employment outside the home, but they continue to be located in predominantly female—labeled jobs and are receiving disproportionate wages for their work. This is further substantiated when the percentages of women in certain professional jobs in the 1970 experienced labor force are considered: women are 1.7% of our engineers, 3.7% of architects, 4.8% and 5.1% of lawyers and judges respectively, 9% of medical and osteopathic physicians, 12% of the nation's pharmacists, 28.6% of college and university teachers, 40.2% of editors and reporters, 40.7% of secondary school teachers, 81.5% of elementary school teachers, and 97.4% Of our registered nurses.36 Therefore, even within the professional classification, women are dramat- ically underrepresented in the highest paying and prestigious occupa- tions and overrepresented in lower paying, traditionally female positions. If these trends are to be reversed, professional schools, for example law and medical, must open their doors to admit more women. Changing family characteristics seem to indicate that many women are no longer content to remain in the home as housewives and mothers for most of their adult lives. 351bid. 36Ibid., p. 6. 37 .0 .Q .Nnmp .eowsws< so sowpessomsH sow swuswu =.m_wmoss owssesmOEeo use Feu4L04mwz s< ”xumwoom seuwsea< s4 soeoze .se4>:om use >444wm s4 umpswsswm .ommp use .oum_ .ommF .muwumvsewueseso Fesowpemzuuo .mpsoaem poemszm .mzmsmu cumF .mzmseu use mo seessm .m.: "mussom _.mm 444 mem._ 4.44 444 44o.4 m.e4 mme._ 444.4 weexeoz e_o;emzoz e4e>4ea 4.44 444.4 Nom.m 4.44 404.4 440.4 4.44 mme.e Nwm.e msexeoz eoe>eem 0.44 444 444.4 4.44 444 444.4 4.4e 444.4 mme.m acetone; sees e._m 4mm mme._ 4.4e e44 e44.4 4.44 444.4 ewe.m meemeeez e mLeELes 4.44 444.4 444.4 4.44 mee.N e_O.4 o.me o__.4 444.4 meeeoeeo e.4e 444.4 mem.~ 4.44 444.4 444.4 4.44 eem.4 444.4 we>4oeeeao 4.44 044.4 mam.m 4.44 444.4 mme.m m._e 044.4 444.4 seaweeesu 4.04 mem.~ m_N.e _.ee e4m.m eom.m o.me oeN.m 440.4 meexeoz 4eo4ee40 4.44 eme._ 4em.e 0.44 O4M.N mee.e e.mm m_e.m 444.4 meexeez weFem e.4m 444.4 444.4 4.44 ooe.m emm.e 4.4m 4ON.e 404.44 msemeees 4.0m mFe.N 444.4 e.em 444.4 4N_.4 4.4e 4__.4 mmm.__ 4eeoemmesoea e.4e moo.44 omo.ee e.em 44_.m4 404.44 0.44 mme.44 mme.e 4 4eeoe s so a z s to a s s so a z mmflmmmmmmm 4 we a 0444 4 we a oem_ 4 we a 0444 .xmm as uwxsoz mxmwz mmuom sow so4ueasuoo as mosou Loseu ueusmwswaxm ms» 4o mmswssem sewu02nr.m.m mFseH 38 Women in Education According to Taylor, women did not participate in the educational process during the beginning years of American schooling, since careers outside the home were considered tabooed. The first female involvement in the educational system took place in the seventeenth century in "dame schools” where young boys were prepared for the standard village school.37 / Actual male and female academies were not established until the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.38 To assess women's place in society, it is necessary to consider educational opportunities and attainment. The majority of the professions, except teaching, were closed to women. Higher education was not made available to them until 1833 when Oberlin College opened its doors to all regardless of race or sex.39 The first women's college, Mount Holyoke, opened in 1837.40 The Civil War provided opportunity for women to fill positions in the classrooms as teachers mainly because the men went off to fight the war. As a result, the demands for qualified women educators emerged: But to do the same task as men, the women had to receive an equal education. From this point in time women made steady progress. By 1870, nearly two-thirds of all public school teachers were women and the careers 37Suzanne Taylor, “Women in Education,” 51% Minority, Connecti- cut Conference on the Status of Women (National Education Association, 1972, p. 61. 3815111., p. 62. 39Flexner, Century prStruggle, p. 40. 401bid. 39 of women educators blossomed up to the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920 when they reached the plateau of their success. 1 During the depression years of the late 19205, the 19305, and continuing through the years following World War II, there was a decline in the involvement of women in education and specifically in educational administration. Statistics reveal that the percentage of women elemen- tary principals to the total number declined between 1951 and 1962, from 56% to 37%.42 The decline in the percentage of women was no less dra- matic at the level of secondary principals, school superintendents, and higher education administrators. Current studies disclose that the same type of administrative decline continues today. Regarding educational attainment by both sexes, an important variable for consideration, we find that in 1950, 7% of women between the ages of 18 to 24 were in college, and by 1970 this figure had increased to 20%.43 In 1960, 11% of the professional work force was female, com— pared to 15% in 1930. Yet more women were attending college in 1960 than in 1930.44 However, fewer women are college graduates than men (5 million women, 7.3 million men) and women are underrepresented in postgraduate study, 1.6 million women as compared to 3.5 million men.45 41Taylor, "Women in Education,” p. 61. 421bid., p. 65. 43Source: 1970 Census. Employment Status and Work Experience. Reprinted in Reilly and Bouvier, ”Women in American Society: A Histori- cal and Demographic Profile,“ Center for Information on America, 1977, p. 1. 44Taylor, "Women in Education," p. 65. 45Reilly and Bouvier, ”Women in American Society,” p. 4. 40 When figures are compared for a thirty year period, it is apparent that women's proportional representation in higher education relative to men is not changing to any appreciable degree (See Table 2.4). While more women are attending college, the numbers of men also continue to rise and the gaps between the sexes have not narrowed. Table 2.4.-—Educational Attainment of the Population 25 Years of Age and Over by Year and Sex. M 1950 F M 1960 F M 1970 F 25 years + % % % % % % No School 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.1 1.6 1.6 Elementary: 1-4 years 9.3 7.4 7.0 5.2 4.4 3.4 5-7 years 16.4 15.5 14.6 13.1 10.5 9.5 8 years 20.8 19.8 17.8 17.3 12.9 12.6 High School: 1-3 years 16.4 17.5 18.7 19.7 18.6 20.0 4 years 17.6 22.5 21.2 27.7 27.8 34.1 College: 1-3 years 6.8 7.5 8.6 9.0 10.6 10.7 4 years or more 7.1 5.0 9.6 5.8 13.5 8.1 Not Reported: 3.1 2.3 Median Years Completed 9.0 9.6 10.3 10.9 12.1 12.1 Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census, 1950 Census; 1960 Census; 1970 Census, Subject Reports, Educational Attainment. Reprinted in Reilly and Bouvier, "Women in American Society: An Historical and Demographic Profile,“ Center for Information on America, 1977, p. 3. Contemporary women are confused as to their status in the field of education. Taylor is pessimistic about the possibility of large numbers of women continuing in education during the future. Women may 41 lose their prominence in a profession in which they had developed great strength over the years: "The prognosis for women in education appears unfavorable."46 Sexton comments: The phenomenal growth of secondary and especially higher education, greatly diminished the numerical dominance of women. In 1970, male teachers, including those in higher education, almost equalled the number of female teachers, 1.2 million and 1.7 million respectively. In 1930, women teachers were almost four times as numerous as males, 819,000 and 216,000 respectively.47 Suzanne Howard examines in her research, teaching as a "female occupation” and arrives at an interesting insight. Howard's progno- sis of a further decline in the percentage of women teachers attributes this reduction to an infiltration by men not only of the teaching pro- fession, but of other professions formerly dominated by women, as well: Men are not only gradually infiltrating the teaching profession, but other female occupations as well, e g., nursing administration, social work, library science. However, while female occupations have become less segregative, or more open about including males, male occupations continue to be resistant to female entry. It may be argued that sex-typing of occupation gets in the way of finding the best qualified person for the job. What is needed to reduce sex-typing in education is not greater inducements to bring men into the profession (higher salaries) but rather a broadening of alternatives for women.48 46Taylor, ”Women in Education,” p. 67. 47Patricia Cayo Sexton, Women ifl Education, (Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa, 1976) p. 15. 48Suzanne Howard, ”Why Aren' t Women Administering Our Schools?” The Status of Women Public School Teachers and the Factors Hindering Their Promotion Into Administration (Arlington,— Virginia. National Council of Administrative Women in Education, 1975) p. 10. 42 Psychologists and educational specialists cite a variety of causes for the vanishing woman educator. Among them are: personal attitude changes, consistent stereotyping, and conflict of roles. Whatever the reasons, the evidence is quite clear that women in education are statistically diminishing. If a large percentage of highly qualified educators are being eliminated from educational administration in the United States, we cannot possibly be promoting quality education. Sex Discrimination in Higher Education and Federal Policy The first comprehensive federal legislation to eliminate sex discrimination in education, Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments, was signed into law June 23, 1972. The guidelines to implement Title IX were issued July 21, 1975. What, briefly, has been the historical development of federal policy in the higher education of women?49 In colonial times, colleges relied for support on aid from Royal governors, acts of the Crown, and legislative bodies of colonial assemblies. The colleges receiving government aid were for men-—the colonial attitude toward the education of women was generally negative. The qualified women who sought to enter colonial colleges were denied on the basis of their sex. Two policies were thus established in the 49Nancy Lee Rogers, ”Sex Discrimination in Higher Education: How Has Federal Policy Developed?” Innovator, published by the University of Michigan, School of Education, April 29, 1979, pp. 15—17. This article, part of a project on “Studies in Federal Educational Policies, 1945—72,“ represents part of MS. Rogers dissertation research: it has been adapted from a paper she presented at the 1978 annual con- ference of the Comparative and International Education Society, held in Mexico City. 43 colonial institutions of higher education: discrimination against women and government aid to higher education. The first major action to involve the federal government in higher education was the Northwest Ordinance of 1785, 1787. The ordinance, which provided that land be set aside for universities in the states formed in the western territories, indicated support of higher education by the federal government. It was important to the higher education of women because the institutions established by this policy were state institutions, free from religious control and able to accept and encourage the development of coeducation. By the end of the 19th century, mostly state, not religious, colleges had opened their doors to women. The Morrill Act of 1862 established new federal policies for higher education. The land grant colleges created under the act changed the traditional curriculum and emphasized agriculture and mechanical arts. The legislation also had an effect on higher education for women. From the beginning, women were admitted to most land grant colleges. In order to capture the attention of farmers and to gain students, the colleges established institutes on subjects of concern to the farmer. Courses offered to the farmers' wives became part of extension programs and the curricula. The colleges, thus aided higher education for women, first by admitting them and then by offering subjects compatible with their needs and interests. During the 19th century, women's colleges, coordinate colleges for women, and coeducation developed. Women's groups began to ask for federal support of higher education for women, presenting plans for 44 such aid and campaigning in magazine to publicize the need. The government did not respond, however, and no federal policy was developed to meet these requests. The third phase of federal involvement in higher education began with the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, which aided vocational education in secondary schools and provided for the training of teachers of vocational subjects. Until this time, women had not found ready entry into the faculties of higher education. As one observer noted, "The most gifted women who graduate from the University receive conspicuous positions as teachers in high schools, seminaries and women's colleges."50 The Smith-Hughes Act led to the hiring of women to prepare teachers in women's vocational education subjects. The fourth period of federal involvement began near the end of World War II with the passage in 1944 of the G.I. Bill. The bill was viewed with some alarm by women in higher education who feared a flood of men veterans would crowd out women students. The women, arguing that colleges and universities had depended on the enrollment of women to keep going during the war and that some women had left college to do war work, urged that policies to protect and aid women in higher education be established. But the sentiment of the times, pressures from groups such as the American Legion, which wanted the veterans rewarded for service, and the interests of the government, which seemed better served if 50George N. Rainsford, Congress gpg_Highep Education in the Nineteenth Century (Knoxville: The University of Tennessee PFESSS—1972) p. 3. 45 women resumed the role of wife and mother, precluded any federal action on behalf of women in higher education. The National Defense Education Act of 1958 further involved the federal government in higher education. The legislation, a response to scientific and technical competition with Russia, provided financial assistance to students, and women benefited because they borrowed almost to the same extent as did men. The teacher training programs established by the legislation were particularly attractive to women and increased their opportunities in higher education, Since World War II, the federal government and the higher education community have viewed with concern the barriers that prevent the full development of individual talent. Studies by educators and government bodies identified religion, race, poverty, geographic isolation, and sex as some of the barriers to higher education. In its report, ”Higher Education for American Democracy,” the Commission on Higher Education established by President Truman in 1946, identified antifeminism as a form of discrimination in higher education. In the early 19505, the American Council on Education (ACE) held conferences on discrimination in higher education in which sex was again identified as a form of discrimination. The ACE also held conferences on the problems of women in education and employment. The demand for educated manpower and the increase in the number of working women forced a sharper focus on the preparation of women for work and on the role of women in society. President Kennedy responded by establishing the Commission on the Status of Women. The commission's report, released in 1963, recommended programs of 46 continuing education and financial assistance (including scholarships and fellowships), re-examination of admission policies, special preparatory programs for returning students, more and better counseling, and research on women in higher education.51 President Johnson supported the Commission on the Status of Women and its recommendations. Stating that his policy was “unabashedly in favor of women,”52 he committed his administration to advance the status of women in government employment and took actions directed toward assisting women. He asked the Federal Women Award winners to for a study group on careers for women and recommend what colleges and universities should do.53 He appointed an administration task force on gifted persons which prepared a position paper on the education of talented women. He approved the addition of the word "sex“ to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. By Executive Order 1121, he continued the work of the Interdepartmental Committee on the Status of Women and broadened the Cabinet representation of the committee. He amended Executive Order 11246 (11375) to include the word ”sex” for the first time.54 These Executive Orders prohibited discrimination in employment 51U. S. President's Commission on the Status of Women, American ng§p_(Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1963TTTTTIT 52U. S. President, Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States (Washington, D.C.: Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Service, Lyndon B. Johnson, 1964) p. 334. 53Press release, ”Remarks Johnson made to Federal Women Award Winners,” White House Central Files, Executive Aides Files, Hardesty (February 28, 1966). 54 1967, p. 3519. , 90th Congress, 15't session, Executive Orders, Volume 2, 47 by colleges and universities holding federal contracts and required from these institutions affirmative action plans to remedy past discrimination. The 1960s also saw the passage by Congress of several acts to support and encourage higher education. The Higher Education Facilities Act of 1963 benefited men and women equally by providing increased opportunities for higher education. The Higher Education Act of 1965 established programs of continuing education and the Teacher Corps, both of importance to women. Although this legislation helped women, no federal legislation explicitly directed toward women in higher education was passed during President Johnson's administration, but the base was laid, and women began to believe that opportunities for ther advancement were increasing. Some women, however, experienced frustration in efforts to improve their status. At the 1966 Governors' Conference on the Status of Women, a group of these women established the feminist organization NOW.55 And in 1968, the Women's Equity Action League (WEAL) was formed from NOW. Both groups raised the issue of sex discrimination in higher education. On college campuses, women's organizations were created to examine the role of women in higher education, and in both academic and professional organizations caucus groups formed to gather data on women in higher education. Most of these groups were organized between 1968 and 1971. 55Betty Friedan, It_Changed My_Life (New York: Dell Books, 1977), p. 119. 48 In 1969, hearings on higher education began in the subcommittee on education of the House Committee on Education and Labor; chairperson of the subcommittee was Edith Green, representative from Oregon and an advocate of education and women's rights. Her position on the committee, her political expertise, and her commitment to education and to women, supplied the leadership necessary for legislation on sex discrimination in higher education. She asked for statistics on sex discrimination in higher education like those collected on race discrimination. She inquired of those testifying about the use of quotas in graduate and professional schools.56 The Omnibus Postsecondary Education Bill of 1970, to promote the advantages of postsecondary education, was in- troduced by Representative Green. The bill included section 805, which prohibited discrimination against women in federally assisted programs and in employment in education. In connection with the bill, she held the first extensive hearings on sex discrimination in education,57 but the bill was not acted upon in this session of Congress. The issue of sex discrimination in education was also raised in congressional debate. For example, Representative Martha Griffiths of Michigan placed in the Congressional Record letters from NOW and WEAL on charges filed by them against universities and colleges for 56U. S. Congress, House Committee on Education and Labor, Hearings gp_Higher Education Apt_1969, before the subcommittee on education, on H.R. 16098, section 805, 91St Congress, 15t session, 1969, pp. 155 and 173. 57U. S. Congress, House Committee on Education and Labor, Discrimination Against Women, Hearings before a subcommittee of the House Committee on Education and Labor, on H.R. 16098, 91St Congress, June 17, 19, 26, 29, 30, July 1 and 31, 1970. 49 discrimination against women in employment under Executive Order 11375.58 All aspects of discrimination against women received congressional study in the early 19705. In March, 1971, President Nixon's legislation on higher educa— tion was introduced in Congress.59 It included Title X, which prohibited sex discrimination in educational programs receiving federal financial assistance, but this prohibition was modified by a ”bona fide occupational” clause. Fearing the clause would be used to avoid the intent of Title X and disliking other features of the bill, Representative Green introduced H.R. 7248, which also included a prohibition against sex discrimination in higher education but did not contain the objectionable clause. After hearings in the subcommittee, her bill went to the House where the measure on sex discrimination was modified to exempt undergraduate institutions. Although Representative Green and other women members of the House spoke against the exemption, it was accepted, and the bill was passed November 4, 1971.60 The Senate passed in August, 1971, a bill on higher education, S. 659, which did not prohibit sex discrimination in education, although Senators Birch Bayh and George McGovern had introduced amendments to that effect. But in February, 1972, amendment 874 was prohibiting 58U. S. Congress, House, Remarks by Representative Martha Griffiths on Discrimination Against Women in Universities, June 3, 1970, Congressional Records, 116, p. 18197. 5901gg§£_gf General Public Bills, Federal Issue Part I (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1971), H.R. 5191, p. 71, S 1123, p. 70. 60U. S. Congress, House, Higher Education Agt_gf 1971, H.R. 7248, 92nd Congress, 1St session, November 4, 1971, 117, pp. 39248—61. 50 sex discrimination in education was introduced by Senator Bayh and was passed. The legislation was reported out to both Houses in late May 1972. A change made by the conference committee on Title X was a modification of the House exemption of all undergraduate institutions to exempt only private undergraduate institutions and those traditionally composed mainly of one sex.61 The legislation on higher education was passed by Congress, and it included a federal policy for women in higher education. Thus, we see that although government support of higher education was present in colonial days, women did not benefit from that support until they gained the right to enter higher educational institutions. Opportunities for women developed as colleges and universities moved from religious control, embraced more liberal and practical curricula, and adopted policies of non-discrimination. Later, both the civil rights and the feminist movements helped provide support for legislation to eliminate discrimination in education. A federal policy for women eventually resulted from these and other actions and from the opportunities they made possible for women in higher education. Sexism and Bias in Higher Education Equality for women is a serious issue. Five years after the Federal Government decreed that colleges and universities that dis- criminate against women or minority groups could lose their lucrative Federal contracts, the employment picture at the nation's institutions 61Education Amendments of 1972, U.S. Code, Volume 2, section 2671. 51 of higher education remains largely unchanged.62 That the overall distribution of women in institutions of higher education is highly suggestive of discriminatory attitudes and practices no one can deny, research into the problem of discrimination against women in higher education is handicapped at present by the scarcity of studies of individual colleges and universities. Several remarks by men famous in the academic world reveal all too clearly how women have been regarded in academe. When President Nathan Pusey of Harvard realized that the draft was going to reduce the number of men applying to Harvard's graduate school, his reaction was, ”We Shall be left with the blind, the lame, and the women.”63 Sometimes there appears in serious publications what may seem to be a reasonable objection to giving women the same opportunities as men. For example: Too many young women are casually enrolling in graduate schools across the country without having seriously considered the obligation which they are assuming by requesting that such expenditures be made for them. And they are not alone to blame. Equally at fault are two groups of faculty—~undergraduate instructors who en- courage their women students to apply to graduate school without helping them consider the commitment that such an act implies, and graduate admissions counselors who blithely admit girls with impressive academic records without looking for other evidence that the applicant has made a sincere commitment to graduate study.64 62Grace Lichtenstein, ”Men Hold Most Top College Jobs 5 Years After U. S. Order on Bias: Possible Federal Aid Loss Has Not Increased Opportunities for Women and Minorities,” Ihg_Ngy_York Times, December 6, 1977, p. 10. 63Ann Sutherland Harris, “The Second Sex in Academe, American Association 9f University Professors Bulletin, Fall 1970, p. 283. 64Edwin C. Lewis, Assistant to the Vice-President for Academic Affairs and Professor of Psychology, Iowa State University, quoted in Ifl§_Chronicle gf_Higher Education, February 9, 1970. various 52 Ann Harris cites a collection of quotations garnered from institutions in 1970. Some are as follows: 1. 65 I know you're competent and your thesis advisor knows you're competent. The question in our minds, is are you really serious about what you're doing? Have you ever thought about journalism? (To a female student who plans to get a Ph.D. in political science). I know a lot of women journalists who do very well. A pretty girl like you will certainly get married; why don't you stop with an M.A.? You're so cute. I can't see you as professor of anything. We expect women who come here to be competent, good students, but we don't expect them to be brilliant or original. Women are intrinsically inferior. How old are you anyway? 00 you think a girl like you could handle a job like this? You don't look like the academic type. (To a young widow who had a five-year old child and who needed a fellowship to continue graduate school). You're very attractive. You'll get married again. We have to give fellowships to people who really need them. Comments such as these can hardly be taken as encouragement for women students to develop an image of themselves as scholars. indicate some professors have different expectations about female perform— ance than about the performance of male graduate students—-expecta- tions based not on ability. "comments like these indicate that we are expected to be decorative objects in the classroom, that we're not likely to finish a Ph.D. and if we do, there must be something “wrong” with us. 65Harris, "The Second Sex in Academe,” p. 284. They Harris counters these quotes by arguing that Single women will get 53 married and drop out. Married women will have children and drop out. And a woman with children ought to stay at home and take care Of them rather than study and teach.”66 Expectations have a great effect on performance. Rosenthal and Jacobson have shown that when teachers' expected randomly selected students to “bloom” during the year, those students' 105 increased significantly above those of a control group. Rosenthal and Jacobson had already shown that experimenter expectation made significant differences in the perform- ance of the subjects-even when verbally identical instructions were read to the groups of subjects. The teachers and the experimenters stated that they had treated all subjects or students exactly alike. They were, however, giving both verbal and nonverbal cues about what was to be the appropriate behavior.67 It would be surprising to find that graduate schools are immune to this phenomenon. When professors expect less of certain students, those students are likely to respond by producing less. That women who go to graduate school and make a serious commit— ment is proved by studies that have taken into account the degree of education of working women. Such studies Show that the amount of edu- cation a woman has received is a more important factor with respect to her decision to work than either marriage or children. The higher her level of education, the more likely she is to be working full time. Astin found that of the almost 2,000 women doctorates she surveyed 10 66Ibid., p. 283. 67Rosenthal and L. Jacobson, Pygmalion ip_the Classroom: Teacher Expectation ppg_Pupil'S Intellectual DevelOpment, New York, 1968. 54 years after they completed their Ph.D.‘s, 91% were working, 81% of them full time. The percentage of men who work full time is not, incidentally, 100%, as most of us think, but was, in 1968, 69.4% of all men of working age.68 Historically, sex discrimination has been an accepted mode of behavior. Sex-role stereotyping in terms of classes, programs, and activities is accepted as a matter of course. There are Significant differences in the prestige of schools and subjects dominated by women. Alice Cook reports that women students are distributed very unevenly within the various colleges, with relatively high enrollments in the college of arts, home economics, social science, and in profes— sional schools of library science, education, nursing, and social work. Women represent a minority, sometimes very small, in agriculture, medicine, and law. And rarely does the proportion of female to male faculty correspond favorably with the proportion of female to male students.69 For example, Ph.Ds. in education are frowned upon by those in traditionally male—dominated fields. Librarians are so conscious of the fact that theirs is a profession identified with women that they are trying to attract men in order to improve the status and salaries of librarians. The University of Chicago report uncovered a Similar phenomenon. Of the 11 female full professors at Chicago (there were 68Helen Astin, ng_Woman Doctorate, Basic Book publishers, 1970. 69Alice Cook, "Sex Discrimination at Universities: An Ombudsman's View,” American Association gf_University Professors (AAUP) Bulletin, 58 (September, 1972), p. 279. 55 475 male full professors) six were in the department of Social Service Administration. At the Assistant Professor rank, the ratio was reversed sharply-fifteen men but only two women, although women comprised 68% of the students in that traditionally female—dominated field. I quote the report: "Another matter of concern to the Committee in connection with recruitment was the statement of women in the School of Social Service Administration that men had in years been given preferential treatment. The vastly different ratios in that school between men and women in tenured and nontenured positions seem to support this allegation. The Committee recognizes the argument that it may be desirable to pro— vide male models in a traditionally women's field (just as it recognizes the parallel argument of the desirability or providing female models in traditionally men's fields). More important, however, we question a second assumption-—that the influx of a large number of men raises the level of professionalization, or even that, rightly or wrongly, it raises the prestige of the field and should therefore be encouraged.”70 Even at the public school level, sex bias is evident. Schmuck attributes sex—bias toward women as leaders in education to men as the manipulators of the profession: Men always have held positions of control in our public schools. Even when women have held management positions, they have typically not been in authority either to give directions or to hire or fire subordinates. Men manage the schools and men are the gatekeepers to admit those who will hold management positions in schools. Men as gatekeepers to the profession-—consciously and uncon- sciously, formally and informally-—encourage male and discourage females from becoming administrators. Clearly Harris, "The Second Sex in Academe," p. 288. 56 the control of our schools is structurally differentiated by sex.71 Schmuck uses psychological theories to explain male educators' resistance to women in school management. Men, she concludes, have a need to believe that women are inferior in ability because: 1. Society devalues women. Educators accept society's norms. 2. Men in education generally have a lower self-image because they are in what is considered to be a predominantly female field. 3. The typical personal life style of the male educational administrator is believed by men to be incompatible with society's view of what every woman's life style should be.72 Educators are usually accepting of societal norms, and schools generally reflect the social order. Women are viewed as best suited to be homemakers, good wives, and mothers. Cultural confirmation of female stereotyping, Schmuck asserts, is still the popular norm. She writes: "Women who are in leadership positions in the schools belie the acceptable sex role norms for women.”73 Men generally strive to prove their own self—worth and prom- inence in their work world. Men in education have a difficult task in this regard because the profession does not compare with law, medicine, or business as a masculine field. As Schmuck remarks: To share responsibility with women will be to share prestige with women. In our society, 71Patricia Ann Schmuck, §§y_0ifferentiation ip_Public School Administration (Arlington, Virginia: National Council of Administrative Women in Education, 1975) p. 86. 721bid., p. 102. 73Ibid., p. 103. 57 women as second class citizens detract-—rather than add to the prestige of the occupational position.74 Men in an accepted "female" occupation must continually strive to validate their self-worth. This sometimes takes the form of unjustly disparaging women to elevate themselves. The findings of Simpson's attitudinal study are very enlighten- ing. The results indicate that attitudes administrators and faculty toward selecting men and women for academic appointments showed that women were chosen over men applicants only when their superior qualifications could not be ignored.75 A survey report released by College and University Association (CUPA) supports the allegations of many in academe that discrimination on the basis of race and/or sex is widespread. Commenting on the survey results, R. Frank Mensel, Executive Director of CUPA, said: ”The real surprise in the study is no surprise. On point after point, the data document the differentials in employment shares and salary levels of women and minorities in administrative employment——differentials that have been the basis of charges leveled by activists against colleges and universities.“76 This study, funded by the Ford Foundation, is the first to provide national data on the employment and compensation patterns in higher education administration by race and by sex. Over 1,000 colleges 74Ibid., p. 105. 75Lawrence Simpson, “Attitudes of Higher Education Agents Toward Academic Women,” ollege ppg_University Business, February, 1977, p. 85. 76Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges, Washington, D.C., No. 18, October, 1977, p. 2. 58 and universities of all types participated in the study. Some of the major highlights of the study are:77 1. White males held about 79% of the administrative positions at the survey institutions, white females held 14%, minority males held 5%, and minority females hero 2%. 2. Institutions with women or minority student bodies employed a much larger percentage of women and minorities in administrative posts than did predominantly white coeducational colleges. 3. Women and minorities were generally best represented in positions relating to student and external affairs. 4. The affirmative action/equal employment officer was the only position included in the survey which had a sizeable representation of all four race and sex groups. 5. Of those serving as affirmative action officers, men were paid more than women. 6. Women, both white and minority, were paid only about 80% as much as men with the same job title when employed by the same type of institution. 7. The percentages of jobs held by women and minorities generally tended to decrease as salaries increased, except at women's colleges and minority institutions. Another form that sex-bias takes is occupational stratifica- tion. The Carnegie Commission Report documents a well known fact of academic life: the higher you go in the academic hierarchy, the fewer 77Ibid., p. 3. 59 women you find.78 Men become the presidents or take over other presti- gious positions. Most females in administration management occupy service or staff roles. Major responsibility is assigned to line supervisors, most of whom are men. If women are thinly represented on faculties, especially in traditionally male fields, they are so rarely represented in top aca- demic administrative positions as to be practically non-existent.79 Despite wide recognition of this problem, and despite the pres- sures applied by affirmative action programs, change has been slow. When we look ahead to an era of reduced university growth it is possible that the number of women in senior positions will actually decline. Though women are lower paid than men, are less likely to have tenure or to hold high level administrative positions, and are dispro— portionately located in the lower ranks in non-Ph.D. granting depart- ments, affirmative action is being criticized as a vehicle which results in discrimination against white males. The fact that academic women in public institutions earned less than their male counterparts in 1975, does not necessarily assure a move toward equality in the future. (Even if a group is successful in convincing others of its plight, it is insufficient in a change-causing process. It is usually necessary for the disadvantaged to convince others that the roots of their problems are in the inequalities 78Opportunities for Women in Higher Education,“ The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, September, 1973. 79Ibid. 6O threatening everyone within and outside the sub—group.8O Written affirmative action programs are required from schools with more than $1 million in Federal contracts. But they have brought very few minority group members or women into the overwhelmingly white male preserves of tenured faculty and top administration. No school has lost a contract because of failure to comply with the Government order, however, nor has the civil rights division of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (H.E.W.) attempted to keep track of how well schools live up to their written promise.81 The H.E.W. civil rights office reported that it did not know how many schools had Federal contracts worth more than $10,000 which would require at least an oral affirmative action plan. The 107 in- stitutions that have contracts worth more than $1 million are the only ones that must submit written plans to the department. Among these are the University of California at Berkeley, where the faculty is about 88% white male; the University of Michigan, where it is about 77% white male; the University of Pennsylvania, about 85% white male, the University of Texas, about 78% white male; and City College of New York, about 63% white male.82 In assessing the success of an affirmative action program, the evaluator often counts the number of members of the previously ag- grieved group who have been accepted into positions previously denied 80Jeffrey S. Kaiser, “Anatomy of an Evolution: Women in Educational Administration,“ niversity Colle e Quarterl , a magazine published by Michigan State University 24 March 1979 p. 15. 81Lichtenstein, ”Men Hold Most Top College Jobs," p. 7. 821bid. 61 them with impunity.83 Thus, inasmuch as women were traditionally denied access to careers in academic administration, one can count the number of women who currently are academic administrators. This can be done with relative ease and one might, in fact, find a substantial increase in the number of women who today fill these positions. One can further look at the number of chief academic officers, staff assistants, deans, and the like to generate a distribution of this employment and again one might determine that in the past several years the inequality gap has been reduced substantially. None of these indicators would, however, tell us whether or not the reality of equality of opportunity had been accom- plished. A measure of ”school quality,‘ as well as the quantitative distribution measure, is required to determine if women are closing the inequality gap in higher education administration.84 Palley's research address itself to relative advancement oppor- tunities. The study was undertaken as an effort to repudiate, at least partially, the critics of affirmative action who look at absolute numbers of women in academic positions, regardless of their qualifications, rank, salary, and the status of the institution and department in which women serve and arrives at some interesting conclusions. Academic women with administrative career goals were studied to determine if equality of opportunity in administration is more myth than reality. The question being raised is whether equality can be measured as a single variable or if it should be operationalized as a multiple set of variables. The assumption is that equality must be seen from a multi- 83Palley, ”Women as Academic Administrators,” p. 4. 84Ibid., p. 8. 62 dimensional perspective. Thus, the number of women in academic positions is not a sufficient indicator of equality. Relative salaries, workloads, and promotion opportunities need to be studied. Similarly, the quality of the institutions at which women have had opportunities for advancement must be examined too. Is there inequality based on sex apparent in the mobility patterns of postsecondary administrators? Clearly the data indicated that once academic women select or are selected for administrative careers, quantitative opportunities are available to them which seem to be approxi- mately equivalent to those open to men. Qualitatively, using a relative traditional indicator of prestige, that is, a major research university is more prestigious than most four-year colleges and two-year colleges—- women do not fare as well as men. Also, if members of religious orders are excluded from the sample, women do not even fare equally with men on a quantitative measures of administrative career achievement. Until recently, legal redress against discriminatory practices and policies was difficult to obtain. Today new federal legislation makes legal recourse more practical. Title IX of the Educational Amendment Act of 1972, Executive Orders 11246 and 11375, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Equal Pay Act all require educational institutions receiving federal funds to avoid unequal treatment on the basis of sex.85 The guidelines on sex discrimination issued by the Equal Employment Oppor- tunity Commission (1972), which enforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, includes employees of public and private educational institutions. 85Howard, ”Why Aren't Women Administering Ours Schools?”, p. 11. 63 Congress will still be increasingly occupied in the 1980s with the legislation necessary to insure that women have equal rights and equal opportunities in higher education throughout the United States. Finally, the typical life style of a woman in education does not conform to the general criterion which has been set as a standard for administrators by men. Male postsecondary administrators find it possible to make a full-time commitment to the job because of supportive wives and families. Since society views a woman's role as ”helping” her hus— band and children, the woman administrator finds it difficult at best to ignore those responsibilities. The notion of women pursuing a career as well as ”having” a husband and children seems to many people to be totally contradictory. Schmuck writes that, ”In addition, the husbands of females who are administrators are viewed with some suspicion," for “what kind of man would allow his wife to pursue such a masculine role?“86 A career woman with definite ambitions and aspirations can often be a source of confusion for males who believe in commonly accepted sex role behavior. From the foregoing, it seems logical to conclude that if sex- bias in education is to be eliminated, it must be the responsibility of the educational institutions themselves. It is at the institutional level that programs and policies must be initiated to end discriminatory employment practices. Educators, themselves, must be the leaders in the endeavor. Women's Aspiration Levels Women do become administrators whether by accident or direct choice. The increasing evidence that more women are becoming interested 86Schmuck, Spy Differentiation, p. 92. 64 in administrative positions demands that continued research be under- taken to provide guidance on how to obtain administrative positions and how to succeed in administrative roles. Traditionally, most young women in the United States have placed top priority on marriage and full-time motherhood. And until fairly recently, apparently there were few complaints. Most women, it was thought, did not have the physiological makeup or the emotional drive necessary to do a creditable juggling act of combining both home and career. Those who did enter career fields in other than a desultory manner were often labeled “overly ambitious,’ or "masculine.' Women have, therefore, set a limit on the education they aspire to, so that only a small number have reached graduate school beyond the Masters level and a scarce few are found in high level professional and corporate positions. One reason why women have been held back clearly is sex—bias, but there are others. Various studies have been conducted to assess one of these other reasons, namely the lack of motivation on the part of females themselves to become administrators. A number of reasons have been identified to account for lack of motivation.87 Some are: 1. Fear of failure 2. Inability to handle conflict 3. Reluctance to accept policy-making roles 87Katherine Van Nessem Goless, Women Administrators 1p Education (Washington, D.C.: National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors, 1977) pp. 14-15. 65 4. Obvious bias against women applying 5. Lack of encouragement to prepare for administrative position 6. Lack of assertiveness 7. Little sponsorship by superiors 8. Lack of encouragement from other females 9. Lack of informal interaction with male peers which reinforces aspirations Even at the highest levels of intelligence, most women do not pursue careers. Terman's well-known longitudinal study, started in the early 19205, included 671 women with an average IQ of 150; when these women were in their mid—405, Terman and Oden reported that fewer than one-half are employed outside the home and ”for most, a career is not of primary importance." They pointed out, moreover, that: Oden. The accomplishments of the gifted women do not compare with those of the men. This is not surprising since it follows the cultural pattern to which most of the gifted women as well as women in general have succumbed. Not only may job success interfere with marriage success, but women who do seek a career outside the home have to break through many more barriers and overcome many more obstacles than do men on the road to success. Although the gifted women equalled or excelled the men in school days were over the great majority ceased to compete with men in the world's work. This characteristic appears to be due to the lack of motivation and opportunity rather to lack of ability.88 McCormack reached conclusions similar to those of Terman and Commenting on the general life patterns found among talented women, she stated that: 88L. M. Terman and M. H. Oden, The Gifted at Mid—Life, California and London: Stanford University and OxTOFd UniverETty Press, 1959, p. 106. 66 "The overall impression is of a group of women who are intelligent, rarely intellectual; competent, rarely creative; performing necessary and useful service, rarely critical. They are in every sense of the word-—socially, intellectually, and economically underemployed.”89 Internal conflict over feminine-masculine role was a major concern of women students in Watley and Kaplan's study. Women who won National Merit Scholarships during the years 1956—1960 were followed up in 1965 to determine their marriage and/or career plans. Therefore, five-nine years had elapsed when the follow-up was conducted, depending on the year college was initially entered. Women with plans of dif- ferent types were asked to indicate the highest level of education they sought: and of those seeking careers, an attempt was made to learn which fields they planned to enter. Each of the 883 women's plans was classified into one of five groups: marriage only, marriage with deferred career, marriage with immediate career, career only, or uncertain. Table 2.5 shows the proportions of women in each category. Almost one-half (46%) planned marriage and an immediate career. Although, 85% indicated that they planned to pursue a career. It is worthwhile to consider information for those married by the time this follow-up was conducted. For example, 95% of those with “marriage only” plans were already married. In contrast, fewer pro- portions of those planning to combine marriage and career were married. Eighty percent with marriage and deferred career plans were married, and 89T. McCormack, ”Styles in Educated Females, Nation 204, 1967, p. 118. 67 65% desiring marriage and an immediate career were already married. Thus, plans were related to their actual marital status. Table 2.5.-—Marriage and/or Career Plans of 1956-1960 Female National Merit Scholars —__—__—___________—____—_____——————— Plans Number Percent Marriage only 76 8.6 Marriage and deferred career 289 32.8 Marriage and immediate career 410 46.4 Career only 53 6.0 Uncertain 55 6.2 TOTAL N 883 100.0 Source: Donivan J. Watley and Rosalyn Kaplan, ”Career or Marriage?: Aspirations and Achievements of Able Young Women,“ Journal pf Vocational Behavior 1, 1971, p. 36. Of those who expressed uncertainty about their plans, only 27% were already married. Thus, ”uncertainty” seemed to include both the marriage only versus career only question as well as the question of whether or not a combination of marriage and career might work better. The median age at marriage was 22 for women in the ”marriage only,“ ”marriage with career deferred,” and ”uncertain” groups. For those combining marriage with an immediate career, the median age at marriage was 23. Results for the highest degree planned by women in the various groups are given in Table 2.6. 68 Table 2.6.——Percentages of Women Scholars with Various Marriage and/or Career Plans Who Aspire to Different Educational Degrees Plans N Highest Level of Education Aspired Less than BA BA MA PHD LLB MD OTHER Marriage only 76 8.2 40.8 46.9 4.1 - — - Marriage & deferred career 289 1.1 20.6 51.1 22.8 2.8 1.1 0.6 Marriage & immediate career 410 1.1 11.2 37.1 38.2 1.5 6.7 4.1 Career only 53 — 9.0 33.3 54.5 - - 3.0 Uncertain 55 3.4 10.3 34.5 48.3 - - 3.4 Source: Donivan J. Watley and Rosalyn Kaplan, "Career or Marriage?: Aspirations and Achievements of Able Young Women,” Journal pf Vocational Behavior 1, 1971, p. 36. The career fields selected when these women entered college and the ones they actually entered or expected to enter are shown in Table 2.7. Considerable shifting occurred among the various fields. Education and "other" professions were the biggest losers from initial to final choices, regardless of group. With the exception of the ”marriage only” group, where ”housewife” gained from all the career fields, the humanities and fine arts field was the biggest gainer of talent in the other four marriage and/or career groups. Almost one-half (49%) of those who planned a ”career only'I wanted careers in the humanities-fine arts and ”other fields.” Almost none sought careers in the social sciences, medicine, law, business, and education fields. 69 so musesm>wwsu< use msowpeswam< mm 4.9m m.u~ ©.m I m.n N.w_ w.~ I m.— I I m.m I m.~ m.m w.—N ¢.m~ I w.~ w.— N.NF m.~ m.m m.~ m.m w.m o.m m.FN Feces FeeeeeH sweusmosu mm N.m_ w.m m.¢m o.m~ I w.— m.~ m.N m.— I w.m m.~u m.um N.m m.n w.m m.m w.m w.m m.— m.m n.m m.m m.m 4ee4s Feweees >Fso smeseu .Nm .e .anp .— .sow>esem _esowueoo>.wm Fesszou =.smEoz mszo> m_n< “some4scez so smegeo: .se_ae¥ sapemom use nerve: .u se>4soo “museum Noe m.m N.u m.m w.o m.w ©.m— m._ m.N n.— 0.4 N.m m.n N.o m.— N.—F —.—m v.4N o.m o.w N.N o o o a LDNNNLD Q'o—OSLOM NNONL‘D F-QNNO ,— _ee_e 4e444e4 sweseo mpewumesw use emewssez mseps wwm c F'— o N I a I r—NOC‘KDI— m r—N o—mmo Fso emewssez urmww swwom Fewoom m Feuwmorowm mowpesmspez mowmzss moswwum —eowm»ss seeseu .mser upewu seeseo Fes44 use FewpwsH ue: osz mser smaseu so\use emewssez meowse> s44: mseFOsom smsoz we memeuseosesrr.u.w mFQeH 70 The humanities-fine arts field was the most frequently chosen "final” career field by women who planned to combine marriage with an immediate career; and, in contrast with the ”career only“ group 22% sought careers in the education, medicine, law, and business fields. Thus, their career preferences tended slightly more toward the traditional types than women who planned a career only. About one-fourth of the women planning to defer their careers indicated that they expected to enter the field of education. This is a considerably larger proportion than was found for women planning immediate careers. The number of career field choices after entering college was counted for each women. In making this count, ”undecided” or "house- wife" was not included. The researchers felt that interpretative con— fusion would have resulted from counting ”housewife” as an occupational field, particularly for those combining marriage with a career. It might be expected that women in the ”marriage only” and "marriage with deferred career" groups changed their career plans more frequently than those planning to go into careers immediately. This expectation could be justified on the grounds that women in these two groups have to adjust their plans more frequently than the others to find workable solutions to include both marriage and their initial (precollege) career ambitions. Table 2.8 shows, however, that this result did not occur. About 53% in each group had only one career choice, and about 37% in each group had two. Only 5 of the 874 women for whom information was available indicated that they did not have at least one career preference after entering college. 71 Table 2.8.—4Percentage of Women Scholars with Various Marriage and/or Career Plans Who Have Made Different Numbers of Career Choices Plans Number of Marriage and Marriage and career Marriage deferred immediate Career choices only career career only Uncertain None — 0.7 0.2 2.0 1.9 One 51.3 55.7 51.4 56.9 47.2 Two 42.1 36.3 37.3 33.3 37.7 Three 5.3 6.3 10.6 7.8 13.2 Four 1.3 0.7 0.5 — — Five - 0.3 - - — Total N 76 287 407 51 53 Source: Donivan J. Watley and Rosalyn Kaplan, ”Career or Marriage?: Aspirations and Achievements of Able Young Women,” Journal 9f Vocational Behavior 1, 1971, p. 39. Only 37 of 870 said they would choose a different career field if they had to do it over again. Although 11% of the ”uncertain” women said they would change, the percentages in the other four groups that said ”yes” ranged from 2-4%. In contrast to Terman and Oden's finding that most of the gifted women in their sample did not pursue careers, 85% of the women Merit Scholars in this study reported that they planned a career. An important difference, however, is that the women in Terman's sample were in their mid-405 and reported actual behavior while the Merit 72 Scholars were in their mid—205 and reported their plans. About 52% of the Scholars reported, however, that they were either already working in their career fields or planned to begin them as soon as their educational programs would permit. It was also observed that, in general, women who planned careers sought more education than those who did not plan a career; and those who planned to begin their careers immediately wanted more education than those who planned to delay them. Thus, the career ambitions of those seeking immediate careers seem clear: they expect to waste no time getting started and they plan to enter the job market well equipped educationally. Although considerable shifting occurred from initial to final career choices, the intentions of these women can be seen in the ”final” career fields they selected. In general, they chose high-level pro- fessions. Some interesting differences were noted, however, among those who planned a "career only” or a marriage-immediate career combination. Almost none of the former group chose careers in the social sciences, medicine, law, business, and education fields, but one-fourth of the latter group selected these same fields. Almost one-half of the ”career only” women were attracted by the humanities-fine arts and "other” fields. Few women said they would choose a different career if they had to make the choice over again. Many women felt that they had encountered problems pursuing their intellectual goals because of their sex. Although discrimination of this type was the problem mentioned most frequently, internal con— flict over feminine-masculine role and insufficient time were other 73 problems frequently expressed. Although traditionally women, even the most intelligent ones, seldom pursue professional careers, most female Scholars give every indication that they have no intention of maintaining this tradition. In addition to being very able, these women are generally highly moti- vated to excel, and they have been given the financial assistance they needed to achieve a college education. Perhaps these are some of the reasons they reject the typical feminine role. Nevertheless, they are very marriage oriented. While some of the Scholars expressed senti- ments of intense feeling about injustices they have either experienced or witnessed, there was no suggestion of rebellion among them. Most have multiple expectations and plans for themselves as wife-mother and as active contributors in their chosen career fields. There is the impression that any demands they have for gratification in untraditional areas are made not on society but on themselves. How successful they will be in fulfilling their ambitions remains to be seen. Blaska and Schmidt in 1975 also examined the vocational develop- ment of college women and found that women, as compared to men, have lower career aspirations, restricted career choices, lower career com- mitment, higher career indecision, more fear of achievement and less persistence.90 They face role confusion, home-career conflict, low self-esteem, uncertain identity and consequent college maladjustment and emotional instability. 908etty Blaska and M. Schmidt, “Women College Students: Self- concept Conflict and Career,“ manuscript submitted for publication, 1975. 74 Francine Fisher examines in her research the career aspirations of women teachers for educational administrative positions and found the following:91 1. Significant differences exist in the aspirations of males and females for, and action to obtain, an elementary principalship. More men than women sampled had applied for this position (12% men to 1% women), while a higher percentage of women than men said they would aspire to become an elementary principal (20% women to 13% men). The men seemed to implement their desire to become elementary principals at a much higher rate than did the women. 2. Significant differences exist in the aspiration of males and females for, and action to obtain, a secondary principalship. Five percent of the men tested definitely had applied, but none of the women tested had applied. Only 9% of the women would aspire for the position, while 16% of the men would so aspire. 3. Significant differences exist in the aspiration of males and females for, and action to obtain, a position in central office. While more males tested tended to apply (6% men to 0 women), an almost equal number of females would aspire for central office positions (27% of men to 20% women). 4. Significant differences exist in the aspirations of males and females for the position of assistant superintendent of schools. Two percent of the males tested applied, but no females applied. While 91Francine Fisher, "A Study of the Relationship Between the Scarcity of Women in Educational Administrative Positions and the Multiple Factors Which Influence the Career Aspirations of Women Teachers," (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1978) pp. 125-26. 75 14% of the men would aspire to be an assistant superintendent, only 7% of the females would so aspire. 5. Significant differences exist in the aspirations of males and females for the position of superintendent of schools. While none of the males nor females tested actually had applied, more males would aspire than women (12% men to 2% women). Epstein's research with women in prestigious occupations indi- cated that career-oriented women felt driven to prove themselves. She noted that ”merely getting into a profession has never been enough.”92 Her findings give evidence that even the most talented and productive women have not been fully accepted into the elite of their professions. She reported that dropping out or being pressured out was a noticeable pattern where discrimination existed. Holmstrom noted that ”some women had been demoted in terms of the prestige of the formal positions they held, even though their professional skills and reputations were on the rise."93 Davis found ample evidence that women in higher education carry a large share of the heavy, low—status introductory work.94 92C. Epstein, ”Structuring Success for Women: Guidelines for Administrators, gpg Counselors 37, 1973, pp. 35—36. 93L. Holmstrom, ”Women's Career Patterns: Appearance and Administrators, ppg Counselors 36, 1973, pp. 77-78. 94A. Davis, ”Women as a Minority Group in Higher Academics," Iflg Professional Woman, (Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing Company, Inc.) 1971, p. 593. 76 Because of the above findings, it seems appropriate to assess the job satisfaction of administrative women in academe to determine what, if any, changes in the working climate have occurred. During 1973-1974, Mary Reeves interviewed ninety-six women administrators in higher education. In this group were women who represented general education, liberal arts, nursing education, medical education, social work, and the allied health fields. Table 2.9 shows current administrative positions of the respondents.95 Table 2.9.-—Current Administrative Position of Respondents Category Number Percent Dean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8.3% Associate Dean . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8.3 Assistant Dean . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 16.7 Department Head. . . . . . . . . . . . 28 29.2 Acting Head. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8.3 Assistant Head . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 12.5 Director, Counseling Center; Curriculum; etc. . . . . . . . . . 16 16.7 Total 96 100.0% Source: Mary Elizabeth Reeves, “An Analysis of Job Satisfaction of Women Administrators in Higher Education,” Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, AdministratorST and Counselors 38 (April 1975) p. 133. 95Mary Elizabeth Reeves, “An Analysis of Job Satisfaction of Women Administrators in Higher Education," Journal gf_th§_National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, Egg Counselors 38 (April 1975)—ET 133. 77 An effort was made to include respondents from both private and public universities so that the study would have validity. Seventy—one percent of the sample were single; 24% were married; and 4% were divorced. Since the great majority of women in higher educa- tion are single, the sample appears to be fairly representative. The interviews were based on a general format of topics to be discussed. Respondents were asked to provide general information about the number of years in their then, current position, their entering position and the number of years from entry position to current position. The findings show that 67% of the sample have upward mobility; 16% have downward mobility by means of demotion; and 17% have lateral mobility. In this latter group, changes in position were in some instances self-initiated but were sometimes directed by top administration. It is interesting to note that 63% of the sample are not working in their original career choice. Approximately 5% are employed at a lower level than the original goal; the remaining 32% have achieved to a far greater extent than they initially hoped. A further breakdown of the upward mobility group demonstrated that 67% achieve a high degree of job satisfaction. The data showed an extremely high degree of dissatisfaction in the downward and lateral mobility group. No person in the latter group indicated job satisfaction. A comparison of single and married respondents produced some interesting data. Fifty-six percent of the single administrators indicated a high degree of job satisfaction compared to 71% of the 78 married group. An analysis of the respondent's level of education and job satisfaction demonstrated that women with Bachelor's degrees who serve in administrative positions are highly dissatisfied, but women adminis— trators with Master's degrees showed a very high satisfaction rate. Among women with earned doctoral degrees, 47% indicated satis- faction and a sense of performing valuable work. However, the majority of women with earned doctorates verbalized dissatisfaction with their work. Table 2.10 yields these data. Table 2.10.——Job Satisfaction and Level of Education Satisfaction A.B. M.S., M.A., M.Ed. Ph.D., Ed.D. M.D. Yes — 28 100% 24 42% 4 100% N0 8 100% - 32 58% - Total 8 28 56 4 96 In most instances, those women in administration who hold only a Bachelor's degree are nearing retirement. All admitted that in today's university it would be virtually impossible to reach an administrative level with only the undergraduate degree. Nonetheless, each administrator in this group expressed extreme dissatisfaction, which seemed to stem from overload assignments of low—status work. Despite a high degree of personal and professional success, this study clearly shows that job satisfaction dows not come automatically with a title or a name on the door. 79 Reasons for lack of satisfaction were varied, but recurring themes were: being required to spend too much time on non—essential paper work; being assigned tasks no one else wants to do; and responsibility but no authority. In summary, the study seems to show that the working climate has not changed appreciably for most women in administrative positions. Job satisfaction, when it is present, seems to come from a sense of personal worth rather from working climate or other external factors. The dimension of women's administrative aspiration needs considerably more research: Specifically, we need information about the number of women who have aspired to admini- strative roles and failed; the conditions under which more women are likely to aspire; the situation in which women are more likely to succeed, the dimensions of the range of success.96 The research undertaken in conjunction with this dissertation is in direct response to studies like those of McCormack, Watley and Kaplan, Blaska, and Fisher all of whom independently arrived at the conclusion that further studies should be done. Public and private funding of programs to assist women in their quest for administrative roles in education will come only after research is completed to support the need for them. Women in Hi her Educational Administration As dramatic as the low percentage of women in higher education is, it is overshadowed in significance by the very small percentage of 96Jacqueline Parker Clement, ng Bias ip_School Leadershi (Evanston, Illinois: Integrated Education Associates, 1975) p. 10. 80 women in higher educational administration positions. The obvious difficulties which women encounter in being appointed as presidents, vice-presidents, chief academic officers, and deans fully justify the concern of women about their place in the educational profession. In the Chronicle of December 10, 1973, the following statement appeared: Were it not for the magnificent Catholic sisters who run their own institutions, the number of women college presidents would be less than the number of whooping cranes. Women who are college presidents should be declared an endangered species.97 These are the words of Bernice Sandler, Director of Project on the Status and Education of Women at the Association of American Colleges. Alice J. Thurston decided to test Sandler's ”women college presidents as scarce as whooping cranes” hypothesis at the two-year college level. An examination of the 1973 Junior College Directory yielded the 98 following data. Listed were: 5 women presidents of community colleges 9 women presidents of independent, not—for-profit junior colleges 23 women presidents of Catholic two—year colleges 1 woman president of a Baptist two-year college Among the 9 presidents of independent, non—profit colleges, 5 are Catholic sisters; all of the women presidents of Catholic institutions are sisters. Thus, of the 38 women presidents in 97ILeChronicle gf_Higher Education, December 10, 1973, p. 8. 98Junior College Directory, 1973. 81 community and junior colleges, 27 or 71% are Catholic sisters. To put these figures further in perspective: the 38 women presidents represent 3% of the total of 1141 presidents listed in the Directory. Among private junior colleges, 14% of the presidents are women; in the public two-year colleges, one-half of 1%.99 These statistics attest to the fact that community and junior college education is obviously male—dominated and probably male oriented. Thurston sent a questionnaire to each of these women presidents of two-year colleges in order to find out about their educational preparation, professional background, experiences as women in presidency, and future plans. Only 9 women presidents responded to the questionnaire. Six were in independent colleges and three in community. While this questionnaire data is in no way representative of the whole population, it does provide some interesting insights. Student enrollment in these colleges ranged from 95 to 5377, including both full—time and part-time students. Respondents were fifty years of age or older. They have been presidents from three to thirty years, with a median of five years. The routes of these women to the presidency included student personnel, teaching and institutional research. Three had been deans of students; one, an academic dean; one, a director of planning and development for a large multi-college district; and 4 teachers, one having been a department chairperson. Six of the 9 had been promoted from within their college; one was promoted from within a system; 2 99Alice J. Thurston, A Woman President?! A Study of Two-Year College Presidents,” Journal gf_tpg National Association jg: Women Deans, Administrators, Egg Counselors 38 (Spring 1975) p. 119. 82 were chosen from the outside. Five held doctorates; 4, the master's degree. Four had studied educational administration while 5 held degrees in a variety of liberal arts areas: psychology, history and geography, English, botany and philosophy. Seven felt they would not have chosen a different academic route; two were undecided, and one said, ”So much of ones route is happenstance."100 These women presidents were unanimous in their feeling that being a woman created no special problems in working with staff, students, their board or other constituencies. Most felt they worked just as easily with men. A president who is a Catholic sister felt that she was more patronized by men because she was a member of a religious order than because she was a woman, and found this very offensive. Respondents said they find their greatest satisfactions in solving problems and in facilitating the growth of students, staff and their institutions. Their greatest frustrations stem from lack of adequate funds, from unions, and from state or other outside forces. All of them wanted to continue as presidents. ”Why are there so few women presidents?" was asked in the questionnaire.101 Some respondents cited discrimination, pointing out that boards and search committees are controlled by men. Others felt that women are not sufficiently prepared in business administration and fundraising. Several felt that many women just don't want the great responsibility of running an institution. 1001bid. 101Ibid., p. 120. 83 What advice would they give a woman aspiring to be a president? Some talked about developing important personal attributes: a willing- ness to work and assume responsibility; respect for faculty and students; resiliency under stress; dedication; understanding; persuasiveness in presenting one's views; firmness; fairness.102 One suggested a realistic year's internship under an experienced woman president (or a male presi— dent). The most comprehensive advice was to get teaching and adminis- trative experience; accept and carry out committee work; be sure there is no conflict between the position and one's personal needs; and be around at the right time.103 It is interesting that this mini-study indicates many of the same findings as Ann Fecher's doctoral dissertation on the career pat— terns of 650 women administrators in non-typical women's positions in public coeducational institutions. (She excluded deans of women, deans of schools of nursing and home economics, and librarians). Her find- ings are as follows: (1) top women administrators generally accept new positions within the same institution rather than seeking promotions elsewhere; (2) they do not have similar educational backgrounds; (3) being a woman in administration is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage; and (4) being married is neither an advantage or a disadvantage.104 1021mm 103Ibid. 104Ann Fecher, "Career Patterns of 650 Women Administrators in Non-typical Women's Positions in Public Coeducational Institutions.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1973. 84 A study made by Alexander Astin of the Higher Education Research Institute revealed that:105 (1) Women constituted only 6.8% of all college presidencies, numbering 132 compared to 1808 male presidents (2) Women in substantial numbers were found only in those middle and low level administrative posts that almost never lead to top academic posts (3) Of entering freshmen, 95.1% were enrolled in institutions where all 3 chief administrators (president, chief academic officer, and dean) were male (4) As a result, 19 out of 20 freshmen enter an institution in which all three key administrative posts were held by men. Majorie Bell Chambers, president of the American Association of University Women (AAUW) states that women in higher education has made no real progress since 1973.106 She says the proportion of women in top-level administrative posts has increased slightly, but women still are underrepresented in these positions. And on university faculties, women still are clustered at the bottom of the pile as instructors and lecturers. Chambers based her comments on a study made by the AAUW in 1977. The survey covered 600 of some 1900 four-year accredited higher educa— tion institutions in the United States. The study, a follow—up to one 105Alexander W. Astin, "Men Still Dominate Academic Adminis- tration,” U.C.L.A. Educator, Spring I977. 106"Few Gains Found for Campus Women,” ng Washington Post, April 8, 1978. 85 in 1970, was made to determine the progress made by women on campus since the advent of federal equal opportunity and affirmative action laws. It said that despite the fact the laws have been on the books for several years, women in higher education are far from achieving equal status with men. The study's statistics showed that 6% of college and university presidents were women, the same as in 1973. Among top posts, 12% of the chief academic officers were women, a gain of 3% points, 5 percent of the chief business officers were women, the same as in 1973; and 8% of the chief development officers were women, an increase of 2% points.107 Putting all this in a broader perspective, what are the factors which seem to create and perpetuate our male-dominated institutions? The culture teaches us myths and stereotypes. Back in the late 1800's a woman named Myra Bradwell, who wanted to practice law in the State of Illinois, was denied a license. She took her case to the Illinois Supreme Court, which sustained the decision, and to the United States Supreme Court, which also upheld it. Justice Bradley's opinion was as follows: The civil law as well as nature herself has always recognized a wide difference in the respective spheres and destinies of men and women. Man is, or should be, woman's protector and defender. . .It is repugnant to the concept of the family for a woman to adopt a distinct and in- dependent career from that of her husband.108 107Ibid. 108This quote was taken from the Boston Globe by Ms. Thurston (No date available). 86 Astin states ”that in order to increase the number of women college and university presidents, institutions must increase the number of women in positions such as chief academic officer, admini- strative vice—president, and deans of major colleges. Those positions are steps on the career ladder for college presidents.109 Thurston suggests a number of things women in administration can do to help women students and staff change the way they tend to see them. They can: (1) Help other women move up the ladder (2) Use individual and collective influence to help get more women into upper level administrative jobs since in the two-year colleges, they are stepping stones (3) Encourage more able women to take graduate programs in higher educational administration (4) Work for funding for top level administrative internships for women especially in two-year colleges to provide them with the breadth of experience needed for a presidency.110 With the financial crisis in higher education, the role of a president is changing. Not much is being said about the president as an educational leader. Rather the president is expected to be a good manager, with skills in marketing and public relations. These changes strongly suggest that future presidents will need training and experience in business as well as academic affairs. Expertise will be increasingly required in areas traditionally avoided by women. 109Astin, "Men Still Dominate,” p. 2. 110Thurston, ”A Woman President?!“ p. 119. 87 Thurston also suggests for those women who want to be a president, their job qualifications should probably include:111 1. 2. A doctorate in higher educational administration A breadth of administrative experience A willingness to learn how to move through a male— dominated system A sureness of who you are A total commitment to a college and supportive family and friends Certainly search committees and top administration tend to be male-oriented; when a man and a woman are equally qualified, the man probably gets the job. Many male administrators tend to use the ”Old Boy” system of recruiting——the informal placement system in which the question more often is “Do you happen to know a good man who?” rather than ”00 you know a good person who?”112 Jo Ann Fley suggested in an article that women in administration need to start an l'Old Girl" system and that we need to keep a vigilant eye on search committees. 113 llllbid. 112Thurston, ”A Woman President?!” p. 121. 113Jo Ann Fley, ”The Time to Be Properly Vicious,” Journal 9: the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors 37, 1974, p. 53. 88 Psychological Barriers Career success for women is certainly influenced by how they perceive themselves, as well as by how others, perceive them. Men and women are beginning to avoid stereotyped expectations and roles. Tra- ditionally, young men have grown up with the idea that they would have a career. No matter how they view their futures, they know they're going to be working. Girls just haven't been taught to think in that mode. The pressures against achievement are strong and complex. The psychological barriers are both subtle and overt, undermining a woman's confidence and purposefulness and blunting her energy and resolve.114 There is substantial agreement among writers and educators that women contribute significantly to their own second—rate status in society. Historically, women have always been conditioned to be inferior and rarely have they attempted to take advantage of opportunities to promote themselves. Stereotypes demeaning to women are taught by women as well as by men; both men and women write children's books that denigrate the female role; adults of both sexes make unconscious assumptions about a woman's “natural” talents; women permit, encourage, and even revel in male superiority; and they present some of the greatest opposition to women leaders.115 Women have been found to be even more condemning 114Patricia S. Faunce, ”Psychological Barriers to Occupational Success for Women,“ Journal 9: £pg_National Association fgp_Women Deans, Administrators, gpg_Counselors 40 (Spring 1977) p. 142. 115Sylvia-Lee Tibbetts, “Sex Role Stereotyping: Why Women Dis- criminate Against Themselves,” Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, ppg_CounseT6r§_38 (Summer 1975) p. 1777—— 89 than men of women who break out of traditional roles. Florence Howe recognizes that women accept and believe in the legitimacy of their 116 inferior status. In fact, it has been suggested by Fillmer that women have so internalized the inferiority of their sex that they are the worse offenders in subverting their own feelings of worthiness.117 Contributing further to women's low opinions of themselves is the fact that stereotypically masculine traits, such as independence, dominance, competition, achievement drive, leadership, decisiveness and logic, are considered more socially desirable than are stereotypically feminine attributes, such as dependence, emotionalism, submissiveness, passivity indecisiveness, and lack of logic.118 Both men and women equate self—assertive, independent strivings, aggressive thinking and intellectual achievement in women with loss of femininity so extensive that it endangers their heterosexual relation- ships. After spending several years investigating the causes of failure to achieve in intellectually gifted women, Horner concluded that some females do equate intellectual achievement with loss of femininity and fear that success will hinder their social life and interfere with their popularity with males.119 116Florence Howe, ”Sexism in Education and the Aspirations of Women,“ hanging Education 5, 1974, p. 32. 117H. Fillmer, ”Sexist Teaching-—What You Can 00,” Teacher 91 1974, p. 30. 1181. Broverman, et. al., "Sex—role Stereotypes and Clincal Judgments of Mental Health,” Journal pf Consulting gpg_Clinical Psychology 34, 1970, p. 5. 119M. Horner, “Why Bright Women Fail," Psychology Today 3 1969, p. 66. 90 Examples set by educational leaders such as Caroline Hazard, a former president of Wellesley College, and Kate Mueller, illustrate how women have contributed to the subjugation of their sex. Hazard, expounding on the topic of the "ideal woman,I wrote, "the lesson of greatest importance which our ideal woman must learn, is the lesson of obedience,I and furthermore, ”blind obedience is better than no obedience.”120 Mueller goes on to say that grooming, manners, personal attractiveness and ethical standards were much more important for a woman than for a man, and that it was “more becoming” for a girl to be dependent while a man learned to be independent. Little boys learn to play on the same team with other boys they don't even like; their relationship focuses on achieving objec— tives. Little girls are very selective about their friends. They emphasize the quality of the relationship with no set goals.121 So men and women feel differently about agression, self-confidence, planning, risk taking, and strategy. In a study conducted on the East Coast with large companies of men and women in middle management positions, the question was asked ”What are your five year goals?” Ninety percent of the men could tell where they were going to be in five years and ninety percent of the women could not.122 120Kate Mueller, ”Sex Differences in Campus Regulations,” Personnel ppg Guidance Journal 32, 1954, p. 530. 121Stinson, “Women in the 705,” p. 77. 122Mary Bach Kievit, "Will Jill Make Department Chairman?" American Vocational Journal (November 1974) p. 40. 91 One of the most insidious elements of sex-role stereotyping is the very innocence with which it has been perpetuated. Some women are not aware of the injustices that have been committed against them and do not recognize the inequity of their position.123 Although 42% of the work force is composed of women,124 the cultural view is that the vast majority of women are housewives and out of the working world. This myth is an ideal view, unrelated to fact. It serves the purpose of forming images, so that even the women who are working are convinced that they are not really "workers" and do not think in terms of their ambitions, goals, demands, and rights. Another myth involves those women who do achieve managerial power. Neither men nor women are supposed to want to work for female bosses. The woman's commands are heard as shrill. Women's managerial styles are not thought to be successful. Women are said to be more liable than men to nag and whine when something goes wrong, to be unaware of how to handle colleagues or how to react to extremes.125 In any case, women are said to be ineffective as managers, whatever their style. Marion Wood, Assistant Professor of Management Communication at the University of Southern California's Business School says, ”I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't. If a woman executive comes on 123A. Montagu, "The Natural Superiority Women," New York: Collier Books, 1974, p. 35. 124"An Overview of Women in the Workforce,” National Commission 9p Working Women, Center for Women and Work, Washington, D.C., September, 1978. 1251bid. 92 strong, she risks alienating her male superiors, and if she comes on soft, she convinces them that she lacks management qualities."126 Rather than holding women entirely responsible for their position in society, it would be more accurate to view them as victims of a culture so steeped in patriarchy that women——and men——cannot help internalizing the notion of female inferiority and transmitting it to the next generation. A survey of the psychological barriers that confront women do reveal obstacles. But some women have surmounted them. And the present climate of aspiration for women should lead to new assaults on the barriers so that large numbers of women may achieve the success that they deserve. Women who have any success find that it is more pleasant than failure. Women who fear taking jobs with authority find that people will listen to them, and that they as women can be effective task leaders and administrators. Women can-—and must-—be responsible for the improvement of their own position in society. They must learn to view their present status as a legitimate basis for dissatisfaction, decide for themselves what is right for them, and stop mindlessly following the dictates of a sexist society. Women need to strategize and draw up a plan just like their competitors-they need to know their strengths and weaknesses. Women as Educational Leaders Women have for many years served ably in educational leadership roles. What is new, however, is the lessening of reluctance by men, who still dominate boards of trustees and executive councils numerically, 126Stinson, ”Women in the 705," p. 77. 93 to select an outstanding woman to head an institution, chair an association, or direct an agency in positions that have historically gone to males. The year 1978 seemed excellent for appointments of women educa- tors to executive positions in universities, federal and state agencies, and professional organizations. The appointments of Hanna Holborn Gray as the new president of the University of Chicago was a signal that women qualified to assume chief executive responsibilities at major universities can get them.127 With the appointment of Elizabeth Kennan as the president of Mount Holyoke, all of the Seven Sister Colleges had women in the top management positions. The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare gained women in two key leadership positions in 1977. Mary Frances Berry was named assistant Secretary of Education and Patricia Graham was named director of the National Institute of Education. Marie Eldridge retained her position as administrator of the National Center for Education Statistics. Also, in the private sector, among fifteen hundred biggest corporations in the country there are 150 women directors in contrast to the 20 or so of five years ago.128 Steel, auto, and railroad industries are almost exclusively men's fields. Generally, women have done better in less tradition-bound fields—-communications, finance, computers, and business. Early this year, Chrysler Corporation, Burroughs Corporation, and the National Bank of Detroit each named their first woman director: former Democratic Representative Martha W. Griffith of Michigan, sponsor 127Joseph M. Cronin and Sally B. Pancrazio, “Women as Educational Leaders," Epi_Delta Kappan (April 1979) pp. 583-84. 128Ibid., p. 583. 94 of the Equal Rights for Women Amendment who retired in January after twenty years in Congress. Recently, Gulf Oil Corporation nominated its first woman director, Sister Jan Scully, a Roman Catholic nun, who is president of Carlow College in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Exxon Cor- poration added Barnard College President, Martha Peterson, to its board last year. The trend in education may come to resemble that of gradual accession of women to corporate positions, state legislatures, the Congress, and cabinet positions, both federal and state. Nationally, women have broken into the ranks of ambassadors and the Council of Economic Advisor to the President. Cronin and Pancrazio, however, cite some real dangers in being overly optimistic in interpreting this trend as follows:129 1. Although chief executive positions may change, middle management may not change at all. Most colleges of school systems, state and local, will for years to come continue to employ men in three-quarters or more of the middle—level executive positions. Women in many organizations may lack the experience and prior opportunities to qualify for the more specialized administrative roles. 2. While certain visible appointments are made at the top of universities, women faculty may not fare any better than previously. Colleges and universities now experience a freezing of the number of senior and tenured positions at a time when women remain in junior positions. Men will still occupy most department chairs for years to come . 129Ibid., p. 584. 95 3. The production of educational research is a major route to academic recognition and promotion, yet many people, both men and women, still view research as masculine, particularly where the research has a quantitative component. A recent report to the membership of the American Educational Research Association indicated that the membership is 34% female, up from 29% two years ago. However, much of the research being conducted by women deals with sexism, sex-role stereotyping, and sex- role differences. However important this is, it may not be valued as highly in the predominantly male research environment as are other research endeavors. Such appraisals could retard promotions for women. 4. The new women executives may have little opportunity and time, outside of the women's colleges, to work on sex equity issues. Their employees may then wonder if all of these visible appointments amount to a significant social revolution. These women executives may downgrade their gender or the significance of their gender to their appointment. A greater danger is that matters of budget preparation, facilities planning, enrollment decline, adjustment, and survival in general will crowd the appointment calendar of female executives. The women at the top may find precious little time to help their sisters on the lower rungs of the organizational ladder. Also, because they've ”made it,“ they may have little motivation to provide help. They may see other women as ”less worthy" than themselves, since their own success in a man's world clearly reflects one kind of superiority. 5. Most men still perceive this issue as a woman's problem rather than a problem of equal opportunity or human resource alloca- tion. Some men are actually threatened by the prospect of more women 96 colleagues in administration or the possibility of a woman supervisor. Some women, like men, unsure about effective management styles, may attempt to model a highly authoritarian style that seems to Show they are "in charge” but results in alienating subordinates and sabotaging their own chances for success. While this sometimes happen to men, the fact that relatively few women occupy management roles makes any problems women have as managers more visible. A Professional Association for Women Administrators The National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors (NAWDAC), was formed by women concerned for women. From the first meeting in 1916, when Kathryn McLean was elected president, the persistent emphasis has been on women as the Association expanded from the "National Association of Deans of Women” to add ”Counselors“ to its name in 1956 and ”Administrators” in 1973.130 The Association has fomented no rebellion, hold itself bound by the laws, has not used the voters' rights gained in 1920 to vote as a bloc for women rights, takes no political stances, and has never 131 raised an angry voice against the status quo. Its members have been seen by some as repressive toward women, since so many have been en- forcers of dress codes, parietal rules, ”ladylike" behavior and 130Eleanor Schetlin, "Remembering the Ladies: Abigail Adams and the Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors,” Journal gf_tpg National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, gpg_Counselors 39 (Summer 1976 p. 1647“ 1311m. 97 132 In fact, the Association (with other conventional aspirations. institutions and associations) was berated by Patricia Roberts Harris, former Dean of Howard University Law School and former Ambassador to Luxemburg, for the slow pace of change in educational institutions.133 In 1933 and 1934, the Association mounted a national campaign to protect high school deans; in 1938, it urged that every college, university, and high school have an adequately prepared woman adminis- trator with administrative recognition, authority, rank, assistants and salary comparable to men doing similar work. It also sought to interest other national women's organizations in concerns such as the administrative work of women, the recognition of women and the direc- tion of women students by trained women.134 In 1947, the Association identified itself as ”an Association existing to further the welfare of women.' Five years later, with the help of Kathryn Phillips, a committee was established to analyze and study the roles of women in modern society. This led in 1953, ten years before the report of the President's Commission on the Status of Women, American Women (1963), to the formation of the Commission on the Education of Women of the American Council on Education.135 1320. Truex, "Education of Women, the Student Personnel Pro— fession, and the New Feminism,” Journal of the National Association jg: Women Deans, Administrators, gpg Counselors 35, 1971, p. 14. 133Patricia R. Harris, ”Deans and Students: A Look to the Future,” Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, Egg Counselors 33, 1969, p. 1. 134R. Barry and B. Wolf, "A History of the Guidance-Personnel Movement in Education,” Teachers College, Columbia University, 1955. 1351bid., p. 45. 98 Fley pointed out that the Association has a truly honorable tradition and that its members have been more out of step than in step with conformity.136 As a highly-respected Black woman dean said, in a 1968 public debate, to angry Black students who accused her of having collaborated with an oppressive system, “If it weren't for me, and all the others like me, who did things we didn't always like to do, within the only system there was, because it was the best that we could manage to do, you young people wouldn't be able to speak up today.”137 In 1971 and again in 1972, the Association decided to strengthen itself as a women's group, to give recognition to the concerns of women in the Journal and at national conventions, to explore ways to give emphasis to women's concerns and to support actively the concerns of women. Evidence that members responded can be found in an article by McCall (1973), in various convention programs, and resolutions, and in Journal articles and themes on, for instance, the women's movement, sexism and bias, and women in administration. By 1976, the Association was even more committed to the concentration on the problems and education of women. Since 1916, the Association may not have changed the world, but it helped the world to change. The Association and its members have done their best to promote the full use of women's capacities. 136Jo Ann Fley, "An Honorable Tradition,“ Journal gf_§pg National Association jg: Women Deans, Administrators, gpg_Counselors 29, 1966. 137Eleanor Schetlin, quoted from notes taken during presentation: "The Search for Identity in the Black Student Movement," National Association of Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors' Annual Conference, Chicago, April 1968. 99 Summary The purpose of this chapter was to substantiate from technical educational literature and related materials the assertions in Chapter I that there is need for further research on the career aspirations of women. First discussed, was a last year's newspaper case study which graphically illustrated the dilemma that male prejudice poses for women in the professions today. This story raised the question of the effect of widely disseminated accounts of sex-bias in the professions, on women's aspiration for a place in the leadership areas of the contemporary professions including education. Next considered were three historic female administrators, Cleopatra, Theodora, and Catherine II. An analysis of these ladies by a modern male commentator was examined. This study concluded through a none-too-clear analysis that the historic influ- ence of the three women was limited. The author conceded a point, however, not always popularly accepted but relevant to this dissertation, namely that the sex of these famous women had little to do with their ascendancy to great power. He attributed their fame in each case much more to intellectual abilities which were superior to those of the famous men over whom they won dominance. Then discussed were women's roles and contributions during the colonial period development up to the present decade. The path of women through the history of education in the United States was traced from their first inroads into teaching in the eighteenth century to their virtual domination of the profession in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The literature review also indicated that although women are at least equally as competent as males as educational 100 administrators, men during the recent years have been strongly aided by society's traditional discrimination against women in the professions, in infiltrating and gaining almost total control of educational leadership positions. Literature regarding sex discrimination in higher education was then addressed. This section gave a full account of the develop— ment of federal policy with respect to the Morrill Act of 1862, which established new federal policies for higher education through the passage of Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments. Areas such as sexism in higher education; women in higher educational administration, psychological barriers, women as educational leaders, and the importance of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors were so treated. Attention was given to research conducted thus far on female aspiration to careers as educational administrators. The focus on the area of the literature regarding female aspiration to careers as educa- tional administrators was necessary because it directly leads to the rationale for the research undertaken in conjunction with this disserta- tion. Although some research indicates that woman's family role does have some restraint on aspiration, and although aspiration seems to decrease as the level of job responsibility increases, the results also establish that there is a significantly number of highly motivated women in higher education, who do aspire to high administrative positions. En— couraging were results of research in two-year institutions which concluded that women presidents do not subscribe to sex-stereotyped notions and their aspiration does not seem to be influenced by the fear of sex-bias. 101 The literature reviewed establishes the increase of awareness among women educators of educational administration possibilities. There is unanimity among the researchers on female aspiration that a great deal more research must be done in order to identify, find the cause of, and make recommendations to eliminate personal factors which negatively influence aspiration by women to higher educational administrative positions. The succeeding chapters of this study will set forth this Idissertation's response to the identified need for further testing of feminine aspirations. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY Introduction This chapter provides a description of the survey procedures and research methods used in conducting the study. The following specific areas will be described: 1. Type of Study 2. Population and Sampling Method 3. Instrumentation 4. Collection of the Data 5. Treatment of the Data 6. Testable Hypotheses 7. Statistical Procedures Type of Study This study was designed to analyze the career aspirations of women professors for higher educational administrative positions. The specific areas Of interest concern the cultural, educational, personal, psychological and the work environment factors that influence female professors for advancement to higher educational management. The study utilizes the descriptive method of research. The goal of descriptive analysis has been described by Sax as: 102 103 The purpose of descriptive research is to show conditions as they exist without being influenced by the investigator. Descriptive research encom- passes a number of different techniques, including correlational analyses, case studies, surveys, and interviews as well as direct observation.1 Comparisons were made among male and female professorS-—each responding to the same questionnaire devised to indicate levels of administrative aspiration as well as degree and intensity of aspiration. The importance of descriptive studies provided the basis for this kind of problem analysis: "Descriptive research may also help point out the extent of a problem and indicate how serious and widespread it is.”2 Population and Sampling Methods The sample process, or the selection of part of a population from which the characteristics of the whole are inferred, has long been accepted as a legitimate and expeditious method of research procedure.3 The population used in the study consists of men and women pro— fessors taken from four of Michigan's public four—year universities, (1) Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan (2) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (3) University of Michigan, Dearborn, Michigan, and (4) University of Michigan, Flint, Michigan. Descriptions of these universities are as follows: 1Gilbert Sax, Empirical Foundations gf_Educational Research (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1968) p. 36. 21bid. 3Mildred Parten, Surveys, Polls, gpg_Samples: Practical Procedures, (New York: Cooper Square Publishers, Inc., 1966) p. 106. 104 I. Institution Identification4 1. School Name: Michigan State University 2. Address: East Lansing, Michigan Zip Code 48824 Campus Description 1. STUDENT BODY PROFILE - 1977-78 School Year a. Headcount: Freshmen Male 3289 Female 3766 b. Headcount: All Undergraduates Male 18295 Female 17585 c. Overall Percent Out-of-State Students 15% d. Overall Percent of Students Living on Campus 50% e. Overall Percent Minority Students 7.25% f. Academic Calendar System: Quarter 9. School Location by Type of Community ___Suburban ___Urban ___Small Community ___Rural 5 II. Institution Identification School Name: University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Campus Address: Ann Arbor, Michigan Zip Code 48109 NH Campus Description 1. STUDENT BODY PROFILE - 1977-78 School Year a. Headcount: Freshmen Male 2539 Female 2027 b. Headcount: All Undergraduates Male 12000 Female 10000 c. Overall Percent Out—of—State Students 21.0% d. Overall Percent of Students Living on Campus 33.0% e. Overall Percent Minority Students 9.5% f. Academic Calendar System: Trimester 9. School Location by Type of Community ___Suburban ___Urban ___Small Community Rural 41978-79 Michigan Postsecondary Admissions gpnginancial Assistance Handbook, prepared by Student Financial Services, Higher Education Manage- ment Services, Michigan Department of Education, Lansing, Michigan, p. 49. 51bid., p. 59. 105 III. Institution Identification6 School Name: University of Michigan, Dearborn Campus Address: Dearborn, Michigan Zip Code 48128 NI—I Campus Description 1. STUDENT BODY PROFILE - 1977-78 School Year a. Headcount: Freshmen Male 679 Female 463 b. Headcount: All Undergraduates Male 2976 Female 2049 c. Overall Percent Out—of—State Students 1% d. Overall Percent of Students Living on Campus 1% e. Overall Percent Minority Students 9% f. Academic Calendar System: Trimester 9. School Location by Type of Community ___Suburban ___Urban ___Small Community ___Rural 7 IV. Institution Identification l-n School Name: University of Michigan, Flint Campus 2. Address: Flint, Michigan Zip Code 48503 Campus Description 1. STUDENT BODY PROFILE - 1977-78 School Year a. Headcount: Freshmen Male 288 Female 330 b. Headcount: All Undergraduates Male 1859 Female 1942 c. Overall Percent Out-of—State Students 1% d. Overall Percent of Students Living on Campus 0% e. Overall Percent Minority Students 14% f. Academic Calendar System: Semester 9. School Location by Type of Community ___Suburban ___Urban ___Small Community ___Rural 6Ipid., p. 62. 7Ibid., p. 63 106 Also, additional information concerning the student body, highest degree offered, and types of programs is provided in the higher education directory on these institutions such as: 1. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY8 Student Body: Coed Highest Offering: Doctorate Total Headcount Enrollment, Fall 1977: 47,034 Type of Program: Terminal occupational below the bachelor's level, liberal arts, and general, teacher preparation, professional 0.0 U9! 2. UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, ANN ARBOR CAMPUS9 Student Body: Coed Highest Offering: Doctorate Total Headcount Enrollment, Fall 1977: 35,954 Type of Program: Liberal arts and general, teacher professional CLO U9) 3. UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, DEARBORN CAMPUS10 Student Body: Coed Highest Offering: Master's Total Headcount Enrollment, Fall 1977: 5,480 Type of Program: Liberal arts and general, teacher professional QOU'OJ 4. UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, FLINT CAMPUS11 Student Body: Coed Highest Offering: Master's Total Headcount Enrollment, Fall 1977: 3,801 Type of Program: Liberal arts and general, teacher preparation 0.0 U9) 81978—79 Directory 9f_Michigan Institutions g: Higher Education, Michigan Department 9: Education. The number of headcount include full- time, part-time and full-time equivalent students in Michigan universities, p. 7. 91bid., p. 10. loIbid. 111bid., p. 11. 107 With relatively few exceptions, all of the information presented here was obtained from forms completed by the institutions as part of the Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) for 1978—79 conducted by the United States Office of Education.12 Due to the geographic extent of the institutions, a limit was placed on the territory to be sampled so as to control and organize the population into a measurable sample. It was rationalized that a popula— tion of two ”Big-Ten” institutions (Michigan State University and Univer- sity of Michigan with campuses in Ann Arbor, Dearborn, and Flint collec- tively) in the state of Michigan selected might be predictive of the "Big-Ten" universities with the same size or nearly the same size student body, geographic location, and economic environment. The total active professor population in these institutions was 4,570 (retired professors, as well as those on leaves of absence were not included). Also this figure does not include medical personnel who work in the General and Henry Ford Hospitals at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. The dissertation writer secured the names, addresses, and ranks of professors by using: (1) ng_Michigan State University Faculty gpg Administration Professional Salary List, October 1978 and (2) ng University gf_Michigan 1978-79 Directory, Officers, Faculty, Staff Egg Associated Organization , for sampling purposes. The population for both institutions was divided into four cell blocks, such as: 150 female professors from Michigan State University; 150 male professors from 121bid., p. 1. 108 Michigan State University; 150 female professors from the University of Michigan; and 150 male professors from the University of Michigan. A skip fraction variable was determined by dividing the total number of professors within each cell block by the number 150. Since there were a total of 348 assistant, associate, and full female professors at Michigan State University, every second name was included in the sample population, example 348 e 150 = 2.3 or 2. Every fourteenth male profes- sor's name contained on the salary list of Michigan State was selected as part of the sample since there were 2,090, example, 2090 a 150 = 13.9 or 14. For the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Dearborn, and Flint campuses, 301 female professors' names appeared in the directory, which also meant that every other name was selected to be a respondent to the quesstionnaire, example 301 a 150 = 2.06 or 2. Lastly, every twelfth male professor's name was randomly selected from the University of Michigan's directory to whom a questionnaire was mailed, example 1831 e 150 = 12.2 or 12. A sample of 600 names and addresses was secured in this manner to make-up the sampled population. It was determined that such a number wOUId eliminate a follow- up letter and yet secure a large enough sample for the study. Instrumentation The survey instrument used to gather the data necessary to fulfill the purposes of the study was a structured questionnaire. The advantages of the questionnaire survey have been summarized by Sax as: 1. The major advantage of the questionnaire is one of economics: the time and expense involved in questionnaires sent through the mail has practical ramifications over other types of survey, such as the interview. 109 2. Each respondent receives the same set of questions phrased in exactly the same way: the job of sum— marizing and comparing responses is reduced. 3. The use of the mail in sending out the question- naires means that a larger variety of persons can be contacted.13 The format of the survey instrument was of considerable importance. Claire Selltiz cites five components of an answerable questionnaire:14 1. The questionnaire length 2. The attractiveness of the questionnaire 3. The ease with which the questionnaire can be completed and returned 4. Coding and quality printing 5. Offering the sample population an abstract or test results of the study All of these factors were taken into consideration when the instrument was sent out to the sampled population. The questionnaire was based on topic areas considered to be important to the aspirational levels of women professors for higher educa- tional administrative positions. A review of the literature pertaining to women in administrative roles and the scarcity was reviewed. 13Sax, Empirical Foundations gf_Educational Research, pp. 214-15. 14Claire Selltiz et al., Research Methods ip_Social Relations, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967) p. 237 110 A multi-factor questionnaire, which was formulated to test 15 served as the model career aspirations among public school teachers instrument. This questionnaire was modified and devised in such a manner so that questions pertained to professors' aspirational levels in higher education. The first draft questionnaire was critiqued by professors at Michigan State University, the week of April 2, 1979, who have appoint- ments in the Administration and Higher Education Department. Their task was to indicate which questions would be most relevant to the study. In order to establish face validity, the questionnaire was field tested at Michigan State University among its faculty during the week of April 9, 1979. Their comments and suggestions, along with editing, were reviewed and analyzed. As a result, questions were added, some were deleted, and others were rephrased and ambiguous words were replaced with clearer ones. A final version of the survey instrument may be found in the appendix. A letter of explanation was developed to accompany the question— naire. Also, a brief letter of endorsement to be included in the questionnaire package was written by a member of the writer's doctoral committee of professors. The services of a research consultant with the Michigan Department of Education, Research, Evaluation, and Assessment Services, Lansing, Michigan were obtained for the purposes of pre-coding the instrument, as well as statistical analysis of the data, which will 15Francine Fisher, ”A Study of the Relationship Between the Scarcity of Women in Educational Administrative Positions and the Multiple Factors Which Influence the Career Aspirations of Women Teachers,” (Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1978) p. 152. 111 be later described. During the week of May 7, 1979, each sample population received the same questionnaire. The survey instrument was divided into three parts: PART I contained levels of aspiration in higher educational administration for which an appropriate response might be included: 1-—I have already applied for this position. 2——I would aspire to this position. 3——It is unlikely that I would aspire to this position. 4——I would never apply for this position. The administrative positions described were: (1) Chief Academic Officer, (2) Dean of a Major College, (3) Administrative Vice-President, (4) College President, (5) Other (please specify). PART II contained 13 demographic items intended to indicate the various backgrounds, for descriptive purposes only, among the sample population. PART III contained the following five major topic areas with appropriate statements for each: Cultural Considerations (questions 1 through 11) Educational Factors (questions 12 through 21) Personal Perspectives (questions 22 through 31) Psychological Aspects (questions 32 through 42) The World of Work (questions 43 through 53) The Likert Scale of five choices was used for response codes: 112 1——Strongly agree 2——Agree 3—-Undecided 4—-Disagree 5-—Strongly disagree Two additional items were also contained in Part III of the questionnaire. They were as follows: 1. Please indicate your major teaching department. (statement 54) 2. What do you consider your primary academic (professional) responsibility? (question 55) These two items were not tested as factors which may be related to administrative aspirations but to ascertain whether or not a significant difference existed among men and women professors in higher education. Collection of the Data One-half (300) of the questionnaires were mailed to the sample population (150 female professors and 150 male professors) selected from the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Dearborn, and the Flint campuses on May 7, 1979. The other half (300) of the questionnaires (150 female professors and 150 male professors) were mailed to the Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan sample population on May 8, 1979. An appropriate letter requesting participation in the study, an endorsement cover letter, and a return self-addressed and self-stamped envelope were contained in the package to each respondent (See Appendix). A table 113 listing the number of questionnaires mailed to and returned by the groups surveyed and the final total for the collectivity of the sample may be found below. (Table 3.1). Table 3.1.——Surveyed Population Count. Questionnaires mailed Completed Returns N % N % % of the returned population Male 300 50 143 43 24 Femaie so m 1619 i 2_6 Total 600 100 303 100 50 Treatment of the Data As the completed questionnaires were returned, the writer then assigned a code number to each one beginning with a numerical order of 001 to 303. Since the items on the questionnaires were pre-coded before mailed, the responses were easily transferred and coded using the Fortran statement coding form. This statement, containing all responses from the total sample population, was given to the Michigan State University Data Processing Division for key punch and verifying purposes.) Data analysis included cross—tabulations, frequency distributions, correlational analysis, chi square Test of Association, and the t-test of significance was based on alpha, testing at the .05 level with variOUS degrees of freedom.16 16Items in Parts I, II, and III were crossed with sex. 114 Testable Hypotheses In order to ascertain whether significant difference existed among men and women professors concerning their aspiration levels for a higher educational administrative position, it was necessary to test the following null hypotheses based on Parts I and III of the questionnaire. PART I: Intent of Aspiration for a Position in Higher Educational_ Administration Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference between men and women respondents and their aspirations to an administrative position in higher education. PART III: Multiple Factors Which May Be Related to Administrative Aspirations CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the cultural considerations between men and women respondents. EDUCATIONAL FACTORS Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference in the educational factors between men and women respondents. PERSONAL PERSPECTIVES Hypothesis 4: There is no significant difference in the personal perspectives between men and women respondents. 115 PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS Hypothesis 5: There is no significant difference in the psychological aspects between men and women respondents. THE WORLD OF WORK Hypothesis 6: There is no Significant difference in the world of work between men and women respondents. MAJOR TEACHING DEPARTMENTS Hypothesis 7: There is no significant difference in the major teaching departments between men and women respondents. PERCEIVED PRIMARY ACADEMIC RESPONSIBILITY Hypothesis 8: There is no significant difference in the perceived primary academic responsibility between men and women respondents. Statistical Procedures The Michigan Department of Education, Research, Evaluation, and Assessment Services, Lansing, Michigan, assisted in recommending appropriate statistical techniques for data analysis. A research con- sultant from the educational assessment program assisted in writing all computer programs for data analysis. The computer programs and facilities of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan were used. The statistical procedures used in the analysis of data were: 116 1. Cross—tabulations 2. Frequency distributions 3. Pearson Product-Moment Correlation 4. The Chi Square Test of Association 5. The t-test of significant difference between group means 6. The hypothesis test of significance based on the .05 level with various degrees of freedom Summary This chapter has attempted to provide a description of the planning and implementation of the study. Specific attention was given to describing the type of study and discussing the population and sampling methods used. The development and pre-sampling of the instrument were then discussed, along with a description of the components which comprised the structure of the final survey instrument. The procedures used to collect the data and the treatment of the data were presented. The testable hypotheses were reviewed and the statistical procedures used in the analysis of the data were the closing topics of discussion. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF RESULTS Introduction The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the scarcity of women in higher educational administration and the administrative career aspirations of women professors. This was accomplished by examining and comparing the responses to statements by both men and women professors for a position in higher educational administration. The educational positions tested for intent were line— administrative positions within universities. The factors considered as important influences of higher educational administrative aspirations were: cultural considerations, educational factors, personal perspec- tives, psychological aspects, and the world of work. The major teaching departments and perceived primary academic responsibilities of the respondents were also testable items. The analysis of the data is presented in the following manner: 1. Each original hypothesis and aspiration factor, such as line-administrative positions and areas of influence of the study are restated and appropriate data and explanation are provided for each. 2. Each original hypothesis and factor are chrono— logically restated and analyzed according to the 117 118 appropriate parts of the questionnaire. Each original hypothesis and factor where there was an indication of significant differences between men and women respondents were accompanied by a correlational table. The data in Parts I, II and III of the questionnaire summarized after each appropriate section. Correlation of selected statements within all areas of influence are provided in tables. 119 Perceived Aspiration Levels of Men and Women Professors for an Administrative Position Part I of the Questionnaire Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the aspira- tion levels between men and women respondents with respect to an administrative position in higher education. Position: Chief Academic Officer This hypothesis was tested using response patterns indicating an intent to become a chief academic officer. The obtained chi square of 31.43 with 3 degrees of freedom was Significant at the .05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.1, 4 percent of the men had applied for this position and 5 percent of the women. However, 13 percent of the men would aspire for a chief academic officer position, as would 35 percent of the women. Table 4.1.~—Chief Academic Officer. m N % N % I have already applied for this position 5 4 6 5 I would aspire to this position 15 13 46 34 It is unlikely that I would aspire to this position 36 31 53 40 I would never apply for this position 61 52 27 21 Total 117 47 132 53 Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the aspira- tion levels between men and women respondents with respect to an administrative position in higher education. 120 Position: Dean of a Major College This hypothesis was tested using response patterns indicating an intent to become a dean of a major college. The obtained chi square of 11.81 with 3 degrees of freedom was significant at the .05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.2, 4 percent of the men had applied for this position or were deans and 3 percent of the women. However, 18 percent of the men would aspire for a deanship as would 35 percent of the women. Table 4.2.--Dean of a Major College. Male Female N % N % I have already applied for this position 5 (( 4 9; 4 l5, 3 I would aspire to this position 21 f” 18 PI 47 If 35 2? It is unlikely that I would aspire to I W; “g ’3 this position 43 37 r' 51 7" 38 I would never apply for this position 4711“ 41 '9 33/UV 24 5; . .~ 1' ,/ Total 116243461]? 13 If“ 54 Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the aspira- tion levels between men and women respondents with respect to an administrative position in higher education. Position: Administrative Vice-President This hypothesis was tested using response patterns indicating an intent to become an administrative vice—president. The obtained chi square of 9.43 with 2 degrees of freedom was significant at the .05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in 121 Table 4.3, none of the men had applied for this position as none of the women. However, 9 percent of the men would aspire for an administra- tive vice—president position, as would 21 percent of the women would so aspire. Table 4.3 --Administrative Vice-President. Male Female N % N % I have already applied for this position 0 ' O I 0 PM 0 I I would aspire to this position 111i? 9 H 2857’ 21)) It is unlikely that I would aspire to , r ‘ , 3. this position 38 33“ 50 ‘ 38 J I would never apply for this position 68 ’ 58" 55 (V 41 4 Total 1177. " 47» 133 53 ’"3 Hypothesis 1: There is no significant difference in the aspiration levels between men and women respondents with respect to an administrative position in higher education. Position: College President This hypothesis was tested using response patterns indicating an intent to become a college president. The obtained chi square of 5.86 with 3 degrees of freedom was not significant at the .05 level. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no dif- ference in the responses of men and women. As shown in Table 4.4, 2 percent of the men had applied for this position and 2 percent of the women. However, 8 percent of the men would aspire for a college presidency as would 18 percent of the women. 122 Table 4 4 --College President. Male Female N % N % I have already applied for this position 2 2 . 2 2 ~ I would aspire to this position .‘yy_*w. 93‘; 8 24 17 It is unlikely that I would aspire to ,_ _ _ ..c this position 38 32:.” 37 “V 28 “I?“ I would never apply for this position 69'II‘ 58i$i 71 If} 53 8T,” Total 118‘“ ‘1? I 47 £15,134 24‘5" 53 Table 4.5 summarizes the data regarding administrative intent between men and women respondents. Table 4.5 —-Results of tests looking for significant differences between males and females on intent to become an administrator in higher education. Test of Administrative Positions Null Hypothesis Chief Academic Officer aR Dean of a Major College aR Administrative Vice-President aR College President NR aR = rejected; NR = not rejected. 123 Descriptive Demographic Characteristics Data of Males and Females— Part II of the Questionnaire As shown in Table 4.6, 23 percent of the men were ages 20 to 39, whereas 56 percent of the women were in that age bracket. Table 4.6.—-What is your age? Male Female Age N—’%—N——°7.— 20 - 29 1 1 9 6 30 - 39 31 21 8O 50 4O - 50 55 39 47 29 Over 50 56 39 24 15 Table 4.7 shows that 90 percent of the men were married or married with children, and 46 percent of the women. However, 33 percent of the women were single and only 7 percent of the men. Table 4 7.--What is your marital status? Male Female Marital Status N——————§?—————7¢~—-——7[——— Single 10 7 53 33 Married 62 45 46 29 Married with children 62 45 27 17 Divorced/Widowed with children 3 2 21 13 Divorced/Widowed without children 0 O 11 7 Separated 2 1. 2 1 Total 139 100 160 100 124 As shown in Table 4.8, 13 percent of the men had no children and 55 percent of the women. Of those respondents with children, 69 percent of the men had two to four and 31 percent of the women had that number of children. Table 4.8.--How many children do you have? Male Female Number of Children N % N % None 19 13 88 55 One 20 14 22 13 Two — Four 98 69 49 31 Five or more 6 4 1 1 Total 143 100 160 100 Table 4.9 presents the responses to the question: ”What is your present teaching level?" As shown in the table, 52 percent of the women are ranked at the assistant professor level, whereas only 12 percent of the men are ranked at this level. On the other hand, 61 percent of the men are full professors, while only 20 percent of the women are found under this rank. Table 4.10 shows that the majority of men and women respondents were Caucasian. The responses to the question: “What level of education have you completed?” are shown in Table 4.11. The table shows that the majority of both men and women respondents have earned their doctorate. 125 Table 4 9.--What is your present teaching level? Teaching Level Assistant Professor Associate Professor Full Professor Total Table 4.10.--What is your racial group? Racial Composition Native American Black Asian American Caucasian Hispanic American Indian Other Total Male N % 18 12 38 27 86 61 142 100 Male N % 22 17 5 4 2 1 107 76 0 O 2 1 0 O 140 100 Female N % 83 52 45 28 32 20 160 100 Female N % 11 7 13 8 2 1 127 79 O 0 1 1 O O 160 100 Table 4.12 shows that 73 percent of the men have been teaching for 11-15 or more years, whereas 41 percent of the women have been teaching those number of years. 126 Table 4.11.-—What level of education have you completed? Male Female Level of Education fi_—____%_____7;__-__:Z_ Doctorate 132 93 112 71 Graduate hours beyond Master's 7 5 22 14 Master's Degree 3 2 23 15 Bachelor's Degree 0 0 0 0 Total 142 100 157 100 Table 4.12.--How many years have you been teaching? Male Female Years of Teaching Ef___——;:—___—fi——————;_ First year 2 1 4 3 1 - 5 11 8 46 29 6 - 10 25 18 44 27 11 — 15 29 20 29 18 15 or more 76 53 37 23 Total 143 100 160 100 As shown in Table 4.13, 47 percent of the men participated in both team and individual sports and 38 percent of the women. Of those who did not participate in any sports, 21 percent were men and 36 percent were women. 127 Table 4.13 --Did you actively participate in sports as a youth? Type of Participation Male Female N % N % Team 23 16 22 14 Individual 23 16 19 12 Both Team and Individual 67 47 61 38 Did not Participate 3O 21 57 36 Total 143 100 159 100 Table 4.14 shows that 59 percent of the men and 49 percent of the women indicated their mothers did not work at all. Of the respondents whose mothers worked from six years to all the time, 27 percent were male and 35 percent were female. Table 4.14.--How many years did your mother work during your growing years? Either full or part-time? Male Female Number of Years —-———-——-———————————————— N % N % 0 84 59 77 5O 1 - 5 20 14 24 15 6 — 10 21 15 24 15 All 17 12 31 20 Total 142 100 156 100 128 As shown in Table 4.15, only 36 percent of the men had worked for a female administrator and 71 percent of the women. Table 4.15.--Have you ever worked for a female administrator? Male Female Female Administrator N % N % Yes 49 36 101 71 No 86 64 42 29 Total 135 100 143 100 Perceived Multi le Factors Which Ma Be Related to Administrative Aspirations of Men and Women Respondents—Part III of the Questionnaire Based on preliminary findings, those statements which tested at a value less than 1.0 between men and women mean scores, were initially excluded for analysis. Therefore, only questions or statements which tested as close to a mean difference of 1.0 or greater were selected for further analysis in the study by using the t—test of significance at the .05 level. CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the cultural considerations between men and women respondents. Factor: Men are More Effective Administrators 129 This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: "For psychological and social reasons, men are more effective administrators than women." The obtained t-statistic of -4.18 with 291 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 3.77 and 4.26 was reported for the women. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.16, 86 percent of the women and 69 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.16.--For psychological and social reasons, men are more effective administrators than women. Male Female Correlation between responses —-——-—-——-——-————-—-—-—- N % N % Strongly agree 2 1 2 1 Agree 20 15 12 8 Undecided 21 15 8 5 Disagree 59 43 54 35 Strongly disagree 36 26 79 51 Total 138 100 155 100 Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the cultural considerations between men and women respondents. Factor: Women Seek Proximity to Others This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”Women are more likely to seek proximity to others than to work independently.” The obtained t-statistic of 1.65 with 292 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not 130 rejected, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 58 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the cultural considerations between men and women respondents. Factor: Women Not as Dependable This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: “In general, I consider women not as dependable as men because of women's biological and personal characteristics." The obtained t-statistic of -3.99 with 294 degrees of freedom was signif— icant. Men had a mean score of 4.38 and women had a score of 4.69. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.17, 91 percent of the men and 96 percent of the women disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.17.——In general, I consider women not as dependable as men because of women's biological and personal characteristics. Male Female Correlation between responses —————————————————————~— N % N % Strongly agree 0 0 O 0 Agree 3 2 3 2 Undecided 10 7 3 2 Disagree 58 41 33 21 Strongly disagree 70 50 116 75 Total 141 100 156 100 131 Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the cultural considerations between men and women respondents. Factor: Male Spouse Would Feel Threatened This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: “A male spouse would be threatened by a competent, career— oriented wife.” The obtained t-statistic of 1.00 with 281 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no difference in the response of men and women. Overall, 60 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 2: There is no significant difference in the cultural considerations between men and women respondents. Factor: Women Who Compete Lose Popularity This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: "College women who attempt to compete with men usually do so at the expense of their popularity or social life.” The obtained t-statistic of 1.52 with 290 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no dif- ference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 65 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed‘with this statement. Table 4.18 summarizes the data for the statements under the Cultural Considerations section of Part III of the questionnaire. EDUCATIONAL FACTORS Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference in the educa— tional factors between men and women respondents. Factor: Male vs. Female Administrator 132 Table 4.18.--Results of tests looking for significant differences between males and females on Cultural Considerations. Test of Statement Null Hypothesis For psychological and social reasons, men J are more effective administrators than women. aR ’ Women are more likely to seek proximity to Zfljf' others than to work independently. NR In general, I consider women not as dependable as men because of women's biological and personal characteristics. aR A male spouse would be threatened by a competent, career—oriented wife. NR College women who attempt to compete with men usually do so at the expense of their popularity or social life. NR Cultural Considerations Statements Not Tested My colleagues would react unfavorably if I became an administrator. Women are better organizers than men. In a given task, women are more likely to ask for help or rely on others in face of a threat, than are men. Women generally have a lower level of achievement motivation than men. Men know more than women about how to seek and obtain opportunities to become administrators. Women lack the drive to become administrators. 6R = rejected; NR = not rejected. 133 This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: "I feel more comfortable working for a male administrator than a female administrator.“ The obtained t-statistic of -2.39 with 293 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 3.77 and women had a score of 4.04. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.19, 80 percent of the women and 67 per- cent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.19.--I feel more comfortable working for a male administrator than for a female administrator. Male Female Correlation between responses N % N % Strongly agree 2 1 5 3 Agree 15 11 6 4 Undecided 30 21 21 14 Disagree 6O 43 67 43 Strongly disagree 34 24 55 36 Total 141 100 154 100 Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference in the edu- cational factors between men and women respondents. Factor: College Courses Deisigned for Male Advancement This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: "In my college career, most college courses were designed for male advancement and emphasis.“ The obtained t—statistic of .30-2 with 292 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null 134 hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 56 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference in the educa- tional factors between men and women respondents. Factor: Uncomfortable in a Class of All Males This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: “I would feel uncomfortable in a higher education adminis— tration class of all males." The obtained t-statistic of —4.09 with 294 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 3.71, and women had a score of 4.18. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.20, 87 percent of the women and 74 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.20.—-I would feel uncomfortable in a higher education administration class of all males. Male Female Correlation between responses N % N % Strongly agree 8 6 1 1 Agree 15 10 13 8 Undecided 14 10 6 4 Disagree 75 54 72 46 Strongly disagree 28 20 64 41 Total 140 100 156 100 135 Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference in the educa- tional factor between men and women respondents. Factor: Encouragement by Female Administrators This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: “There have been female administrators who have encouraged me to seek an administrative position.” The obtained t—statistic of 6.18 with 288 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 3.91 and women had a score of 3.00. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.21, 48 percent of the women and 78 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.21.--There have been female administrators who have encouraged me to seek an administrative position. Male Female Correlation between responses ——————————-———-————————— N % N % Strongly agree 3 2 25 16 Agree 17 13 49 32 Undecided 10 7 6 4 Disagree 65 48 48 31 Strongly disagree 41 3O 26 17 Total 136 100 154 100 Hypothesis 3: There is no significant difference in the educa- tional factors between men and women respondents. Factor: Administration Encouragement 136 This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”In our institution both men and women are encouraged to apply for administrative positions.” The obtained t-statistic of —4 36 with 293 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 2.28 and women had a score of 2.80. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.22, 32 percent of the women and only 14 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.22.--In our institution both men and women are encouraged to apply for administrative positions. Male Female Correlation between responses N % N % Strongly agree 20 14 12 8 Agree 82 59 66 42 Undecided 18 13 28 18 Disagree 18 13 38 25 Strongly disagree 2 1 11 7 Total 136 100 154 100 Table 4.23 summarizes the data for the statements under the Educational Factors section of Part III of the questionnaire. PERSONAL PERSPECTIVES Hypothesis 4: There is no significant difference in the personal perspectives between men and women respondents. Factor: Need to Know Administrators 137 Table 4.23.--Results of tests looking for significant differences between males and females on Educational Factors. Test of Statement Null Hypothesis I feel more comfortable working for a male administrator than a female administrator. aR In my college career, most college courses were designed for male advancement and emphasis. aR I would feel uncomfortable in a higher education administration class of all males. aR There have been female administrators who have encouraged me to seek an administrative position. aR In our institution both men and women are encouraged to apply for administrative positions. aR Educational Factors Statements Not Tested Welcoming women as equals into the professional management levels may tend to downgrade the teaching profession. Female students who never experience women in leadership positions are not likely to develop aspirations or values that move beyond traditional stereotypes. Women administrators have less power to make decisions than men. Educational counseling enabled me to plan for advancement in my career. Most administrators in my schooling process were male. aR rejected; NR = not rejected. 138 This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”I feel I need to know a few administrators well in order to win their support for an administrative position.” The Obtained t-statistic of 2.15 with 293 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 2.90 and women had a score of 2.64. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.24, 26 percent of the women and 33 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.24.--I feel I need to know a few administrators well in order to win their support for an administrative position. Male Female Correlation between responses N % N % Strongly agree 10 7 15 10 Agree 46 33 69 43 Undecided 37 27 33 21 Disagree 35 26 39 25 Strongly disagree 9 7 2 1 Total 137 100 158 100 Hypothesis 4: There is no significant difference in the personal perspectives between men and women respondents. Factor: Too Many Family Responsibilities This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”I have too many family responsibilities to seek an adminis- trative position.“ The obtained t—statistic of -1.70 with 295 degrees 139 of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 81 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 4: There is no significant difference in the personal perspectives between men and women respondents. Factor: Encouragement to get College Degree This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: “In my home, I was encouraged to get a college degree.” The obtained t-statistic of 1.27 with 295 degrees of freedom was not significant, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected. Overall 9 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 4: There is no significant difference in the personal perspectives between men and women respondents. Factor: Encouragement from an Administrator This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”I have personally received encouragement from an adminis- trator in my institution to apply for an administrative position.” The obtained t-statistic of .83 with 287 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indi— cating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 58 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. 140 Hypothesis 4: There is no significant difference in the personal perspectives between men and women respondents. Factor: Image of University Administrators This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”I have a negative image of university/college adminis- trators.” The obtained t-statistic of -.12 with 295 degrees of free- dom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 53 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.25 summarizes the data for the statements under the Personal Perspectives section of Part III of the questionnaire. PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS Hypothesis 5: There is no significant difference in the psycholog- ical aspects between men and women resoondents. Factor: Seeking an Administrative Position This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”I have been in my present position too long to seek an administrative position now.” The obtained t—statistic of -3.93 with 287 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a score of 3.64 and women had a score of 4.09. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.26, 88 percent of the women and 70 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 5: There is no significant difference in the psycho- logical aspects between men and women respondents. Factor: Delegating Tasks 141 Table 4.25.--Results of tests looking for significant differences between males and females on Personal Perspectives. Test of Statement Null Hypothesis I feel I need to know a few administrators well in order to win their support for an a administrative position. R I have too many family responsibilities to seek an administrative position. NR In my home, I was encouraged to get a college degree. NR I have personally received encouragement from an administrator in my institution to apply for an administrative position. NR I have a negative image of university/college administrators. NR Personal Perspectives Statements Not Tested A woman can be a successful administrator and happily married at the same time. My spouse would be upset if we had to move because I was selected as an administrator. I have planned specifically for advancement in higher education administration. What my spouse thinks about an administrative position has an influence on me. I would be eager to become an administrator, even if I had to move somewhere else. aR = rejected; NR = not rejected. 142 This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: “I like delegating tasks and working with people." The obtained t-statistic of 1.36 with 291 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indi- cating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 10 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.26.—-I have been in my present position too long to seek an administrative position now. Male Female Correlation between responses N % N % Strongly agree 7 5 3 2 Agree 18 13 6 4 Undecided 16 12 9 6 Disagree 71 52 9O 59 Strongly disagree 25 18 44 29 Total 137 100 152 100 Hypothesis 5: There is no significant difference in the psycho- logical aspects between men and women respondents. Factor: Being a Top Contender This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: "If I applied for an administrative position, I feel I might be a top contender.” The obtained t-statistic of —1.48 with 290 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no difference in the 143 responses of men and women. Overall, 20 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 5: There is no significant difference in the psycho- logical aspects between men and women respondents. Factor: Competing for Position This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”I would rather not compete for an administrative position.” The obtained t—statistic of -4.24 with 287 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 1.48 and women had a score of 1.44. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4 27, 50 percent of the women and 31 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.27.--I would rather not compete for an administrative position. Male Female Correlation between responses —————————u—-——-—--—- N % N % Strongly Agree 26 19 14 9 Agree 51 37 35 23 Undecided 17 13 28 18 Disagree 34 25 56 37 Strongly disagree 8 6 20 13 Total 136 100 153 100 Table 4.28 summarizes the data for the statements under the Psychological Aspects of Part III Of the questionnaire. 144 Table 4.28.--Results of tests looking for significant differences between males and females on Psychological Aspects. Test of Statement Null Hypothesis 1 have been in my present position too long to seek an administrative position now. aR I like delegating tasks and working with people. NR If I applied for an administrative position, I feel I might be a top contender. NR I would rather not compete for an administrative position. aR Psychological Aspects Statements Not Tested Seeking an administrative position involves too much ”politics." I am satisfied with my present employment and would not seek an administrative position. I feel confident in most leadership positions. I would be willing to further my education or training for an administrative position. Administrators in my institution would react favorably if I became an administrator. Being an administrator would enhance my self-image. Administrators tend to become ”out of touch" with the teaching environment. aR rejected; NR = not rejected. 145 THE WORLD OF WORK Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in the world of work between men and women respondents. Factor: Administrators Compromising Principles This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: “People who are at administrative levels are often asked to compromise their principles." The obtained t-statistic of .51 with 296 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 32 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in the world of work between men and women respondents. Factor: Security in Present Position This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: "My present position provides too much security for me to seek an administrative position.” The obtained t-statistic of —2.27 with 287 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 3.58 and women had a score of 3.83. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.29, 75 percent of the women and 65 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in the world of work between men and women respondents. Factor: Men's Advancement 146 Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in the world of work between men and women respondents. Factor: Men's Advancement This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”Men advance faster in administration with less experience Simply because they are men.” The obtained t-statistic of 6.60 with 293 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 2.98 and women had a score of 2.17. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.30, 36 percent of the men and 15 percent of the women disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.29 --My present position provides too much security for me to seek an administrative position. Male Female Correlation between responses N % N % Strongly Agree 3 2 1 1 Agree 18 13 14 9 Undecided 27 20 24 15 Disagree 72 53 85 56 Strongly disagree 16 12 29 19 Total 136 100 153 100 Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in the world of work between men and women respondents. Factor: Quest for an Administrative Position 147 This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”I am willing to "go for broke“ in my quest for a position in administration.” The obtained t-statistic of 3.56 with 289 degrees of freedom was significant. Men had a mean score of 4.32 and women had a score of 3.94. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.31, 73 percent of the women and 87 percent of the men disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.30 --Men advance faster in administration with less experience simply because they are men. Male Female Correlation between responses N % N % Strongly agree 9 6 39 25 Agree 45 32 77 49 Undecided 36 26 18 11 Disagree 37 27 18 12 Strongly disagree 12 9 4 3 Total 139 100 156 100 Hypothesis 6: There is no significant difference in the world of work between men and women respondents. Factor: Too Much Competition This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”There is just too much competition in trying to become an administrator.” The obtained t-statistic of .94 with 291 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not 148 rejected, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Overall, 66 percent of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this statement. Table 4.31.--I am willing to ”go for broke" in my quest for a position in administration. Male Female Correlation between responses —————————-————————————- N % N % Strongly Agree 0 O 3 2 Agree 4 3 11 7 Undecided 15 10 27 18 Disagree ' 53 38 6O 4O Strongly disagree 68 49 50 33 Total 140 100 151 100 Table 4.32 summarizes the data for the statements under The World of Work section of Part III of the questionnaire. Indication of Major Teaching Department and Primary Academic Responsibility of Respondents--Part III of the Questionnaire Hypothesis 7: There is no significant difference in the major teaching departments between men and women respondents. Factor: Major Teaching Departments This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following statement: ”Please indicate your major teaching department.” The obtained chi square of 59.11 with 4 degrees of freedom was significant. -—__ 149 Table 4.32.--Results of tests looking for significant differences between males and females on the World of Work. Test of Statement Null Hypothesis People who are at administrative levels are often asked to compromise their principles. NR My present position provides too much security for me to seek an administrative position. aR Men advance faster in administration with less experience Simply because they are men. aR I am willing to “go for broke“ in my quest for a position in administration. aR There is just too much competition in trying to become an administrator. NR The World of Work Statements Not Tested The “white-male club” promotes men over women for positions in administration. I see a position in higher education administration as attainable by me. Men are more often chosen for an administrative position than women. I consider that working with college students is more rewarding than administration. Being a successful administrator is easier for men than for women. My university or college colleagues assisted me in seeking an administrative position. aR rejected; NR = not rejected. 150 Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected. As shown in Table 4.33, 31 percent of the men teach in the physical sciences and technological departments, whereas 2 percent of the women teach in these departments. Also shown in the table is that 16 percent of the men teach in the health services area, as compared to 58 percent of the women. Table 4.33.--Major Teaching Departments. Male Female Departments ———————————-————————-——— N % N % College of Education 12 14 18 14 Social Sciences 20 24 15 12 Health Services 13 16 73 58 Arts and Letters 13 16 17 13 Physical Sciences and Technology 26 31 2 2 Total 84 40 125 60 Hypothesis 8: There is no significant difference in the primary academic responsibility between men and women respondents. Factor: Perceived Primary Academic Responsibility This hypothesis was tested using responses to the following question: ”What do you consider your primary academic responsibility?” The obtained chi square of 4.80 with 4 degrees of freedom was not significant. Therefore, the null hypothesis was not rejected, indi- cating no difference in the responses of men and women. Men and women grouped evenly in the six listed categories, as shown in Table 4.34. ' Il"\~n --- i—__ 151 Table 4.34.—-Perceived Primary Academic Responsibility. Male Female Responsibility N % N % Teaching only 45 39 57 44 Research only 14 12 16 12 Administration only 11 10 12 10 Teaching and Research 45 39 39 30 Teaching and Administration 1 1 6 5 Research and Administration 0 O 0 0 Total 116 47 130 53 Table 4.35 summarizes the data regarding identification of major teaching departments in Part III of the questionnaire. Table 4.35.--Result of test looking for significant differences between males and females on major teaching departments. Test of Statement Null Hypothesis Please indicate your major teaching department. aR aR = rejected. NR = not rejected. Table 4.36 summarizes the data for perceived primary academic responsibility in Part III of the questionnaire. 152 Table 4.36.-—Result of test looking for significant differences between males and females on primary academic responsibility. Test of Question Null Hypothesis What do you consider your primary academic responsibility? NR aR = rejected; NR = not rejected. Table 4.37 summarizes the data regarding aspiration levels between men and women respondents for administrative positions in higher education. Table 4.37.--Aspiration levels of males and females for administrative positions. CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER Male Female Aspirers N % N % I have already applied for this position. 5 4 6 5 I would aspire to this position. 15 13 46 34 Total 20 17 52 39 Non-Aspirers It is unlikely that I would aspire to this position. 36 31 53 40 I would never apply for this position. 61 52 27 21 Total 97 83 80 61 153 Table 4.37.--Continued. DEAN of a MAJOR COLLEGE Aspirers I have already applied for this position. I would aspire to this position. Total Non-Aspirers It is unlikely that I would aspire to this position. I would never apply for this position. Total ADMINISTRATIVE VICE-PRESIDENT Aspirers I have already applied for this position. I would aspire to this position. Total Non-Aspirers It is unlikely that I would aspire to this position. I would never apply for this position. Total COLLEGE PRESIDENT Aspirers I have already applied for this position. I would aspire to this position. Total 21 26 43 47 90 11 11 38 68 106 11 Male % 18 22 37 41 78 33 58 91 10 Female 47 51 51 33 84 28 28 50 55 105 24 26 % 35 38 38 24 62 21 21 38 41 79 17 19 154 Table 4.37.--Continued. COLLEGE PRESIDENT Non-Aspirers N It is unlikely that I would aspire to this position. 38 I would never apply for this position. I 69 Total 107 Male % 32 58 90 Female N % 37 28 71 53 108 81 Table 4.38 summarizes aspiration levels between men and women respondents according to aspirers and non-aspirers for administrative positions in higher education. Table 4.38.--Breakdown of aspirers vs. non—aspirers for administrative positions in higher education. CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER N Aspirers 20 Non-Aspirers 97 Total 117 DEAN of a MAJOR COLLEGE Aspirers 26 Non-Aspirers 90 Total 116 Male % 17 83 100 22 78 100 Female N % 52 39 80 61 132 100 51 38 84 62 135 100 155 Table 4.38.——Continued. Male Female ADMINISTRATIVE VICE-PRESIDENT N % N % Aspirers 11 9 28 21 Non-Aspirers 106 91 105 79 Total 116 100 133 100 COLLEGE PRESIDENT Aspirers 11 10 26 19 Non-Aspirers 107 90 108 81 Total 117 100 134 100 Table 4.39 summarizes the correlational data which pairs two statements (three sets) between men and women respondents under Cultural Considerations. Table 4.40 summarizes the correlational data which pairs two statements (two sets) between men and women respondents under Educational Factors. Table 4.41 summarizes the correlational data which pairs two statements (two sets) between men and women respondents under Personal Perspectives. Table 4.42 summarizes the correlational data which pairs two statements (five sets) between men and women respondents under Psychological Aspects. 156 Table 4.43 summarizes the correlational data which pairs two statements (two sets) between men and women respondents under World of Work. mm Data analyses of the chi square Test of Association were used in the assessment of hypotheses in Part I and the last two hypoth- eses in Part III of the questionnaire. Chi square Test was also used in Part II of the questionnaire.} The t-test of significance was used to assess hypotheses in Part III of the questionnaire. Also in Part III, the Pearson Product—Moment Correlation Test was used to determine whether a relationship existed between statements within each area of influence. The hypothesis test of significance was based at the .05 level for all tests. A summary of the hypotheses can be found in Chapter V. 157 pseowswsmwm n .sm4m psoeovwoooo scene—ossoo n Asv Eouoosw so moosmou u wu esope u e os mo» .smem 3. 04. 3 we» we» .sowm 44. O4. 3 mo% mo» .sme we. 8. E .msopespmwswsue osoooo op mowpwsousooao sweuno use some op 3o; psose soEoz sesp osoE Boss so: .soE sesp sowpe>wuos 4so5o>owsoe mo —e>o_ sozo— e o>es >__esosom soEoz .msopesumwswsue oeoooo o4 o>wsu esp xoer sosoz .mowpmwsopoeseso Fesomsoo use FeowmoFowo m_soEo3 so omzeooo see we o—oeusooou me uos soEoz souwmsoo H .Fesosom sH .zppsousooousw xsoz op sesu msospo op zuwswxoso seem op AFoxTF osoE ose soEoz .29: :53. mechmms—o wapwn— 0L6 50503 .4 .m "mpsosopepm oswessowpmoso mumfl. mama. mo.e ouH mNH mu NuH HmH z o—eEos oFez .msowuesouwmsou Feszppzo som mesouso mom oFeEou use oPez soozpeo sowueFossoo somseosII.mm.4 opseh monH5 :4 msopespmpspEue pmoz .om we» we» .smpm .moozpoosopm pesopppuesp mp. mm. Asv usozon o>oE pesp mos—e> so msoppespome ooFo>ou op apopr pos ose msopppmoo opsmsoueo— sp soEoz oosopsoaxo so>os osz mpsouzpm opesou .mp .sopespmpspsue opeEop e sop sesp sopespmpspEue opeE e sop mspssoz opoepsossoo osoe poop H .mp os mo» .smpm mo. 0N. Asv .soE sesp msopmpoou oseE op so2oe 44oF o>es msopespmpspeue soEoz .44 ”mpsoEopepm ospessoppmouo I))(I))I)))))III)) omop. mama. mo.e mup mNH wu mop HmH z machospespmssseue se sos AHoae op sospspspmss HE ss sopespmsssEue se we» we» .smsm Eoss psoEomeszooso uo>sooos AHHesomsoo o>es H .om 4m. 44. E .omHo ososZoEom o>oE op ues H ss so>o .sopespmsssEue se oEooos op someo on uHuoz H .mm .omHo ososzosom o>oE op ues H ss so>o mo» mop .smsm .sopespMHssEue se oEoooo op someo on uHooz H .mm 4.4. me. E .sospespmHsHEue sospeozuo sosmss sp psoEoose>ue sos HHHeopssoesm uosseHe m>es H .mm ”mpsoEopepm ossessospmooo oomH. mmmH. mo.e moH ONH su moH NNH z mm>HHumammma Hppoo msos Hesomsos sos mpsouso mom oHeEos use oHez sooZpon sospeHossoo somseosII.H4.4 oHnes 160 pseossssmsm n .smsm psososssooo sospeHossoo u Asv Eouooss so moosmou u su essHe n e .sousopsoo op e on ps HE H Hoes H .sospsmoa o>spespmssssue se sos uosHese H sH .mm we» we» .sosm mm. mm. Asv .msosppmoe ossmsoueoH pmoE sH psousssoo Hoes H .mm .=moppsHoo= sous oop me>Ho>sH sospsmoe o>ppespmsspsue se msssoom .N4 we» os .smpm mm. HH. Asv .sosppmoe o>spespmsssEue se sos oposeoo pos sospes uHsoz H .O4 .omeEsIsHom as mosesso quoz sopespmsssEue se mssom .mm we» we» .smsm mm. 44. Asv .sospsmoo o>ppespmssssue se sos mssssesp so sospeosuo >9 sospsos op mssHHsz on quoz H .4m .sopespmpsssue se oseoos H ss xHoeso>es we» we» .smsm poems quoz sospzpspmss >5 ss msopespmsspsu< .mm om. me. E .msoppsmoo essmsoueoH pmoE ss psousssoo Hoes H .mm .sosppmoo o>ppespmsssEue se sos oposeoo pos sospes quoz H .04 we» mop .smsm 44. mm. Hsv .sosppmoe o>ppespmsssEue se some pos quoz use psoEHoHoEo psomess HE spsz uossmspem Ee H .mm ”mpsoEopepm ospessoppmouo NsmH. mesH. mo.e oMH HmH su me mmH z whomsm< Hms oHesos oHez .mpoo m< Heos oHoso ms sos mpsouso mom oHeEos use oHez soozpoe sospeHossou somseosII.m4.4 oHoes 161 pseossssmsm u .smpm psososssooo sospeHossoo n Asv Eouooss so moosmou u su esoHe u e IIIAIIIII) .sospespmssHEue sesp mssuseZos osoE ms mpsouzpm omoHHoo spsz ossssoz pesp soupmsoo H .om (((()I mop os .smsm mm. oH. Asv .sospsmos o>spespmsspEue se some op oE sos xpsszoom sous oop mous>ose sospsmos psomoss >2 .44 .soppespmsssEue ss msoppsmos sos soEoz so>o sos mopoEoso eszHo oHeEIopssze oss .u4 me» me» .smsm ms. 4n. Asv .soE ose zosp omzeoos zHoEsm oosossosxo mmoH spsz sospespmpspsue ss sopmes oose>ue so: .m4 umpsosopepm ossessospmozo mmsH. mmsH. mo.e mNH omH su omH NNH z sac: so osmoz mzs oHeEou oHez .ssoz so u—soz esp sos mpsouso mom oHeEos use oHez soozpos sospeHossoo somseosII.m4.4 oHses CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summar This study was designed to analyze the career aspirations of women professors for higher educational administrative positions. The specific areas of interest concern were the cultural, educational, personal, psychological and the work environment factors that influence female professors for advancement to higher educational management. Comparisons were made among male and female professors——each responding to the same questionnaire devised to indicate levels of administrative aspirations. The need for the study, as well as purpose, significance, assumptions, research hypotheses, design, and limitations have all been outlined in Chapter 1. Chapter II was devoted to reviewing the litera— ture related to the purpose of the study. The literature was reviewed in the ten major areas listed below: 1. Women in contemporary professions 2. Historical perspective 3. Women in education 4. Sex discrimination in higher education and federal policy 162 163 5. Sexism and bias in higher education 6. Women's aspiration levels 7. Women in higher educational administration 8. Psychological barriers 9. Women as educational leaders TO. A professional association for women administrators The design of the study was presented in Chapter III and the analysis of results in Chapter IV. Findings PART I OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE: PERCEIVED ASPIRATION LEVELS OF MALE AND FEMALE PROFESSORS FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION l. Significant differences exist in both the aspirations and actions of males and females with respect to obtaining a chief academic officer position. A slightly higher percentage of women than men sampled had applied for such a position (5 percent women, 4 percent men). Likewise, a higher percentage of women than men indicated they would aspire to become a chief academic officer (35 percent women, l3 percent men). The women seemed to implement their desire to become chief academic officers at only a slightly higher rate than did men. 2. Significant differences exist in both the aspirations and actions of males and females with respect to obtaining a deanship of a major college. Four percent of the men tested were deans or had applied, as compared to 3 percent of the women. However, 35 percent of the women would aspire to the position, while only l8 percent of the men would so aspire. 164 3. Significant differences exist in both the aspirations and actions of males and females with respect to obtaining an administra— tive vice—presidency. None of the men or women sampled had applied for such a position. However, 2l percent of the women would aspire to this position as compared to 9 percent of the men. 4. There were no significant differences in both the aspira— tions and actions of males and females with respect to obtaining a university/college presidency. Only 2 percent of the men and 2 percent of the women had applied. While l8 percent of the women would aspire to be a president, 8 percent of the men would aspire. PART 11 OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE: DESCRIPTIVE DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF MEN AND WOMEN RESPONDENTS l. The majority of females tested were 39 years of age or younger (56 percent). On the other hand, a much smaller percentage of men were in that age bracket (23 percent). The majority of the men were 40 years of age or older (77 percent), compared to 44 percent of the women. 2. Males tested had a higher percentage of families consisting of two or more children (69 percent, females 3l percent). Fifty-five percent of the women had no children as compared to l4 percent of the men. 3. With reference to the present teaching ranks of male and female respondents, 6l percent of the men were at the full professor level, as opposed to only 20 percent of the women. Fifty—two percent 165 of the women were at the assistant professor level, as compared to l2 percent of the men. 4. The majority of men and women respondents were Caucasian (76 percent male, 79 percent female). 5. The majority of both men and women had earned the doctor- ate degree (93 percent male, 7l percent female). 6. Seventy—three percent of the men respondents had been teaching for II or more years, compared to 4l percent of the women. 7. With reference to sports participation as a youth, a higher percentage of males had participated in both team and individ— ual sports (47 percent compared to 38 percent females). 8. A higher percentage of females indicated that their mothers did not work at all during their growing years (49 percent compared to 35 percent). 9. With respect to whether or not the respondents had ever worked for a female administrator, 36 percent of the men had, as com- pared to 7l percent of the women. PART III OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE: PERCEIVED MULTIPLE FACTORS WHICH MAY BE RELATED TO ADMINISTRATIVE ASPIRATIONS OF MEN AND WOMEN PROFESSORS Cultural Considerations.—-Significant differences existed in the responses of males and females in two of the questions tested under Cultural Considerations. I. More men than women agreed that men are more effective ad- ministrators than women (l6 percent men compared to 9 percent women). 166 2. A higher percentage of women than men disagreed with the idea that women are not as dependable as men (96 percent women, 9l percent men). Educational Factors —-Significant differences existed in the responses on males and females in four of the questions tested under Educational Factors. l. A higher percentage of women than men disagreed with the idea that they would be more comfortable working for a male adminis- trator (79 percent women, 67 percent men). 2. A higher percentage of men agreed with the idea that they would be uncomfortable in a higher education administration class of all males (l6 percent men, 9 percent women). 3. More women than men agreed that there have been female administrators who have encouraged them to seek an administrative position (48 percent women, l5 percent men). 4. A lesser percentage of women than men agreed with the idea that both males and females are encouraged in their teaching institu- tion to apply for administrative positions (73 percent men, 50 percent women). Personal Perspectives.—-Significant differences existed in the responses of males and females in one of the questions tested under Personal Perspectives. I. More female respondents than males agreed that they would need to know a few administrators in order to win their support for an administrative position (53 percent women, 40 percent men). 167 Psychological Aspects.-—Significant differences existed in the responses of males and females in two of the questions tested under Psychological Aspects. l. A higher percentage of males agreed with the idea of being in their present position too long to seek an administrative position (l8 percent men, 6 percent women). 2. A higher percentage of men indicated an unwillingness to compete for an administrative position (56 percent men, 32 percent women). The World of Work.—-Differences existed in the responses of males and females in three of the questions tested under World of Work. I. More males than females agreed their present position pro— vides too much security to seek an administrative position (l5 percent men, IO percent women). 2. A much higher percentage of women agreed that men advance faster in administration with less experience simply because they are men (74 percent women, 38 percent men). 3. A slightly higher percentage of females agreed with the idea of being willing to ”go for broke” in their quest for a position in administration (9 percent women, 3 percent men). PART III OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE: INDICATION OF MAJOR TEACHING DEPARTMENT AND PERCEIVED PRIMARY ACADEMIC RESPONSIBILITY OF RESPONDENTS Major Teaching Department.--Significant differences existed in the responses of males and females regarding indication of their Major Teaching Departments. 168 1. A higher percentage of males than females teach in the Physical Sciences and Technology departments (31 percent men, 2 percent women). A greater percentage of the female respondents teach in the Health Services area (58 percent women, 16 percent men). In the Colleges of Education, Arts and Letters, respondents grouped evenly. Perceived Primary Academic Responsibility.—-There were no significant differences in the responses of males and females regarding Perceived Primary Academic Responsibility. 1. In response to this question, both males and females clustered mainly under two categories. Thirty-nine percent of the men indicated that their primary academic responsibility was teaching only, as did 44 percent of the women. Also, 39 percent of the men indicated teaching and research to be the main perceived responsibility, as did 30 percent of the women. Therefore, 78 percent of the men and 74 percent of the women clustered under these categories of perceived primary academic responsibility. Although the purpose of this study was to analyze female aspira- tions, as questionnaire items were heavily weighted in this direction, a resultant by-product was also noted as being just as significant as the lack of feminine desire to be administrative leaders in higher education. The very same percentage of males as females had applied for adminis— trative jobs, but a higher percentage of women than men would aspire to these positions. For a chief academic officership, 34 percent of the women and 13 percent of the men would aspire to this position; for dean of a 169 major college, 35 percent of the women and IS percent of the men would aspire to this position; for an administrative vice-presidency, 2l percent of the women and 9 percent of the men would aspire to this position; and for a university/college president position, l7 percent of the women and 8 percent of the men would aspire to this position. Two men and two women actually had applied for a college presidency. In total, only l2 female and l2 male respondents were in positions of administration or had applied for any of the positions tested. Thus, it can be concluded from the test results, only a small percentage of the sampled professors, whether male or female, has much ambition to leave teaching and research to become administrators. This study seems to indicate that 85 percent of the professors sampled have no ambition to fill administrative jobs. Under Part II of the questionnaire, the data revealed by Palley's findings indicating that in the I975-76 academic year, the majority of female professors were clustered at the lower teaching ranks and the majority of males at the higher ones,1 mainly full professor, are existing even today. The statement, ”I have too many family responsibilities to seek an administrative position, was not rejected, indicating no difference in the responses of men and women. Eighty-one percent of the respond- ents disagreed with this statement. The rising trend toward shared responsibility seems to have eased the concern of women about the idea 1Palley, “Women as Academic Administrators," p. 3. 170 of some educational researchers that social milieu's stress on the fundamental role of the woman as mother and wife inhibits them from becoming administrators. Implications Administrative Aspiration Level Because the female population sample was much younger than the men's, may account for one of the reasons their aspiration levels were higher. Perhaps, they just haven't been working within the system long enough to become cynical about the world of administration. The men, on the other hand, were older, taught on an average for more years, and ranked higher on the professor ladder. It seems appropriate to mention, although it was not this study's purpose to deal with the issue, that one problem could be the very nature of administrative positions. Perhaps, the times of social and political conflicts are placing insuperable demands and expectations upon policy makers. Cultural Considerations Almost twice as many men, than women, believed that they are more effective administrators than women, although not a very higher percent (16 percent men, compared to 9 percent women). An overwhelming majority of both male and female respondents rejected the statement that, ”Women are not as dependable as men because of women's biological and personal characteristics” (91 percent 171 men, as compared to 96 percent women). The fact that only 2 percent of the men, as well as 2 percent of the women, agreed with the idea does not seem to register any bias. However, when this variable was correlated with "Women lack the drive to become administrators," to see if there might be a relationship, a higher correlation for men was obtained. The next statements (variables) were then crossed: "Men know more than women about how to seek and obtain opportunities to become administrators, and ”Women generally have a lower level of achieve- ment motivation than men.’ The correlation for men was significant and the women's was not. The statement, ”Women are more likely to seek proximity to Others than work independently" was not rejected. Fifty-eight percent of both male and female respondents disagreed with this statement. When this variable was correlated with, ”Women are better organizers than men, an interesting result occurred. The men's correlation was significantly higher than that for women. Perhaps, men are more posi- tive in their thinking about their counterparts' organizational skills than women are themselves. The ability to work well with others seems to be viewed by the men in the sample, as a desirable quality. Women did not correlate as high on these two statements (variables). Both statements, (I) "A male spouse would be threatened by a competent career—oriented wife,“ and (2) ”Women who compete with men usually lose their popularity, were rejected. Six percent of the respondents disagreed with the first variable, and 65 percent with the second. I72 These observations may suggest that some male professors have different expectations about female performance than of their own- expectations based not on ability. Some bias would seem to be indicated. Schmuck2 attributes sex-bias toward women as capable leaders in educa- tion to men as the manipulators of the profession. Men as gatekeepers to the profession-—consciously and unconsciously, formally and infor— mally-encourages males and discourages females from becoming adminis- trators. The control of our institutions is clearly structurally dif- ferentiated by sex. This part of the analysis seem to indicate a trend toward women rejecting the sex-stereotyping views men being superior to women in leadership roles. Educational Factors When the two statements (variables), ”Female students who never experience women in leadership positions are not likely to develop aspirations or values that move beyond traditional stereotypes," and "Most administrators in my schooling process were male” were tested, men's correlation was slightly higher than women's. These data indicate both men and women feel there is a need for more female models in educa— tional administration that may serve as a catalyst for feminine aspira— tion. Both male and female respondents rejected the idea that college courses were designed for male advancement and emphasis by 56 percent. Interestingly, a higher percent of women disagreed with the idea of 2Schmuck, "Sex Differentiation," p. 86. 173 feeling uncomfortable in a higher education administration class of all males (86 percent women, as compared to 74 percent men). Women are just as confident, if not more so, about their academic perform- ance than their counterparts. Even more significant, 48 percent men contrasted to 78 per- cent of the women have received encouragement from female administra- tors to apply for an administrative job. This could attribute to the fact that only 36 percent of the men have worked for a female admin- istrator, as have 7l percent of the women. The little experience men have had working for a female administrator may have lessened this factor. A large majority of both men and women rejected the idea that they would feel more comfortable working for a male administrator, (80 percent women, 67 percent men). That only l2 percent of the men indicated they would feel more comfortable working for a male rather than a female administrator could denote an increased acceptance of women into administrative positions. Could women be underestimating the degree of their acceptance by men into the administrative ranks? When this variable was correlated with, "Women administrators have less ll power to make decisions than men, males obtained a significant corre— lation. Women obtained a correlation of no significance. Male respondents registered a high agreement with the idea that in their institution both men and women are encouraged to apply for administrative positions (73 percent men, 50 percent women). This 174 part of the analysis seems to be indicating that men view women as competitive equals moreso than women view themselves. If women in the sample were responding to this issue from personal experience, more authority would lend itself to the female opinion. Personal Perspectives The following statements were not rejected: (l) "I have too many family responsibilities to seek an administrative position,"-- (8l percent of the respondents disagreed); (2) "In my home, I was en- couraged to get a college degree,"——(9 percent of the respondents disagreed with this statement); (3) "I have personally received en- couragement from an administrator in my institution to apply for an administrative position,—-(58 percent of respondents disagreed). When the third statement was correlated with "I would be eager to become an administrator, even if I had to move somewhere else,” the following results occurred. The women obtained a higher correlation than the men. Correlating statements, "I have planned Specifically for advancement in higher education administration," and ”I would be eager to become an administrator even if I had to move somewhere else," brought the following results. Male respondents' obtained correlation was higher than women's. If the sample is valid, both women and men are willing to move in order to fill an administrative position. The fact still remains that very few men or women in the sample had applied for administrative positions. (4) The statement "I have a negative image of university/college administrators" was also rejected with 53 percent of the respondents disagreeing with the idea. 175 Women, in the sample, felt that they need to know a few administrators in order to win their support for an administrative position, more so than men (53 percent women, compared to 40 percent men). Since men are for the most part in control of the mechanisms whereby administrators are chosen, women may feel there is a tendency for built-in bias to exist within the selection process. Psychological Aspects This area of the questionnaire indicates that women are not as confident of their leadership ability as men. When variables, ”I feel confident in most leadership positions,‘ and ”If I applied for an ad— ministrative position, I feel I might be a top contender,‘ were corre- lated, the men registered slightly higher. When statements, “I feel ll confident in most leadership positions, and ”Administrators in my institution would react favorably if I became an administrator,' were correlated, the men also registered a higher relationship between the two. Fifty-six percent of the men and 32 percent of the women simply would rather not compete for an administrative position. Correlating ”I am satisfied with my present employment and would not seek an administrative position“ with the above idea of competitiveness, reinforces the afforementioned statement. The males' correlation was significantly higher. Men, more so than women, would rather not compete. Females, on the other hand, seem to be very interested in seeking administrative employment. When statements, ”I would be willing to further my education or training for an administrative position," and “Being an administrator would enhance my self-image” were tested, women 176 correlated higher. As earlier noted, men may view administration more cynically than women. The following two variables, when correlated, were not signifi- cant for men, but were for women, “I would rather not compete for an administrative position,' and "Seeking an administrative position involves too much "politics. Perhaps, it is the women who are more in touch with reality regarding administration in higher education. The data seem to indicate that women are interested in competing for administrative jobs. The data also seem to suggest that women professors are not contented to stay in the classroom and/or conduct research, but they are remaining in the classroom for the most part. Though both men and women of the sample seem to feel confident about their administrative ability, very few actually compete for the positions. The data raise another question. Why is it that so few profes- sors apply for administrative positions in higher education? Could it be, as previously mentioned, that impossible demands are being placed upon most administrators, thus, making administration less attractive? The World of Work When tested as a Single variable, women in higher numbers agreed that “Men advance faster in administration simply because they are men” (74 percent women, 38 percent men). When this item was correlated with, ”The white-male club promotes men over women for positions in administration,I significant high correlations registered for both males and females. These data could be reinforcing the hard core fact that women really are at a disadvantage when competing with men. 177 The following statement was not rejected: "People who are at administrative levels are often asked to compromise their principles.” Sixty-eight percent of the respondents met with agreement on this item. A higher percentage of women disagreed with the idea that their rpresent position provides too much security to seek an administrative position (75 percent women, and 65 percent men). However, correlating this statement with, ”I consider that working with college students is more rewarding than administration,“ brought the following results. Males' obtained correlation was not significant. However, women's correlation was significant. A higher percentage of men disagreed with the idea of being willing to ”go for broke" in their quest for an administrative position (87 percent men, compared to 73 percent women). However, both men and women did not reject the idea that there is too much competition in trying to become an administrator, an overall 66 percent of the respond- ents agreed. The data seem to suggest that there is little competition by either sex for positions in higher educational administration. Summary of Conclusions The research results seem to point to the following factors: 1. A small percentage of men and women professors sampled, compete for administrative jobs. 2. Women's aspiration levels are slightly higher than are men's. 3. Women are not as confident about their administrative ability as are men. 178 4. Not only women's aspirations decrease as the responsibilities of the job increase, but men's did too. 5. Large majorities of professors, male nor female, do not aspire to be administrators in our institutions of higher learning. The following statistics will support this conclusion and reveal the aspiration level of men and women for each administrative position tested: a. Chief Academic Officer - 17 percent men, as compared to 39 percent women b. Dean of a Major College - 22 percent men, as compared to 38 percent women c. Administrative Vice—President - 9 percent men, as compared to 21 percent women d. University/College President — 10 percent men, as compared to 19 percent women 6. Women seem to be rejecting the sex-stereotyping views of men being superior in leadership roles. 7. Although some male bias against women seems to be perceived, it is probably decreasing and men's acceptance of women into the administrative ranks seems to be increasing. 8. Women's perception that there are unfair odds against them, discourages women from seeking administrative jobs. 9. Results from this study indicate that men today seem to be more aware that family responsibilities are not incompatible with women's careers in higher educational administration. 179 Recommendations Much has been written about women in educational administration, but a quick glance around this country will Show that, in higher education, women are generally administering women—related programs, affirmative action, women's projects, and women's colleges. Little has been written or researched, however, to suggest what institutions of higher education are or should be doing to equip women to move upward into the central administrative structure. Even in the face of federal legislation we are aware of what institutions are doing to train, recruit and promote capable women into responsible administrative positions. At best, the answer is ”not much” and in most cases, a definite "nothing”. The question then becomes, not what are institutions doing for women, but rather what are women doing for themselves and what are they willing to do for each other. Women must learn to work together. Obviously, competence, the graduate training and academic credentials associated with leadership are not enough. Some women find it diffi- cult, because of their socialization process, to become allies with other women; some professional women have tended to be intolerant and suspicious of other professional women. The I'old boy” network has always existed to teach those important “informal" ropes of the profession to chosen male proteges: the introductions to professional colleagues, the personal recommen- dation for fellowships, the intervention for those top job opportunities. Those women aspiring to be educational leaders must learn the skills associated with teamwork and two—way communication for effective professional leadership. They must begin to seek out and provide 180 opportunities for other women, through inservice programming and intern experiences. Women must accept the responsibility to recommend and recruit capable women whenever their input is solicited and to speak up with recommendations when it is not. Thus, it is recommended that: Special training institutes and internships for women in higher education administration at all levels be increased. Programs "for women only” are necessary to help overcome legacies of prejudice, self-doubt, and absence of role models. Effective programs for moving into, as well as maintaining women in academic administrative posts have become an essential vehicle. This tactic has been one of the most popular strategies of the 1970's for facilitating the entry of women into academic administration. The early programs were founded on the assumption that faculty women needed compensatory education because they had been excluded from both formal and informal training experiences which prepared male faculty for senior administrative posts. More recently established programs for women have an increased emphasis on the managerial skills and fiscal knowledge that are generally seen as necessary for administrators of both sexes. They also take a broader perspective as to their constituency, welcoming many more women who have adminis- trative but not necessarily faculty positions. There are a number of training programs which are geared toward aiding professional women in academic administration in higher education. Some are: (1) Project FLAME (Female Leaders for Adminis- tration and Management in Education), conducted by the Educational 181 Personnel Development, Consortium D, is funded by the U. S. Office of Education under the Women's Educational Equity Act Program (WEEAP) and is designed to increase ”the professional opportunities for women aspiring to be educational leaders”; (2) Project DELTA (Design for Equity: Leadership Training Attitudes) is also funded by WEEAP. Its main purpose was to develop a model for enhancing the entry of women into administrative leadership positions in higher education and to insure their continued mobility and success in such decision—making roles; (3) the Institute for Administrative Advancement, designed specifically for faculty women sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation of New York and by the Ford Foundation; (4) the Administrative Intern Program for Women in Higher Education (this program does not necessarily require its interns to hold advanced degrees); (5) the Summer Institute for Women in Higher Education Administration, sponsored by Higher Education Resource Services and funded by the Donner Foundation which stresses the creation of professional networks. Despite the benefits of administrative training programs for academic women, one must realize that supplemental programs do not substitute for academic credentials; the terminal degree, and the tenure—track position. Women who consider entering a training program should be aware that the benefits of such a program can be limited. Such programs will introduce women to the general nature of adminis- tration and can be useful in making or modifying career plans. They also provide access to female role models. They contribute to a woman's sense of professional identity, they increase her visibility, and they can provide access to important professional networks. For women with 182 the necessary credentials, a training institute or internship can lead to rewards such as: raises, responsibility, and new and more opportunities. It has been predicted that the 19805 and 905 is the no-growth phase of higher education. If this prediction is true, tenured faculty (predominantly male) may be increasingly attracted to administrative posts as their chances for mobility as faculty members decline. Even those women who have attained tenured positions, may face even more stiff competition from their male counterparts for senior adminis- trative positions. This prediction argues not only for improved training but also for increased vigilance in enforcing affirmative action programs. It is also recommended that: Women in academe act as mutual role-models and support for each other—-that is role-models as female professionals. The establishment of ”support groups” within the academic community should be developed to assist women in a number of ways. There should be university wide coordination of services with decen— tralization within the academic departments. By women——faculty, graduate students and undergraduates coming together, each department would have its own support group linking students, faculty, and administrators. Such a formal program may work in the following manner. One person from each group would be liaison person; she would seek the aid and advice of special service offices on campus in planning departmental organization, programming, and counseling. This collective body would 183 get to know each other, serve as a supportive system, and provide information channels of communication which are used so regularly by male professionals. Therefore, a sense of pride in their womanhood would be instilled in these women and they would be able to identify with each other's successes. Given the lack of female models in the profession and in the training programs for educational administration, a woman entering higher education generally evaluates her own future in terms of limited ambitions and possibilities. It is the responsibility of those women who are now on college and university campuses to serve as "mentors”, to make sacrifice if necessary to see that opportunities for women begin to become fair, and equitable-to survive. Group objectives for this type of structure may consist of the following: 1. to create dialogue among all levels of women 2. to encourage student-faculty contacts 3. to raise self—esteem and competence levels of women 4. to deal with areas concerning career aspirations 5. to provide support on an immediate, professional and personal level 6. to encourage faculty support of each other's professional activities and commitments 7. to assist women in learning the necessary skills, as well as knowledge, needed for successful academic and professional careers 184 8. to build a sense of community and identity among women, and to keep informed on contemporary issues as a basis for action There is a need for some system of support groups among women professionals. More female faculty and administrators' involvement is obviously needed in providing role models of successful academic women. A program of this nature is a necessary adjunct to university life for women. If women think they can ever make any headway without their own base of support and power, or insights into and defenses to deal with the arguments and stereotypes which have sought to alienate women from one another, they are very naive. Only when women unite together can they grow, and succeed within the academic world. It is further recommended that: The equity employed by universities in making appointments to administrative positions should be carefully monitored by women professors and other political pressure groups. An attempt should be made on their part, to identify biased appointed search committee members, and take whatever steps deemed necessary to correct the problem. Women's political influence should be used to make education live up to its promise. It is recommended that: Women seeking administrative roles in higher education should develop a thorough understanding of the nature of discrimination as well as the legal means to combat it. Although a considerable amount of progress has been made in changing laws, women have not obtained all the 185 legal rights due them. While numerous laws exist to guarantee these rights, the problem is educating women and men to the common but subtle aspects of discrimination. The Bakke decision, while disallowing racial quotas in medical schools, still, in essence backed affirmative action. If such programs are desirable to right past racial injustices, they should be equally desirable to right past injustices toward women educators. An under- standing of political and personal power is essential if women are to become effective leaders, to take on the risk, and responsibilities of having the freedom to affect the future of higher education. Recruiting women for high administration positions can be utilized as a mechanism to bring a reasonable balance between men and women in the system. Lastly, it is recommended that: Administration and Higher Education departments within our nation's institutions should promote strong campaigns to attract women to enroll in their programs at the graduate level. The curriculum should be de— signed as to provide beneficial administrative practicum experiences, which would lead to leadership opportunities. Adrienne Rich once said: ”At the top is a small cluster of highly paid and prestigious persons, chiefly men, whose careers entail the services of a very large base of ill-paid persons, chiefly women. . . .In its very structure, then, the university encourages women to continue perceiving themselves as means and not as ends—-as indeed their whole socialization has done.”3 3Adrienne Rich, ”Toward a Woman-Centered University," [pg Chronicle gj_Higher Education, July 21, 1975, p. 32. I86 Suggestions for Further Research Further research would appear to be called for in areas in— cluding a more detailed investigation of many issues raised. The following are suggestions for further research: I. Replicate this study using female administrators in higher education and attempt to identify those areas which were per— sonally and professionally most significant in obtaining an adminis- trative position. 2. Replicate this study using female administrators in higher education and attempt to ascertain how many had a mentor and then make a comparison of the possible advantages enjoyed by those females who had a mentor with those who did not. 3. Construct a study which would compare male attitudes toward female administrators with female perceptions of what male attitudes toward female administrators in higher education are. 4. Construct a study to determine why and how co-educational four-year public institutions which have an unusually large number of women in line positions of academic administration attracted the women administrators. The level of administrative aspiration for their female professors could also be examined as part of the research. 5. Select twenty to thirty women professorsvdkiresponded to this dissertation's questionnaires and interview them to ascertain why they did not aspire for the various levels of administration. APPENDIX LU Form No. F R OFFICE USE ONLY 188 ° ADMINISTRATIVE ASPIRATION QUESTIONNAIRE GENERAL DIRECTIONS: THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IS DESIGNED TO OBTAIN THE OPINIONS 0F PROFESSORS 0F MICHIGAN‘S UNIVERSITIES CONCERNING THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE ASPIRATION. ASPIRATION IS A TERM USED TO DESCRIBE THE SEEKING AFTER 0R ACTIVELY APPLYING FOR A PARTICULAR LEVEL OF EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION. IT IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE REGARDING EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL ADMINISTRATIVE APPLICANTS. WHAT IS WANTED IS YOUR OWN POINT OF VIEW ABOUT EACH OF THE STATEMENTS IN PARTS I, 11. AND III OF THE QUESTION- NAIRE. PART I INDICATES ACTUAL ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS: PART II SIMPLY SEEKS DEMOGRAPHIC DATA TO AID IN ANALYZING RESULTS OBTAINED. YOUR ANSWERS WILL BE KEPT STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL AND AT NO TIME WILL INDIVIDUALS BE IDENTIFIED. AFTER READING EACH ITEM IN PART III. INDICATE THE EXTENT OF AGREEMENT WITH YOUR POINT OF VIEW ON EACH ITEM BY ENCIRCLING THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE SELECTED. PART I ANSWER EACH ITEM UNDER ”LEVEL OF ASPIRATION" WITH AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE FROM BELOW. NUMBERS MAY BE USED AS OFTEN AS NECESSARY. l -- I HAVE ALREADY APPLIED FOR THIS POSITION. 2 -- I WOULD ASPIRE TO THIS POSITION. 3 -- IT IS UNLIKELY THAT I WOULD ASPIRE TO THIS POSITION. 4 —- I WOULD NEVER APPLY FOR THIS POSITION. LEVEL OF ASPIRATION: l. CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER _ 2. DEAN OF A MAJOR COLLEGE __ 3. ADMINISTRATIVE VICE—PRESIDENT _ 4. COLLEGE PRESIDENT _ 5. OTHER __ (PLEASE SPECIFY) PART II DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ANSWER EACH OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: l. WHAT IS YOUR AGE? 7. WHAT IS YOUR RACIAL GROUP? 45 () I 20—29 () I. NATIVE AMERICAN () 2. 30-39 () 2. BLACK () 3. 40-50 () 3. ASIAN AMERICAN () 4 OVER 50 I) 4. CAUCASIAN ) s. HISPANIC 2. WHAT IS YOUR SEX? () 6. AMERICAN INDIAN () I. MALE () 7. OTHER () 2. FEMALE 8. WHAT LEVEL OF EDUCATION HAVE YOU COMPLETED? 16 3. l(IlHAI Is YOUR SIBLING PLACEMENT IN YOUR FAMILY? () I_ Doctomg ) l. VOUNGEST CHILD 2. GRADUATE HOURS BEY N T ' () 2 SECOND YOUNGEST TO MIDDLE () 3. MASTER'S DEGREE 0 D MAS ER 5 ) 3. MIDDLE CHILD 4. BACHELOR'S DEGREE () 4. MIDDLE T0 SECOND OLDEST U I) 5 OLDEST CHILD 9. HOW MANY YEARS HAVE YOU BEEN TEACHING? 17 () 6 ONLY CHILD ( l. FIRST YEAR 2. l-S 4, WHAT IS YOUR MARITAL STATUS? () 3. 6-l0 (I ; IIIIIGIED () 4. lI-IS R 5. l5 OR MOR () 3. MARRIED WITH CHILDREN 0 E (I 4. DIVORCED/HIDOHED HITH CHILDREN l0. IDENTIFY THE EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY IN WHI H Y R N W 19 () 5. DIVORCED/HIDOUED NITHOUT CHILDREN TEACHING? c 0” A E 0 () 6 SEPARATED () I. URBAN ‘ () 2. SUBURBAN 5. HOW MANY CHILDREN DO YOU HAVE? () 3. RURAL () I. 0 I) 2. ONE ll. DID YOU ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN SPORTS AS A YOUTH? 19 () 3. THO-FOUR () I. TEAM () 4. FIVE OR MORE () 2. INDIVIDUAL I) 3. BOTH TEAM AND INDIVIDUAL 6. WHAT IS YOUR PRESENT TEACHING LEVEL? () 4_ 010 Not PARTICIPATE () I. ASSISTANT PROFESSOR () 2. ASSOCIATE PRO‘ESSOR 12. HOW MANY YEARS DID YOUR MOTHER WORK DURING YOUR GROWING 3° () 3. FULL TROFESSOR YEARS? EITHER FULL OR PART—TIME? E) l. 0 2. 1-5 () 3. 6—l0 () 4. ALL 21 22 23 2M 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 3M 35 36 37 38 39 H0 uI N2 13. 189 HAVE YOU EVER WORKED FOR A FEMALE ADMINISTRATOR? () I. YES (I 2. NO PART III RATING SCALE: MDUNH DIRECTIONS: ENCIRCLE YOUR RESPONSE TO EACH ITEM. CULTURAL CONSIDERATIONS I. 2. 10. II. MY COLLEAGUES WOULD REACT UNFAVORABLY IF I BECAME AN ADMINISTRATOR. FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL REASONSI MEN ARE MORE EFFECTIVE ADMINISTRATORS THAN WOMEN. WOMEN ARE BETTER ORGANIZERS THAN MEN. WOMEN ARE MORE LIKELY TO SEEK PROXIMITY TO OTHERS THAN TO WORK INDEPENDENTLY. IN A GIVEN TASK. WOMEN ARE MORE LIKELY TO ASK FOR HELP OR RELY ON OTHERS IN FACE OF A THREATI THAN ARE MEN. IN GENERAL, I CONSIDER WOMEN NOT AS DEPENDABLE AS MEN BECAUSE OF WOMEN‘S BIOLOGICAL AND PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS. A MALE SPOUSE WOULD BE THREATENED BY A COMPETENT. CAREER- ORIENTED WIFE. WOMEN GENERALLY HAVE A LOWER LEVEL OF ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION THAN MEN. MEN KNOW MORE THAN WOMEN ABOUT HOW TO SEEK AND OBTAIN OPPORTUNITIES TO BECOME ADMINISTRATORS. WOMEN LACK THE DRIVE TO BECOME ADMINISTRATORS. COLLEGE WOMEN WHO ATTEMPT TO COMPETE WITH MEN USUALLY DO SO AT THE EXPENSE OF THEIR POPULARITY OR SOCIAL LIFE. EDUCATIONAL FACTORS 12. 13. 14. IS. 16. I7. I8. I9. 20. 2T. WELCOMING WOMEN AS EQUALS INTO THE PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT LEVELS FMY TEND TO DCWNGRADE THE TEACHING PROFESSION. FEMALE STUDENTS WHO NEVER EXPERIENCE WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP POSITIONS ARE NOT LIKELY TO DEVELOP ASPIRATIONS OR VALUES THAT MOVE BEYOND TRADITIONAL STEREOTYPES. WOMEN ADMINISTRATORS HAVE LESS POWER TO MAKE DECISIONS THAN MEN. I FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WORKING FOR A MALE ADMINISTRATOR THAN A FEMALE ADMINISTRATOR. IN MY COLLEGE CAREER. MOST COLLEGE COURSES WERE DESIGNED FOR MALE ADVANCEMENT AND EMPHASIS. I WOULD FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE IN A HIGHER EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION CLASS OF ALL MALES. EDUCATIONAL COUNSELING ENABLED ME TO PLAN FOR ADVANCEMENT IN MY CAREER. THERE HAVE BEEN FEMALE ADMINISTRATORS WHO HAVE ENCOURAGED ME TO SEEK AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. MOST ADMINISTRATORS IN MY SCHOOLING PROCESS WERE MALE. IN OUR INSTITUTION BOTH MEN AND WOMEN ARE ENCOURAGED TO APPLY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE POSITIONS. -- STRONGLY AGREE -- AGREE -- UNDECIDED -- DISAGREE -- STRONGLY DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE UNDECIDED 3 DISAGREE 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 5 '63 NH 105 M6 M7 “8 M9 50 51 52 53 5M 55 56 57 SB 59 60 61 62 63 6k 65 66 67 190 PERSONAL PERSPECTIVES 22. A WOMAN CAN BE A SUCCESSFUL ADMINISTRATOR AND HAPPILY MARRIED AT THE SAME TIME. 23. I FEEL I NEED TO KNOW A FEW ADMINISTRATORS WELL IN ORDER TO WIN THEIR SUPPORT FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. 24. I HAVE TOO MANY FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES TO SEEK AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. 25. MY SPOUSE WOULD BE UPSET IF WE HAD TO MOVE BECAUSE I WAS SELECTED AS AN ADMINISTRATOR. 26. IN MY HOME. I WAS ENCOURAGED TO GET A COLLEGE DEGREE. 27. I HAVE PLANNED SPECIFICALLY FOR ADVANCEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION. 28. WHAT MY SPOUSE THINKS ABOUT AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION HAS AN INFLUENCE ON ME. ‘ 29. I WOULD BE EAGER TO BECOME AN ADMINISTRATOR, EVEN IF I HAD TO MOVE SOMEWHERE ELSE. 3D. I HAVE PERSONALLY RECEIVED ENCOURAGEMENT FROM AN ADMINISTRATOR IN MY INSTITUTION TO APPLY FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. 3T. I HAVE A NEGATIVE IMAGE OF UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE ADMINISTRATORS. PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS 32. I AM SATISFIED WITH MY PRESENT EMPLOYMENT AND WOULD NOT SEEK AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. 33. I FEEL CONFIDENT IN MOST LEADERSHIP POSITIONS. 34. I WOULD BE WILLING TO FURTHER MY EDUCATION OR TRAINING FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. 35. ADMINISTRATORS IN MY INSTITUTION WOULD REACT FAVORABLY IF I BECAME AN ADMINISTRATOR. 36. I HAVE BEEN IN MY PRESENT POSITION TOO LONG TO SEEK AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION NOW. 37. I LIKE DELEGATING TASKS AND WORKING WITH PEOPLE. 38. BEING AN ADMINISTRATOR WOULD ENHANCE MY SELF-IMAGE. 39. IF I APPLIED FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION, I FEEL I MIGHT BE A TOP CONTENDER. 40. I WOULD RATHER NOT COMPETE FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. 4I. ADMINISTRATORS TEND TO BECOME "OUT OF TOUCH” WITH THE TEACHING ENVIRONMENT. 42. SEEKING AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION INVOLVES TOO MUCH ”POLITICS." THE WORLD OF WORK 43. PEOPLE WHO ARE AT ADMINISTRATIVE LEVELS ARE OFTEN ASKED TO COMPROMISE THEIR PRINCIPLES. 44. MY PRESENT POSITION PROVIDES TOO MUCH SECURITY FOR ME TO SEEK AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. 45. MEN ADVANCE FASTER IN ADMINISTRATION WITH LESS EXPERIENCE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE MEN. 46. THE "WHITE—MALE CLUB" PROMOTES MEN OVER WOMEN FOR POSITIONS IN ADMINISTRATION. STRONGLY AGREE I AGREE 2 UNDECIDED 3 DISAGREE 4 STRONGLY DISAGREE 5 fl 191 STRONGLY STRONGLY AGREE AGREE UNDECIDED DISAGREE DISAGREE Ge 47. I SEE A POSITION IN HIGHER EDUCATION ADMINISTRATION As ATTAIRABLE BY ME. I 2 3 4 5 59 48. MEN ARE MORE OFTEN CHOSEN FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION THAN WOMEN. I 2 3 4 5 'IO 49. I AM WILLING TO ‘GO FOR BROKE' IN MY QUEST FOR A POSITION IN ADMINISTRATION. I 2 3 4 5 “ll 50. I CONSIDER THAT WORKING WITH COLLEGE STUDENTS IS MORE REWARDING THAN ADMINISTRATION. T 2 3 4 5 12 5]. THERE IS JUST TOO MUCH COMPETITION IN TRYING TO BECOME AN ADMINISTRATOR. I 2 3 4 5 13 52. BEING A SUCCESSFUL ADMINISTRATOR Is EASIER FOR MEN THAN FOR HOMER. I z 3 I: 5 1M 53. MY UNIVERSITY OR COLLEGE COLLEAGUES ASSISTED ME IN SEEKING AN ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. I 2 3 4 5 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE IN MY EFFORTS To IMPROVE HIGHER EDUCATION. PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM To: DEPT. OF ADMIN. I HIGHER EDUC. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ERICKSON HALL. ROOM 406 EAST LANSING. MI. 48824 75—76 54. Please TTndica‘te your major teaching department. 77—78 55. What do you consider your primary academic (professional) responsibility? 192 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION EAST LANSING - MICHIGAN ' 48824 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION AND HIGHER EDUCATION ERICKSON HALL May 6, 1979 Dear C011eagues: Charlene Savage, one of our outstanding graduate students, is working on a dissertation entitied ”A Study of the ReIationship Between the Scarcity of Women in Higher Educationa] Administrative Positions and the Mu1tip1e Factors Which Infiuence the Career Aspirations of Women Professors.” She has designed a questionnaire which wiII take on1y 15 minutes of your time to compIete. Your responses wi11 he1p us to make some generaIizations about the tota] popuiation. Won't you pIease com- pIete the attached questionnaire and enciose it in the seIf-addressed enveiope. Most Appreciativer, - I , 3 1 Mi] {AUWMN Louis Romano Professor of Education 193 1530 Woodbrook Dr., Apt. 9 East Lansing, MI 48823 May 9, 1979 Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter is an invitation for you to participate in a study considering the factors that are important in aspiring to higher educational administrative positions. The study is being conducted to determine the relative difference, if any, in the administrative aspirations of men and women professors. The purpose of the study is to obtain information upon which to assess the perceived lack of aspiration of women at the administrative levels of higher education. The questionnaire is easy to complete and just a few minutes of your time will provide data that may help educators to assess the factors that influence a career for women in higher educational administration. This survey will be valid only if you will give complete information. Your confidence will be honored. I pledge complete secrecy of in— dividual responses. The results will be reported in statistical form only. No individuals or institutions will be identified. Please answer the enclosed questionnaire and return it in the self- stamped addressed envelope. A return by May 23 would be very much appreciated. The results should prove interesting. If you wish a review of the results when the dissertation is complete, just let me know and I will be happy to oblige. Thank you for your time and interest; they are deeply appreciated. Sincerely, T ,I I . («l/{I‘L -£’4LIF\.'\_ j/{f/ or" ;A, Charlene Savage Candidate for Ph.D. Michigan State University Enclosures BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY "An Overview of Women in the Workforce. National Commission on Working Women. Center for Women and Work. Washingtonj—D.C., Septem er 1978. Astin, Alexander W. "Men Still Dominate Academic Administration.” U.C.L.A. Educator. 1977. Astin, Helen. The Woman Doctorate. Basic Book, 1970. Barry, R., and Wolf, B. ”A History of the Guidance-Personnel Move- ment in Education." A report. Teachers College Columbia University, 1955. Blaska, Betty, and Schmidt, M. ”Women College Students: Self—Concept Conflict and Career.” 1975. Broverman, I., et al., “Sex-role Stereotypes and Clincial Judgments of Mental Health.” Journal gf_Consulting and Clinical Psychology 34, 1970. Clement, Jacqueline Parker. Sex Bias in School Leadership. Illinois: Integrated Education Associates, 1975. Cook, Alice. ”Sex Discrimination at Universities: An Ombudsman's View." American Association of University Professors Bulletin 58 (September 1972 p. 279. Cronin, Joseph M., and Pancrazio, Sally B. "Women as Educational Leaders.” Phi Delta Kappan (April 1979) pp. 583-84. Dale, Charlene T. ”Women Are Still Missing Persons in Administrative and Supervisory Jobs." Educational Leadership 13 (November 1973) pp. 123—27. Davis, A. “Women as a Minority Group in Higher Academics.” The Professional Woman. Massachusettes: Schenkman 1971. Deckard, B. Ih§_Women's Movement. New York: Harper & Row, 1975. Dexter, Elizabeth A. Colonial Women of Affairs: A_Study 9f_Women jfl_Business and the ProTessiohg'ifl_America Before 1776. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1921. 194 195 Digest 2: General Public Bills. Federal Issue Part 1. Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1971. Epstein, C. "Structuring Success for Women: Guidelines for Gate- keepers." Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, gflg_Counselors 37, 1973, pp. 35-36. Faunce, Patricia S. "Psychological Barriers to Occupational Success for Women." Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, gflg_COUn§5Tbrs 40 (Spring 19775 BET‘14o-43. Fecher, Ann. ”Career Patterns of 650 Women Administrators in Non-typical Women's Positions in Public Coeducational Institutions." Unpublished dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1973. "Few Gains Found for Campus Women. [Lg Washington Post. April 8, 1978. Fillmer, H. ”Sexist Teaching-—What You Can Do.” Teacher 91, 1974. Fisher, Francine. "A Study of the Relationship Between the Scarcity of Women in Educational Administrative Positions and the Multiple Factors Which Influence Career Aspirations of Women Teachers.” Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1978. Flexner, Eleanor. Century gf_Struggle. Harvard University Press, 1959. Fley Jo Ann. ”An Honorable Tradition. ” Journal Lf the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, aLd Counselors 29, 1966. Fley Jo Ann. ”The Time to be Properly Vicious. ” Journal of the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, aLd Counselors 37 1974, pp. 50— 58. Friedan, Betty. l§_Changed My_Life. New York: Dell Books, 1977. Gordon, Francine E., and Strober, Myra H. Bringing Women into Management. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1977. Harris, Ann Sutherland. ”The Second Sex in Academe. " American Asso- ciation Lf University Professors Bulletin (Fall 1970) p.283. Harris, Patricia R. "Deans and Students: A Look to the Future.” Journal Lf the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, aLd Counselors 33, 1969, pp. 1— 5. Havinghurst, Robert J., and Neugarten, Bernice J. Society gag Education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1967. 196 Holmstrom, L. "Women's Career Patterns: Appearance and Reality.” ._.—__—._—___—______— Administrators, gflg_Counselors 36, 1973, pp. 77—78. Hook, Sidney. IL§_Hero 13 History. Boston: Beacon Press, 1943. Hornor, Matina. ”A Bright Woman is Caught in a Double Bind. In Achievement Oriented Situations She Worries Not Only About Failure But Also About Success.” Psychology Today 3 (November 1969) pp. 36-38. Hornor, Matina. ”Why Bright Women Fail.” Psychology Today 3 (November 1969) p. 66. Howard, Suzanne. "Why Aren't Women Administering Our Schools?” National Council of Administrative Women in Education. Washington, D.C., 1975, pp. 1-10. Howe, Florence. "Sexism and the Aspirations of Women." Phi Delta Kappan. (October 1973) p. 102. James, E.T.; James, J.T.; and Boyer, P.S. Notable American Women 1607—1950: A_Biographical Dictiona y. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974. Joyner. W. ”Women, Development, and the Challenge. Journal gf_£Lg National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, Eng Counselors 41 (Summer—I9785 pp. 157—61. Junior College Directory, 1973. Kaiser, Jeffrey S. ”Anatomy of an Evolution: Women in Educational Administration." Universit College Quarterly, Michigan State University (March 1979 p. 15. Kievit, Mary Bach. ”Will Jill Make Department Chairman?" American Vocational Journal (November 1974) p. 40. Korda, Michael. Success. New York: Random House, 1977. Landon, Glenda Lee. "Perceptions of Sex Roles Stereotyping and Women Teachers Administrative Career Aspirations.” Ph.D. disserta— tion. University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1975. Lauter, Paul. "The Women's Movement: Impact on the Campus.I Issues 19 Higher Education, pp. 1—11. Lerner, Gerda. "The Lady and the Mill Girl: Changes in the Status of Women in the Age of Jackson." Qg§_American Sisters. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1973. Current 197 Lewis, Edwin C. Professor of Psychology, Iowa State University quoted in [Lg Chronicle 21 Higher Education, February 9, 1970. Lichtenstein, Grace. “Men Hold Most Top College Jobs 5 Years After U.S. Order on Bias: Possible Federal Aid Loss Has Not Increased Opportunities for Women and Minorities.” ID§.ESU York Times, December 6, 1977. McCormack, T. "Styles in Educated Females." Nation 204, 1967, p. 118. Michigan Institutions 9: Higher Education. Michigan Department pf Education. The number of headcount in Michigan universities, Directory, 1978-79. _—.—_——-—_——_— Higher Education Management Services, Michigan Department of Education, Lansing, Michigan, 1978-79. Molloy, John T. The Woman's Dress for Success Book. Chicago: Follett Publishing Company, 1977. Montagu, A. ILg Natural Superiority Women. New York: Collier Books 1974. Mueller, Kate. ”Sex Differences in Campus Regulations." Personnel gag Guidance Journal 32, 1954, pp. 530-36. th 90 Congress, 1St session, Executive Orders 2, 1967. Oppenheimer, Valerie K. "Rising Educational Attainment, Declining Fertility and the Inadequacies of the Female Labor Market.” Demographic gpg Social Aspects g: Population Growth. ed. by Westoff, Charles F., and Parke, Robert, Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972. "Opportunities for Women in Higher Education. on Higher Education, September 1973. Carnegie Commission Palley, Marian Lief. "Women As Academic Administrators in the Age of Affirmative Action.” Journal gf_;Lg_National Association jg: Women Deans, Administrators, apg_Counseiors 42 (Fall 1978) pp. 3-9. Parten, Mildred. Surveys, Polls, gflg_5amples: Practical Procedures. New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1966. Prather, Jane. “Why Can't Women Be More Like Men: A Summary of the Sociopsychological Factors Hindering Women's Advancement in the Professions." American Behavioral Scientist 15 (November/December 19715 pp. 172-83. 198 Press release. "Remarks President Johnson made to Federal Women Award Winners." White House Central Files, Washington, D.C., February 28, 1966. Project on the Status and Education of Women. Association of American Colleges, Washington, D. C. (October 1977) pp. 2-8. Rainsford, George N. Congress and Higher Education in tLe Nineteenth Century. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1972. Reeves, Mary Elizabeth. ”An Analysis of Job Satisfaction of Women Administrators in Higher Education. ” Journal Lf the National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors 38 (April 1975)—pp.133-36. — Reilly, Mary Ellen, and Bouvier, Leon F. "Women in American Society: A Historical and Demographic Profile." Population Profiles. Center for Information on America, pp. 1-8. Rogers, Nancy Lee. "Sex Discrimination in Higher Education: How Has Federal Policy Developed?” Innovator. University of Michigan, 1978, pp. 15-17. Rosenthal, and Jacobson,L Pygmalion in tLe Classroom: Teacher Expectation aLd Pupil 5 Intellectual Development. New York, 1968. ‘" Rossi, Alice S. IL; Feminist Papers. New York: Bantam, 1974. Sax, Gilbert. Empirical Foundations g: Educational Research. New Jersey: Prentice—Hall, 1968. Schetlin, Eleanor. "Remembering the Ladies: Abigail Adams and the Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors," Journal Lf Lhe National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, aLd— Counselors 39 (Summer—1976 65p 158-165. Schmuck, Patricia Ann. Sex Differentiation in Public School Admin- ______—__—————__—_____ istration. Virginia: National Council of Administrative Women in Education, 1975. Selltiz, Claire, et al. Research ip_Social Relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967. Sexton, Patricia C. Women in Education. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa, 197 . Simpson, Lawrence. "Attitudes of Higher Education Agents Toward Academic Women." College gpg_University Business. February 1977. Stinson, Marilyn. "Women in the 70$-Have Opportunities Really Changed?” Journal 9: Business Education 54 (November 1978) pp. 75-88. 199 Taylor, Suzanne. ”Women in Education.I 51% Minority. Connecticut Conference on the Status of Women, National Education Association, 1972. Terman, L.M., and Oden, M.H. The Gifted g: Mid-Life. California and London: Stanford University and Oxford University Press, 1959. Thurston, Alice J. ”A Woman President?! A Study of Two-Year College Presidents.” Journal pf_§fl§_National Association fpp_Women Deans, Administrators, 329 Counselors 38 {Spring 1975) p. 119. Tibbetts, Sylvia-Lee. "Sex Role Stereotyping: Why Women Discriminate Against Themselves." Journal pf_;Lg National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, gpg_Counselors 38 {Summer 19767— pp. 171-77. '“"_ Trevelyan, G. [Lg American Revolution. New York: David McKay, 1964. Truex, D. ”Education of Women, the Student Personnel Profession, and the New Feminism." Journal of the National Association for ___._____..——.___—— Women Deans, Administrators, gpg_Counselors 35, 1971, p 14. U.S. Congress House Committee on Education and Labor. "Discrimination Against Women Hearings." H.R. 16098, 91St Congress, 1970. U.S. Congress House Committee on Education and Labor. Hearings on "Higher Education Act 1969.” H.R. 16098, section 805, 91St Congress, 1St session, 1969. U.S. Congress House. Higher Education Ag; of 1971. H.R. 7248, 92nd Congress, 15t session, 1971. "“ U.S. Congress House. "Remarks by Representative Martha Griffiths on Discrimination Against Women in Universities." Congressional Records, 1970. U.S. Education Amendments of 1972, Washington, D.C.: 2 Section 2671. U.S. President, Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Service, 1964. U.S. President's Commission on the Status of Women. American Women. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1963. Van Nessem Goless, Katherine. Women ip_Education. Washington, D.C.: National Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors, 1977, pp. 14—15. Veblen, Thorstein. IL§_Theory pf_§he Leisure Class. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1899. 200 Verheyden-Hilliard, Mary Ellen. "Kindergarten: The Training for Women in Administration.“ Journal pf_;Lg National Ground Association for Women Deans, Administrators, and Counselors 38 (Summer 19757—51 151. Watley, Donivan, and Kaplan, Rosalyn. "Career or Marriage?: tions and Achievements of Able Young Women.” Journal Vocational Behavior 1, 1971, pp. 36-42. "What Next for U.S. Women." Time. December 5, 1977, p. 19. Aspira- 91 ETERARIE iv lv mp. IV A» 293 02592 2042 'L‘ A l H MlLHlL 1H» II 1.