INFORMATION TO USERS

This reproduction was made from a copy of a manuscript sent to us for publication
and m icrofilm ing. W hile the most advanced technology has been used to p ho­
tograph and reproduce this manuscript, the quality of the reproduction is heavily
dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. Pages in any manuscript
may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify notations which
may appear on this reproduction.
1. Manuscripts may not always be complete. When it is not possible to obtain
missing pages, a note appears to indicate this.
2. When copyrighted materials are removed from the manuscript, a note ap­
pears to indicate this.
3. Oversize materials (maps, drawings, and charts) are photographed by sec­
tioning the original, beginning at the upper left hand comer and continu­
ing from left to right in equal sections w ith small overlaps. Each oversize
page is also film ed as one exposure and is available, for an additional
charge, as a standard 35m m slide or in black and white paper format. *
4. Most photographs reproduce acceptably on positive microfilm or micro­
fiche but lack clarity on xerographic copies made from the microfilm. For
an additional charge, all photographs are available in black and w hite
standard 35m m slide format. *

♦For more information about black and white slides or enlarged paper reproductions,
please contact the Dissertations Customer Services Department.

University
M icrofilm s
International

8 6 0 34 68

P ie r c e , M e lo d y C .

TH E S IM IL A R IT IE S A ND D IFFER EN C ES OF TH E S E L F-P E R C E IV E D R O L E S
AND A T T IT U D E S O F M IN O R IT Y AND W HITE PR O F E S S IO N A L W O M E N
E M P LO Y E D A T M IC H IG A N S T A T E UNIVERSITY

Michigan State University

University
Microfilms
International

Ph.D .

300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

Copyright 1985
by
Pierce, Melody C.
All Rights Reserved

1985

PLEASE NOTE:

In all cases this material has been film ed in the best possible w ay from the available copy.
Problems encountered w ith this d o cu m en t have been identified here with a check mark

1.

Glossy photographs or p a g e s ______

2.

Colored illustrations, paper or p rin t_______

3.

Photographs with dark b a c k g ro u n d _____

4.

Illustrations are poor c o p y _______

5.

Pages with black marks, not original c o p y ______

6.

Print shows throu g h as there is text on both sides of p a g e ________

7.

Indistinct, broken o r small print on several pages

8.

Print exceeds m argin req u irem en ts______

9.

Tightly bound c o p y with print lost in s p in e ________

V .

10.

C om puter printout pages with indistinct p rin t_______

11.

P a g e (s )_____________ lacking w hen material received, and not available from school or
author.

12.

P a g e (s )_____________ seem to b e missing in numbering only as text follows.

13.

Two pages n u m b e re d

14.

Curling and w rinkled p a g e s _______

15.

Dissertation contains pages w ith print at a slant, filmed as received__________

16.

Other

. Text follows.

_______________________________________________________________________

University
Microfilms
International

THE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF THE SELF-PERCEIVED ROLES AND
ATTITUDES OF MINORITY AND WHITE PROFESSIONAL WOMEN EMPLOYED
AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
By
Melody C. Pierce

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Educational Administration

1985

In Memory of
Mary T. Sarkar Pierce
and
Issac Crosby, Ph.D.
Stephens College
Columbia, Missouri

Copyright by
MELODY C. PIERCE
1985

ABSTRACT
THE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF THE SELF-PERCEIVED ROLES AND
ATTITUDES OF MINORITY AND WHITE PROFESSIONAL WOMEN EMPLOYED
AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
By
MELODY C. PIERCE

The Problem
The purpose of this study was to investigate the attitudes and
self-perceived roles of minority and white professional women employed
at the same institution. A significant aspect of this exploration has
been the comparison of these two groups and their perceptions of their
role and job responsibilities.
Methodology
The population for the study consisted of one hundred and eightythree respondents. Three samples were selected: Sample I included fiftythree women who identified themselves as having minority status; Sample
II included a matched selection of fifty-six white females; and Sample
III included seventy-four white females selected at random from academic
disciplines and administrative units not represented in Samples I and
II.
The participants responded to the data-gathering questionnaire,
which focused on three areas: one, self-perceived roles and personal
viewpoints; two, educational and professional information; and three,
demographic data.

Principle Findings
1.

Levels of education were significant, with minority
respondents holding a greater percent of advanced degrees
when compared to the white groups.

2.

Affiliation with professional groups was more significant
for the minority and the matched white group, but not for
white females selected at random.

3.

Types of organizations, professional and social, were
significant with minority women participating to a greater
percent than either of the white groups.

4.

Minority respondents perceived themselves to be equally or
better informed on problems, issues, and developments at
the department, college, or university level than the
white respondents.

5.

Written reports, forms, and contract grants and proposals
created more pressure and anxiety for minority and matched
white respondents than for white females selected at
random.

6.

Minority respondents perceived their opportunities for
promotion and/or tenure to be less than that of white
respondents.

7.

Minority respondents believed that governmental pressure
for affirmative action was instrumental in securing their
current positions at this institution, whereas white
respondents do not believe this to be true in their case.

8.

The normal search and selection process and general
application procedure were perceived by white respondents

as having the greatest impact on securing their current
position.
9.

Minorities believed that academic preparation, affirmative
action policy, sex/gender, and race were more instrumental
in securing their initial positions at this institution
than did white respondents.

10.

Conference presentations were significant, with minority
respondents making substantial contributions in comparison
to either of the white groups.

11.

Minority women interacted, to a significant degree, with
only minority students, more so than did white women with
white or minority students.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The writer wishes to express appreciation to all those significant
others who assisted in making this dissertation a reality.
To Dr. Max R. Raines, Advisor and Chairperson of my doctoral
committee, for his support, guidance and encouragment throughout the
doctoral program; and to other committee members, Drs. Mildred Erickson,
Howard Hickey and Donald Nickerson for their continued assistance
throughout my graduate studies.
To Dr. Ralph Bonner, Director of Human Relations and Diana Algra,
Director of Womens Program and to their staff, a special thanks for
making this study possible.
To several individuals who influenced the writer’s professional
development during the past five years, Drs. Cynthia Johnson, Lee
Meadows, Clifford Pollard, Phillip Stubblefield, Doris Yates, a warm
thanks.
To Dr. Carolyn Callahan, a special thanks for her time, research
and statistical expertise; and for the warm hospitality.
To Patricia M. Lowrie and the Dean’s Office of the College of
Veterinary Medicine, a special appreciation for providing graduate
assistantships that made the completion of the dissertation a reality.
To Steven J. Green, a special thanks for his time and computer
expertise in facilitating the computer programs used to analyze the
survey results.

To special individuals, a warm thanks for providing all the warm
fuzzies and many a laugh over the past several years, Pam Bellamy,
Winnie Griffieth, Aurelia (Dee) Harris, Pamela Jones, Carmen
Sanguinetti, Nancy Silvers, Vivien Walls-Collins, and Betty Wilson.
To Dr. Victoria Kingsbury, a special thanks for her editorial and
typing expertise.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables ...................... .........

I.

viii

INTRODUCTION
Overview of Study ...........................................
Significance of Study .......................................
Statement of Problem ................................
Methodology ................................................
Procedure ..................................
Hypotheses Tested ..........................................
Basic Assumptions ..........................................
Data Treatment .............................................
Limitations of Study .......................................
Definition of Terms ...........................
Overview of Dissertation
..............................

1
6
9
10
11
11
12
12
12
13
14

II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Introduction ............................................... 15
The Education of Women and Its Impact
Upon Society ..........................................
15
History of Academic and Professional Women ................ 17
Factors and Conditions that Influence the Career
Development of Professional Women ....................... 30
Summary ..................................................... 63

III. METHODOLOGY
Introduction ...............................................
Population and Sample .............
Development of Survey Instrument ..........................
Collection of Data .........................................
Analysis of Data ...........................................
Hypotheses Tested .................
Summary .................................................

64
65
65
67
68
71
75

IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA
Introduction .............
Demographic Data ...........................................
Results .....................................................
Discussion .........................................
Summary ....................................................

V.

76
77
79
131
131

SUMMARY, DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATONS
Introduction ..............................................
Discussion ................
Implications ..............................................
Recommendations ...............
Conclusion
..........................................

133
136
143
146
147

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ...............................................

150

APPENDICES
A. Letters
............................................. 158
B. Open-ended Responses ................................... 163
C. Questionnaire .......................................... 188

vii

LIST OF TABLES

Table
3.1
3.2
3.3
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
4.16
4.17
4.18
4.19
4.20
4.21
4.22
4.23
4.24
4.25
4.26
4.27
4.28
4.29
4.30
4.31

Description

Page

Sample by Race .............................................. 74
Sample and Record of Responses ........................
74
Non-useable Questionnaires .......
75
Age by Group ................................................ 81
Age by Group ................................................ 81
Marital Status by Group
.................................. 82
Level of Educational Attainment by Group .................. 82
Level of Educational Attainment by Group .................. 83
Salary by Group .................................
83
Salary by Group ............................................. 84
Children by Group ........................................... 84
Children by Group ........................................... 84
Years in Current Position .................................. 85
Years in Current Position .................................. 85
Michigan State University Population by Group ............. 85
Michigan State University Population by Group ........
86
Current Levels - F a c u l t y .............
86
Current Levels - Administrative/Professional .............. 87
Current Levels - Administrative/Professional .............. 87
ANOVA - Employment Rank or Position ........................ 90
Employment Rank or Position by Group ....................... 91
ANOVA - Effectiveness of Network and/or
Support Group .............................................. 94
Effectiveness of Network and/or SupportGroup
by Group ................................................... 95
ANOVA - Decision-Making Process ............................ 99
Decision-Making Process by Group .......................... 100
Opportunities for Upward Mobility ......................... 104
Opportunities for Upward Mobility by Group
........... 105
Factor Analysis for Pressure & Anxieties
Characteristics .......................................... 107
Factor Analysis for Job Satisfaction
Characteristics .....................
108
Factor Analysis of Factors that Limit or
Hinder Professional Goals ................................ 109
ANOVA - Institutional, Personal, and Career
Barriers or Options ...............
112
Institutional, Personal, and Career Barriers or
Options by Group ........................................ 113
Limitation in Publishing .................................. 117
Professional Contributions ................................ 117

viii

4.32
4.33
4.34
4.35
4.36

ANOVA - Strategies for Maintaining
Professional Standing ..............................
Strategies for Maintaining Professional
Standing by Group ..............
ANOVA - Environment ..................................
Environment by Group ......................................
Characteristics of Each Group .................

ix

118
119
123
125
130

Chapter I
OVERVIEW OF STUDY

The major thrust of this study has been to build a link between
two major bodies of research and literature.

There appear to be

distinct trends in the way professional women, minority and white, are
discussed in the literature.

White female researchers tend to draw

their samples from the white female population, while black researchers
focus on the concerns of the black population.

However, only a very few

address the concerns of the minority American Indian, Asian American,
Black, Hispanic professional woman.
Further research on the professional woman is called for by Jones
and Welch (1979).

These writers make three important points:

One,

minority women have traditionally been defined by others; two, more
research is needed that focuses on minority professional women who
assume nontraditional roles in society; and three, there needs to be
more investigation into the differences between the same sex group.
It is believed that further investigation into the different
socioeconomic status, profession, races, career, and educational
patterns would more likely provide greater insight into the development
of women (Jones and Welch, 1979).

This need is further supported by

Allen's (1981) studies which indicated that the status, roles, and
attitudes of black females have generally been neglected by social
researchers.

The lack of research into these areas is believed to

contribute to increased misinterpretation of their position in our
society.

1

2
The need for further study in this area is suggested by Swann and
Witty (1980).

They suggested that the more black professional women

become aware and understand themselves and the politics of higher edu­
cation the better they will be able to make career decisions which in
turn will have a tremendous impact on their future upward mobility in
the higher education sphere.
Various dissertation studies that examine characteristics, atti­
tudes, career development, leadership styles and various other aspects
of the professional female's makeup have a tendency to be limited.

The

majority focus only on women at the administrative level, or focus only
on black or white females separately, or fail to analyze minority female
responses separately.

The rather small number of black professional

women employed in colleges and universities, outside of traditional
black institutions, may be one factor that would influence the number of
black professional women included in these types of studies.
This study was designed to take a closer look at this issue.
explored role and status perceptions;

It

just how different or similar in

these self-perceptions and attitudes are black and white professional
women employed at the same institution?
rests on three factors.

The uniqueness of this study

One, research on black professional women is

scarce, largely due to the fact that this group of women is generally
categorized under one of two titles— minority or women in general.

Two,

there is a very limited number of sources that address the role or
condition of the black professional woman in the academic arena.

More­

over, these few writings focus on the role of the black professional
woman administrator and do not include other essential roles these women
play in the academic setting, as faculty, staff and other professionals.

3
Three, the literature covered in ERIC, the Dissertation Abstract Index,
and the Social Service Index does not include an empirical study which
compares the perceptions of minority and white professional women
employed in the same institutions of higher education, thus controlling
in part for most internal variables.
Has the status of professional women in the academic arena of
higher education historically reflected society's expectations of women?
It was noted by Graham (1973) that male and female professionals are
comparable along status lines when they began working in the
professional arena.

But with the advancement of age and years one

notices increasing discrepancy in their status and rank.

Traditionally,

males move into positions of higher status, while females are usually
clustered at the lower levels of the academic ladder.

Various

explanations have been advanced to explain this phenomenon.

These

explanations range from the socialization expectations and education
patterns of women to traditional and institutional prejudices
(Schlossberg, 1974).
Major research conducted by Rossi and Calderwood (1973) has
demonstrated the high degree of sex inequalities in hiring, salary,
rank, fringe benefits, and promotion that exist in the academic arena.
Astin's (1973) research indicates that despite current changes and
pressures from affirmative action policies, professional women in higher
education are still largely located in middle and low-level administra­
tive posts, which do not usually lead to top career positions.

In the

area of academic rank, Robinson (1973) concludes that women comprise
more of the lower than upper levels of faculty hierarchies.

Her report

4
illustrates this situation with graphic "pyramids" depicting the
decreasing percentage of women as a function of rank.
Delworth and Jones (1980) in their examination of employment pat­
terns of women administrators state that it is no secret that women are
underemployed in higher education.

An informal observation of the

Chronicle of Higher Education conducted by these authors concludes that
women administrators are following the "musical chair" pattern which is
also typical of ethnic minorities.

In other words, women are moving

along horizontal lines rather than vertical ones, within the institution
or from one campus to another.

Current general observations by Finlay

and Crosson (1981) which support the above statements, include the
following:

Women are under-represented in major college policy-making

positions and are clustered in low-level and middle-level stereotyped
administrative positions; women are paid less than their male counter­
parts and the problem is especially severe for minority women.

The

structure of the job market in higher education is noted by these
authors as presenting limited opportunity es for women in higher
education administration.

The current state of the economy and the

steady-state condition of the majority of colleges and universities is
stated by Finlay and Crosson as having a negative impact on the
administrative opportunities for women.
Various studies (Carroll, 1973; Mosley, 1980; and Swann and Witty,
1980) conclude that black female professionals face an even more
uncertain future than white females. Several terms have been used to
describe the dilemma of the black professional woman in higher education
today:

"an endangered species," "three is a crowd," "another token," or

"caught in a Catch-22."

She has been further described as isolated,

5
underrepresented, underutilized and often demoralized by Carroll, who
asserts that the status of the black female in higher education also
mirrors her impact on the national scene.

The black woman has been

excluded from institutions of higher education as she has been excluded
from all other opportunities.
The bulk of writing that deals with black women appears only in
the contexts of the feminist and the black movements and in affirmative
action activities (Lerner, 1972; Rickman, 1972; Smythe, 1972).

Moore

and Wagstaff (1974) stated that not one single definitive study on black
women educators has been conducted by academicians in predominately
white colleges and universities.

Their review of the literature con­

cludes that writers only allude in passing to black female educators in
colleges and universities.

Women activist organizations have not

isolated and dealt with the problems or concerns of the black profes­
sional women in institutions of
Currently black women are
or "minority women."

higher education.
placed under broadcategories;

"women"

Such labeling practices conceal the finer distinc­

tions of a more specific minority group.

They do not allow one to focus

more clearly on the particular social and cultural variables that influ­
ence and direct women from specific backgrounds, and their professional
and educational environment.
Because of the lack of empirical research in this area we were not
able to determine what the future is for black professional women in
today's colleges and universities.

Again, Moore and Wagstaff (1974)

state that studies in higher education do not mention black women as
academic professionals and that

researchers fail to

report the race

differential, position and rank

of minority women. With a lack of this

6
type of data young black female professionals strike out on a career
track with very little knowledge of the unique conditions, issues and
concerns of black female professionals in higher education.

Significance of the Study
There is a scarcity in the literature of empirical research
addressing the issues of professional minority females in the academic
arena.

Large studies rarely analyze results according to demographic

data such as sex or minority status, which may be due to the small
numbers of minorities included in studies (Menges and Exum, 1983).
Various explanations by Menges and Exum have been espoused to explain
the relatively small number of women and minorities available to pursue
an academic career, mainly, one's socioeconomic profile and sex role
expectations of the American culture. Only a very small percent of
minorities are able to successfully negotiate the high cost of prolonged
education, and the need to support or to raise a family has continued to
pose, in numerous cases, insurmountable obstacles for women and
minorities.
Of the small percent of professional women, minority and non­
minority, who manage to enter the academic arena, an even smaller number
successfully negotiate the tenure and promotion system.

With continued

critical financial cutbacks facing higher education, mobility across
academic institutions for women and minorities has become severely
restricted and has in turn challenged those who wish to remain in their
academic disciplines.

Individuals who have been denied tenure, who are

not in a tenure track position, or who are just entering the academic
job market have been labeled the "hidden professoriate," "proletariats"
or "gypsy scholars" (Menges and Exum, 1983).

Women and minorities are

over-represented in the lower ranks and therefore are particularly
vulnerable to lay-offs during retrenchment and reorganization in an
institution.
Upward mobility in the academic arena centers on faculty members
being able to function in various capacities, such as teaching,
advising, serving on various committees and performing community
services, as well as conducting research and publishing, of which the
latter two are the most critical elements in the promotion and tenure
decision-making processs.

Professional women are faced with a dual

dilemma, that of balancing professional and family responsibilities.
Several studies (Horning, 1980; Menges and Exum, 1983; Moore and
Wagstaff, 1974; and Rossi and Calderwood, 1973) confirm the fact that
teaching responsibilities differ by sex; in other words, women have
traditionally been assigned heavier undergraduate course loads, advise
more students, serve on more committees, which in turn allows limited
time for research and publications.

Academic teaching, per se, is not

viewed as the typical road to tenure, this is confirmed by research
conducted by the Carnegie Institute (Menges and Exum, 1983), that
"teaching does little to strengthen one's professional position."
In the past decade, networking has become an important dimension
for women's advancement into traditionally male power structures.

Green

(1983) defines networking as one, serving to combat isolation, two,
providing women with access to needed information, and three, creating a
vital support system among women who can in turn facilitate the growth
and development of others by advising, mentoring and sponsoring and
providing moral support.

Communication circles in the academic arena

generally consist of clusters of individuals of the same gender and

ethnic background, to which women and minorities have limited access.
In other words, networking can be critical to the advancement of
professional women.
In conclusion, various factors and conditions have been identified
by researchers that are believed to affect professional women in general
and in turn hinder or limit their full participation in the academic
arena.

These factors and conditions are crucial and serve as a

cornerstone for this investigation which will attempt to not only
document the need for additional women in all areas of the university
structure but will also assess the perceptions and attitudes of
professional women currently employed in higher education.

The role of

professional women in academe has been a pressing issue since the early
sixties, but an investigation of the role of professional minority
women, outside of Black institutions, has only recently surfaced in the
literature.

The investigation into the attitudes and roles of minority

and non-minority professionals in predominantly white institutions is
the primary focus in this research.
The data and conclusions provided by this study will reveal the
similarities and differences that are presumed to exist among minority
and majority professional women in a predominantly white institution of
higher education, their reaction to various factors and conditions, and
the avenues that they have created to resolve or negotiate barriers and
conflicts.
These findings will be useful to all professional women employed
in higher education as to their future in their profession or
discipline, to graduate women considering careers in higher education,
to those in the academic area who interact with professional women, and

9
to academic advisors and graduate directors who are responsible for the
developing, planning and implementing of graduate and professional
studies.

Educational institutions that do not currently employ adequate

numbers of professional women will find the conclusions of this study
useful as they evaluate affirmative action policies and guidelines.

Of

particular significance, this research reflects the similarities and
differences of professional women in one academic setting.

Statement of Problem
The purpose of this study has been to explore the attitudes and
self-perceived roles of minority professional women at Michigan State
University and to compare these findings with attitudes and self
perceived roles of white professional women employed at the same
institution holding similar positions.
A significant aspect of this exploration has been the comparison
of similarities and differences that exist between these two groups in
their perceptions of their roles and job responsibilities.
The following specific questions are explored in this study:
1.

What types of positions and/or ranks do minority and white
professional women occupy at Michigan State University?

2.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of the
development of their network and/or support system?

3.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of their
roles or functions in regard to opportunities or abilities
to effect change or to influence the decision-making
processes in their academic departments or administrative
units?

4.

How do these groups compare with respect to their
perceptions of their opportunities for upward mobility?

5.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of their
professional role in terms of institutional, career or
personal barriers, limitations or options?

10
6.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of the
development of their strategies for maintaining their
professional standing?

7.

How do these groups compare in their perception of their
environment?

The data and conclusions provided by this study are useful and
informative to minority and white women entering the academic arena.
They should also be helpful to others within the institutional milieu
who work with, interact with, or come into contact with the professional
female.
Methodology
The sample of this study consisted of three hundred and forty-two
subjects.

Due to the relatively small number of minority professional

women (121) employed at Michigan State University, a census of the
entire minority population was taken.

An equal number of white (121)

professional women was also selected to participate in this study. The
selection of this group was matched against the minority female on rank,
starting date of employment, and academic department or administrative
unit at Michigan State University.
The sample, then, consisted of 121 minority professional women, a
selection of 121 white professional women matched by rank, date of
employment, and academic department or administrative unit, and a random
selection of 100 white professional women drawn from areas not
represented in either of the matched samples.

All respondents were

currently employed and classified by this institution in the following
categories: administrative/professional and faculty.

The total number

of respondents for all three samples is three hundred and forty-two
subjects.

11
Procedure
An exploratory questionnaire was designed using the Moore and
Wagstaff (1974), Swanne and Witty (1981), Mosley (1980), and Hairston
(1981) instruments as models. The final instrument was constructed using
similar type items plus additional items developed by the writer.
The questionnaire requested:

(1) demographic data, (2) educa­

tional and professional information, and (3) data on self perceived
roles and personal view points.

The general purpose was to discern

similarities and differences between the three groups of women.

Hypotheses Tested
The following hypotheses were tested:
1.

2.

There is a significant relationship between the race of
employed female professionals and their rank or position
at Michigan State University.
There is a significant difference between minority and
white professional women relative to their perceptions
the effectiveness of their networks and/or support
systems.

of

3.

There is a significant difference between professional
minority and white females on their perceptions of their
opportunities or abilities to effect change or influence
the decision-making process in their academic departments
or administrative units.

4.

There is a significant difference between professional
minority and white females regarding their opportunities
for upward mobility.

5.

There is a significant difference between minority and
white professional females on their perceptions of their
professional roles in terms of institutional, personal,
and career barriers, or options.

6.

There is a significant difference between minority and
white professional females in their perceptions of the
development of their strategies for maintaining their
professional standing.

12
7.

There is a significant difference between minority and
white professional females on their perceptions of their
environment.

Basic Assumptions
It was assumed, in administering the questionnaire, that the
responding individuals would provide honest and open answers and that it
was feasible to gather direct, consistant, reliable, and valid informa­
tion concerning background, educational, and career data; attitudes and
self-perceived career limitations or barriers; range of influence,
control, and impact; and mobility patterns.

Data Treatment
The data collected from the questionnaire were computer recorded
and processed.

Data were categorized, tallied and compared to determine

similarities and differences between the three groups in the sample.
The statistical methodology incorporated the following measures:

Condescriptive statistic was used to determine basic
distributional characteristics of each variable: frequency,
mean and standard deviation procedures enabled the researcher
to define the parameters of each variable.
The appropriate analysis of variance was used to determine
whether scores on one or more factors differ significantly from
each other, and whether the various factors interact
significantly with each other.
Scheffe post-hoc comparison of the mean was used to test the
direction of the statistical significance of the F ratio
between the three groups.
Factor analysis procedure was used to further explore and
examine new groupings of variables.

Limitations of the Study
The population of this study was limited to professional women
currently employed at Michigan State University as administrative/

13
professional personnel or as members of the faculty.

The findings do

not generalize beyond this group.
The study is limited by the factors inherent in the utilization of
a questionnaire, which include, but are not limited to, the difficulties
in securing the complete cooperation of the individuals being asked to
participate.
The design of the questionnaire does not allow for the respondents
to answer each item simply using yes/no categories.

Therefore,

respondents were compelled to indicate their responses to the categories
indicated in an item without expressing a clear yes/no response in the
subject items.

Definition of Terms

Administrative/Professional— females employed full-time
primarily in positions whose titles denote authority; these
positions entail broad responsibilities for decision-making,
supervision of staff, and general management functions at
Michigan State University.
Faculty— female educators employed full time whose duties
mainly focus on academic instruction at Michigan State
University.
Network— a communication system or channel which interconnects
or interrelates with other systems or groups.
Support systems— a system of mutual support among superiers,
peers, and subordinates with information and benefits flowing
in multiple directions.
Environment— one's setting or community.
Control— having the ability, power, or authority to guide or
manage.
Influence— having the power or capacity of causing an effect in
a direct, indirect or intangible way.
Upward mobility— an upward or vertical movement, promotion, and
advancement opportunities within or outside the institutional
structure.

14
Career barriers— constraints or limitations which prevent
advancement toward a career goal or objective.

Overview of Dissertation
Chapter I:

The introduction/problem statement, the methodology, the
assumption, the limitations, the definition of terms, and
the overview.

Chapter II:

Literature review.

Chapter Ill:

The methods of data collection, the design and development
of the questionnaire instrument, interview procedure, and
analysis of data.

Chapter IV:

Report and analysis of the findings of the study.

Chapter V:

Summary of the study, conclusions and recommendations for
further research.

Chapter II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This review of the literature serves as a background to the
research undertaken as part of this dissertation. The following pages
present a review of the literature supporting the specific questions
outlined in the previous section. Topics presented as background in
Chapter One will be expanded upon. This chapter is divided into the
following subtopics:
I.

The Education of Women and its Impact upon Society

II.

The History of Academic and Professional Women
Discrimination
Socialization

III. Factors and Conditions that Influence the Career Development of
Professional Women
Factors and Conditions
Status and Rank
Attitudes and Perceptions
Ability to Effect Change
Conflicts and Barriers
Role Models and Mentors
Support Groups
Upward Mobility
Career Pattern and Life Styles
Networks
Educational Patterns
Blaska's (1976) study has illustrated certain factors that refer
to the impact of professional women upon the larger society.

The

limited number of women professionals and faculty members curtails role
modeling and deprives women of demand and challenges from male pro­
fessors.

Epstein (1973) elaborates upon this issue even further by

noting that male professionals do not (1) encourage women to model them,
(2) demand hard work, and (3) require excellence in performance.

In

other words women exist in what Epstein has labeled a "structure of

15

16
ambiguity" wherein their standing in the profession and their motivation
are undermined.

Dickerson (1974) has labeled this phenomenon the

"climate of unexpectation."

To expect less of women students, faculty

and professionals enact a self-fullfilling prophecy whereby women stu­
dents have been noted as achieving less academically than their male
counterparts.
As recent as 1985, Arnold and Denny reported that the decline in
self esteem is common among college women and that women who do well in
high school think of themselves as less
college.

intelligent after a few years of

In their report, college women stated thatthey are not getting

the same recognition, opportunities to demonstrate their skills,
potential employers do not enthusiastically seek them as potential
candidates for employment, and are not given the same opportunities to
experiment with new and different things.
Roby’s (1972) findings have shown that; (1) women need special
support and encouragement to perform intellectually and professionally,
and (2) students need to see women in a wider variety of roles than
housewife-mother, and (3) to know that other roles are available.
Roby’s (1972) study concluded that the
. . .absences of women in faculty and administrative positions
serves as a silent, but potent message to female students that
"aiming high" would be foolish indeed.
Kahne's (1976) report on women in professional occupations, con­
cluded the following:

(1) half of all the women employed are still

located in 70% of occupations labeled female, (2) their choices are more
limited, and (3) mobility is constrained by life style and occupational
growth rates where they wprk.

The author argued that the effects of

17
increasing women's employment options will be beneficial to the indi­
vidual as well as to society in the long run.
Faunce (1977) defines equality for women as, (1) not being judged
by a different set of standards than those of their male counterparts,
and (2) having exposure to the same set of options and forces as males.
Faunce notes a different set of measures has cheated women and suggests
that what is needed is the dismantling of both psychological and ex­
plicitly discriminatory barriers to occupational success for women.

The

author concludes that only when this is done will women be able to make
their full contribution to society.
Various studies throughout the past decade continue to support the
major premise that the presence of professionally successful women
influenced in a positive manner the career aspirations of female stu­
dents (Graham, 1970; Husband, 1972; Rapoport and
Tidball, 1973; and Vetter, 1973).

Rapoport, 1971;

Wood (1979) makes the supporting

observation that the cultural and institutional barriers, which
influence the participation of women as faculty members and
administrators will continue to influence the level and quality of
participation of female students in higher education.

History of Academic and Professional Women
Most professions in the U.S. have been defined traditionally as
open only to males and have been male dominated and male controlled
(Bock, 1969).

Bock suggests that the percentage of males in a given

occupation is an indication of the degree to which that occupation is
professionalized.

It has been further suggested by Bock that for

blacks, professional occupations have long played an important part in
their occupational aspirations.

The following factors were given for

18
consideration as to what may have shaped the occupational orientation of
blacks:

First, discrimination in lower levels of work; second, the lack

of business know-how; third, a poor history of businesses owned by
blacks; and fourth, the opportunities for blacks to become professionals
serving the black communities.

In turn, these factors have helped to

produce an occupational mobility pattern among blacks that differs from
that of whites.
Discrimination and its effects have long been attributed to the
lack of substantial growth in the number of black professionals.

In

examining education patterns, black male education patterns are revealed
as characterized by a low level of education, high dropout rates in
public schools, and low educational and occupational aspirations when
compared with their white counterparts.

On the other hand, black

females compared with black males generally belong to a higher social
class, as measured by education, acculturation, income and familiarity
with the white world.

Bock (1969) further suggests that more contacts

with the dominant society have been available for black women because
they have been less feared sexually and less threatening occupationally.
Even though black females have greater opportunities than black males
these changes are more narrowly confined in various social structures
(Bock).

The advantages identified earlier have assisted black females

in making a relatively greater contribution to the total number of black
professionals than their white female counterparts.
Davis (1975) elaborated on the issue of discrimination against
women in the labor force and strongly suggested that it is the most
overt and intensive form of discrimination in the U.S. today.
supports this with evidence indicating that there is a greater

She

19
percentage of women in low-salaried, sex-stereotyped occupations and a
lower percentage in career-oriented positions compared to males with
similar levels of education.

Reasons given for these situations are

thought to be deeply rooted in our culture (Davis, 1975; and Scott,
1977) presents a stronger case for the dilemma of the black female in
the labor market than does Bock (1969).

She suggests that black women

are members of two oppressed groups and supports her statments with U.S.
Bureau of Census data.

These data seem to indicate that black women

suffer severely from racism and sexism in the labor market.

From their

work profile, black females appeared to be concentrated in low-paying,
service-oriented or white collar office jobs with limited opportunities
for advancement or training.

Scott (1977) asserts that the black female

has labored under the occupational stereotypes of the domestic servant.
This statement can be subtantiated by occupational data and research
(Bond, 1975; and Mapp, 1972).

Examination of labor force participation

data on black females shows that the same holds true today.

In other

words, black women are over-represented in service-related occupations.
In examining the status of women in the academic arena of higher
education Freeman (1977) states that academic women, for the most part,
have been on the fringes of the academic mainstream.

Even though

faculty females have increased in numbers on the college campus, they
have lost and are continuing to lose ground compared to their male
counterparts.

Data collected by the Carnegie Commission (1973) sub­

stantiates the claim that faculty and academic females have increased in
number, but fail to point out that the increase is generally in the
lower, off-tenured track positions. Freeman claims that this finding is
consistent across the board in higher education, more so at prestigious

20
and influential institutions of higher education.

Wood (1979)

elaborated on this point from a broader perspective.

When one examines

the participation levels of women in the labor force it is noteworthy
that women are under-represented in responsible positions in the
professions, government, business and industry, as well as in higher
education.
The 1960s had a tremendous impact on the U.S. college and univer­
sity campuses.

With the very large increase in student enrollment,

there was an inflated demand for additional faculty.

Professional women

returned to campus in record numbers unaware of the change that would
take place in the 1970s.

These women generally filled ancillary slots,

which Horning (1980) defined as lecturers, instructors, or adjunct
assistant professors, which were not generally routes to tenure,
security, and highly respected professional status.

The boom of the

1960s was short lived and these women in untenurable positions would
become vulnerable to potential cutbacks.
Mosley (1980) postulates that the historic denial of access of
equal opportunity to education has created a gap between the degreed and
the non-degreed, and between blacks and whites.

This denial at various

stages in development can mean that an individual, or group of individ­
uals, will be ineligible to participate in certain areas, which in turn
affect one's ability to secure or maintain a productive future.

In

other words, denial to educational institutions whose entry is based on
a type of certification closes future doors and opportunities.
Carroll's (1973) observations show that even though black males
and females start off on a fairly even footing when entering college,

21
black males enter advanced degree programs in greater numbers and
thereby have access to more job opportunities at the professional level.
Black and white female researchers (Carroll, 1973; and Graham,
1973) agree that the status of women, black and white, in academe
reflects society’s expectations of them.

The former are excluded from

the majority of opportunities, while the latter remain in a relatively
subordinate status.
Historically, black professional women have had more opportunities
to participate in higher education as leaders, founders, and faculty
educators in traditionally black institutions than their white female
counterparts.

Further exploration into the current status of black

females employed in historically black institutions will be discussed
later on in this review. In contrast, for many white females,
opportunities were limited due to discrimination in coeducational
colleges and universities and they were confined primarily to leadership
roles in all-women colleges (Moore and Wagstaff, 1974).
In assessing the present participation of women faculty and
administrators, researchers (Gappa and Uehling, 1979) feel that the
employment of women faculty in higher education has remained basically
the same over the past fifty years.

They argue that higher education

has been resistant to change during this period, despite the increasing
numbers of women earning graduate degrees, equal-employment legislation,
affirmative-action regulation, and consciousness raising on the part of
women faculty regarding their status in the academic arena.

Discrimination
Harris’ (1970) review of the literature supports the contention
that women faculty are systematically discriminated against with regards

22
to hiring practices, promotions and salaries.

The status of faculty

women has been examined closely by major researchers, starting in the
early 1960s and continuing well into the 1970s (Rossi and Calderwood,
1973; and Bernard, 1974).

Their major findings were that faculty women

in all kinds of institutions are distributed unevenly, clustered in the
lower ranks, in part-time positions and in institutions or programs
considered by many colleagues to be low-prestige.
Women earned about 13% of the PH.Ds in the 1960s, just under 40%
of the M.A.s and comprised about 22% of the faculty in all institutions
of higher education (Harris, 1970).

In 1971-1972 women comprised only

23.5% of faculty position in four year institutions and only 16.8% of
all university positions.

By 1976 their employment was estimated at

24.5% and 17.3% (NEA Research MEMO, 1973; and Horning, 1980).
Various patterns emerge when one takes a closer look at women’s
status.

Ferber and Loeb (1972) report that perceptions of sex dis­

crimination appear to be more accurate among women than among men, that
women are aware of salary and rank inequalities, and that married women
seem more aware of discrimination than single women.

Ferber and Loeb

conclude that this may be due to the fact that women have experienced
more discrimination than have men.
Jaffe’s (1973) examination of women's place in academe points out
other areas of discrimination.
doctoral awards than do men.

For example, women receive fewer post­
But with only thirteen percent of women

receiving doctoral degrees, it is understandable why women receive fewer
post-doctoral awards than men. Historically, faculty women did not
receive the same pension benefits or the same insurance coverage as even
faculty wives. Current retirement policy changes have been implemented

23
to eliminate this situation.

Jaffe (1973) further states that faculty

women are subjected to the same discriminatory attitudes which their
male colleagues exhibit toward female students.
Sophie (1974) asserts that discrimination against women in academe
forces them into less favorable employment and reduces their opportuni­
ties for scholarly accomplishment, which in turn makes them less able to
compete for more desirable positions.
In examining the status of professional minority women Moore and
Wagstaff (1974) state that black women in the academic community are
subjected to a different type of discrimination.

In some cases, for

example, the selection of a black male over a black female with the same
qualification is also discriminatory.

When compared to the black male

professional in the same hierarchy black women neither secure
commensurate treatement nor remuneration.

The authors concluded that

sex discrimination is rampant against black women.
This issue is addressed from a different perspective by Alperson
(1975).

Her examination of the Affirmative Action statutes point out

that sometimes preferred status is accorded one minority group over
another.

Alperson's and Nieto's (1974) examination of the U.S.

Commission on Human Rights reports indicate that "women" is being inter­
preted by most employers to mean Anglo women, while "minorities" is
being interpreted to mean minority males.

Their interpretation of the

Commission's report tends to challenge the myth that minority women
benefit the most by Affirmative Action regulations.
Allen's (1981) statistical analysis of the status of black women
in the U.S. suggests that race discrimination along with sex discrimi­
nation, retards not only the educational attainments of black females

24
but their economic returns on achieved education as well.

Allen

substatiated this statement with median earnings and educational attain­
ment for black and white males and females and claims that even for
black women who have successfully climbed the ladder of a professional
career the forces of race and sex discrimination continue to limit the
financial compensation which they receive.
The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (1973) postulated that
discrimination exists in virtually all public institutions and many
private institutions, but that discrimination does not take the form of
paying a woman a lower salary than her male counterpart, but takes the
form of not moving up through the ranks as quickly.

The Commission's

findings also indicate that a large number of women are retained at the
position of lecturer or instructor.

Four major issues were also

reviewed by the Commission which bear upon discriminatory practices
against faculty women.

First, the recruitment methods tend to favor

male over female candidates.

In other words, more males than females

are recommended for positions by their major professors or advisors at
the graduate level and male candidates have greater access to the
informal communication network systems.

Second, the married woman is

far less mobile in moving from one institution to another than is her
male counterpart.

Third, if a married woman's income is considered

secondary in the family she may not strive for salary increase as
vigorously as a male.

Fourth, a married faculty woman may not choose to

actively compete, scholastically or economically, with her spouse and
therefore may choose not to challenge issues of inequity.

The Com­

mission (1973) suggested that this occurs more at the departmental

25
level, which tends to take advantage of the fact that women have less
bargaining power than men have.
During the early 1970s institutions of higher education were
criticized for perpetuating society's generally low valuation of woman
and/or for treating women unfairly.

Robinson's (1973) comprehensive

study of the institutional variation in the status of academic women
demonstrates that a pattern of discrimination against women exists in
academe and supports this claim with numerous studies on the status of
academic women.
Peter's (1974) review of the literature points out that the pro­
fessional woman career pattern from college through retirement and her
position in the reward structure in higher education demonstrates that
both society and higher education discriminate against her on the basis
of sex stereotyping.

Her literature review exposes the fact that such

systematic exclusion results not from the women's lack of femininity,
lack of intellectual achievement, or lack of commitment to the pro­
fession, but from ambivalent, contradictory and stereotyped attitudes
and notions concerning what the professional woman is thought to be.

Socialization
Over the past decade numerous reports appeared which have
substantiated the phenomenon that the reason women are at a disadvantage
when attempting to move into a professional

career may be attributed to

their earlier socialization process (Davies, 1975; Tibbett, 1975;
Blaska, 1976; Sexton, 1976; Faunce, 1977).

These writers have traced

the history of the status of women and have postulated various theories
as to how this process occurs and why.

26
Tibbett (1975) researches the concept of the "innate inferiority"
of women and states the following:
1.

Historically, women have always been conditioned to be
inferior.

2.

Rarely have they attempted to take advantage of
opportunities to promote themselves.

3.

Some women seem to enjoy a second class status and oppose
those who attempt to change their way of thinking.

4.

The socialization process reinforces women in their nurturant, docile, submissive, and conservative roles and
discourages self-assertion, achievement, and independence.

5.

Male development and achievement are thought to be more
important than that of women.

Davies (1975) research supports the notion that females do not get
the type of education that provides them with the necessary skills and
therefore they are eliminated from non-traditional career tracks early
in their career development and are not in a position to earn promotion
or security in a job later on.
How the socialization process impacts on the lives of college-age
women has been addressed by Jaffe (1973).

The path to a profession

generally starts with a college degree and ends academically with an
advanced degree from a graduate school or institution.

Data demon­

strates that males and females are graduating from high school at about
the same rate.
picture.

But college enrollment figures present a different

Overall, females make up only 41% of first year enrollment.

Jaffe gives several reasons for this phenomenon.

The first reason is

society’s attitude that a college education is still more important for
males than for females.
earn higher grades.
aids for females.

Second, females need to be highly motivated and

Third, there are fewer scholarships and financial
Fourth, less is expected of the female student and

27
they therefore have lower aspirations than males have.

Fifth, societal

pressures and expectations impact on the female student's career
expectations, which may cause her to lose interest and not pursue her
education.
It is felt by Jaffe (1973) that the lack of undergraduate counsel­
ing and female role models may make the difference as to whether a
female pursues advanced studies or not.
exist at this level:

Similar types of obstacles also

less financial aid, assistantships, role models,

and mentors. The degree of ease into the social environment at the
graduate level is vital to one's existence in an academic hierarchy.
Jaffe (1973) defines this social environment as having the following
components:

being accepted by colleagues, recognition from mentors and

other professionals, opportunities for challenging intellectual
stimulation and interaction, opportunities to develop a strong
professional identity, and a chance to develop a sense of competence.
Jaffe (1973) states that female students and faculty may have a dif­
ficult time establishing these components.

The lack of development in

these areas may exacerbate self-doubts and reinforce their own mis­
givings, and in turn may create and support self-fulfilling prophecies.
Faunce (1977) explores the idea that females are "other directed."
This term is defined as questioning one's behavior in view of how others
will respond.

An example of this is, "Am I doing the right thing?

What

shall I be or do that will please ray husband, children, and parents?"
(p.41). This type of orientation is felt by this author to be less
effective, because women, out of a need to please others, may not strive
for occupational success.

In terms of the types of rewards received

from these types of relationships one spends more time being committed

28
to a person, to a set of persons, or to an institution.

Faunce believes

that this militates against one’s own discipline or professional
success.
Jones and Welch (1979) and Scott’s (1977), writings on occupa­
tional stereotyping and the black female, focused on the obstacles that
black women face in choosing careers.

These authors agree that any dis­

cussion of the black female must address the effects of race and sex on
career opportunities.

They support this claim by presenting evidence

that negative occupational stereotyping is perpetuated by the mass media
and that these women still live under the stereotype of black women as
emasculating matriarchs.

These conditions and myths were challenged by

data which demonstrate that black women are not better educated than
their black male counterparts, in the long run, and that black females
may seek other career avenues in order to not be labeled as "domineer­
ing" or "overly-agressive."
Scott’s (1977) study makes the following observations:
1.

Because black women are frequently excluded in research
studies of professional black women are virtually non­
existent.

2.

Problems black women face as students in non-traditional
programs, feelings of loneliness and isolation, are in­
creased and amplified upon entering the labor force.

3.

Lack of female role models.

4.

Black women feel the pressure to be "super black" or
"super women."

In reviewing the limited number of studies that do explore the
experiences of the black female professional the following conclusion
can be drawn (Fichter, 1967; Noble, 1955; Epstein, 1973; Scott, 1977):
Black professional females in non-traditional male dominated fields were
reported to be remarkably confident in their competences and abilities.

29
It was postulated by Scott (1977) that this could be related to a "fear
of failure" or to a rugged determination to overcome all obstacles.
The opposite position is reported by several studies which indi­
cate that American females are socialized to not achieve
Jaffe, 1973; Tibbetts, 1975; Bardwick, 1972).

(Faunce, 1977;

Horner (1969) has coined

the phrase "the fear of success." She defines this phenomena as some
females demonstrating a fear of appearing "unfeminine" and therefore not
developing their talents, abilities, and interests because of this fear.
In conclusion, the literature consistently cited traditional
cultural conditioning of males and females to conform to sex-role
stereotypes as the primary reason so few women advance to professional
status in the higher education hierarchy.

30
Factors and Conditions that Influence
the Career Development of Professional Women
Several authors have cited the following factors as being
responsible for the relatively small number of professional women on
college and university campuses:

discrimination, socialization, sex-

role stereotyping, lack of effective role models, the absence of a
network system, the limited access of education and employment oppor­
tunities, and institutional practices and societal attitudes (Benton,
1980; Gordan and Ball, 1977; Cummings, 1979, Gappa and Uehling, 1979).
Freeman (1977) summarizes the conditions professional women in
academe must face in the coming decade: A declining birth rate, a slug­
gish economy, decreasing financial support for higher education, and a
conservative political and budgetary climate on today's college and
university campuses.
women.

These present a dim future for young professional

These individuals are mainly clustered in low ranking posi­

tions, assistant and instructorships, which mean that those hired last,
with low or no seniority, are the first to be fired.
Alexander (1979) and Mosley (1980) demonstrate how the minority
female professional functions in the academic setting and under what
conditions she must survive:
1.

loneliness and a sense of functioning in isolation

2.

no or limited male companionship

3.

being seen as an outsider to her previous community

4.

absence of the normal mechanism of legitimization—
insufficient feedback from peers

5.

loss of "old" identify, and

6.

conformity versus transformation— how to transform
professionalism to make her better able to help her
people.

31
Gappa and Uehling's (1979) research focused in more clearly on the
institutional practice that influenced the career advancement of the
professional women.

These writers identified the following practices:

1.

Hiring process— recruitment

2.

Selection process

3.

Anti-nepotism and inbreeding rules

4.

Compensation

5.

Variables affecting salary— length of time employed,
administrative activities, and mobility

6.

Salaries of administrators

7.

Promotion and tenure

8.

Effect of male attitudes

The impact of these practices on faculty women has been further
explored by these authors who argue that because women faculty repre­
sentation on academic committees is in disproportion to male colleagues
they have limited influence on promotion and tenure criteria and
procedures.

Heavy teaching loads are also thought to be detrimental to

female faculty chances for promotion and, in turn, tenure.

One

essential criteria for promotion is one's ability to conduct research
and to publish.

These authors have advanced the following reasons why

women faculty are less productive in this area:

heavier teaching loads,

teaching mainly undergraduate courses, and lack of research resources
and facilities, mainly because females are not employed in great numbers
at universities where the bulk of research is conducted.

These reasons

are consistent with the findings of Horning (1980) and Greenleaf (19731974).
Gappa and Uehling (1979) and Freeman (1977) have demonstrated that
one's marital status can be detrimental to the advancement of academic

32
women.

Their research shows that academic rank is strongly related to

marital status for male professionals. For the male, marriage is per­
ceived as a facilitative factor for the scholarly labors of a man,
whereas marriage can create an obstacle for academic women, who are
generally responsible for the major portion of child bearing and
rearing. On the other hand, remaining single for females is no guarantee
of professional success.

It is concluded by these writers that married

women are less likely to be promoted than single women, although married
men are more likely to be promoted than single men.

Status and Rank
Freeman's (1977) comparative analysis of faculty women in the
American university reported the following:
1.

Women are not found in equal proportion in all academic
fields.

2.

There is a
few fields

3.

The percentage of women in all disciplines tends to
decrease as one moves from the undergraduate to graduate
level and from less to more prestigious universities.

A.

tendency for faculty women to be clustered in a
stereotypically thought of as "feminine."

Women tend to populate the lower professional rank and
non-tenure track positions.

5.

Women are not as likely to hold the Ph.D as are men.

6.

Since most women are clustered in the lower ranking
positions, they are likely to experience a sense of job
insecurity much more than are men

7.

Female faculty bear a disproportionate share of the under­
graduate instruction, have less contact with graduate
students, and are less likely to be given teaching and
research assistants.

8.

Women faculty have a tendency to publish less than their
male counterparts.

33
Freeman (1977) views the professional career woman as a second
class member of the academic community; she sacrifices more in personal
terms, works harder, and receives fewer pay-offs and rewards in the long
run.
Numerous studies were found to be consistent with Freeman's
findings (Gappa and Uehling, 1979; Horning, 1980; Finlay and Crosson,
1981; Slay and McDonald, 1981).

Their review of the literature and data

analysis also support Gappa and Uehling's claim that part of the
explanation for the status of women faculty may lie in the institutional
hiring and promotional practices and in faculty attitudes.
Finlay's and Crosson's (1981) research on women in higher educa­
tional administration observed the following:
1.

Women are under-represented in major policy-making
positions in colleges and universities.

2.

Women administrators are clustered in low and middle-level
stereotyped administrative positions.

3.

Women administrators are paid less than male
administrators.

4.

These problems are especially severe for minority women.

5.

The structure of the job market in higher education limits
opportunities for women in higher education
administration.

6.

The present steady state conditions in college and
universities will jeopardize recent gains for women.

These researchers acknowledged the fact that the number of women
administrators in higher education has increased during the last decade,
but they have not attained positions and status in proportion to their
numbers and contributions to colleges and universities.
Gappa and Uehling's (1979) research reveals the information
regarding minority women to be limited or nearly non-existent.

This is

34
felt to be attributed to the type of procedure utilized in data
collection.

Traditionally, data on race and sex were not collected

simultaneously and therefore trends on the status of minority women are
very difficult to establish.
Gappa and Uehling*s (1979) and Mosley's (1980) research on women
in academe make the following observations:
1.

Minority women on college and university faculties are
scarce in all types of positions.

2.

Minority women are also concentrated in lower, untenurable
positions and certain disciplines.

3.

Major differences between minority and white females
centered on rank distribution.

4.

Minority women were frequently found teaching in ethnicstudies, basic-skills, and supportive services programs.

5.

Two-thirds of Spanish speaking women on faculty were
teaching a foreign language.

6.

During 1972-1973 white females comprised 93.6% of female
faculty appointments, black females 4.8%, American Indian
females.9%, Asian females 1.7%, and Spanish-speaking
females .5%.

7.

The locating of minority female faculty in non-traditional
academic positions makes it more difficult for them to
achieve promotion and tenure.

These findings were consistent with the results of an earlier
study conducted by Moore and Wagstaff (1974), whose research focused on
black educators in white colleges. Their study provided a more compre­
hensive examination of the status and rank of black professional women.
These writers defined the status of these women by the titles they hold,
assistants to assistants:
Assistant and associate dean, special assistants to provost,
administrative assistants, coordinators, directors, and human
relations specialists were common administrative title
designations (Moore and Wagstaff, 1974, p.163).

35
It is thought that these titles only indicate supportive roles
with definition and/or description (Moore and Wagstaff, 1974).
Schlopsberg's (1974) writings also support this finding.

She states

that most women in leadership positions are labeled "assistant to," a
position of derived status.
Moore and Wagstaff (1974) found that
. . . some black women indicated that, after being hired, they
were in charge of trivia, their talents and abilities were not
used except in management of remedial programs, as liaison
persons with minority students, and as administrators in other
soft-monied programs.
(A surprisingly large number of the
women who wrote comments felt that they were not only the token
black, but also the token black female.) (p.164).
Alperson (1975) presents a stronger case:
The attempt is often made in academic institutions to channel
minorities into token jobs where their competence is
underplayed and only their racial and ethnic status emphasized.
This practice undermines the minority individual’s self-esteem
and feeds the myth that a minority group could not compete on
par with Anglo candidates on competence criteria alone (p.252).
Mosley (1980) makes the following comments:
The "access" that black women have had has been to the lowest
paying, lowest status, unwanted jobs. Higher education,
through its practices, is perpetuating this myth, thus making
black women the bastards of higher education (p.18).
The foregoing review has addressed the status of minority and
white female faculty employed in white institutions of higher education.
But the examination of the status of black professional women at
traditionally black institutions present different and interesting
patterns.

Research conducted by Swann and Witty (1980) reveals that

black women have made only small gains at traditionally black institu­
tions.

Institutions examined by these researchers followed the general

patterns— the higher the position, the fewer the women, and that
administrative units typically are headed by men and staffed by women.

36
These findings are also consistent with those of an earlier study
conducted by Robinson (1973).
When one takes an overall view of the status of women faculty
employed in all types of institutions the following pictures emerge:
Research conducted by Howard (1978) indicates that women still have the
same employment patterns since the early 1970s.

Overall women occupied

only 25% of all full time positions in all types of institutions, with a
steady decrease as one moves from less prestigious to more elite insti­
tutions, and from lecturers to professorship positions.

Women colleges

have traditionally had the highest percentage of women faculty employed.
Overall they occupy 57% of all positions, but a closer inspection
reveals that they occupy only half of all full, associate and assistant
professor positions. Administratively Gordon and Ball (1977) state that
women are generally found administering women-related programs, Affirma­
tive Action, women's projects, and women's colleges.
Wright (1981) reports that black women comprise over 50% of black
professionals, but that 60% are concentrated in traditional disciplines
such as nursing, teaching, library science, and social work, with only
about 10% of the positions in non-traditional disciplines. Epstein
(1973) reports that black college women generally obtain a B.A. degree
in education and that, even though teachers are considered professional,
teaching ranked lower in occupational prestige in comparison to other
professional occupations.

At the Higher Education level, the National

center for Education Statistics reports that black females comprise only
2.1% of the total faculty in all types of institutions (Strain and Drew,
1981).

37
Further research by Abramson (1975) and Roberts (1975) explored
the status of women in non-academic professional roles.

They state that

this group makes up a large percent of employed members, even to the
point of out-numbering teaching faculty.

Their status mainly comprises

research assistantships, programmers, technical experts, laboratory
assistants, associates in research, administrative/professional, scien­
tific and specialist, and academic staff.

Generally, these positions

are funded by federal and soft money that does not provide tenure, job
security, or status.

Job moves were generally made parallel, which also

impedes job seniority and other employment benefits.

Attitudes and Perceptions
Greenleaf's (1973/1974) perception of the status of the academic
woman states that it is essential that every female educator take stock
of her attitude towards, and her involvement in the women's movement of
the 1970s.

She feels that it is also vital that the academic woman

become concerned about the role of women in today's educational world.
. . . that she must serve fully as an educator, must serve as
an example by her participation in all phases of education, and
must challenge and encourage other women to work for self­
learning and self-growth (Greenleaf, 1973, p.77).
In other words, academic women can no longer not assume the tasks
necessary to provide leadership in the educational world.

Greenleaf

(1973/1974) claims that traditional women have undervalued their
capabilities to lead.

It was suggested by her that women need

encouragement to apply for decision-making positions.

With an increase

in status and power they could contribute much to the status, worth, and
acceptance of all women.

38
On the other hand, Slay and McDonald (1981) alluded to the fact
that society still believes that for a woman family will always come
first and career second.

Benton’s (1980) writings make a strong case

for women's attitudes in regards to their status.

She asserts the fact

that women must first see themselves as leaders if they expect to be
promoted to positions of responsiblity.
Further exploration of professional women attitudes by Niebor
(1975) states that a main concern of women who wish to aspire to the top
level of their profession is one of leadership image. That even when a
woman fulfills leadership functions, she is seldom evaluated or judged
to be a leader, either by herself or by her male colleagues.

It was

also reported that the professional woman receives limited or no posi­
tive feedback or reinforcement for her leadership efforts.
The effects of male attitudes on women’s development and self
concept is examined by Tidball (1976).

Her writing stated that male

faculty self-esteem levels are more positive than that of the female
counterparts.

She reported that male and female faculties in all types

of institutions felt more positive about themselves when compared with
women than when compared to men.

In other words, women tended to com­

pare themselves negatively when asked to compare themselves with men.
The type of institution one is affiliated with tended to impact upon the
climate of self-esteem.

In research institutions, such as universities,

levels of self-esteem were higher for males.

Tidball’s research

discovered that feelings of success and self-esteem for women correlated
only weakly with the research image of the institution.

Tidball

concluded that women's perceptions of success and self-esteem do not
correspond with those of men, who predominate in the academic environ­

39
ment and who tend to control success factors such as promotion and
tenure decisions, merit increases, and working assignments.

Whereas

self-esteem and feelings of success were highly correlated for women who
identified with women-related issues, and for women associated with male
faculty possessing a high degree of self esteem and teaching effective­
ness.
It was reported by Epstein (1973) that black and white profes­
sional women perceived a need to be better than others so as not to be
labeled incompetent.

That black females were more aggressive in this

matter than their white counterparts.

It was stated by Epstein (1973)

that this strong need in black females may be tied in with selfconsciousness, their visibility, and their sense of responsibility for
others of their race and sex.

These findings parallel the findings of

Swann and Witty (1980) who examined the attitudes and perceptions of
black female administrators employed at traditionally black institu­
tions.
Epstein's (1973) research reflected on the attitudes of thirty
black and white professional women in the New York area, and observed
the following:
1.

Black women professionals had a higher regard for
other than did their white female counterparts.

each

2.

There was less self-hate exhibited among the black
females.

3.

Black females exhibited a more matter-of-fact attitude and
felt confident in the ability of other women.

A.

Overall, white females did not favor other women
professionals.

The perceptions of the black female professional has been examined
by various black researchers, who basically agreed that black female

40
academicians share a deeper feeling of isolation and aloneness than does
the black male (Moore and Wagstaff, 1974; Mosley, 1980; Carroll, 1973).
These feelings are felt to stem from the treatment accorded them by
their colleagues (Mosley, 1980).

Mosley states that the majority of

black women in her study were treated as peers more by white women than
black or white male counterparts.

This finding was substantiated by

earlier writings of Alperson (1975) who asserted that the minority
professional female may often become the target for a great deal of
contempt and may be resented and ignored by their minority male
counterparts.

Alperson postulated that minority men may feel socially

and economically threatened and that these feelings may stem from the
fact that more educational and occupational opportunities are now
opening up to minority women.

In conclusion, Moore and Wagstaff's

(1974) study presented a contrasting point of view on this issue.

They

report that male participants felt that they treated professional black
women as equals.

The Ability to Effect Change
The ability to effect change is generally based on one's range of
power and influence.

Johnson's (1976) research focused on power as an

aspect of social interaction.

In that study Johnson defined power as

having the ability to get others to do or to believe something one would
not have necessarily done or believed spontaneously, and the amount of
tension toward change one can bring to bear on another person's "life
space."

She further stated the the ability to use power may be also

labeled as influencing another's behavior or actions.
Power, according to Johnson's (1976) review of the literature, is
associated with resources, social status, self-confidence, and exper-

41
tise. It has been hypothesized that the mode or style of influence one
chooses is important in terms of success, self-confidence, and other's
expectations of one's self.

The mode of power one chooses is based on

the consequences of one’s ability to influence, but also is the result
of sex-role expectations of our society (Johnson, 1976).

Johnson also

hypothesized that men and women are expected to use power styles
differently and that for women this difference has produced negative
consequences.
Three dimensions of power styles and six power bases are illus­
trated by Johnson and are as follows:
1.

Indirect, versus Direct, power, often labeled as manipula­
tion, is defined as when one's actions or motives are
unknown to another person. Women and minorities are
believed to use more indirect power style, so as to not
disturb the status quo. The negative consequences of this
power style is that the source of power is concealed and
keeps its user in a subordinate position. Also, one's
self concept is reinforced and in this case the use of
indirect power is not viewed as an effective position for
either women or minorities.

2.

Personal, versus Concrete, power contrasts two different
types of power resources that one can possess. Personal
power is defined as depending on personal relationships,
whereas concrete power is independent of relationships.
Males control concrete resources such as money, knowlege,
expertise, physical strength, which in turn influence and
control the major military, technical, scientific,
intellectual, and political institutions in our society.
Males have the opportunities to use types of resources
whereas women, who may also possess such resources, are
discouraged from using them directly.
Personal resources, on the other hand, center on such
things as love, affection, and approval. The
effectiveness of this type of power is viewed as short
run. In other words, one's power is lessened if one has
to depend on others for resources.

3.

Helplessness versus Competence. Women often do not feel
competent, underestimate their successes and abilities,
and tend to view themselves as less intelligent and less
logical than males. Women often rely on helplessness
because of their lack of concrete resources. The negative
consequences of using a position of weakness is that it

42
may make it difficult later to move into a position of
strength, and that helplessness leads to a loss of self­
esteem.
Raven (1965) presented six power bases, ways in which power is
used:
1.

Two of these are reward and coercion powers— defined as
one’s ability to provide positive ornegative sanctions
for the actions of another.

2.

Referent power is based on the psychological process of
identification, the more similar or likeable one's beliefs
or attitudes are with another individual or organization.

3.

Expert power is defined as having superior skills or
knowledge and trustworthiness. Males are viewed by
society as acknowledged experts even in areas considered
"feminine.”

4. Legitimate power is defined as having the right to
influence, which may come with one’s status, rank or
position within a hierarchical social structure.
5.

Informational power is defined as the ability of one
person to provide an explanation, data, and/or knowledge
as to why one should believe or behave differently.

Johnson's (1976) study concluded that people would view personal
rewards and coercions, referent, helplessness, and indirect forms of
power as stereotypic of females, and expert, legitimate, informational,
and direct rewards and coercion as stereotypic of males.

Her evidence

supported the hypothesized male source of power as strongly expected of
males.

While, on the other hand, evidence for the female source for

power was not as strongly supported, though the evidence was in the
hypothesized direction— it was significant only for personal reward and
sexuality.

Her research paralleled the findings of earlier writers who

reported that males are allowed to show "feminine" traits, but females
are not allowed to demonstrate "masculine" traits.

In other words,

males have a much broader base to operate from whereas females are
limited to fewer powerful bases.

43
Johnson (1976) concluded that if women's power bases continue to
conform to expectations and remain limited to personal helplessness and
indirect power, women will remain in a powerless status in relationship
with others and in society.
Garson's (1975) writings focused in more clearly on areas where
professional women have limited power.

She claims that the decision

making process is an area in which sexist attitudes are most apparent.
Decisions made by women without proper instruction or clearance are
later overruled by their superiors.
women evaluate themselves.

This impacts on how professional

Being ignored, bypassed, and overruled, they

begin to question their level of competency and self-esteem.
Upon taking a closer look at the minority professional woman one
finds that she holds very few powerful positions on non-black campuses
(Payton, 1981).

Often she is the person with the least amount of power

to affect administrative changes (Alperson, 1975).
From an administrative standpoint, Moore and Wagstaff (1972) and
Mosley (1980) reported that the majority of surveyed respondents in both
of their studies held staff officer positions, which were basically
peripheral.

They reported themselves as existing at the pleasure of

others.
Smith (1980) defines staff officer positions as those which are
outside of the administrative hierarchy in institutions.

Their power

and authority are based on the knowledge they possess about given issues
and on their ability to influence line officers.

They are generally

subordinate to line officers or may only function as a consultant to
them.

On the other hand, line officers are managers with administrative

authority and direct responsiblity for personnel, budgets, and programs

44
related to major goal activities (Smith, 1980).

Hopkins (1978) reports

that, administratively, more black scholars on white land grant campuses
are in staff positions where they most often hold "assistant to" titles
and have little direct authority to make important decisions.
Moore and Wagstaff's (1974) research explored another dimension of
power and its impact upon the individual. These writers noted some of
the greatest frustrations of professional black administrators as not
having their positions defined, not being told how they will be evalu­
ated, what is expected of them, and not being informed of their perfor­
mance rating until something is wrong.

Major complaints centered upon

the fact that authority, general responsibilities, and decision making
responsibilities were very vague (Moore and Wagstaff, 1974).
Copeland (1979) defined power as having the ability to exercise
control, to exert authority, or to influence in some way a given situa­
tion, which also included the authority to form policy, to develop,
modify, and implement programs, and the freedom to make decisions that
affect the lives of the academic community.

She noted that other’s per­

ceptions of one’s power are determined by how one develops policy, makes
decisions, handles responsibilities and o n e ’s role within the university
structure.

According to this author, minorities and women have tradi­

tionally been viewed as inferior on first impression.
Moore and Wagstaff (1974) also noted that black female adminis­
trators have little influence in the selection, hiring, and termination
of personnel and that they are rarely involved in long-range planning.
Gordan and Ball (1977) summarized the issue of power and influence by
stating that women must understand the politics of personal power if
they expect to become effective leaders.

45
Conflicts and Barriers
Various writers have addressed the problems, conflicts, and
barriers that have impeded the advancement or progress of professional
women.

Epstein (1973) identified two major obstacles that have

historically narrowed the choices of professional women.

First, the

self-maintaining mechanism of the present stratification system within
the profession clearly operates to keep the participation of certain
individuals or groups at a limited level in spite of educational
advancements and achievement.

Second, the elaborate filtering system,

which in this case is the education system, has aided in the process of
separated classes of people.
Blaska's (1976) review of the literature focusing on vocational
development of college women, noted that when compared to men, women
have lower career aspirations, restricted career choices, lower career
commitments, higher career indecision, more fear of achievement, and
less college persistence.

Besides the psychological barriers listed

above, Blaska identified "external'’ forces or "institutional" factors
that impede college women's progress: discrimination in admission
practices, less financial aid, obstructive institutional regulations,
restricted services and available curricula, and negative faculty and
staff attitudes.
Faunce's (1977) research presented a different perspective on the
issues of psychological barriers to occupational success for women.
identified four central barriers:

She

(1) female socialization, (2) con­

flicting definitions of sucess for women, (3) mistaken stereotypes and
myths regarding women's work that both women and men believe, and (4)
the exclusion of women from a "charismatic education," which is defined

46
as the ". . .education of persons selected to assume leadership roles"
(p.142).
In speaking before a conference on "The Minority Woman in America"
in 1979, Dr. Epps comments were consistent with those of Faunce (1977).
She restated the fact that occupational options and career expectations
of women are still significantly limited by sex role socialization and
stereotyping as well as by inadequate career-counseling and negative
experiences in the educational process.

She further delineated a number

of complex barriers encountered by women in their effort to obtain
professional training.

These included:

frustration in their profes­

sional aspirations in terms of being discouraged from pursuing certain
male-dominated professions, the conflicts between family and career
obligations, the traditional view that a women’s career is second in
importance to her spouse's career, the social and professional isolation
of women, the stereotyping of women in terms of career options, and the
fear of success (p.28).

Epps concludes that while all of these diffi­

culties are applicable to all women they apply especially to minority
women because of attitudinal, cultural, economic, and political bar­
riers, which continue to impact on the participation of minority women
in the professions.
Epps' following remarks paralleled those of earlier writers
(Carroll, 1973; Mosley, 1980; Moore and Wagstaff, 1974) that even though
minority women are found in limited number in the mainstream of profes­
sional careers, those who do occupy these positions are usually over­
worked, and overutilized on committees, as advisors and as spokespersons
on all issues affecting minorities.

In other words, the minority female

professional does not have ample time and energy for the research and

47
publications, which in turn impact on one’s chances for promotion and
tenure.

This finding is also substantiated by several other writers

quoted above (Gunnings, 1981; Hoskins, 1978; and Copeland, 1979).
Mosley's (1980) research focused in on specific areas that posed
problems for black female professionals:

(1) inadequate sources of

information or data necessary to do a job effectively, (2) lack of
control over finances or budget in one's own position or area of respon­
sibility.
In focusing more clearly on barriers that impact on the aspiration
of the professional woman, Van Wessem Goerss's review of the literature
from 1960 to 1976 (1977) concluded the following:
1.

Many women do not seek top level positions because of
their fear of failure.

2.

They are uncertain about their abilities to handle
conflict, or are reluctant to accept policymaking roles.

3.

Some women stated that obvious bias against women dis­
couraged them from applying.

4.

Others stated that they are not encouraged to prepare to
train for top level positions.

5.

Their choices were limited by the female socialization
process from earlier years.

6.

Discriminatory practices were accepted by educators.

7.

Women were not assertive enough.

8.

Lack of sponsorship by superiors.

9.

Women have not united to encourage one another.

10.

Women lacked informal interaction among their male col­
leagues that reinforces aspiration and allows for an
exchange of ideas, data, and possible openings.

11.

Women were expected to have more credentials and meet
higher standards then men when applying for advanced
positions.

48
12.

Interruptions of employment due to child-rearing and lack
of child care facilities while pursuing graduate studies.

13.

Lack of opportunities to serve on university committees.

14.

Lack of informal network and therefore lack of visibility.

These barriers were identified by participants in various studies
cited by Van Wessem Goerss (1977), Wood (1979), Swann and Witty (1981),
Wright (1981) and Delworth and Jones (1981).

49
Role Models and Mentors
Faunce's (1977) examination of the psychological barriers to
occupational success for women noted that women are generally excluded
from what is termed a charismatic education.

This is defined as an

educational system that trains individuals to assume positions of
leadership.

This type of system has provided the male with masters,

mentors, and role models who observe and interact with the individual,
correcting inappropriate behavior when necessary.

Role models have been

shown to be essential for the development of self-concept (Niebor,
1975).
In general, women have been denied a charismatic education
(Faunce, 1977; Walker, 1981).

Studies (Asburn, 1977; Morlock, 1973; and

Niebor, 1975) have demonstrated, however, that the presence of profes­
sionally successful women influence in a positive manner the career
aspirations of female students.

They further demonstrated that the more

role models one has for a particular behavior, the more one would think
the behavior appropriate and would tend to take on those behaviors
(Asburn, 1977).
The lack of role models not only impacts on the lives of students,
but also on the number of women who will pursue graduate and profes­
sional studies. Nieboer (1975) noted that the lack of role models for
prospective women administrators created a scarcity of women adminis­
trator applicants. This in turn impacts on the number of females
appointed to such positions.
It is suggested by Holt (1980) and Walker (1981) that a mentor can
facilitate one’s career advancement by "teaching the ropes," initiating

50
contacts, opening doors, making recommendations and serving as role
models.

In other words, mentoring speeds up the promotion process.

What percentage of professional women are willing to assist other
women?

Benton's (1980) studies reported that over half of the respon­

dents were willing to take time out from their duties to act as role
models and actively recruit and support women candidates for advanced
positions.
Other writers (Walker, 1981; Mosley, 1980; Wright, 1981) suggest
that there tends to be a preference for the individuals selected for
sponsorship to have similar values as the mentor or role model and
profess the same organizational ideology.

This posture virtually leaves

out women and most minorities.
In looking at the larger society several writers (Bock, 1969;
Epstein, 1973; Scott, 1977; Moore and Wagstaff, 1974) have noted that
blacks have few professional role models in the larger society and even
fewer are found on the university campus.

Others have shown that the

lack of role models or mentors for the black professional female on
academic campuses tends to perpetuate feelings of lonelines and isola­
tion (Scott, 1977).
parallel Scott's.

Mosley's (1980) and Wright's

(1981) writings

They conclude that black women, and oth^r minority

women, have fewer sponsors, mentors or role models, which in turn
impacts upon their ability to effectively fit into this setting.

Support Groups
Touchton and Shavlik (1978) stated that due to the limited number
of women in the academic system more individual women must consciously
create their own support systems.

They have outlined various items that

may address some of the needs of the professional woman.

These are, the

need for collegial relationship, information, continuous professional
training, and the need for professional recognition.
The need for collegial relationship and its impact on productivity
for black faculty has been examined by Scott (1981).

He hypothesizes

that once an individual is hired the following factors increase or
decrease one's likelihood of being productive:

access to material

resources, access to information channels, and professional colleagues.
Being affiliated with an institution that emphasizes research and high
productivity creates an environment that not only pressures the young
professional, but also makes the necessary resources available for him
to comply with established norms (Scott, 1981).

Pressure through com­

munication is applied by various standards, which are met with sanctions
such as denial of tenure and denial of promotion.

Information networks

depend on interpersonal contact with others in the system.
Scott's (1981) findings indicate the following:
1. That contact with whites had significant main effects on
the productivity of lecturers, assistant professors, and
full professors.
2.

The interactions of contact with whites and school quality
was significant only for lecturers, suggesting the
function of contact with whites is not to exert conformity
pressures on black faculty.

3.

For only two of the academic ranks, full professors and
lecturers, did contact with blacks also have significant
effects on productivity.

4.

When the effects of contact with whites are tested, the
association between contact with whites and productivity
remains the same for all academic ranks except lecturers.

Alperson (1975) believes the support of other minority groups is
often sought out in order to confirm and validate the experience of
exclusion or social isolation.

These groups allow their members to

share common experiences of frustration.

52
The majority of black female administrators surveyed in Mosley's
(1981) research reported a different set of opinions and attitudes with
regard to the effectiveness of support groups.

It was felt that the

women’s movement did not address issues of minority women and was
dominated by middle class white women.

The following reasons were given

for lack of relevance to minority women: domination by white middle
class women, a method used to divide minority males and females and
undermine the efforts of the Civil Rights movement.

The majority of the

participants in the Mosley study did belong to black faculty and
administrators organization, but had mixed reactions.

Some felt they

were also being rejected by black male members or were excluded from
strategy sessions.
Other writers (Mosley, 1981; and Alperson, 1975) expressed a need
for support groups but acknowledged that there was a need for organi­
zation, definite goals, and an acceptance of diverse ideals in these
groups.

It is believed by Collins (1979) that minority professional

women compensated for being invisible by privately depending upon their
informal network of association for support.

Upward Mobility
In exploring the status of women in prestigious institutions of
higher education, Freeman (1977) asserts that one’s social origin or
socioeconomic status and academic opportunities are closely interrelated
and are major factors in determining a person's opportunities for upward
mobility.

Her findings support the idea that the majority of male and

female professionals in academe were white, were from a socioeconimic
milieu that was supportive, and had a facilitative influence on their
careers. Male participation levels in prestigious institutions parallel

53
that of their respective ethnic groups' place in the general population,
with the exception of Orientals.

On the other hand, women followed

similar patterns with no exceptions, the least fortunate being black
women, followed by oriental women, and then white woman at the top of
the scale. Freeman (1977) believes that being female and of color are
stigmas which limit the individual's opportunities for success.

These

findings, along with Wright's (1981), were in total opposition to those
of Epstein's.

Epstein (1973) asserts that being black and female, which

produced a cumulative negative effect, was an advantage point for the
thirty-one black professional women in non-traditional careers she
interviewed.

But this does not seem to be true when examining the

status of minority professional women in institutions of higher
education.

Minorities are concentrated in the lower socioeconomic

strata of the society and therefore class related factors may explain
more effectively the reason for their under representation in all
professions. The issue of class does not fully explain the limited
representation of women since women are spread evenly across class
lines.

Freeman believes that sex-linked factors may provide a more

plausible explanation.
Van Wessem Goerss' (1977) review of the literature on women
administrators in education concluded that a major problem for women in
all studies reviewed was a lack of mobility complicated by sexist prac­
tices of educational institutions.

The following reasons were given for

prevented promotion or upward mobility:

higher credentials were

expected of women, higher standards, more experience was needed, and
child rearing responsibilities.

Touchton and Shavlik (1978) examined

the roles of males and females and concluded the following:

54
Recognition of the prevalence of men in the system, and the
continuance of the "old boy" network for nominating and recom­
mending people for jobs, brings us back to the issues of prepa­
ration and access. Men, more than women have benefited from
on-the-job training. One often sees young men hired for their
potential, given jobs they can grow into, and brought along in
a process of collegial learning and mentoring. Women, on the
other hand, are most likely to be hired for their acomplishments, if they are hired at all. If there are any questions
about prior accomplishments or performance women tend to be
regarded as not yet ready and advised to get more training and
experience in order to be in a position to assume greater chal­
lenges in the future. The experience of women is in sharp con­
trast to that of men who are given access to positions in which
they can develop competence, and who more easily learn from
each other because they function in homogeneous groups (p.101).
Mobility patterns of women administrators, explored by Moore and
Sagaria (1981) exhibited the following:

First, a great number of women

have built their careers in one institution; second, there was little or
no movment across institutions within a state or from state to state;
and third, women in top academic positions generally conformed to the
traditional academic model of career advancement, which consists of a
faculty chair or department position.

These findings are also consis­

tent with those of Stevenson (1973).
Mobility patterns for males in administration demonstrated a dif­
ferent path.

Stevenson's (1973) review of the literature states that

the fastest route to the top in Big Ten schools for males was from the
outside.

She further believes that this statement cannot be generalized

to women.
Gappa and Uehling (1979) examined the status of faculty women and
traced the mobility patterns of professors and noted that only after 22
to 23 years did women reach parity in rank with men.

One of the strik­

ing differences between male and female faculty according to rank is the
length of time between promotions.

Scott (1977) believes that the rea­

son minority and women are not as successful in moving up the academic

55
hierarchy is that they are unfamiliar with its composition.

She argues

that young minority and women professionals are frequently frustrated by
the rigidity and the emphasis on publishing, tenure, and rank.
Mosley (1980) considers visibility essential in terms of upward
mobility. In other words one must be seen in order to be recognized.
However, she noted that non-white women do not have the same level of
visiblity and therefore are not afforded the same advancement oppor­
tunities, which often leads to feelings of powerlessness and insecurity.
Moore and Wagstaff (1974) expressed the belief that black women in
senior institutions are not promoted as quickly as their white and black
male counterparts regardless of their preparation and production.

In

some cases, for example, she is deliberately discriminated against in
favor of a black male.

Career Patterns and Life Styles
As more men and women find themselves in dual and/or conflicting
roles, more studies are focusing on the relationships between academic
career, marital status and child rearing practices.

Gappa and Uehling

(1979) postulated that professional women are entering the traditional
life cycle and spending less time in it, postponing marriage and child
rearing and reducing family size.
Various writers have reflected on the marital status of academic
faculty (Ferber and Loeb, 1972; Gappa and Uehling, 1979).

They

concluded that for males, marriage was a great advantage and that
academic rank for males is strongly related to marital status.

For

females, however, marriage did not have the same advantages as for the
male.

Married women were less likely to be promoted, received less

honors, and held lower rank and salary than did single women (Gappa and

56
Uehling, 1979).
advantage.

In other words, being single for women was a relative

Remaining single does not resolve sex-related professional

problems for women.

Freeman’s (1977) research concluded that the single

woman is often viewed as a sex object, regarded as unreliable, is
professionally and economically exploited, and can be subjected to
social harassment and intimidation. Even though the single woman appears
to fare better in the academic arena, she pays a higher price for her
independence.
Slay and McDonald’s (1981) research supported previous findings
that women were able to integrate career and family involvement, but
they did have to make sacrifices and they experienced conflicts.

It was

concluded (Slay and McDonald, 1981; Mayfield and Nash, 1976) that
professional women generally do benefit from their careers through
personal fulfillment, financial gain, and increased opportunities (Slay
and McDonald, 1981; Mayfield and Nash, 1976).
Research into the career patterns of black professionals at white
institutions of higher education (Andrulis, D.P.; Iscoe, I.; Sikes,
M.P.; Friedman, T., 1975) indicated the following:
1.

The majority are employed in institutions with a student
body enrollment of less than 10,000.

2.

Only 11% of their sample size were employed in schools of
25,000 and above. The majority of state land grant insti­
tutions fall within this bracket and encompass a consider­
able proportion of the total student population.

3.

There was a substantial increase of employment at the
state college level which basically consisted of schools
with 10,000 to 15,000 students.

Andrulis et.al. (1975) shed light on some of the reasons why so
few black women appear in studies that explore the characteristics of
professional women at the land grant institutions.

From their findings,

57
these researchers estimated that there was roughly a 2 to 1 ratio of
black males to black females employed in higher education (predominantly
white colleges and universities).
Moore and Wagstaff (1974) observed that the majority of black
professional women attended public secondary schools, had post masters
work, and remained in the profession, while their white female counter­
parts tended to quit the profession after marriage and returned after
their family obligations had been met.
Black professional women with Ph.Ds generally pursued positions
that were more stable and less likely to be on the periphery of the
institution (Moore and Wagstaff, 1974).
without doctorates.
administrators.

This is not true of women

They generally ended up as being labeled ad hoc

The 1960s and 1970s produced a rash of ethnic programs

and projects which are now in the process of being dismantled (Moore and
Wagstaff, 1974).

This, in turn, has placed the black professional woman

in a precarious position as to where her future lies.
Black professional women are generally concentrated in five major
areas; behavioral science, social science, education, English, and
remedial education.

They comprise only 2.1% of faculty positions. White

females, on the other hand, who comprise 25% of the faculty positions,
are concentrated in a broader "feminine" typed position (Moore and
Wagstaff, 1974; Rossi and Calderwood, 1973; Strain and Drew, 1981).
Upon closer inspection of occupational distribution of fulltime
faculty employed in historically black institutions for 1975 an
interesting pattern emerges.

Overall, black women are employed in

larger proportions at the lower ranks of instruction than their non­
black female counterparts.

Black females comprise 45% of all black

58
faculty and 71% of all female faculty, but Asian and white females are
found in larger proportion in the top three academic ranks: professor,
associate, and assistant professor.
In other words, black females do not fare as well as whites or
other non-black females in relationship to their participation level in
black institutions or single sex institutions, as in this case, women's
colleges.

A partial explanation for the relatively lower rank of black

females is that they are less likely to hold the advanced degrees
generally required for high ranking faculty positions.

Networks
In taking a closer look at the status of the academic woman over
the past decade, there appears to be an increasing amount of attention
given to the effects of a network system.

Neuman (1977/1978) explored

what she considered to be the working elements of the scientific
academic community.

She identified these elements as a system of

initiation, sponsorship, and social circles.

In other words, young

academics are introduced by their mentors into the "old boys" network.
This network of interactions and contacts are made up of scholars and
professionals interested in similar intellectual fields (Neuman,
1977/1978).

This system provides the young professional with

employment, promotional opportunities, grants, and fellowships.

Freeman

(1973) expressed the belief that women are excluded from this informal
network of communication as early as graduate school, at which time
vital information regarding professional socialization is shared with
male faculty and male students (Freeman, 1973).
Cummings (1979) defined networking as consciously associating
one's self with other women for mutual support, developing mentoring

59
relationships between women, making contacts with other women profes­
sionals, and sharing information and data on job openings.
Neuman (1978) wrote that due to the lack of women belonging to
network systems academic women find themselves in precarious positions
of either being ignored by male colleagues or being treated as sex
objects by those who have power over their future careers.

Benton

(1980) described this phenomena as a barrier to the academic woman's
upward mobility which allows her to remain invisible in the academic
community.

Harris (1970) stated as early as the 1970s that women were

discriminated against by means of this semi-secret grapevine because
there were so few women in the academic hierarchy to develop an effec­
tive communication system.
MacConkey's (1980) research on the role of linkages and networks
in the structure of personal power, concluded:
1.

That with a scarcity of resources in the college and
university social system today, there is a steady decrease
in tenure slots, promotions and salaries.

2.

That one must understand the unique decision-making
process of a university and that there will be variation
in this process based on location and size.

3.

That communication linkages are a brand of campus power.

4.

Effective usage of this linkage involves personal and
active participation and observation of the behavior and
actions of others.

5.

Know what support groups are available and who comprises
its membership.

6.

Realize that information is not just confined to the upper
echelon.

7.

Understand that support networks do not operate in a
vacuum; that they operate from inside and outside the
campus area.

60
A study by Holt (1981) found that membership in networks is
essential for career advancement and that loners typically do not
advance in academe.
Scott (1979) believes that many minority and women professionals
experienced considerable frustration during the early stages of their
careers.

It is suggested that this may stem from a lack of familiarity

with the formal and informal codes of the academic hierarchy.

In order

to gain access to this information network, these two groups need to
belong to, or develop two types of network systems.

These two types of

networks are defined as (1) a separatist network composed of women
and/or minorities and (2) an assimilationist network composed of a
diverse group of individuals who belong to a particular profession.
This concept was also supported by research conducted by Peterson et.al.
which focused on black student enrollement on white campuses.

Educational Patterns
The National Center for Education Statistics (1975) succinctly
illustrated the educational patterns of black females.

Their findings

are as follows:
1.

Black females have higher aspirations than black males and
they attend college in greater numbers.

2.

In general their educational aspirations are higher than
their white female counterparts.

3.

Black families had higher education aspirations for their
children than whites when income is taken into
consideration.

4.

Black females were more career or work oriented than white
females.

61
Comments by thirty-one black professional women in male dominated
fields, interviewed by Epstein (1973) illustrated factors which might
explain the higher aspiration levels of black women:
1.

Black women have greater access than white woman to top
professions. Epstein feels that this may be due to the
fact that they are more familiar or have been more exposed
to white values and habits. That they may be regarded as
more "serious" professionals than white women and may not
be viewed as sex objects, or seen as out to get a husband.

2.

Black maternal role models tended to be ambitious women, a
higher percent of black wives work than do white wives.

3.

Black families stress middle class values which influence
the educational aspirations of their children.

4.

Education is considered a valuable investment. It is
reported to increase the self-confidence of black women
more so than for whites, because education is less common.

5.

Education offers higher economic rewards to black women
than it does to white women, based on median income
levels. In other words, black women are more concerned
with economic rewards and therefore are not as concerned
or bound by conventional stereotypes of occupations
labeled as feminine.

6.

For black women at all educational levels, who expected to
determine the quality of their lives, marriage was
reported to be of limited importance.

7.

Fertility rates of middle and upper class blacks are lower
than whites and black mother's attitudes toward their
children was different than that of whites. They viewed
themselves as less anxious, and their families still held
on to traditionally extended family networks. In other
words, others were allowed to assist the family. This is
not so in middle class white society.

8.

Black professionals were reported to be more supportive of
other female professionals, which was not found to be true
among white female professionals. The latter harbored
(male) negative stereotypical attitudes of women
professionals.

9.

Black women professionals are reported to have derived
higher levels of self-esteem from their professional
roles.

62
Epstein (1973) also examined the educational patterns of whites
and noted the following:
1.

In underprivileged white families the male child is given
preference when a college education is considered.

2.

Middle class families support the notion of a college
education for their daughters, but do not readily
encourage them to pursue advanced college degrees. It is
stated that professional training is a waste, detrimental
to marriage opportunities, or simply inappropriate for
women.

In conclusion, current patterns of financial aid and recruitment
of minority students may be obstacles that will impede the future
progress of black women (NCES— National Center for Educational
Statistics, 73074). Various authors also support the concepts that
education has a strong impact on one's social-economic status, that
blacks have traditionally placed a heavy emphasis upon educational
attainment as a vehicle for upward mobility and personal enrichment, and
that special emphasis has been placed on the black female (Moore and
Wagstaff, 1974; Bock, 1969; Allen, 1981; Wright, 1981; Malcom, Hall and
Brown, 1976).
However, current data documented by Strain (1981) clearly illus­
trate the reverse educational pattern that emerges at the graduate
level.

White females earned in 1978/1979 44.7% of Bachelor degrees

awarded that year, 46.7% Masters, and 28.1% PH.Ds.

Black females

earned, by comparison, 4.1%, 4.6%, and 1.9%.
Factors that lower the levels of educational attainment of women
in ethnic or racial minorities are summarized by NCES (1975):
1.

Cultural values regarding the feminine role or life styles
that are counterproductive to educational attainment

2.

Obstacles to post secondary education posed by low income,
and low social status

63
3.

Inferior elementary and secondary preparation, and

4.

For some groups, social, geographical, and political
isolation.

Over all, in looking at additional factors that influence the
achievement of women, numerous reports consistently show that black
women experienced the same institutional barriers of sexism as white
women (NCES, 1975; Swann and Witty, 1980; Carroll, 1973; Collins, 1979;
Alexander, 1979).

But Swann and Witty (1980) support Horner's (1972)

theory of "the fear of success" and stated that black women do not share
to the same extent a will to fail as do white women.

Summary
An attempt was made through reviewing research and related litera­
ture to provide background on the status of minority professional women
employed in institutions of higher education.

The plight of the

minority professional female is serious when compared to non-minority
professionals in higher education.

The charge was made that minority

professional females employed in non-black institutions of higher
education are generally located in positions which have the following
limitations:

limited power and/or ability to effect or influence

change, and limited opportunities for upward mobility.
Various factors and conditions were explored that are believed to
affect professional women in general and in the case of minority females
to have a definite impact on her employment future in higher education.
Prior publications suggest a strong need for more information
about the characteristics, career patterns, and opportunities for
minority female professionals in various types of higher education
institutions.

Chapter III
METHODOLOGY

The major objective of the study is to determine the similarities
and differences in the self perceived roles and attitudes of minority
and white professional women employed in higher education at Michigan
State University.

More specifically, the following questions will be

the focal point of this exploration.
1.

What types of positions and/or ranks do minority and white
professional women occupy at Michigan State University?

2.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of the
development of their network and/or support system?

3.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of their
roles or functions in regard to opportunities or abilities
to effect change or to influence the decision-making
processes in their academic departments or administrative
units?

4.

How do these groups compare in regards to their
perceptions of their opportunities for upward mobility?

5.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of their
professional role in terms of institutional, career or
personal barriers, limitations or options?

6.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of the
development of their strategies for maintaining their
professional standing?

7.

How do these groups compare in their perceptions of their
environment?

The procedure employed for collecting and presenting the data in
this study included the following steps: (1) identifying population and
sample, (2) constructing survey instrument, (3) collecting data, (4)
developing statistical hypotheses and (5) analyzing data.

64

65
Population and Sample
There were approximately 1,409

professional women employed at

Michigan State University during the 1982-1983 academic year. The popu­
lation studied was limited to professional women holding full-time
faculty and administrative/professional appointments employed during the
above period. The subjects surveyed were identified from the Faculty and
Administrative Personnel Records. Three samples were selected: Sample I
included 109 women who identified themselves as having minority status,
Sample II included a matched selection of 109 white females. This match­
ing process was as follows, each minority female in Sample I was matched
with a white female on the following three variables: academic disci­
pline or administrative unit, rank, and date of employment. Due to the
under representation of minority women in various academic fields and
administrative levels an additional sample was selected. This sample,
which is identified as Sample III, consisted of 100 white females
selected at random from academic disciplines and administrative units
not already represented in Sample I and II.
Kerlinger (1973) and Borg and Gall (1979) suggest that the main
purpose of matching is to reduce initial differences between groups on
dependent variables or related variables. The purpose of the random
sample, identified as group III, is to assess the degree of similarity
or differences when the above variables are not held constant.

Development of the Survey Instrument
The questionnaire was developed on the basis of information gained
through: (1) reviewing the literature relating to the problem of the
study, (2) consulting with researchers from the Office of Research

66
Consultations, (3) consulting with educators in the field and (4) con­
sulting with members of the dissertation guidance committee.
Since the primary thrust of this study was geared toward perceived
roles and attitudes, it was necessary to identify those attitudes and
roles generally considered to be common to and representative of profes­
sional females in institutions of higher education. Borg and Gall (1977)
state that the respondent's knowledge and expertise is an important
factor in the interpretation of attitudinal data. Thus, the principle
sources influencing the construction of the content of each item were
Hairston (1980), Moore and Wagstaff (1974), Mosley (1980) and Swanne and
Whitty (1981).
The questionnaire was constructed around three basic areas. Part I
was exploratory in nature, its major focus was to elicit information
from all respondent's regarding self-perceived roles and personal view­
points. Part II requested data regarding educational and professional
information for the purpose of establishing similarities and differences
among the respondences in the sample. Part III requested information
regarding demographic data by which to also ascertain similarities and
differences. Suggestions by Borg and Gall (1977), Dillman (1980) and
Oppeinheim (1966) were utilized as guidelines for the development of the
questionnaire format.
Part I included closed alternative items and open ended items.
Closed alternative items are generally thought to be more desireable for
a number of reasons: one, quantification and analysis of the items can
be carried out more efficiently, two, increased uniformity of measure­
ment and three, increased reliability (Borg & Gall, 1979, Kerlinger
1973).

67
The design of the open ended items allows for more flexibility,
greater depth, probing, encourages cooperation and achieves rapport and
to make better estimates of respondents true intentions, belief and
attitudes and can also suggest possibilities or relations and hypotheses
(Kerlinger 1973). Borg and Gall (1979) suggest a general rule for ques­
tionnaire constructions: it must generally be constructed as an attitude
scale and must use a minimum of ten items in order to obtain a reason­
able picture of the attitudes concerned.
The questionnaire was pretested by administering it to fourteen
white and minority professional male faculty and administrative/professionals employed at Michigan State University and several white
and minority male and female graduate students currently enrolled in
various fields of study. A one-page evaluation sheet accompanied each
questionnaire; this provided the researcher with suggestions for im­
provements and changes, which were then incorporated into the basic
instrument that was finally utilized in the data collection process. A
100% return rate was achieved on the pretest sample.

Collection of Data
Information was obtained by mailing a twelve page questionnaire
accompanied by a cover letter and a self-addressed stamped envelope to
women currently holding faculty and administrative/professional appoint­
ments as described previously. Initially, 318 questionnaires were mailed
with a two-page cover letter explaining the general objective of this
investigation. The questionnaires were coded for identification purposes
only so that follow-up letters could be mailed to those individuals who
had not previously responded. A follow-up letter was sent to non­
respondents three weeks later. A second questionnaire was forwarded to

68
respondents who did not receive the first one or who had misplaced it.
Several calls were received for more information regarding the nature of
this study. See Appendices A, B, and C for copies of the questionnaire,
cover letter and follow-up letters used in the study.
Sixty-five questionnaires were returned incompleted for several
reasons, the major one being that these individuals were no longer
employed at the university. Eight respondents stated that even though
they were listed as having an administrative/professional rank their
jobs were really of a different nature than that of an administrative/
professional. A total number of 252 responses was received, of which
only 185 were usable. A final return rate of seventy-three percent was
achieved. Tables 3.2 and 3.3 provide a summary of the responses.

Analysis of Data
The returned questionnaires were divided into three categories
based on the sampling procedure. Group I was composed of all respondents
who were identified as having minority status. Group II was composed of
all respondents who were matched with Group I. This matching process was
as follows: each minority female in Group I was matched with a white
female on the following three variables: academic discipline or
administrative unit, rank and date of employment. Due to the under­
representation of minority women in various academic fields and
administrative levels, an additional sample was selected at random. This
group was identified as Group III, which was composed of non-minority
professional women.
Questionnaire responses were coded and verified and then entered
into the computer for analysis; frequency and percentage tabulations
were completed for each of the separate groups for comparison purposes.

69
Two-way cross tabulations and analyses of a number of variables were
completed to investigate possible similarities and differences between
the three groups. Statistical Packages for the Social Science computer
program were utilized in the analyses.
Descriptive statistics were used to describe the raw data; this
technique is used to indicate the average score and the variability of
scores of each group in the sample. Kerlinger (1973) and Borg & Gall
(1979) define descriptive studies as typically employing either survey
or observational research methods. Its primary purpose is to collect
information that permits a researcher to describe the characteristics of
person, educational processes, or an institution. These authors con­
cluded that a careful quantitative description by itself often leads to
improved understanding of educational phenomena.
Inferential statistics were used to make inferences from sample
statistics to the population parameters. This statistical method is
utilized since the entire population is rarely studied. A test of
statistical significance is done to determine whether the null hypothe­
ses can be rejected (Borg & Gall 1979).
Data Analysis Procedure
To examine the seven hypotheses in this investigation, a series of
statistical treatments were used to compute results. Inferential sta­
tistics were used to examine the characteristics of the sample in order
to make inferences from the sample statistics to the population
parameters.
A condescriptive subprogram was used to determine the basic
distributional characteristics of each of the variables to be used in
the subsequent statistical analysis and constitute a basic computer

70
reference document for the entire raw data file. One-way frequency
distribution tables were used to ensure that each variable has suf­
ficient variability to be used in subsequent relational analysis and to
check the validity of the data to ensure that it has been coded, punched
and inputted to the desired specifications. Condescriptive statistics
were used to analyze continuous interval-level data, which enables the
researcher to compute the following descriptive statistics: mean,
standard error, standard deviation, minimum and maximum ranges.

All

statistics computed using condescriptive statistics assume that the
variables are numerically coded and interval in scale (SPSS).
Condescriptive and frequency statistics were computed for the
relationship tested in Hypothesis 1.
An ANOVA was used to provide the researcher with the following
three types of information: (1) the decomposition of the sum of squares
which are used as descriptive indicators of the overall relationship
between the independent and dependent variables; in this case, race is
the independent variable; (2) an F ratio and accompanying statistics
were obtained to determine the degree of statistical significance and
(3) estimates of effects of differences among the three groups means
were used to interpret the patterns of the independent effect. Tests of
significance were analyzed and reported using the 0.5 level of
probability where the ANOVA produced an F statistic to calculate
significance (SPSS).

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to

compute relationships for Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
Scheffe post hoc comparison and test of the means is done mainly
for explorative and interpretative purposes.

This statistical treatment

is applied to all comparisons of the means, after the analysis of
variance, and only to those items in which the F test is significant.
Factor analysis procedures were used to further explore and
examine several items, and to assist in determining the degree to which
a given set of variables are part of a common dimension.

Factor

analysis procedures were used to examine several items identified with
Hypothesis 4.

Hypotheses Tested
The seven hypotheses investigated were stated in the null form and
tested for significance at the .05 alpha level. They are as follows:
Null Hypothesis I :
There is no significant relationship between the race of the employed
female professional and her rank or position at Michigan State
University.
Hn : u3 = ul
U
u2 = ul
Alternative Hypothesis I :
There is a significant relationship between race of the employed female
professional and her rank or position at Michigan State University.
H. : u3 > ul
u2 > ul
Null Hypothesis II:
There is no significant difference between minority and white
professional women relative to their perceptions of the effectiveness of
their network and/or support systems.

Alternative Hypothesis I I :
There is a significant difference between minority and white
professional women relative to their perceptions of the effectiveness of
their network and/or support system.
H, : u3 > ul
u2 > ul
Null Hypothesis III;
There is no significant difference between professional minority and
white females in their perceptions of their opportunities or abilities
to effect change or influence the decision-making process in their
academic department or administrative units.
Hn : u3 = ul
u2 = ul
Alternative Hypothesis III:
There is a significant difference between professional minority and
white females in their perceptions of their opportunities or abilities
to effect change or influence the decision-making process in their
academic department or administrative units.
H. : u3 > ul
u2 > ul
Null Hypothesis I V ;
There is no significant difference between professional minority and
white females regarding their opportunity for upward mobility.
Hn : u3 = ul
u2 = ul
Alternative Hypothesis I V :
There is a significant difference between professional minority and
white females regarding their opportunity for upward mobility.
H. : u3 > ul
u2 > ul
Null Hypothesis V :
There is no significant difference between minority and white females in
their perceptions of their professional roles in terms of institutional,
personal, and career barriers or options.

73
Alternative Hypothesis V :
There is a significant difference between minority and white females in
their perceptions of their professional roles in terms of institutional,
personal, and career barriers or options.
H, : u3 > ul
u2 > ul
Null Hypothesis V I :
There is no significant difference between minority and white
professional females in the development of their strategies for
maintaining their professional standing,
Hn : u3 = ul
u2 = ul
Alternative Hypothesis V I ;
There is a significant difference between minority and white
professional females in the development of their strategies for
maintaining their professional standing.
Hn
U

:u3
u2

> ul
> ul

Null Hypothesis VII:
There is no significant difference between minority and white
professional females and their perceptions of their environment.
Hn
U

:u3 = ul
u2 = ul

Alternative Hypothesis V I I :
There is a significant difference between minority and white
professional females and their perceptions of their environment.
H. : u3 > ul
1
u2 > ul

74

Table 3.1

Sample by Race

Race

Faculty

American Indian
Asian/Pacific Islander
Black/African American
Chicano
Hispanic
White/Caucasian

TOTALS

Minority I
Matched Whites II
Non-Matched Whites III

TOTALS

Table 3.2

Administrative/Professional

2
5
30
1
4
68

0
2
7
1
2
61

110

73

183

42
41
27

11
15
47

53
56
74

110

73

183

Sample and Record of Responses

Participants

Mailed

Nonusable

Returned

Percent
Returned

Usable
Returns

Minority I
Matched
Whites II
Non-Matched
Whites III

109
109

22
26

53
56

47
51

53
56

100

18

76

76

76

TOTALS

318

66

185

73

185

75

Table 3.3

Participants

Nonusable Questionnaires

No longer
employed
at MSU

Not
Quali­
fied

Over
Commit­
ted

On
Sabbat­
ical
Leave

Choose
Not to
Parti­
cipate

Lost

Total

14
Minority I
Matched Whites II 12
Non-Matched
11
Whites III

3
4
1

1
3
1

1
2
1

3
3
3

0
2
1

22
26
18

37

8

5

4

9

3

66

Totals

Summary
This chapter discussed the following: the sample used for the
study; the construction of the survey instrument, procedures for
collection of data; statistical hypotheses; and the analysis of data.

Chapter IV
Introduction

As indicated earlier, the purpose of this study is to determine
the similarities and differences in the self-perceived roles and atti­
tudes of minority and white professional women employed at Michigan
State University.
Responses were received from 53 female minority respondents
(Minority I), 56 matched white female respondents (Matched Whites II),
and 74 non-matched white female respondents selected at random (Non­
matched Whites III), constituting a total number of 183 as described in
Chapter III. Since all respondents did not answer every questionnaire
item, the total number indicated for each question may vary.
Major consideration in the analysis of the data collected in this
study is the comparision of the reported self-perceived attitudes of
three groups with emphasis on rank or position, ability or opportunity
to change or influence the decision-making process, career barriers,
upward mobility, networking or support systems, professional standing,
and environment.
The sections of this chapter include: (1) a descriptive analysis
of the demographic data; (2) presentation of the results of the analysis
of variance, which compares the three sample groups on each of the items
within the seven hypothesises;

(3) presentation of the factor analysis

of items that comprise hypotheses four; (4) discussion of presentation
and findings, and (5) summary.

76

77
Demographic Data
Personal information was obtained to provide a better under­
standing of how certain elements such as age, race, marital status,
number of children, educational attainment, salary range, and years in
current position influence the respondents' rank or position. Tables 4.1
to 4.16 present a summary of the data on the personal characteristics of
the professional women employed at Michigan State University.
Age
Table 4.1 and 4.2 indicate the age ranges of all three groups in
the study. The respondents of this study ranged in age from 25-67 years
of age. The median age range for all three groups was between 36-39
years of age. In addition, 23% of all the respondents in the non-matched
group were in the 36-40 year old category; overall, this group appeared
to be slightly older.
Marital Status
Table 4.3 indicates that 120 of all the respondents, or 65.5%,
were married: 59.6% of the minority females, 64% of the matched white
females, and 71.6% of the non-matched white females. Respondents in
Sample III differed mostly in the never-married and living with a sig­
nificant other categories.
Education
Tables 4.4 and 4.5 indicate that 90.6% of all respondents in all
three groups have a Bachelor's degree. However, noted differences
existed across all three groups. Over 43% of the minority females held
doctoral and professional degrees, whereas only 38% of matched white and
23% of the non-matched white females held these degrees.

78
Salary
Tables 4.6 and 4.7 indicate the salary range for 180 respondents,
of which over seventy percent earned over $18,000, with a mean/average
of $22,757 for the total group.

Based on the data, it appears that

minority females earned more, but not to a significant degree.

Salary

ranges and education levels appear to be consistent across all three
groups.
Children
Tables 4.8 and 4.9 indicate the number of children, if any, that
are still in the home. Fifty-five percent of all respondents indicated
that there were no dependents still residing in the home. Fifty-three
percent of the minority females, 37.5% of matched white females, and
44.5% of the non-matched white females have one or more dependents still
in the home.
Years in Current Position
Tables 4.10 and 4.11 indicate the number of years all respondents
have been employed in their current position. Seventy-eight percent of
all respondents were employed less than five years: 85% of minority
females, 79% of matched white females, and 73% of non-matched white
females. Sixteen percent of all respondents were employed six to ten
years, with 13% of minority females, 18% of matched white females and
non-matched white females.

Only 5% of all respondents were employed

more than ten years: 2% of minority females, 3.6% of matched white
females, and 10% of non-matched white femlaes.
Description of Group or Segment of MSU Population
Table 4.12 indicates that 46% of minority faculty and admin­
istrative/professional females worked with a particular segment of the

79
MSU population. The type of group (Table 4.13 ) minority faculty and
administrative/professional women worked with was significant at the .05
alpha level. Only minority females were found to be working with
minority students, significantly more so than white females with white
or minority students.
Current Type of Positions
Tables 4.14 to 4.16 summarize the type of faculty and adminis­
trative/professional positions held by the respondents. Faculty
positions were held by 83% of minority females, 78% of matched white
females, and 96% of non-matched females. Tenure-track positions, such as
professor, associate, and assistant professor were held by 50% of
minority females, 44% of matched white females and 52% of non-matched
white females. Twenty-six percent of those who held faculty positions
were in the Specialist category, which was comprised of 28.5% minority
females, 22% matched white females, and 30% of non-matched females.
Administrative/Professional positions were held by 21% of minority
females, 25% of matched white females, and 64% of non-matched white
females. Minority and matched white females were fairly consistent in
the employment levels that they held.

Results
Age, educational attainment, years in current position, and the
type of group or segment of the population faculty and administrative/
professional women worked with were the major differences between the
three groups. The median age range for minority and matched white
females was between 31-35 years of age. Respondents in the non-matched
female group were slightly older— the median age range for this group
was between 36-40 years of age. The level of education was another area

80
in which respondents differed. Minority faculty and administrative/
professional females held higher academic degrees than their matched
white female counterparts and to an even greater degree when compared to
white females selected at random. Of all the respondents who were
employed for more than ten years, white female respondents in the random
sample held the highest percent, when compared to minority females and
matched white females.
The type or segment of the Michigan State University population
that employees worked with was significant at the .05 alpha level.
Minority females, employed in faculty and administrative/professional
positions worked with minority students to a significant degree.

81

Table 4.1

Age by Group

Minority

Age Levels

Matched Whites

N

%

N

20-25
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
56-60
61-65
66-70

0
6
17
10
9
2
4
1
0
0

0
12
35
20
18
4
8
2
0
0

1
9
18
12
9
2
1
3
0
0

TOTALS

49

99

55

Table 4.2

Group

Minority
Matched Whites
Non-Matched Whites

TOTALS

Non-Matched Whites

%

2
16
32.7
22
16
3.6
1.8
5.4
0
0

99.5

N

%

1
12
19
17
7
10
2
4
1
1

1
16
26
23
9
13.5
3
5
1
1

74

98.5

Age by Group

Count

Mean

Standard Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

49
55
74

38
36
39

7.483
7.956
9.031

26
25
25

59
60
67

178

38

8.309

25

67

82

Table 4.3

Marital Status by Group

Minority

Matched Whites

N

%

N

Single
Married
Separated
Divorced
Widowed
Living with
Significant Other

10
31
1
9
1
0

19
60
2
17
2
0

12
36
1
7
0
0

TOTALS

52

100

56

Marital Status

Table 4.4

%

N

%

21
64
2
12.5
0
0

6
53
0
8
2
5

8
72
0
11
3
7

99.5

74

100

Levels of Educational Attainment by Group

Minority

Matched Whites

N

%

Less than 4 year
2
degree
Bachelor's
9
Master's & Specialist 19
Professional & Ph.D. 23

4

3

17
36
43

100

Educational Level

TOTALS

Non-Matched Whites

53

N

Non-Matched Whites

%

N

%

5

13

18

13
19
21

23
34
37.5

16
27
17

22
37
23

56

99.5

73

100

Table 4.4 illustrates the levels of educational attainment by groups.
Ten educational levels were collapsed into four primary categories to
facilitate reporting of data.

83

Table 4.5

Level of Educational Attainment by Group

Group

Count

Minority
Matched Whites
Non-Matched Whites

TOTALS

Mean

Standard Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

53
56
74

7.288
6.964
6.243

1.753
2.191
2.207

3
0
1

10
10
10

183

6.727

2.172

0

10

Table 4.5 indicates the educational range of all three groups. The data
implies that the majority of the participants had acquired master’s
degrees, but that minority females had pursued academic degrees beyond
the master degree.

Table 4.6

Salary by Group

Minority

Salary Levels

-10,000
10,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000 33,000 36,000 39,000 +

TOTALS

13,999
17,999
20,999
23,999
26,999
29,999
32,999
35,999
38,999

Matched Whites

Non-Matched Whites

N

%

N

%

N

2
0
5
9
10
11
4
2
3
2
3

3
0
9
18
20
21.6
8
4
6
4
6

5
3
8
12
9
7
5
4
0
0
3

9
5.4
14
21
16
12.5
9
7
0
0
5.4

2
2
17
12
13
11
6
4
3
0
3

51

100

56

100

73

%

3
3
23
16
18
15
8
5.5
4
0
4

100

84

Table 4.7

Group

Minority
Matched Whites
Non-Matched Whites

TOTALS

Salary by Group

Count

Mean

Standard Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

51
56
73

$24,538
$21,570
$22,423

$7,392
$7,648
$6,964

$9,000
$9,000
$9,000

$40,499
$40,499
$40,499

180

$22,757

$7,358

$9,000

$40,499

Children by Group

Table 4.8

Minority

Matched Whites

Non-Matched Whites

N

%

N

None
One
Two
Three or more

25
14
11
3

47.2
26.4
21
6

35
9
11
1

62.5
16
20
2

41
13
15
5

55.4
18
20
7

TOTALS

53

100.0

56

100.0

74

100.0

Number of Dependents

Minority
Matched Whites
Non-Matched Whites

TOTALS

N

%

Children by Group

Table 4.9

Group

%

Count

Mean

Standard Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

53
56
74

.885
.607
.784

1.003
.867
.997

0
0
0

4
3
3

183

.754

.961

0

4

85

Years in Current Position

Table 4.10

Group

Count

Minority
Matched Whites
Non-Matched Whites

TOTALS

53
56
74

183

Mean

Standard Deviation

Maximum

3.7
4.0

2.8
3.1
3*3

.5
1.0
*3

19 yr.
20 yr.
15 yr.

4

3.1

.5

20 yr.

Years in Current Position

Table 4.11

Minority

Years

N

1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21+

45
7
1
0
0

TOTALS

53

Table 4.12

Minimum

%

84.9
13
2
0
0

100

Matched Whites

N

44
10
12
1
0

56

Non-Matched Whites

%

78.6
18
5
2
0

100

N

54
13
7
1
1

74

%

73
17.6
9.5
1.4
1.4

100

Michigan State University Population by Group

Matched Whites

Minority

Particular Population

N

No
Yes

28
24

TOTALS

52

%

53.8
46

100

Non-Matched Whites

N

%

N

%

42
14

75
25

46
23

66.7
33

56

100

69

99.7

86

Table 4.13

Michigan State University Population by Group

Minority

Description of
Population

Matched Whites

N

%

Handicapped
Athletic
Female
Minority
International
Faculty & AP
Other

2
0
6
12
4
6
7

5
0
16
32
11
16
19

TOTALS

37

99

Table 4.14

Non-Matched Whites

%

N

%

1
1
3
0
0
5
6

6
6
19
0
0
31
37

0
1
2
0
2
13
8

0
4
8
0
8
50
31

16

99

26

100

N

Current Levels - Faculty

Minority

Matched Whites

Non-Matched Whites

N

%

N

%

N

%

Professor
Assoc. Professor
Asst. Professor
Instructor
Lecturer
Adjunct Position
Specialist
Other

1
9
11
2
0
0
12
7

2
21
26
5
0
0
28.5
16

1
6
11
1
0
0
9
13

2
15
27
2
0
0
22
32

2
1
11
4
0
0
8
1

7
4
41
15
0
0
30
4

TOTALS

42

98.5

41

100

27

100

Current Level

87

Table 4.15

Current Levels for Administrative/Professional

Minority

Matched Whites

Non-Matched Whites

Current Levels

N

%

N

%

N

%

13 - 16 High
10 - 12
7 - 9 Low
Other

2
8
1
0

18
72.7
9
0

1
11
2
0

7
78.5
14
0

12
17
18
0

25
36
38
0

14

99.5

47

100

11

TOTALS

Table A.16

100

Current Levels for Administrative/Professional

Group

Count

Minority
Matched Whites
Non-Matched Whites

11
14
47

TOTALS

72

Mean

Standard Deviation

Minimum

11.36
10.82
10.47

3.00
2.16
6.61

7
7
7

8.2A

24.75

7

16

Maximum

16
16
16

88
The Analysis of Variance
The analysis of variance was used to examine the seven research
hypotheses presented in Chapter 3.

In some cases Schefee post hoc

comparisons were utilized when mean differences between the study groups
were statistically significant.

The procedure was considered to be an

appropriate technique to analyze the data generated from rank type items
in regard to testing the stated hypothesis. The seven hypotheses were
tested for significance at the .05 alpha level with the appropriate
degrees of freedom.

In each analysis, race was the independent variable

and each item constituted a dependent variable.

Analysis of variance is

summarized in Tables 4.17 to 4.35.
Rank and Position
The first hypothesis addressed in this study was an investigation
of the relationship between race and rank or position across the three
groups sampled.
Hq

There is no significant relationship between the race of
employed female professionals and their rank or position at
Michigan State University.
An analysis of variance, by implementation of ANOVA, was computed

for each variable defined to encompass the dimension of rank or posi­
tion. The relationship between race and rank or position is presented in
Table 14.7. According to the results, the following variables were
statistically

significant at the .05 alpha level: education and ethnic

background; that is, rank or position differed significantly according
to racial membership. In addition, Schefee post-hoc comparisons were
carried out on the indicated significant variables.
Educational levels were significant, with noted differences, in
all three samples. A Schefee post-hoc comparison of the indicated means

89
illustrates that the education levels of minority women is significantly
greater than the other two groups of respondents.

The results indicate

that respondents classified as minorities held a larger number of
advanced degrees than their matched white female counterparts and the
non-matched random group.
With regard to the second significant variable associated with
rank or position, the following was noted. Due to the sampling procedure
used, the greatest ethnic diversity existed among the minority females.
In other words, minority respondents identified their ethnic background
as either American Indian, Asian American, Black or Hispanic. Groups II
and III were comprised of white female respondents.
Even though there is no significant difference between salaries
earned by each group, it may be noted that salaries were consistent with
each group's educational level (Tables 4.6 and 4.7).
Based on the data presented, H q is not rejected. As indicated on
Table 4.17, the one-way analysis of variance results reveal no
significant difference on seven of nine items between race and one's
rank or position of employment.
Lastly, a mean and standard deviation was calculated for each item
identified with rank or position across all three groups. The
information is presented in Table 4.18.

90
Table 4.17

Qt. #

29
30
31
36
37
40
46
46
48

*.05
**.01

Employment Rank or Position at Michigan State University
Analysis of Variance

Source of Variation

(N)

SS

Administrative
Position
Primary Unit
Current Adminis­
trative Position
Ethnic Background
Education
Salary
Current Position
Faculty
Current Position A/P
Length of Time

82

11.5244

2

.1410

1.361

.2628

88
89

489.7159
41.6556

2
2

5.5580
.4754

1.555
.314

.2172
.7312

180
181
180
110

370.852
766.8398
984.9500
649.6727

2
2
2
2

2.038 789.184
4.0834
4.898
2.247
5.4269
5.9262
1.313

73
183

43.8904
4247.7377

2
2

DF

MS

.6154
23.0874

F

SIG . OF F

.661
1.993

.0011**
.0085**
.1087
.2732
.5194
.1393

Table 4.18

Q t .#

29
30
31
36

Rank
Indicators

Employment Rank or Position by Group

N

Administrative Position 82
Primary Unit
88
90
Current Administrative
Position
Ethnic Background
181

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

1.1600 .4726 (25)
4.0833 2.2634 (24)
1.6400
.7000 (25)

1.2500 .4472 (16)
5.0588 2.6568 (17)
1.5882
.6183 (17)

3.019

.8430 (53)

6.000

0

(56)

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

6.000

0

F

1.361
1.555
.314

.2623
.2172
.7312

(72) 2 789.184

.0011

1.0732
.2637 (41)
5.0851 2.2920 (47)
1.7292 .7068 (48)

2
2
2

F ratio

•3BS-

37

Education

181

7.2335 1.7527 (52)

7.0909 1.9933 (53)

6.2432 2.2072 (74)

2

4.898

.0085

40
46

Salary
Current Position/
Faculty
Current Position/AP
Length of Time

180
110

5.7451 2.3820 (51)
4.7619 2.4773 (42)

4.8214 2.4129 (56)
5.2927 2.5714 (41)

5.0685 2.2257 (73)
4.3333 2.1304 (27)

2
2

2.247
1.313

.1087
.2732

73
183

.5394 (11)
1.9091
3.6226 2.2551 (53)

2.2667
.8837 (15)
4.2857 3.1549 (56)

2.1277
.7972 (47)
5.3108 6.7680 (74)

2
2

.661
.5194
1.993 1.393

46
48

*.05
**.01

>

92
Network and Support System
The second hypothesis addressed in this study was an investigation
of the perceptions of the effectiveness of network and/or support system
across the three groups sampled.
Hq

There is no significant difference between the minority and
white professional women relative to their perception of the
effectiveness of their network and/or support system.
An analysis of variance, by implementation of ANOVA, was computed

on each variable defined to encompass the dimension of network and/or
support system. The difference of the effectiveness of network and/or
support system is presented in Table 4.19. According to the results the
following variables were significant at the .05 alpha level:
professional/scholarly organizations and type of organization—
professional and social. In other words, participation in a
professional/scholarly organization and the type of organization
differed significantly according to racial membership. In addition,
Schefee post-hoc comparisons were carried out on the indicated
significant variables.
Based on the data presented, respondents belonged to or identified
with professional organizations to a significant degree, at the .0000
alpha level. Schefee's comparison of the means demonstrates that
minority and matched white female groups belonged to professional groups
to a greater degree than respondents in the non-matched white female
group.
Type of organizations was significant at the .001 alpha level in
two categories: professional and social. Minority female respondents
belonged to professional and social organizations more so than either of
the other two group.

93
Even though the level of effectiveness of support groups in ad­
vancing professional and/or personal development was not significant,
over three-fourths of the respondents who were affiliated with support
groups believed that such groups were effective in advancing their
professional and personal development.
Based on the data presented, H q is not rejected. As indicated in
Table 4.19, the one-way analysis of variance results reveals no
significant difference between the means of the respondents in two out
of thirteen of the items relative to their perception of the
effectiveness of their network and/or support system.
In conclusion, a mean and standard deviation was calculated for
each item identified with network and/or support system (Table 4.20).

94
Table 4.19

Qt. #

15

15

16
16

17

19

20

*.05

**.01

Analysis of Variance Results
Effectiveness of Networks and/or Support Group

Source of Variation

(N)

DF

Professional &
Scholarly Organi­
zations
Professional &
Scholarly Organi­
zation— Chair or
Office
Communication Net­
work
Level of Interaction:
University
Regional
National
Effectiveness of
Communication Net­
work
Type of Organization:
Professional
Honorary
Social
Effectiveness of
Support Group

179

2

25.6313

.1262

13.538

146

2

33.4795

.2281

1.902

.1531

177

2

40.5763

.2285

1.799

.1685

182
182
182
90

2
2
2
2

28.918
29.519
28.918
56.4889

.159
.162
.159
.6447

2.914
1.741
1.874
.310

.057
.1786
.156
.7344

182
182
182
115

2
2
2
2

44.601
26.404
33.934
75.4435

.245
.145
.186
.6564

10.716
2.293
11.402
1.465

SS

MS

F

SIG1. OF F

.0000*^

.001**
.104
.001**
.2354

Table 4.20

Qt.#

15
15

16
16

Effectiveness of Networks and/or Support Groups by Group

Network/Support Group
Indicators

Professional & Scholar-ly Organizations
Professional & Scholar­
l y Organizations
Office
Communication Network
Levels of Interaction:
University
Regional
National

N

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

179

1.9811

.1374 (53)

1.8909

.3146 (55)

1.6620

.4764 (71)

2 13.538

146

1.3846

.4913 (52)

1.2500

.4376 (48)

1.4348

.5012 (46)

2

1.902

.0000
*
.1531

177

1.4615

.5034 (52)

1.3091

.4664 (55)

1.3143

.4676 (70)

2

1.799

.1685

182
182
182

.302
.283
.283

.383
.358
.383

2
2
2

2.914
1.741
1.874

.057
.178
.156

.468
.455
.455

(53)
(53)
(53)

.125
.196
.143

.334
.401
.353

(56)
(56)
(56)

.176
.149
.176

(74)
(74)
(74)

Table 4.20 (cont.)

Qt.#

17
19

Network/Support Group
Indicators

Effectiveness of
Communication Network
Type of Organization:
Professional
Honorary
Social

20

Effectiveness of Networks and/or Support Groups by Group

Effectiveness of
Support Group

*.05
**.01

N

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

90

2.4194

182

.792

.409

(53)

.375

.489

(56)

182
182

.189
.302

.395
.463

(53)
(53)

.250
.321

.437
.471

115

2.0256

.7199 (31)

.7429 (39)

2.5652

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

.310

.7344

.8433 (36)

2

.581

.497

(74)

2 10.716

.001

(56)
(56)

.108
.284

.313
.454

(74)
(74)

2 2.293
2 11.402

.104
.001

1.7273 .9108 (33)

2.000

.8435 (23)

2.5556

.7868 (43)

2

1.465 .2354

97
Decision-Making Process
The third hypothesis addressed in this study was an investigation
of the opportunities or abilities to effect change or influence the
decision-making process in academic departments or administrative units
across the three groups sampled.
Hg

There is no significant difference between professional
minority and white females in their perceptions of their
opportunities or abilities to effect change or influence the
decision-making process in their academic departments or
administrative units.
An analysis of variance, by implementation of ANOVA, was computed

for each variable defined to encompass the dimensions of the ability to
effect change or influence the decision-making process. The differences
in the ability to effect change or influence the decision-making process
are presented in Table 4.21. According to the results, the following
variable was significant at the .05 alpha level: informed of department,
college or university problems as compared to other females in their
area. In addition, Schefee post-hoc comparison was carried out on the
indicated significant variable.
In terms of being informed of problems, issues, and developments
at the department, college, or university level, a significant differ­
ence was noted when respondents compared themselves to other male and
female counterparts. Schefee post-hoc comparisons of the means
demonstrate that of the respondents who had female counterparts,
minority female respondents perceived themselves as being equally or
better informed than respondents in the matched white female group and
the non-matched white female group. But there was no significant
difference between the three groups when asked to compare themselves to
their male counterparts.

98
Based on the data presented, H q is not rejected. As indicated in
Table 4.21, the one-way analysis of variance results reveal no
significant difference on sixteen of seventeen items designed to explore
the opportunities or abilities to effect change or influence the
decision-making process in academic departments or administrative units.
In conclusion, a mean and standard deviation was calculated for
each item identified with the decision-making process (Table 4.21).

99
Table 4.21

Analysis of Variance Results
Decision-Making Process

Qt. #

Source of Variation

(N)

DF

1

Impact on DecisionMaking
Impact compared to
Females
Impact compared to
Males
Academic Matters
Financial Matters
Administrative
Matters
Hiring/Promotion
Women
Hiring/Promotion
Minorities
Hiring/Promotion
Practices
Tenure Policies
Involved in PolicyMaking
Informed of Issues
Informed Compared
to Females
Informed Compared
to Males
Identify Experiences
Access to Data
Females
Access to Data Males

180

2

137.3944

.7671 1.058

.3494

148

2

60.7297

.4100 1.558

.2141

141

2

60.1844

.4195 2.730

.0688

126
144
150

2
2
2

57.2143
53.9755
66.5933

.213
.4635
.3725 1.936
.4465 1.072

.8081
.1481
.3450

141

2

150.3121

1.0880

.080

.9235

143

2

176.4336

1.2208 2.262

.1079

143

2

167.6084

1.1880

.541

.5836

77
125

2
2

67.2208
77.4720

.8590 2.126
.6279 .690

.1265
.5036

171
142

2
2

117.3801
35.4155

.570
.6940
.2421 3.634

.5668
.0289*

143

2

53.7343

.3803

.653

.5218

165
70

2
2

36.327
11.0857

.222 1.299
.1526 2.830

.276
.0661

71

2

12.8732

.1841

.3848

2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
6
7
7
8
33
33

*.05

**.01

SS

MS

F

.969

SIG . OF F

Table 4.22

3t.#

1
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4

4
4

Decision-making
Indicators

Impact decision-making
Process
Impact compared to F
Impact compared to M
Academic Matters
Financial Matters
Administrative Matters
Hiring/Promotion of
Women
Hiring/Promotion of
Minorities
Hiring/Promotion Prac­
tices or Policies
in General
Tenure Policies
Involved in Policy­
making

Decision-Making Process by Group

N

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

180

2.1154

.7581 (52)

148
141
126
144
150
141

.6611
1.9796
2.3500 .6622
2.2222
.7035
2.2826 .6205
.7051
2.2391
2.2143 1.0400

143

1.9778 1 .0551 (45)

143

2.5778

77
125

3.2400
2.8500

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

.9273 (55)

1.8182
2.3023
2.1579
2.4000
2.3023
2.3056

.6203
.6375
.6789
.5454
.6375
.9508

F

1.058

.3494

(55)
(58)
(43)
(58)
(61)
(63)

2
2
2
2
2
2

1.558
2.730
.213
1.936
1.072
.080

.2141
.0688
.8081
.1481
.3450
.9235

2.4865 1.1200 (37)

2.2951 1.1305 (61)

2

2.262

.1079

.9412 (45)

2.5143 1.1212 (35)

2.3651 1.1681 (63)

2

.541

.5836

.9695 (25)
.7696 (40)

3.0526 1.1291 (19)
2.9429 .6835 (35)

3.5758
2.7400

2
2

2.126
.690

.126
.5036

(44)
(43)
(38)
(40)
(43)
(36)

2.1644

F ratio

2

(49)
(40)
(45)
(46)
(46)
(42)

2.3455

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

.9131 (73)

1.7636 .6372
2.0690 .6451
2.2558
.6580
2.1552 .6435
2.1148 .6608
2.2381 1.0883

.7513 (33)
.8762 (50)

Table 4.22 (cont.)

Qt.#

6
7
7
8
33

33

Decision-making
Indicators

*.05
**.01

N

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

.5668

171

2.0800

.8533 (50)

2.2500

.8603 (52)

2.2029

.7967 (69)

2

.570

142
143
165
70

2.0444
2.1591
1.7556
2.0000

.5623
.6801
.4346
.4472

(45)
(44)
(45)
(21)

1.8776
2.1860
1.6000
2.0000

.4393
.5458
.4949
0

(49)
(43)
(50)
(13)

1.7708
2.0536
1.6714
1.7778

.4722
.6155
.4731
.4216

(48)
(56)
(70)
(36)

2
2
2
2

3.634
.653
1.299
2.830

71

2.0000

.4714 (19)

2.0833

.2887 (12)

1.9000

.4414 (40)

2

.969

.0289*
.5218
.2757
.0661

.3848

101

Informed of Problems,
Issues, & Development
Informed Compared to F
Informed Compared to M
Identify Experiences
Informed of Data in
Administrative Unit
Compared to Females
Informed of Data in
Administrative Unit
Compared to Males

Decision-Making Process by Group

102
Upward Mobility
The fourth hypothesis addressed in this study was an investigation
of the perception of the opportunities for upward mobility across all
three groups sampled.
Hq

There is no significant difference between professional
minority and white females regarding their perceptions of
their opportunities for upward mobility.
An analysis of variance, by implementation of ANOVA, was computed

for each variable defined to encompass the dimension of opportunities
for upward mobility and the results are presented in Table 4.23.
According to the results the following variables were significant
at the .05 alpha level: pressure or anxiety regarding aspects of one's
position; preparation of written reports and forms, and grant or
proposal writing. In addition, Schefee post-hoc comparisons were carried
out on indicated variables.
Exploring nine factors that are perceived to create pressure and
anxiety, only two factors appeared to create more stress to a
significant degree (.05 alpha level): preparation of written reports and
forms and grant or proposal writing. Schefee comparison of the means
demonstrates that these two factors seem to have a greater impact on
minority and matched white females, more so than on the non-matched
white female group, which again may be attributed to the fact that this
group may have had more experience or expertise in these areas, due to a
longer employment record.
According to the data, university, career and personal factors
were not perceived as having serious limitations in achieving profes­
sional goals for all three groups. Even though the data do not reflect
any major differences among the three groups, when compared on six job

103
satisfaction characteristics, minority females expressed greater
dissatisfaction with salary and job responsibility than either of the
other two groups. Matched white females expressed dissatisfaction with
geographical location, administrators/supervisor and co-workers/
colleagues, with the non-matched white female group scoring above the
mean in all six areas, in other words, expressing less dissatisfaction
in all six areas (Table 4.24).
Even though negative aspects of success were not significant,
there were noted differences between the three groups: matched and nonmatched whites had identical responses, whereas minority females
demonstrated the greatest difference in terms of the mean. In other
words, minority females perceived themselves as experiencing negative
aspects of success of one type or another more so than either of the
other two white female groups (Table 4.24).
Based on the data presented, H q is not rejected. As indicated in
Table 4.23, the one-way analysis of variance results reveal no
significant difference on seventeen of nineteen items designed to
explore the opportunities for upward mobility. In addition, a mean and
standard deviation was calculated for each item identified with upward
mobility (Table 4.24).
Based on the research conducted by Swann and Witty (1980), which
explored factors that create pressure and anxiety, factor analytic
procedures were carried out to further investigate the items most
closely associated with pressure and anxiety (Table 4.25). In addition,
factor analytic procedures were utilized to investigate items that
define job satisfaction characteristics and factors that limit or hinder
professional goals (Tables 4.26 and 4.27).

104
Table 4.23

Qt. #

9
9
9

10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
11

12
12
12
12
12
12

*.05

**.01

Analysis of Variance Results
Opportunities for Upward Mobility

Source of Variation

(N)

DF

University Factors
Career Factors
Personal Factors

178
176
175

2
2
2

228.4494
167.4318
224.5371

182

2

22.306

.123

.496

.610

182

2

30.689

.169

.938

.386

182

2

19.335

.106

1.031

.359

182

2

24.404

.134

.256

.775

182

2

29.519

.162

3.629

.029*

182
182

2
2

12.077
28.918

.066
.159

1.989
4.223

.140
.016*

182
182
165

2
2
2

27.683
37.224
41.4940

.152 1.783
.205 2.129
.2504 1.356

.171
.122
.2606

176
178
176

2
2
2

100.3580
90.9944
109.1818

.5725 1.153
.5121 1.341
.6248
.872

.3182
.2642
.4198

178

2

108.9719

.6083 2.069

.1294

176

2

81.9773

.4667 1.318

.2703

178

2

138.4719

.7912

.9975

Pressures/Anxieties:
Independent DecisionMaking
Interaction with
Superiors
Interaction with
Subordinates
Relationship with
Colleagues and
Co-workers
Written Reports and
Forms
Managing the Budget
Grant/Proposal
Writing
Publications
Lack of Support
Negative Aspects
Characteristics
of Job:
Salary
Job Responsibility
Geographical
Location
Administrators/
Supervisors
Colleagues/
Co-workers
Professional and
Personal Develop­
ment

SS

MS

F

1.2971
.559
.9560 1.073
1.2985
.458

.002

SIG!. OF F

.5730
.3441
.6331

Table 4.24

Opportunities Upward Mobility by Groups

Qt.#

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.)' (N)

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.)1 (N)

178
176
175
176
178
176
178

2.5000 1.2287 (52)
3.2157 1.0063 (51)
3.0408 1.0793 (49)
2.2830 .7173 (53)
2.8868 .7509 (53)
3.0000 .7211 (51)
2.8679
.7348 (53)

2.6429 1.1189 (56)
3.3273 .9241 (55)
2.8571 1.1025 (56)
2.4074 .7652 (54)
3.000
.6086 (55)
2.8148 .7542 (54)
2.7455 .8437 (55)

176
178

3.0385 .5928 (52)
2.6078 1.0016 (51)

2.8909
2.6000

9
9
9
12
12
12
12
12
12

Upward Mobility
Indicators

University factors
Career factors
Personal Factors
Salary
Job Responsibility
Geographical Location
Administrators/
Supervisor
Co-workers/Colleagues
Opportunities for
Professional &
Personal Development

N

.7116 (55)
.8944 (55)

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

2.4286 1.0844 (70)
3.0714 .9974 (70)
2.8571 1.2073 (70)
2.4928 .7788 (69)
3.1000 .7642 (70)
2.9718 .8614 (71)
3.0286 .7608 (70)

2
2
2
2
2
2
2

.559
1.073
.458
1.153
1.341
.872
2.069

.5730
.3441
.6331
.3182
.2642
.4198
.1294

3.0870
2.6111

2
2

1.318
.002

.2703
.9975

.7223 (69)
.7941 (72)

Table 4.24 (cont.)

Opportunities Upward Mobility by Groups

Qt.#

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev,) (N)

10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
11

Upward Mobility
Indicators

PRESSURES/ANXIETIES
Independent Decision­
making
Interaction w/ Superior
Interaction w/
Relationship w/
Colleagues & Co­
workers
Written Reports & Forms
Managing the Budget
Grant/Proposal Writing
Publications
Lack of Support
Negative Experiences

*.05
**.01

N

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

183

.113

.320 (53)

.179

.385 (56)

.135

.344 (74)

2

.496

.610

183
183
183

.245
.094
.189

.434 (53)
.295 (53)
.395 (53)

.250
.089
.143

.437 (56)
.288 (56)
.353 (56)

.162
.162
.149

.371 (74)
.371 (74)
.358 (74)

2
2
2

.938
1.031
.256

.386
.359
.775

183
183
183
183
183
165

.245
.075
.264
.245
.321
1.5957

.434 (53)
.267 (53)
.445 (53)
.434 (53)
.471 (53)
.4961(47)

.286
.018
.268
.214
.357
1.4528

.456 (56)
.134 (56)
.447 (56)
.414 (56)
.483 (56)
.5025(53)

.108
.018
.095
.122
.203
1.4545

.313 (74)
.313 (74)
.295 (74)
.329 (74)
.047 (74)
.5017(66)

2
2
2
2
2
2

3.629
1.989
4.223
1.783
2.129
1.356

.029*
.140
.016*
.171
.122
.260

107
A factor analysis of the nine items that comprise the pressure and
anxiety causing factors (Qt. 10) yields four factors on the orthagonal
rotation, using the PA 2 principal factoring with iteration, which
accounted for the following percent of variance: Factor I 37.8%; Factor
II 30.9%; Factor III 17.5%; and Factor IV 13.8% comprising a total
variance of 100% (Table A.25). An examination of Factor I suggests the
ability to handle professional writing assignments and projects, i.e.,
grant and proposal writing, pressure to contribute to the professional
literature and preparation of written reports and forms. Factor II
examines interaction patterns with others in the environment, i.e.,
interaction with superiors and subordinates and relationships with
colleagues or co-workers. Factor III examines management-related
activities, i.e., managing the budget and independent decision-making.
Factor IV suggests levels of support from administrators, staff and
faculty.

Table 4.25

Factor Analysis for Pressure
& Anxiety-Causing Factors

Question #10

Independent Decision-Making
Interaction with Superiors
Interaction with Subordinates
Relationship with Colleagues
& Co-workers
Written Reports and Forms
Managing the Budget
Grant and Proposal Writing
Publications
Lack of Support from
Administrators, Faculty & Staff

Factor Load

Percent of
Variance

.26129
.49314
-.02285
.20359

(3)
(2)
(2)
(2)

.24183
.28920
.58824
.41193
.30591

(1)
(3)
(1)
(1)
(4)

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

37.8%
30.9%
17.5%
13.8%

108
A factor analysis of the six items that comprise the job
satisfaction characteristics (Qt. 12) yields one factor on the
orthogonal rotation, using the PA 2 principal factoring with iteration,
which accounted for 100% of variance (Table 4.26). An examination of
Factor I suggests the characteristics of job satisfaction, i.e., salary,
job responsibility, geographical location, administrator

&

supervisors,

co-workers & colleagues, opportunity for professional and personal
development.

Table 4.26

Factor Analysis for Job Satisfaction

Question #12

Factor Load

Percent of
Variance

Salary
Job Responsibility
Geographical Location
Administrators &
Supervisors
Co-workers/Colleagues
Opportunity for Professional & Personal
Development

.09067
.26832
.11511
.36140

(1)
(1)
(1)
(1)

.23836
.16039

(1)
(1)

A factor analysis of the three items that comprise factors that
limit or hinder achievement of professional goals (Qt. 9), yielded one
factor on the orthogonal rotation, using the PA 2 principal factoring
with iteration, which accounted for 100% of variance (Table 4.27). An
examination of Factor I suggests the factors that impact on achieving
professional goals, i.e., university factors; financial cutbacks; lack
of position; career factors; lack of education, training, or experience;
personal factors, not able to move, family or personal concerns or
personality conflicts.

109

Table 4.27

Factor Analysis of Factors that Limit or Hinder
Professional Goals

Question #9

Factor Load

University Factors
Career Factors
Personal Factors

.17751
.59450
.21901

Percent of
Variance
(1)
(1)
(1)

(1) 100

Institutional, Personal and Career Barriers and Options
The fifth hypothesis addressed in this study was an investigation
of the perceptions of the impact of institutional, personal, and career
barriers or options across the three groups sampled.
Hq

There is no significant difference of the means between
minority and white professional females on their perceptions
of their professional roles in term of institutional,
personal, and career barriers or options.
An analysis of variance, by implementation of ANOVA, was computed

for each variable defined to encompass the dimension of institutional,
personal, and career barriers or options. The impact of institutional,
personal, and career barriers or options is presented in Table 4.28.
According to the results, the following variables were significant at
the .05 alpha level: one, chances for promotion and tenure compared to
other female counterparts; two, factors instrumental in securing initial
position at MSU: governmental pressure for affirmative action, and the
normal search and selection process; three, channel through which one
acquired initial position: general application procedure; four, factors
that contributed to successfully obtaining initial position: academic
preparation, affirmative action policies, sex-gender, and race.

110
In terms of opportunities for promotion and/or tenure, compared to
female and male counterparts in their academic discipline or unit, there
is a significant difference at the .05 alpha level in the way minority
females perceive their chances for promotion and/or tenure. In other
words, minority females perceived their opportunities to be less than
either of the white female groups. When comparing their opportunities,
to male counterparts, all three groups perceived themselves as having
less opportunities, but there was no significant difference of the mean
between the three groups.
Two factors were significant at the .05 alpha level in the instru­
mentation of securing current positions. Minority females believe that
governmental pressure for affirmative action was instrumental in
securing their current position, whereas neither of the white female
groups believed this was true in their case and therefore their
responses were below the mean. The normal search and selection process
was also significant at the .05 alpha level,

with the matched white

female respondents demonstrating the greatest difference within all
three groups. Acquisition of one's initial position at this institution,
utilizing general application procedures, was significant at the .00
alpha level for matched white females.
Six factors were identified that contributed to the initial suc­
cess in securing a position at this institution. Four of these factors
were significant at the .01 alpha level: academic preparation, affir­
mative action, sex-gender, and race. Schefee comparison of the means
demonstrates that minority females scored considerably different than
either of the white female groups. In other words, minority females
perceived that academic preparation, affirmative action policy,

Ill
sex-gender, and race were more instrumental in securing their initial
position than white females. Non-matched white females scored
consistently below the mean in all six areas. In other words, non­
matched white females did not perceive these six factors as being
essential in securing their initial position.
Based on the data present, H q is not rejected. As indicated in
Table 4.28, the one-way analysis of variance results reveal no
significant difference between the means of the respondents on seventeen
of twenty-five items designed to explore the impact of institutional,
personal and career barriers or options.
In conclusion, a mean and standard deviation was calculated for
each item identified with barriers or options (Table 4.29).

112
Table 4.28
Analysis of Variance
Institutional, Personal, and Career Barriers or Options

Qt. #

21

22
22
23
24

32
32

32
32

43
43
43
43
43
44
44
44
44
44
44
45
51
52

*.05

**.01

Source of Variation

Opportunities for
Promotion & Tenure:
Female
Male
Chances for
Promotion
Chances for Tenure
Level of Job Security
Level of Job Security:
Females
Males
VARIABLES IN SECURING
CURRENT POSITION:
University
Reorganization
Government Pressure
for Affirmative
Action
Position was Created
Normal Search
& Selection
VARIABLES IN SECURING
INITIAL POSITION:
Recruited
General Application
Promoted
Position was Created
Spouse employed in
the area
Academic preparation
Affirmative Action
Policy
Sex-gender
Race
Job Qualification
& Experience
Spouse employed in
the area
Source of Salary
Tenure/Job
Security
Teaching Assignment

SS

MS

F

SIG!. OF F

(N)

DF

95
89
112

2
2
2

28.9474
30.3598
98.0354

.2908
.3494
.8906

3.780
.446
.039

.0265*
.6418
.9613

88
180

2
2

91.9886
129.6611

1.0620
.7204

.808
1.499

.4491
.2263

149
138

2
2

52.4564
47.6522

.3520
.3441

1.512
1.746

.2239
.1783

182

2

7.650

.042

.155

182

2

9.454

.052

10.591

182
182

2
2

18.077
36.787

.099
.202

2.105
3.376

.125
.036*

182
182
182
182
182

2
2
2
2
2

34.929
39.978
44.863
15.421
17.814

.192
.220
.247
.085
.098

1.523
4.893
1.392
.252
1.982

.221
.008**
.251
.778
.141

178
158

2
2

160.4719
230.6899

.8421
1.1170

7.780
25.766

.0006**
.0000**

156
158
178

2
2
2

210.2244
186.1519
124.6798

1.2833
5.407
.5036 107.317
.7066
.725

.0054**
.0000**
.4859

145

2

74.0276

.5212

.022

.9782

182
181

2
2

98.5769
358.5967

.5496
1.9790

.184
1.602

.8323
.2044

170

2

201.0882

1.1861

1.267

.2845

.857
.001**

Table 4.29

Qt.#

21

Institutional, Personal and Career Barriers or Options by Groups

Institutional,
Personal and Career
Indicators

Non-Matched
N

Minority I
Matched Whites II
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev0 i (N)
(X) (St.Dev.)' (N)
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

44

INITIAL POSITION:
Academic Preparation

178

3.7755

.5109 (49)

3.4286

.8915 (56)

3.1096 1 .1250 (73)

2

7.780

.0006
**

44

Affirmative Action

158

2.8913 1.1968 (46)

1.4800

.9528 (50)

1.6452 1 .0258 (62)

2 25.766

.0000

44

Policy
Sex-Gender

156

2.2955 1.2310 (44)

2.0408 1.2241 (49)

1.5873

.9777 (63)

2

5.407

.0054

44

Race

158

2.9556 1.1472 (45)

1.600

.4677 (50)

1.0952

.3900 (63)

2107.317

.0000

44

Job Qualification and
Experience
Spouse Employed by MSU

178

3.6923

.8053 (52)

3.6296

.8079 (54)

3.5139

.8880 (72)

2

.725

.4859

145

1.2162

.7504 (37)

1.2500

.7193 (44)

1.2344

.7069 (64)

2

.022

.9782

21
22
22
23
24

95
89
112
88
180

2.1250 .4484 (24)
2.3158 .5824 (19)
2.7308
.8744 (26)
3.0909 1.0193 (22)
2.4906
.8687 (53)

.6742 (33)
1.7273
2.1724 .6584 (29)
2.7027 1.0237 (37)
3.1563 1.1670 (32)
2.2182
.7862 (55)

1.89747
2.1707
2.7600
3.4118
2.2917

.4526
.5433
.9161
.8916
.8791

(38)
(41)
(50)
(34)
(72)

2
2
2
2
2

3.780
.446
.039
.808
1.499

.0265
.6418
.9613
.4491
.2263

149
138

2.0638
2.1500

.6394 (47)
.6998 (40)

1.8750
2.2391

.5696 (48)
.5651 (46)

1.8889
2.0192

.5719 (54)
.5045 (52)

2
2

1.512
1.746

.2239
.1783

■5H5-

44

113

24

Opportunity for
Promotion/Tenure
compared to females:
compared to males:
Promotion
Tenure
Job Security
Job Security:
compared to females:
compared to males:

Table 4.29 (cont.)

Institutional,
Personal and Career
Indicators

Qt.#

32
32
32
32

CURRENT POSITION:
University Reorganiza­
tion
Government Pressure for
Affirmative Action
Position was Created
Normal Search and
Selection
Recruited
General Application
Promoted
Position was Created
Spouse Employed in Area
Source of Salary
Tenure/Job Security
Teaching Assignment

*.05

**.01

Non-Matched
N

Minority I
Matched Whites II
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

.155

.857

183

.057

.233

(53)

.036

.187

(56)

.041

.199 (74)

2

183

.170

.379

(53)

0

0

(56)

.014

.116 (74)

2 10.591

.001**

183
183

.094
.283

.450
.455

(53)
(53)

0
.214

0
.624

(56)
(56)

.108
.446

.313 (74)
.761 (74)

2
2

2.105
3.376

.125
.036*

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

1.523
4.897
1.392
.252
1.982
.184
1.602
1.267

.221
.008**
.251
.778
.141
.8323
.2044
.2845

183
183
183
183
183
182
181
170

.478 (53)
.340
.434 (53)
.245
.340
.478 (53)
.094
.295 (53)
.192 (53)
.038
2.0755 .7557 (53)
3.0377 1.5312 (53)
3.1373 1.2003 (51)

.196
.401 (56)
.482
.504 (56)
.214
.414 (56)
.071
.260 (56)
.143
.353 (56)
2.1607 .8263 (56)
3.0893 1.4682 (56)
3.1765 1.1438 (51)

.432 (74)
.243
.257
.440 (74)
.351
.560 (74)
.108
.313 (74)
.135
.344 (74)
2.1096 .6575 (73)
3.444 1.2547 (72)
3.4265 .9513 (68)

114

43
43
43
43
43
45
51
52

Institutional, Personal and Career Barriers or Options by Groups

115
Professional Standing
The sixth hypothesis addressed in this study was an investigation
of the perceptions of the development of strategies for maintaining
professional standing across the three groups sampled.
HQ

There is no significant difference between minority and
white professional females in their perceptions of their
development of their strategies for maintaining their
professional standing.
An analysis of variance, by implementation of ANOVA, was computed

for each variable defined to encompass the dimension of developing
strategies for maintaining one's professional standing. The differences
in the development of strategies for maintaining professional standing
is presented in Table 4.32.

According to the results the following

variable was significant at the .00 alpha level: presentation of papers
at conferences. Schefee post-hoc comparisons were carried out on the
indicated significant variable.
Conference presentations were significant at the .00 alpha level,
with minority females making substantial contributions in comparison to
either of the white female groups. This may be attributed to the fact
that a higher percent of minority females hold advanced degrees and
therefore may be offered more opportunities to attend conferences and
present papers.
Even though the type of journals published in and contributions to
books and monographs, either written, edited or reviewed, was not
significant, minority females were consistently above the mean in these
three areas. In other words, more contributions were made by minority
females than by white females. Factors that create limitations in the
area of publication are summarized in Table 4.30. A large number of
matched white respondents and non-matched whites were not required to

publish or had no inclination to do so more than minority females. A
noted difference in the type of positions held by respondents may
contribute to this difference. Generally speaking, professional women
classified as administrative/professionals are not required to publish
and therefore may have no inclination to do so. Overall, respondents in
all three groups identified time as creating the greatest limitation in
being able to publish.
The type of professional contributions made by professional women
is summarized in Table 4.31. The majority of contributions were made in
the area of publications and research, with a limited number serving on
graduate committees or contributing to the Fine Arts area.
In terms of research, even though there is no significant difTtffe'hce*'oetween the levels of participation in conducting research,
minority females participated as the principal researcher/director and
collaborated with other researchers, more so than their white female
counterpart, but they participated less as a member of a research team.
Based on the data presented, H q is not rejected. As indicated in
Table 4.32, the one-way analysis of variance results reveal no
significant difference between the means of the respondents on five of
the six items designed to explore the development of strategies for
maintaining professional standing.
In conclusion, a mean and standard deviation was calculated for
each item identified with professional standing (Table 4.33).

117

Table 4.30

Minority
N
%

Qt. #

54
54
54
54
54
54

Family
Responsibilities
Administrative
Responsibilities
Teaching Load
Limited Time
Not Required
to Publish
Have no Inclination to Publish

Table 4.31

60
53
57
58

Graduate
Committees
Contributions to
the Fine Arts
Publications
Books &
Monographs
Research

Matched Whites
N
%

Non-Matched Whites
%
N

11

20

16

22

34

5

9

13

18

8
25
10

15
47
19

10
16
15

18
29
27

13
17
26

18
23
35

3

6

6

9

8

11

13

24.5

18

Professional Contributions

Minority
N
%

Qt. #

59

Limitations in Publishing

Matched Whites
N
%

Non-Matched Whites
N
%

11

21

8

14

11

14

7

13

10

18

7

23
18

43
34

22
15

39
27

28
21

38
28

27

51

25

45

24

32

9.5

118

Table 4.32

Qt. #

54
55
53
56
57
58

Analysis of Variance
Strategies for Maintaining Professional Standing

SS

MS

F

SIG . OF F

Source of Variation

(N)

DF

Opportunity to
Publish
Conference
Presentations
Publications/
Principal Author
Proposals/Grants
Professional Book
& Monographs
Research

130

2

28.168

.217

.039

152

2

102.328

.562

5.005

183

2

2587.257

14.216

.286

.749

183
182

2
2

38.235
1510.732

.252
8.301

1.093
.169

.338
.845

182

2

850.929

4.675

.165

.848

.962
.008**

Table 4.33

Qt.#

Strategies for Maintaining Professional Standing by Groups

Professional
Indicators

N

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

F

Opportunity to Publish 130
Conference Presentation 152

1.698
1.694

.465
.466

(43)
(49)

1.694
1.563

.467
.501

(36)
(48)

1.673
1.545

.474
.503

(52)
(55)

2
2

.039
5.005

.9622
.0080

53

Publications/Principal
Author
Proposals/Grants
Professional Book and
Monographs
Research

183

1.547

4.496

(53)

1.036

2.471

(56)

1.122

4.041

(74)

2

.286

.7495

183
182

1.491
.577

.608
1.819

(53)
(52)

1.286
.696

.706
2.898

(56)
(56)

1.054
.716

.774
3.628

(74)
(74)

2
2

1.093
.169

.338
.845

182

.750

1.877

(52)

.607

1.522

(56)

.784

2.681

(74)

2

.165

.848

56
57
58

*.05

**.01

119

54
55

120
Environment
The seventh hypothesis addressed in this study was an
investigation of the perceptions of the environment across the three
groups sampled.
Hq

There is no significant difference between minority and
white professional females and their perceptions of their
environment.
An analysis of variance, by implementation of ANOVA, was computed

for each variable defined to encompass the dimension of environment. The
differences in the maintenance of one’s environment are presented in
Table 4.34. According to the results, the following variables were
significant at the .05 alpha level: population type— minority students,
and pressures and anxieties— written reports, contracts, grants, and
proposals. Schefee post-hoc comparison of the means were carried out on
the indicated signficant variables.
Types of student populations on campus that professional women
worked with were significant at the .001 alpha level. Of the six
categories listed, minority women were found to be working primarily
with minority students to a significant degree, when compared to either
of the other two white female groups.
Even though negative aspects of success were not significant,
minority females perceived themselves as having more negative
experiences than reported by white females.
Characteristics of current jobs were not significant, but minority
females perceived themselves as being less satisfied with their salaries
than reported by white females. In regard to actual earning power, a
higher percent of minority females earned salaries of $24,000 or more
compared to either of the other two groups (Tables 4.6 and 4.7).

121
Minority females were also more dissatisfied with their job responsi­
bilities than either of the two white female groups. Matched white
females reported a higher level of dissatisfaction with geographical
location, administrators/supervisors, and colleagues/co-workers than
minority and the non-matched white female group. Non-matched white
females reported a higher level of satisfaction in all six areas, which
may be attributed to a longer employment record.
In regard to interaction patterns, minority females were
consistently above the mean in all four areas, more so than either of
the other two groups. In other words, minority females perceived their
interaction patterns with others in their environment to be fairly
positive and open, with a larger number of minority females reporting
that they seek out the advice of others in making professional
decisions.
Of the several factors that created pressures and anxieties, two
were significant at the .05 alpha level: preparing written reports and
contract grants and proposals. Minority females and matched white
females perceived themselves as experiencing greater pressure and
anxiety in these two areas, more so than the non-matched groups, which
may be attributed to an increased level of work experience by this
group.
Due to the ambiguous phrasing in the design of questions #25 and
#26, statistical results with regard to these two items were not
reported.
Based on the data reported, H q is not rejected. As indicated in
Table 4.34, the one-way analysis of variance results reveal no sig-

122
nificant difference between the means of the respondents on 19 of 22
items designed to explore their perception of their environment.
In conclusion, a mean and standard deviation was calculated on
each item identified with environment (Table 4.35).

Table 4.34

Qt. #

Analysis of Variance
Environment

Source of Variation

(N)

DF

61

Population Type
Minority Students

176
182

2
2

39.977
11.213

.227 2.741
.062 :L8.713

.067
.001**

11

Negative Aspects

166

2

41.4940

.2504 1.356

.2606

176
178
176
178

2
2
2
2

100.3580
90.9944
109.1818
108.9719

.5725 1.153
.5121 1.341
.6248 .872
.608362.069

.3182
.2642
.4198
.1294

178

2

138.4719

.7912

.002

.9975

176

2

81.9773

.4667 1.318

.2703

2
2

77.5754
93.1173

.4396
.5288

.227
.044

.7974
.9567

2

133.6313

.7591

.081

.9821

2

127.0112

.7189

.834

.4359

12
12
12
12
12
12

13
13
13
14

Char, of Current Job:
Salary
Job Responsibility
Geographical Location
Administrators &
Supervisors
Professional &
Personal Development
Colleagues/
Co-workers

Interaction Patterns:
Others Listen to Me
179
Others Take my Ideas 179
Seriously
Others Seek my Advice 179
Professional
Decisions

178

SS

MS

F

SIG. OF F

124
Table 4.34 (cont.)

Qt. #

10
10
10
10

10

10
10
10
10

*.05

**.01

Analysis of Variance
Environment

Source of Variation

(N)

Pressures & Anxieties ••
Independent Decision- 182
Making
Interaction with
182
Superiors
Interaction with
182
Subordinates
Relationship with
182
Colleagues or Co­
workers
Preparation of
128
written reports/
forms
Managing budget
182
182
Grant or Proposal
Writing
182
Pressure to Publish
Lack of Support from 182
Administration,
Staff or Faculty

DF

SS

MS

F

SIG . OF F

2

22.306

.123

.496

.610

2

30.689

.169

.938

.386

2

19.335

.106

1.031

.359

2

24.404

.134

.256

.775

2

29.519

.162

3.629

.029*

2
2

12.077
28.918

.066
.159

1.989
4.223

.140
.016*

2
2

27.683
37.224

.152
.205

1.783
2.129

.171
.122

Table 4.35

Qt.#

Environmental
Indicators

Environment by Group

N

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

61

Population Type:
Minority Students

176
182

1.434
.226

.537
.423

11

Negative Aspects

165

1.5957

176
178
176
178

2.2830
2.8868
3.000
2.8679

12
12
12
12
12
12

13
13
13
14

Characteristics of
Current Job:
Salary
Job Responsibility
Geographical Location
Administrators and
Supervisors
Colleagues/Co-workers
Professional and
Personal Development
Interaction Patterns:
Others Listen to Me
Others Take My Ideas
Seriously
Others Seek My Advice
Professional Decisions

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

1.250
0

.437
0

(53) 1.243
(56)
0

.569
0

.4961 (47)

1.4528

.5025

(53) 1.4545

.7173
.7509
.7211
.7348

(53)
(53)
(51)
(53)

2.4074
3.0000
2.8148
2.7455

.7652
.6086
.7542
.8437

(54)
(55)
(54)
(55)

176
178

3.0385
.5928 (52)
2.6078 1 .0016 (51)

2.8909
2.6000

179
179

1.5962
1.6538

.6934 (52)
.6533 (52)

179
178

1.8462
2.3396

.8719 (52)
.8536 (53)

(53)
(53)

F ratio

F

2 2.741
2 18.713

.067
.001

.5017 (66)

2

1.356

.2606

2.4928
3.1000
2.9718
3.0286

.7788
.7642
.8614
.7608

(69)
(70)
(71)
(70)

2
2
2
2

1.153
1.341
.872
2.069

.3182
.2642
.4198
.1294

.7116 (55)
.8944 (55)

3.0870
2.6111

.7223 (69)
.7971 (72)

2
2

1.318
.002

.2703
.9975

1.6182
1.6182

.6802 (55)
.7575 (55)

1.5417
1.6528

.6266 (72)
.7536 (72)

2
2

.277
.044

.7944
.9567

1.8182
2.2222

.7720 (55)
.9248 (54)

1.8194
2.1408

.9394 (72)
.7800 (71)

2
2

.018
.834

.9821
.4359

(70)
(74)

Table 4.35 (cont.)

Q t .#

10
10
10
10
10

N

Pressures and Anxieties:
Independent Decision-making
Interaction with Superiors
Interaction with Subordinates
Relationship with Colleagues
or Co-Workers
Preparation of Written
Reports/Forms
Managing Budget
Grant or Proposal Writing
Pressure to Publish
Lack of Support from Admin­
istration, Staff or Faculty

*.05
**.01

Non-Matched
Whites III
(X) (St.Dev.) (N) df

F ratio

(56)
(56)
(56)
(56)

.135
.162
.162
.149

.344
.371
.371
.358

(74)
(74)
(74)
(74)

2
2
2
2

.496
.938
1.031
.256

.610
.386
.359
.775

.456

(56)

.108

.313

(74)

2

3.629

.029*

.134
.447
.414
.483

(56)
(56)
(56)
(56)

.108
.095
.122
.203

.313
.296
.329
.047

(74)
(74)
(74)
(74)

2
2
2
2

1.989
4.223
1.783
2.129

.140
.016*
.171
.122

Minority I
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

Matched Whites II
(X) (St.Dev.) (N)

.113
.245
.094
.189

.320
.434
.295
.395

(53)
(53)
(53)
(53)

.179
.250
.089
.143

.385
.437
.288
.353

.245

.434

(53)

.286

.075
.264
.245
.321

.267
.445
.434
.471

(53)
(53)
(53)
(53)

.018
.268
.214
.357

F

126

10
10
10
10

Environmental
Indicators

Environmental Milieu by Group

127
Analysis of Variance
An analysis of variance of the questionnaire revealed:
1.

Out of a total of one hundred variables tested, a total
eighteen items were found to be significant, with five
items signfificant at the .05 alpha level and thirteen
items significant at the .01 alpha level.

of

Hypotheses Tested
1.

Findings resulting from the testing of Hypothesis I
indicate no statistical basis for rejection of the null.
Failure to reject the null hypothesis indicates that there
is no significant relationship between the race of the
respondents and their rank or position.

2.

Findings resulting from the testing of Hypothesis II indi­
cate no statistical basis for rejection of the null.
Failure to reject the null hypothesis indicates that there
is no significant difference of the mean scores between
these three groups and their perceptions of the
effectiveness of their work and/or support system.

3.

Findings resulting from the testing of Hypothesis III
indicate no statistical basis for rejection of the null.
Failure to reject the null hypothesis indicates that there
is no significant difference of the mean scores between
these three groups and their perceptions of their
opportunities or abilities to effect change or influence
the decision-making process in their academic departments
or administrative units.

4.

Findings resulting from the testing of Hypothesis IV
indicate no statistical basis for rejection of the null.
Failure to reject the null hypothesis indicates that there
is no significant difference of the mean scores between
these three groups and their opportunity for upward
mobility.

5.

Findings resulting from the testing of Hypothesis V
indicate no statistical basis for rejection of the null.
Failure to reject the null hypothesis indicates that there
is no significant difference of the mean scores between
these three groups and their perceptions of their
professional roles in terms of institutional, personal,
and career barriers or options.

6.

Findings resulting from the testing of Hypothesis VI indi­
cate no statistical basis for rejection of the null.
Failure to reject the null hypothesis indicates that there
is no significant difference of the mean score between
these three groups and their strategies for maintaining
their professional standing.

128
7.

Findings resulting from the testing of Hypothesis VII
indicate no statistical basis for rejection of the null.
Failure to reject the null hypothesis indicates that there
is no significant difference of the mean score between
these three groups and their perceptions of their
environment.

Principle Findings

Qt. #

7

10
10

21
43

Summation of Significant Findings at the .05 Alpha Level

Decision-Making Process
Informed of problems, issues and developments compared
to female counterparts
Upward Mobility
Written reports and forms
Grants and proposal writing
Institutional, Personal, and Career Barriers and Options
Opportunities for promotion and tenure compared to
female counterparts
Securing current position— normal search and selection
process

129

Principle Findings

Qt. #

37

Summation of Significant Findings at the .01 Alpha Level

40

Demographic Data
Ethnic background
Education levels

15
19
19

Network and Support Systems
Professional and scholarly organizations
Type of organization— professional
Type of organization— social

43
44
44
44
44

Institutional, Personal, and Career Barriers and Options
Securing current position— government pressure for
affirmative action
Securing initial position— general application
academic preparation
affirmative action
sex-gender
race

55

Professional Standing
Conference presentation

61

Environment
Population type— minority students

32

Table 4.36

Characteristics of each Group
Minority

Matched White Females

Non-Matched White Females

Personal Characteristics:
Age (X)

38 years

36 years

39 years

Dependents

47.2% have no children

62.5 have no children

55.4 have no children

Marital Status

50% married
17% divorced
19% single

64% married
12.5% divorced
21% single

72% married
11% divorced
8% single

130

Professional Characteristics:
Education

Master's degree 36%
Professional &
Ph.D.
43%

Master's degree 34%
Professional &
Ph.D.
37.5%

Master's degree 37%
Professional &
Ph.D.
23%

Salary (X)

$24,538

$21,570

$22,423

Years in Current
Position

3.7

4.0

4.0

Particular Segment
of Student Popul.

Minority students

—

—

Faculty Rank:

Specialist 28.5%

Specialist 22%

Specialist 30%

Administrative/
Professional Rank

Level 10-12 72.7%

Level 10-12 78.5%

Level 10-12 36%

131
Discussion
The primary thrust of this study and the principle sources
influencing the construction of the content of each item was derived in
part from the literature. The literature review provided the foundation
for the exploration of the seven designated hypotheses. Self-perceived
attitudes and personal viewpoints were explored regarding employment,
rank and/or position, decision-making process, upward mobility, career
limitations or options, network and/or support systems, maintenance of
professional standing and environment. Demographic data, educational and
professional information were generated in order to explore similarities
and differences across the three groups sampled.
Condescriptive statistics, analysis of variance, Scheffe post-hoc
comparison of the means and factor analytical procedures were utilized
to ascertain similarities and differences that exist between minority
and white professional females employed in the same institution of
higher education.
Summary
In Chapter IV the results of condescriptive statistics, analysis
of variance, Scheffe post-hoc comparison, and factor analytical
procedures were reported. Condescriptive statistics were used to
determine basic distributional characteristics of each variable;
frequency, mean and standard deviation procedures indicated the degree
of dispersion around the mean and enabled the researcher to more
precisely define the parameters of each variable. Analysis of variance
was used to assess the effects of race upon the seven designated
hypotheses and the differences between the means of the three groups.
Scheffe post-hoc comparisons of the means were used following a

132
significant F ratio in analysis of variance procedure, to test the
statistical significance of the differences between the three group
means. Factor analysis procedures were used to further explore several
items identified with upward mobility, pressure and anxiety factors, job
satisfaction characterics and factors that limit or hinder professional
goals in order to explore and examine new patterning of variables.
The data collected in the study were submitted to the above
statistical analysis procedures and the results were reported in Chapter
IV. All seven null hypothesis were rejected as a result of the
statistical findings. The failure to reject all seven hypotheses
indicated that, overall, there was no significant difference between
minority and white professional females and their self-perceived
attitudes and personal veiwpoints, on a majority of the items comprising
each of the seven hypotheses.
This chapter discussed the following: demographic data, results of
teh analysis of variance, results of the factor analysis of items that
comprised hypothesis four, presentation of significant findings,
discussion and summary.

Chapter V
Summary, Discussion, and Recommendations

The purpose of this study was to explore and compare the self­
perceived attitudes and roles of minority professional women at Michigan
State University and to compare these findings with those of white
professional women employed at the same institution holding similar
positions.
A review of the literature focused on the status of minority
professional women employed in institutions of higher education. The
charge was made that minority professionals employed in majority
institutions of higher education are generally located in positions
which have the following limitations: limited power and/or ability to
effect or influence change and limited opportunities for upward
mobility.
There are various conceptualizations of the factors and conditions
that influence the career development of women in general. Essential
elements of career development appear to be impacted upon by the atti­
tudes and perceptions of women, which are influenced by role models,
mentors, available career options, lifestyles, and educational resources
and patterns.
The review of the career development literature also dealt with
various sources of conflict and barriers. In addition, the review of the
history of academic and professional women shed light on the staus of
women in the academic arena and reflects society’s expectations of them.
The literature consistently cited traditional cultural conditioning of
males and females to conform to sex-role stereotypes as the primary
reason why so few women advance to professional ranks in higher

133

134
education. The review of the current staus of minority women in higher
education is primarily limited to black females, due to the fact that
there is a very small percent of non-black minority female professionals
employed in higher education. Empirical research in this area does not
analyse the results according to race; further exploration into the
composition of these sample populations substantiates the lack of repre­
sentation by minority females. The following general observations of the
status of minority women employed in higher education illustrates the
scarcity of minority women in all types of positions, with such women
being generally concentrated in lower, untenurable positions and certain
disciplines, mainly ethnic studies, basic skills or supportive services;
Spanish-speaking women are relegated to teaching language courses, and
are generally located in non-traditional academic positions that create
barriers to the achievement of promotion and tenure.
The following factors and conditions were identified as having an
impact on the relatively small number of professional women on college
and university campuses: discrimination, socialization, sex-role
stereotyping, lack of effective role models, the absence of a network
system, the limited access of educational and employment opportunities,
and institutional practices and societal attitudes.
The future of higher education in the eighties is faced with the
following conditions: a declining birth rate, a sluggish economy, de­
creasing financial support for higher education, and a conservative
political and budgetary climate on today's college and university
campuses (Freeman 1977). For the professional woman in academe, these
factors present a dim future for her and those who also choose this
career path.

135
The sample population for the study consisted of 53 minority
female respondents, 56 matched white female respondents, and 76 non­
matched white female respondents selected at random, constituting a
total number of 185 respondents. A return rate of 72% was achieved.
These individuals were selected from the Faculty and Administrative
Personnel Records at Michigan State University.
The instrument utilized for the study was constructed by the
investigator and validated with the assistance of researchers in the
field and dissertation committee members. The participants responded to
the data-gathering instrument, which was constructed around three basic
areas: (1) self-perceived roles and personal viewpoints, (2) educational
and professional data, and (3) demographic data. Data was collected
between January 1983 and March 1983 by mail-in questionnaires, which
were then coded, key-punched, and verified. The complete statistical
treatment of the data was executed through the facilities of the com­
puter center located on the campus of Michigan State University, East
Lansing, Michigan.
The analysis of the data, which tested each of the seven
hypotheses explored in the investigation, included condescriptive
statistics and a one-way analysis of variance. A Scheffe post-hoc
comparison of the means was used only on those items in which the F test
was significant. Factor analytical procedures were used to determine the
degree to which a given set of variables are part of a common dimension.

136
Discussion
The following discussion is an attempt to integrate the findings
of this study with existing theoretical concepts presented in Chapter
II.
Rank/Position
In terms of rank and position, a significant difference existed
across the three groups sampled in regard to educational level. In other
words, rank/position differed significantly according to racial
membership. The results indicated that respondents classified as
minorities held a larger number of advanced degrees than their white
female counterparts. This finding is substantiated by earlier research
by Moore and Wagstaff (1974), who observed that the majority of black
professional women had post masters work, and remained in the
profession, while their white female counterparts tended to quit the
profession after marriage and return after their family obligations had
been met.
Networks/Support Systems
In exploring the effectiveness of networks and support systems, a
significant difference existed among the three groups sampled, in regard
to participation levels. In other words, participating in a pro­
fessional/scholarly organization and the type of organization differed
significantly according to racial membership. It is believed by this
researcher that minority females and their matched white female
counterparts perceived a greater need for this type of networking and
support system than white females selected at random. It should be noted
that a larger number of white females selected at random were classified
as administrative/professionals and not faculty, and that individuals

137
with this type of employment classification may not perceive a need for
belonging to professional organizations, due to their employment
responsibilities. Types of organizations were also significant according
to racial membership. Minority female respondents belonged to pro­
fessional and social organizations to a greater percent than either of
the white female groups. Research by Touchton and Shavlik (1978)
identifies some of the needs that may be met by affiliation with
professional and social organizations: a need for collegial relation­
ships, information, continuous professional training and a need for
professional recognition. Collins

(1979) states that minority

professional women compensate for

being invisible by privately depending

upon their informal network of assocations for support. Networking, as
defined by Collins, provides mutual support, development of mentoring
relationships between females, establishment of contacts with other
women professionals and acts as a clearinghouse for sharing information,
research, and possible job openings. MacConkey's (1980) research on
linkages and networks concludes that communication linkages are a brand
of campus and community power and that information need not be confined
to the upper echelon in the academic community. One’s affiliation with
networks is considered essential for career advancement and loners
typically do not advance in academe. These findings shed additional
understanding on how minority and

some white females perceivethe

advantages of network and support

systems.

Decision-Making Process
In terms of being informed of problems, issues and developments at
the department, college or university level, a significant difference
was noted when respondents compared themselves to other male and female

138
counterparts. Minority females respondents perceived themselves as being
equally or better informed when asked to compare themselves to female
counterparts in their academic or administrative units. But white female
respondents did not perceive this to be true in their case. There was no
significant difference between the three groups when asked to compare
themselves to their male counterpart. This finding substantiates earlier
writings by Tidball (1976), which states that when faculty females are
asked to compare themselves to other faculty members, women tended to
feel more positive about themselves when comparing themselves to other
females. But when asked to compare themselves to male faculty members,
their responses tended to be negative. Epstein's (1973) research states
that black and white professional women perceived a need to be better
than others so as not to be labeled incompetent, but that black females
were more aggressive in this matter than their white female counterpart.
Epstein believes that this strong need in black females may be tied in
with self-consciousness, their visibility, and their sense of responsi­
bility to other members of their race and sex. These findings parallel
the writings of Swann and Witty (1980), who believe that in order for
minority females to demonstrate their levels of competency it is
imperative that they be informed of problems, issues and developments in
their department or college. In a majority setting, minority females may
perceive themselves as highly visible and feel that they are in the
spotlight more often and therefore may perceive a greater need to appear
competent and knowledgeable of issues and concerns in their immediate
environment. Moore and Wagstaff (1974) state that minorities are often
forced to play the role of spokesperson regarding all issues that
concern minorities. This increased pressure therefore may force

139
individuals to be conscious of their levels of competency and expertise,
never wanting to appear unprepared.
Environment
Of the several types of student populations at this institution,
minority women were found to be working primarily with minority students
to a significant degree, when compared to either of the other two white
female groups. This finding is substantiated by Moore and Wagstaff's
(1974) research, which concludes that minority faculty are hired not for
their talents and abilities outside of remedial, supportive, or
developmental programs. Minority faculty are hired to handle minority
concerns and issues and their programs are often supported by soft
money. Alperson (1975) postulates that minority faculty are often
channelled into token jobs, positions where their competence is
underplayed and only their racial and ethnic status emphasized. Alperson
further espouses the view that this undermines a minority individual's
self-esteem and continues to perpetuate the myth that a minority group
is not competent enough to compete on any criteria other than racial or
ethnic status.
Upward Mobility
In terms of upward mobility, minority females and their matched
white respondents differed significantly from white females selected at
random. The two former groups identified written reports and forms and
grant and proposal writing as two areas that created the most pressure
and anxiety for them in terms of productivity. Limited available time
was also perceived as a factor limiting their opportunity to publish.
Touchton and Shavlik (1978) report that female professionals are hired
and promoted on their levels of accomplishments, if they are hired or

140
promoted at all. If questions are raised regarding prior achievement or
performance, women tend to be regarded as not yet ready and are advised
to get more training, experience, exposure, research, and publications
under their belt in order to be in a position to assume greater chal­
lenges in the future. Van Wessen Goerss (1977) states that higher
credentials, higher standards, and more experience were expected of
women, and family and child-rearing responsibilities were factors given
which prevented promotion and/or upward mobility. This researcher
believes that with limited available time to address the issue of
productivity, professional women are at a disadvantage when it comes to
meeting the rigorous requirements of publishing, tenure and rank.
Institutional, Personal, and Career Barriers and Options
In terms of barriers and options, minority and matched white
females perceived different sets of barriers and options as being
instrumental in securing their position at this institution. Barriers
and options differed significantly according to racial membership.
Opportunities for promotion and tenure differed significantly when
respondents were asked to compare themselves to other male and female
counterparts. Minority females perceived their opportunities to be less
than either of the white female groups. This finding is not totally
consistent with Tidball's (1976) research, which states that when
faculty women compare themselves with other females the results are
positive. On the other hand, this finding is consistent when respondents
were asked to compare themselves to their male counterparts. Again, all
three groups perceived themselves as having less opportunities when
comparing themselves to male faculty members.

141
It should be noted that Tidball's research did not measure
attitudes of self-esteem of faculty members by ethnic background, only
by gender. Her findings, therefore, do not reflect the differences, if
any, between white and minority females. Upon closer inspection of
Epstein's (1973) research, whose primary thrust focused on the
differences that exist between black and white professional women, but
does not explore female attitudes in regard to males.
Several factors were identified as significant in securing initial
and current positions at this institution: governmental pressure for
affirmative action, normal search and selection process, general
application to this institution, academic preparation, sex/gender, and
race. These factors differed significantly according to racial member­
ship. Minority females perceived that affirmative action efforts were
instrumental in securing their current position, whereas neither of the
white female respondents perceived this to be true in their case.
Matched white females believed that they secured their positions through
the normal search and selection procedure, utilizing the general
application process. In terms of academic preparation, affirmative
action policy, sex/gender and race, minority females perceived the above
factors to be more instrumental in securing their initial position than
non-matched white female respondents.
A major obstacle that has continued to impede the advancement or
progress of professional women has been identified by Epstein (1973) as
the self-maintaining mechanism of the present stratification system
within the profession which clearly operates to keep certain individual
and groups participation at a limited level in spite of educational
advancements and achievements. Van Wessem Goerss' (1977) research

142
findings parallel those of Epstein: she espouses the view that a major
problem for women in the academic area is the lack of mobility which is
complicated by sexist practices of educational institutions. Further
exploration into mobility patterns, by Moore and Sagaria (1981),
exhibits the following: first, in general women built their career at
one institution; second, little or no movement exists within a state or
from state to state; and third, women in top academic positions general­
ly conform to the traditional academic models of career advancement,
which consist of a faculty chair or department position.
Little or no research exists on what factors or options contribute
to securing positions in the academic arena. In turn, studies over the
past decade generally focus on what prevents professional women from
advancing or progressing in institutions of higher education.
Professional Standing
In exploring factors that impact on the development of strategies
of maintaining one's professional standing, a significant difference
existed across the three groups sampled. The number of conference papers
presented differed significantly according to racial membership.
Minority females made substantial contributions in comparison to either
of the white female groups. This may be attributed to the fact that a
higher percent of minority females held advanced degrees and therefore
may be offered more opportunities to attend conferences and present
papers. Epps' (1979) remarks that minority females professionals do not
have ample time or energy to conduct the necessary requirements for
research and publishing, which in turn impacts on their chances for
promotion and tenure. Epps' findings have also been substantiated by
several other writers (Gunnings, 1981; Hoskins, 1978; and Copeland,

143
1979). A different point of view is espoused by Scott (1981). He states
that once an individual is hired certain factors in the environment may
increase or decrease one's likelihood of being productive: access to
material resources, access to information channels, and interaction with
professional colleagues. It is further hypothesized by Scott that being
affiliated with an institution that emphasizes research and high
productivity creates an environment that not only pressures all
professionals, but also makes the necessary resources available for each
to comply with established norms. Scott believes that pressure through
communication is applied by various standards, which are met with
sanctions such as denials of tenure and promotion. Since one of the
primary functions or missions of this institution is research, faculty
women are compelled to comply with established norms and standards.
Under the restriction of time, some minority women employed at this
institution have negotiated the obstacle of time in order to prepare
materials for conference presentation.
In conclusion, the data and information collected in this study
represent an attempt to bring these findings into broader focus. Various
factors and conditions were explored that are believed to affect profes­
sional women in general and their impact on the employment future for
women in higher education.

Implications
The findings of this study have several feasible implications. The
statistical analysis of data provided by condescriptive statistical,
analysis of variance, factor analysis and Schefee post hoc comparison
provide some evidence to support the following implications. Racial
membership is a significant dimension in regard to the following

144
factors: rank/position; participation in professional/scholarly organi­
zations and types of organizations; informed of problems, issues and
developments at the department, college and university level; inter­
action with types of student populations; institutional, personal and
career barriers and options; and professional standing. Pressure and
anxiety created by written reports and forms and proposal and grant
writing were considered to be factors that impeded upward mobility.
From the viewpoint that there is significant data to support these
findings, the following implications appear to be critical to the future
advancement of women pursuing a career in the academic arena. It is
evident that minority females in this study were highly career oriented
and perceived that certain variables were critical for upward mobility.
Affiliation with professional/scholarly organizations, association with
professional and social organization, presentations at conferences,
being informed of issues and concerns in their environment and one's
professional standing impacted on career advancement. It appears that
even though minority females are aware of some of the critical variables
that impact on career advancement, only a limited number of respondents
are conducting research, publishing, or advancing to a significant
degree compared to their matched white female counterparts. Therefore,
it follows that more emphasis needs to be expended on negotiating
obstacles that prevent conducting research and publishing for all
faculty women. Limited time to publish has been identified by a number
of the respondents as the primary obstacle. The majority of respondents
had not published any articles or books. Efforts to provide enough time
and other incentives would prove beneficial to the growth of all
professions as well as the academic community. Currently, faculty and

145
professional women associations and organizations are focusing on the
rigors of the academic arena and how to successfully negotiate stress
and time management, family and child rearing responsibilities and the
pressures of the profession. Further exploration into the impact and
effectiveness of the types of seminars and workshops is needed to
determine whether these types of activities are addressing the issues,
needs and goals of faculty and professional women.
The following obstacles were identified by minority and white
respondents as creating additional pressure and anxiety: written reports
and forms and proposal and grant writing were perceived as factors that
increased levels of stress. Today there are increasing expectations and
pressure to secure additional funding from sources outside of the
university, such as government, corporations and foundations. One’s
ability to secure and maintain these types of funds is critical to one's
level of productivity, employment expectation and evaluation. Training
workshops, seminars and professional grant and proposal specialists
should be made available to the entire academic community. Due to major
cutbacks in higher education, acaademic programs and research are forced
to rely more heavily on outside funding or fear elimination. Expertise
in the area of productive grants and proposals preparation, delivery and
follow-up would prove beneficial to the entire academic arena. The
ability to secure grant and proposal fundings provides individuals with
an opportunity for creative thinking, research, and adds a challenging
and distinctive flavor to learning through new discoveries and
experiments. Effective and simplified methods need to be established to
handle the volume of paperwork generated from daily tasks and grant and

146
proposal writing. Such methods would enhance the productivity and
operation of the entire academic community.
Ability to affect or influence change in the decision-making
process is an area that needs further exploration. It appears that
respondents in this study utilized indirect methods of change. In order
to facilitate effective change it is critical that one understands the
elements, models and strategies for progressive change, including a
thorough knowledge of factors and barriers that impede progress.
Training seminars, workshops and internships are avenues that would
provide the necessary information, strategies, tactics, management
skills and expertise needed for effective and progressive change in the
academic arena.
Recommendations
1.

The study should be conducted with populations from dif­
ferent types of institutions of higher education: urban,
majority institutions, traditionally black institutions,
private, single sex, and land grant institutions.

2.

Further research is needed to explore the relationship
between the long range effects of negative attitudes and
behavior on work production and career patterns.

3.

Research efforts should be developed that focus on the
issue of time management and its impact on research and
publication production.

4.

Pre-service and in-service training programs should be
conducted to provide a formula for scientific and
journalistic writing and preparation of contact grants and
proposals.

5.

Develop a women's caucus, to facilitate an intrainstitutional communication's network, to assist in
analyzing the power structure and decision-making
practices at this institution.

6.

Develop and participate in local, regional, or national
interest and research groups that can assist in developing
research projects and publications.

147
7.

Further research is needed that focuses on the dual-career
lifestyle and the difficulties and stress that evolves
when combining a career and a family.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the nature of the study and information collected
produced a number of specific findings. The conclusions which are drawn
here represent an attempt to bring these findings into broader focus.
1. In view of the minority and white professional females
respondents included in the study, ability to effect or influence change
in the decision-making process in o n e ’s department, unit or college
appears to be limited. From questionnaire items and open-ended
responses, it appears that respondents utilized a more indirect
mechanism of change. In other words, areas in which respondents
perceived that they were able to effect change were generally
categorized under the following labels: entry to middle management
tasks, general personnel duties and limited academic responsibilities.
In the area of finances and top level administrative responsibilities,
very few respondents had an opportunity to effect change.
2. Even though the majority of respondents perceived themselves as
being able to maintain a balance between a professional career and
personal life, a number of respondents identified various university,
career, and personal factors which presented obstacles that limited or
hindered reaching professional goals. Respondents’ abilities to
negotiate these factors are critical in maintaining a workable and
healthy balance between career demands, personal needs and being able to
survive in a sometimes hostile or frustrating work environment.
University factors, such as financial cutbacks and lack of positions,
created the majority of problems or concerns for respondents, whereas

148
career and personal factors were not perceived as presenting as strong a
concern. Overall, respondents suggested the following: utilizing all
available options, increasing levels of competence, developing decision­
making behavior and problem-solving techniques, networking and
participating in support groups. The following strategies were suggested
for coping with career factors: securing additional training and
advanced degrees were perceived as avenues by which to advance or
overcome career obstacles. Respondents perceived that communicating
feelings, clarifying and prioritizing professional and personal goals,
increasing physical exercise and activities as options that could be
utilized to deal with stress.
3. Negative aspects of success, which brought a wide range of
responses, impacted on all aspects of the respondents's lives, ranging
from conflict with significant others, lack of support in the work
arena, to a variety of illnesses stemming from frustration and stress.
Earlier findings substantiated the need for positive collegial
relationships, continued professional training and the need for
professional recognition. Levels of productivity, creativity and energy
have been reported to be influenced by the increased levels of stress
and the lack of professional colleague support.
4. Respondents perceived that young women entering the academic
arena will need more new and innovative strategies and skills than their
predecessor, such as a working knowledge of computers, ability to
perform as a team player and a level of awareness of department and
university organization structure and policies. For today's young
professional female, delaying marriage and family life will be critical

149
decisions that will have to be made after their professional careers are
well-established.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abramson, Joan. The Invisible Woman. Discrimination in the Academic
Profession. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1975.
Alexander, Vicki.
"The Nature of Professional Training for Minority
Women: An Overview." Paper delivered to the Conference, The
Minority Women in America: Professionalism at What Cost?, San
Francisco: University of California, March 1979. ED 180 409.
Allen, Walter R. "The Social and Economic Statuses of Black Women in
the U.S." in Phylon. (42), 1981, pp. 26-40.
Alperson, Erma Dosamantes.
"The Minority Women in Academe" in Pro­
fessional Psychology. (6), 1975, pp. 252-256.
Andrulis, D.P.; Iscoe, I.; Sikes, M.P.; Friedman, T. "Black Profes­
sionals in Predominantly White Institutions of Higher Education— An
Examination of Some Demographic and Mobility Characteristics" in
Journal of Negro Education, (44), Winter 1975, pp. 6-11.
Arnold, Karen and Denny, Terry. "College Hurts. Self-esteem of Bright
Women." Paper delivered at the American Educational Research
Association. Chicago, IL. April 1985.
Asburn, Elizabeth A. "Motivation, Personality and Work Related
Characteristics of Women in Male-Dominated Professions" in Ruth
Sprang Research Award Monograph Series. No. 2, NAWDAC, 1977.
Astin, Helen S. "Career Profiles of Women Doctorates" in the Rossi &
Calderwood, ed. Academic Women on the Move, New York: Sage Founda­
tion, 1973.
Bardwick, Judith M. Psychology of Women: A Study of Bio-Cultural
Conflicts. New York: Harper; Row Publishers, 1971.
Benton, Sandra Y. "Women Administrators for the 1980s:
Journal of NAWDAC. Summer, 1980, pp. 3-8.
Bernard, Jessie. Academic Women.
University Press, 1964.

University Park:

A New Breed" in

Pennsylvania State

Blaska, Betty.
"Women in Academe— The Need for Support Groups." in
Journal of NAWDAC. (39), Sum. 1976, pp. 173-178.
Bock, E. Wilbur.
"Farmer's Daughters Effect: The Case of the Negro
Female Professionals." in Phylon (30), Sp. 1969, pp. 17-26,

150

151
Bond, J. "The Media Image of Black Women." In Freedomways:
Review of the Freedom Movement (15), 1975, pp. 34-37.
Borg, Walter and Gall, Meredith.
New York: Longman, 1979.

Educational Research.

A Quarterly

3rd Edition.

Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. Opportunities for Women in
Higher Education. New York: McGraw Hill, 1973.
Carroll, Constance M. "Three's a Crowd: The Dilemma of the Black Woman
in Higher Education" in Rossi & Calderwood eds., Academic Women on
the Move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.
Collins, Sharon.
"Making Ourselves Visible: Evolution of Career Status
and Self-Image of Minority Professional Women." San Francisco:
University of California. Paper delivered to the Conference The
Minority Women in America: Professionalism at What Cost?, 1979.
Copeland, Elaine J. "Black Women and Power: Perspectives from Black
Women Administrators." Paper prepared for the Annual Conference of
the National Association of Women Deans and Counsellors, 1979, ED
178 628.
Cummings, Nancy Perkins.
"Women in Higher Education Administration" in
Margaret C. Berry ed. A Book of Readings. NAWDAC, Washington,
D.C., 1979.
Davis, Elaine, C. "Women in Non-traditional. Roles: Hurdles, Challenges,
Rewards" in Educational Horizon, (53), No.3, Sp.1975, pp. 98-101.
Delworth, Ursula & Jones, Nancy W. "Women in Administration: A View
from the Top" in Beverly Prosser-Gelwick ed. Up the Ladder:
Women, Professional; Clients in CSP. Cincinnati: ACPA Media
Productions No.25.
Dickerson, K.H.
"Are Female College Students Influenced by the
Expectations They Perceive Their Faculty and Administration Have
for Them?" in Journal of NAWDAC, (37), No.4, pp. 167-172.
Dillman, Don A. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method.
New York: Wiley, 1978.
Epps, Anna Cherrie.
"Cultural Conflicts in Professional Training of
Minority Women." San Francisco: University of California. Paper
delivered to the Conference The Minority Women in America: Profes­
sionalism at What Cost?, 1979, ED 180 409.
Epstein, Cynthia F. "Positive Effects of the Multiple Negative:
Explaining the Success cf Black Professional Women" in American
Journal of Sociology, (78), No.4, 1973, pp. 912-935.
Epstein, Cynthia F. "Structuring Success for Women: Guidelines for
Gatekeepers" in Journal of NAWDAC. 1973, (37), No.l, pp. 34-42.

152
Faunce, Patricia C. "Psychological Barriers to Occupational Success for
Women" in Journal of NAWDAC. (40), Sum., 1977, pp. 141-144.
Ferber, Marianne A.; Loeb, Jane W. "Performance, Rewards and Perceptions
of Sex Discrimination Among Male and Female Faculty" in American
Journal of Sociology (78), No.4, 1972, pp. 995-1002.
Fichter, J. "Career Expectations of Negro Women Graduates" in the
Monthly Labor Review, (90), 1967, pp. 36-42.
Finlay, Cheryl Schratz & Crosson, Patricia H. "Women in Higher Educa­
tion Administration Status and Strategies" in Administrator's
Update. (2), N.3, Win. 1981.
Freeman, Jo. "Women on the Move: Roots of Revolt." inRossi;
Calderwood eds., Academic Women on the Move. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation, 1973.
Freeman, Bonnie Cook.
"Faculty Women in the American University: Up
the Down Staircase." in Higher Education. (6), 1977, pp. 165-188.
Gappa, Judith M. & Uehling, Barbara S. "Women in Academe: Steps to
Greater Equality" in AAHE-ERIC/Higher Education Research Report.
No.l, 1979, Washington D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Educa­
tion, George Washington University, 20036.
Garson, Helen S. "Hurry up Please, I t ’s Time."
(38), Pt. 2, Sum.1975, pp. 168-172.

Journal of NAWDAC.

Gordan, R. Susan & Ball, Patricia.
"Survival Dynamics for Women in
Educational Administration" in Journal of NAWDAC. (70), No.2, Win.
1977, pp. 46-48.
Graham, Patricia A.
pp. 1284-1290.

"Women in Academe" in Science. (169), 1970,

Graham, Patricia A. "Status Transitions of Women Students, Faculty, and
Administration" in Rossi & Calderwood eds., Academic Women on the
Move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.
Green, Madeleine F. "A Washington Perspective on Women and Networking:
The Power and the Pitfalls" in the Journal of NAWDAC. Fall 1982,
pp. 17-21.
Greenleaf, Elizabeth A. "The Role of Women in Education— Responsibility
of Educated Women" in Educational Horizons. (54-55), No.2, Winter
1973-1974, pp. 77-80.
Gunnings, Barbara B. "The Relation Between Stress Factors and Self­
perceived Roles of Black Administrators in Predominantly White
Public Four Year Institutions of Higher Education in Michigan."
East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University (unpublished
dissertation, 1981).

153
Hairston, Shirley. "Sources of Role Conflict for Black and White
Professional Women in Higher Education." University of Pittsburgh
(unpublished dissertation, 1980).
Hale, Frank W. Jr. "A Sprinkle of Pepper: The State of Black Influence
in White Colleges and Universities" in the Journal of Non-White
Concerns, vol.3, pp. 45-52, 1975.
Harris, Ann Southerland. "The Second Sex" in AAUP Bulletin.
283-295.

(56), 1970,

Holt, Margaret.
"Strategies for the 'Ascent of Women' in Higher
Education in the 80s." Journal of NAWDAC. (44), 1981, pp. 21-24.
Horner, Matina.
1969.

"Why Bright Women Fail" in Psychology Today, (6), 3,

Horning, Lilli S. "Untenured and Tenuous: The Status of Women Faculty"
in American Academy of Political & Social Science. (448), March
1980, pp. 115-125.
Hoskins, Robert L. Black Administrators in Higher Education: Condi­
tions and Perceptions. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1978.
Howard, Suzanne. But We Will Persist: A Comparative Research Report on
the Status of Women in Academe. Washington, D.C.: American
Association of University Women, 1978.
Husband, Sandra Acker. "Women's Place in Higher Education?" in School
Review. (80), 1972, pp. 261-274.
Jaffe, Lorna. "Women's Place in Academe" in Midwest Quarterly.
No.4, Aug./Sept., 1973, pp. 16-30.

(15),

Johnson, Paula.
"Women and Power: Toward a Theory of Effectiveness" in
the Journal of Social Issues. (32), No.3, 1976, pp. 99-110.
Jones, Joyce & Welch, Olga.
"The Black Professional Woman: Psycho­
logical Consequences of Social and Educational Inequalities Upon
the Achievement of High-Status Careers in Leadership Positions" in
Journal of NAWDAC. (43), Win. 1979, pp. 29-33.
Kahne, Hilda.
"The Women in Professional Occupations: New Complexities
for Chosen Rolls" in Journal of NAWDAC. (39), Sum. 1976, pp. 179185.
Kerlinger, Frederick N. Foundations of Behavioral Research.
Edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1973.

2nd

Lerner, Gerda ed. Black Women in White America, A Documentary History.
New York: Random House, 1973.

154
Malcom, Shirley M.; Hall, Paula Q. & Brown, Janet W. "The Double Bind:
The Price of Being a Minority Women in Science" in American
Association of Science. Washington, D.C., 1976.
Mapps, E. Blacks in American Films.
Press, 1972.

Metuchen, New Jersey:

Scarecrow

Mac Conkey, Dorothy I. "Linkages and Networks in the Structure of
Personal Power" in Journal of NAWDAC. Sum. 1980, pp. 39-41.
Mayfield, Betty & Nash, William. "Career Attitudes of Female Professors"
in Psychological Reports (39), 1976, pp. 631-634.
Menges, Robert J. and Exum, William H. "Barriers to the Progress of
Women and Minority Faculty" in Journal of Higher Education (54),
1983, pp. 123-144.
Moore, Kathryn M. & Sagaria, Mary Ann D. "Women Administrations and
Mobility: The Second Struggle" in Journal of NAWDAC (44), 1981,
pp. 21-36.
Moore, William Jr. & Wagstaff, Lonnie, W. Black Educators in White
Colleges. Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1974.
Mosley, Myrtis Hall.
"Black Women Administrators in Higher Education:
An Endangered Species" in Journal of Black Studies. (10), No.3,
March 1980, pp. 295-310.
Moslock, Laura.
"Discipline Variation in the Status of Academic Women"
in Rossi and Calderwood eds. American Women on the Move. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.
Noble, J. The Negro Woman Looks at Her College Education. New York:
Columbia University, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, 1955.
National Education Association. "The Status of Women Faculty and
Administrators in Higher Education Institutions, 1971-1972."
Washington, D.C.: Research of National Education Association,
20036, 1973-7.
Neuman, Stephanie.
"Wife, Mother, Teacher, Scholar, and Sex Object:
Role Conflicts of a Female Academic" in Intellect. (106),
1977/1978, pp. 302-306.
Nieboer, Nancy A. "There is a Certain Kind of Woman. . . . " i n Journal
of NAWDAC. (38), No.3, Sp. 1975, pp. 99-103.
Nieto, C. "The Chicana and the Women’s Rights Movement" in Civil Rights
Digest, Sp., 1974, pp. 36-42.
Office of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
"Barriers to Women's Participation in Post Secondary Education:
Review of Research and Commentary as of 1973-1974." Esther M.

A

155
Westervelt, ed.
Office, 1975.

Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Government Printing

Oppenheim, Abraham N. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement.
New York: Basic Books, 1966.
Payton, Lucretia R. "Black Women in Higher Education: Power, Commitment
and Leadership" in George L. Mims ed., The Minority Administrator
in Higher Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman Publishing Co.,
Inc.
Peters, Dianne S. "And Pleasantly Ignore my Sex" in Academic Women.
Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Center for the Study of Higher
Education, School of Education, 48104, 1974.
Peterson, M.W.; Blackburn, R.T; Gamson, Z.F.; Arce, C.H.; Davenport,
R.W. & Mingle, J.A. Black Students on White Campuses: The Impact
of Increases of Black Enrollment. Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan, Institute for Social Research, 48106, 1978.
Rapoport, R. & Rapoport, R. "Early and Later Experience as Determinants
of Adult Behavior: Women’s Family and Career Patterns" in British
Journal of Sociology. (22), 1971, pp. 16-30.
Raven, B.H.
"Social Influences and Power" in I.D. Steiner & M. Fishbein
eds. Current Studies in Social Psychology. New York: Holt, 1965.
Rickman, G. "Affirmative Action Programs: Their Relationship to
Feminism & Racially Based Movements." Miami Beach: Paper pre­
sented to the Fifty-fifth Annual Meeting of the American Council on
Education, 1972.
Roberts, Joan. Creating a Facade of Change: Informal Mechanisms Used
to Impede the Changing Status of Women in Academe. Pittsburgh:
Know, Inc.
Robinson, Lora H. "Institutional Variation in Status of Academic Women"
in Rossi & Calderwood eds. Academic Women on the Move. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.
Roby, Pamela.
"Women and American Higher Education" in The Annals of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science.
Philadelphia, (44), Nov. 1972, pp. 118-139.
Rossi, Alice S. & Calderwood, Ann eds. Academic Women on the Move.
York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.

New

Schlossberg, Nancy.
"The Right to be Wrong is Gone: Women in Academe"
in The Educational Record. (55), No.4, pp. 257-263, F '74.
Scott, Patricia Bell.
"Preparing Black Women for Non-Traditional
Professions:
Some Considerations for Career Counseling." in
Journal of NAWDAC. Sum. 1977, pp. 135-139.

156
Scott, Patricia Bell. "Moving up the Institutional Hierarchy: Some
Suggestions for Young Minority and Women Professionals from the
Notebook of a Novice" in Journal of NAWDAC. (43) Win. 1979,
pp. 34-39.
Scott, Richard.
"Black Faculty Productivity and Interpersonal Academic
Contacts" in Journal of Negro Education, (50), No.3, 1981, pp. 224236.
Sexton, Patricia C. "Women in Education" in Phi Delta Kappa.
Bloomington, Indiana: Educational Foundation, 1976.
Slay, Tana & McDonald, Ann. "Female Professors/Male Professors Career
Development: Attitudes, Benefits, Cost" in Psychological Reports.
(48), 1981, pp. 307-314.
Smith, Calvert Hayes.
"The Peculiar Status of Black Educational
Administrators. The University Setting" in Journal of Black
Studies. (10), No.3, March 1980, pp. 323-334.
Smythe, M.M.
"Feminism and Black Liberation: Common Experience and
Pitfalls." Miami Beach, Paper Presented at the Fifty-fifth Annual
Meeting of the American Council on Education.
1972.
Sophie, Joan. "Women as Scholars" in American Psychologist. (29), Part
2, July, 1974, pp. 529-532.
Stevenson, Florence Byrd. Women Administrators in Big Ten Universities.
East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, 1973. (Unpublished
dissertation)
Strain, Lucille B & Drew, Theodore. Status of Black Women in Higher
Education. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Educational
Statistics (unpublished), Sept.1981.
Swann, Ruth H. & Witty, Elaine F. "Black Administrators at Traditional
Black Colleges & Universities: Attitudes, Perceptions and Poten­
tials" in Western Journal of Black Studies, (4), No.4, Win. 1980,
pp. 261-270.
Ten Elshof, Annette & Tomlinson, Elaine. "Alleviating Stress for Women
Administrators" in Journal of NAWDAC. (44), 1981, pp. 37-41.
Tibbett, Sylvia-Lee.
"Sex Roles Stereotyping: Why Women Discriminate
Against Themselves" in Journal of NAWDAC. (38), No.4, Part 2,
Sum.75, pp. 177-183.
Tidball, M. Elizabeth.
Higher Education.

"Equality and Success" in Current Issues in
1976, pp. 192-199.

Tidball, M. Elizabeth.
"Perspective on Academic Women and Affirmative
Action" in Educational Record. Sp.
1973, pp. 130-135.

157
Touchton, Judith & Shaulik, Donna.
"Challenging the Assumptions of
Leadership: Women and Men of the Academy" in New Directions for
Higher Education. (22), 1978, pp. 95-106.
Van Wessem Goerss, Katherine.
"Women Administrators in Education.
Review of Research" in the Ruth Stang Research Award Monograph
Series. No. 3, NAWDAC, July 1977.

A

Vetter, B. "Data on the Participation of Minority Women in the
Sciences." Paper delivered to the Conference The Minority Women in
America: Professionalism at What Cost? San Francisco: University
of California, March 1979.
Vetter, L.
gist.

"Career Counseling for Women" in The Counseling Psycholo­
(4), 1973, pp. 54-67.

Walker, Doris M. Factors Affecting the Advancment of Women Within
Educational Administration: Managerial Effectiveness, Career
Aspirations, Professional Socialization, and the Culture of the
Organization. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, 1981
(Unpublished Dissertation).
Woods, Bennie Burks. Significant Characteristics of Professional Women
Employed in Public Two-Year and Four-Year Higher Education Insti­
tutions in Michigan. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University,
1979. (Unpublished dissertation)
Wright, Madeline E. "Current Perspectives on Black Female Adminis­
trators" in George L. Mims, ed. The Minority Administrator in
Higher Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Schenkman Publishing Co.,
1981.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Letters

158

M IC H IG A N STATE U N IV E R S IT Y
iM v n y iv

r o ' i M i i 1i i

hum an s u n jir n

o \

K iU A K r n

iw o iv i.n c

fast

t a m in g

• M i c h i g a n • « k »j «

ii> c R n iii

2 » A D M IN IS T R A T IO N B u ll DING

January k, 1983

|M 7> JTVJ1M .

Ms. Melody C. Pierce
Office of Human Relations
380 Administration Building
Dear Ms. Pierce:
Subject:

Proposal Entitled, "The Similarities 6 Differences in
the Se1f-Perceived Roles t Attitudes of Minority t
__________ White Professional Women Employed in Higher Education"
UCRIHS review of the above referenced project has now been completed.
I am
pleased to advise that the rights and welfare of the human subjects appear
to be adequately protected and the Committee, therefore, approved this project
at its meeting on
January 3 . 1983
You are reminded that UCRIHS approval Is valid for one calendar year. If you
plan to continue this project beyond one year, please make provisions for
obtaining appropriate UCRIHS approval prior to the anniversary date noted above.
Any changes in procedures involving human subjects must be reviewed by the
UCRIHS prior to Initiation of the change. UCRIHS must also be notified
promptly of any problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.) involving
human subjects during the course of the work.
Thank you for bringing this project to our attention.
future help, please do not hesitate to let us know.
Sincerely

Henry E. Bredeck
Chairman, UCRIHS
HEB/jms
cc:

Dr. Raines

If we can be of any

159

M I C H I G A N S TA T E U N I V E R S I T Y
l » I ' A K l>ll M

<»

M IM A ".

Ill I A I I O N S • t t O M I N A

I A M

n U K . H A M A

10 January

Dear

■ Mil I I I U A S • ml.'I

1983

Colleague:

Th
woman w
higher
sionals
sional

per
car
my
at

I A N V M i

My
cept
eer
doct
Mich

ere is stil
ho holds de
learning.
have been
women holdi

l v
cis
All
of
ng

ery little known about the
ion-making appointments at
recent studies of college
a general character, genera
administrative positions.

research focuses directl
ions of professional wome
advancement.
I am undert
oral degree in the Depart
igan State University.

This

research

will

explore

y upon the self
n as they relat
aking this as d
ment of Adminis

the

—

The positions and ranks held
Michigan State University.

—

The racial
predicting

—

The relationship of
variables to career

background
employment

following
by

academic professional
large institutions of
and university profes­
lizing only to pr of es­

-repo
e to
isser
trati

rted attitudes and
their employment and
t at ion rese arc h for
on and Curriculum

areas:

professional

women

at

of these women as a variable
and career advancement.

in

academic, personal and professional
development and advancement.

The principle resource instrument is a questionnaire.
Completion
will take some of your time, but the lack of data concerning the role of
professional women makes this kind of effort a worthwhile investment.
The coded number on the questionnaire
follow-up, if necessary.
All results will
fidence and all participants will remain an
not be used in any way in the di ss ert at ion
materials.
Upon request, and within these
made available to participants.
If you wou
of the final report, please return the encl
after you have returned this questionnaire.
di sc on t i n u e the survey at a n y time with out

is only for the purpose of
be treated with strict con­
onymous.
Your identity will
or in any subsequent published
restrictions, results will be
ld like a copy of the results
osed form through campus mail
You may also feel free to
recrimination.

160

Page

2

P l e a s e , if, for a n y r e a s o n , yo u feel u n c o m f o r t a b l e p r o v i d i n q th e i n ­
formation requested in any single item, please skip that question and
continue on with the survey.
Y o ur c o o p e r a t i o n in this r e se arc h p r oj ect
is gr eatly appreciated.
A se lf -ad dr ess ed en ve lop e is
hope you will find it po ss ibl e to
time received.
If yo u have a n y qu
or the study, please feel free to
a d vi sor . Dr. Ma x Raines, D e p a r t m e n
355-6613.
Thank you
questionnaire.

for

taking

the

time

enclosed for your convenience.
I
respond within four days from the
estions regarding the questionnaire
contact me at 355-7816, or my major
t of Administration and Curriculum,

and

energy

to

fill

out

this

Sincerely,

M e l o d y C. Pi er ce
Ph.D. Candidate

D i a n a V.
Division
Enclosures

I would

-

R.
of

2

like a

copy

of

the

results

of

this

study.

N A M E __________________________________________________
CAMPUS

ADDRESS

Return

this

______________________

form

through

campus

mail

to:

M e l o d y C. P i e r c e
Department of Human Relations
380 Administration Building
Campus

Alqra, Director
Women's Programs

161

M I C H I G A N S TA T E U N I V E R S I T Y
IWPAHI Ml M

lit

I AM I ANMNI, • Mil llll. AN •

III MAN III I AI IO
NA • W1IMIVA I'KIX.HAMS

Janu ary 1 9 , 1983

D e a r C o lle a g u e ,
S e v e ra l days ago you re c e iv e d a q u e s tio n n a ir e d esig n ed to e x p lo re
th e a t t i t u d e s and p e rc e p tio n s o f p r o fe s s io n a l women em ployed a t M ich ig an
S ta te U n iv e r s ity .
As o f t h is d a te I have n o t re c e iv e d a response from y o u .
I re a liz e
t h a t you perhaps have n o t had th e tim e to co m p lete i t in th e s e v e ra l days
as o r i g i n a l l y re q u e s te d .
The success o f t h is re s e a rc h depends to a la r g e
measure upon y o u r resp o n se.
May I em phasize t h a t th e q u e s tio n n a ir e can
be co m p leted in a b o u t 25 m in u te s and t h a t th e d a ta w i l l be h e ld in s t r i c t
c o n fid e n c e .
I f f o r some reason th e q u e s tio n n a ir e has been m is p la c e d o r d id n o t
re a c h y o u r o f f ic e , p l e a s e r e tu r n th e bottom p o r tio n o f t h i s l e t t e r and a
q u e s t io n n a ir e w i l l be m a ile d to you.
I f you have a lr e a d y re tu r n e d y o u r q u e s tio n n a ir e , p le a s e d is re g a rd
t h i s r e q u e s t.
Thank you a g a in f o r y o u r c o o p e ra tio n and i n t e r e s t .
S in c e r e ly ,

M elody C. P ie r c e
Ph. 0 . C a n d id a te

I w is h to r e c e iv e a q u e s tio n n a ir e .

P lea se send one to th e fo llo w in g a d d re s s .

NAME_________________________________________________
ADDRESS_____________________________________________

P le a s e r e tu r n t h is p o r tio n to th e fo llo w in g a d d re s s :

Artmm/Fi+st

hihlalM*

M elody C. P ie r c e
D iv is io n o f Women's Program
380 A d m in s tra tio n B ld g .
CAMPUS

162

M IC H IG A N STATR U N IV E R S IT Y
I H f A K I M l S I O l ItV M A N K H A T m W • W O M I V I ntO G M A M S

I A\ I IANMNG • M
ICl l l f . \ \ * «*^J|

F e b ru a ry 8 ,

1983

D e a r C o lle a g u e ,
A few weeks ago you r e c e iv e d a c o v e r l e t t e r and a q u e s tio n n a ir e e n t i t l e d
"A re You A Change A g e n t? " .
As o f t h i s d a t e , o u r re c o rd s show t h a t y o u r
q u e s t io n n a ir e has n o t been re c e iv e d by t h i s o f f i c e .
T h is p a r t i c u l a r re s e a rc h
p r o j e c t e x p lo r e s th e a t t i t u d e s and p e rc e p tio n s o f p r o fe s s io n a l women employed
in h ig h e r e d u c a tio n .
Due t o th e la c k o f c u r r e n t d a ta c o n c e rn in g th e p r o fe s s io n a l
r o l e o f women, such a s y o u r s e l f , we t h in k t h a t i t i s im p e r a tiv e t h a t we r e c e iv e
as much in p u t as p o s s ib le fro m p r o fe s s io n a l women em ployed a t t h i s l e v e l .
C o m p le tio n o f th e q u e s t io n n a ir e w i l l ta k e a b o u t 25 m in u te s o f y o u r t im e .
I f th e q u e s t io n n a ir e i n q u e s tio n has n o t re a c h e d y o u r o f f i c e , p le a s e f i l l
o u t th e b o tto m p o r t io n o f t h i s l e t t e r and a q u e s t io n n a ir e w i l l be fo rw a rd e d
t o you im m e d ia te ly .
S e v e r a l re q u e s ts have come i n , b u t due t o th e l a c k o f
p e r t i n e n t in f o r m a tio n on th e re q u e s t fo rm , such as name and a d d re s s , we have
n o t been a b le to send a q u e s tio n n a ir e to y o u .
Thank you a g a in f o r y o u r t im e , e n e rg y and s u p p o rt.
S in c e r e ly ,

M elo dy C. P ie r c e
Ph. D. C a n d id a te

1 w is h to r e c e iv e a q u e s t io n n a ir e .

P le a s e send one t o th e f o llo w in g a d d re s s .

NAME
ADDRESS

P le a s e r e t u r n t h i s

p o r t io n t o th e fo llo w in g a d d re s s :

M elo dy C. P ie r c e
D iv is io n o f Women’ s Program
38 0 A d m in is t r a t io n B ld g .
CAMPUS

M i l l i t mm A /fin m + t i v A ttim m /ffm m l O ffm rtm m tty Im tM m tm m

163
A Summary of Responses to Open-Ended Items
Four open-ended questions were examined to determine the fol­
lowing: (1) experiences in which the respondents were able to influence
the decision-making, development, or planning process in their dis­
cipline or area; (2) how respondents dealt with university, career, or
personal factors that hindered or limited achieving professional goals;
(3) negative aspects of success that they have experienced as profes­
sionals; and (4) advice respondents would offer young professional women
entering their field or discipline.

EXPERIENCES IN WHICH YOU WERE ABLE TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION-MAKING, DEVELOPMENT OR
PLANNING PROCESS IN YOUR DEPARTMENT
MINORITY RESPONDENT

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Provide inservice training,
regional fact finding committee,
chair of committee

Planning and development of
resources and training materials
for state level project

Responsible for budget,
therefore, have considerable
input into fund allocations

Setting up program for
cooperative extension service

Responsibility for planning
emergency services

Nature of minority programming

Development and implementation
of new department program

Helped to develop direction of
our new research and extension
center and instrumental in
carrying out first year program

Increase student staff
Conflict resolution with staff
Chair academic program and
policy committee
Influence hiring and project
planning of experimental
laboratory
I feel my opinions are volued,
proposals seriously considered
Development of programming and
hiring policies

General administrative policies
within health clinic
Input on the hiring of
chairperson, department vote on
college bylaws

Advise the dean on internal
employee relations and external
public relations
I have input on decisions which
affect the budget

Chair of search committee

Implemented shift from a
programming philosophy and
systems to another

Increase in scope of
responsibility for the unit and
staff positions

Changing staff expectations

Design procedures and write
proposals for which my (male)
boss took credit

All department policies
originate from my office, but
require higher administrative
approval before implementation

EXPERIENCES IN WHICH YOU WERE ABLE TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION-MAKING, DEVELOPMENT OR
PLANNING PROCESS IN YOUR DEPARTMENT
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Development of computer programs
in research and instruction
I put forth an idea and it is
implemented
Budget department, hiring of
women and minorities at the
department and university-wide
level
Budget reductions and
reorganization
Research animal welfare
Parking regulations
Instrumental planner of out test
shipment to India
Change policies and move unit to
a self-supporting position
Recruitment
Hiring procedures: philosophy
and goals

EXPERIENCES IN WHICH YOU WERE ABLE TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION-MAKING, DEVELOPMENT OR
PLANNING PROCESS IN YOUR DEPARTMENT
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Developing new and more
efficient methods of operating
Reworking methods of operations
Information systems and problem
solving proposals accepted
Department level: influence
admissions policy and curriculum
content
Due to competency able to
acquire additional
responsibility over unit
Broadening scope of
responsibilities, securing
additional funding for staff
Named to planning group for
reorganization for our college
Student action procedures,
equipment purchases for
communication art building

EXPERIENCES IN WHICH YOU WERE ABLE TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION-MAKING, DEVELOPMENT OR
PLANNING PROCESS IN YOUR DEPARTMENT
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Personnel decision
Chair search committee three
times
Hiring of new staff, attend
staff meetings, office
supervisor and planning
Advisory committee on promotion
and tenure
Develop department policy
regarding sexism and racism

HOW HAVE YOU DEALT WITH UNIVERSITY FACTORS THAT HINDER OR
LIMITED ACHIEVING PROFESSIONAL GOALS
MINORITY RESPONDENT

Soft money and/or federal
grants.
Work load.
Try to increase my level of
competency.
Develop decision-making behavior
and problem solving techniques.
Look for other position in
university.
Better planning.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Grin and bear it.
Reduction in personnel,
additional responsibilities have
made it difficult to schedule
the necessary time for these
pursuits.
Get involved, become
knowledgeable; know the people
in decision-making position.

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

I have not been able to purchase
the computer equipment necessary
to do the job at its best level.
I just try to get through them
by balancing all aspects of my
life as much as possible.
Investigating other job options.
Compromise and make adjustments
when necessary.
Changed jobs when mine was
eliminated by financial
cutbacks.

Males view of women is negative.
Make many compromises.

To handle them in the most
professional way.
Currently taking classes at MSU.
Choice to remain with family
involves a professional trade
off of job security and
traditional progress of
flexibility and relaxation of
traditional job pressures e.g.,

HOW HAVE YOU DEALT WITH UNIVERSITY FACTORS THAT HINDER OR
LIMITED ACHIEVING PROFESSIONAL GOALS
MINORITY RESPONDENT

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

achieving tenure.
Accepted some of them, learn as
much as I could from others.
Currently working on a bachelor
degree.
Due to cutbacks lack of
opportunities for promotion.
Lack of funds for training
seminars, now not able to attend
for professional development.
Strategy to create a new
university position.
Lack of position, but still seek
additional responsibilities.
Increase participation in
networking with key advocates in
unit.
How has anyone: You just wait it
out.

HOW HAVE YOU DEALT WITH UNIVERSITY FACTORS THAT HINDER OR
LIMITED ACHIEVING PROFESSIONAL GOALS
MINORITY RESPONDENT

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Give my job the "best shot"
every day.
I have assumed a more
philosophical approach, less
aggressive.
Due to little research
interaction with colleagues, I
am not part of their research
focus and have not been
encouraged to join them. I
pursue colleagues at other
universities through
professional associations.

HOW HAVE YOU DEALT WITH CAREER FACTORS THAT HINDER OR LIMIT
ACHIEVING PROFESSIONAL GOALS
MINORITY RESPONDENT

Seek advanced degree.
Paid for conference expenses and
other forms of professional
improvement expenses.
Develop decision-making behavior
and problem solving techniques.
Additional education.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Take courses for professional
development.

I've had to adjust my goals and
expectations.

Take additional training in my
field.

Taking courses at MSU.
Obtain Master's Degree, attempt
to overcome lack of professional
degree and gain credibility by
initiating programs of interest
and of use to the faculty.
Advancement has occurred without
having earned a college degree.
Compromise and make adjustments
when necessary.
Taking classes to upgrade
ability.
Earn advanced degree.
Do not have a Ph.D., which in
turn limits advancement.
I weigh the value to me of
continuing on for a Ph.D.

HOW HAVE YOU DEALT WITH PERSONAL FACTORS THAT HINDER OR LIMIT
ACHIEVING PROFESSIONAL GOALS
MINORITY RESPONDENT

Communicate feelings.
Personality conflict with male
counterpart.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Made a choice to have children,
but it also interferes with
career.

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

In a pinch prioritize family and
personal needs.

Clarify professional goals.

Tried to look at long range
goals and the overall picture of
each situation.

Increase physical exercise to
deal with stress.

Not able to move because of
family ties.

Set more realistic goals.

Formulate game plan for this
physical location until we can
move.
Mobility will be less of a
problem in the future,
developing other short term
goals.
Accept them.
Divorce or they remain
unresolved.
I have not dealt with personal
factors, I have chosen to stay
put and this has limited my
professional goals.

HOW HAVE YOU DEALT WITH PERSONAL FACTORS THAT HINDER OR LIMIT
ACHIEVING PROFESSIONAL GOALS
MINORITY RESPONDENT

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

I have worked hard on my values,
this has opened new personal
choices that are really quite
satisfactory.

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF SUCCESS

MINORITY RESPONDENT

Stress and fatigue.
Husband does not view my success
as significant.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Coping with family time vs.
profession, travel time, spouse
jealousy.

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Lack of respect from
subordinates. Women in
particular tend not to support
an achiever.

Increase work load and time.
Overlooked for a raise and
promotion.
Constantly having to prove one's
abilities.
Feeling like I had to have all
the solutions and answers.
10-15 hour work days.
Resistance from superiors.
Overloaded with work and
affirmative action policies,
equal opportunity policies and
minority affairs.
Lack of support from colleagues
and negative attitudes.
Health problems.

Less free time.
Some jealousy by women
colleagues.
Stress, pressure, depression
because you have to be better.
Dealing with the unknown, moving
into regions where I am insecure
about my capabilities.
Inability to achieve job
security and a salary
commensurate with my education,
experience, abilities and
performance.
Not getting credit when it is
due.
Lack of support for women who
continue to develop their
professional goals.

Success in limited field
stereotypes one and makes it
difficult to move into other
areas.
I have had to devote more time
and energy to my job (away from
my home responsibilities) and as
a single parent that has caused
some stress.
Less time for family and self.
Due to the lack of female
counterpart and the barriers by
the "good old boy" network, I
have no sounding board on which
to vent my frustrations or
relieve the job pressures.

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF SUCCESS

MINORITY RESPONDENT

Lack of creative opportunities
and time.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

More demands on time, lack of
balance between professional and
personal life.

Lack of personal time.
Expect more out of you the more
you produce.
Accomplishment and skills not
acknowledged by superiors.
Lack of time, resources,
pressures and stress.
Others act as if promotion was
given as a favor and not as if
you earned it.
Have position only because you
are a minority.
Reluctance of some individuals
to work effectively with women
and minorities.
Some members of my ethnic
background view my success and
employment at the university as

"Carry" others who have
withdrawn from the turmoil, who
were tenured and thus not
threatened the way I was.
Reduced time for personal and
family commitments.
One tends to get overextended,
you feel like you are always
fighting, some do not see you as
an equal, some males do not see
you as an equal, but set you off
because they feel intimidated.
I have often felt like a second
class citizen— having "only a MS
in the land of the Ph.D."

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Not having sufficient time or
energy for keeping up to date on
the latest equipment and methods
of applicaton.
Dis-stress, stomach ulcers,
intestinal disorder, insomnia,
worry.
Stress of doing more than one
job because of budget cuts and
reduced staff. Frustration of
never having enough time to
accomplish all the objectives
for the department.
Lack of credibility from other
departments.
It caused trouble in my marital
relationship, spouse feels
inferior.
More is expected of me because
of past successful programs.

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF SUCCESS

MINORITY RESPONDENT

total assimilation into white

society.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Tiredness, not being able to
develop as much time due to

family demands.
Some male and female co-workers
resent me at times.
Women's Movement has had an
impact on sexism, now able to
enjoy genuine support from
colleagues.
I have to be careful that I
don't threaten unproductive
faculty members.
At time too much responsibility.
Secretary doesn't seem very
willing to socialize with me or
include me in activities.
From a few subordinates.
Only from a few females in the
department, I feel the pressure
of being on display all the
time. But do not want to be "one

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF SUCCESS

MINORITY RESPONDENT

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

of the guys." At the same time,
I want and need to have the
confidence of the female staff
in the department.
Some male faculty feel a bit
threatened by my success,
particularly if they are not so
successful.
Having achieved a certain amount
of success, it's difficult to
allow myself to occasionally
"take a rest" from the feeling
that I must always achieve.
As a successful professional, I
have found that I do not have
the "acceptance," which may be
associated with the role of a
traditional woman. In particu­
lar, I have found many people
(men and women alike) are ready
to condemn women in "nontraditional" roles and to accuse
them of such devious purposes as
the "destruction of the American
family."

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF SUCCESS

MINORITY RESPONDENT

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Little time for family life—
hard on marital relationship,
spouse feels threatened by my
job and salary.
Lack of personal development,
difficult with marriage, failure
to follow other avenues of in­
terest, indecision regarding
motherhood.
Have the feeling that one always
needs to be better than one's
male counterparts.
Much longer working hours than
colleagues, experience
professional jealousy.
It makes finding a satisfactory
permanent companion or mate
difficult.
Become a workaholic and don't
get married or have children.
Women with professional
aspirations today have a choice

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF SUCCESS

MINORITY RESPONDENT

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

between family and a career.
They cannot have both in the way
that I do, unless they can find
a mate who is willing to be a
"house-husband" and whom they
can still respect.

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Learn a foreign language and
computer skills.

Consider job opportunities in
the area of college teaching.

A degree is advantageous,
recommend computer experience.

Sound academic preparation,
publish and conduct research,
obtain high visibility in state,
regional and national
organizations.

Recognize the limitations
created by culturally-defined
requirements of dual careers for
women, learn to accept what
these limitations imply. Delay
child rearing until training is
complete, maintain a sense of
humor.

Get academic credentials as well
as work experience, don’t box
one's self into staff position,
try to get a joint academic
appointment.

Mentor and get involved.
Get technical training and
experience/grantsmanship and
computers.
Be committed.
Develop team play, communication
skills, develop network and
support groups, mentor someone
else, continue with professional
development.
Have clearly defined goals,
learn to cope with stress.

Need background in teaching,
time management, blend of selfconfidence, assertiveness,
dignity and a sense of humor.
Work on advanced degree, apply
for advanced positions, belong
to professional organizations.
Develop a strong networking
system, set specific
professional goals, continually
strive for opportunities to
"stretch" and grow.

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

There are good job opportunities
available. Be responsible and
prove you are the best person
for the job...do not rely on
special treatment because you
are a woman. Be yourself...you
do not have to work the job like
a man.
Be prepared for subtle covert
discrimination, develop support
network early.
Develop a key support group and
network.
Despite affirmative action and
non-discriminatory language,
when entering a male dominated

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

Early in career start research,
publish and learn university
system.
Avoid over specialization,
review career opportunities—
interdisciplinary programs.
Avoid over commitment to pro­
fessional responsibilities at
the expense of personal and
family responsibilities and
needs.
Get Ph.D., be assertive and
confident, get a mentor, join
professional organizations.
Focus on technological applica­
tion, be professional, prompt,
reliable and accurate at all
times.
Minority women need to be aware
of job positions that are on the
peripheral circle of the univer­
sity, join support groups and
develop coping strategies.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Get the most education possible,
obtain consultation-effective
ways on managing issues of women
in administration.
Work hard to prove competency,
sometimes it seems that women
have to put forth more effort to
prove themselves.
Know your goals and how much of
your personal life you are
willing to sacrifice to achieve
them; never accept less than
excellence in your work, join a
top research team with an
advisor, who has many
professional contacts.
Learn to say "no." It is easy to
become the "housewife" of the
department— doing the unpleasant
jobs nobody wants, sitting on
lots of committees, taking lots
of service work, reading
everyone else's papers and
generally being "helpful." You
will be well-liked, and feel

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

field, women must have better
qualifications, have to prove
themselves capable for a longer
period of time and are paid less
than their male counterparts.
Conducting business on the golf
course may no longer be true,
the location may have changed,
but the ideas still hold. Many
decisions are still made away
from the office setting and
women are frequently excluded.
Personally, I feel a deep
commitment to my family and
community, that precludes my
taking part in the informal
decision-making opportunities
that may, from time to time, be
afforded to women.
Try to preserve your mobility.
Get a degree in an applicable
field.

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

Have confidence, be assertive,
do your homework, affirmative
action not working as well as
administration will have you
believe— tokenism.
Be as competent as you possibly
can in your field, participate
in community affairs and social
agencies as a community volun­
teer. Know your rights, but also
be ready to assume responsi­
bilities.
Be a bit more selfish of one’s
time, publish more, teach less
classes.
Develop competency, establish
professional contacts, evaluate
professional goals in terms of
interest and competencies.
Integrity in terms of personal
values.
Understand the basic norms of
the organization, develop
support group for survival,

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

that you are doing a good job.
Then at promotion time they will
say, "Yes, she's a good teacher,
advises lots of students, is
great at committee work, but
what has she published?" Better
to be less popular and turn out
more publications. You must hold
the line on how much of yourself
you are willing to give away to
others.
Be prepared for a struggle,
maintain solidarity with other
women and minority colleagues.
Our students and our profession
need our skills.

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Don't take work home with you,
your personal life comes first,
vary your education as much as
possible, take advantage of
continuing your education, try
not to internalize the stress—
take stress management
workshops, courses, etc.
Get involved in university-wide,
state, national organizations,
join personal and professional
women's support groups for
growth of knowledge, skill
development and confidence.
I've come a long way without a
college degree, but sometimes I
feel the lack of it.
Degree and experience.
Education, business and stamina.
Seek out opportunities in states
with less economic stress.

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

develop plan for staying in
system and advancing.
Choose your mate very carefullymarry late, be realistic about
the demands of the career and
other aspects of your life, have
a sense of humor, set up support
network early in your career.

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Limited job opportunities in
very specialized field— lab
technicians.
Good education, hard work and be
dedicated to your profession.
General business experience,
data processing knowledge, selfconfidence, ability to sell your
ideas.
Know your discipline, theory and
practical application. Learn
effective grammatical usage,
public speaking and dress for
success.
Develop competencies in more
than one area, research and
statistical skills. Conduct
research and publish early in
your career, participate in
national professional associa­
tions, develop networks with
colleagues and supporters on the
local and national level.

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Work hard, don't let emotional
or personal factors interfere
with job, act intelligent.
Couple academic strength with
practical application, don't be
defensive or awed by male
counterparts or supervisors.
Initiate new projects, make
yourself look creative. Tell key
people what you are doing. Don°t
bulk at dull work, it may result
in an opportunity for something
more exciting.
Young women should be certain
that they keep up their skills,
education and work experience.
Have all the credentials (aca­
demic, administrative, writing
skills, organizational skills
and interpersonal skills). Learn
to listen, don't be arrogant,
have integrity, positive
creative problem solver and
serve as a role model.

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

Expect to work hard, more than
40 hours, learn to be hard, shed
any "female" humaness, or you
will not survive. Read "Games
Mother Never Taught You," take
executive development courses.
Decide whose career, your's or
your spouse's, will have
priority.
Have a strong background and
experiences in private practice.
Get a Ph.D. from a good
university and publish often.
Most women must "prove
themselves" and that the degree
of "proof" exceeds that expected
of their male counterpart.
Nonetheless, we can do it.
Be assertive of your rights, but
not hostile or belligerent.
Specialist position is a "noth­
ing" category, as far as a

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

faculty position is concerned.
The tenure faculty really
doesn't accept you as an equal,
nor do you fit in with A/P or
CT's.
Write a lot the first three
years, consider this your major
task, contribute to committees,
emphasize teaching only if you
can handle the publishing
requirements well.
I have not received the personal
assistance, guidance, friend­
ship, or career assistance that
my male counterparts have re­
ceived from the senior faculty.
Obtain good listening skills, be
assertive, have support system,
recognize conflicts and resolve
problems rather than deny them.
Make sure your credentials are
impeccable— better than the
average male's. Don't get the

WHAT ADVICE, IF ANY, WOULD YOU OFFER YOUNG PROFESSIONAL WOMEN
ENTERING YOUR FIELD OR DISCIPLINE?
MINORITY RESPONDENTS

MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

NON-MATCHED WHITE RESPONDENTS

reputation of being a "rabblerouser" on women's issues.
Need to actively look at your
professional aims and personal
needs and you need to assess
what type of professional life
will suit those needs once in a
position, a woman should be
expected to perform as well as
her male counterparts.
Caution them about the
frustration that is inevitable
when one gets an advanced degree
in a limited field, competition
is very hard and one can feel at
a disadvantage as a woman with a
family.
Beware of department politics.
Find a mentor with whom to work
with on research, know
guidelines for tenure.

APPENDIX C

Instrument

188
Code Number

ARE YOU A
CHANGE

AGENT ?

PROFESSIONAL WOMEN AND THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS
TO HIGHER EDUCATION AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY

DIVISION OF WOMEN'S PROGRAMS
MICHICAN STATE UNIVERSITY
380 Administration Building
East Lansing, MI.
48823

189

PAGE 1

In s tru c tio n s :
(1 ) P le a s e c o m p le te
resp o n se.
(2 )

1.

If,
fo r any
re q u e s te d
in
th e s u rv e y .

shade

in

th e

c irc le s

th a t

re p re s e n t

2
3
4

p ro ces s

in

VERY GOOD
GOOD
L I M I T E D IM P A C T
NO IM P A C T

MY FEMALE COUNTERPARTS
MY MALE COUNTERPARTS

ACADEMIC MATTERS
F I N A N C I A L MATTERS
A D M I N I S T R A T I V E MATTERS

To w hat
areas?

1

your

reason,
you f e e l u n c o m f o r t a b le p r o v i d i n g th e i n f o r m a t i o n
an i t e m ,
p le a s e s k ip
t h a t q u e s t i o n an d c o n t i n u e on w i t h

BETTER
THAN
0
0

EQUAL
TO
0
0

e x t e n t do
(S h ad e one

BETTER
THAN
0
0
0

EQUAL
TO
0
0
0

you f e e l
t h a t YOU e x e r t
resp o n s e f o r each ite m )

H I R I N G A N D /O R PROMOTION OF
WOMEN
H I R I N G AND/OR PROMOTION OF
M IN O R IT IE S
H I R I N G AND PRO MO TIO NAL PRAC­
T I C E S OR P O L I C I E S I N GENERAL
TENURE P O L I C I E S

in y o u r d e p a r t ­
to
o th e rs
in

LESS
THAN
0
0

When c o m p a r e d w i t h y o u r M a l e c o - w o r k e r o r c o l l e a g u e
c e iv e y o u r im p a c t upon th e d e c is io n - m a k in g p ro c e s s in
lo w in g a re a s ?
(S h a d e o ne re s p o n s e f o r e a c h it e m )

1
2
3
4.

or

How d o y o u p e r c e i v e y o u r i m p a c t u p o n t h e c h a n g e p r o c e s s
m e n t,
c o lle g e ,
or
a d m in is tra tiv e
u n it
as
com pared
yo u r area?
( S h a d e o n e r e s p o n s e f o r e a c h i tern)

1
2
3.

b la n k s

How d o y o u p e r c e i v e
y o u r im p a c t upon th e d e c is io n - m a k in g
your d e p a rtm e n t, c o lle g e , or area?
(S h ad e one r e s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0

2.

th e

LESS
THAN
0
0
0

in flu e n c e

NO COUNTER
PART
0
0
how d o y o u
each o f th e

p er­
fo l­

NO COUNTER
PART
0
0
0
in

th e

fo llo w in g

GREAT
DEAL
0

MODER­
ATE
0

SOME­
WHAT
0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

POOR
0

DOES NOT
APPLY
0

( o ver)

190

PAGE 2
S.

If
you
are
in v o lv e d
in
p o lic y
m a k in g ,
what c a te g o ry
y o u r l e v e l o f in v o lv e m e n t?
(S h a d e one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0
0

6.

U N IV E R S IT Y -W ID E
C O L L E G E /U N IT
DEPARTM ENT
AREA W I D E
I AM NOT IN V O L V E D

M AK IN G
or

A G REAT DEAL
AS MUCH AS I WOULD L I K E
NOT AS MUCH AS I WOULD L I K E
UN IN FO R M ED
U N A B L E TO ASSESS

In
g e n e ra l,
t o w h at e x t e n t a r e you k e p t in fo rm e d o f d e p a rtm e n t, c o l ­
le g e ,
o r u n iv e rs ity
p ro b le m s ,
is s u e s ,
and d e v e lo p m e n t s as c o m p a re d t o
o th e rs in yo u r p o s itio n ?
(S h a d e o ne re s p o n s e f o r e a c h it e m )

1
2
8.

P O LIC Y

d e s c rib e s

T o w h a t e x t e n t a r e you k e p t in f o r m e d
o f d e p a rtm e n ta l, d iv is io n a l,
u n i v e r s i t y p r o b le m s , i s s u e s , and d e v e lo p m e n ts ?
(S h a d e one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0
0

7,

IN

best

BETTER
THAN
0
0

MY F EM A L E COUNTERPARTS
MY MALE COUNTERPARTS

EQUAL
TO
0
0

LESS
THAN
0
0

NO C O U N T E R PA R T
0
0

Can you i d e n t i f y
e x p e rie n c e s
I n w h ic h you w e re a b l e t o i n f l u e n c e th e
d e c is io n -m a k in g ,
d e v e lo p m e n t,
o r p la n n in g
p ro cess in y o u r d e p a rtm e n t
u n i t , a r e a , o r c o lle g e ?
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )
0
NO
0
YES— ► I f
" y e s ," p le a s e b r i e f l y
d e s c rib e
th e n a t u r e and d e g re e o f
in flu e n c e
in
th e s it u a t io n
w here you b e lie v e d you w ere m ost e f f e c t i v e

9.

To w hat e x t e n t have th e f o llo w in g
f a c t o r s h in d e r e d o r l i m i t e d you in
a c h ie v in g
your
p ro fe s s io n a l
g o a ls ?
(S h a d e
one
resp on se
fo r
each
ite m )

1

2

3

U N I V E R S I T Y FACTORS
(F in a n c ia l c u tb a c k s , la c k o f
posi tio n )
CAREER FACTORS ( L a c k o f
e d u c a tio n , t r a in in g , or
e x p e rie n c e )
PERSONAL FACTORS
(N o t a b le
t o m ove, f a m i l y o r p e r s o n a l
co n cern s, or p e r s o n a lity
c o n flic ts )
► -H o w

G REAT
DEAL
0

SOME­
WHAT
0

A
L IT T L E
0

NO
HINDRANCE
0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

have

you

d e a lt

w ith

th e s e

b a rr ie rs ?

191

PAGE 3
10.

In
g e n e ra l,
w h ic h
c re a te s
p ressu res
a p p ly .>
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

11.

13.

If

" y e s ,"

p le a s e

p o s itio n ,
if
a ll
c irc le s

th a t

you

have

e x p e ri­

each o f th e f o llo w in g c h a r a c t e r is ­
resp o n se f o r each ite m )

VERY
D IS S A T IS F IE D

DISSATIS­
FIED

SATIS­
FIED

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

you d e s c r i b e y o u r i n t e r a c t i o n p a t t e r n s
(S h a d e one re s p o n s e f o r e a c h i t e m )

OTHERS L I S T E N TO ME
OTHERS TAKE MY I D E A S S E R IO U S L Y
OTHERS SEEK MY A D V I C E

GREAT DEAL
0
0
0

VERY
S A T IS F IE D

w ith

c o -w o rk e rs

MODERATE
0
0
0

SOMEWHAT
0
0
0

When m a k i n g i m p o r t a n t p r o f e s s i o n a l d e c i s i o n s ,
how o f t e n d o y o u
a d v ic e o f yo u r c o -w o rk e rs o r c o lle a g u e s ?
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0
0

any,
th a t

d e s c r i b e _________________________________________________

SALARY
JOB R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y
G EOGRAPHICAL L O C A T IO N
A D M IN IS T R A T O R S / S U P E R V IS O R S
CO -W ORKERS/CO LLEAGUES
O P P O R TU N ITY FOR P R O F E S S IO N A L
AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

How w o u l d
le a g u e s ?

1
2
3
14.

NO
YES— ^

a s p e c ts o f th e su ccess
(S h ad e o ne re s p o n s e )

To w h a t e x t e n t a r e you s a t i s f i e d w i t h
t i c s o f y o u r c u r r e n t jo b ?
(S h ad e o ne

1
2
3
4
5
6

o f your
(S h a d e

IN D E P E N D E N T D E C I S I O N MAKING
I N T E R A C T I O N W IT H SU P E R IO R S
I N T E R A C T I O N W IT H S UB O R DINATES
R E L A T I O N S H I P W IT H COLLEAGUES OR CO-WORKERS
PREPA RATION OF W R IT T E N REPORTS AND FORMS
MANAGING THE BUDGET
GRANT OR PROPOSAL W R I T I N G
PRESS TO C O N T R IB U T E TO THE P R O F E S S IO N A L L I T E R A T U R E
LACK OF SUPPORT FROM A D M IN IS T R A T O R S , S T A F F , OR FACULTY
OTHER ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) ________________________________________________________________

Have t h e r e b een n e g a t i v e
enced as a p r o f e s s i o n a l ?
0
0

12.

of
th e fo llo w in g
a s p e c ts
or
a n x ie tie s
fo r
you?

0
0
0
0
0
0
or

c o l­

POOR
0
0
0
seek

th e

ALMOST ALWAYS
OFTEN
O CCASIONALLY
SELDOM
NEVER
(o v e r)

192

4

PAGE
15.

Do you
b e lo n g ,
or
have you b e lo n g e d
in
th e
n a tio n a l p ro fe s s io n a l/s c h o la rly
o rg a n iz a tio n ?
0
0

16.

“y e s ,"

h e ld o f f ic e ?
0
NO
0
YES

(S h ad e

one

response)

0
0
0
0
0

n etw o rk s

(e .g .

w hat i s y o u r l e v e l o f i n t e r a c t i o n in th e s e n etw o rk
system s? (S h ad e a l l re s p o n s e s t h a t a p p l y . )
0
U N IV E R S IT Y
0
R E G I O N A L /L O C A L
0
N A T IO N A L

d e s c rib e th e e ffe c tiv e n e s s o f t h is
your
p ro fe s s io n a l
a n d /o r
p erson al

you

d e s c rib e

c o m m u n ic a tio n
d e v e lo p m e n t?

n etw o rk
(S h ad e

th e

g ro up

in

q u e s tio n

117?

one

(S h ad e

re­

FORMAL ( s t r u c t u r e d )
INFORMAL ( u n s t r u c t u r e d )

A r e y o u a m em b er
l o c a l co m m un ity?
0

20.

ever

or

EXTREMELY USEFUL
USEFUL
OF L I T T L E USE
NOT USEFUL

How w o u l d
sponse)
0
0

19.

NO
YES — ► I f

How w o u l d y o u
in
a d v a n c in g
one re sp o n s e)
0
0
0
0

18.

you

Do y o u b e l o n g t o o n e o r m o r e p r o f e s s i o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n
n e w s l e t t e r s f r o m NOW, C A S 1 D , W I D ) ?
(S h a d e o ne re s p o n s e )
0
0

17.

NO
YES — ► H a v e

p a 8 t,
to a re g io n a l
(S h ad e one r e s p o n s e )

o f any
(S h ad e

o f th e f o llo w in g o r g a n iz a t io n s
a l l re sp o n s es t h a t a p p ly .)
^

at

MSU

or

in

th e

PRO FESSIO NA L O R G A N IZ A T IO N S
(p le a s e c i r c l e
any o f th e fo llo w in g
to
w h i c h y o u b e l o n g — A A U P , AAUW, B l a c k F a c u l t y £ A d m i n . A s s o c . , W I D ,
F a c u lty
W o m e n 's
O rg a n iz a tio n ,
A d m in is tra tiv e /P ro fe s s io n a l
A s s o c .,
F a c u l t y A s s o c i a t i o n , B u s i n e s s W o m e n 's C l u b , e t c . )
HONORARY O R G A N IZ A T IO N S ( P h i D e l t a K a p p a , D e l t a K a p p a Gamma, e t c . )
C H A R IT A B L E
O R G A N IZ A T IO N S
(U n ite d
W ay,
H e a rt Assoc.
Cancer
Assoc,
e tc . )
R E L I G I O U S O R G A N IZ A T IO N S
S O C IA L O R G A N IZ A T IO N S
OTHER_______________________________________________________________________________ _ _ _

I f
you
are
a ffilia te d
w ith
a
su p po rt
g ro up
(m e n to r/p e e r,
p ers o n a l
frie n d s )
how w o u l d y o u r a t e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h i s g r o u p i n a d v a n c ­
in g
your
own p r o f e s s i o n a l
or
p erso n al
d e v e lo p m e n t?
(S hade
one
re­
sponse)
0
0
0
0

EXTREMELY USEFUL
USEFUL
OF L I T T L E USE
NOT USEFUL

193

PAGE 5
i f

21 .

you
have
te n u re
or
jo b
s e c u rity ,
c o n tin u e w it h th e n e x t q u e s tio n .

p le a s e

BETTER
THAN

EQUAL
TO

0
0

0
0

22. I n

y o u r v ie w ,
w h a t a r e YOUR c h a n c e s
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e f o r e a c h it e m )

1
2

123,

fo r

p ro m o tio n

GOOD

UN CERTAIN

0
0

0
0

0
0
of

jo b

LESS
THAN

o th e rw is e

o p p o rtu n itie s
your
area
or

NO CO UNTER­
PART

0
0

0
0

VERY GOOD

or

te n u re

at

MSU?

NONEXISTENT

0
0

s e c u rity

in

your

cu rren t

p o s itio n

EXTREMELY SECURE
SECURE
IN S E C U R E
NOT ABLE TO ASSESS

How w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r l e v e l o f
a t MSU c o m p a r e d w i t h OTHERS i n
resp on se f o r each ite m )

1
2
25.

PROMOTION
TENURE

How w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r l e v e l
a t MSU?
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0

24.

to

In
yo u r e s tim a tio n ,
how w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r c h a n c e s o r
fo r
p ro m o tio n
a n d /o r
te n u re
com pared
w ith
OTHERS
in
d is c ip lin e ?
(S hade one re s p o n s e f o r e a c h it e m )

MY FEMALE COUNTERPARTS
MY MALE COUNTERPARTS

23.

s k ip

MY FEMALE COUNTERPARTS
MY MALE COUNTERPARTS

jo b s e c u r it y in yo u r c u r r e n t p o s itio n
your area
or d is c ip lin e ?
(S h ad e one
BETTER
THAN
0
0

EQUAL
TO
0
0

LESS
THAN
0
0

NO CO UN TER PART
0
0

I n y o u r v i e w , t o w h a t e x t e n t do you b e l i e v e t h a t th e f o l l o w i n g ty p e s o f
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n e x i s t a t MSU i n r e g a r d s t o t h e h i r i n g o f f a c u l t y , a d m i n i ­
s tr a to rs , or s ta ff?
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e f o r e a c h it e m )

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a

P H Y S I C A L APPEARANCE
SEXUAL PREFERENCE
R E L IG IO N
RACE
M A R IT A L STATUS
AGE
SEX
P H Y S IC A L IM P A IR M E N T

EXTREMELY
PREVA LEN T
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

EX IS TS
SOMEWHAT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

ONLY A
L IT T L E
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

NON­
EXISTENT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

DO NO'
KNOW
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

(over)

194

PAGE 6
26.

How l a r g e
a p ro b le m ,
fo r
th e u n i v e r s i t y
in
each ite m )

1
2
3
4
27.

L ARGE
PROBLEM
0
0
0
0

MODERATE
PROBLEM
0
0
0
0

a c tio n
(S hade

p o lic ie s
c re a te d
one re sp o n s e f o r

M IN O R
PROBLEM
0
0
0
0

I n yo u r v ie w , w hat a r e yo u r o p p o r tu n itie s
c a p a c ity ?
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0
0

28.

BLACKS
H A N D IC A P P E R S
OTHER M I N O R I T I E S
WOMEN

if
any,
has a f f i r m a t i v e
its
h irin g
p ra c tic e s ?

to

NO T A
PROBLEM
0
0
0
0

se rv e

in

an

ALREADY HOLD AN A D M I N I S T R A T I V E P O S I T I O N
O P P O R T U N I T I E S ARE A V A I L A B L E
L I M I T E D O P P O R T U N I T I E S I N MY AREA OR D I S C I P L I N E
NOT I N T E R E S T E D I N A D M I N I S T R A T I V E R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S OR D U T I E S
HAVE L I M I T E D A D M I N I S T R A T I V E R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S OR D U T I E S

In g e n e ra l,
how w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r p r o f e s s i o n a l r e p u t a t i o n w h e n j u d g e d
at
each
of
th e
fo llo w in g
le v e ls ?
(S h ad e
one
resp o n s e
fo r
each
ite m )
STRONG ADEQUATE L I M I T E D
1
2
3

U N IV E R S IT Y
S T A T E /L O C A L /R E G IO N A L
N A TIO NAL

0
0
0

I f y o u d o n o t h o l d an A D M IN IS T R A T IV E
w is e c o n t in u e w it h th e n e x t q u e s t io n .
29.

W h ic h
ty p e
o f a d m in is tra tiv e
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0

30.

a d m in is tra tiv e

FULL T IM E
PAR T T I M E I N
PART T I M E I N

Over
what
resp on se)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0

a p p o in tm e n t p le a s e

p o s itio n

do

ONE A D M I N I S T R A T I V E U N I T
TWO OR MORE A D M I N I S T R A T I V E

p rim a ry

u n it

do

0
0
0

you

you

NOT A B L E TO
ASSESS
0
0
0

s k ip

c u rre n tly

to

I

h o ld

34

o th e r­

at

MSU?

U N IT S

e x e rc is e

a u th o rity ?

(S h ad e

one

M U L T I P L E - S E C T I O N COURSES
PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT
D IV IS IO N
COLLEGE
A R E A - W ID E
DO NOT E X E R C IS E A U T H O R IT Y OVER A U N I T
OTHER ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) _________________________________________________________________

195

• PAGE 7
31.

W h ic h o f th e f o ll o w i n g
(S hade one re sp o n se)
0
0
0

d e s c rib e s

your

cu rren t

a d m in is tra tiv e

p o s itio n ?

REGULAR L I N E P O S I T I O N ( d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g c a p a c i t y )
REGULAR S T A F F P O S I T I O N ( p r o v i d i n g s u p p o r t i v e s e r v i c e s )
OTHER ( p l e a s e d e s c r i b e ) _______________________________________ _______________________

32.

T o w h a t e x t e n t d o you b e l i e v e t h a t t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s w e re in s t r u m e n ­
ta l
in
s e c u rin g
your
cu rren t
p o s itio n ?
(S h ad e
a ll
re sp on s es
th a t
a p p ly )
0
U N I V E R S I T Y R E O R G A N IZ A T IO N
0
GOVERNMENTAL PRESSURE FOR A F F I R M A T I V E A C T IO N
0
P O S I T I O N WAS CREATED FOR ME
0
NORMAL SEARCH AND S E L E C T IO N PROCESS
0
OTHER ( p l e a s e d e s c r i b e ) ______________________________________________________________

33.

Do you b e l i e v e
t h a t you h a v e e q u a l a c c e s s t o th e k i n d and am ou n t
d a t a o r i n f o r m a t i o n you need t o do y o u r jo b e f f e c t i v e l y as com pared
o th e rs
in
your
a d m in is tra tiv e
u n it?
(S h ad e
one
resp on se
fo r
ite m )

1
2

BETTER
THAN
0
0

MY FEMALE COUNTERPARTS
MY MALE COUNTERPARTS

EQUAL
TO
0
0

NO COUNTER­
PART
0
0

LESS
THAN
0
0

B r ie fly

F IN A L L Y ,
p r e t th e

we w o u ld
re s u lts .

P erso n al

D a ta :

34.

Your

p res en t

35.

M a r ita l

lik e

to

get

some

in fo rm a tio n

about

of
to

you

to

d e s c rib e

h e lp

in te r­

a g e : ________ y e a r s

S ta tu s :

(S h a d e
0
0
0
0
0
0

one

resp o n s e)

S IN G LE ( n e v e r m a r r i e d )
M A R R IE D
SEPARATED
D IV O R C E D
WIDOWED
L I V I N G W IT H A S I G N I F I C A N T OTHER

(o v e r)

E th n ic
B a c k g ro u n d /C itiz e n s h ip
c o lu m n )
A M E R IC A N I N D I A N / A L A S K A N
A S I A N / P A C I F I C IS L A N D E R
B L A C K /A F R IC A N
C H IC A N O /M E X IC A N
H IS P A N IC /S P A N IS H
W H IT E /C A U C A S IA N

0
0
0
0
0
0

W hat

SELF
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

s ta tu s :

N A T IV E

0
0
0
0

(S h ad e

one

in

each

U . S . BORN
PERMANENT R E S I D E N T
NON R E S I D E N T / A L I E N
N A T U R A L IZ E D C I T I Z E N

i s t h e h i g h e s t e d u c a t i o n l e v e l a t t a i n e d b y You?
3 6 . W hat i s th e h ig h e s t e d u c a tio n l e v e l a t t a i n e d by Y o u r Spouse*
or
S ig n ific a n t
O th e r.
(S h ad e
one
resp on se
in
each
c o lu m n )
S P O O S E /S .0 .
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0

0
0

0

0

NOT A P P L I C A B L E
H IG H SCHOOL
SOME COLLEGE
A S S O C I A T E DEGREE
B A C H E L O R 'S DEGREE
M A S T E R 'S DEGREE
M A S T E R 'S DEGREE PL U S 3 0 HOURS
6TH Y R . C E R T I F I C A T E , S P E C I A L I S T , OR S P E C I A L D IP L O M A
ABOVE MASTERS
DOCTORAL DEGREE
P R O F E S S IO N A L DEGREE ( M . D . , D . D . S . , L L . B . , J . D . ,
D .V .M . e t c . )
OTHER

How m a ny
c h ild re n
p le a s e w r i t e in 0)

do

you

have,

if

any,

s till

at

W hat i s y o u r p re s e n t an n u a l s a la r y rang e (e x c lu d in g
o r c o n s u l t i n g f e e s , e t c . )?
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

re sp o n s e

hom e?

( If

none,

e x tra

c o m p e n s a tio n

w h ic h

you

L E S S THAN 1 0 , 0 0 0
1 0 ,0 0 0 - 1 3 ,9 9 9
1 4 ,0 0 0 - 1 7 ,9 9 9
1 8 ,0 0 0 - 2 0 ,9 9 9
2 1 ,0 0 0 - 2 3 ,9 9 9
2 4 ,0 0 0 - 2 6 ,9 9 9
2 7 ,0 0 0 - 2 9 ,9 9 9
3 0 ,0 0 0 - 3 2 ,9 9 9
3 3 ,0 0 0 - 3 5 ,9 9 9
3 6 ,0 0 0 - 3 8 ,9 9 9
3 9 , 0 0 0 - OVER

P le a s e s p e c ify
h ig h e s t d eg ree

area o f s p e c ia liz a tio n
(e .g . area
or o t h e r fo rm o f p r e p a r a t i o n ) .

in

re c e iv e d

197

PAGE 9
42.

Is
y o u r a c a d e m ic b a c k g ro u n d ,
area
n ecessary
p re re q u is te
fo r
your
sponse)
0
0

43.

o f s p e c ia liz a tio n
p res en t
p o s itio n ?

or

p re p a ra tio n
a
(S h ad e
one r e ­

YES
NO

How d i d y o u
a p p ly )?
0
0
0
0
0
0

a c q u ire

your

in itia l

p o s itio n

(C irc le

a ll

resp on ses t h a t

R E C R U IT E D
GENERAL A P P L I C A T I O N TO T H I S AND OTHER U N I V E R S I T I E S
PROMOTED FROM W I T H I N THE U N I V E R S I T Y
P O S I T I O N WAS CREATED FOR ME
A P P L I E D FOR A V A IL A B L E P O S I T I O N S BECAUSE SPOUSE OR S I G N I F I C A N T OTHER
WAS OFFERED A P O S I T I O N A T MSU OR I N THE LOCAL CO M M U N IT Y.
OTHER ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) ________________________________________________________________

44.

To w h a t e x t e n t do you
b e lie v e each o f th e fo llo w in g c o n trib u te d to your
success in
o b ta in in g yo u r
in itia l
p o s itio n
a t MSU.
(S h ad e o ne
re­
sponse fo r each ite m )
NONE
A L IT T L E
SOME
A GREAT DEAL
1
A C ADEM IC PR EPA R A T IO N
0
0
0
0
2
A F F I R M A T I V E A C T IO N P O L I C Y
0
0
0
0
3
SEX
0
0
0
0
4
RACE
0
0
0
0
5
JO B Q U A L I F I C A T I O N / E X P E R I E N C E 0
0
0
0
6
SPOUSE EMPLOYED BY MSU
0
0
0
0

45.

In d ic a te
s a la ry .
0
0
0
0

46.

you

re c e iv e

th e

m a jo r

p o r tio n

of

your

SO FT MONEY ( g r a n t s , s p e c i a l p r o j e c t s )
HARD MONEY ( M S U * s g e n e r a l f u n d )
GOVERNMENT CONTRACT
C O M B IN A T IO N ( p l e a s e d e s c r i b e ) ______________________________________________________

C u rren t

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

th e
s o u rc e fro m w h ic h
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )

p o s itio n

at

MSU?

(S h ad e

one

FACULTY
PROFESSOR
A S S O C IA T E PROFESSOR
A S S I S T A N T PROFESSOR
IN S T R U C T O R
LECTURER
A D JUN CT P O S I T I O N
S P E C IA L IS T
OTHER

47.

T itle

of

your

48.

How l o n g

have

cu rren t

you

h e ld

resp o n s e)
A D M IN IS T R A T IV E /P R O F E S S IO N A L
LEVELS: 0
1 3 -1 6
0
1 0 -12
0
7 -9
OTHER
0

p o s itio n

your

at

MSU?

cu rren t

(o p tio n a l)

p o s i t i o n ? _____________ ’_____________ y e a r s ?

(o ver)

198

PAGE 10
49.

P le a s e in d ic a t e th e
s i n c e you w e re f i r s t

r a n k an d
e m p lo y e d

title
of
a t MSU:

each

p o s itio n

1ST.
P O S I T I O N ____________________________________________ LENGTH
2ND.
P O S I T I O N ____________________________________________ LENGTH
3RD.
P O S I T I O N ____________________________________________ LENGTH
4TH . P O S IT IO N
LENGTH
50.

Do you
p res en t
0
0
0
0
0

51.

or

have

h e ld

OF T I M E ______________
OF_T I M E ______________
OF_T I M E ______________
OF_T I M E ______________
jo b

s e c u r it y in

your

HAVE TENURE ( f a c u l t y )
DO NOT HAVE TEN U R E, BUT CAN EARN I T
HAVE JO B S E C U R I T Y ( a d m i n i s t r a t i v e / p r o f e s s i o n a l )
DO NOT HAVE JO B S E C U R I T Y , BUT CAN EARN I T
P O S I T I O N NOT ON TENURE OR JO B S E C U R IT Y TRACK

VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE
S I G N I F I C A N T L E V E L OF KNOWLEDGE
NOT AS KNOWLEDGEABLE AS I WOULD L I K E

TO BE OR NEED TO BE
d e s c rip tio n

your

la s t

5 years

of

e x p e rie n c e

in

a n s w e rin g

P R I N C I P A L AUTHOR
CO-AUTHOR

H a ve you
fo u n d
one re s p o n s e )
0
0

of

q u e s tio n s

How m any p u b l i s h e d
a rtic le s
and s c h o l a r l y p a p e r s
c o -a u th o r e d t h a t h ave been ac ce p te d in a jo u r n a l?

1
2

jo b

your p resen t

GRADUATE CLASSES
UNDERGRADUATE CLASSES
BOTH GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE CLASSES
NO T E A C H IN G AS S IG N M E N T

C o n s id e r

54.

te n u re

W h ic h o f
th e
fo llo w in g
p ro v id e s
th e b e s t
te a c h in g a s s ig n m e n t?
(S h ad e one r e s p o n s e )
0
0
0
0

53.

can you a c q u i r e ( e a r n )
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )

you

How w o u l d y o u r a t e y o u r d e g r e e o f a w a r e n e s s i n r e g a r d s t o t e n u r e o r
s e c u r ity g u id e lin e s , p o lic ie s , or p ro ced u res.
(S hade one re s p o n s e )
0
0
0

52.

have,
or
p o s itio n ?

th a t

(n u m b e r)
(num ber)

your

o p p o rtu n ity

NO
YES - ► i f
" y e s , " w h ic h
th e lim ita tio n s ?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

REFEREED JOURNAL
___________________
___________________
to

p u b lis h

have

53

you

to

60

w ritte n

or

NO N-R EFER EED JOURNAL
___________________
___________________
has

been

lim ite d ?

(Shade

o f th e fo llo w in g fa c to r s a re re s p o n s ib le
(S h ad e a l l re s p o n s e s t h a t a p p ly )

fo r

F A M IL Y R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S
DEMANDING A D M I N I S T R A T I V E R E S P O N S I B I L I T I E S
DEMANDING T EACH IN G LOAD
L I M I T E D A V A IL A B L E T I M E
MY P O S I T I O N DOES NOT R E Q U IR E ME TO P U B L IS H
I HAVE NO I N C L I N A T I O N TO P U B L IS H
NONE OF THE ABOVE
( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) ___________________

199

PAGE 11
55.

Have you p r e s e n te d
one resp o n se)
0
0

56.

n a tio n a l

If

or

lo c a l

c o n fe re n c e ?

(S h ad e

how m a ny ? ______________

p ro p o s a l?

(S h ad e

one

resp on se

" y e s , " how many w r i t t e n ? ____________
how many f u n d e d ? ___________

been yo u r c o n t r i b u t i o n ,
( F i l l in b la n k s )

if

any,

you

c o n d u c te d

research?

(F ill

in

to

p ro fe s s io n a l

books

or

mono­

b la n k s )

P R I N C I P A L R E S E A R C H E R /D IR E C T O R --------------------------------► n u m b e r
of
COLLABORATED W IT H OTHER RESEARCHERS -------------------- ► n u m b e r o f
P A R T I C I P A T E D AS A MEMBER OF A RESEARCH T E A M - ^
num ber o f

MASTER
S P E C IA L IS T
P H .D

How m a n y ? ______
How_m a n y ? ______
How_m a n y ? ______

fo llo w in g

g rad u ate

C h a i r e d _______
C h a i r e d _______
C h a i r e d _______

W hat has been yo u r c o n t r i b u t i o n ,
i f any,
o f p ro d u c tio n s ?
( F i l l in th e b la n k s )
1
2
3
4

61.

a

A p p ro x im a te ly ,
how many o f t h e
s e r v e d on?
( F i l l in b la n k s )
1
2
3

60.

at

W R IT T E N — ► how m a n y ________ ?
E D I T E D — ► how m any________ ?
REVIEW ED —► how m any________ ?

Have
1
2
3

59.

NO
YES— ►

W hat has
graphs?
1
2
3

58.

" y e s ,*

paper

H ave you w r i t t e n
a c o n tra c t or g ra n t
and f i l l i n b l a n k s , w h e re a p p r o p r i a t e )
0
0

57.

NO
YES — ► I f

a

in

p r o j e c t s ___ ?
p r o j e c t s ___ ?
p r o j e c t s ___ ?

c o m m itte e s

have

you

M e m b e r_
M e m b e r"
M e m b e r”
each

of

th e

fo llo w in g

k in d s

M U S IC A L
p r o d u c e d / d i r e c t e d ______ w r i t t e n _______ p a r t i c i p a t e d _______
T H E A T R IC A L p r o d u c e d / d i r e c t e d
w ritte n
p a r t i c i p a t e d _________
A R T IS T IC p r o d u c e d / d i r e c t e d
w ritte n
p a r t i c i p a t e d ____________
L IT E R A R Y _____ p r o d u c e d / d i r e c t e d ______ w r i t t e n _______ p a r t i c i p a t e d _______

Do y o u c o n s i d e r y o u r j o b t o b e o n e t h a t d e a l s p r i m a r i l y w i t h a p a r t i c u ­
l a r g r o u p o r p o r t i o n o f t h e MSU p o p u l a t i o n ?
(S h ad e one re s p o n s e )
0
0

NO
YES

(P le a s e
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

shade

a ll

responses

th a t

a p p ly )

HA NDICA PPED STUDENTS
A T H L E T I C STUDENTS
FEMALE STUDEN TS
M I N O R I T Y STUDENTS
I N T E R N A T I O N A L STUDENTS
FACULTY OR A D M I N I S T R A T I V E / P R O F E S S I O N A L
OTHER

STAFF

(o v e r)

200
PAGE 12
W hat
your

a d v ic e ,
fie ld or

if
any,
w o u ld
d is c ip lin e ?

you

o ffe r

young

p ro fe s s io n a l

women

A D D I T I O N A L COMMENTS ARE WELCOME:

Thank

you

fo r

your

tim e

and

e ffo rt

in

fillin g

th is

fo rm

o u t.

e n te rin g