Tenuring Women Profs: Not the 7% Solution

"You can never have a bad day because it always shows," says Barbara J. Grosz, McKay Professor of Computer Science, who is one of two tenured women in the entire division of applied sciences. "It gets tiring being the only woman role model around," she says.

Grosz, who received a tenured post at Harvard directly after leaving a private business, says in the past she has felt unable to "say no" to female students who sought her counsel, because she knew that there are no other women around to shoulder the burden of advising.

The numbers of women faculty in the sciences are unusually low, but Grosz's experience closely parallels those of women in other disciplines, many of whom say that women are the most overworked and least rewarded members of Harvard's academic community.

In a series of interviews with more than 20 junior and senior faculty members, many say that women junior faculty members face barriers that may prevent them from being promoted through the ranks of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS).

They say the University's seven year junior faculty plan is too inflexible for scholars with children and departments rely on women junior faculty to do a disproportionate amount of the administrative work. In addition, a more subtle bias against the non-traditional areas of research favored by some women faculty is an obstacle toward career advancement, these scholars say.

That only 29 of Harvard's 175 women faculty members are tenured bears out the claim that substantial, though subtle, barriers still exist, they say.

Both administrators and faculty members say, however, that a "critical mass" of junior women faculty has developed, and that this increasingly large pool of women--as yet untenured--is leading Harvard toward new areas of scholarship and different academic approaches. The Women's Studies concentration, which was approved by a near-unanimous faculty vote last year, is perhaps the most significant result of the activism of Harvard's women faculty.

The University faces the impending problem of propelling these women from junior to senior-level positions. Faculty members say Harvard must continue to reform its tenure system--and general attitude--which is skewed in favor of "upperclass white males with wives at home to take care of the children," in the words of one Junior faculty member.

Only 7 percent of the tenured faculty are women 25 percent of the junior faculty, and 37 percent of the other instructors. There are no tenured Black women, and only two Black women who are junior faculty members.

Although the University has made recruitment of women and minorities a high priority in recent years, observers say the changes have not come fast enough. Harvard lags far behind othercolleges in the percentage of its faculty that arewomen, and as the University continues to play thegame of catch-up, it must consider some of thestructural reasons for the lag, these professorssay.

"Harvard must think about equal opportunity forwomen," says Mary Gray, a professor of computersciences at American University who helped preparea rare external review of Harvard's undergraduateeducation last year. "There has been an influx ofwomen into the lower ranks, but without seniorwomen the quality of education is affectedadversely."

Gray's conclusions about the University's womenfaculty are echoed by many scholars here. Andadministrators also acknowledge that theUniversity should have more women faculty,especially at the senior level.

"At all levels of the Faculty there'sunder-representation of women," says AssociateDean for Undergraduate Education David Pilbeam."But there is sort of a drop-off at the seniorlevel and we have to consider what can be done."

Change Underway

The process of change, however, is alreadyunderway, spurred on by an increasingly large andactivist pool of women in academia. These women,who entered the profession in the aftermath of therevived women's movement of the late 1960s, havesparked an increased interest in feministscholarship.

Many have progressed up the academic ladder andare now being considered for tenured posts. Inmany areas of the humanities at Harvard, facultysay that newly hired women professors have playeddecisive roles in changing the traditionalacademic agenda.

"There is a group of women just beginning tomake their mark felt," says Judith L. Ryan,professor of German and comparative literature."It is simply inherent that the increase willbring with it a lot more candidates for thesesenior positions."

Barbara K. Lewalski, Kenan Professor ofEnglish, agrees: "Sheer numbers [of women inacademia] are going to make a difference in somefields, and are already doing so."

Yet administrators and women faculty members atall levels indicate that, while the numbers willincrease over the next few years, the more seriousstructural problems encountered by Harvard's womenfaculty members will continue for decades.

The recruitment of women faculty at the seniorlevel and the advancement of women junior facultyalready at the University are two of the mostpressing issues Harvard faces, according tofaculty members, who say that women still confrontsignificant--though subtle--barriers to successhere.

"There is a fairly masculine criteria for whatcounts in tenure, and that's a great danger," saysGrosz.

In the course of interviews, two main themesemerged as factors working against Harvard'sjunior women faculty in their bid for tenure.First, women hold more positions of administrativeresponsibility in their departments, positionsthat often take time away from their scholarship.They say these extra duties are not taken intoaccount during the tenure review process.

"What you have is women doing a lot moreadministrative work in terms of theirproportions," says Deborah E. Nord, Loeb AssociateProfessor of the Humanities. "And that's not thething that's rewarded when you tenure people."

Assistant Professor of Afro-American StudiesCarolivia Herron is an extreme case of the excessdemands placed on women faculty. As one of twoBlack women faculty members, Herron says shespends a disproportionate amount of her timedealing with women's issues. "Everything aboutBlack women comes to me," says Herron, whose fieldis not women's studies, but rather the epic inliterature. "I don't study it, I live it," shesays, adding that she would prefer to concentrateon her chosen field of study.

"The pressure on scholarship is very bad,"Herron says. She is also head tutor of theAfro-American Studies Department, a position thatentails many other administrative duties.

In fact, the percentage of women who serve ashead tutors is much higher than the percentage ofwomen on the faculty--31 percent of head tutorsare women, while they comprise only 14 percent ofthe faculty eligible. Professor of RomanceLanguages Barbara E. Johnson says the significanceof this figure is that junior women faculty areconsciously channeled into positions that do notdirectly enhance their chances for tenure andactually detract from their amount of researchtime.

Second, women junior faculty may engage innon-traditional areas of research, particularly infeminist theory. Many faculty members say thesedifferent academic approaches are held againstwomen as they are reviewed for tenure and thatsuch biases can be hidden behind the mask ofpolitical differences.

"Junior women faculty are not onlydiscriminated against because they're women, butalso because the senior male faculty don't agreewith their work," says Alice A. Jardine, associateprofessor of Romance languages and literature."It's not just a question of sexual difference,but very often one of epistemological andpolitical differences," she says. She cities as anexample the raging debate over what books shouldbe included in the literary canon, a debate thatdivides scholars along political and sexual lines.

Serious Business

"There is still the sense that [some women'sinterests] may not be very serious or legitimatescholarly business," says Lewalski, who ischairman of the History and Literature DepartmentJohnson says that those impressions vary bydepartment--psychology and even history are lessreceptive to feminist scholarship than English,she says.

Many faculty say that academic isolation andbureaucratic burdens are the lot of Harvard'sjunior faculty, male and female. "Harvard has areputation for burning out their junior faculty,"says one woman who will be reviewed for tenure inthe next year. She says it is hard to distinguishbetween general junior faculty issues and thoseproblems specific to women faculty.

The problem, however, seems to be more severefor women faculty. Several observers say the 1980s"Superwoman" myth has a Harvard counterpart--themodel of the woman who teaches, counsels students,publishes regularly and has a family. "Often youhave to be several people at once [as a juniorwoman]," says one faculty member.

"Being a woman faculty member at any level doestend to mean you have all kinds of other littleduties and responsibilities that creep in," saysRyan, who was hired by the University after an18-year stint at Smith and says that Harvard ismuch less accepting of women faculty.

Women faculty say they are unable to evade themany administrative and teaching demands placed onthem. "Women find it harder to say no than men do,and others find it harder to accept from women,"says Johnson. Lewalski says women try even harderthan men to accomplish everything, and that, as aconsequence, they fall more easily into thepattern of assuming departmental responsibility.

"Publication is really the only criteria fortenure," says Professor of German Maria M. Tatar,the chairman of the Germanic Languages andLiterature Department. Hiring decisions at Harvardare often based on a single criterion--the amountand quality of published research. And faculty saythat the other skills Harvard's junior womenfaculty have cultivated are consequently devaluedin the tenure decision process, as a result ofthis reliance on the candidate's bibliography.

Dean of Faculty A. Michael Spence issued areport two years ago that may have significantimpact on the numbers of women who reach thesenior ranks. The Spence plan aims to ensure thatHarvard's junior faculty have a greater chance ofbeing promoted from within the ranks. And sincethe percentage of women faculty at the juniorlevel is higher, proponents of the plan say thatits implementation will have the correspondingresult of increasing female representation at thesenior level.

But the Spence plan, however far-reaching itspotential consequences, is far from beingrealized--the dean himself concedes that it willtake at least 10 years to alter significantly theappointments system. And while administrators aregenerally optimistic about the report, many womenfaculty are skeptical.

"I don't think there's any concerted effortmade" to actually hire senior women, says M. DeaneBowers, an associate professor of biology who wasdenied tenure earlier this year. "I have yet tosee any evidence of [Spence's plan], so at thispoint I don't think much of it," she says.

Women faculty members say the Spence plan,while directed at an admirable goal, will notaffect the percentage of female senior facultybecause prejudices against women remain embeddedin the decision-making process.

The dean's inability to dictate a course ofaffirmative action for the University is a productof Harvard's decentralized academic system,administrators and faculty say. There are 33departments in FAS, each of which has primaryresponsibility for its own hiring decisions--theadministrators in University Hall say they canonly serve in an advisory capacity to thedepartments.

Harvard does have a centralized affirmativeaction machinery in place to monitor and work tocorrect the numbers of women and minoritiesfaculty members. The administration "establishesguidelines and practices in search and recruitmentprocesses that ensure steps are taken to cast anet for women and minorities," says Associate Deanfor Academic Planning Phyllis Keller, FAS's equalemployment opportunity officer.

"The major issue is what can be done to retainwomen in academia at the same rate men areretained in given comparable abilities," saysPilbeam, a member of the faculty standingcommittee on the status of women.

Special Attention

"It is a priority of the University to takespecial pains to make sure that women and minoritycandidates are identified and carefullyconsidered," says President Bok. "In making thefinal selection, we look for the best person--thebest teacher, the best scholar--to fill aposition."

Harvard's system of hiring for women has beenlikened to a "trickle-down" theory--the Universitymakes sure that women are included on the lists ofcandidates for senior jobs, but requires nospecial consideration for the women candidates. Asmore women gain prominence in the outside academicworld, they will make up a larger percentage ofsearch lists and, eventually, the Faculty,according to the administration's argument.

But many faculty members say the present systemof appointments, even if it was altered bySpence's plan, would still not address fundamentaldifferences between men and women in academia.

"Women are on a definitely different academiaschedule," says Jardine. "Historically,intellectually and of course biologically theircareers are different. [All these factors] playinto the way the system is structured," she says.Women in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences

1977-78  1987-88Total  Women  Total  WomenTenured Professors  352  13 (3.7percent)  383  27 (7.0 percent)Assistant and Associate Professors (positionson the ladder to tenure  221  46 (20.8percent)  223  57 (25.6 percent)Other Teaching Posts (positions that do notlead to tenure)  76  35 (46.1percent)  245  91 (37.1 percent)

DEBORAH E. NORD, Loeb Associate Professorof the Humanities