Table of Contents
Background: The status of women in academia
Gender Equity Projects at the University of Arizona
Hypothesis driven research
GRACE project data sources
Hypothesis #1: The distribution of rewards and resources at the COM is gender blind
Analysis of salary data
Additional adjustment for measures of productivity
The facts (a): Adjusted mean salary, by gender, and deficit for women
Adjusted mean salary (n), by gender and deficit for women
Mean gender difference in adjusted salary, by department
The facts (b): Credit and resources
Hypothesis #1: The reality
Gender distribution by rank, UA COM
Gender distribution by track, UA COM
Number of males and females at each rank, by track, UA COM
Hypothesis #2: The distribution of women in the COM reflects the pool of available women
Facts: Percent female and male faculty, by rank, US, 1989 & 1999
Hypothesis #2: The reality
Hypothesis #3: Women are less career-oriented, due to family and other commitments
Despite the lack of gender differences in productivity or reported commitment:
Hypothesis #3: The reality
Leadership at COM (1999-2000)
Hypothesis #4: Women donít have the ìright stuffî to be leaders
The facts (b): Women were less likely to:
Hypothesis #4: The reality
Hypothesis #5: There are no gender differences in treatment at the COM
Summary (I): Gender differences in at the College of Medicine
Summary (II): Gender differences in at the College of Medicine
The next steps: Identifying and implementing solutions
Examples of possible solutions
GRACE Project web address
Gender differences in salary by rank and department type
Lifetime salary differential if receive average female salary
Salary data log-transformed to reduce effect of outliers
|
Author: Arizona Health Sciences Center
Download presentation source
|
GRACE
Homepage