June 30, 2005
Academic Advisory Group
Office of the President
Harvard University
Massachusetts Hall
Cambridge, MA 02138
Re: Comments on Recommendations of Task Forces on Women Faculty and Women in Science and Engineering
Dear Members of the Academic Advisory Group:
On behalf of the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund (LAF), a program within the American Association of University Women (AAUW) Educational Foundation, I am writing to comment on the recommendations of the task forces charged with reducing the barriers to the advancement of women in academia. The mission of LAF is to support individuals challenging sex discrimination in higher education. The AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund is an integral part of the AAUW Educational Foundation, which is a leader in promoting research on the educational and economic status of women and girls, funding for women pursuing graduate studies, and career development.
I would first like to commend the members of the task forces for their comprehensive work and quality recommendations. Many of the recommendations regarding women faculty are aligned with those that the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund delineated in its 2004 report Tenure Denied: Cases of Sex Discrimination in Academia. Additionally, the task forces’ recommendations also embody many of those resulting from the Roundtable on the Opportunities for Women in Higher Education, convened by AAUW and the Knight Higher Education Collaborative in 2001 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
However, as MIT’s critical self-examination revealed more than five years ago, there is a persistent gap between the promise and practice of inclusiveness. It is because of this gap, and our organization’s rich history and expertise in addressing the diverse needs of university women, that we offer both suggestions and cautions regarding the potential impact of some of the task forces’ recommendations.
Creation of Oversight Structures within the Office of the Provost
The task forces recommend the creation of a Senior Vice Provost for Diversity and Faculty Development as well as an Office for Postdoctoral Affairs. These types of positions within the Office of the Provost could indeed help bring more of an understanding about issues of diversity to the office, which serves faculty, staff, and students alike.
However, we caution that these proposed positions within the Office of the Provost may lose credibility if they are not equipped to take affirmative steps against inequitable conduct on campus. Without the necessary resources and authority, the positions may be seen as feeble advisors to the provost, carrying the promise of a more equitable campus, but lacking the proper means for implementation of those promises.
For example, it has been the experience of the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund that at times, the provost of a college or university has made employment decisions that have run contrary to prior decision makers in the chain of command, resulting in significant adversity for a female academician. In the sex discrimination cases of two female assistant professors of chemistry supported by the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund, the provosts of both universities uncharacteristically recommended against tenure despite positive tenure recommendations of all prior departmental and institution-wide review committees. The professors were ultimately denied tenure and had difficulty continuing their academic careers.
The AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund believes that equity for women on campus can be achieved with a combination of proactive strategies and strict accountability for violations of policies and law. Therefore we suggest that the task forces’ proposed positions within the Office of the Provost be designed to serve as both advisors to the provost on diversity issues and collaborators with the university’s ombudsperson or equal employment opportunity/affirmative action office to ensure implementation and enforcement of equitable policies.
Campus Climate Surveys
The AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund believes that it is imperative for institutions of higher education to conduct campus climate surveys to assess the needs and challenges of women and minorities on campus. While Harvard’s task force on women’s faculty recommends that the university launch a climate survey for faculty, we suggest that the survey include all constituents on campus to more fully assess the university’s campus climate. Indeed, the 2003 report of the Steering Committee for the Women’s Initiative at Duke University encompassed the institution’s undergraduate and graduate students, faculty, staff, and alumni, and may serve as a useful model. The leaky pipeline for women and minorities in academia–particularly in fields in which they are underrepresented–occurs at all levels, and is not simply a faculty level problem.
We understand that campus climate surveys can ultimately lead to programs, services, or policies that improve the climate for women and minorities. In fact, the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund recognizes such campus programs that have made a positive impact on college and university women through its annual Progress in Equity Award. For example, at the University of Arizona College of Medicine, the GRACE Project (Generating Respect for All in a Climate of academic Excellence)–managed by college faculty and administrators–documented potential disparities between male and female faculty in rank and track assignment, salaries and leadership positions, and investigated the causes of these disparities. Many of the documented disparities have already been remedied.
We caution, however, that a climate survey may not necessarily indicate a lack of programs, services, or policies for women and minorities on campus, but may in fact indicate an overall counterproductive attitude toward women and minorities, such as lingering gender stereotypes, that must be addressed holistically. We urge you to ensure that your climate surveys address such issues.
Work-Family Balance Issues
The AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund whole-heartedly commends the task forces’ efforts to improve women’s balance of family and career. Indeed, in Tenure Denied, we provided a series of recommendations, such as “time off the tenure clock” to help ensure that women faculty are evaluated fairly.
However, as our research report also demonstrates, female faculty who want to have children while on the tenure track continue to be stigmatized, and it is the experience of many of the women who our organization has supported that existing maternity leave policies do little to combat this stigma. In one instance cited in our report, an assistant professor in business administration was granted an extra year on the tenure clock, only to be expected to produce an extra year’s worth of publications. In another instance, an assistant professor of political science stated that her chair expected female faculty to time their pregnancies so that their childbirths would not interfere with the academic year.
Due to this negative culture surrounding motherhood, many female faculty chose not to take advantage of family leave policies for childbirth and either wait to have families after their tenure review or return to work quicker than they would like, even when a stop-the-clock policy exists. Indeed, it is evident that this mindset in academia can only be combated with a combination of progressive policies and overall climate change. Thus, we urge you to vigilantly monitor the implementation of any new tenure clock policies to ensure that they have real meaning for women faculty.
Implementation of Best Practices
Through its experience in supporting the rights of university women, the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund has learned that equitable campus policies are only as successful as their implementation and enforcement. In some instances, such policies have been on the books of colleges and universities for decades, many of which are required by state and federal civil rights laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Indeed, many of the policies commended by the task forces originate from campuses that continue to face severe problems with promotion and retention of female faculty. For equitable policies to truly effect change, colleges and universities must make every effort to administer them consistently and fairly.
Further, the AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund believes that it is up to all members of the campus community –students, faculty, staff, and administrators–to ensure that equitable policies are enforced. Therefore, when a member of the campus community comes forward to ensure that his or her rights are respected under a policy or law, or when he or she challenges a policy or practice as inequitable, that individual must not be ostracized or penalized. Of course, the law protects an individual from retaliation. However, beyond protection from retaliation, individuals who speak up should be admired for encouraging the institution to reach a higher standard, one that eradicates the gap between inclusive promises and inclusive practices.
Again, we thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on your task force reports. Harvard now has a unique opportunity to develop equitable policies and practices for the advancement of women in higher education that can serve as models to colleges and universities throughout the nation. Harvard also has the opportunity to take the lead in preparing the next generation of women leaders. We look forward to your progress and stand ready to provide you with any information we may have to assist in the implementation of your initiatives.
Sincerely,
Leslie T. Annexstein
Director, AAUW Legal Advocacy Fund
