Report on the Status of Women in the Natural Sciences and Engineering at Boston University, Summer 2012
Web version
This website presents selected portions of the final report to the National Science Foundation on benchmark data for BU from grant #0820175, “ADVANCE Partnerships for Adaptation and Dissemination (PAID) Award: WIN: Women in Networks, Building Community and Gaining Voice” (Deborah Belle and Sheryl Grace, PIs). Except where noted, the data have been provided by the Provost’s Office and Office of Institutional Research* and further analyzed by Carol Neidle.
IntroductionThis report presents some of the findings from the benchmark data that were made available to us. It has not been easy to gather and interpret all of the data we might have liked to view, in part because of historical limitations in exactly what records have been kept and how things have been categorized. (There have been major improvements, in these respects, however, in the last few years.) In some cases, additional historical data for BU or comparative data from other universities provide a context within which to interpret the findings reported here.
The focus is primarily on the period between academic years 2006-07 and 2010-11. Data from these years are presented, along with a brief analysis of what the facts seem to indicate. In some cases, the report includes data from earlier years and/or 2011-12. Included are: the College of Arts & Sciences (CAS), with breakdown by division (Humanities, Social Sciences, and Natural Sciences), the College of Engineering (ENG), and Sargent College of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences (SAR). Within CAS, comparisons are provided for the Humanities and the Social Sciences because there are significant discipline-specific differences in the challenges that women face. For these purposes, the departments counted as Natural Sciences included Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry, Geography & Environment, Earth Sciences, Mathematics & Statistics, Computer Science, Physics, and Cognitive & Neural Systems. Social Science departments/programs included Economics, History, International Relations, Political Science, Psychology, Sociology, Anthropology, American & NE Studies, African American Studies, and Archaeology; Humanities included Classical Studies, English, Philosophy, Modern Languages & Comparative Literature, Religion, Romance Studies, Creative Writing, and the Editorial Institute. It should be noted at the outset that the situation is quite different in the College of Arts & Sciences Natural Sciences and the College of Engineering, where females have, for many years, had low representation on the faculty, and in Sargent College, which is predominantly female. For that reason, some of the discussion focuses on the first two of those divisions.
We wished to document the progress that has been achieved thus far, in addition to identifying areas that warrant particular attention. The lessons from other universities suggest that continuing vigilance and transparency are key to extending the progress in these areas.
Overall, there has been significant progress with respect to female representation at BU since the NSF PAID grant was awarded, which has also largely coincided with changes in the administrative structure of the university. Our current University President, Robert Brown, arrived at the university in the fall of 2005, marking a dramatic change in the way the institution was governed, and both he and the two Provosts who have been in place since his arrival (David Campbell and, since January of 2011, Jean Morrison), as well as the College Deans now in place, have been responsive in implementing remedies where inequities have been identified and proactive in working to establish a climate supportive to both male and female faculty. In 2009, a new position, with the current title of “Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs,” was created: Julie Sandell has had oversight over faculty recruitment, appointment, and compensation.
During the period from 2006-07 to 2010-11, the percentage of female tenured and tenure-track faculty members increased from 12.8% to 15.7% in the CAS Natural Sciences, from 11.4% to 13.5% in Engineering, and from 56.5% to 61.5% in Sargent College. This expansion in female representation resulted from increases in numbers at the Assistant Professor level. In the CAS Natural Sciences and Engineering there was no increase in female representation among Associate and Full Professors. There was also a continuing disparity in female representation in ladder (tenured or tenure-track) vs. non ladder positions in the CAS Natural Sciences.
Overall, from 2006-07 to 2010-11, there was an impressive record of hiring female scientists into entry-level positions. However, females were under-represented in the limited number of senior hires. Women (especially senior women) were also under-represented in departmental leadership positions, such as that of Department Chair.
The attrition rate is disproportionately high for females in the sciences at BU. Close attention should be paid to issues related to tenure and promotion in the sciences and, more generally, the retention of female scientists.
With respect to gender equity in salaries, this is much less of a concern for women in Engineering, Sargent College, and the CAS Natural Sciences than for women (especially senior women) in CAS Humanities and Social Sciences. At some ranks and in some divisions at BU, female scientists have higher average salaries than their male counterparts. However, the university as a whole is nonetheless behind many of its peers in its F:M average salary ratios, particularly for Professors, and to a lesser extent for Assistant Professors.
This abbreviated Web version of the report includes data in the following areas:
I. Female Representation among Tenured and Tenure-track Faculty
II. Female Representation by Tenure Status
Further detail is available in the complete written report. Note that the figure numbers from the original report have been retained, although not all of the original figures have been included here—resulting in discontinuities in the figure numbering on this site.
* We very much appreciate the assistance in data collection that has been provided by Suzanne Brown, Liz Avery, Julie Sandell, Nancy Insley, Mike Devitt, and others.
