A.A.U.P. fact sheet on the status of women shows that in academic
2000-1, women made up only 31 percent of the faculty at doctoral-level
institutions and 40 percent of the faculty at baccalaureate
institutions. Women did, of course, make up 50 percent of the
faculty at institutions without ranks.
numbers are even worse in the sciences. A 1999-2000 report
from the Association of American Medical Colleges shows that
the percentage of tenured women on the faculty at medical
schools has stayed exactly the same for several years15 percent.
At my current employer, Yale University, only 11 percent of
the tenured professors are women. And a 1998 report from the
Higher Education Research Institute of the University of California
at Los Angeles says that female faculty members "continue
to serve in the lower academic ranks more often than do men"
and are "less likely to be tenured."
seems to agree that there are plenty of outstanding female
graduate students. "The problem is not in the pipeline,"
they say. But somewhere between the pipeline and the tenure
track, tons of women get discouraged and bail out.
report was prepared by the AHA's Committee on Women Historians,
by Carla Hesse, with the assistance of Katharine Norris and
National Research Council Summary Reports of Doctoral Recipients
from United States Universities (1991, 1992) demonstrate that
a commitment to the principle of "affirmative action"
works. As a consequence of affirmative action policies the
percentage of women and minorities in the historical profession
increased dramatically in the 1970s. Since 1980 the number
of women has continued to rise while the gains of minorities
have leveled off considerably. The American Historical Association
remains committed to the goal of enriching the profession
of history through the continued diversification of its practitioners.
The main obstacle toward that end remains the small pool of
minority Ph.D.'s. Every effort should be made to increase
these numbers. Given the current underrepresentation of minorities
in the larger pool of history Ph.D.'s affirmative action policies
are still one of the most effective mechanisms (along with
scholarship programs) to remedy the problem of underrepresentation.
American Historical Association's Report on the Status and
Hiring of Women and Minority Historians in Academia has been
prepared by the Committee on Women Historians in consultation
with the Professional Division, and has been endorsed by the
Council. It is designed to provide useful information by which
history departments may measure their progress in providing
equity for women and minority historians.
to the most recent National Research Council (NRC) Summary
Reports (1991, 1992) in 1992, American universities produced
725 new history Ph.D.'s; of these 34.2% were women.
NRC data from 1991 reveal that women constitute 18.7% of all
history Ph.D.'s (granted1956-91) with academic employment.
69.6% of males in academic employment are tenured, compared
to 48.1% of women. Women are more than twice as likely as
men to hold nontenure-track jobs (4.2% of men compared to
9.9% of women). Based on data from a survey sent to U.S. history
departments listed in the 1994ñ95 edition of the Directory
of History Departments and Organizations in the United States
and Canada, part time historians are almost twice as likely
to be male as female, but women account for a higher proportion
(35%) of part time than full time faculty.
Ph.D.'s: Women comprise 33.3% of academically employed historians
with Ph.D.'s granted between 1986-91 (For the percentage of
doctorates earned by women in those years see priority #2
below). 80.8% of women hold faculty positions, as compared
to 84.5% of men. Women remain underrepresented at the level
of full professor; 4.8% of men hold this appointment, compared
to 0.2% of women, and overrepresented in adjunct positions:
only1.9% of men hold this status, compared to 4.9% of women.
the entry level, there is evidence of growing equity. In the
1991 NRC survey, women represented 33.3% of academically employed
history Ph.D.'s who had received their doctorates within the
past five years, and in this cohort, slightly more women than
men held tenure-track positions (59.1% of women; 58.2% of
the cohort six through fifteen years since Ph.D., women represented
just 26.6% of all academically employed historians, fewer
held tenure (60.4% of men; 53.4% of women), and more occupied
nontenure-track positions (10.9% of women; 6.0% of men).
the cohort sixteen through thirty-five years since Ph.D.,
women represented 12.4% of all academically employed historians,
with 66.9% having tenure, compared to 84.9% of men. In this
cohort, 3.3% of untenured women occupied tenure-track positions
(1.8% of untenured men in this cohort are in tenure-track
#1: To maintain progress toward equity in employing women
in academic positions
women constitute 34% of current history Ph.D.'s (1992), they
have comprised over 30% of all history Ph.D.'s since 1975
and about one-third of Ph.D.'s each year since 1984ódepartments
should attempt to reflect these figures in their permanent
tenure-track appointments. In seeking candidates, departments
should recognize that historians of women are also specialists
in traditional chronological and geographical fields.
#2: More rapid promotion and tenure for women historians
if every third or fourth grant of tenure were to go to a woman
this policy would produce only a very modest increase in the
absolute numbers of women among all tenured historians. Departments
should continue to remain attentive to the goal of gender
parity in making tenure decisions.
goal will be easily achieved by those departments that already
have a high proportion of women in untenured or tenure-line
positions. Success will however, require more effort by departments
that lack women in the tenure "pipeline." Current
evidence supports cautious optimism about the expansion of
the job market in the 1990s; departments should use new positions
as opportunities to redress imbalances and to recruit women
into tenure-track positions. In undertaking affirmative action,
departments should keep in mind the percentages of women among
history Ph.D.'s, as shown in Table 1 (page 3; Women as Percentage
of PhD Cohorts in History,1930-1992).
NRC Humanities Doctorates in the United States,1991 Profile.
Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 1994
#3: Recognizing spousal/partner issues
candidates make career decisions within the context of committed
relationships with spouses or partners with their own job
and career concerns. To hire and retain strong faculty members
and to ensure equal opportunity for women, some colleges and
universities will need to begin to respond to dual career
couples with new institutional policies. The Committee on
Women Historians continues to discuss possible guidelines
that would recognize the complex issues of affirmative action
and department autonomy. Although no gender-specific statistical
data is available about marital status of historians, the
Committee is concerned by the continuing lack of gender parity
in the statistics on part-time employment, suggesting that
women more often than men are compromising full-time careers
to accommodate spouses and partners. Departments, and institutions
more generally, should think creatively in assisting and accommodating
relationships in hiring and retention procedures.
Median Annual Salaries of Full-time Employed History
Ph.D's, 1991, by Years since Ph.D.(in thousands of dollars).
NRC Humanities Doctorates in the United States: 1991 Profile,
Washington D.C. National Academy Press, 1994, p. 21.
incomplete data on salaries suggest a pattern similar to that
found in employment. Recent women Ph.D.'s enjoy a more favorable
position relative to their male counterparts, one approaching
- and in some cases exceeding - equity. But salary inequities
between men and women increase with the number of years since
the Ph.D. Overall, full-time employed women Ph.D.'s in the
humanities make 87% of men's salaries. In four-year colleges
and universities, women Ph.D.'s. make 84% of men's salaries.
#4: Redressing salary/pension inequities
should consider measures to redress historic inequity in male
and female salaries Percentage raises mean that existing inequities
grow greater each year and continue into retirement, leaving
women with smaller pensions. Salary committees, department
chairs, and college and university administrators should support
lump-sum adjustments for senior women to bring the salaries
and pensions of women into line with those of comparable male
Minority women and men are still deplorably scarce among history
Ph.D.'s, as is made clear in new data from the National Research
Council (8.2% of 1991 Ph.D.'s). The following charts, document
low percentages of minority Ph.D.'s and the absence of sustained
improvement since 1975, especially notable is the lack of
positive change in the late 1980s when the number of history
Ph.D.'s overall increased significantly.
to a commonly voiced notion of minority women's advantage
in the profession relative to minority men, NRC data show
that women hold 38.6% of Ph.D.'s granted to minorities in
1991. Since the numbers of Ph.D.'s granted to particular minority
groups each year are so small that percentages by sex are
meaningless, the graph below compares all history Ph.D.'s
granted to minority men and women between 1975 and 1991.
1991, 44 history Ph.D.'s were granted to minority persons.
Of that cohort, 17, or 38.6% were women. Minority persons
represented 8% of all history Ph.D.'s (n=552); minority women
were 3.1% of all history Ph.D.'s and 8.1% of all female Ph.D.'s.
1975, 90% of Ph.D. recipients were white compared to 88.9%
#5: To create a critical mass of minority and women historians
Given the dramatic lack of change overall in the percentage
of minority Ph.D.'s since 1975, departments should implement
measures to increase the number of minority graduate students
in history. It is crucial that history departments recruit
minority women for their graduate programs and support their
doctoral work. In light of the changing legal climate, departments
need to insure equity in the distribution fellowships and
teaching assistantships. Furthermore, to increase the pool
of minority women in graduate programs, departments should
take active steps to encourage minority under-graduates to
go on to graduate school.
complete statistical data prepared for this report, including
an appendix found in the print version is available in numerical
form from the Committee on Women Historians upon request.
Contact Committee on Women Historians, American Historical
Association, 400 A Street, SE, Washington, DC 20003.
University of Notre Dame has the following, legally binding,
ND's "non-discrimination" statement
The University of Notre Dame does not discriminate on
the basis of race, color, national or ethnic origin, sex, disability,
veteran status, or age in the administration of any of its educational
programs, admissions policies, scholarship and loan programs,
athletic and other school-administered programs or in employment.
1997, the Officers of the University were asked by the Faculty
Senate and other campus groups to include "sexual orientation"
in the university's non-discrimination policy, but after consideration,
the Officers refused, citing potential legal problems - as
Notre Dame's understanding of the difference between "sexual
orientation" and "homosexual activity" is not
shared by the society at large.
of an expanded non-discrimination clause, the University now
publishes the following:
The Spirit of Inclusion in All University
and sojourners no longer..." (Ephesians 2:19)
University of Notre Dame strives for a spirit of inclusion
among the members of this community for distinct reasons articulated
in our Christian tradition. We prize the uniqueness of all
persons as God's creatures. We welcome all people, regardless
of color, gender, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation,
social or economic class, and nationality, for example, precisely
because of Christ's calling to treat others as we desire to
be treated. We value gay and lesbian members of this community
as we value all members of this community. We condemn harassment
of any kind, and University policies proscribe it. We consciously
create an environment of mutual respect, hospitality and warmth
in which none are strangers and all may flourish.
of the essential tests of social justice within any Christian
community is its abiding spirit of inclusion. Scriptural accounts
of Jesus provide a constant witness of this inclusiveness.
Jesus sought out and welcomed all people into the Kingdom
of God the gentile as well as the Jew, women as well
as men, the poor as well as the wealthy, the slave as well
as the free, the infirm as well as the healthy. The social
teachings of the Catholic Church promote a society founded
on justice and love, in which all persons possess inherent
dignity as children of God. The individual and collective
experiences of Christians have also provided strong warrants
for the inclusion of all persons of good will in their communal
living. Christians have found their life together enriched
by the different qualities of their many members, and they
have sought to increase this richness by welcoming others
who bring additional gifts, talents and backgrounds
to the community.
spirit of inclusion at Notre Dame flows from our character
as a community of scholarship, teaching, learning and service
founded upon Jesus Christ. As the Word through whom all things
were made, Christ is the source of the order of all creation
and of the moral law which is written in our hearts. As the
incarnate Word, Christ taught the law of love of God and sent
the Holy Spirit that we might live lives of love and receive
the gift of eternal life. For Notre Dame, Christ is the law
by which all other laws are to be judged. As a Catholic institution
of higher learning, in the governance of our common life we
look to the teaching of Christ, which is proclaimed in Sacred
Scripture and tradition, authoritatively interpreted by Church
teaching, articulated in normative understandings of the human
person, and continually deepened by the wisdom borne of inquiry
and experience. The rich heritage of the Catholic faith informs
and transforms our search for truth and our understanding
of contemporary challenges in higher education.
This statement was adopted by the Officers of the University
on August 27, 1997 in conjunction with an Open Letter to the
Notre Dame Community.
Open Letter to the Notre Dame Community, Edwin A. Malloy,
Officers of the University have been asked to modify the University's
non-discrimination clause to include sexual orientation. In
Spring 1996 the Ad Hoc Committee on Gay and Lesbian Student
Needs recommended that the officers consider this issue. The
Faculty Senate and the Student Senate passed resolutions during
the 1996-97 academic year supporting this change. In addition,
the College Democrats, a student organization, submitted a
petition signed by many students in favor of this change.
During the1996-97 academic year and this past summer, the
officers of the University studied this issue - first, in
a subcommittee I appointed, and then in the Officers' Group
as a whole.
officers began their discussions by reflecting on the teachings
of the Catholic Church relating to gay and lesbian persons.
The Church distinguishes between homosexuality as an orientation
and sexual activity between homosexual persons. The Church
teaches that homosexual orientation in a person is neither
sinful nor evil. The call of the gospels is a call to inclusiveness
- to a recognition of the dignity inherent in each person
that flows from our creation in the image and likeness of
a loving God, who brings us together as brothers and sisters
through Jesus Christ on a common journey back to the God who
Church also teaches that all people, regardless of their sexual
orientation, are called to live chaste lives in accordance
with their vocation as single people, married couples, priests
or religious. Specifically, the Church asks all people to
reserve sexual union to the covenanted and consecrated union
of a man and woman in marriage. Neither heterosexual union
outside the permanent bond of marriage nor homosexual union
is morally acceptable.
University has tried to speak with an authentic voice on both
of these dimensions of Church teaching--on homosexual orientation
and on sexual union. In a number of different settings in
recent years, we have stated publicly that we prize the gay
and lesbian members of this community as children of God,
entitled to the same respect as all other members of this
community. Moreover, we deplore harassment of any kind as
antithetical to the nature of this community as a Christian
community. Our discriminatory harassment policy specifically
precludes harassment based on sexual orientation. At the same
time and with an equally strong voice, we strive to set policy
and make operating decisions perhaps most notably in
the area of student life in a manner that supports
the teaching of the Church calling all people, regardless
of their sexual orientation, to reserve sexual union to those
who are married.
all of our actions we have been guided by gospel values that
we regard as normative for this community. We have premised
our decisions and framed our statements on issues relating
to the gay and lesbian members of this community on the language
of Church teaching. Indeed, we believe that some of the deepest
aspirations of this community flow from the law of Christ
and not necessarily from civil law.
University exists, however, within a societal and cultural
milieu that does not always accept gospel values as normative.
Moreover, society at large uses language in ways that mean
different things to different people. With respect to this
issue, for example, American society does not always use the
phrase "sexual orientation" to mean only orientation.
Many people use this single phrase in a manner that entangles
what we regard as two distinct concepts - homosexual persons
and homosexual conduct. Within society at large, the phrase
"sexual orientation" sometimes becomes a term that
does not admit of distinction between sexual orientation and
the manner in which people live out their sexual orientation--a
distinction that is critical to us as a Catholic institution.
have been asked to change our non-discrimination clause to
add sexual orientation as a protected category. Institutional
non-discrimination clauses are highly stylized statements
which are legally binding. Neither federal nor state law mandates
that sexual orientation be included in non-discrimination
clauses. Thus, like a number of other institutions, our clause
does not currently include sexual orientation.
considerable reflection, we have decided not to add sexual
orientation to our legal non-discrimination clause. To make
the change requested would mean that our decisions in this
area would be measured by civil courts that may interpret
this change through the lens of the broader societal milieu
in which we live. This, in turn, might jeopardize our ability
to make decisions that we believe necessary to support Church
teaching. We wish to continue to speak to this issue in the
Catholic context that is normative for this community.
law does not constitute the exclusive basis for commitments
made within this community. As mentioned above, we regard
some of our deepest aspirations as flowing from our call to
live the message of the gospels. We choose not to change our
legal non-discrimination clause, but we call ourselves to
act in accordance with what we regard as a higher standard
Christ's call to inclusiveness, coupled with the gospels'
call to live chaste lives. In some senses both of these messages
are counter-cultural. It is this dual call that is so deeply
rooted in our religious tradition to which we commit ourselves.
speak in a variety of settings most notably, in our
student life policies to our affirmation of Church
teaching with respect to sexual conduct. As a way of underscoring
our equally strong commitment to the Church's teaching on
the dignity inherent in every person as a child of God, we
will publish the above statement on The Spirit of Inclusion
at Notre Dame in all University publications.
ND's "academic freedom" statement
freedom and associated responsibilities
Freedom of inquiry and freedom of expression
are safeguarded by the University. The rights and obligations
of academic freedom take diverse forms for the students, the
faculty, and the administration; in general, however, they
derive from the nature of academic life, and they are consistent
with the objectives of the University as a community which
pursues the highest scholarly standards, promotes intellectual
and spiritual growth, maintains respect for individuals as
persons and lives in the tradition of Christian belief.
principles of academic freedom supported at the University
include: freedom to teach and to learn according to one's
obligation, vision and training; freedom to publish the results
of one's study or research; and freedom to speak and to write
on [public issues as a citizen.
obligations include: respectful allowance of the exercise
of these freedoms by others; proper acknowledgment of contributions
made by others to one's work; preservation of the confidentiality
necessary in personal, academic and administrative deliberations;
avoidance of using the University to advance personal opinion
or commercial interest; and protection, in the course of one's
conduct, utterances and work, of the basic aims of the University
and its good name.
"gender inclusive language" statement
University of Notre Dame shall use respectful and gender-inclusive
language in its official proclamations and documents and calls
upon members of the University community to adopt such usage
in the conduct of their work and their social life within
and outside the Notre Dame Community. "
Sample "Departmental Gender Report" for outside
Introduction: institutional background
The (*******) Department currently employs 29 tenured or tenure-track
T&R faculty. Of these, 22 are men and 7 are women. For
the 2000-2001 academic year, the department's regular faculty
is distributed across rank as follows:
to the university's most recently available statistics on
the gender breakdown of regular research faculty in the College
of Arts and Letters, the (*******) Department ranks as the
fourth highest of the seventeen departments in terms of its
percentage of male faculty.
ranking is a marked example of a more pervasive problem in
the institutional culture of Notre Dame. At its last accreditation
visitation in 1994, the Commission on Institutions of Higher
Education of the North Central Association of Colleges and
Schools noted the lack of proactive initiatives in recruiting
and tenuring women and minorities. They made the following
"The University should develop and implement a plan for
filling the projected new 150 faculty positions that is sensitive
and responsive to ethnicity and gender concerns. The absence
of such a plan or an affirmative action office questions the
seriousness of the University committee to increasing faculty
diversity. Specific plans need to be developed to attract
female and minority students."
This is indeed a challenge because so many university policies
are not gender friendly: for example, there is no university
policy on parental leaves, no adoption of a gay-lesbian nondiscrimination
clause, no policy on spousal hiring, little institutional
support for the hiring of non-academic spouses, medical insurance
policies which exempt reproductive issues including contraception,
and a student health service without a gynecologist on its
that we are midway through the accreditation cycle and no
plan has been forthcoming, concern is growing. On 7 December
1999, the Faculty Senate passed a resolution demanding that
the Provost publish its plan to attract female and minority
Within this institutional context, the (*******) Department
has not taken a leadership role in gender affirmative action.
Beyond perfunctory and sporadic reports of the gender breakdown
of the Ph.D. pool in (*******) at the opening of each academic
year, the Department has not engaged in any substantial discussion
of what a culture of affirmative action might mean in terms
of its hiring, growth, and daily governance.
the neglect has had a negative impact on both student and
faculty life in ways that are surprising given overall trends
in the field, where women are closing the gender gap at a
rapid rate in their representation in departmental faculties
and graduate and undergraduate majors.
The impact of gender on faculty life
The impact of male predominance at the senior level means that
the dominant political voice in the department is male. There
has never been a female department chair; there has never been
more than one woman on CAP during a given academic year (and
only the CAP votes on hiring, renewal and tenure.) Until five
years ago, there was no female representation on the Committee
of the Fulls, the departmental body that makes recommendations
on promotion to full and chaired professor. Although two women
joined the Committee of the Fulls between 1995 and 2000, the
same period saw five more men added to the same Committee. With
11 male members and 2 female members, the Committee is disproportionately
the past five years, however, administrative labor has historically
fallen, and continues to fall, most heavily on the shoulders
of women, whether staff, professional specialists, or T&R
faculty. Currently, the workload is excessive on all shoulders.
We have already lost one administrative assistant in the department
because she was expected to serve as an assistant to both
the DGS and the chair, responsibilities which, she claimed,
fall on two separate secretaries in other departments. The
woman who has assumed her position frequently stays past 5.00
p.m. and sometimes even comes in on Saturdays to complete
the work left unfinished from the week. The professional specialist
is equally burdened. Administrative responsibilities initially
stated to consume no more than three working days, have become
a full time job, frequently requiring more than 40 hours a
week. Often junior faculty of both sexes, but especially women,
has been asked to serve as Director of Undergraduate Studies
or Director of Graduate Studies before having been tenured.
This practice has given rise to circumstances where those
least able to say no are appointed to some of the most demanding
departmental jobs. Because our department is administratively
understaffed, women faculty have many times found themselves
working far beyond what their job descriptions require.
last affirmative action officer was a woman, who, as an untenured
member of the faculty, was ineligible for the CAP. She resigned
in the spring of 1999 when representatives of the university
affirmative action committee pressed her to justify departmental
hiring trends in which she played no role. In the fall of
1999 the chair informed her that he considered her the "de
facto affirmative action officer" since no one else had
been appointed. In effect, she was not allowed to resign.
Hiring and retention of faculty
While there is plenty of goodwill on all sides, this goodwill
somehow never gets translated into actual hires. At the end
of the 1998-99 academic year, for example, male voices were
raised at a departmental meeting about the need to hire a
senior woman faculty member. Then, when we decided to offer
a chaired position to a senior woman during the 1999-2000
academic year, everyone in the department was enthusiastic.
The candidate, however, declined our offer.
notwithstanding, the reality is that the gender imbalance
in our department has gotten worse. We have a structural problem
which needs to be addressed. Since 1991, we have hired 22
new faculty. Eight of these have been women, of whom five
were hired between 1991-1995. All but one of these women were
hired at the junior level. In contrast, ten of the fourteen
men hired since 1991, were hired at the senior level. Eleven
men and only three women were hired between 1996-2000.
one woman who was appointed at the senior level during this
period, moreover, was not initially to be hired at that rank.
Only after a male colleague who was hired that same year refused
to accept the job unless he was appointed with tenure was
a similar offer extended to her. Even more disconcerting,
when a female colleague about to come up for tenure at another
university was hired at Notre Dame during the 1995-1996 academic
year and asked to be appointed with tenure, she was told such
an appointment was precluded by departmental policy.
1991, there have been 22 new hires, 8 of whom have been women.
the 8 women, 5 were hired between 1991-1995. Of the 14 men
hired since 1991, 3 were hired between 1991-1995.)
faculty were denied tenure or renewal in 1998-99 and 1999-2000,
respectively. Both were women.
Notre Dame has offered a number of "target of opportunity"
and "impact player" hires several of which
have been given to our department the process of pursuing
this type of hire is obscure. We have never managed to hire
a woman through this process, although we have hired several
men. The one woman who was offered such a position turned
us down. It is uncertain whether we could pursue the hiring
of additional women through this avenue, because no clear
process of putting forward candidates has been articulated
by the administration.
have also been unsuccessful in hiring women in open searches.
In some searches women have declined our offers. In other
searches, we were unable to turn up viable women candidates,
perhaps because of the ways the positions have been defined
or because of the nature of the fields. In some cases our
inability to hire women may be because Notre Dame and other
Catholic colleges and universities are sometimes perceived
as being hostile to women intellectuals.
have also experienced little success in promoting women. During
the last two academic years, two of the department's three
junior women came up for tenure and renewal, and both failed.
This suggests that the department has been less than successful
in mentoring junior faculty (of whatever gender). It is perhaps
not coincidental that during the 1990s, when these women were
hired, the department tried to improve its gender ratio by
hiring superior women ABDs and both of the aforementioned
women fell into these categories. Unless they receive excellent
mentoring and protection along the way, it is exceedingly
difficult for ABD's to complete their degrees and begin their
careers simultaneously. Our department may well have failed
our junior women in this regard. Our failure rate in retaining/tenuring
these women suggests that we may not be devoting enough of
the time and energy of our senior faculty to mentoring our
junior women (and men) and to ensuring that their time is
devoted to professional development rather than service work.
order to meet these needs, there must be an open departmental
discussion to establish a more formal basis for mentoring.
In this way the fundamental difficulties of integration and
retention/tenuring of junior women can be dealt with more
effectively; such discussion would, of course, enhance the
well being of all junior faculty in the department. Again,
there is no lack of goodwill, and the informal conversation
currently taking place between senior and junior faculty is
fruitful. This matter was mentioned in a memo to the department
during Fall '99, in which the chair, in response to faculty
requests, raised such preliminary questions as what a mentor's
responsibilities should be and how any potential conflicts
of interest should be handled when mentors also serve on the
CAP. However, these inquiries have yet to be followed up in
a substantive way: the issue has not been discussed at any
departmental meeting and there is no written departmental
policy on mentoring. At the same time, we are still in need
of a general guideline regarding the time commitment expected
of mentors, more concrete ideas on the expectations mentees
might hold regarding advice on professional development, feedback
on research, their introduction to the culture of Notre Dame,
and help with teaching.
noted above, the issue of mentoring is of particular concern
to the women of the department. More open, consistent mentoring
practices would greatly benefit senior as well as junior faculty.
Increased discussion of our junior faculty's research in more
regular seminars or colloquia would also enrich the department's
intellectual climate and might begin to address the problem
of intellectual isolation articulated by some senior women
faculty in the course of preparing this document.
record at hiring and retaining minority faculty also leaves
much to be desired. Since 1992, three minority women have
been hired; we have not managed to retain one of them. While
our record in hiring three minority women might seem laudable,
it should be noted that two of these women were hired to fill
our position in African-American (*******), where retention
has been a long-standing problem. The first left Notre Dame
after complaining about campus racism in the Journal of Women's
(*******). The second stayed for only one year, after which
another university recruited her, which boasted a strong Afro-American
(*******) program and a more racially diverse (*******) department.
The third, who was denied tenure two years ago, was discussed
above. Since 1992, one other minority woman was offered employment
in the (*******) department (again for the African-American
position); she declined our offer. In the same period, only
one additional minority woman has been invited to campus for
interview (in 1993).
Some more hopeful developments have occurred, however. The
department has recently extended a pre-doctoral fellowship
to one minority woman who is completing her degree in (*******)
at Yale. She is studying African-American religious (*******),
an area in which we hope eventually to hire.
addition, the university is currently offering several other
pre-doctoral fellowships on a competitive basis to other minority
students, both men and women. Some of these have been offered
in (*******). Last year, for example, one was offered to a
male who ultimately went to Dartmouth instead of Notre Dame.
There is widespread hope, however, that this strategy will
help us increase our minority representation. Although here,
too, we have concerns about how, and if, these pre-doctoral
fellows will be introduced, much less integrated, into our
The impact of gender on student life
A. Graduate students
Our graduate program also is marked by gender imbalance. Of
the 54 students presently studying for the Ph.D., 18 are women
and 36 are men. Efforts to recruit outstanding women students,
moreover, have been hindered by the fact that very few apply
to study American religious (*******), the area to which we
direct the greatest amount of departmental resources at the
graduate level. For example, 16 candidates (14 men and 2 women)
applied to study with _________ for fall 1999; for fall 2000
the figures were 6 men and 3 women. We have, however, been
more successful in recruiting women to study American Catholic
(*******). Until the 2000-2001 academic year, the great majority
of our graduate students in this field have been women despite
the fact that the applicant pool is about equally divided
between men and women. For the 2000-2001 class, 2 men and
1 woman applied to study American Catholic (*******). Of these,
two were seriously considered: 1 woman and 1 man. Our American
Catholic (*******), however, decided that they could train
no more than one candidate, and they selected the male applicant
for that slot.
minuscule number of women we do accept into our graduate program,
and the fact that many of them do not study American religious
(*******), have negatively affected their experiences at graduate
with our female graduate students suggests that many feel
marginalized in, and alienated from, the department. Because
the numbers of women graduate students in our department are
small, statistical analysis would be difficult to produce.
However, two former Directors of Graduate Studies report being
told by female graduate students that their intelligence had
been denigrated by other graduate students, that they have
learned to keep their mouths shut in class, or that the subjects
of their research are marginal or unimportant. Male (and maybe
female) graduate students warned women not to engage in feminist
or theoretical research, lest their interests harm them in
the profession and prevent them from getting jobs. In addition,
some women graduate students report that certain male faculty
members seem unenthusiastic about working with them, or ignore
their contributions in class. While certain "top"
women students are respected for their intellectual accomplishments
and have won departmental prizes, those with less stellar
accomplishments tend to be seen as far less talented than
male peers whose abilities are similar to their own.
type of atmosphere can have subtly devastating effects on
our women graduate students. Low expectations among faculty
can lead to disappointing performance; ridicule or disrespect
among male graduate students can lead female graduate students
to decide that a low profile is their best strategy. Such
incidents are regularly reported. While some women graduate
students thrive and deny encountering such an atmosphere,
others report being deeply harmed. Gifted students have become
convinced they are too stupid, untalented, or otherwise unsuited
to succeed in an academic career. Several of our talented
females have chosen (or are considering) not to seek jobs
in the academy.
Our department has also failed in recruiting female undergraduate
students to the major. The most recent statistics, from 1998-1999,
show that of 192 majors, 59 percent were male, and 41 percent
female. In the college as a whole, the gender split is nearly
equal: 50.02 percent of the undergraduates in the College
of Arts and Letters are male; 49.98 percent are female. We
cannot explain precisely why this gender disparity exists,
in part because we have never asked the students. In discussions
of undergraduate affairs, there are few official channels
between students and the department. Undergraduates are even
less represented in departmental governance than graduate
students. There was no undergraduate voice in the relevant
section of this review; indeed, there is no undergraduate
representative on the Undergraduate Committee. (The only departmental
committee with undergraduate representation is the Honesty
Committee, and this is mandated by the University.)
discussions of undergraduate affairs there are few points
of contact between the students and the department. The only
institutional venue for students to discuss the major is through
the office of the Director of Undergraduate Studies. The office
is open every day. The problem, however, is that a professional
specialist, not a regular member of the faculty, sees the
overwhelming majority of undergraduate students. The remainder
fall to the DUS, an untenured member of the faculty, who is
therefore also equally powerless to effect meaningful change.
some informal efforts have been made to give majors a voice
in their education. Between 1993 and 1995, for example, the
DUS held annual "forums" for undergraduates to meet
and discuss the major. The forums, for example, were instrumental
in instituting a new student advising system. At another forum,
majors proposed, and then began publishing, a bi-monthly newspaper
which was at the time intended to provide yet another means
for undergraduates to discuss their perceptions of the major.
The paper now appears twice a year, but has assumed a very
different form. The students who have written for it during
the past two years have made it an avenue for discussing their
research, international study experiences and exploring postgraduate
career paths. Although these are laudable contributions to
their intellectual life, the fact remains that the number
of informal channels for undergraduates to communicate their
perceptions of the major has decreased.
concern is that many of our very best female students do not
appear to take advantage of departmental efforts to introduce
our best majors to more challenging classroom opportunities.
For example, during the 1999-2000 academic year, the department
began offering a methods seminar for our most academically
talented junior majors. 17 students (i.e. all those with the
necessary grade point average) were originally invited to
enroll: 11 women and 6 men. However, even after additional
students had been selected for invitation, only 4 women actually
enrolled; the 12 other students were men.
experience of faculty also indicates that our very best women
majors have not seized opportunities for post-graduate fellowships,
including Rhodes and Fulbright awards, in the same numbers
as their male counterparts. Conversations with faculty members
reveal that it is invariably our male majors who apply for
those awards. Two women who teach European (*******), for
example, report that they have helped students with 14 Fulbright
applications during the past five years. None has been a woman.
In fact, the 6 Fulbrights awarded to our department have been
awarded almost exclusively to men (5 men and 1 woman).
statistics give rise to a series of questions which need to
be addressed and answered. Is there enough diversity in the
curriculum to make it attractive to women? Do we need more
mentorship of our talented women majors to encourage them
to seek national fellowships such as Fulbrights and Rhodes?
Is our advising effective in cultivating the development of
our female majors? How does our lack of women faculty affect
women's perception of (*******) as a major?
1) that the department elect an affirmative action committee
composed of tenured and untenured faculty, graduate students,
and undergraduates whose mandate would be to address the issues
raised herein and report to the department biannually over
the next three years.
that all search committees prepare and submit affirmative
action reports including both affirmative action statistics
and the strategies they adopted to locate and recruit women
and minority applicants.
that each year, the graduate admissions committee prepare
a report to the department outlining its efforts to recruit
women graduate students.
that an elected committee re-evaluate departmental governance
impact on gender relations by comparing its current procedures
to other departments in the College of Arts and Letters and
to peer (*******) departments which are most successful in
recruiting and retaining women and minorities. Based on this
comparative information, the committee should make recommendations
for productive changes in departmental governance.
that only tenured faculty hold positions of DUS, DGS, and
Affirmative Action Officer.
that the department collect more information on the gender
imbalance in the undergraduate majors and holds an open forum
with the undergraduates about the form and content of the
that the Graduate Students elect an affirmative action committee
and that this committee reports biannually to the DGS regarding
the gender climate in the graduate program.
that the department follow some of its counterparts in the
College by adopting its own non-discrimination clause against
gays and lesbians, and that this policy be noted on our website.
that administrative understaffing be addressed and rectified.
February 22, 2001
ND's student population
From: Dennis Brown, Public Relations, ND
choose to attend Notre Dame for many reasons, but the University's
strong academic reputation ranks as by far the most important
factor, according to an annual survey of college freshmen
conducted by the American Council on Education (ACE) and the
Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA.
95 percent of Notre Dame's first-year students cited academic
reputation as a very important factor in their college decision-making
process, about 40 percentage points higher than students nationwide.
Dame students also are right where they want to be, with 85
percent saying the University was their first choice, compared
with 71 percent elsewhere.
statistics are consistent with Notre Dame's place among the
most selective universities in the nation, joining Harvard,
Princeton, Yale, Stanford, Dartmouth, Brown, MIT and Rice
as the only schools that admit fewer than half of their freshman
applicants and enroll more than half of those who are admitted.
annual ACE/UCLA survey is designed to profile the political
and social views of the nation's college freshmen. This year's
survey is based on the responses of 269,413 students at 434
of the nation's four-year institutions.
worrisome trend in this year's survey - a lack of interest
in politics among first-year students nationwide - was far
less evident at Notre Dame.
up with politics" is essential or very important to 47
percent of the 2000 freshman class at Notre Dame -19 points
higher than the national average of 28 percent. The overall
response is the lowest level in the survey's 35 years and
is especially surprising because the percentages historically
have risen in election years.
Dame students also were more likely than their peers to have
discussed politics within the past year, some 27 percent responding
affirmatively, compared with 16 percent nationwide.
political engagement is likely one reason why Notre Dame freshmen
report greater interest than their peers in civic leadership
and are more optimistic about their ability to effect change.
Some 46 percent at Notre Dame believe it is important to become
a community leader, 15 percentage points above the national
average, and 85 percent, compared with 73 percent nationally,
believe the efforts of individuals can make a difference.
Among other noteworthy observations drawn from the survey:
In the 2000
political campaigns, conservative candidates were more likely
to draw the votes of Notre Dame freshmen. Some 35 percent
label themselves politically conservative and 21 percent
are liberal, compared with 20 percent and 28 percent nationally.
The largest political group is comprised of those who describe
themselves as middle of the road - 44 percent at Notre Dame
and 55 percent nationwide.
By significant margins over their peers, Notre Dame freshmen
oppose both abortion (68 percent to 46 percent) and the
death penalty (55 percent to 31 percent).
Some 96 percent of the University's freshmen report they
performed volunteer work in the past year, compared with
81 percent of students nationally, and 61 percent plan tocontinue
with community service, as compared to some 24 percent nationally.
(Notre Dame freshmen are likely underestimating their future
volunteer efforts; the University's Center for Social Concerns
reports that 80 percent of Notre Dame students actually
engage in volunteer projects during their four years on
Some 97 percent of Notre Dame's freshmen report they attended
a religious service in the past year and 44 percent regularly
discuss religious issues, compared with 83 percent and 30
About 64 percent of the first-year students at Notre Dame
say it is essential or very important to be well-off financially,
9 percent less than the national average.
Notre Dame's freshmen are opposed to casual sex, with 79
percent rejecting the statement "if two people really
like each other, it's all right for them to have sex even
if they've known each other for a very short time."
About 58 percent nationwide are similarly opposed.
Developing a meaningful philosophy of life is essential
to 62 percent of Notre Dame freshmen, 20 percentage points
higher than the national average.
Notre Dame students have shown far more interest in their
academic preparation than peers nationwide. About 76 percent
of the University's freshmen spent six hours or more per
week on their high school homework, compared with just 36
The University's first-year students smoke far less than
the average and drink alcoholic beverages at a slightly
lower rate. Some 10 percent of college freshmen have smoked,
compared with 2 percent at Notre Dame. Nationwide, 54 percent
of students had consumed wine or liquor and 48 percent drank
beer, compared with 49 percent and 46 percent for Notre
About 34 percent of students on other campuses support the
legalization of marijuana, compared with 22 percent at Notre
Statistics on graduating seniors
About 94 percent of the 1,908 students who enrolled at Notre
Dame in the fall of 1997 will receive a diploma Sunday (May
20) - a graduation rate exceeded only by Harvard and Princeton.
33 percent of this year's seniors spent one or two semesters
studying abroad, the highest such percentage for any major
American research university.
80 percent of the graduates participated in volunteer and
service-learning programs in both the greater South Bend area
as well as nationwide.
10 percent of this year's seniors - about 180 - will continue
in volunteer service to society, engaging in a year or more
of work in programs such as the Peace Corps, Teach for America,
the Jesuit Volunteer Corps, and Notre Dame's own Alliance
for Catholic Education and Holy Cross Associates.
50 of the United States are represented in the senior class,
as are some 80 nations worldwide among both the seniors and
advanced degree candidates, making Notre Dame one of the world's
most geographically diverse universities.
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) defines "disability"
as an impairment that "substantially limits one or more
of the major life activities." Although some disabilities,
such as inability to walk, missing or impaired limbs or severely
impaired vision, are easy to observe, many disabilities are
not. Some examples of "hidden" disabilities are learning
disabilities, mental illness, epilepsy, cancer, arthritis, mental
retardation, traumatic brain injury, AIDS and asthma. Many people
do not believe that hidden disabilities are bona fide disabilities
ND employees with disabilities
disabilities can result in functional limitations which substantially
limit one or more of the major life activities, just like
those which are visible. Accommodating hidden disabilities
can keep valued employees on the job and open doors for new
ADA requires that reasonable accommodation be provided, if
necessary, for all impairments that meet the definition of
"disability," whether hidden or visible. Reasonable
accommodations must be determined on a case-by-case basis
to ensure effective accommodations which will meet the needs
of the employee and the employer. Accommodations can range
from making existing facilities accessible for wheelchair
users to job restructuring, acquiring or modifying equipment,
developing flexible work schedules or modifying task protocols.
qualified employees with disabilities sets up a win-win situation:
employers gain a qualified, stable, diverse workforce; people
with disabilities get jobs; and society saves money that previously
funded public benefits and services for people with disabilities.
Governor's Planning Council for People with Disabilities
143 West Market Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204
(317) 232-7770 (Voice)
(317) 232-7771 (TTY)
(317) 233-3712 (FAX)
Job Accommodation Network (JAN)
JAN is a toll-free information and referral service on job
accommodations for people with disabilities; on the employment
provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act; and on
resources for technical assistance, funding, education, and
services related to the employment of people with disabilities.
In addition, JAN analyzes trends and statistical data related
to the technical assistance it provides. JAN can be accessed
by phone at 1-800-526-7234 or 1-800-ADA-WORK (1-800-232-9675)
or by Internet
(JAN) http//www.jan.wvu.edu/english/homeus.htm). Staff contact:Paul
a sample job description and salary information (probably at
the low end of the scale) for administrative assistants in the
College of Arts and Letters -- just so we can know who we are
working with and what they are getting paid, $21,120 - 28, 416
Administrative assistants at Notre Dame
TITLE: Administrative Assistant
$2,010 - $2,368 per month
PERIOD: 4/3/01 TO 4/22/01
40 hours per week, 52 weeks per year
JOB DUTIES: Perform a wide variety of administrative activities
for the Department Chair, Faculty, and Graduate Teaching Assistants.
Process manuscripts, graphics, tables, statistical equations,
tests, various correspondence, and research documents for
the department. Set up merge programs to send letters to several
persons or institutions, such as to prospective students,
to faculty applicants, letters of recommendations for students,
etc. Prepare and maintain strict confidentiality of examinations
for undergraduate and graduate courses. Some exams require
use of ExamMaster program. Grade student exams using department's
optical scanner. Assist with supervision of student assistants;
coordinate work schedules, assign duties, oversee work and
process time cards. Coordinate and oversee preparation of
course descriptions for undergraduate students each semester.
Process grants in a timely and proper format. Create, maintain
and oversee databases for numerous special projects such as
graduate student and faculty applications, undergraduate students,
etc. Design and prepare departmental brochures. Answer telephones,
send departmental e-mail, faxes, sort mail and perform all
other office duties to ensure a professional office operation.
High school diploma or equivalent with some college level
course work. At least three to five years experience in office/clerical.
Must be proficient in a variety of software programs with
the ability to learn new programs as needed. Must have excellent
organizational skills to adapt to handling multiple projects
at once. Must have excellent communication skills, interpersonal
skills and project a positive, professional image.
APPLY: Submit a Promotion/Transfer Application
__________ by _____________
Dame is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
are frequently expensive, lengthy, painful, and uncertain. In
most cases, it is wise to exhaust all other possibilities before
involving yourself in the legal process. In fact, our hope is
that "Best Practices" will help you avoid the last
resort of a lawsuit. They require time, money, effort, and they
can become quite overwhelming in a person's life. In this section,
I've tried to put together a primer about sex discrimination
suits; the law can be very complex and always depends on particular
circumstances so this explanation in no way should be seen as
legal advice or as an exhaustive discussion of discrimination
Sex Discrimination Suits and the Frese Appeal
The law prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis
of race, color, religion, gender, or national origin. Discrimination
means treating people differently in hiring, and in the terms
and conditions of employment. In order to bring a sex discrimination
suit against an employer, for example, you have to show not
only that you were treated unfairly but that you were treated
unfairly because of sex, because you are a woman. This is
frequently shown by demonstrating that a "similarly situated"
man received benefits that you did not. For example, a man
with the same number of years of service and a similar publications,
teaching, and service record as you was promoted to full professor
and you were not. Or that man is paid more than you are. Remember,
being treated badly is not enough; employers can be unfair
as long as they're unfair to everyone. You have to show that
you are treated differently because of race, color, religion,
sex, or national origin or you have no legal basis for a lawsuit.
If you think you are or have been discriminated against, my
advice is to talk to your superior - chair or dean -- first,
as long as you are comfortable doing that. For example, you
might say to your chair, "Arnold, you may not be aware,
but your last ten appointments to the X committee were all
men." Or, "Jack, you might not have noticed, but
my salary seems to have lagged behind that of others at my
rank in the department. I thought I'd call it to your attention
before you do the budget this year so that you can fix it."
The problem might get resolved easily. Discrimination rears
its ugly head in subtle as well as obvious ways, and because
Notre Dame has been male dominated for so long, it can occur
inadvertently. In other words, they just don't notice or know
better. So try and talk it out first. Failing that the new
Office of Institutional Equity is specifically charged with
hearing your complaint and helping you resolve it (we've listed
other resources under "Picking Your Battles").
The University has been sued many times, according to campus
talk, but in nearly all cases, it has settled before trial.
The details of the settlements are difficult to discover because
often the settlement includes an agreement not to discuss
the details. In only one case I know of, a person received
tenure and was reinstated (the Frese case discussed below).
In some cases (I think), people have technically received
tenure but have gone elsewhere. Monetary settlements are the
our knowledge, the first sex discrimination suits were filed
against the University in the late 70s. At that time, only
two women, Elizabeth Fiorenza and Josephine Ford, had tenure
and both sued because they could not get promoted. Dolores
Frese, who had been denied tenure in the English Department,
joined them in suing the University for discrimination based
on sex. The University moved to separate the suits, since
tenure was not at issue in the Fiorenza and Ford cases, and
the cases proceeded separately. Subsequently, the Frese suit
became a class action, which other women faculty were invited
at least three years of extensive discovery (depositions,
examining files, getting documents), during which Judge Sharp
ordered that the University had to turn over confidential
files and the EEOC joined the Frese suit, the women prevailed
and all three suits were settled. Fiorenza and Ford were promoted
to full professor as part of the settlement agreements. Frese
was granted tenure, reinstatement in the English Department,
and legal fees; a special appeals process for women who are
denied tenure was established as part of the settlement and
still exists (commonly called the "Frese appeal").
The University requested but did not get a gag order. The
Frese suit became something of a "cause celebre,"
generating angry letters and an article in the National Catholic
many other sex discrimination suits are rumored to have been
filed, only three have any public records: suits of Beth B.
Kern, Sonia Goltz, and Eileen Bender (copies of the opinions
are available in WATCH archives), and these opinions, while
interesting, are not about the outcome but on motions filed
before trial, such as requests to produce certain kinds of
documents. They are, nonetheless, instructive as to the complicated
tactics and roadblocks that one can encounter in a discrimination
particular interest is the judge's comment in a 1998 opinion
denying summary judgment (dismissal before trial) to the University
in the Kern and Goltz suits (the motion for summary judgment
referred to both suits). The judged rued the massive file
that had accrued (18 inches in depth) and commented that "[i]t
is obvious that someone on one side of this case or another,
perhaps at an early stage, adopted what can only generously
be described as a scorched earth approach to this litigation."
This kind of massive and very expensive pretrial discovery
is sometimes a tactic of defendant companies in discrimination
cases who have much more money to spend on legal services
than the plaintiffs who have sued. Sometimes plaintiffs run
out of money and give up or accept low settlement offers.
Three other discrimination suits have public records: those
of Joseph R. Moore, an assistant football coach (age discrimination);
Vincent Eaton, a dining hall cook (race discrimination); and
Oscar Brookins, an economics professor (race discrimination).
Eaton's case was dismissed on summary judgment because the
University was able to put forth "legitimate, nondiscriminatory
reasons, supported by evidence, for its decisions not to promote"
him. The record available in the Brookins case is about disclosing
documents and the University was ordered to disclose because
"no academic privilege exists which would protect from
disclosure the names and identifying information of the reviewers
of academic qualifications for tenure...."
Moore case in 1998, which went to a jury trial and Moore won,
earned the University some embarrassing adverse publicity.
Although Moore was denied reinstatement, he received liquidated
damages, front pay, back pay, legal fees, and reimbursement
of expenses; the University received a damaging blow to its
reputation for fairness. The Moore case may well act as a
powerful incentive to the University to settle discrimination
cases before they become very public.
you're going to serve on a university committee or council -
that is, a "deliberative body" that operates by Robert's
Rules of Order - here is some basic information that will help
you be more effective in being heard and better able to affect
the course of decisions-making. The Faculty Senate, the College
Council and the Academic Council are a few of these, but the
principles, in principle, are applicable to departmental CAP
proceedings and other committees you might be on. You will find
that those committee members who know Robert's Rules will use
them effectively to press their wishes by amending motions,
closing debate on a motion, etc.
Robert's Rules of Order
has held two workshops, led by Jean Porter, to inform our
membership about how parliamentary procedures proceed. These
brief notes are far from complete but will give you an idea
of the principles, and the "moves".
of all, the Robert of Robert's Rules of Order was a union
general during the Civil War. He wrote a book, not a legal
document, to propose rules whereby a deliberative body (an
assembly) could function well and democratically - that is,
act, definitely, on behalf of its constituents. A deliberative
body is one who makes decisions based on debate, and then
formal votes. Robert's Rules can be used anywhere that a representative
body is empowered by their constituents to act on their behalf.
They are of course subject to the by-laws of the particular
a useful definition. A deliberative body: 1. exists to make
decisions: it is legislative, not executive or investigative;
2. it takes actions by vote, not by consensus; 3.it functions
in a formal or structured way (according to a set of rules,
like Robert's); 4. it is not a format for open-ended discussion,
purpose of Robert's Rules of Order is to guarantee a debate
that is inclusive of all members' voices (based on the moral
principle that everyone should be heard) and to guarantee
a vote that is fair. There are rules for closing or limiting
debate. Usually a simple majority is all that is required
to pass most motions. Those motions which require more than
a majority are those which have the effect of cutting off
debate , eg, "to call the question"
or to reverse a prior action of the body eg, to rescind
something previously passed.
underlying principle is the neutrality of the chairperson,
who normally doesn't participate in the debate nor show his/her
particular position on the subject. The Chair can vote, however,
and in a close election might need to do so to break a tie.
Rules are also designed to make sure the debate is orderly,
by laying our rules for the precedence of motions, and, to
make sure that any motion passed is definitive. It sets out
quorum requirements and voting requirements. It also stipulates
that the acts of the assembly can only be overruled by the
motion (to act) must be clear. Ideally it is in writing, and
distributed to the members in enough time to be studied before
motion can be modified through an amendment before a vote.
are a few common mistakes and things to watch out for:
The chair should be completely impartial and should never
engage in debate, although s/he may answer factual and procedural
questions when asked.
The by-laws of an organization have the ultimate authority:
a motion which contradicts the bylaws of the organization
should not even be debated, much less passed; it should be
ruled out of order as soon as proposed.
The chair is in charge. A parliamentarian acts in an advisory
capacity only. However a procedural ruling by the chairperson
can be appealed, but this is straight motion which is debatable
and is decided by vote. The chair cannot halt debate on his/her
own initiative, although s/he can (and should) enforce rules
of debate, which do impose some limits.
The motion to table is meant to halt consideration of a motion
in view of some emergency, such as "I move to table the
motion in view of the fact that the hall is on fire."
The motion to table does not require debate and requires a
simple majority to pass. However, it should not be used as
a way to dispose of an awkward motion without taking a vote.
There is a way to do this, namely, by making a motion to postpone
indefinitely, but this motion itself is debatable, which the
motion to table is not.
The other way to end debate is the motion to "call the
question". This motion itself must be voted on and calls
for a 2/3rd majority. It is not appropriate to close debate
as soon as someone shouts out, "Question!"
The Invention of Sodomy in Christian Theology (The
Chicago Series on Sexuality, History and Society), Mark Jordan
Challenge and Promise of a Catholic University, Theodore
Book of Kills: A Mystery Set at the University of Notre Dame,
by Ralph M. McInerny
Shrubs, and Vines on the University of Notre Dame Campus,
Barbara J. Hellenthal, Thomas J. Schlereth, Robert P.
Dame, the Official Campus Guide, Damaine Vonada
A Year at Notre Dame, by Kevin Coyne
of Notre Dame Du Lac, by Edward Sorin, James T. Connelly
Coach's Wife, Terry Phelps
Manifesto of a Tenured Radical Academic Keywords: A Devil's
Dictionary for Higher Education, Cary Nelson
and Perish: Three Tales of Tenure and Terror, James Hynes
in the Classroom: Stories of Adjunct Faculty and the Price
We All Pay, editor, Michael Dubson
Anthology of Snakebites: On Women, Love and Philosophy, Seven
Bridges Press, Gretchen J. Reydams-Schils
Sisters in Arms: Catholic Nuns Through Two Millenniums,
Jo Ann Kay McNamara
Changing Face of the Priesthood : A Reflection on the Priest's
Crisis of Soul, B. Cozzens
Useful websites for women faculty
on the blue title to open the site in a new window.)
Groups, Associations and Organizations
American Association of University Women
is a national organization that promotes education and equity
for all women and girls. The commitment to these issues is
reflected by the AAUW public policy program.
was founded in 1985 to create a grassroots network
of donors that would give women the credibility they needed
to win elections.
is a grassroots, interactive community by, for and about women.
It aims to facilitate information-sharing among women and
encourage mobilization around political issues.
Feminist Majority Foundation's mission
is to create innovative, cutting-edge research, educational
programs, and strategies to further women's equality and empowerment;
to reduce violence toward women, to increase the health and
economic well-being of women, and to eliminate discrimination
of all kinds.
Independent Women's Forum
a voice for American women who believe in individual freedom
and personal responsibility. The National Advisory Board is
chaired by Christina Hoff Sommers, and includes as members
Elaine Chao and Linda Chavez.
Institute for Women's Policy Research
is a public policy research organization dedicated to informing
and stimulating the debate on public policy issues of critical
importance to women and their families.
Women's Press, Inc.,
is a communications business whose mission it is to promote
communication by, about and among women in ways that create
community and are grounded in a transforming feminist worldview.
Ms. Foundation for Women,
a national, multi-issue, public women's fund, supports
the efforts of women and girls to govern their own lives and
influence the world around them, funds and assists women's
self-help organizing efforts, and pursues changes in public
consciousness, law, philanthropy, and social policy. The foundation
directs resources to break down barriers based on race, class,
age, disability, sexual orientation and culture.
Association for Women in Education
the first professional association for women working in higher
education. It was founded in 1916 as the National Association
of Deans of Women (NADW).
National Organization for Women
is the largest women's rights organization in the United States,
with a membership of over 500,000 contributing women and men
in more than 550 chapters in all 50 states and the District
Women's History Project "History
looks different when the contributions of women are included."
Women's Studies Association (NWSA)
supports and promotes feminist/womanist teaching, learning,
research, and professional and community service at the pre-K
through post-secondary levels and serves as a locus of information
about the inter-disciplinary field of Women's Studies for
those outside the profession.
a global movement to end violence against girls and women.
To date, Eve Ensler's Obie Award-winning play, "The Vagina
Monologues," has been the centerpiece of these events.
In order to translate its mission into action, V-Day established
the V-Day Fund in 1998.
for Reproductive Law and Policy,
an independent, non-profit organization "dedicated to
ensuring that all women have access to appropriate and freely
chosen reproductive health services".
National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL).
Its mission is to protect and preserve the right to choose
while promoting policies and programs that improve women's
health and make abortion less necessary.
National Right to Life Committee
was founded in 1973. It is the largest pro-life
organization in the United States.
Parenthood Federation of America believes
in the fundamental right of each individual, throughout the
world, to manage his or her fertility, regardless of the individual's
income, marital status, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation,
age, national origin, or residence.
climate: Pointers for choosing a women-friendly
college, by Mary Miller
of Higher Education
in Higher Education, a monthly source
of news and views to provide an overview of issues affecting
women on campus.
Center for Women and Information Technology,
established at the University of Maryland Baltimore
County (UMBC) in July, 1998, seeks to address and rectify
women's under-representation in IT and to enhance our understanding
of the relationship between gender and IT.
Stanford Learning Lab is a collaborative
venture to improve student learning and to promote creativity
in education through the introduction of pedagogically informed
University of Maryland women's studies database,
begun in September 1992, serves those people interested in
the women's studies profession and in general women's issues.
Women's Studies Section Links,
developed and maintained by the WSS Collection Development
Committee of the Association of College and Research Libraries
provides access to web sites in a variety of academic disciplines
as they relate to women and gender.
Studies/Women's Issues Resource Sites
is a selective, alphabetical listing of web sites containing
resources and information about women's studies/women's issues,
with an emphasis on sites of particular use to an academic
women's studies program. If you're looking for sites on a
specific women-focused topic, you can select from a variety
Faculty Organizations at Other Universities
Faculty and Staff Issues at the University of Wisconsin
provides links to offices and committees that work
collaboratively to improve policies, programs, benefits and
work conditions for women and their families.
Chancellor's Committee on the Status of Women at the University
of Illinois serves as an advisory committee
to the Chancellor on campus policies, procedures and issues
as they affect the status of women faculty, staff and students.
Examples of policies and issues are included.
Women Faculty Resource Network
is a grass roots effort of women faculty on the University
of Oregon Campus who are interested in strengthening and supporting
the scholarly activities of women faculty on this campus.
Organization of Women Faculty at Northwestern University,
founded in 1981, has been improving the working
conditions for women faculty at Northwestern for 15 years.
The Organization was established in recognition of the fact
that female members of the Northwestern University faculty
share certain interests that need to be considered in the
making of university policy and that are not always given
sufficient recognition by the University.
for Women Faculty at the University of Arizona
has as its goal to achieve a campus climate which fosters
the careers of women faculty and academic professionals.
of Women Faculty at Washington University
has as its purpose to promote professional and social interactions
among women faculty at Washington University in order to discover,
support, and pursue mutual goals.
State University for Faculty Women provides
a means for faculty women to become acquainted with each other,
to share mutual interests, activities, and concerns, particularly
as they relate to academic responsibilities of teaching, research,
and service at WSU.
University of Texas Faculty Women's Organization
was founded in 1982. Membership is open to all women faculty,
including those not on the tenure track. The purpose of the
organization is to provide a support network for women in
the campus community, to sponsor programs concerned with the
professional development of women faculty, and to disseminate
information about University practice and policy vital to
Faculty and Professional Association
at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville
was founded in 1984 by a small group of women faculty and
administrators who recognized the need for establishing an
organization to promote the advancement of women's concerns
at the University of Virginia. Since that time, WFPA has created
a groundwork for UVA women to explore the professional dimension
of employment in higher education