University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Women in instructional middle management in California community colleges: A study of mobility

(USC Thesis Other)

Women in instructional middle management in California community colleges: A study of mobility

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content WOMEN IN INSTRUCTIONAL MIDDLE MANAGEMENT IN CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES: A STUDY OF MOBILITY
A Dissertation
Presented to
the Faculty of the School of Education
University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Education
by
Dorothy Joleen Bock
January 1976
UMI Number: DP71494
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
in the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
Dissertation R jblishing
UMI DP71494
Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
uesf
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
t-Aj-Juc
IZ)
'76
B465"
This dissertation, written under the direction
of the Chairman of the candidate's Guidance
Committee and approved by all members of the
Committee, has been presented to and accepted
by the Faculty of the School of Education in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Doctor of Education.
D a te....
Jt4o7£
Dean
Guidance Committee
Cnattfman
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES........................................ iv
Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM.................................... 1
Background of the Study
Purpose of the Study
Importance of the Study
Assumptions
Delimitations of the Study
Definitions of Terms
Organization of the Study
II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE................. 6
Legal Issues
Women Faculty in Four-Year Institutions
Women Administrators in Higher Education
Women in Community Colleges
Women in Graduate Education
Attitudinal Barriers
Leadership Ability
Women in Management
Summary
III. PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGY................... 30
Sources of Data
Development of the Questionnaire
Treatment of the Data
Response to the Survey
IV. THE FINDINGS.................................. 33
Distribution of Women
Current Positions Held by Women in Middle
Management in Instruction in California
Community Colleges
Personal Data
Educational Background
Management Training
Teaching Experience
Mobility
Career Aspirations
Summary
Chapter Page
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . 57
Summary
Conclusions
Practical Recommendations
Research Recommendations
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................ 64
APPENDIX............................................. 71
111
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Percentage of Master's Degrees Awarded to
Women, Comparing 1950 and 1970 Populations . 17
2. Percentage of Ph.D. Degrees Awarded to Women,
Comparing 1950 and 1970 Populations .... 17
3. Fall 1974 Distribution of Women in California
Community Colleges by Category ............. 34
4. Women in Middle Management in Instruction
Compared to Categories of Full-Time
Enrollment ......................... 37
5. Women Holding the Title of Associate Dean at
California Community Colleges, Fall, 1974,
by Area Classification..................... 38
6. Women Holding the Title of Assistant Dean at
California Community Colleges, Fall, 1974,
by Area Classification..................... 39
7. Women Holding the Title of Director at
California Community Colleges, Fall, 1974,
by Area Classification..................... 39
8. Women Holding the Title of Coordinator at
California Community Colleges, Fall, 1974,
by Area Classification..................... 40
9. Women Holding the Title of Division Chair
person at California Community Colleges,
Fall, 1974, by Area Classification........ 41
10. Women Holding the Title of Department Chair
person at California Community Colleges,
Fall, 1974, by Area Classification........ 42
11. Women in Selected Job Classifications at
California Community Colleges, Fall, 1974 . 43
12. Women in Middle Management in California
Community Colleges, Fall, 1974, Shown by
Age Bracket and Entry into Middle
Management.................................. 44
XV
Table Page
13. Major Fields of Study for Master's and
Doctorate Degrees among Women in Middle
Management Positions in California
Community Colleges, Fall, 1974 ....... 45
14. Opportunities to Learn Administrative
Techniques Reported by Women in Middle
Management Positions at California Community
Colleges, Fall, 1974 ....................... 46
15. Teaching Experience of Women Respondents in
Middle Management Positions at California
Community Colleges, Fall, 1974............. 47
16. Mobility Related to Marital Status Reported by
Women in Middle Management Positions at
California Community Colleges, Fall, 1974 . 48
17. Mobility Related to Years Employed by an
Institution Reported by Women in Middle
Management Positions at California Community
Colleges, Fall, 1974 ....................... 50
18. Career Aspirations for 1980 and 1985 Reported
by Women in Middle Management Positions at
California Community Colleges, Fall, 1974 . 51
19. Comparison of Career Aspirations for 1980 and
1985 Reported by Women in Middle Management
Positions at California Community Colleges,
Fall, 1974 .................................. 52
20. Age Ranges of Women Reporting an Interest in
Higher Level Administration ............... 53
21. Highest Degree Held by Women Reporting an
Interest in Higher Level Administration . . 53
22. Mobility of Women Reporting an Interest in
Higher Level Administration ........ 54
V
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
I
I
Background of the Study
! In a study of administrators in California commu-
Inity colleges (Pfiffner, 1972), only 26 women were found in
j the top three administrative level positions on campuses
I throughout the state. Recent studies (Oltman, 1970;
i
! Robinson, 1971; McGannon, 1972 ; Sizemore, 1973; Taylor,
i
j1973) indicated that, nationwide, few women serve in
j administrative capacities in higher education. These
jreports were further verified in documents in Educational
I
j Resources Information Centers (ERIC) studies of four-year
college campuses during 1970-1972, when data were being
I collected as a basis for affirmative action plans.
I
California reports in this series included: California
State College at Fullerton (Bratfisch, 1970), Stanford
I University (Miner, 1971), University of California, Davis
I(Fisher, 1972), and University of California, Santa Cruz
j (University of California, Santa Cruz, Special Committee on
ithe Status of Women at UCSC, 1971).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to determine how many
qualified, experienced women were interested in and avail
able for instructional administrative positions in
California community colleges.
The following questions were considered in this
study:
1. How many qualified women existed currently in
California community colleges from which to select instruc
tional administrators?
2. What prior teaching and supervisory/management
experience did these women have which would prepare them
for higher level administrative positions?
3. Did the educational backgrounds of these women
give evidence towards securing degrees in a particular
discipline?
4. How many of these individuals had doctorates,
or were working towards the degree, or began a program and
discontinued it?
5. At what age did women assume positions in
middle management?
6. What were career aspirations of the women in
five and ten years?
7. Was geographical location of the community
colleges related to the number of women in middle-
I
: management positions in instruction?
1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A
8. Was there a relationship between mobility,
marital status, or length of service at the institution of
current employment?
9. Was size of enrollment on a campus related to
the number of women in middle-management in instruction?
10. What currently were the proportions of women in
middle-management in instruction, compared to total women
I faculty, and women board members?
I
i
I Importance of the Study
I Although there is a growing body of knowledge about
I
women in four-year colleges and universities, there is a
! paucity of information regarding women in community
I colleges. The only available published study of women in a
I community college (Metropolitan Junior College District,
I
I Kansas City, Missouri, 1972) showed a total of two women
j above the department chairman level in a district of three
I colleges.
This study sought to determine whether there was a
pool of women currently qualified and available for
instructional administrative positions in California
community colleges.
Assumptions
Two assumptions were basic to the investigation:
1. Affirmative action has created an intensity in
the academic setting for increased consideration of women
as administrators in higher education.
2. A trend toward seeking women for employment in
!
I higher education will continue.
I Delimitations of the Study
I
! The Pfiffner (1972) study showed only 4% of the
i
senior-level administrators in California community
j colleges were women. That study viewed only the top three
I
I administrative levels as shown on college organization
charts. This study is delimited to women in instruction at
I middle management levels, including those certificated
I positions noted in the definitions. The study is further
I
I delimited to the California community colleges. It
I excludes personnel in college district offices.
Definitions of Terms
Experienced. As used in this study, experienced
applies to those women who have had positions for one or
more years in academic middle management.
Middle management. For purposes of this study,
middle management is defined as those supervisory positions
in instruction below President/Superintendent, President,
Vice-President, Administrative Dean, and Dean, where
applicable. This would include such titles as department
chairperson, division chairperson, coordinator, director,
supervisory, assistant dean, associate dean, and head
librarian.
Qualified. Qualified refers to those individuals
having at least a master's degree. This is a minimal
educational requirement normally placed on administrative
I positions at community colleges.
I Organization of the Study
; Chapter I presented an overview of the problem.
j The importance of the study was stated, along with delimi-
!
I tations. Some important terms were defined. Chapter II
I reviewed the existing research related to the study.
I Studies of women in management, particularly in academic
I institutions, were presented. Primary attention was given
I to those studies appearing after 1970. Chapter III
I contained sources of data collected and described the
I questionnaire developed and procedures. Chapter IV
discussed the findings as they related to the questions.
Chapter V summarized the study and presented conclusions
and recommendations. Suggestions for further research were
included.
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Although the role of women in higher education is
accepted, the number of women on faculties within institu-
!tions of higher education has not quantitatively improved.
I In 1879 women represented 38% of total college faculties,
but in 1971-72, women held only 19% of full-time faculty
positions (Bernard, 1964; National Education Association,
1972). Variables such as lack of manpower after the Civil
War and the subsistence level of salaries have been used to
partially explain this differential; however, not once
since 1879 have women on college faculties reached 30%
(Bernard, 1964).
Education, often referred to as a "women's"
profession, cannot statistically be called so at adminis
trative levels. Although 89% of elementary teachers in
1973 were women, only 13.5% of elementary and secondary
school principals and 0.1% of the superintendents of school
districts were women (California School Boards, 1974;
Fishel, 1974). Central office sub-administrators (super
visors, curriculum consultants, etc.) included 35% women.
I School boards nationwide showed only 12% women as trustees.
At the same time, only one state, Montana, had a female as
head of a State Department of Education. However, the
! addition of Wisconsin, since Fishel's study, increased the
number to two out of the 50 states.
Federal educational agencies are also low in
I percentage for utilization of women. Although 54% of the
: Office of Education and 59% of the National Institute of
i
Education (NIE) are women, only 18% in the Office of
; Education and 23% in the NIE are in classifications of
IGS 13-15. The higher GS 16-18 levels include only 10%
I
; from the Office of Education and none from the Institute
I
I(Fishel, 1974). The GS scale indicates the federal civil
I service level of positions and pay rates. Clerical levels,
I in which the majority of these women hold positions, are
jprimarily below GS 13.
j
I Legal Issues
I
I
I A multitude of studies now available indicates that
I
I there is discrimination against women in higher education.
I
ERIC reported studies of women in 138 four-year institu
tions between 1970 and 1972. The studies showed women on a
j percentage basis to be not represented at all, or slightly
!
i represented in numbers of instructional staff, department
jchairmen, academic deans, and administrators. When found,
I women were most often deans of women, or chairmen of home
j
I economics, nursing, or women's physical education depart-
i ments. A composite study of 54 of these reports confirmed
I , '
jthe individual campus findings (Robinson, 1971).
L .
The individual campus investigations were made as
an initial step in establishing affirmative action policies
as required by the federal government under Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act (Carnegie Commission, 1973). Both the
American Association of University Women (AAUW) (1971) and
the American Association of University Professors (AAUP)
(1973) formally issued recommendations for objectives to be
reached in changing the small representation of women.
Robinson (1971), in a review of the status of academic
women, showed the largest number and percentage of women at
I the lowest academic rank of instructor. Arter (1972), in
I her survey of the status of women administrators at state
I universities and land-grant colleges, found that chief
executive officers of these institutions were in favor of
; hiring women in senior-level positions, but that very few
I women actually held these positions.
j
I The myriad of studies on the status of women in
i
; higher education has been brought about by, among other
things, requirements of the Department of Health, Education
i and Welfare, which came as a result of several legal
I
I provisions.
The Equal Pay Act of 1963 provided that individuals
should receive equal pay for equal work regardless of their
sex or race. Four qualifications had to be met before a
position became eligible under its provisions: (1) both
men and women must work in the same establishment; (2) jobs
8
must require equal skill, equal effort, and equal responsi
bility; (3) jobs must be performed under similar working
conditions; and (4) the work itself must be equal (Ross,
1973). This law has been useful for business and industry
in helping to end discrimination, but its provisions have
I
I been difficult to meet. Many individuals the law was meant
! to assist, do not meet all four qualifications.
The following year the Civil Rights Act of 1964
I was enacted. Title VII, as amended in 1972, prohibited
i discrimination in employment, including hiring, upgrading,
I salaries, fringe benefits, training, and other conditions
I of employment, on the basis of race, color, religion,
I national origin, or sex. This included all institutions
I with 15 or more employees (Carnegie Commission, 1973).
Title VII has been particularly useful to women because of
three fundamental concepts : (a) availability of opinions
based upon "class" effects rather than for one single case,
inasmuch as employment practices in education affect
thousands of women in similar types of situations ; (b) sex
segregation as a basis for discrimination and easier to
prove than equal pay for equal work; and (c) provision for
action on "neutral rule doctrines"--conditions of employ
ment which appear facially neutral, but which in fact
adversely affect employment opportunities of women or
minorities.
In 1968, President Johnson signed Executive Order
11246 which forbade any institution with a federal contract
over $10,000 to discriminate, as stated in Title VII.
' President Nixon modified these orders with Executive Order
I
j
■ 11375 which forbade discrimination in employment within the
! federal governmental agencies (Ross, 1973).
Title VII and Title VIII of the Public Health
!
: Service Act prohibited discrimination in admission of
' students on the basis of sex, and Title IX of the Higher
I Education Act (1972 Amendments) declared that;
I No person in the United States shall, on the basis
I of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied
I the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
I under any education program or activity receiving
i federal financial assistance. (Buek, 1973)
i
I This included both students and employees. The Education
j Amendments of 1972 also included an amendment to the Equal
I Pay Act of 1963. This act covered teachers and other
I professional personnel in educational institutions at all
levels. Mere differences in position titles were not to be
considered a sufficient reason to deny equal pay.
Women Faculty in Four-Year Institutions
The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (1973)
reported women in 1971-72 represented 46% of all under
graduate and 37% of all graduate students in higher
education, but only 27% of the faculty members. The same
number was reported in 1959-60 by Bernard (1964). These
represented decreases in all academic ranks, except
10
1 instructor, which increased during that time from 29% to
I 39%. In charting the century 1869-1969, the relative
iposition of women has not improved to any great degree.
! From a low of 12% in 1869, the percentage of women on
; college faculties reached a high of 38% in 1879, but
jdecreased to 20% in 1969. These figures included women's
I
; colleges which normally have a larger number of women
I faculty members.
I The Carnegie Commission study, as do most other
jstudies, attributed discrimination to initial decisions
j within departments and schools doing the actual recruitment
I
I and selection of staff and initiate recommendations for
j salary, tenure, and promotion. Throughout higher educa-
I tion, the problem of promotion for women is one of greater
difficulty than that of being originally selected, as
evidenced by the fact that few women are appointed to full
I
professorial positions. The Carnegie Commission survey of
I 1969 showed a range of no women professors in engineering
to 29% in liberal arts and two-year colleges. The range in
i research universities was none and 15% in the same subject
I fields (Carnegie Commission, 1973, pp. 200-201).
I In analyzing data for the Carnegie Commission
jreport, the investigators indicated that married women have
I less bargaining power than men for promotions because they
I
I are less mobile, are secondary wage earners, and the feel-
!ing by some women that reaching a salary or career status
!
i 11
superior to their husbands is to be avoided. It is signif
icant, however, that two-thirds of the faculty women
throughout the country are single and would appear to be
immune to these problems (Gardner, 1966).
In summarizing the findings concerning faculty
women, the Carnegie Commission report stated:
To sum up, then, discrimination tends to occur at
the department level, but college and university
administrations have been guilty of indifference
to the problem. Departments have not been asked
whether they passed over qualified female candi
dates in appointments and promotions or whether
their recruitment procedures included special
efforts to search for qualified women. Now, under
pressure from the federal government and from
women's committees, institutions are developing
affirmative action policies that embody intensive
scrutiny of departmental procedures, but progress
in developing and implementing these policies is
frequently very slow [p. 122].
Women Administrators in Higher Education
In a survey of presidents of the 750 colleges and
universities which hold institutional membership in the
American Association of University Women (AAUW, 1971), it
was reported that 11% of the presidents were women : 3% in
public institutions and 8% in private, parochial, or women's
colleges. The largest percentage of women administrators
were chief librarians (35%); varied administrative roles in
student personnel accounted for 20-25%; and 18% were
academic deans. The report further commented on this
phenomenon :
I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ^
The position of women in administration is similar
to that of women students--they are working at
jobs requiring skills and attention to detail, but
without much relationship to policy-making or
influence. Generally they are in positions at
middle management level or which involve sex stere
otypes, such as Dean of Nursing [p. 151].
Ninety percent of the respondents said promotional policies
were the same for men and women faculty, but showed little
■ evidence of this. The average number of women department
! heads was 2.6 per college, primarily in home economics,
women's physical education, English, languages, nursing,
and education.
A more recent study of women in administration in
state universities and land-grant colleges (Arter, 1972)
showed a ratio of male to female faculty as 5:1. Over 50%
of the institutions had no women in top level administra
tion, although 93% said they would consider women for these
positions. Both male chief administrators and women admin
istrators agreed that women are not promoted as readily as
men. Both groups considered the proportion of women in
administration to women students as "unfavorable."
Women in Community Colleges
Few published reports are available concerning
women as faculty members or administrators in community
colleges. In 1972 the Metropolitan Junior College District
of Kansas City, Missouri (Alfred, 1972) studied women
students, faculty members, classified staff, and
13
administrators. The study found that 34% of the faculty
were women. This was slightly higher than the average for
the country as a whole which was 31.2% in 1971-72 (Carnegie
Commission, 1973). During the eight years prior to the
Kansas City report, administrative positions in that
district had increased from nine to 33 persons. Only two
; of these positions were filled by women. In the year of
j the study, eight women held administrative positions, with
I six of these at the lowest administrative level--department
chairman. This report suggested that the causative factors
for this low representation were that: few qualified women
were available ; women did not have individual motivation to
pursue an administrative career; women either could not, or
!
; would not, assume duplicate family and career responsibili-
j ties ; and noted there was a lack of in-service training for
j administrative career opportunities. The report also
j
I briefly addressed itself to the possibility that women did
not have the characteristics for success in administration:
I
I Although the argument could be advanced that few
women possess the characteristics that determine
academic and professional success--academic degree,
actual experience in administration, research inter
ests, success in publication, individual motivation,
and occupational mobility--it is apparent that early
childhood socialization for "traditional" sex roles
has severed women from the opportunity to enculturate
desirable characteristics for individual achievement
[p. 31].
More recently, 1973-74 new hiring of full-time
faculty in California community colleges (Faculty Associa-
j tion of California Community Colleges Bulletin, November,
I_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 4
1974) showed that out of 732 new faculty, 45% were female.
For that same year the Office of the Chancellor, California
Community Colleges (1973) reported 28,5%, total women on
faculties as compared to 28% in 1971-72 (Pfiffner, 1972).
The increase of 0.5% bears out the findings of the Carnegie
Commission on Higher Education (1973) that if the new staff
in community colleges had been 100% women since 1970, women
I would be 50% of the faculties by 1975-76, but that even
I with new hirings at 50%, the percentage of total women
i faculty would reach only 38% by 1990.
' In a study of senior-level administrative positions
in California community colleges, Pfiffner (1972) reported
I that 4% of the positions at the top three administrative
, levels on college organizational charts were held by women.
I Two years later, the Office of the Chancellor reported
I 14.7% women in administrative positions. The Chancellor's
report included positions at all administrative levels,
I
I including department chairmen.
I Of the 26 women in senior-level administrative
I positions, Pfiffner showed two at a first level; eight at a
I second level (vice-president, administrative dean, or
dean); and 16 at a third level (dean, associate, or
assistant). Pfiffner indicated a relationship between the
number of women and the geographical location and size of
the colleges. Twenty-two of the 26 women were located in
institutions south of a line drawn through Fresno, and in
large metropolitan colleges.
Women in Graduate Education
A question often asked is whether women are educa
tionally prepared for faculty and administrative positions
in higher education. For this type of information it is
necessary to look at graduate educational opportunities
available to women.
In an analysis of the Carnegie Commission Survey of
Faculty and Student Opinion of 1969, Holmstrom (1973) found
that substantial proportions of graduate students agreed
! with the statement that "professors in my department don’t
I really take female graduate students seriously." Forty
i percent of the students in biological and physical sciences
I felt this to be true, as did 35% of the students in social
: science and humanities. Faculty responding to the state-
I ment, "The female graduate students in my department are
; not as dedicated as the males," ran from a high of 38% in
I
; the sciences to a low of 18% in education.
I
! The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (1973)
found that 40% of the master's degrees were awarded to
women in 1930 ; the percentage dropped to 38% by 1950, and
took two decades to rise again to 40%. There has been a
substantial increase in the percentage of women receiving
I master's degrees in the scientific areas (see Table 1).
j Fifteen percent of all doctorates were awarded to
I women in 1930, 8% in 1950, and 13% in 1970 (Carnegie
iCommission, 1973) (see Table 2).
L_____________________________________________________________________
TABLE 1
PERCENTAGE OF MASTER' S DEGREES AWARDED TO WOMEN,
COMPARING 1950 AND 1970 POPULATIONS
Subject Field 1950 1970 Increase
Agriculture 1. 6. 5.
Engineering 0.5 1. 0.5
Chemistry 13. 22. 9.
Mathematics 21. 30. 9.
Physics 4. 6. 2.
Health Sciences 6. 28. 22.
Biological Sciences 22. 32. 10.
TABLE 2
PERCENTAGE OF Ph.D. DEGREES AWARDED TO WOMEN,
COMPARING 1950 AND 1970 POPULATIONS
Subject Field 1950 1970 Increase
Mathematics 6. 7. 1.
Social Sciences 10. 16. 6.
English 18. 30. 12.
Arts and Humanities 18. 28. 10.
Education 15. 20. 5.
Physical Sciences 6. 10. 4.
Engineering 0.5 1. 0.5
Life Sciences 18. 28. 10.
Economics and Statistics 10. 12. 2.
...... _ ................. 17
There has been an increase in the number of doctor
ates received by women. However, Heiss (1970) found in her
interviews with presidents, chancellors, and faculty
members of 10 graduate schools that sex was probably the
most discriminatory factor applied in the decision whether
to admit an applicant to graduate school. During these
interviews several department chairmen volunteered the
information that women are purposely screened out as Ph.D.
candidates and as faculty members. One department chairman
was very concerned that because of the financial necessity
of filling all the doctoral student positions and the lack
of qualified male applicants which caused 25% of the group
to be female, his department would suffer a loss in
I prestige.
I The Carnegie Commission had several recommendations
; regarding the logistics of tearing down discriminatory
! walls of graduate education, but one in particular seems
I important inasmuch as the problem is mentioned in many
I studies--that of changing attitudes. They recommended:
I Positive attitudes on the part of faculty members
I toward the serious pursuit of graduate study and
I research by women are greatly needed. College and
I university administrations should assume responsi-
! bility for adoption of policies that will encourage
I positive, rather than negative, attitudes of faculty
! members in all fields [p. 107].
18
Attitudinal Barriers
In a review of literature and from correspondence
with the authors of the books and articles. La Puma (1972)
I found that traditional attitudes toward women still exist;
j that colleges and universities do not provide women with
; the same opportunities as men; that the academic market
place was determined partially by sex; and, based on the
I letters, women were less qualified and less committed to
academic careers.
The attitudinal problem seems to encompass most of
the educational field. In a study of teachers, administra
tors, and board of education presidents in Cook County,
Illinois (Matheny, 1973), most of the respondents thought
that men are not necessarily better suited temperamentally
to be administrators; that women must work harder to get
positions; that boards of education would hire male super
intendents; that women do not receive adequate counseling
I by colleges; that the community would accept women as
I administrators ; and that women must work harder to get
promoted. The majority of males indicated they would
I prefer to have a male supervisor ; the majority of women saw
I
: a sex bias in appointments. The same percentage of males
I
I and females aspired to administrative positions, but the
I women thought that their chances of achieving such a
i
i position were slight.
i Petit's (1972) survey of deans, vice-presidents,
I 19
and faculty women In higher education in six northwestern
states revealed that the respondents thought that women
were less mobile than men, that women should learn to
broaden their career interests, and that women should be
I
I more competitive and not accept subordination.
Cobbley (1970), in a study of attitudes toward
women as elementary principals in six western states, found
! that positive attitudes existed on the part of staff and
; community toward women's ability to administer success-
! fully. Less than 5% of the sample indicated an interest in
I becoming an administrator. This corresponded with the
negative attitudes expressed by women regarding their
iopportunities for a principalship.
A study of male attitudes toward women's role as it
I
t relates to male self-esteem was conducted by Miller (1973) .
I The participants were in small, private, predominantly male
; institutions in the northeastern part of the country. He
' found a direct relationship of negative attitudes toward
women's role and low levels of self-esteem on the part of
; the respondents. Some fear of women was expressed by those
i
, students who were not sure of themselves and their role in
I
i society.
I
I Trow (1972) supported the thesis that attitudes are
I the heart of the dilemma facing women. He added a new
I dimension to the problem; the fact that it was not only
I attitudes of men, but of women themselves, which were
20
holding back the acceptance of women in predominantly male
careers.
Hahn (1970) agreed with Farmer and Bohn (1970),
saying that women must change their own attitudes as well
as society's if they are to take advantage of their full
jopportunities. At a symposium on the proposed Equal Rights
I constitutional amendment (Cavanaugh, 1971) , it was indi-
Icated that:
I A weak sense of self is consistent with the woman's
I perception that the culture devalues her. Not only
I the male culture, but women themselves, devalue
j whatever women do [p. 274] .
I During the symposium it was pointed out that women have the
!
! same caste-like status as "traditional" negroes: a high
: social visibility, supposedly inferior intelligence, more
I
^ emotions (childlike), is all right in her place, is myth-
i ically contented, can outwit "white folks" (feminine
I
,wiles), helpless, deferential manner, limited education,
'confined to traditional jobs, barred from supervisory
! positions, no precedent for aspirations, social and profes
sional segregation, and vulnerable to criticism. These
factors all contribute to the psychological and sociolog
ical barriers women have in regard to their opportunities
and capabilities. This is expressed by Horner (1969) in a
study of test-anxiety in which women consistently get
higher test-anxiety scores than men. She concluded:
In recent years many legal and educational barriers
to female achievement have been removed; but it is
clear that a psychological barrier remains. The
21
motive to avoid success has an all-too-important
influence on the intellectual and professional lives
of women in our society [p. 36].
In a further study of this topic (Horner, 1970), she indi
cated that anxieties, such as fear of loss of femininity and
self-esteem, can be provoked in a woman at the very antici
pation of success over a male. She determined that this
j fear of success inhibits positive achievement and motiva-
1 tion, resulting in actual avoidance of success on the part
! of many women.
! Another conflict which causes psychological prob-
I lems is that of home versus career. Farmer and Bohn (1970)
I
j measured the effects of home-career conflict on the level
I of women's vocational interests and were convinced that
I motivational interest in careers would be raised if this
I conflict were reduced. In agreement with Farmer, LaBarthe
I (1973) found that a woman's felt responsibility for chil-
i
I dren and family was a major obstacle to overcome if she
I were to have equal access to work. In her study of women
I in administrative and supervisory positions in unified
I
districts in Southern California, she also found that sex-
labeling of jobs and prejudice against women in the world
of work were major problems.
Time (February 18, 1974) commented on the fact that
although 40% of the work force is female, only 2% are
managers earning over $25,000. In trying to determine why
this is the case, discrimination was suggested, but also
22
woman's passivity and misunderstanding. Men assume that
women are more interested in marriage or children than in
careers ; while women assume they must be super-efficient if
they are to survive in the managerial ranks. For this
reason, many women specialize in one area, but are afraid
to branch out into areas which might gain them access to
more responsible positions. The author suggested that
women should be womanly, but demanding more responsibility.
A final point in the article was one considered important
by sociologists; that women have no support system such as
the locker room or lunch. This is what sociologist Jessie
Bernard calls the "stag effect," a phenomenon that limits
not only her participation in professional gossip, but also
i
her access to ideas (Freivogel, 1973).
I
I Leadership Ability
j Jeanne and Herbert Greenberg (Los Angeles Times.
I September 4, 1974) reviewed their evaluations of 300,000
I
: company personnel in a dozen industries. They concluded
that age, race, sex, education, and previous experience
were simply not realistic as criteria to predict success.
Their findings relating to sex indicate that:
These [findings] clearly destroy many of the myths
relating to sex difference in effective work poten
tial. If anything, contrary to common belief,
females often are more assertive than males. They
are at least as reliable, somewhat less complacent ;
and somewhat more sociable. Women are a bit more
impulsive than men, and certainly do not trail men
in their energy level or willingness to work.
23
Perhaps surprisingly, the female group demonstrates
somewhat better leadership ability, and has a much
higher percentage of good decision-makers and dele
gators than does the male group [p. 26].
In the field of education, the number of female
administrators appears to be dwindling each year. Johnson
(1972) reported that women administrators decreased 16%
from 1958 to 1969, and has continued at the rate of 2% per
year.
The November, 1974 issue of California School
Boards was devoted entirely to all aspects of sexism in the
schools. Investigators reported that 89% of the elementary
j teachers were women, while only 18% of the elementary
I principals were women, despite the fact that studies over
I the past 15 years have shown that male principals are not
I superior to female principals in educational leadership,
i A number of studies (Grobman, 1956; Hemphill, 1962 ; Gross,
I 1965 ; Saunder, 1971; Van Meir, 1971; Kobayaski, 1974) show
; that women were rated higher on knowledge of teaching
methods and techniques; were more concerned with teaching,
I
I pupil participation, and evaluation of learning ; were more
i concerned with teacher and pupil personnel problems, with
I
I staff relationships, with objectives, instruction, curricu-
j lum planning, and evaluation of teachers. Both males and
; females were somewhat negative toward male principals, and
I generally positive toward female principals, if they had
jworked under their supervision.
i
' Taylor's (1971) doctoral study confirmed the fact
! 24
i that men are preferred to women in educational leadership.
! Half of the school systems she studied did not encourage
women to train or apply for administrative positions. Her
I
data showed that the only factor which appeared to have any
I significance on the hiring process was that of sex. Other
I variables--age, type of position, length of experience,
j size of district--had no valid correlation with hiring
practices.
What of the woman who is an administrator? What
are her problems? Freivogel (1973) delineates:
Her rank and salary may be her most visible job
disadvantages, but her isolation from the sources of
information and influence in her department and pro
fession affect her more profoundly. Though she will
do her share of committee work and belong to at
I least one professional society, she is cut off,
! largely because she is a woman, from the camaraderie
' of male professionals--lunch, drinks, vocabulary
included--a situation less a result of overt discrim-
I ination than of deep societal attitudes toward women
I as strangers. As a result, she is denied much of the
I professional information which comprises the conver-
I sation of her colleagues [p. 186].
I
i
i Women in Management
I
I .... .......
; Clare Boothe Luce (Saturday Review/World. August
: 24, 1974) reviewed the case of women in management between
j 1963 and 1973. She found that bank presidents had been
I reduced from 168 to 40; bank vice-presidents from 688 to
I 400 ; that there was only one woman on the Stock Exchange ;
I
I of the self-made cosmetic businesswomen, only one remained;
I and that there were only three top women publishers of
25
major newspapers, all of whom had inherited their posi
tions. Her analysis showed that women now have many jobs
in which they sit apart and analyze, identify, and solve
business, industrial, political, and scientific problems,
I but that they are still not receiving jobs with upward
j mobility in line management. She attributed this fact to
I the age-old concept that women should not boss men, but
stated:
Today it is certain that the centuries-old underly
ing culture of male supremacy no longer serve man's
best interests, if for no other reason than that
the political and economic arithmetic of sex dis
crimination, like the arithmetic of slavery, is
increasingly written in red ink. And although the
majority of men are not yet themselves aware of it,
there are many evidences that the superior male-
inferior female relationship is no longer serving
their psychological needs [p. 62].
Among the many who declare that women have to be
I twice as good to be successful in the work world. Bird and
I Briller (1968) also deplored the fact that women are paid
less, "protected" from promotion, and discouraged from
! entering "male" careers. Freivogel (1973) points out that
I
I
' a status study of women in academic professions showed that
I
I eight out of 10 women did not once interrupt their careers
j
I for any reason, including childbirth. In refuting the myth
of women as unstable faculty members, she questioned
whether male career patterns were the only legitimate ones.
Loring and Wells (1972) discussed managerial
climate as it affected the female manager. In their
perception, the entire managerial climate was male-valued,
26
paternalistic, and exploitive, where the male is the
standard model for comparison.
A seminar on women and the psychology of management
at Rosary Hill College (1970) concluded that the largest
problem of women in management is that men see all women
as the same. Because of this, women should insist that
only the results of their work be used as a criterion to
! move into management.
I The American Management Association published a
study by Lunch (1973), which reported "myths" surrounding
women in management. They identified 11 "myths" which were
; common beliefs of males:
1 1. Women can't take heavy responsibility
’ 2, Women cry too much; they are too emotional
; 3. Women ask for special privileges
4. Women are terrible bosses and men don’t like to
work for them
5. Women are terrible bosses and other women don't
like to work for them
6. Women can't get along with their peers--
especially men
7. Management women have lost their femininity
8. Women use dirtier tactics than men to climb up
the ladder
9. Women can't do two jobs well--either career or
home must suffer
10. Women returning to the job market are unskilled
11. Young women can't take management jobs because
they will move with their executive husbands
[pp. 16-30].
The study concluded that :
Most negative conceptions of women managers, then,
are really just myths. They effectively keep vast
numbers of women out of top-level jobs despite the
fact that they simply don't apply to modern women
in today's fast-paced management world [p. 31].
Killian (1971) spoke of the waste of human
27
resources when he indicated that:
Management must recruit, supervise, and utilize the
womanpower that is available today. The longer
management delays in getting its house in order and
providing realistic equality for women, the more
needless time and valuable potential will be wasted
[p. 175].
I Summary
I
I
The review of the literature since 1970 showed an
ever-increasing number of studies about women in higher
j education, the majority being data collected as a basis
; for legally required affirmative action plans. Statistics
: on the current status of women in both public schools and
I higher education showed women as being extensively employed
in the lower professional ranks and rarely in senior admin-
I
' istrative positions. The percentage of female public
!
] school administrators has steadily declined since the
‘ 1920’s.
' Legally, executive orders and civil rights legisla-
1 tion established a means to change this pattern of employ-
' ment ; however, studies showed that the greatest barriers to
!
I employment and promotion were not legal, but sociological
and psychological in nature. Attitudes of students were
largely positive toward women faculty. Problems were
apparent at the "grass roots" department level where
selection and promotion of women has not readily been
accepted. College and university administrators favored
I more women in administrative positions, but were still
L ________________________________ 2^
questioning women’s leadership ability despite numerous
studies showing their competency in this area. Women
administrators were found primarily in parochial or women’s
colleges, or in large colleges and universities in so-
I called "women’s’ ’ positions such as deans of women or as
department chairmen of women’s physical education, allied
health, library, or social work departments.
i
! In community colleges women composed one-fourth to
I one-third of the faculty, but held few senior-level admin
istrative positions.
Finally, a brief review of women in management
showed little difference in the status quo or in opportuni
ties for women in business than in education.
29
CHAPTER III
PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGY
This survey of women in middle management in
instruction in California community colleges followed the
procedures outlined in the following sub-divisions: (1)
sources of data, (2) development of the questionnaire, and
(3) treatment of the data.
Sources of Data
Primary sources for the literature referred to in
I this study were books, documents, and dissertations found
I
! through library catalogs, periodical indices. Dissertation
'Abstracts. and Research in Education, the index to docu
ments available through the Educational Resources Informa-
I tion Center of the United States Office of Education
I
; (ERIC). Additional resources included popular media
publications, newsletters of women's activities, and book
I stores with collections of materials related to women.
i
The 1975 Community and Junior College Directory was
searched to obtain student enrollments in California
community colleges and the numbers of women faculty
members, both in California and nationwide. The Fall 1974
Racial and Ethnic Survey of the Office of the Chancellor,
30
California Community Colleges, provided information regard
ing numbers of women in administrative positions.
Letters were written to chief state officers of
community college systems in Florida, Illinois, Michigan,
New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Virginia, and Washington
I
! requesting information regarding the numbers and/or per-
! centage of administrators who were female. Data collection
! systems in these states were either nonexistent or so
' varied in approach that the data were not usable. j
I A list of women in middle management in instruction
: was compiled by searching the faculty and administrative
I sections of the 1974 catalogs of the California community
I colleges. For those institutions which did not make these
1 designations in their catalogs, information was obtained
1 from their instruction offices by telephone or by mail.
I For purposes of comparing this study with that of
j Pfiffner (1972), those colleges north of Fresno were
i
I considered in northern California and all others considered
I in southern California.
I
i
I Development of the Questionnaire
Questions used by Gardner (1966) and Arter (1972)
in their doctoral studies of career patterns of women
administrators in higher education in Illinois, and in
state universities and land grant colleges, were studied
I
for relevance to this study. In addition, the interview
I
I 31
guide used by Pfiffner (1972) with women administrators in
California community colleges was reviewed.
After the questionnaire was developed, it was
critiqued by the members of the doctoral committee and
validated by males in middle management in instruction at
two community colleges. Antelope Valley and Moorpark.
Males were used because the survey instrument was to be
sent to the total available sample. A copy of the ques
tionnaire is included in the Appendix.
Treatment of the Data
Information from the questionnaires was collated
into usable form for quantitative and descriptive analysis,
Variations in terminology used by respondents were consid
ered and combined where similarities existed, except in
cases where meaning could be affected.
Response to the Survey
Following a survey of research studies relating to
women administrators in higher education, the development
of a survey instrument and a pilot study, questionnaires
were mailed to 288 women in 99 California community
colleges. Replies were received from 214 women (74.6% of
the population). Data collected were analyzed and were
presented in Chapter IV of the investigation.
32
CHAPTER IV
I
I
I
‘ THE FINDINGS
I
I The survey instrument was mailed to 288 women in
; middle management positions in instruction on the 99
; campuses of the California community colleges. This con-
I stituted the total sample available. Usable responses
I were received from 215 persons on 86 campuses, a 74.6%
response. Thirteen colleges had no women in the positions
being surveyed. The data were collected in six parts:
! (1) present position, (2) educational background, (3)
j experience, (4) future career aspirations, (5) mobility,
!
j and (6) personal data.
I
I Chapter IV includes the tabulated results of the
survey instrument and the implications related to specific
I questions posed in Chapter I.
The first part of this chapter is concerned with
data obtained from all 215 respondents. The second part
I presents information about those women whose career aspira-
I tions indicated a desire to attain positions at one or more
of the top three levels of administration in community
I colleges by 1980.
33
Distribution of Women
The Fall 1974 Racial and Ethnic Survey, an unpub
lished report presented by the Office of the Chancellor,
California Community Colleges, to the Boards of Trustees,
California Community Colleges, in June, 1975, indicated
that the 70 community college districts had 186 women in
administrative positions. In this report, administrators
were defined as "Staff of the College who determine
executive polity [p. 16]." Some colleges interpreted this
to include department and division heads. Table 3 shows
the comparison of the percentage of women in all areas of
California community colleges.
TABLE 3
FALL 1974 DISTRIBUTION OF WOMEN IN CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES BY CATEGORY
Category of Position
Women Men
Number Percent Number Percent
Classified Staff^ 7,146 58.6 5,044 41.4
Students (total)^ 369,875 46.3 428,682 53.7
Students (full time)^ 117,846 40.2 175,224 59.8
Faculty^ 9,604 31.0 21,386 69.0
Middle Management
Personnel in
Instruction^) 288 17.8 1,333 82.2
Administrators^ 186 14.2 1,126 85.8
^Office of the Chancellor, California Community Colleges
1974-75 College Catalogs 34
The highest percentage of women was among classi
fied staff. Women represented 17.8% of the positions in
middle management in instruction. The number of women
reported in administrative positions and those in middle
management in instruction overlaps at the lowest level
administrative positions, because of reporting procedures
(see Table 3).
According to Geographical Location
Women in middle management in instruction were
distributed, as is the total population of California
(California Information Almanac. 1973), approximately one-
I third north of Fresno and two-thirds in southern
i California. In the positions studied, northern California
; had 101 women and southern California had 187 women (see
i Figure 1). The number of colleges was more evenly
: distributed: 43 in the north and 56 in the south. Thus,
1 although 43.4% of the colleges were located north of
i Fresno, only 35% of the women in middle management were in
I northern California community colleges.
I
According to Size of College
Pfiffner (1972) found that the number of women in
top-level management increased as enrollment increased.
This was also true of women in middle management. The
average number of women in middle management assignments
; increased from an average of one position per college with
35
Fig. 1. Geographical Distribution of Women in
Middle Management in California Community Colleges,
Fall, 1974.
36
full-time enrollment less than 1,000, to nine per college
with 9,000 to 10,000 full-time enrollment. The statewide
average, regardless of size of enrollment, was 2.91 women
per campus (see Table 4).
TABLE 4
I WOMEN IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT IN INSTRUCTION COMPARED
! TO CATEGORIES OF FULL-TIME ENROLLMENT
Full-Time Number of Colleges Number of Average peri
Enrollment No. Calif. So. Calif. Women College I
Under 1,000 8 9 17 1.0
1,001-2,000 8 8 41 2.6
2,001-3,000 8 7 41 2.7
3,001-4,000 4 7 33 3,0
4,001-5,000 8 8 43 2.6
5,001-6,000 3 6 36 4.0
6,001-7,000 2 6 37 4.6
7,001-8,000 1 5 31 5.1
8,001-9,000 0 0 0 0.0
9,001-10,000 __1 __g 9 9.0
Total 43 56 288 2.91
37
Current Positions Held by Women in
Middle Management in Instruction
in California Community Colleges
In specialized subject areas, health occupations
had 63 women in middle management positions at five levels.
This total represented 29.3% of the respondents. The field
of library/learning resources had 20 respondents at six
levels, or 9.3% of the total. No other subject area was
represented in more than two categories. Tables 5 to 10
indicate, by subject field, the number of women in each
title category.
TABLE 5
WOMEN HOLDING THE TITLE OF ASSOCIATE DEAN AT CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974, BY AREA CLASSIFICATION
Area
Number
(N=9)
Instruction 4
Learning Resources 2
Arts and Sciences 1
Evening College 1
Academic Administration 1
38
TABLE 6
WOMEN HOLDING THE TITLE OF ASSISTANT DEAN AT CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974, BY AREA CLASSIFICATION
Area
Number
(N=9)
Learning Resources 4
Instruction 3
Evening and Summer 1
Health Occupations 1
TABLE 7
WOMEN HOLDING THE TITLE OF DIRECTOR AT CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY
COLLEGES, FALL, 1974, BY AREA CLASSIFICATION
Area
Number
(N=30)
Health Occupations 20
Learning Resources 6
Educational Development 1
Independent Learning Center 1
Continuing Education 1
Community Campus 1
39
.. .. .... .
TABLE 8
WOMEN HOLDING THE TITLE OF COORDINATOR AT
COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974,
BY AREA CLASSIFICATION
CALIFORNIA
Area
Number
(N=26)
Learning Resources 6
Health Occupations 5
Cooperative Work Experience 3
Special Programs/Projects 2
College of Arts and Sciences 1
Bilingual Center 1
Early Childhood 1
Curriculum Development 1
Women's Studies 1
Off Campus Satellites 1
Saturday College
1
Community Services 1
Adult, Parent Education, and Home Arts 1
Occupational Programs
.
1
40
..... ....... . _ ......... ...................
TABLE 9
WOMEN HOLDING THE TITLE OF DIVISION CHAIRPERSON AT
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974,
BY AREA CLASSIFICATION
Area
Number
(N=45)
Health Occupations 13
Business 6
Humanities 5
Life Sciences 3
English 3
Library 2
Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 2
Science, Mathematics, and Engineering 2
Home Economics 2
Women's Studies 1
Communications 1
Ethnic Studies 1
Physical Science 1
Foreign Language 1
Fine Arts 1
No Area Listed 1
.i
TABLE 10
WOMEN HOLDING THE TITLE OF DEPARTMENT CHAIRPERSON AT
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974,
BY AREA CLASSIFICATION
i
Area
Number
(N=95)
i Health Occupations
Home Economics, Consumer Education,
24
Early Childhood 16
Women's Studies 8
English 8
Behavioral Sciences 6
Business 5
Humanities 4
Speech 3
Health, Physical Education, and Recreation 3
Life Sciences
■
2
Mathematics 2
Air Transportation 2
Art, Bilingual Education, Black Studies, 1 each
Fashion Merchandising, Foreign Language,
Library, Human Services, Music, Physics/
Engineering, Reading/Study Skills,
Visual Arts, Work Experience
(Total=12)
42
One woman in cosmetology was at the supervisor
level. The majority of women were department and division
chairpersons.
A recapitulation of Tables 5 through 10 shows the
number of women in each job category (see Table 11).
TABLE 11
WOMEN IN SELECTED JOB CLASSIFICATIONS AT CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
Title
Number of Women
(N=215)
Percent of
Total Women
Department Chairperson 95 44.2
Division Chairperson 45 21.0
Director 30 14.0
Coordinator 26 12.1
Assistant Dean 9 4.1
Associate Dean 9 4.1
Supervisor 1 0.5
Personal Data
The women in this study had an age range of 35
years. The majority of women (53.5%) were in the 40-54 age
bracket. The age range at which they achieved their first
middle management position was in the 30-45 age bracket.
Of the 215 women responding, 89 were single, 113
were married, and 13 did not respond (see Table 12).
43
TABLE 12
WOMEN IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT IN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY
COLLEGES, FALL, 1974, SHOWN BY AGE BRACKET
AND ENTRY INTO MIDDLE MANAGEMENT
Age
Bracket
Number
of
Women
(N=215)
Percent
of Total
Women
At First
Mid-Mgmt
Position
(N=215)
Percent
of Total
Women
Under 30 2 0.9 18 8.4
30-34 16 7.4 35 16.3
35-39 23 10.7 24 11.2
40-44 33 15.4 39 18.1
45-49 44 20.5 27 12.6
50-54 39 18.1 13 6.0
55-59 26 12.1 2 0.9
60 and Over 22 10.2 1 0.5
No Response 10 4.7 56 26.0
Educational Background
Of the 215 women responding, 167 had master's
degrees, and 23 had doctorate degrees. Master's degrees
included 17% in the health occupations, 14.6% in education,
112.5% in English/Literature, and 11.8% each in social
[Sciences and library science. At the doctoral level,
I
seven women had degrees in education, four had degrees in
the social sciences and English/Literature, and three in
foreign languages and sciences (see Table 13).
44
TABLE 13
MAJOR FIELDS OF STUDY FOR MASTER'S AND DOCTORATE DEGREES
AMONG WOMEN IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS IN CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
i
Master's Degree^ Doctorate Degree
(Subject Field
i
Number
(N=190)
Percent Number
(N=23)
Percent
1
Education 35 18.4 7 30.4
Health Occupations 28 14.7 1 4.4
Library Science 17 8.9 0 0.0
i
English/Literature 14 7.4 4 17.5
Social Sciences 12 6.3 4 17.5
(Science/Mathematics 9 4.7 2 8.7
Business 7 3.7 1 5.5
Fine Arts 7 3.7 0 0.0
! Foreign Languages 6 3.2 3 13.1
I c h i l d Development 5 2.6 0 0.0
Home Economics 4 2.1 0 0.0
Health, Physical
Education, and
Recreation 2
1.1 0 0.0
Miscellaneous 4 2.1 1 4.4
No Major Listed 4 2.1 0 0.0
^Multiple responses were possible in reporting.
Twelve of the respondents reported that they were
'currently enrolled in doctoral programs and expected to
complete this degree no later than 1980. Twenty-five
45
^indicated their highest degrees were less than the master’s
I
I level.
Management Training
Training in some supervisory/management techniques
had been received on the campus by 72.3% of the respon
dents: 48.8% on-the-job and 23.5% through on-campus
seminars (see Table 14).
TABLE 14
OPPORTUNITIES TO LEARN ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNIQUES REPORTED
BY WOMEN IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS AT CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
Opportunity
Number
of Women*
(N=215)
Percent
of Women
On-the-job 106 48.8
On-campus seminars 51 23.5
Flexible schedule to attend classes 33 15.2
Released time to attend classes 21 9.7
Off-campus seminars 15 6.9
Internships 11 5.1
Fellowship or scholarship 3 1.4
Sabbatical 1 0.5
iArmed forces leadership training 1 0.5
Professional organization position 1 0.5
^Multiple responses were possible in reporting.
46
Teaching Experience
Some teaching experience is a usual prerequisite
for obtaining an administrative position. Respondents
reported that 55% had taught in two-year colleges, 29% in
secondary, 17% in four-year colleges, and 12% in elemen
tary schools (see Table 15).
TABLE 15
TEACHING EXPERIENCE OF WOMEN RESPONDENTS IN MIDDLE
MANAGEMENT POSITIONS AT CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY
COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
Number
of
Years
N u m b e r of W o m e n (N==215)®
Elementary Secondary 2-Year
College
4-Year
College
1 - 5 19 33 27 29
6-10 15 18 48 5
11 - 15 1 7 19 2
16 - 20 0 4 14 1
21 - 25 0 0 10 0
Over 25 0 0 1 0
Multiple responses were possible in reporting.
Other types of experiences listed included nursing,
governmental agencies, armed forces, libraries, counseling.
and business.
47
Mobility
One of the purposes of the study was to determine
I the mobility of women to take positions in colleges other
I than the one where currently employed. More married women
I(32.3%) than single women (21.2%) indicated that they would
I commute 25 miles; while 13.4% of the married and 9.2% of
the single women would commute 50 miles. Ability to
I relocate showed that 15.2% of the married and 19.8% of the
I single women would move to northern California; 10.1% of
I the married and 12.9% of the single women would move to
I southern California, and 8.3% of the married and 11.5% of
the single women would move out of state (see Table 16).
I
; TABLE 16
i MOBILITY RELATED TO MARITAL STATUS REPORTED BY WOMEN
IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS AT CALIFORNIA
; COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
Commutability (N=215)
25 miles 50 miles 75 miles 100 miles
Married 70 29 3 1
; Single 46 20 0 4
No response 42
I
' Relocatability (N=215)
I
I Northern Southern
I California California Out-of-State
: Married 33 2 18
i
Single 43 28 25
;No Response 66
48
Another factor to be considered in the mobility of
people from one job to another is the number of years they
I have been at their current place of employment. This study
showed that 44.8% of the respondents had been on their
I current campuses for 10 years or less; 19.1% of them, five
'years or less. As shown in Table 17, the number willing
I to either commute or relocate diminished after 10 years
with an institution.
Career Aspirations
Inasmuch as one of the major purposes of this study
was to determine the availability of women for top level
I
,administrative positions, the population was asked about
: their career aspirations in five and again in ten years.
I Retirement was listed by 24.9% of the women for 1980 and by
'9.2% of the women for 1985. Another 35.5% did not answer
I
I for 1980 and 79% did not answer for 1985. Thus, a substan
tial percentage of the women showed retirement or listed no
definite career goals for the next 10 years (see Table 18).
There were 34 women interested in administrative
positions at the first three levels, ranging in age from
I under 30 to the 55-59 age range. Fifteen of these women
I were married, 18 were single, and one did not answer.
1 Currently, 16 live in northern California and 18 in
southern California. Three of the women are enrolled in
doctoral programs. All had teaching experience except two,
who had library experience.
TABLE 17
MOBILITY RELATED TO YEARS EMPLOYED BY AN INSTITUTION
REPORTED BY WOMEN IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS
AT CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
I Commutability (N=2I5)
I
Years on
Campus 25 miles 50 miles 75 miles 100 miles
1 - 5 34 14 0 1
6 - 10 41 14 1 4
11 - 15 19 9 0 1
16 - 20 11 4 0 0
21 - 25 4 0 1 0
Over 25 4 0 1 0
Relocatability (N=215)
Northern Southern
California California Out-of-State
1 - 5 20 10 12
6 - 10 22 13 12
11 - 15 8 6 3
16 - 20 4 6 0
21 - 25 0 0 0
Over 25 0 1 0
50
TABLE 18
CAREER ASPIRATIONS FOR 1980 AND 1985 REPORTED BY WOMEN
IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS AT CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
j Career
Number
........- (N=
1980
of Women
=215)
1985
^ Retirement 54 20
1 Dean 20 4
Back to the Classroom 16 4
Department or Division Chairperson 14 2
Outside of a Community College 10 0
Dean of Instruction 7 4
Coordinator 5 0
Administrator (General) 3 1
Administrator (Occupational Education) 3 0
Associate Dean 3 0
Assistant Dean 2 2
President 2 4
Director of Learning Resources 1 1
No Response 75 173
51
TABLE 19
COMPARISON OF CAREER ASPIRATIONS FOR 1980 AND 1985
REPORTED BY WOMEN IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS
AT CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES, FALL, 1974
1 9 8 0 1 9 8 5
Career
Number
of
Women
(N=215)
Percent
Number
of
Women
(N=215)
Percent
Retirement 54 24.9 18 8.3
First three levels of
administration 34 15.7 15 6.9
No change from current
position 29 13.4 4 1.8
Less than third level
administration 24 11.0 5 2.3
Back to classroom 16 7.4 4 1.8
Position outside of the
community college 10 4.6 3 1.4
No Response 48 23.0 166 77.5
52
TABLE 20
AGE RANGES CE WOMEN REPORTING AN INTEREST IN
HIGHER LEVEL ADMINISTRATION (N=34)
Age Range Number of Women
Under 30 1
30 - 34 4
35 - 39 7
40 - 44 7
45 - 49 6
50 - 54 6
55 - 59 2
No response 1
table 21
HIGHEST DEGREE HELD BY WOMEN REPORTING AN INTEREST
IN HIGHER LEVEL ADMINISTRATION (N=34)
Level of Degree Number of Women
Bachelor's 5
Master's 24
Doctorate 5
53
Since positions at the top levels of administration
are often available on campuses other than the one of
current employment, it was necessary to determine the
mobility factor of the women interested in these positions.
TABLE 22
MOBILITY OF WOMEN REPORTING AN INTEREST IN
HIGHER LEVEL ADMINISTRATION (N=34)
C om m ut a bi l it y
Married
Single
No Response
25
Num
ber
miles
Per
cent
50
Num
ber
miles
Per
cent
75
Num
ber
miles
Per
cent
100
Num
ber
miles
Per
cent
5 14.7 6 17.6 1 2.9 1 2.9
12 35.3 3 8.8 1 2.9 2 5.9
3
R e 1 o c a t a b i 1 i t
y"
Northern
California
Num- Per-
ber cent
Southern
California
Num- Per-
ber cent
Out-of-state
Num- Per-
ber cent
Married
Single
7 20.6
14 41.2
6
12
17.6
35.3
6
1
17.6
29.4
^Multiple responses were possible in reporting.
Concerning willingness to commute, the largest
percentage of women (36.4) would commute 25 miles and were
single; the next largest group (18.2%) were married and
would commute 50 miles. Ability to relocate was greatest
54
I among single women: 42.5% would relocate in northern
jCalifornia, 36.4% in southern California, and 30.3% out-of-
state. Of the married women, 21.2% would move to northern
I
California, 18.2% to southern California, and 18.2% out-of-
I
I state.
i
I Summary
i
Chapter IV presented data in tabular form and
I related it to the questions posed in Chapter I. The data
I showed that the percentage of women in middle management in
i
I instruction was 18% of the total population at this level,
jThis was 13% less than the percentage of women faculty.
I At this middle management level, 65.5% were department or
I division chairpersons, normally the lowest paid positions
I of those surveyed. Slightly over 50% of the respondents
iwere in the 40-54 age range. Graduate degrees were
primarily in health occupations and education. Over half
; of the respondents had previously taught in a community
'college. Nearly 50% had learned administrative techniques
on the job. Over 50% of the women were willing to commute
25 miles to work and to relocate in California, while
; nearly 20% were willing to move out of state.
■ Fifty-eight percent of the respondents will either
retire or listed no career goal for 1980. Although 52% of
the women stated a career goal, only 15% were interested in
I
positions at the top three levels of administration.
55
The women interested in top level positions were
primarily in the 35-54 age range. Five held doctorate
degrees, with two more currently enrolled in such programs.
All had teaching and/or library experience. Forty-four
percent of the single and 32% of the married women in this
group were willing to commute up to 50 miles, while nearly
10% more single than married women were willing to relocate
either in California or out of state.
56
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
)
j
i Summary
i
j Nationwide studies since 1970 have shown few women
jlocated at senior level administrative positions. The
IPfiffner (1972) study showed only 26 women in the first
j three levels of administration in California community
colleges, indicating a need to study women at the middle
I management level to determine whether there existed a
I source of women who were prepared and interested in assum
ing higher rank. Implementation of affirmative action
j plans would be difficult if there were no labor pool from
: which to draw women administrators.
Women in middle management were selected as the
group to be studied. By virtue of their current positions,
it was assumed that this group would have supervisory/
management experience and the educational background deemed
necessary for advancement. The parameter of instruction
and academic affairs was selected for the sample. The
other two broad areas of administration, business services
; and student personnel services, are often filled with non-
,certificated personnel who usually are not eligible for
consideration as administrators at the top three levels.
57
The following questions were posed, and findings ,
related to each are shown:
1. How many qualified women existed currently in
California community colleges from which to select instruc-
i tional administrators?
I
It was found that in instructional middle manage-
I ment in California community colleges during 1974-
75, 215 women were qualified either by master's
degrees or vocational credentials; however, only
j 34 of those women expressed interest in assuming
positions of higher responsibility by 1980.
2. What prior teaching and supervisory/management
; experience did these women have which would prepare them
I
; for higher level administrative positions?
; It was found that the majority of women had six to
10 years teaching experience. All respondents had
supervisory/administrative experience.
3. Did the educational backgrounds of these women give
evidence toward securing degrees in a particular disci
pline?
It was found that degrees were listed in a wide
I variety of subject fields at the bachelor's level.
Education and various health occupations accounted
for the majority of master's degrees, and education
was the major for seven of the 23 doctorates.
4. How many of these individuals had doctorates, or
58
were working towards the degree, or began a program and
discontinued it?
It was found that 23 women had doctorates and 12
were enrolled in doctoral programs. No woman
I indicated that she had discontinued a doctoral
I
program.
I 5. At what age did women assume positions in middle
I
I management?
j It was found that the majority (18.1%) assumed
!
! middle management positions at the 40-44 age range,
I followed closely (16.3%) by the 30-34 age range,
i 6. What were career aspirations of the women in five
: and 10 years?
I
■ It was found that retirement by 1980 was the stated
j plan for 24.9% of the respondents. An additional
; 8.3% will retire by 1985. Thirty-four women
(15.7%) indicated a desire to move to the first
three levels of administration by 1980, while 16
indicated this goal for 1985. The remainder of the
respondents indicated either no change in position,
back to the classroom full time, or gave no
response.
j 7. Was geographical location of the community colleges
related to the number of women in middle management
I positions in instruction?
It was found that women in middle management in
! 59
instruction were distributed geographically, as is
the population of California, approximately one-
third north of Fresno and two-thirds in southern
California.
8. Was there a relationship between mobility, marital
1 status, or length of service at the institution of current
I employment?
I It was found that married women were willing to
I commute further distances than single women, while
single women were more willing to relocate. After
10 years on a campus, women were less willing to
either commute or relocate.
I 9. Was size of enrollment on a campus related to the
I
I number of women in middle management in instruction?
I It was found that the average number of women in
middle management assignments increased from one
position per college with a full-time enrollment
less than 1,000 to nine per college with 9,000 to
10,000 full-time enrollment. The statewide average
was 2.91 women in middle management in instruction
per campus,
, 10. What currently were the proportions of women in
: middle management in instruction, compared to total women
faculty?
It was found that women composed 17.8% of the total
number of persons in middle management positions
I and 31% of the faculty.
Conclusions
From the findings indicated above, it can be con
cluded that the opportunities for women in middle manage
ment are greater in large, urban colleges. Few women plan
to move into the top three administrative levels in
California community colleges, even though they possess
both teaching and supervisory/management experiences.
Because of this, even fewer women seek doctoral degrees.
I
! Practical Recommendations
It is recommended that the percentage of women at
both middle and top management levels in California
! community colleges be increased to 31%, a ratio equal to
the percentage of women on community college faculties.
This could be accomplished by a thorough examination and
implementation of affirmative action plans; by a positive
attitude on the part of present top-level administrators
toward women as peers ; by encouraging women to prepare for
and seek these positions ; and by the election of more women
! to boards of trustees. It is further recommended that
groups such as the California Community and Junior College
'Association, the California School Boards Association, and
the Association of California Community College Administra
tors actively promote recruitment of women for administra-
Itive positions.
61
Because there are so few women who complete
doctoral programs, it is recommended that women's groups,
such as the American Association of Women in Community and
j Junior Colleges and the American Association of University
! Women, promote the need for women to complete the doctorate
I degree and to consider higher administrative positions as
I career goals. It is further recommended that institutions
of higher learning who offer doctoral programs examine
admissions policies to be certain that they in no manner
discriminate against women, either by word or by implemen-
I tation.
Research Recommendations
' Since only 15.6% of the respondents in this study
I
! expressed a desire to move into the top three levels of
I administration, further study needs to be undertaken to
; determine why so few women in middle management consider
these positions a viable goal.
An attempt is being made in public schools to
expand career concepts of girls and young women. In the
I next decade, a study should be instituted to determine
whether there has been an attitudinal change toward career
I goals.
I
It is recommended that the 34 women in this study
who expressed a desire to obtain positions in the top three
levels of administration by 1980 be the population of an
i 62
I in-depth study in that year to determine whether their
! goals were achieved, whether their goals had changed, and
jwhat circumstances affected them in either case.
! There is a growing body of knowledge concerning
women in higher education; however, it normally includes
only women in four-year institutions, A national study
I
I could be undertaken to establish a data base concerning
I all aspects of women employed in community colleges. From
I this study, recommendations could be made and implemented
I
! which would assist this segment of higher education to
! utilize women to their fullest potential.
63
BIBLIOGRAPHY
64
BIBLIOGRAPHY
AAUW Standards for Women in Higher Education Affirmative
; Policy in Achieving Sex Equality in the Academic
; Community. American Association of University Women,
I 1971.
v/'Alfred, R. L., & Good, M. F. Women's status in higher
education and the professions: Metropolitan Junior
College District. 1971-72. Kansas City, Mo.: Office
of Educational Development and Research, Metropolitan
Junior College District, 1972.
I American Association of University Professors Council
! Commission on Discrimination. Affirmative action in
higher education, AAUP Bulletin, 1973, 5_9, 178-183.
Are myths about misses amiss? Report says yes. Senior
Scholastic. 1971, 12-13.
v/^Arter, H. M. The status of women in administration in
I state universities and land-grant colleges. Unpub-
' lished doctoral dissertation, Arizona State
I University, 1972.
I Bayer, A. E. College faculties : "Le Plus Ca Change."
i Change. March 1974, pp. 49-50.
i ....
Bird, C., & Briller, S. W. Born female--the high cost of
; keeping women down. New York: David McKay, 1968.
yIBuek, A. P., & Oreleans, J. H. Sex discrimination--a bar
^ , to a democratic education: Overview of Title IX of
! the Education Amendments of 1972. Connecticut Law
Review, 1973, 1-27.
^ . . . . .
L/" 'California Information Almanac: Past, Present, Future.
: Lakewood, Ca.: California Almanac Co., 1973.
,/ j The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. Opportunities
for women in higher education. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1973.
Cavanaugh, B. K. A little dearer than his hours : Legal
stereotypes of the feminine personality. Harvard
Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 1970, 6^,
274.
65
iCavender, E. Women in administration? You've got to be
j kidding! NASSP Bulletin, December 1974, pp. 90-94.
j Cobbley, L. A study of attitudes and opportunities for
women in six western states to become elementary
school principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Brigham Young University, 1970.
I Dale, C. T. Let's open district doors to female adminis-
! trators. Nation's Schools. 1974, 9^, 12+.
i
j Draxler, B. A. A study of attitudes toward the employment
I of women in higher education as revealed in the
I literature of higher education. Unpublished doctoral
j dissertation. New York University, 1972.
jEducation and the feminist movement. Phi Delta Kappan,
October 1973, entire issue.
Fall 1974 Racial and Ethnic Survey. Report by the Office
' of the Chancellor, California Community Colleges, to
I the Board of Trustees, California Community Colleges.
Sacramento, June 1975. (Mimeographed.)
Farmer, H. S., & Bohn, M. J. Home career conflict reduc
tion and the level of career interest in women.
Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1970, JJ, 228-232.
fishel. A., & Pottker, J. Women in educational governance :
A statistical portrait. Educational Researcher, July-
August, 1974, pp. 4-7.
Fishel, A., & Pottker, J. Women lose out : Is there sex
discrimination in school administration? The Clearing
House. 1973, 387-391.
Freivogel, E. F. Women in archives: The status of women
in the academic professions. The American Archivist.
1973, 36, 183-201.
Furniss, W. T., & Graham, P. A. Women in higher education.
Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education,
I 1974.
!
: Gardner, H. R. Women administrators in higher education in
I Illinois: A study of current career patterns.
1 Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University,
1966.
Greenberg, H., & Greenberg, J. Los Angeles Times,
September 4, 1974, Part 1-A, p. 57 Interview.
1
! 66
Hageman, T. Qualities of effective leadership of women in
the field of higher education. Unpublished master's
thesis, California State University, Northridge, 1975.
I Hahn, M. C. Equal rights for women in career development.
! Personnel. 1970, 55-59 .
!
I Harmon, L. W. Anatomy of career commitment in women.
I Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1970, %7@ 77-80.
I Harris, A. S. The second sex in academe. AAUP Bulletin.
1970, 283-295.
i
Heiss, A. M. Challenges to graduate schools.
! San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1970.
;Holmstrom, E. L., & Holmstrom, R. W. The plight of the
woman doctoral student. Washington, D.C.: American
Council on Education, 1973.
Horner, M. S. The psychological significance of success in
competitive achievement situations : A threat as well
, as a promise. Unpublished manuscript. Harvard Univer
sity, 1970.
Horner, M. A bright woman is caught in a double bind. In
achievement-oriented situations she worries not only
about failure but also about success. Psychology
Today. 1969, 36+.
Johnson, D. L. Ms. administrators, where are they? School
Administrator. August 1972, pp. 6-10.
Kaufman, H. M. The status of women in administration in
selected institutions of higher education in the
United States. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
New York University, 1961.
Koontz, E. D. The best kept secret of the past 5,000
years; Women are ready for leadership in education.
Bloomington, Ind.: Phi Delta Educational Foundation,
1972.
Krohn, B. The Puzzling case of the missing Ms. Nation's
j Schools and Colleges. November 1974, pp. 32-38.
\ILaBarthe, E. R. A study of the motivation of women in
; administrative and supervisory positions in selected
, unified school districts in southern California,
i Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of
Southern California, 1973.
67
'Leonard, Y. E. An analysis of the status of women as full-
I time faculty members in coeducational colleges and
I universities of California. Unpublished doctoral
j dissertation. University of Southern California, 1963.
I
ILeppaluoto, J. R. Attitude change and sex discrimination :
: The crunch hypothesis. Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document
I Reproduction Service, ED 071 548, 1972.
t
.Levitt, E. S. Vocational development of professional
; women: A review. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
: 1971, 1, 375-385.
I
Loring, R., & Wells, T. Breakthrough : Women into manage
ment. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1972.
'Luce, C. B. The 21st-century women--free at last?
! Saturday Review/World, August 24, 1974, pp. 58-62.
ILude, C. Women in community college management: An Atti
tudinal study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
' Colorado State University, Greeley, 1975.
I Lynch, E. M. The executive suite--feminine style,
j New York: AMACOM, 1973.
;Matheny, P. H. P. A study of the attitudes of selected
i male and female teachers, administrators and board of
; education presidents toward women in educational
administrative positions. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. Northwestern University, 1973.
.Mattfield, J. A. Many are called, but few are chosen.
Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction Service,
ED 071 549, 1972,
McGannon, J. B. Tooling up in the talent pool: A proposal
for regional administrative internship programs for
women. Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction
Service, ED 071 188, 1972.
Mickish, G. Can women function as successfully as men in
I the role of elementary school principal? Boulder,
Colo.: Bureau of Educational Research, University of
Colorado, 1971.
Miller, T. W. Male self-esteem and attitudes toward
women's roles. Journal of College Student Personnel,
1973, 14, 402-406.
1975 Community and Junior College Directory. Washington,
D.C.: American Association of Community and Junior
Colleges, 1975.
68
Norman, B. À study of women in leadership positions in
North Carolina. DKG Bulletin, 1970, 2Ê) 11-14.
Oltman, R. M. Campus 1970. where do women stand?
Washington, D.C.: American Association of University
Women, 1970.
Petit, Sister R. M. Attitudinal study of faculty women in
higher education in northwest United States. Unpub
lished doctoral dissertation. University of Montana,
' 1972.
jPfiffner, V. T. Factors associated with women in major
administrative positions in California community
I colleges. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
^ University of Southern California, 1972.
^Pifer, A. Women in higher education. Paper presented at
' the meeting of the Southern Association of Colleges
! and Schools, Miami, Florida, November 29, 1971.
Robinson, L. H. The status of academic women. Bethesda,
Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 048 523,
! 1971.
i
I Ross, S. C. The rights of women: The basic AC LU guide to
a woman^ s rights. New York: Avon, 1973.
(Rossi, A. S., & Calderwood, A. (Eds.). Academic women on
the move. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973.
I
: Sandler, B. Sex discrimination, educational institutions,
and the law: A new issue on campus. Journal of Law
and Education, 1973, 2, 613-635.
Sandler, B. Women in higher education. Vital Speeches,
1972, 532-537.
Sassower, D. L. Women's rights in higher education.
Current. 1972, 145. 29-34.
The sexes. Time. February 18, 1974, pp. 76-77.
Shulman, C. H. Affirmative action: Women's rights on
campus. Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Document Reproduction
Service, ED 066 143, 1972.
Sizemore, B. A. Will the woman administrator make a
difference? Bethesda, Md.: ERIC Reproduction
Service, ED 078 497, 1973.
69
I Taylor, S. S. Educational leadership: A male domain.
I Phi Delta Kappan, 1973, 124-128.
Trow, J. J. Higher education for women. Improving College
and University Teaching. 1972, 20, 19-20.
U.S. Office of Education. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare. Commissioner's Task Force on the Impact
j of Office of Education Programs on Women. A look at
I women in education : Issues and answers for HEW.
Washington, D.C., 1972. (Mimeographed.)
I
I Whitney, M. E. Women student personnel administrators:
The past and future. Journal of College Student
Personnel, 1971, 12, 7-10.
I
'Women in education. California School Boards, November
I 1974, entire issue.
Women's bias toward other women. Intellect, 1973, 101,
I 348.
: You still have a long way to go--baby. Business Week,
; 1971, 2195, 74-76+.
70
APPENDIX
71
September, 1974
I Dear Colleague:
This questionnaire was designed to provide a data base
I for a longitudinal study of women currently in middle
management (department or division chairperson, coordina-
! tor, director, supervisor, assistant or associate dean) in
I California Community Colleges. It asks for information
regarding your education, teaching and administrative
experience, mobility, and future plans.
’ The data collected will be used anonymously, but will
I
, be retained so that you can be contacted in five years to
determine what changes, if any, have taken place in employ-
I ment and promotion of women in California Community
,Colleges.
Preliminary results will be made available through
various women's newsletters. Would you please take a few
minutes to respond NOW? If you have any questions regard-
'ing the study, please contact me at College of the Canyons
j (805) 259-7800, ex. 68, or at my home (213) 479-1473
collect.
I
D. Joleen Bock
' Director, Instructional Resources
72
SURVEY OF WOMEN IN MIDDLE MANAGEMENT POSITIONS IN
INSTRUCTION IN CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES
Present Position College
Title Subject or Responsibility
Area
Department Chairperson ___________________________
Division Chairperson
Coordinator
Director
Supervisor
Assistant Dean
Associate Dean
Other (List)
(If title is Head Librarian or Media Special
ist, indicate whether this is equated to one
of the above titles.)
Age at achieving first middle management position, as
defined above ____
B. Educational Background
Bachelor's Degree Major_________________
Master's Degree Major _________________
Doctor's Degree Major _________________ Minor_________
If no doctorate:
(a) Are you currently enrolled in a doctoral
program? ______ Degree expected Approxi
mate completion date _____
(b) Have you ever been enrolled in a doctoral
program? _____
How have you been given opportunity to learn adminis
trative techniques? (Check all pertinent.)
_____________ 73
Released time to attend classes On-campus
seminars or workshops Flexible schedule to attend
classes Internship On-the-job
Other (List)_________________________________________
Experience Prior to Present Position (Answer all
pertinent,)
teacher (No. Years) elementary secondary
two-year college four-year college
or university
Other (List)_____________________________
Non-administrative certificated experience other
than classroom (e.g. Librarian, Nurse, Counselor)
Level___________ Years______
Number of years :
_____Department Chairperson_______Division Chairperson
_____Director Coordinator Supervisor
Assistant Dean Associate Dean Head
Librarian (or related title)
D. Future
To what position do you aspire by 1980? _______________
by 1985? ________________
E. Mobility
If employment conditions were satisfactory, what is the
greatest number of miles you would commute from your
present college?
25 50 75 100
If employment conditions were satisfactory, would you
relocate?
74
r
If yes: _Northern California (Fresno or North)
Southern California (South of Fresno)
_____Out-of-state
How many years have you been at your present
college? _____
F. Personal Data
Age range : ___Under 30 ___30-34 ___35-39 ___40-44
45-49 50-54 55-59 60 or over
_____Single _____Married
75

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A study of idealism in the Nobel Prize literature

PDF

Consumer participation on Advisory Councils of Area Agencies on Aging: An exchange relationship

PDF

Factors that effect the changes in degree aspirations of African American and Latino community college students

PDF

Guardianship: A minimally used resource for California's dependent children, a study in policy: 1850-1978

PDF

Crisis preparation in technical organizations: A study using a multi-dimensional approach

PDF

A study of Mexican American perceptions of law enforcement policies and practices in East Los Angeles

PDF

Community mental health care of the elderly: A study of policy making and implementation

PDF

Proposition 140: A study of the impact of term limits on the California Assembly

PDF

Communication, commitment and decision-making in the marital relationships of schizophrenics

PDF

Bulimia nervosa: A response to trauma associated with parental alcoholism and sexual abuse in college sorority women

PDF

An examination of personality type dominating leadership positions in department of defense program management

PDF

Reading achievement influenced by certain home factors in Mexican-American homes

PDF

The development of leadership and organization building in the Black community of Los Angeles from 1900 through World War II

PDF

An investigation Piaget's theory of cognitive development as a basis for the assessment of reading disability of Afro-American junior high school students and for developing remedial curricula

PDF

A study of delinquent girls in a Pasadena junior high school

PDF

Parents' verbal attempts to influence problematic child behavior: A study of the nature and accuracy of social workers' beliefs

PDF

The effects of the Educational Employment Relations Act and the impact of using alternative bargaining techniques

PDF

The effect of cooperative and individualistic goal structures on the preferences and attribution of field-dependent and field-independent students

PDF

Evaluation of the effectiveness of public social services: A methodological study

PDF

Asian American social workers: A case study of organizational development

Asset Metadata

Creator Bock, Dorothy Joleen (author)

Core Title Women in instructional middle management in California community colleges: A study of mobility

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Degree Doctor of Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education,OAI-PMH Harvest,Social Sciences

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c37-62487

Unique identifier UC11632789

Identifier DP71494.pdf (filename),usctheses-c37-62487 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier DP71494.pdf

Dmrecord 62487

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Bock, Dorothy Joleen

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA