Women in Leadership in Higher Education

By

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LITERATURE REVIEW1

Introduction1

Historical Perspective6

Suffrage Movement8

Women in the Workforce9

Women in Academia and Higher Education10

The Role of University President11

Impact of Women Leaders in Higher Education14

Role of University Presidents in Higher Education 3 pages16

Pathways to the Presidency20

Administrative Path23

Academic Career Path25

Glass Ceiling28

Effects of the Glass Ceiling in Higher Education30

Women Leaders in Higher Education32

Summary35

REFERENCES37

LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

This chapter provides a review of literature in a few areas that serves as the foundation for the study: leadership, women in leadership, leadership in higher education and women leadership in higher education. The review of literature was an emergent and iterative process. The researcher began with a review of research related to the nature of crisis, and explored additional areas as data was unitized and sorted (Surrey, 1991).

Higher education in the United States has become a booming industry over the last several decades with more students enrolled in a greater variety of programs and disciplines. The job of leading these academic enterprises has become increasingly challenging. Presidents have come to find themselves holding the positions of CEO of a corporate enterprise, mayor of a multifarious polity, and academic leader of an intellectual community.all at the same time. University presidents balance a multitude of equally important issues including community and government relations, fundraising, academic achievement, financial oversight, and the overall quality of the student experience. As the complexity of the presidential role increases, it is critical that institutions recruit and hire the best-qualified person for the job. Colleges and universities are preparing for a wave of impending retirements that are going to leave many presidencies open. A report by ACE (2007) projected significant turnover in higher education leadership as current presidents retire in the next several years. Search committees and boards of trustees will have to widen the scope of presidential candidates to identify the most capable individuals.

The major contribution by Wessel and Keim (1994) was the identification of a nonacademic path to the presidency. The second path classified by Wessel and Keim was the Administrative Career Pattern. In this model the president had little or no experience as a faculty member, but had extensive experience as a college administrator. This individual made a career in higher education by attaining administrative positions with increasing responsibility. Wessel and Keim found that approximately 31% of the presidents in their study followed an administrative career path.

The work of Wessel and Keim (1994) was adapted by Birnbaum and Umbach (2001), who identified four possible career paths of university presidents. Birnbaum and Umbach examined survey data collected by ACE from presidents serving in 1986, 1990, and 1995. After analysis of the data, the authors distinguished two categories of career paths: Traditional and Nontraditional. The Traditional category consisted of the most common academic path, which Birnbaum and Umbach identified as the Scholar path, and a population labeled Stewards, who had long careers in higher education as administrators. Approximately 20% of Birnbaum and Umbach's sample was Steward presidents. In addition to the Traditional paths, Birnbaum and Umbach added two Nontraditional paths of ...