The promotional opportunities for female academics are few and far between because most prestigious, top-paying university jobs are held by older academics in tenured positions. A study (titled Women, research and research productivity in the post-1987 universities: Opportunities and constraints) funded by the Department of Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs has found that many women in higher education saw themselves as "tortoises within the system" because they had to work twice as hard as some male counterparts but were rarely rewarded with a suitable promotion (3)

It should be noted that this study did not take into account the fact that, by having such a heavy teaching load, there is not the opportunity for the majority of women in lower grade, mostly contract, jobs, to develop a research interest, and while quality in teaching is now generally a criterion for promotion, there is a perception that it is not rated as highly as good research. Furthermore an additional barrier to participation in research seems to be that most of the funding resources for both research and teaching is controlled by males.

The contributions that women make because of greater caring skills, and the skills acquired in the management of home and family are undervalued. If time off is taken to have a baby, the loss of peer esteem is frequently an added pressure on rejoining the work force, especially because there is no real opportunity for them to upgrade, update or catch up.

Women in Decision-Making. There is a continuing under-representation of women graduates at decision-making levels. The proportion of female academics promoted to positions above senior lecturer across the higher education system is 10.71% (3). This is a cause for concern, since it is here that upholding the concept of social justice for women should be a major goal.

There are a number of issues raised in the second term of reference of the Review Committee which pertain to the equitable representation of women on decision-making bodies in universities. It is worth pointing out that traditionally such decision-making bodies have been dominated by male staff members. This represented both the relatively small numbers of women employed at senior levels and certain structural constraints of university culture which have tended towards the inhibition of women from participating on committees, boards and the like.

Over the past ten years of affirmative action, EEO and changes in the university sector, the picture has changed. There are now more women occupying positions on decision-making bodies in universities, but problems still persist and the representation of women can not yet be said to have reached a satisfactory level in terms of equity, when taken as a broad picture.

AFUW would like to draw attention to how the equitable representation of women pertains to the second term of reference, as this will be significant for the future of universities in this country.

a) There is evidence that women can bring different approaches and ideas to the consideration of administrative and academic issues when they are involved in decision-making bodies (4). In particular, women appear to favour less hierarchical decision-making, and often show high levels of sensitivity and flexibility in problem-solving. Women also appear to draw the attention of committees to arenas of concern which are of significance to women, but which may not be considered significant by men. It is certainly not always the case that women do offer these kinds of input. And it is not the case that individual men cannot demonstrate similar qualities and concerns. However, on balance it does appear that women favour styles of participation and modes of input which do imply increased creativity and flexibility. "New" management styles which have been enthusiastically taken up by the private sector to increase productivity and efficiency have been described as particularly compatible with the kinds of administrative and management styles favoured by women as workers and managers. It would seem that if universities are to be able to "respond creatively and flexibly to change", the retention of targets for the equitable representation of women on university decision-making bodies is essential.

b) One of the major changes taking place over the past two decades has been the increase in female enrolments at university. Currently, female enrolments slightly outnumber enrolments by male students. Furthermore, the past decade has seen the gradual softening of the gender divide between Faculties and Disciplines, so that more females are entering fields of study previously dominated by men, such as medicine, law and engineering, and some males are entering fields such as nursing, previously a female domain. Side by side with such changes, increasing numbers of women have been taking up academic staff appointments, both in traditionally female fields and in some non-traditional fields. These changes mean that the composition of university populations, staff and students, is now quite different. It seems logical that the composition of decision-making bodies in the universities ought to reflect this new state of affairs. Women currently make up 43 per cent of the work force. The female students studying at university now will enter a world in which more of the traditional gender divisions will fall away even further. Universities need to be in a position to respond flexibly and creatively to the needs of the student population of the 21st century when the participation of women in all sectors of public life will probably increase again. They will be in a better position to do this if decision-making in tertiary institutions fully includes the representation of women.

c) Over the next two decades a number of trends in work and industry will continue to develop:

(i) There will be increasing reliance on information technologies for communication and information search and retrieval, as well as further development of new technologies for experimental simulation and modelling.

Since the development of these new technologies women have had rather an ambiguous relationship to these forms (5). Many of the newer computer and technology applications in industry and business, however, are targeted at sectors of the professional and managerial workforce in which women are highly represented. Clearly it will be in the interests of all future employees in professional and managerial fields to become fully competent in using new technologies. Yet there is evidence that women on tertiary campuses are not availing themselves of training programs nor undertaking postgraduate research involving new technological forms, in anywhere near the numbers that male students are taking up such endeavours (5). Clearly it is in the interests of universities to encourage female students to develop a positive attitude towards new technologies. The equitable input of female staff to decision-making on this issue is vital if universities are to respond quickly to the challenge of new technologies.

(ii) There will be an increasing trend towards the concept of paid work in Australia moving in the direction of casual, part-time and contract positions, and this will eventually take effect in all sectors of the workforce, including professional and managerial fields. Traditionally these forms of work have been more associated with women than with men. Universities need to respond sensitively and creatively to these changes in the workforce and the definition of work, which may mean some adjustment to professional degrees, particularly with regard to multi-skilling. The input of women decision-makers in terms of analysis and insight into such changes, and how universities might respond appropriately to them, will be significant.

The AVCC has a standing recommendation/guideline that all AVCC committees will have each gender represented and recommends that all significant university committees have gender representation. However, it has been an individual University decision in the past if there are targets for female participation. This submission is written at a time when the Federal Government has declared that it favours the "mainstreaming" of women's issues, which has led to the dropping of targets for the equitable representation of women as a public policy. While mainstreaming is a desirable, and inspiring, goal, AFUW considers that the dropping of targets for the equitable representation of women in Higher Education at this time would be counter-productive.

Women in Science. In 1993 the Australian Government established a group to advise on strategies to improve women's participation in careers and education in Science, Engineering and Technology (SET). The brief included improving public awareness of the contribution that women can make to SET in Australia.

The Women in Science, Engineering and Technology (WISET) Advisory Group produced a Discussion Paper in September, 1994 and, following input from interested parties, the final Report was published in May, 1995 (6). The slow government response to this report is in marked contrast to the way this issue is viewed in the UK, where a similar Working Party was set up by the British Government. The Report from that Working Party, The Rising Tide (7), was published in February, 1994, the Government's response was made in July, and the Development Unit recommended in the Report began work in December, 1994. In Australia, the previous Government did not respond to the WISET paper before the change of Government in March, 1996. Very recently, the present Government has made it clear (8) that "the paper's recommendations are more relevant to the outlook of the previous Government. Consequently, this Government will not prepare a written response to the detailed recommendations of the WISET paper."

The Minister for Science and Techology has declared support for "a broad, positive environment in which all Australians have the maximum opportunity to achieve their potential". However, in most institutions, this is likely to remain just a laudable and inspiring, but very distant, goal unless the specific targets detailed in the WISET recommendations are put in place.

Although figures show a marked increase in women's participation in SET-based education in some areas (39.4% of all science students are women; but note that for Ph.D study the figure is only 29.4%; Table 11, Ref. 6), they remain under-represented in some disciplines (only 10.8% of engineering students in 1991; Table 11, Ref. 6). In employment they are not well-represented, particularly at the most senior levels. For example in the higher education sector, while 24.4% of science academics (all levels) were women, only 4.1% of tenured staff above the senior lecturer level in all Science disciplines were women in 1991 (Tables 10 and 5, Ref. 6). In engineering, the comparable figures are 6.9% (all levels) and 0.9% (tenured staff above senior lecturer level). The obstacles to women's achievement in SET appear to be even greater than in many other professional areas.

The WISET Advisory Group gave two important reasons why these obstacles should be identified and overcome, and with these AFUW would agree. First, women have a right to access the full range of challenge and endeavour which is open to men. More pragmatically, under-participation of women in SET-based education, training and employment is also likely to inhibit Australia's capacity to develop internationally competitive research and science-based industries. Secondly, SET is likely to be enriched by incorporation of the different life experiences of women. The negative images of SET (not socially responsible, not people-oriented, inflexible and arbitrary) can be improved by incorporating female values, perspectives, priorities and operating styles. SET needs to better recognise and value the ways that women contribute to the wide range of disciplines, skills and applications of SET and allowed to participate in SET as women, and not through developing the attributes of men.

The Advisory Group identified the need to pay greater attention to a range of behaviours towards females by those who dominate both the educational and employment environments of SET (that is, males). The WISET Report introduces the term "Gender Harassment" to describe "a range of exclusion, marginalising and resistance behaviours which result in women being discouraged or inhibited from access to and progression in SET education, training and employment. These behaviours are often subtle, and sometimes unintentional. Nevertheless they continue to have a significant impact on the way women perceive SET and careers and education in these fields."

The Advisory Group recognised that there are many generic issues in employment and education which affect all women, and not only those in SET training and careers. Most women face the need for availability of appropriate child care, more flexible working hours, and a recognition of the impact of caring responsibilities, and this would be the AFUW viewpoint also. The Recommendations encompass these concerns by advocating giving a high priority to public sector-specific reforms already under way. More SET-specific recommendations deal with re-entry and re-training programs, mentoring schemes, recognition of women's prior learning in selection procedures, and equal gender representation on selection panels. Recommendations dealing with barriers to access such as the critical filter of maths and computing are very pertinent to both participation and retention of women in SET. Better statistics to monitor the participation of women in SET employment and research are also advocated. Research into gender inclusive teaching staff development needs is proposed, as is investigation of the underlying causes for lower levels of female participation in some disciplines.

AFUW commends the WISET Report to the Review Committee, and urges you to support the 14 recommendations contained therein.

AFUW took an active interest in the work of the Advisory group by making submissions to it, publishing an article in the AFUW magazine, Graduate Women, and holding a public Forum in South Australia to publicise the recommendations. There are a number of the recommendations that are of particular relevance to the Federation. Specifically we have begun a strategy to use our considerable record in raising money for scholarships, and our contacts with universities in Australia, and overseas, to encourage the implementation of Recommendation 2(a). This concerns the need for provision of re-entry scholarships for women wishing to retrain in fields of science, engineering and technology in higher institutions, particularly at postgraduate level, after a period of career interruption due to family-care responsibilities. We are well aware of the need to update skills and regain confidence for women returning to the work force after a career break, and have researched this area in the past. While this is a widespread problem, it is perhaps more acute in the sciences, where the advance of both knowledge and technologies is so rapid.

The Status of Women Working Party of AFUW-SA has collected information pertinent to WISET Recommendation 2(a). We know of several current re-entry schemes, for example, both the University of Western Australia and the University of Melbourne now offer Re-entry Postdoctoral Research Fellowships for women; The Flinders University of South Australia has a Re-entry Scholarship for Women to enable preparation for a research higher degree; and similarly the Australian National University offers Re-entry Scholarships to Women, which basically are designed to assist completion of a higher degree. While we applaud these various Australian initiatives, we note that none is given specifically for work in science or engineering.

AFUW-SA therefore wrote in late December to the Vice-Chancellors in the three SA universities urging them to make early provision for Re-entry Fellowships for Women in Science and Engineering similar to those offered in the UK In the United Kingdom, a Fellowships scheme for women wishing to return to careers in science or engineering was established in 1985 by the work of the late Professor Daphne Jackson. Strongly supported by industries, as well as universities, that scheme has been a great success (information on http://www.sst.ph.ic.ac.uk/trust/ ). The Daphne Jackson Memorial Fellowships Trust was commended in The Rising Tide (7), the analogous Report on Women in SET in the UK to the WISET Report in Australia. AFUW saw elements of this scheme as worthy of consideration in the Australian context. AFUW-SA pointed out to the Vice-Chancellors that seeking the assistance of industrial concerns in funding such a project would fit neatly with recent moves to strengthen the relationships of universities with industry and the business world. It would also allow the Universities to act more readily on this important WISET recommendation at a time of financial constraint.

AFUW-SA expressed the hope that this strategy, repeated in all three South Australian universities, would result in multiple opportunities in that State for women whose potential is being wasted at present. Further it would lead to long-term benefits to the universities and to the industrial sector in gaining increased access to the expertise of highly trained women scientists and engineers. AFUW awaits responses to this AFUW-SA pilot scheme and would hope if the results are encouraging to adopt it as a national strategy,

AFUW recommends that the Review Committee consider the elements of the Daphne Jackson Memorial Fellowships scheme in the UK, as a way of helping women wishing to return to careers in science or engineering by involving industries together with universities.

Rural Students. This section addresses the concern that "financial, social and geographic factors should not act as a barrier to higher education for appropriately qualified students within Australia". The data is taken from Tasmania. However a recent first national stocktake of programs to promote equity, undertaken by the Higher Education Council, found that two groups were still severely under-represented, rural and isolated students, and students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.

The data from Tasmania in 1996 (9) indicate that region and demography clearly play an important part in determining whether or not a student goes on to university. Even in a state such as Tasmania where the actual kilometre distance of any student's home from a university campus is not perhaps as great as in some other states (e.g. WA, NSW, Qld), there is still a clear trend. This is, that the chances of a student continuing on to HE appear to decrease the more rural and isolated is their home. Using the most recent Tasmanian university data, it can be seen that there is still clearly much lower representation from students who live in the NW of Tasmania, the most rural and isolated region, on university campuses than from those in the South, the most urban region, as the following 1996 data show:

59% of all Tasmanian university students in 1996 were from the South
28% were from the North
13% were from the NorthWest.

Demographically, Tasmania is divided into three regions: South, North and NorthWest. The population distribution in these three regions is approximately 48%, 28% and 24%, respectively. Hence, it can be seen that "the NorthWest was ...under-represented in the University student population by 11% and the South over-represented by 11%" (9)

The Tasmanian University data also examined the student population more specifically on the basis of rurality, across all three regions. Students from rural backgrounds made up approx. 20% of the university population in 1996. However, this indicates a significant under-representation, as the rural Tasmanian population is estimated to be twice as high as this - at approx. 40%

So, it is the case in Tasmania (and elswhere) that rural students are significantly under-represented in the university population and that this constitutes a major disadvantage. If rurality is coupled with other disadvantaging factors (e.g., gender), then it can be assumed that even greater disadvantage is likely. Government then should take very active steps to ensure equity of access to HE for such groups.

The Tasmanian University data also reveals some insights into the relationship of region and gender. What is heartening to note is that women now constitute 55% of the overall university student population in Tasmania. What is interesting, however, is that this % varies considerably from campus to campus: 52% of students on the Hobart campus are women, 58% in Launceston and 68% on the new Northwest campus.

The much larger percentage of women on the NW campus and the fact that it only opened in 1995 would seem to imply that it is catering in its early years for something of a `backlog' of women - that is, those who were qualified to take up university studies in the past, but did not do so. Presumably this might be taken to indicate that women are more likely than men to be affected by factors other than ability when considering university education.

Perhaps women are less able to travel to university than men, or perhaps they are more constrained by family and financial considerations? The 1996 Tasmanian data indicate, for example, that the new NorthWest campus students are not only preponderantly female (68%), but they are also older (75% are 25+ years) and part-time (80%), compared with the Hobart campus (52%, 35% & 28%, respectively) and the Launceston campus (58%, 41% & 33% respectively). This suggests that there has been a large pool of academically qualified potential female students who did not participate in University education until a campus was opened locally.

Added to this of course is the factor of economic depression in rural areas and the costs involved in university education. It is worthy of note that even in the youngest age group of students on the NorthWest campus of the University of Tasmania (in Burnie), two-thirds (67%) were part-time in 1996. This means that they are very likely to have a range of other commitments, including financial ones, which would have made higher education difficult, if not impossible, if they had had to live out of the region in order to participate.

This is very significant for access and equity considerations. It implies that factors such as gender and region of domicile powerfully influence whether or not a student goes on to higher education. In particular, the combination of being female and being from a rural area is likely to make tertiary studies very much less likely than, for example, a youmg male living in an urban area. Government should make every effort to provide financial and other support to universities to enable them to provide high quality education in rural areas.

Women and Financial Barriers to Access to Higher Education.. The high cost of tertiary education, both through the fee structures of higher education institutions and loan schemes, are barriers to accessing learning for low-income families and for women. The ability of women to pay back loans is influenced by the fact that on average they are in lower paid jobs than males, and if they take time out to have children then the loans accumulate interest and the debt burden increases. Furthermore the needs of women wishing to continue their own education are often given low priority when considered within a total family budget. This seems to be particularly the case with postgraduate studies where it is much harder for females to persist. Postgraduate study comes at a time when they are likely to be setting up homes, having families with partners trying to establish themselves in both occupational and personal roles. The pressure is on women to spend their time and funds in and on the home situation. If they pursue studies, then they have to make several sacrifices in terms of time spent with family, and possible guilt and/or fatigue in fulfilling so many roles.

The recent changes to the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) are of concern to AFUW. A study of the impact of the HECS when it was first introduced in Australia was criticised (10) on the grounds that the authors did not recommend any changes to the HECS scheme as a result of their study. Yet the study showed that, "while it is true that the percentages of those who identified HECS as very important in their decision not to enrol or re-enrol is very small (2% of potential entrants and 5% of undergraduates), the percentages can also mean that those who are discouraged from continuing their studies are precisely those most disadvantaged in our society." The impact of HECS was greatest in terms of a decline in enrolments for part-time and external students. Another result of this study (10) was that a larger percentage of all postgraduate re-enrollees (10%) cited HECS as very important in their decision not to re-enrol. That is the impact of HECS was most apparent in the postgraduate area. It is in this area that women students are most under-represented (1). These statistics highlight the need for careful statistical and compositional analysis of the effect of changes in educational policies such as the latest increases in HECS in Australia. AFUW would like to see questions of equity addressed in such analyses. We foresee a negative effect on women with a family who are trying to get back into the workforce. We are concerned that the advances that are beginning to be made in women attempting higher degrees (from 25% of HD students in 1982, to 35% in 1992; Ref. 1) may be set back .

Given the information in Rural Students above, on the disadvantages of being rural and female, it would seem that voucher and student loan schemes should be considered with caution. While there is some attraction in giving students the opportunity to select their HE institution, this is something of a Clayton's opportunity in Tasmania with only one university. Similarly if the students were to use their vouchers to go to a university in another state, this would involve considerable financial costs (e.g. accommodation, living expenses) and would once again be very unlikely to benefit the rural female student, especially if she were over 25. If the recent Tasmanian experience is anything to go by, it would suggest that such a person is only likely to access HE if the opportunity was available locally.

The fear with a voucher system would be that smaller regional campuses/universities would not be financially viable with just the local rural student numnbers. As the rural campuses will undoubtedly always have lower numbers, there will be little incentive to offer a wide range of courses and the costs that might now be borne for rural campuses from central university funds on the basis of equity might not be so readily available. (How would equity be maintained under a voucher system?)

It is also uncertain how the voucher system would operate in states where there are several universities. However, it may mean that the prestigious older universities in the capital cities would be favoured and the regional universities would be struggling to maintain numbers.

Perhaps a system of grants would be viable (which includes fees and a living allowance) such as used to operate in the UK, but it is hard to see how this would be of any great benefit to the older female rural student, who seems fairly tied to location

In view of the arguments put forward in this section, AFUW strongly urges that educational reforms be accompanied by adequate monitoring of the impact of such changes on equity issues related to women, to rural students and to low-income groups.

Indigenous Australians. If the position of women in higher education is at risk of marginalisation, then that of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islanders is much more so. It is clear from a range of welfare and health indicators that Indigenous Australians are the most socially and educationally deprived section of the Australian community (11). In higher education, the participation rate for Indigenous Australians in 1991 was 1.8% of the relevant population cohort, while that for other Australians was 3.0%. The proportion taking part in postgraduate study showed an even greater disproportion, being 8% of the total Indigenous students, compared with 20% for other Australian students (12). This report noted that further graduate study should be regarded as an appropriate path to provide Indigenous leadership, and that financial limitations are a major impediment to study (12).

AFUW recognised this at a recent Federal Triennial Conference where the following resolution was passed: That AFUW affirms the objective of promoting understanding, friendship and cooperation among university women graduates of the world, irrespective of race, nationality, religion or political opinions, integral to which objective is reconciliation within Australian society; and that, recognising the need to promote the academic advancement of Indigenous Australian women, AFUW further resolves to undertake ways and means to assist such women undergraduates and post-graduates with their studies

This resolution aims to enable Indigenous Australian women, through their undergraduate and post-graduate education, to have a better quality of life, and a better chance of coming to the fore and making a difference for others.

The branch of AFUW in SA has already set up a scholarship of $2,500 for this year in response to this resolution, and other State and Territory Associations are looking at "ways and means" to implement it.

AFUW recommends to the Review Committee that, given further graduate study is an appropriate path to provide Indigenous leadership, this should be a major focus for targeting aid to Indigenous Australians

Conclusions

The combination of market-driven research and the opening of higher education to the mass of the population have produced a system that values short-term, income-generating research over excellence in teaching and in fundamental research. While no one doubts the necessity of meeting national economic goals, market-driven education does not take account of the social and hence long-term value of investment in higher education. AFUW believes that government should reject the tendency to withdraw from its responsibilities to provide "free" education; and the social and economic value to the nation of investment in higher education should be recognised.

One of the outcomes of a market-driven value system is the risk that some sectors of the population will be marginalised. This is becoming increasingly apparent for women, who make up 52% of the population. While to-day there would be few nations that do not express public support for the rights of women to equality of access in higher education, this is more difficult to achieve in practice. AFUW is concerned that without an emphasis on practical ways to ensure gender equity at all levels of education, the proportion of women who are disadvantaged will increase. The continuing small presence of women graduates at decision-making levels is a cause for concern, since it is here that upholding the concept of social justice for women should be a major goal.

This paper focuses on the present position of women in teaching and in science, of the financial barriers to access to higher education for women, and the special problems of rural students and of Indigenous Australians in higher education. Statistics in all of these areas highlight the need for careful statistical and compositional analysis of the impact of educational reforms, with questions of equity addressed in such analyses

REFERENCES

1.National Report on Australia's Higher Education Sector (1993) Higher Education Division, DEET

2. Female Academics (1993) Report No. 18, Higher Education Series. DEET

3. Deane, Elizabeth, Johnson, Lesley, Jones, Gar and Lengkeek, Nicola (1996). Women, Research and Research Productivity in the Post-1987 Universities: Opportunities and Constraints. EIP Report, DEETYA

4. Ozga, J. & Walker, L. (1995) 'Women in Educational Management: Theory and Practice', in B. Limerick & B. Lingard (eds) Gender and Changing Educational Management, Hodder Education, Sydney.

5. Spender, D. (1995) Nattering on the Net: Women, Power and Cyberspace, Spinifex Press, Melbourne.

6. Report of the Women in Science, Engineering and Technology Advisory Group (The WISET Report) (May, 1995).AGPS, Canberra. ISBN 0 644 45467 9

7. The Rising Tide. Report of the British Committee on Women in Science, Engineering and Technology (1994) HMSO Publication, ISBN 0 11 430096 8

8. Minister for Science and Technology, Senate Question No 447. Question on notice asked by Senator Stott Despoja on 3 March, 1997.

9. University of Tasmania, Statistics, 1996, p.61

10. Currie, Jan (1990). The Impact of the HECS. Australian Universities' Review, 33: 72-739

11. The Health and Welfare of Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples (1997) Australian Bureau of Statistics

12. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Students (1992) Update No. 2, Higher Education Series. DEET

Dr. Daphne Elliott
PO Box 364, MYLOR, SA 5153
Phone: (08) 8388 5778
Email: Daphne.Elliott@flinders.edu.au

Dr Marian Stone
Warilei
Invergowrie Road
MSF 2002, ARMIDALE, NSW 2350
Phone/fax: (067) 75 2221
Email: mstone@metz.une.edu.au

Mrs. Marjorie Carss
Graduate School of Education
University of Queensland
Phone: (07) 3365 6606
Email: m.carss@mailbox.uq.edu.au

With Contributions by:

Dr Pam Nilan
University of Newcastle

Dr. Marion Myhill
University of Tasmania

April 17, 1997

[Return to Top] [Return to Index]