April 6, 1972
TO: Annette Flower, Jane Sheets, Co-chairpersons, Faculty
Association Committee on the Status of Women, All Faculty
FROM: Kenneth A. Shaw
As Dr. Fisher's memo to you suggested, I was to respond to Points 1,
2, 4, 5 and -6 of the March 13 proposal for affirmative action. Below is
my response. Before I react to each item, however, I would like to make
several comn.ents with respect to the data you presented in your report. As
you correctly stated, the data was collected by the administration and the
analysis and interpretation of the data were yours. My connnents pertain to
the analysis and interpretation of findings and are as follows:
1. The conclusion to Table III indicates that it takes longer for women
to be promoted than for men and that two and three rank advances are made less often
by women than by men. Our analysis of the data is at variance with both conclusions,
particularly the latter. I asked the Office of Academic Systems Research
to compare the number of two and three rank promotions of women and men who have
been here more than 10 years and to make the same comparison with men and women
who have served the college less than 10 years. For persons with more than
10 years of service who have been promoted, 30 out of the 32 men, or 94 per
cent, were promoted two or more ranks, and 13 out of 13 women, or 100 per cent,
were promoted two or more ranks. In comparing persons with less than 10 years
of service, 7 out of 55 men who were promoted, or 13 per cent,were promoted two
or more ranks, and 5 out of 23 women, or 22 per cent, were promoted two or
more ranks. In terms of three rank promotions for those with more than 10 years
of service, 19 males out of 32 who were promoted,or 59 per cent,had three rank
promotions, and 9 out of 13 women, or 69 per cent, had three rank promotions.
One man with less than 10 years of service had been promoted three ranks and no
women out of 23 had three rank promotions. While the numbers are perhaps too
small to justity a generalization, the above would suggest that promotions
for women are not that much different than for men. I'm not sure how to explain
the discrepancy between your conclusion and mine except to say that the difference
may be attributed in part to the method of analysis.
2. The conclusion to Table IV, Page 5 indicates that in the past three years
Towson has hired proportionately fewer women than in earlier years. A computation
of your Table IV reveals that 33 per cent of the people hired in the past three
years are women. This is slightly above the present percentage of women faculty
(32 per cent); thus, it is incorrect to state that Towson State College "has
hired proportionately fewer women than in earlier years." I should add tbat while
the present percentage of women might be less than you would contend are needed,
it does compare favorably with national findings. The Department of Labor Women's
Bureau recently revealed that 22% of faculty and professional staff at colleges
are women; thus, we are far ahead of most institutions of higher education.
