Contributing to Research: Two Female Post-Tenure Accounts of Our Journeys Developing Our Educational Research Programs

Author(s):

Laurie-ann M. Hellsten(presenting / submitting)Laureen J. McIntyre

Conference:

ECER 2016

Network:

22. Research in Higher Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

22 SES 07 B, Gender in Academia

Paper Session

Time:

2016-08-24

17:15-18:45

Room:

NM-Theatre O

Chair:

Liudvika Leisyte

Contribution

Context

Research has shown the academic workplace, and the need to achieve tenure within the first six years, is designed in ways that work against women (e.g., Halpern, 2008; Park, 1996). For example, factors contributing to difficulties for women in academic settings include networking that excludes women and work-family conflicts (Bassett, 2005; Foster et al., 2000). In addition, despite idealistic expectations (Rice, Sorcinelli, & Austin, 2000), faculty report unbalanced lives and feelings of loneliness, isolation, and rivalry between colleagues (Greene et al., 2008). Novice faculty also report becoming dissatisfied, overworked, stressed, and physically ill (Hellsten, Martin, & McIntyre, 2010; Hellsten, McIntyre, Martin, & Kinzel, 2011), as they attempt to meet the often unwieldy, vague, and increasing tenure and promotion requirements (Schuster & Finklestein, 2006). However, despite a growing body of literature examining the scholarship of researcher development (Evans, 2011), there is little peer reviewed research literature exploring the challenges female academics experience when developing a program of research in today’s academic environment.

Purpose of the Study

Using a resiliency framework, the purpose of this study was to explore what factors helped or hindered the development of our research program, and the continued challenges we face as female tenured faculty in a Canadian Faculty of Education.

Theoretical Framework

Resiliency theory formed the framework for our discussions on the factors that have helped or hindered the development of our research program, and the continued challenges we face as female faculty. Resiliency is defined as the ability to make positive adaptations in spite of serious threats or significant adversity to adaptation or development (Masten, 2001). Resilience results from the operation of basic human adaptational systems including attachment, extended families, mastery motivation, and self-regulation (Masten, 2001). Development in the face of adversity is robust when these basic systems are functioning. Conversely, when these systems are weakened, the risk for developing problems is much greater. Using the resiliency framework, we can ask ourselves what factors have helped or hindered the development of our research program (e.g., how were you supported by college/faculty to initiate and focus your research program? what factors have helped/hindered you from engaging in your research endeavours?). Resiliency theory is appropriate to use to frame our discussions since it fits in with the perspective of promoting well-being and considering solutions to adversities rather than focusing on hardships and negative experiences. This framework allowed us to consider strategies we have used, or factors that have supported us, in successfully developing our programs of research.

Results and Discussion

Using autoethnography, we identified five common themes in our narrative: (1) the context and temporal placement of our employment including the subthemes of institutional supports for research and (increasing) workload; (2) the increasing competition for research dollars; (3) individual persistence in seeking research resources; (4) the difficulty in (and importance of) finding reciprocally supportive research partners; and (5) taking advantage of research opportunities.

In reflecting on our research journeys, we noted that many of the changes we, as academics and developing researchers, experienced demonstrated our abilities to make positive adaptations and succeed in spite of adverse circumstances (Masten, 2001). In addition, many of our changes also fit the multidimensional conceptual model of researcher development put forth by Evans (2011). Reflecting on these factors will provide us the opportunity to improve the academic climate for current and future female faculty.

Method

METHODS AND CONTEXT We conducted an autoethnographic exploration of our research pathways as post-tenure females in university tenure-track faculty positions in a Faculty of Education in a western Canadian province. Authoethnography is a form of narrative inquiry legitimatizing the researcher’s use of her own experience and requires the researcher write herself into the account of a phenomenon. The defining feature of autoethnography is that it emphasizes subjectivity and requires the researcher to perform a narrative analysis pertaining to herself and intimately related to a particular social phenomenon. Therefore, the written outcomes are as individual as its authors, taking a variety of different forms (Ellis, 1999). However, regardless of written form, the authoethnographic representation conveys meaning attached to an experience. The goal of authoethnography is “...to tell a story that readers can enter and feel a part of” (Ellis, 1999, p. 674). We used self-reflection to explore the factors that have helped or hindered the development of our research program, and the continued challenges we face as female faculty. Our discussions were digitally recorded and transcribed. Following the work of Braun and Clarke (2006), thematic analysis of the interview transcripts was conducted by the each of the participant-researchers independently before jointly developing the resulting themes. We are two female University post-tenure faculty members, hired within the past ten years, who are both currently Associate Professors. Each of us brings different academic/professional experiences (hired without completed doctoral degree and with/without considerable professional experience, including professional licensure), areas of expertise (psychometrician, speech-language pathologist), work experiences (post-doctoral position, previous professional career), family situations (married/single, no/young children), and personal challenges to the process of acquiring tenure/promotion and developing a viable research program. When we started in our tenure track positions there was no formal or informal research mentorship in our department or college. Our department head was functioning as an administrator and was unable to act as a research mentor. We both had limited publishing and grant writing experience coming out of our doctoral training. Although we were both passionate about and had an interest in research, we were left to figure out how to focus and implement our research visions on our own.

Expected Outcomes

DISCUSSION Five themes emerged from our analysis: (1) the context and temporal placement of our employment including the subthemes of institutional supports for research and (increasing) workload; (2) the increasing competition for research dollars; (3) individual persistence in seeking research resources; (4) the difficulty in (and importance of) finding reciprocally supportive research partners; and (5) taking advantage of research opportunities. The following abbreviated elaboration of the theme taking advantage of research opportunities is presented as an example. One factor that has helped us further our research in recent years, is taking advantage of research resources as they became available. Our college recently hired facilitators to support and enhance the research programs and activities of all faculty members. Taking the time to access new supports has benefited our research. Now I can’t imagine my research life without our research facilitators. The agencies are always changing and increasing the complexity of the programs. It’s been a relief to hand-over that work to someone else. Now I can focus on applying for funding or doing the research rather than keeping up to date on all the nuances and changes. Making use of the research supports offered by our university has strengthened our research programs and made us more confident in pursuing our research endeavors. In reflecting on our research journeys, we noted that many of the changes we, as academics and developing researchers, experienced demonstrated our abilities to make positive adaptations and succeed in spite of adverse circumstances (Masten, 2001). In addition, many of our changes also fit the multidimensional conceptual model of researcher development put forth by Evans (2011). Reflecting on these factors provides us with the opportunity and responsibility to do what we can to improve the academic climate for current and future female faculty.

References

References Bassett, R. H. (Ed.). (2005). Parenting and professing: Balancing family work with an academic career. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. Ellis, C. (1999). Heartful autoethnography. Qualitative Health Researcher, 9(5), 653-667. Evans, L. (2011). The scholarship of researcher development: mapping the terrain and pushing back boundaries, International Journal for Researcher Development, 2 (2), 75 – 98. Foster, S.W., McMurray, J.E., Linzer, M., et al. (2000). Results of a gender-climate and work-environment survey at a Midwestern academic health centre. Academic Medicine, 75, 653-660. London: Sage. Greene, H.C., O' Connor, K.A., Good, A.J., Ledford, C.C., Peel, B.D., & Zhang, G. (2008). Building a support system toward tenure: Challenges and needs of tenure-track faculty in colleges of education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(4), 429-447. Halpern, D.F. (2008). Nurturing careers in psychology: Combining work and family. Educational Psychological Review, 20, 57-64. Hellsten, L.M., Martin, S., & McIntyre, L.J. (2010). Navigating the pot holes and speed bumps: Three female perspectives on tenure. Journal of Educational Thought, 44(1), 99-115. Hellsten, L., McIntyre, L.J., Martin, S., & Kinzel, A. (2011). Women on the academic tenure track: An autoethnographic inquiry. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education, 2(1), 271-275. Masten, A.S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist, 56, 227-238. Park, S. M. (1996). Research, teaching, and service: Why shouldn’t women’s work count? Journal of Higher Education, 67, 46-84. Rice, R., Sorcinelli, M., & Austin, K. (2000). Heeding New Voices: Academic Careers for a New Generation. American Association for Higher Education, Washington, DC. Schultz, N. (2008). Balancing faculty careers and family work: Tenure-track women’s perceptions of and experiences with work/family issues and their relationships to job satisfaction. Paper presented at the 94th Annual Convention of the NCA, San Diego, CA. Retrieved September 30, 2009 from www.allacademic.com/meta/p259816_index.html Schuster, J., & Finklestein, M. (2006). The American Faculty: The Restructuring of Academic Work and Careers. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.

Author Information

Laurie-ann M. Hellsten (presenting / submitting)

University of Saskatchewan, Canada

Laureen J. McIntyre