Barriers to Women's Participation in Post‐secondary Education1

Abstract

Although the phenomenon has long been observed that women enter all types of post‐secondary education at lower participation rates than men, there have been few attempts to analyze the reasons for this. These barriers may be categorized as (1) institutional, (2) situational, and (3) dispositional. Institutional factors that serve to exclude women from participation in post‐secondary education include admissions practices, financial aid practices, institutional regulations, types of curriculum and services adopted, and faculty and staff attitudes. Situational barriers that deter women from participation in further education include family responsibilities, financial need, and societal pressures. Dispositional barriers that prevent women from continuing education include their fear of failure, attitude toward intellectual activity, role preference, ambivalence about educational goals, level of aspiration, passivity, dependence, and inferiority feelings.

Women in Psychology in the United States

“…Clear evidence of discrimination against women has been found in terms of admission to graduate study and also in obtaining financial aid. 12 Yet, studies have shown that most women admitted to graduate schools do obtain their Ph.D.s, do stay in the field, do publish, and do contribute.12 It is true that the student who runs in and takes one or two courses and then runs home is missing a great deal. She doesn't experience the peer and collegial relationships so necessary to the making of a psychologist.…”

Where is Merlin when I need him? The barriers to higher education are still in place: Recent re-entry experience

“…P. Cross (1981) provided a structural framework for my lament in her text, Adult as Learner , which explored three major barriers to academic reentry: “situational, dispositional, and institutional” (p. 98). An earlier review of literature by Ruth Ekstrom (1972) had identified and labeled the barriers, but Cross (1981) went well beyond merely categorizing them; she analyzed the implications of the barriers for adult learners and offered direction to institutions that might want to capitalize on this growing student pool. However, despite her analysis of existing barriers and her creation of models to understand adult learning needs within post‐secondary institutions, later researchers traversing her path have found that those early barriers still exist.…”

The woman doctorate, her doctoral study, and postdoctoral career development

“…-Be the best that you can be and respect others. 1956;Aurbach et al, 1964;Goodwin, 1966;Lewis, 1968;Mitchell, 1968Mitchell, , 1969Folger et al, 1970;Rossi, 1970a;Sharp, 1970;Stokes, 1970;Creager, 1971;Kreps, 1971;Ekstrom, 1972;Husbands, 1972;LeFevre, 1972;Carnegie Commission, 1973;Feldman, 1973Feldman, , 1974Patterson and Sells, 1973;Rees, 1973;Sells, 1973;Schlossberg, 1974;Thrower, 1976;Harway and Astin, 1977), although Mooney (1968) Mooney, 1968;Astin, 1969;Mitchell, 1969;Gray, 1970;Mitchell and Alciatore, 1970;Stokes, 1970;Creager, 1971;Ekstrom, 1972;Boyer, 1973;Rees, 1973;Sells, 1973;Centra and Kuykendall, 1974;Harway and Astin, 1977;Stoddard, 1977), although Patterson and Sells (1973) and Holmstrom (1974) reported that financial difficulties did not account for attrition among female doctoral students. Financial problems have been reported to cause in...…”