Practices in the recruitment and hiring of faculty for psychology departments in Canadian universities.

Abstract

An investigation was made of faculty recruitment and hiring practices of psychology departments in Canadian universities, as well as the job search experiences of recently hired male and female faculty. Questionnaires were sent to 61 departments and 105 faculty, and data from 38 completed department questionnaires (62%) and 64 faculty questionnaires (61%) were analysed. Results suggested that the majority of psychology departments lack complete affirmative action policies, and many lack other specific requirements for ensuring participation by women. In spite of some deterrents to full equality, including a salary differential favouring men, it appears that women are being hired in proportion to their representation in the psychology labour force. Differences in male and female applicants which may favour the hiring of male faculty were found to be few.

Women in Social Work Education: Progress or Promise?

“…Across academic disciplines, women appear to be rewarded at a lower salary level than men (Blackburn & Holbert, 1987;Fox, 1981;Leland & Nelson-Wernick, 1983) and are seriously underpaid at all levels when rank, field, doctoral cohort, type of institution, and work functions are held constant (Hornig, 1980). Reports for 1982-1983 showed a 19% salary difference between male and female faculty (Blackburn & Holbert, 1984).…”

Recruitment practices and job search for academic positions in psychology.

“…In 1983 only 22% of psychology departments had an affirmative action policy in place; in 1994, 93% had such a policy. The percentage of female faculty appointed increased from 29% in 1979-81 (Leland & Nelson-Wernick, 1983) to about 50% in 1994. As in earlier surveys, the great majority of hired faculty members are not a member of any visible minority group.…”

“…This study has provided some clear evidence for a need to improve the way applicants are treated in die job selection process. Whereas all responding departments indicated that they responded to all applicants, the applicants reported some experience of not receiving acknowledgment of, or replies to, their applications, consistent with reports in Darlcy andZanna (1981), Tacono (1981), Leland andNelson-Warwick (1983), andMcRac (1979). As McRac (1979) suggested, applicants repeatedly indicated that they would appreciate receiving information about the hiring decision, the successful applicant's qualifications, and why the applicant was unsuccessful.…”

“…It is certainly "the buyer's marker. In this survey, departments received more applications (a median of 20) than in Leland and Nelson-Wernick's (1983) survey (a median of 11 from males and 3 from females). As in 1983, departments reported a mean of 2.82 applicants interviewed per position.…”

“…Without any data on the characteristics of unsuccessful applicants, we do not know what variables discriminate successful from unsuccessful applicants. The need for an answer is clear (Follette & Klesges, 1988; Klesges et al, 1982; Leland & Nelson-Wernick, 1983; Ponterotto & Furlong, 1986). Thus, another objective of the present study was to identify such variables.…”