TY - JOUR
T1 - Mentoring and sponsorship in higher education institutions
T2 - men’s invisible advantage in STEM?
AU - O’Connor, Pat
AU - O’Hagan, Clare
AU - Myers, Eva Sophia
AU - Baisner, Liv
AU - Apostolov, Georgi
AU - Topuzova, Irina
AU - Saglamer, Gulsun
AU - Tan, Mine G.
AU - Caglayan, Hulya
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, © 2019 HERDSA.
PY - 2020/6/6
Y1 - 2020/6/6
N2 - This article is concerned with the source of men’s invisible advantage in the male-dominated disciplines of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). It is suggested that this advantage has been obscured by combining sponsorship and mentoring. The research asks: Are men or women most likely to be mentored? Is it possible to distinguish between mentoring and sponsorship? Is there gender variation in either or both of these depending on the source–whether from the academic supervisor, line manager or other senior academics? This qualitative study draws on interview data from 106 respondents (57 men and 48 women) at high, mid and early levels, in four universities: one each in Bulgaria, Denmark, Ireland, and Turkey. It shows that both men and women received mentoring from their PhD supervisor, albeit with slightly different reported nuances. Men were more likely than women to receive sponsorship in that relationship. Both men and women received sponsorship from the Head of Department, whose wider responsibilities may have reduced homophily. Men were more likely than women to receive sponsorship and mentoring from senior men, with most women indicating a lack of access to such senior academics. By distinguishing between mentoring and sponsorship, this article contributes to our understanding of the way male dominance in STEM is perpetuated and suggests the source of men’s invisible advantage in STEM.
AB - This article is concerned with the source of men’s invisible advantage in the male-dominated disciplines of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). It is suggested that this advantage has been obscured by combining sponsorship and mentoring. The research asks: Are men or women most likely to be mentored? Is it possible to distinguish between mentoring and sponsorship? Is there gender variation in either or both of these depending on the source–whether from the academic supervisor, line manager or other senior academics? This qualitative study draws on interview data from 106 respondents (57 men and 48 women) at high, mid and early levels, in four universities: one each in Bulgaria, Denmark, Ireland, and Turkey. It shows that both men and women received mentoring from their PhD supervisor, albeit with slightly different reported nuances. Men were more likely than women to receive sponsorship in that relationship. Both men and women received sponsorship from the Head of Department, whose wider responsibilities may have reduced homophily. Men were more likely than women to receive sponsorship and mentoring from senior men, with most women indicating a lack of access to such senior academics. By distinguishing between mentoring and sponsorship, this article contributes to our understanding of the way male dominance in STEM is perpetuated and suggests the source of men’s invisible advantage in STEM.
KW - Higher educational institutions
KW - invisible advantage
KW - mentoring
KW - sponsorship
KW - STEM
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075194388&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/07294360.2019.1686468
DO - 10.1080/07294360.2019.1686468
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85075194388
SN - 0729-4360
VL - 39
SP - 764
EP - 777
JO - Higher Education Research and Development
JF - Higher Education Research and Development
IS - 4
ER -