As a component of human capital, education is an important indicator of a country’s global competitiveness. Education represents influential factor that determines the direction and prospects of the economic, political, and cultural development of society. It acts as an important tool for empowering people, the basis for the formation and implementation of gender equality in society. However, the study showed that the growth factor of education as a way to reduce gender inequality does not work. This suggests that higher education does not use its potential as an agent for the formation of a gender culture of an egalitarian type in society. In the absence of explicit discriminatory practices, gender stereotypes and values are transmitted through latent practices and attitudes in higher education institutions.In only 3 hours we’ll deliver a custom Gender Inequality in Higher Education essay written 100% from scratch Get help
Gender equality is an essential principle of modern civilization and part of US government policy. However, the traditionally patriarchal dominant of public consciousness remains a serious counterbalance to this day. The education system can and should be the main tool today for introducing the idea of equality between men and women in the public mind, but, as studies show (De Welde, Stepnick, & Pasque, 2014), including our empirical qualitative research, it itself reproduces patriarchal ideas about the “natural” purpose of women.
As part of our empirical study, we performed coding, which is the practice of grounded theory. The purpose of a grounded theory is to identify, on the basis of a study of the observed phenomena, underlying structures or influencing relationships. In contrast to the “scientist model” of understanding science, hypotheses are not put forward here at the beginning of the study, but appear in the process of its completion. They arise as a result of the analysis of empirical data available to the researcher.
After the first interviews were conducted (the total sample size was 23 people), we moved on to the first phase of the analysis ‑ open coding. With open coding, the researcher identifies the categories presented in the data. The next phase of the analysis is called axial coding. The researcher selects several categories discovered at the previous stage and places them at the center of the process (interaction between people), as phenomena. These categories are then associated with other categories. The latter are elements of a paradigm model: causal conditions (factors that lead to the occurrence of a phenomenon), strategies (actions taken in response to causal conditions), intermediate circumstances (specific situational factors that influence strategies), and consequences (results that lead to use of strategies). The results of open and axial coding are presented in the table below.
Results of open and axial coding of an empirical study of gender inequality in higher education.
|Open coding||Axial coding|
|1. Gender-based discrimination||Gender culture (2, 4, 10)|
|2. Traditions||Diversity (5, 6, 13)|
|3. Affirmative action||Gender inequality (8, 9, 10)|
|4. Human capital||Discrimination (8, 9, 10)|
|5. Culture||Latent discrimination (12, 13)|
|7. Career development|
|8. Glass ceiling|
|9. Sticky floor|
|10. Latent curriculum|
|11. Gender stereotype|
|12. Performance-based contract of employment|
The charts below show the characteristics of respondents regarding age and position.
The identified problem is the contradiction between the need to increase the presence of women among highly qualified specialists and the preservation of various barriers that limit their career growth and upward social mobility. Even if the representation of women in higher education and science is large enough, they are still discriminated against, are in the background, in the shadow of men. Many respondents noted the gender distribution of academic activities of teachers by field of knowledge, reflecting generally accepted ideas about the “female” and “male” sciences and professions, which have the character of a global trend. The most feminized are the humanities and social sciences, while the most masculinized are the technical ones. Such a division, reflecting even only the current situation of the representation of women in science, refracting in the public consciousness, forms a fairly stable and very widespread idea of the branches of knowledge that correspond to or do not correspond to the peculiarities of “female/male thinking” and suitable or inappropriate occupations for women and men. As a measurement of the ‘hidden curriculum,’ such a distribution consolidates also among students professional gender stereotypes that contribute to the reproduction of gender barriers defined by the term “glass walls” (Waller, Ingram, & Ward, 2017).Academic experts
available We will write a custom Sociology essay specifically for you for only $16.00 $11/page Learn more
Respondents also noted that as academic qualifications increase, gender balance in all sectors and sciences is shifting in favor of men. In the most feminized humanities, women make up almost two-thirds of candidates and only one-third of doctors. In technical, these indices constitute the fifth and tenth, respectively. Only in art history and pedagogy, the number of women among doctors of sciences exceeds the number of men, and in sociology both sexes are represented equally. It can be concluded that this situation is related to the fact that, as respondents indicated, stereotypical representations are attributed to men: “active-creative” characteristics, instrumental personality traits, such as activity, dominance, self-confidence, aggressiveness, logical thinking, and leadership ability. Femininity, on the contrary, is considered as a “passive-reproductive principle,” manifested in expressive personality characteristics, such as dependence, caring, anxiety, low self-esteem, emotionality.
At the same time, it is characteristic that submission to gender norms can be manifested in behavior, but not in compliance, or in behavior and compliance (desire to get approval from society), or can be determined by the need to not deviate from peers (that is, in our case, colleagues of the same gender) externally. Individuals, to varying degrees, are subject to the so-called traditional gender roles, but some attach the greatest importance to sex-typification, completely subordinating to the above roles. The following conclusion about the influence of gender stereotypes on the behavior and work of a given department can be made based on the interaction and communication of the department employees with each other. The presence of talks not on the working topic, the presence of rumors, gossip indicates a certain atmosphere in the department, and it also supports the confirmation of the stereotype that in the department or organization, or group, there are only representatives of a certain gender (in this case, women). Also, it was found that the majority of respondents believed that gender was important in making decision in a conflict.
Some respondents expressed their own interpretation of the situation, its causal relationship. In particular, it was noted that these data do not at all indicate that modern women are less likely than men to engage in scientific activity and are less likely to improve their academic qualifications. However, due to the fact that progress along the steps of the scientific hierarchy is a rather lengthy process, in the scientific community, the most qualified personnel are localized in older age groups, in which the percentage of women is the lowest. Therefore, we can assume that this trend does not reflect the current mood of the scientific intelligentsia as a whole, and especially not of its young generation. Having no neurobiological prerequisites, such a gender gap is socially-culturally determined and is the result of a decades-long process of the scientific elite formation. Nevertheless, a similar current situation reinforces the gender stereotype that ascribes to women a lesser capacity for intense intellectual work and scientific creativity. Although today there is a very definite tendency to increase the number of women among highly qualified scientific personnel, it will take time and special efforts to bridge the gender gap and overcome the stereotype.
Most of the respondents claim that the “glass ceilings” and “sticky floors” in higher education lengthen the career path of women in science and limit their access to management and positions related to responsibility and decision-making. All the noted gender imbalances result not only in longer career paths of women in science and higher education, the difference in the social prestige of scientists and official positions occupied by women and men, but also in a material and very tangible difference in income depending on gender (one of respondents indicated a very definite quantitative value _ up to 20%).
A separate consideration should be given to the problem of the position of women in the leadership of universities. This is a very traditional problem in universities, when only a small percentage of all rectors are women, and relatively few women are among vice-rectors, as well as among department heads, professors, etc. Women usually act as associate professors, teachers, or teaching assistants. Men more often defend dissertations and achieve high positions in the academic hierarchy, while women remain at the primary and secondary levels. The question of why this happens also remains open for future research. It is important to understand whether we are talking about a conscious choice of women, or whether discrimination still exists.
It is striking that 90% of the respondents surveyed experienced sexism in the workplace, 75% of female respondents, in an interview, were asked about their marital status and the availability of children. In other words, despite the willingness to fire employees for sexist remarks, the situation in American higher education is not at all so transparent.
Speaking about current practices and attempts to combat gender discrimination, some respondents noted that an effective contract and transparent mechanisms for hiring and promoting employees should partially solve the problem of discrimination (not only gender, but also other types). In this case, the salary of employees and their career advancement are made dependent on the observed performance indicators, which reduces the potential for discrimination. On the other hand, the introduction of an effective contract with significant incentive payments for scientific publications leads to gender specialization, when men do research and write articles and women teach, which is a relatively less paid work ‑ thus, again, gender inequality arises.15% OFF Get your very first custom-written academic paper with 15% off Get discount
Positive discrimination, like in the case of positive discrimination provided for African Americans, does not improve the situation. Positive discrimination primarily for African Americans, Hispanics, and women in education, regarding employment and the provision of business contracts, was originally conceived in the 60s of the last century as a temporary measure. However, after fifty years, this policy has exhausted its potential, has grown into a network of bureaucratic institutions, and, as often happens, has turned into an ideological end in itself: to ensure from above administrative proportional representation of racial and gender groups. “You cannot fix the picture with quotas” ‑ this phrase of one of the respondents clearly shows the current situation. The task is not to send up to the “glass ceiling” thousands of women, but to change the business culture, because in its current form, the place ‘on top’ requires incomparably more from a woman than from a man ‑ constant stress and work in a skeptical surrounding, as well as the actual abandonment of family life.
It is interesting to note in this context that, as business statistics show, the largest number of women in managerial positions is observed in countries that have never introduced quotas for business (Machado & Davim, 2017). The first one on the path of quotas in the commercial sector was Norway. In 2003, a law was passed according to which at least 40% of women should be on the board of directors. Soon, Iceland, Spain, and France supported this initiative. Germany, in turn, demanded that companies’ supervisory boards should have at least 30% of women.
The ethics of such ‘prescriptions’ continues to raise questions, and women in top management who got there thanks to quotas are called “golden skirts” (Flynn, Haynes, & Kilgour, 2015). Studies on the results of such government intervention continue to give diametrically opposite results. Thus, the National Bureau of Economic Research in the United States found that Norwegian quotas did not increase the number of women in business schools and did not help reduce salary differences (Flynn et al, 2015). Another study by the University of Michigan in 2011 showed that the market reacted poorly to the introduction of quotas, because of which the shares of Norwegian companies fell, and joining the board of directors of supposedly less experienced and qualified women worsened the results of the management’s work (Flynn et al., 2015). Despite the fact that these data were obtained in the business sector, they are quite applicable for universities, especially taking into account the fact that many of them are private. In addition, the management methods used in business have long become the standard practice of universities, which suggests that it is advisable to study the data obtained by researchers when studying various problematic situations in the business environment, when analyzing the activities of universities and making practical recommendations.
In frames of Feminist Standpoint Theory, an understanding of gender as a cultural metaphor indicates that research on gender issues goes beyond the biological and social aspects to the space of the symbolic aspect. The focus of this approach is on the expression of “masculine” and “feminine” at the ontological and epistemological levels as elements of cultural-symbolic series, traditional dichotomous series, based on the opposition of nature and culture (Flynn et al., 2015):
- Cultural = masculine = rational = spiritual… etc.
- Natural = feminine = sensual = bodily… etc.
In addition to these theories of gender, there is an understanding of gender as a psychological gender. Gender/psychological gender is an expression in the activities of men and women that are generally accepted in a given society in a given culture of behavioral patterns. The content of such patterns is most often associated with the biological sex, but the presence of this relationship is not necessary. However, as it can be seen from our study, in the system of higher education of even such a highly developed and democratic country as the United States, there is a tendency to identity concepts of gender and biological sex ‑ women are latently “prescribed” with a certain degree secondary roles. In this context, it should be said that for the current stage of development of gender studies, the most fruitful is a comprehensive understanding of the gender category which takes into account all the diverse capabilities of this category. The initial interdisciplinarity of gender theory implies a comprehensive approach to the application of methods and allows exploring various objects of social and cultural reality through the prism of gender.
Thus, in higher education and university science, all the phenomena of professional segregation take place:
- “Glass walls,” which provide stratification even when choosing the sphere of professional activity and the field of scientific research in accordance with the common beliefs about occupations “suitable” for a certain gender, and sciences “corresponding” to the alleged specificity of female/male thinking;
- “Glass ceiling,” associated with the limited opportunities for scientific, teaching, and administrative careers, as well as the growth of professional status for women;
- “Sticky floor,” which is manifested in the fact that, with an equal level of scientific qualification, women, compared with men, stay longer in the initial positions of the job hierarchy.
Identified trends and phenomena, speaking as important aspects of the gender composition of scientific and pedagogical personnel as a measurement of the university’s hidden curriculum, ‘broadcast’ gender stereotypes about “female”/“male” occupations and sciences, the existence of genetically determined differences in thinking and intellectual activity, and the lesser ability of women to intense intellectual work and scientific creativity, about the greater ability of men to leadership and decision-making, and women to performing work, etc. Reflected in the public and individual consciousness, these stereotypes set, on the one hand, the level of expectations from a student / young researcher, and on the other, determine the level of her aspirations in qualification and career plans. Thus, even in the absence of obvious discriminatory practices, a vicious circle is created that reproduces gender asymmetries not only in science, but in professional and social activities. Identification of the features of such reproduction will allow identifying ways of achieving gender parity in the national higher school, taking into account the historical, socio-economic, and cultural characteristics of its development. Since the prospects for the development of any state are largely related to the activities of its educational institutions, it is legitimate to talk about the special function of higher education in the development of the gender culture of society, no less important than such as research and training of highly qualified personnel.Get your customised and 100% plagiarism-free paper on any subject done for only $16.00 $11/page Let us help you
The vast majority of respondents indicated the creation of a culture of diversity as a possible measure to reduce the level of gender inequality. Purely regulatory measures, according to respondents, do not bring tangible results. A growing number of universities are discovering a new strategic resource ‑ Diversity Management. Its importance for the internationalization of education and science is growing from year to year. The concept of “Diversity” conceals dissimilarity and differences, heterogeneity and diversity. In practice, we are faced with such aspects of it as ethnic and gender differences, sexual orientation, the difference in worldview and age. However, none of the respondents noted the existence of any diversity management practices in their educational institution.
Many universities today have begun to shape the multi-ethnic type of corporate culture that is characteristic of universities with a heterogeneous national composition of teachers, staff and students. Elements of a multi-ethnic corporate culture are present in universities, where a large number of foreign students study and foreign teachers work ‑ representatives of different cultures and peoples (Machado & Davim, 2017). However, with regard to gender diversity, the potential of diversity is used extremely poorly, and respondents noted this in their responses.
Meanwhile, diversity today is seen as a source of creativity and innovation. Under the concept of diversity, experts mean “diversity, pluralism, and heterogeneity,” and the emphasis is on the creative potential of diversity and equal chances in education and career (Machado & Davim, 2017, p.18). Even a brief analysis of the definitions of diversity shows that its main components are heterogeneity and individuality. Universities should consider corporate culture as a resource of their organizational development. To fulfill its mission, corporate culture must be sensitive to the diversity that is emerging in the gender-heterogeneous university community. Today, the leaders of the universities come to realize that this variety can and should be managed; however, as our study shows, effective practical steps for this have not yet been determined.
The idea of managing diversity is based on the assumption that the development of these differences will create a fruitful environment in which everyone will feel their value, the abilities of workers will be fully applied, and the goals of the organization achieved (Machado & Davim, 2017). Diversity management is a guarantee that all employees fully realize their potential and make the maximum contribution to the organization. It implies the value of diversity, that is, the value of differences between people and the various qualities that they bring to their work, which can lead to the formation of a more fruitful environment.
Understanding and recognizing diversity will allow the university to use the different views and contributions that each participant in the educational process makes, i.e., every gender. This is especially important in the context of the Feminist Standpoint Theory, as, according to it, women are better equipped to understand some aspects of the world. The challenge of time lies in the ability to use diversity to improve things in each particular educational institution, and, thereby, in the field of education as a whole. The main thing today is to pay more attention to managing differences and constructively resolving gender conflicts, including hidden ones. Managing diversity does not mean eliminating differences, but using them and creating rich experience on their basis. It is necessary to learn to value diversity, and not be afraid of it.
Due to the fact that university leaders themselves are in a key position in managing diversity, they have the ability to persuade other participants in the educational process to present themselves as “part of a rich tapestry, where each thread contributes to the beauty and value of the entire canvas” (Machado & Davim, 2017, p. 58). They can become the best agents of change in the project (preferably informal) of reformatting the corporate culture towards using the potential of gender organizational diversity. At the same time, it is necessary to resolve conflicts so that diversity becomes part of the solution, and not part of the problem. Diversity is an important resource for leadership in education, not an obstacle. The experience of successful business companies shows that understanding and using diversity allows finding a solution to many issues and challenges (Mensi-Klarbach & Risberg, 2019). This experience, within the framework of the concept of “new management,” is quite applicable for higher education institutions.
Managing diversity does not boil down to simply addressing bias or discrimination issues. However, in order to manage diversity and ensure equality, a university needs to fight against prejudice and discrimination. When people are discriminated against, their confidence and self-esteem are destroyed, so they will not contribute to the university’s successful functioning. Accordingly, in this case, the level of employee involvement (engagement) will tend to zero. If the leadership discriminates against people and does not show them respect, then the management team becomes a source of tension, hostility, disagreement, distrust, which makes it difficult to manage the university effectively. This fact was also noted by the respondents: it was indicated that the entrenched practices of latent gender discrimination make it impossible to build a culture of engagement.
The basic principles for positive using of such valuable resource as the potential of diversity can be formulated in the form of the following statements:
- People are more alike than different.
- Differences appear at different times and in different situations.
- All differences are recognized and respected, not giving preference to one or the other.
- The potential of diversity is a mosaic that takes into account and uses the characteristics of each.
- Individuals make unique contributions.
Of course, the rector’s decision is not enough to implement the diversity management process. However, it should be borne in mind that the agents of change in their view (the thought process) give preference to some point of view and related management methods. The preferences of respondents are conditionally divided into two views:
- Top-down management through rational approaches and strategic management;
- Bottom-up management based on the development of organization and self-organization.
It can be assumed that for the successful implementation of large-scale changes, a combination of both perspectives seems to be the most fruitful option, but the results of the study show that agents of change are inclined to any one view. In addition, situational factors can have a significant impact on decisions about behavior and method. Examples of these are the representation of agents of change about the culture of the organization, what its leaders think about change, etc. At the time of the practical implementation of change, namely situational factors have a great influence on managers. One of these factors is the management methods adopted by the organization, the vision of managers higher in the hierarchy of how to manage. Agents may not follow their preferences, but follow the lead of a responsible manager.
It should also be understood that there is no independent position of the observer ‑ the leader is included in the organization being changed, and what organization, and how he perceives it, depends on this leader (there is no objective view). However, the question is not how objective are representations of the agent of change about the organization, but about what difficulties the methods used create and how they help solve the problem. The organization should be changed not “by the right methods,” but possible ones, based on its current state and current skills, the capabilities of the university and its management (through the area of the nearest change). The organization is such a complex system that complex changes will require different ideas, which means group work and social structures. The task of the leader is to resolve the contradictions that arise in the process of clash of different views on the organization and the necessary methods for managing it. In the work environment of the university, consisting of hierarchical separate departments, change management is a new condition for the success of gender diversified leadership.
In this context, gender diversity competence implies the ability to establish clear communications between people in situations that are often intense and emotionally overloaded, the ability to form a feedback mechanism, as well as the ability to see problem and risk situations, the ability to control the situation, the ability to independently think and make decisions, creativity, a penchant for creativity, a sense of humor. The skills of group work are also required: the ability to solve issues in small groups and direct the efforts of its members in a constructive direction, to contrast the ideas of employees during the discussion, the skills of an informal leader, the ability to separate personal and official, professionalism.
It is people who are the “guardians” of change, and Michael Hammer very accurately said this, noting: “The most puzzling, annoying, frustrating and incomprehensible part of BPR is people” (Hammer as cited in Cran, 2015, p.42). if people are annoying or upsetting, not so important – says Hammer (Hammer as cited in Cran, 2015, p.43); the fact is that people are the decisive factor for the success of any BPM project, and if not to build this part of the project correctly, it will either fail or its success will be limited. The project team can develop better BPM processes and systems, but if people refuse to use them or use them incorrectly, the project will not be successful. People do not like change, and will not implement the program of change or participate in it unless they believe that it is necessary. People do not need persuasion: they need leadership ‑ the direction of movement, constancy, momentum, and perseverance; employees need leaders who focus on decisions and actions.
The results of the study allow recommending the leadership of universities, in overcome the resistance of teachers to changes, to use the method of value management, as the resistance of employees to the changes made has a value determination. It should be emphasized that the solution to this problem cannot be achieved by “hard” methods, as is often done in business companies, where the commitment of employees to the proclaimed organizational values is one of the key indicators in the assessment and certification procedures. The peculiarity of the university is that it is a professional organization based on values. The development and adoption of a new system of organizational values here is possible only on the basis of “soft” management methods.
Obviously, in organizations that demonstrate values such as trust and openness, the success of change is influenced by universal reach and participation. Accordingly, the success of the changes is significantly affected by the correspondence between organizational values and: a) personal values of employees; b) the values of the purpose or content of the changes being undertaken; c) the values underlying the change management method. It is especially worthwhile to focus on the theory of emergent cyclical levels of existence (ECLET) offered by Graves, based on eight basic value systems that can be measured using a value test. This theory claims that the change and development of culture in organizations occurs according to a certain hierarchy of levels (Cran, 2015). Each new level leads to a change in organizational culture in connection with the advent of a new set of values. If the existing value system is ineffective at overcoming changes in the external environment of the organization, then a value system appears that can cope with them. This leads to the development of a new organizational culture and concomitant changes in behavior. The driving force behind the transition to a more complex system of values is the need to solve new problems that the existing system cannot solve. Each level in the hierarchy goes beyond and includes all levels below it and thus embraces greater complexity, which, in turn, provides a greater degree of freedom in thinking and behavior.
In a period of change, people are more than ever in dire need of information about what is happening, what will happen, and what will be the result. At the same time, the most important thing that excites people is the reason for what is happening and how the results will affect them personally. Therefore, the leader pays special attention to internal communications. Also, in a period of change, information is a valuable resource. Naturally, the more information, the more confident and calm people feel. As a result, there is a lack of fear of the unknown and transition to the adoption stage is softer and faster. Therefore, the leader’s task is to create communication platforms and involve each team member in the discussion. As a result, the team’s involvement in the organization processes, necessary during the period of changes, will also appear. Evidently, only after each member of the team accepted the changes and reconfigured to work according to the new rules, the leader can switch back to manager mode ‑ system and directing.
The study of human capital implies the need to take into account a factor of a discriminatory nature ‑ gender conflict, blocking the effective allocation of resources and undermining the very foundation of progressive socio-economic dynamics through institutionalization and formalization of inequality of opportunities for individuals. This conflict is manifested in the structural deformation of society. Gender approach to conflict resolution consists in the need to take into account gender differences in the personal characteristics and social behavior of the parties to the conflict, taking into account gender stereotypes on the basis of which the parties to the conflict are based on each other, and in anticipation of appropriate behavior, as well as the correction of these ideas and expectations, in accordance with research and communication with a particular participant.
Increasing the presence of women in prestigious activities in higher education and science is not an end in itself. Rights in the field of education go beyond the scope of numerical equality and are designed to encourage the achievement of real gender equality in the field of education, which can be achieved through practices of effective management of organizational diversity, primarily on the basis of a deep understanding of its advantages and potential for the sustainable functioning of a particular university, and higher education systems in general. The chain is developing: productivity – improving economic efficiency – achieving other key development goals. This is nothing but the logical circle of civilizational being: human capital – human rights – gender equality – sustainable development – progress – quality of life – human capital. This construction is quite deserving of designation as a humanitarian formula for civilizational development. It is necessary to realize that the manifestation of gender inequality in the development process is unacceptable.
Today, there is no doubt that business organizations should demonstrate the behavior of responsible citizens. However, there is practically no formalized evidence of relevant requirements for educational institutions, while namely from their walls experts and business leaders come out to demonstrate a socially responsible attitude to global problems. This necessitates the construction of the current activities of universities on the principles of sustainable development, including, inter alia, the effective use of the potential of organizational diversity in its gender aspect.
Respondents rightly noted that it is difficult for a university alone to implement conceptual activities and programs; therefore, the concept of a sustainable university provides for partnership programs and cooperation between a university and commercial and public organizations. The university should participate in existing national and international organizations that promote and develop the principles of sustainable development and gender equality, in particular, develop partnerships with enterprises of various forms of ownership engaged in sustainable development programs, diversity management and gender equality.
Back in 2005, recognizing the global importance of education for sustainable development (ESD), the Ministers of Environment and Education of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) member states adopted the UNECE Strategy for Education for Sustainable Development. The purpose of this strategy is to encourage ECE member states to develop and integrate ESD into their education systems within the framework of relevant academic disciplines. The overall objective of the strategy is to provide people with knowledge and the formation of skills in the field of sustainable development, which allow them to acquire additional competence and self-confidence, while at the same time expanding their opportunities for a healthy and productive lifestyle in harmony with nature and in accordance with social values, principles of gender equality and national and cultural diversity. To adhere to the principles of sustainable development in the mission of the university and to indicate these principles among the strategic development goals, of course, it is important for both external and internal audiences of the university. Although even at this stage not all universities clearly understand and formulate the essence of sustainable development, reducing them to a limited circle of “green” initiatives, the most difficult task is to institutionalize the principles of sustainable development, that is, the penetration of the principles of sustainable development into all areas of the university to achieve and consolidate successful progress towards the goals of education for sustainable development. Obviously, such an education can be implemented only if there is no gender inequality in the teaching staff.
Cran, C. (2015). The art of change leadership: Driving transformation in a fast-paced world. Denver, CO: Wiley.
De Welde, K., Stepnick, A., & Pasque, P. A. (2014). Disrupting the culture of silence: Confronting gender inequality and making change in higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Flynn, P., Haynes, K., & Kilgour, M. (2015). Integrating gender equality into business and management education: Lessons learned and challenges remaining. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.
Machado C., & Davim, J. P. (2017). Managing organizational diversity: Trends and challenges in management and engineering. New York, NY: Springer.
Mensi-Klarbach H., & Risberg, A. (2019). Diversity in organizations: Concepts and practices. New York, NY: Red Globe Press.
Waller, R., Ingram, N., & Ward, M. (2017). Higher education and social inequalities: University admissions, experiences, and outcomes. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.