SAA Task Force on Gender Disparities in Archaeological Grant Submissions
In Spring 2013, the Society for American Archaeology (SAA) created the Task Force on Gender and Rates of Research Grant Submissions because of a troublesome disparity in the rates of senior (post-Ph.D.) proposal submissions by male and female PIs to archaeology programs at both National Science Foundation(NSF) and the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. While NSF success rates of men and women over the past few years (2009-2011) were roughly equal (35% of applications submitted by women were successful, compared to 33% from men), the number of submissions from women were half that of men (270 women submitted applications over this three-year period compared to 542 men).
Given the documented increase in the proportion of women in academic archaeology among early and mid-career academics, this 33% representation of women in the applicant pool seems low. Moreover, submissions for doctoral dissertation improvement grants at NSF are more evenly divided between men and women. Statistics for Wenner-Gren funding note the same disparity in their post-PhD funding in archaeology, though NOT in other anthropology sub-disciplines. Statistics for NSF funding in biological anthropology and cultural anthropology similarly showed no difference in submission rates by men and women. The primary question, therefore, is why don’t post-PhD women archaeologists apply for extramural research funding in proportion to their presence in the field?
Given the documented increase in the proportion of women in academic archaeology among early and mid-career academics, this 33% representation of women in the applicant pool seems low. Moreover, submissions for doctoral dissertation improvement grants at NSF are more evenly divided between men and women. Statistics for Wenner-Gren funding note the same disparity in their post-PhD funding in archaeology, though NOT in other anthropology sub-disciplines. Statistics for NSF funding in biological anthropology and cultural anthropology similarly showed no difference in submission rates by men and women. The primary question, therefore, is why don’t post-PhD women archaeologists apply for extramural research funding in proportion to their presence in the field?
Hypothesis #1
The disparities in research grant submissions are proportional to the number of male vs. female archaeologists in the profession, and especially to the number of male vs. female archaeologists in job settings where grant writing and grant related research is encouraged (i.e., academic settings with graduate programs and research museums).
Hypothesis #2
Women in archaeology have heavier service burdens. For example, more women may be in administrative positions that constrain the amount of time spent on research and grant submissions. They may also have heavier advising burdens, particularly to female and underrepresented minority students.
Hypothesis #3
Because archaeology is (or perceived as) more field-based than other subfields of anthropology, and family responsibilities keep women from doing extensive fieldwork (particularly overseas), fewer women apply for NSF grants unless they are applying for a fieldwork component.
Hypothesis #4
Women tend to conduct smaller projects and therefore go to Wenner-Gren, National Geographic, and other funding sources for smaller amounts of money.
Hypothesis #5
Women are going to other funding sources within NSF to obtain funding, many of which are larger than Archaeology Program grants, therefore lowering the numbers for Archaeology Program itself.
Hypothesis #6
Women may not perceive their research as suitable for NSF and more women are applying for, and being funded through, other agencies such as NEH.
Hypothesis #7
Women’s reactions to negative reviews are different from men’s and have resulted in their feeling discouraged from resubmission. If true, this trend may be compounded by the current trend for proposals to not be funded during the first round within NSF Archaeology.
Hypothesis #8
Women work more on their own than men in archaeology and this may have an effect on the frequency of grant submissions.
Hypothesis #9
The nature of archaeological field research includes a number of stresses, such as long field seasons, difficult living conditions, long distance travel, coordination of large crews, and close living quarters with colleagues. Such conditions limit women’s ability to find appropriate childcare.
Results
Data
SAA TF Gender Disparities Final Report
Recommendations
References Cited
