The Australian Research Council (ARC) is responsible for administering Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA), Australia’s national research evaluation framework. In the ERA 2015 evaluation round, gender data was collected for the first time. Gender data was used for aggregate reporting and analysis purposes only and to provide a baseline for analysis in future rounds: it was not made available to peer reviewers or Research Evaluation Committees (RECs) and did not form part of the evaluation process. Figures were published at the two-digit Field of Research (FoR) code level.

In 2018 the ARC published data at the four-digit FoR code level revealing figures for individual social science disciplines. For philosophy the codes 2201 Applied Ethics, 2202 History and Philosophy of Specific Fields and 2203 Philosophy were used.

Figure 1. Distribution of academic appointments in philosophy in Australia by gender, 2017 (headcount)

Source: Australian Research Council, Gender and the Research Workforce. Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) 2018.

Since 1980 there have been efforts to understand the status of women in the profession, including three reports by Eliza Goddard: To investigate the special problem concerning women in the philosophy profession (1982) and Employment of women 1983-9 (1990) Improving the participation of women in the philosophy profession (2008). The 2008 report assesses the participation of women in the philosophy discipline including analysis of data on employment, appointments and student enrolment. This report emerged out of the concern with the poor representation of women in philosophy programs and interest in developing targeted strategies to address these patterns. Important to these debates was the role of the Committee of Senior Academic Philosophers to address the Status of Women in the discipline set up in 2006. This was not the first incursion into such issues (see Goddard, 2008a, p. 4). 

Using data published in Australasian Journal of Philosophy and data collected as part of the Philosophy Program Profile, Goddard (2008c) shows that over time there has been an increase in the number of women in continuing teaching and research positions. In over three decades, women have gone from representing 4 per cent of continuing teaching and research positions in 1970 to 23 per cent of those positions in 2006 (Goddard, 2008c, p. 7). By 2009, women represented 28 per cent of the staff in the discipline (Bishop, Beebee, Goddard & Rini, 2013, p. 232). 

This expansion of the academic staff in the discipline has seen an increase in the share of women throughout the levels (see Table 1). The percentage of female lecturers rose from 7 per cent to 40 per cent between 1970 and 2006. The increase was less significant in the Senior Lecturer category. The share of women in Senior Lecturer positions went from 3 per cent in 1970 to 14 per cent in 2006. The share of women at the Associate Professor level moved from 0 per cent to 12 per cent and from 0 per cent to 6 per cent for Professorial levels (Goddard, 2008c). 

The patterns are a little more complex as illustrated by Figure 1 below. Between 1994 and 2006 there were several contractions in the percentage of women. An example of this is the reduction of the share of women at the level of Associate Professor from 21 per cent in 1996 to 12 per cent in 2006. This contraction has been associated with an upsurge in the number of Associate Professor positions and a similar reduction of Reader positions between 1996 and 2006 (Goddard, 2008c, p. 9). In 2006, women represented 11 per cent of all continuing teaching and research staff engaged in positions above Lecturer level (Goddard, 2008c, p. 10). Further, women represented 9 per cent of all heads of philosophy programs (Goddard, 2008a). 

Goddard (2008a, pp.8) noted that patterns evident in the university sector are reflected in philosophy. The expansion of the number of positions in late 1970s and early 1980s combined has slowed since then and women have found themselves in the lower academic levels and relatively over-represented among contract and non-continuing positions. More recent research suggests that between 2006 and 2008 there has been an increase in women in Level C, and a decrease in the number of women in Level B (Bishop, Beebee, Goddard & Rini, 2013, p. 233). Bishop, Beebee, Goddard and Rini (2013) note that a deeper understanding of events in departments would be required to understand these changes including access to data on retirement and promotions.

Table 1. Percentage of women in continuing teaching and research positions in philosophy, Australia, by level (1970-2017)

Source: Goddard (2008c, p. 10), 2017 figures provided by the Australasian Association of Philosophy

Figure 2. Percentage of women in continuing positions in philosophy, Australia, by level (2006)

Source: Goddard (2008c, p. 10).

Overall, these figures suggest an ‘inverse relationship between gender and seniority’ and a trend that has been sustained over time with more women engaged in the discipline failing to reach to most senior positions (Goddard, 2008a, p. 9). With regards to continuing research positions, the numbers are low and the number of women that has held these positions is low ranging from one to three since 1984 (Goddard, 2008c, p. 10).

Another interesting dimension of the analysis conducted by Goddard (2008d, p. 5) is an assessment of appointments in 2005-6. This report shows that for a period of two years (2005-6) women represented 31 per cent of continuing teaching and research appointments. Goddard found that no woman was appointed for a continuing research appointment. Women were better represented in casual positions with women representing 38 per cent of contract teaching and research appointments and 31 per cent of contract research appointments. In more general terms for the period 2005-6 women represented 33 per cent of all appointments, 36 per cent of teaching and researching appointments and 30 per cent of research appointments (Goddard, 2008d). Given the small total number of continuing appointments in 2005-6, it is important to be careful with generalisations and take these as an illustration of a much broader problem of women’s poor representation in the discipline (see Goddard, 2008a, p. 11). 

Goddard (2008d) looked into applicant pools for these positions and found that women represented 33 per cent of the short list and 29 per cent of the total number of applicants for continuing teaching and research positions in 2005-6. Goddard (2008d) compares these results with findings from the analysis of 1989-99 AAP Appointments Monitor. She found that there was a minor increase in the numbers of positions filled by women from 29 per cent in 1989-99 to 33 per cent in 2005-6. There was a more visible increase in the share of women in applicant pools: from 18 per cent in 1989-99 to 29 per cent in 2005-6. 

Figure 3: Distribution of academic appointments in philosophy in Australia, by gender, 2003 and 2017

Source: Author’s calculations from data supplied by Australasian Association of Philosophy

The latest annual figures collected by the Australasian Association of Philosophy are still be analysed, and the caveat on all data from the AAP is that the statistics are provided by individual heads who change over the years of the collection. This caveat means that we should not try to draw big conclusions from the data, rather they should be understood as presenting a series of ‘snapshots’. Eliza Goddard says of the 2017 figures that the female FTE rate has remained reasonably constant, while it appears that the male FTE has decreased – this may be due to retirements and positions not being filled.

Analysis of the actual student load of students enrolled produced by Goddard (2008b, p. 4) found that between 2001 and 2006, the average female percentage enrolment at the level of Bachelor was 55 per cent. At a Masters by coursework level the average female percentage enrolment was 56 per cent. This percentage dropped for masters by research with an average female percentage enrolment at 32 per cent and the doctorate by research was 36 per cent (Goddard, 2008b, p. 4). 

Goddard (2008a, p. 12) shows that the average share of female enrolment for philosophy units reduces as the education level increases. Between 2001 and 2006 the percentage of female enrolment in philosophy units was 57 per cent for the first year, and 53 per cent by the second year. By the fourth year the share of women enrolled was 47 per cent (see Figure 2). This suggests that while there might have been a degree of ‘success in attracting women to philosophy, there has been less success in keeping women students throughout the major and into honours’ (Goddard, 2008a, p. 12).

Figure 4. Average percentage of female enrolment in philosophy units, Australia, by course level (2001-6)

Source: Goddard (2008a, p. 12).

Bishop, Beebee, Goddard and Rini (2013, p. 236) argue that while more women than men appear to be interested in studying philosophy, ‘more men than women are serious about it, in the sense of majoring at the undergraduate level’. 

References

Eliza Goddard (2008a). Improving the participation of women in the philosophy profession: Executive summary May 2008. On behalf of Susan Dodds, Lynda Burns, Marl Colyvan, Frank Jackson, Karen Jonesand Catriona Mackenzie. Accessed 11 October 2017.

Eliza Goddard (2008b). Improving the participation of women in the philosophy profession: Report C: Students by gender in philosophy programs in Australian universities. On behalf of Susan Dodds, Lynda Burns, Marl Colyvan, Frank Jackson, Karen Jonesand Catriona Mackenzie. Accessed 11 October 2017.

Eliza Goddard (2008c). Improving the participation of women in the philosophy profession: Report A: Staffing by gender in philosophy programs in Australian universities. Susan Dodds, Lynda Burns, Marl Colyvan, Frank Jackson, Karen Jonesand Catriona Mackenzie. Accessed 11 October 2017.

Eliza Goddard (2008d). Improving the participation of women in the philosophy profession: Report B: Appointments by gender in philosophy programs in Australian universities. Susan Dodds, Lynda Burns, Marl Colyvan, Frank Jackson, Karen Jones and Catriona Mackenzie. Accessed 11 October 2017.

Glenys Bishop with Helen Beebee, Eliza Goddard and Adriane Rini (2013). Appendix 1: Seeing the trends in the data. In Katrina Hutchinson and Fiona Jenkins (Eds.), Women in Philosophy, What needs to change? (pp. 231-52). New York: Oxford University Press.