Search

This paper reports on a research project designed to understand the work experiences and career opportunities of people working in higher education institutions (HEIs) across the UK, which received formal recognition for supporting gender equity between 2015 and 2020. The findings reveal multiple intersecting barriers to women's full engagement, inclusion, support and career success in higher education, despite the implementation of organization-based gender equity plans, and institutional inter/national recognition for advancing equity. Most axes of de/privilege that are based along lines of gender, race, ethnicity and religion are enacted as everyday sexism that resist gender equality policy. Moreover, our findings suggest that 'place' is a constitutive element of intersectional dis/advantage, not merely a context within which compounded barriers to inclusion and advancement may exist. In addition, the findings demonstrate that whilst inter-categorical intersectionality is based on the notion that all social categories (such as age, race and gender) are equally salient, the degree of importance of any category will likely depend on location or context of the phenomena being examined. Our findings therefore invite further, iterative and translocational research into the impacts of the intersections of gender, ethnicity, race and religion in spaces of higher education, particularly those with colonial legacies and presence.

Purpose: This paper argues that universities can facilitate women graduates' employability by supporting gender equity within their institutions. It presents a rationale and strategy for addressing the gendered nature of career confidence which negatively impacts women graduates' entry into the workplace -- a phenomenon that influences women graduates' career and life trajectories, and all industries' capacity to serve women stakeholders. Design/methodology/approach: The authors consider existing literature as "words to think with" (Kinsella and Shepherd, 2020), as a feminist methodology to contribute fresh ideas into the discourse arena of graduate employability and as a means to make social change possible (Phelan, 1994). Findings: The paper presents the feminist viewpoint that a reconfiguration of gender relations in the academy, through deploying gender equity quotas, and professional development activities designed to expose and help mitigate implicit gender bias are required to support women graduates' career confidence and employability. Research limitations/implications: The paper offers a viewpoint rather than an empirical evidence because of the difficulty in directly assessing a causal relationship between gendered education experience and graduates' self-efficacy and transition from college to work, "due to its longitudinal nature … [and] because cultural beliefs are … difficult to manipulate experimentally" (Sterling et al., 2020, p. 30,306). Also, while gender equity quotas have had some success, they can be disrupted by gendered bias within the workplace. Although the authors recommend a combination intervention of gender equity quotas and professional development to address gender bias, they acknowledge that the intervention is yet to be evaluated. Practical implications: Universities are tasked with supporting graduate employability, an inherent quality of which is graduate identity. The study offers a practical solution to increasing the number of women leaders within the academy by recommending the introduction of gender equity quotas, supported by professional development designed to develop leaders' gender insight and change agency, and combat all university workers' gender bias. This approach provides more equitable work structures within universities and increases the number and nature of women role models to support women's graduate identity development. Gender equity principles are presented as the key to facilitating women graduates' self-efficacy and work readiness. Social implications: Strategy designed to enhance women graduates' career confidence is critical because women's lower career confidence tends to inform their lower-level starting positions with lower-level pay, resulting in role and pay gaps that are sustained and magnified throughout the life cycle of their careers. Additionally, interventions to address gender bias in the academy are significant because providing gender equity quotas alongside facilitating women in leadership positions to be/come change agents move beyond what Cockburn (1989, p. 218) defines as supporting a short-term agenda of "equality for individual women … [to supporting a] project of transformation for organizations". Originality/value: The novel contribution of this paper is the feminist conceptualisation that gender equity practices, most notably a composite of gender equity quotas and professional development, are located within universities' remit to support graduate employability.

This paper explores institutional leaders' perceptions of learning and teaching involved in facilitating and assessing Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET) survey instruments across Australian regional universities. It focuses on how they understand the function of SET, strategies used to mitigate bias, and potential residual harm. Through adopting a combination of inductive and deductive research processes and a thematic analysis through the ethical lens of nonmaleficence (first, do no harm), we report that leaders in learning and teaching perceive SET as a form of surveillance and Quality Assurance 'performance', recognise inherent biases inhabited in SET reports, and identify how these biases negatively impact academics through a lack of systematic harm mitigation strategies. The paper's critical – and novel – contributions include an increased understanding of how SET inflicts harm towards women and other marginalised academic groups through systematic and authorised microaggressions and how SET contravenes universities' duty of care to employees. It recommends an expansion of the principle of nonmaleficence beyond potential harm to research subjects, including those who undertake research or evaluation (such as academics), particularly if these impact them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

E-commerce businesses have proven to offer lifelines for residents in regional, rural, and remote (RRR) locations traditionally reliant on agricultural income. Prolonged droughts and frequent floods have had devastating impacts on the ability to farm, propelling the need to generate off-farm income to survive. This ever-growing necessity to overcome climate hardship has catalyzed a new generation of women e-commerce entrepreneurs in RRR Australia, in turn, supporting community development. Our study focuses on interviews with successful women e-commerce entrepreneurs from rural Queensland, Australia, to explore the common barriers they face and their use of social media to connect with consumers throughout Australia and globally. Results identified their three greatest challenges to be product supply, product distribution, and unreliable internet connectivity. Data exploring social media behaviors suggested a strong reliance on Facebook and Instagram to drive website traffic and generate sales. This study provides a unique contribution to knowledge regarding an under-researched segment of entrepreneurs, and how they contribute to community development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As researchers working within a neoliberalist academic regime propagated by discourses of responsibilisation, risk and prudentialism, we experienced a dilemma about whether to publicly present views expressed by research participants that critiqued the policy position of the government department that funded the research. Our dilemma was exacerbated because research funding is relatively difficult to attain for women academics. However, in recognising that rural women's voices are often marginalised in rural policy formation, and to maintain our ethical responsibility to these participants, in this article we share these potentially contentious research findings and in doing so problematise neoliberal strictures that can erode individual researcher autonomy "and" that of universities as independent agents.

RATIONALE: The tobacco harm reduction literature is replete with vague language, far-reaching claims, and unwarranted certainty. The American Thoracic Society has increasingly recognized the need for a framework for reliably making such claims. Evidence-based standards improving the scientific value and transparency of harm reduction claims are expected to improve their trustworthiness, clarity, and consistency. METHODS: Experts from relevant American Thoracic Society committees identified key topic areas for discussion. Literature search strategy included English language articles across Medline, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Collaborative databases, with expanded search terms including tobacco, addiction, smoking, cigarettes, nicotine, and harm reduction. Workgroup members synthesized their evidentiary summaries into a list of candidate topics suitable for inclusion in the final report. Breakout groups developed detailed content maps of each topic area, including points to be considered for suggested recommendations. Successive draft recommendations were modified using an iterative consensus process until unanimous approval was achieved. Patient representatives ensured the documents relevance to the lay public. RESULTS: Fifteen recommendations were identified, organized into four framework elements dealing with: estimating harm reduction among individuals, making claims on the basis of population impact, appropriately careful use of language, and ethical considerations in harm reduction. DISCUSSION: This statement clarifies important principles guiding valid direct and inferential harm reduction claims. Ideals for effective communication with the lay public and attention to unique ethical concerns are also delineated. The authors call for formal systems of grading harm reduction evidence and regulatory assurances of longitudinal surveillance systems to document the impact of harm reduction policies.

Founded on and sustained through patriarchal thought and value systems, higher education remains a highly gendered and en/gendering institution. This reflects and simultaneously constitutes epistemological injustice, and creates a viscous cycle or de/privilege. Moreover, regionality de-centres and further marginalizes women academics, and those belonging to other equity groups experience compounding inequities. To understand the experiences of 'becoming' women academics within regional universities, we engaged a qualitative collaborative autoethnography and the post-qualitative practice of re-considering and re-inscribing ethnographic 'data' that glowed in us. These glowful data illuminated our 'non-linear' and non-teleological careering away from, around, and into academia, highlighting synergies between our 'non-traditional' academic pathways and (un)structured, in-the-making epistemological practice. In this paper, we share our 'glowful' process and consider the possibilities (and tensions) of engaging in research that occupies a space bordering qualitative and post-qualitative inquiry, designed to resist Cartesian and Positivist epistemologies and methodological practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]