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.

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]

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.

Background: Podiatry enrolments at Australian and New Zealand universities have decreased by 17.3% since 2015, which threatens the profession's sustainability and the health and wellbeing of Australian and New Zealand people and communities. Reasons for this decline remain unclear due to insufficient evidence on factors influencing career choices. The overarching aim of this study was to identify motivators and barriers for studying podiatry in Australia and New Zealand. Methods: This study used a convergent mixed methods design. Students enrolled in (i) podiatry and (ii) relevant non‐podiatry health, sport or science programs at nine Australian and one New Zealand university, were invited to participate in an online survey. First‐year podiatry students were also invited to participate in an online workshop. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and linear/logistic regression models. Three independent assessors used inductive thematic analysis for the qualitative data. Results: Overall, 278 podiatry students (mean age 24.9 ± 8.5 years, 65.1% female) and 553 non‐podiatry students (mean age 24.8 ± 8.2 years, 75.4% female; 32.2% from physiotherapy and 29.1% from occupational therapy) responded to the survey. Interest in a health‐related career, wanting to make a difference to people's health, and opportunity to care for people from different backgrounds/age groups were key motivating factors among podiatry students. Barriers to studying podiatry were encountered by 28.1% of podiatry students. Thematic analysis identified seven themes concerning career choice, which are as follows: (i) awareness of profession and scope of practice; (ii) stereotypes and negative perceptions of the profession; (iii) awareness of career pathways; (iv) job prospects and earning potential; (v) working with people and building relationships; (vi) podiatry is not the first preference; and (vii) barriers which limit student enrolment. Conclusions: There are a variety of factors that motivate and influence students to study podiatry, however, altruistic reasons are most highly rated. Allied health students have limited understanding of the scope of practice and career opportunities in podiatry. Additionally, the podiatry profession often faces negative stereotypes. Further work is required to reverse the negative stereotypes and perceptions of podiatry and build knowledge of the profession's scope of practice, career pathways/opportunities, job prospects and earning potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]