he Mich i gan Civil Rights Initiat ive (MCRI), a constitutional amendment proposed to be on the s t ate ballot in November 2006, wo u l d, if passed, ban gove rnment “ p re fe re n c e s ” based on ra c e,s ex , c o l o r, ethnicity or national ori gin in public educat i o n , gove rnment employment and gove rn-

ment contra c t i n g. In 2004, the UM President's A dv i s o ry Commission on Women's Issues, wh i ch isch a i red by CEW director Carol Hollenshead and wh i ch advises UM President Mary Sue Coleman on ge n d e r- re l ated policy and pra c t i c e, became concerned about the potential effects of the ballot initiat ive.For ex a m p l e, in re m a rks at a Feb ru a ry 2004 Dive rsity Summit, UM President Coleman ex p ressed herc o n c e rn that “ [ m ] a ny programs across the state that open doors for women and minorities are at ri s k ”because MCRI “seeks to limit theability of public institutions to consider race and gender as fa c t o rs in determining part i c i p a-t i o n .” S i m i l a rly, in Ja nu a ry 2005re m a rks on Martin Luther King, J r.D ay, P resident Coleman stated herbelief that MCRI was “not a 'civil rights' initiat ive,” but would instead “ close the doors to outre a ch andre c ruiting progra m s , m e n t o ri n g, and financial aid that encourage women and under- rep resented minori t ystudents to seek the highest possible academic ach i eve m e n t s .”

To add ress these questions and concern s , CEW conducted re s e a rch on the gender impact of Pro p o s i t i o n2 0 9 , a nearly identical initiat ive passed by Califo rnia vo t e rs in 1996. Th at re s e a rch , conducted by CEWre s e a rch e rs Susan Kaufmann and Anne Davis and rep o rted in “ The Gender Impact of the Pro p o s e dM i ch i gan Civil Rights Initiat ive,” found that Proposition 209 has had stro n g ly negat ive consequences fo rall women and for men of color in Califo rnia. While Proposition 209, l i ke the MCRI, ex p l i c i t ly add re s s e dp u blic educat i o n , p u blic employment and gove rnment contra c t i n g, t h eCEW rep o rt found that Proposition 209 has resulted in add i t i o n a lch a l l e n ges to health care, domestic violence services and other pro-grams essential to women's we l l - b e i n g. If interp reted as Pro p o s i t i o n209 has been, the rep o rt concl u d e d, MCRI ap p e a rs to provide no newc ivil rights and could seri o u s ly erode the gains women and minori t i e sh ave made in the last seve ral decades. The key findings of the CEWrep o rt are summari zed below.

The MCRI ap p e a rs to have been designed by its backe rs to encom-pass all functions and all levels of state and local gove rn m e n t .

T

CEW Researchand Advocacy WorkingTogetherOver the past several years,CEW has been involved inresearch and advocacy activ-ities that focus on flex i b l epolicies in higher education.Fa m i ly - f ri e n d ly policies,wo rk / l i fe policies, p o l i c i e st h at promote fl ex i b i l i t y –e a ch of these terms is cur-re n t ly used to ap p ly to poli-cies and practices that makeit easier for employees to bal-ance and integrate thedemands of the wo rk p l a c ewith the demands of home orfa m i ly. Over the past seve ra lye a rs , CEW has beeni nvo l ved in re s e a rch anda dvo c a cy activities that fo c u son fl ex i ble policies in highere d u c ation.

In the context of theU n ive rsity of Mich i gan e nv i ro n m e n t , CEW and theP re s i d e n t ’s A dv i s o ryCommission on Wo m e n ’sIssues (PACWI) have wo rke dwith campus constituenciesto ensure that unive rsity policies re c og n i ze the lifeex p e riences of women – andi n c re a s i n g ly, men – thatm a ke fl ex i ble policies soi m p o rtant for re c ruiting andmaintaining excellent fa c u l t yand staff. In 1988/89, CEW conducted focus groups withwomen faculty on campus tol e a rn about their ex p e ri e n c e swith UM policies. In fa c t ,these focus groups identifi e ds p e c i fic needs for wo m e n

Michigan Civil Rights Initiative (MCRI) Could Have Unfortunate Outcomes for Michigan Residents

Continued on page 6Continued on page 6

F A L L 2 0 0 5S E R V I C E

R E S E A R C H

A D V O C A C Y

“It (MCRI) could ban outreach programs to recruit men to nursing or girlsand women to science, math and technology. It could make illegal any scholarships based on race, s ex , ethnicity or national o r i g i n . It could prohibit programs to help women and minorities becomeapprentices in the skilled trades, where their numbers remain very low.”

In this Issue:

Page 2 From the Director

Page 3 CEW Counselors Cover aVariety of Topics

Page 4 Planned Giving Page 7 Leadership CouncilPage 8 Scholar in Residence,

Jana Nidiffer

On the web: www. c e w. u m i c h . e d u

n Ann Arbor as across the country, we ' ve been seeing new ss t o ries re l ated to Hurricanes Kat rina and Rita since Labor Day we e k-e n d. Commentat o rs and new s c a s t e rs alike have noted that these s t o ries have shown the nation images of A m e ricans living in pove rt yand have illuminated issues of pove rt y. In the afterm ath of these hur-ri c a n e s , a new spotlight has shone on pove rty in the U. S.

For those of us at CEW, our dismay at seeing these terri ble images iscoupled with a reminder of one of the fundamental needs for wo m e nin A m e rica today – the need for education. While only 4.3% of thep o p u l ation holding a four year degree or higher is below the pove rt yl i n e, the nu m b e rs rise dra m at i c a l ly for those with only a high sch o o ldiploma (12%) and re a ch 21% for those without a high sch o o ld egre e. Clearly, economic and social strat i fi c ation tra n s l ates intoe d u c ational leve l s , as David Brooks describes in a September 25,2005 editorial in the N ew Yo rk Ti m e s. Students in the poorest quart i l eof the population have less than a 10% likelihood of completing ac o l l ege degre e, while those in the top quartile economically have a75% ch a n c e.

Women comprise 56% of A m e ricans over 18 who live in pove rt y.Ye t , women's earnings and income increase dra m at i c a l ly when theyh ave college degrees. Completing a fo u r- year college degre e“ s h a rp ly reduces women's chances of being poor, f rom 16.7 perc e n tto 1.6 perc e n t .” Higher education is even more vital for wo m e nbecause in order to re a ch the income levels of men with high school diplomas, women need post-second-a ry education. Men with a high school degree in 2001 earned more than $34,000, while women who hadan associates degree earned just over $32,000.

A c c o rding to UM's National Center on Pove rt y, “ Pove rty rates are highest for families headed by singlewo m e n , p a rt i c u l a rly if they are bl a ck or Hispanic. In 2004, 28.4 percent of households headed by singlewomen we re poor, while 13.5 percent of households headed by single men and 5.5 percent of m a rried-couple households lived in pove rt y.”

The grim photos of women and ch i l d ren in pove rty in New Orleans illuminate the need for wo m e n , a n de s p e c i a l ly single mothers , to improve their economic prospects through education. Not only doeswomen's educational attainment result in higher earnings and a reduced pro b ability of living in pove rt y,recent re s e a rch points to the interge n e rational benefits of higher educational attainment. “Higher levels ofp a rental education… increase the likelihood that ch i l d ren will be successful in sch o o l ,” and the educat i o n-al attainment of parents is re flected in the subsequent educational attainment of their ch i l d re n .

The suffe ring fo l l owing the Gulf Coast disasters reminds us that CEW's ongoing wo rk to improve e d u c ational access for women can have tangi ble results. Improving the lives of individual women and c o n s e q u e n t ly their ch i l d ren's lives happens in many ways at CEW. Wo rking to advance women's e d u c ational attainment is one important way we touch the lives of hundreds of women each ye a r.

For a ve rsion of this column that includes citat i o n s , please visit the CEW website at www. c ew. u m i ch . e d u .

I

CEW STA F FCarol Hollenshead, Director

Susan Kaufmann, Associate Director

Louise AugustEilisha DermontValerie EaglinBeth HalloranJoan Henry

Roxann KeatingJeanne Miller

Catherine MuellerDoreen Murasky

Akanke Omorayo-AdenreleJanice ReubenSally SchmallBeth Sullivan

Merta TrumbleJean Waltman

Audrey Williams

Affiliated ScholarsPeggy KahnJana Nidiffer

Valerie PolakowLily Jarman-Reisch

Jayne Thorson

Graduate Student ResearchersHeather Branton

Patricia MoonsammyGilia Smith

Leadership CouncilLisa Baker, Ann Arbor, MI

Jean W. Campbell, Ann Arbor MIAnthony Derezinski, Ann Arbor MI

Molly H. Dobson, Ann Arbor MIAnne E. Lehker, Milford, MI

Robert D. Oliver, Ann Arbor, MIMargaret A. Riecker, Midland MIDesma Reid-Coleman, Detroit MI

Ann Sneed Schriber, Ann Arbor MIMarina v. N. Whitman, Ann Arbor MI

Emeritae CouncilMenakka M. Bailey, Ann Arbor, MI

Nancy Barbour, Alexandria, VANorma C. Barfield, Bloomfield Hills, MI

Ellen M. Byerlein, Petoskey, MILois P. Cohn, Bloomfield Hills, MI

Julie F. Cummings, Birmingham, MIMartha Meier Dean, Newton Square, PA

Beverly B. Denbo, Bethesda, MDAnne Duderstadt, Ann Arbor, MI

Susan S. Florsheim, Highland Park, ILTwink Frey, Grand Rapids, MI

Beverley Geltner, Ann Arbor, MIMatina Souretis Horner, Belmont, MA

Judith H. Lax, Ann Arbor, MIAshley M. Maentz, Lake Bluff, IL

William Martin, Ann Arbor, MIRebecca McGowan, Ann Arbor, MI

Ann V. Parfet, Kalamazoo, MILana B. Pollack, Ann Arbor, MISheila M. Potiker, La Jolla, CA

Kathleen K. Power, Ann Arbor, MIKarla Sherer, Chicago, IL

Martha R. Seger, Ann Arbor, MICarol S. Smokler, Boca Raton, FL

Maxine J. Snider, Chicago, ILNellie M. Varner, Detroit, MI

Erica A. Ward, Bloomfield Hills, MI

Cente r f or the Educat ion o f Women Un iver s i t y of Mich igan Fal l 200 5 P age 2

F R O M T H E D I R E C T O R

Women comprise 56% of Americans over 18 who live in pov e r t y. Ye t , w o m e n ’s earningsand income increase dramatically when they have college degrees. Completing a four-year college degree “sharply reduces women’s chances of being poor, from 16.7 percent to 1.6 percent”

■ Median annual income of workers 25 and older: Wo m e nwith associate degree $32,153;Men with high school completion$34,723

■ 56% of the poor in the U.S. a r ewomen; 18% are children

■ About 10% of men with a highschool diploma live below thep overty line; the percentage is virtually identical (9.7%) forwomen with some college.

■ While only 4.3% of the popula-tion holding a four year degree orhigher is below the poverty line,the numbers rise dramatically forthose with only a high schooldiploma (12%).

The Center for the Education of WomenUniversity of Michigan

330 East Liberty Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104-2289

734.998.7080www.cew.umich.edu

Ove r Fort y Yea rs o f Prov id ing S er v i c e , Research and A d v o c a c y P age 3

he above quote illustrates the kind of feedback that CEW typically receives from individuals who have taken advantage of ourcounseling service. The professional counselors at CEW work one-on-one in over 1,000 appointments each year – sometimes seeing awoman once, sometimes for a series of appointments as they workon a specific issue such as a decision about a career change.

Describing CEW’s counseling can be challenging. The concerns thatindividuals bring into their meetings with counselors range fromexploring educational goals or a new career area to rebuilding lifeafter divorce, to a serious financial crisis. The following storiesillustrate the variety of ways in which CEW works with women andmen as partners in life transitions.

❂ Eva, a scientist with a doctoral degree, came to CEW when shewas uncertain about continuing in her career track. She learnedabout the “imposter feelings” sometimes experienced by highachievers in the academy, reacquainted herself with lost goals, andrenewed connections with those who believed in her talents. Severalmonths later, she was able to accept “the job of her dreams.”

❂ An office worker for a small manufacturing business, Roxy feltsmothered and bored. Art had always been an outlet for her, and hercounselor suggested an art degree as one possibility. The counseloroffered a number of resources and informational contacts, and Roxyfollowed through on each one. She decided to pursue a degree inart, and was admitted to the University of Michigan.

❂ Jenny and her husband had been looking at finances and thetiming of having a second child. But Jenny was also interested instarting a demanding graduate program and felt that the departmentwould expect her to continue as a full time student without an inter-ruption. In meetings with a counselor, Jenny explored how she andher husband could balance their career and family demands; thecounselor also provided her with information about child careresources and potential financial help while assisting her to explorethe leave policies available to her.

❂ Carol recently retired from a successful career. While herretirement has afforded her the opportunity for greater travel withher still-employed husband and the time to become more involved involunteer and community activities, Carol yearns for more. Shecame to CEW for assistance in determining what activities, paid orunpaid, she can now embark on that will challenge her mind andkeep her active. She is working with a CEW counselor to exploreher values, skills and interests, and to discover ways to explore heroptions and weigh her choices.

❂ The combination of classroom and clinical requirements in her

demanding academic program, combined with her job and a 45 milecommute, forced Donna to consider the frightening prospect of quitting her job, as her advisor urged. A single mother, strugglingeconomically, Donna needed financial support but also personalsupport. The counselor was able to assist her financially with aCritical Difference grant and also linked Donna to a number of campus resources, including a student-run single parent support group.

Each story is different, yet in eachcase CEW counselors provided anassortment of services: personalsupport, guidance, problem-solv-ing assistance, financial aid, orsimply a listening ear for a womantrying to cope with challengingcircumstances or a difficultchange. In addition, CEW counselors assisted these womenin finding informal and formalresources on campus and in thecommunity. Working within theCenter’s services that include mul-tiple program offerings, publicaccess computers available in thelibrary, and the library’s books andjournals, each counselor has athand an array of resources for dif-ferent issues, different types oflearners, and different interests.

The Center is committed to pro-viding this free counseling serviceto assist persons in transition.These illustrations clearly showthe power of such support and theability to change stress to success.

The Counseling and ProgramFund represents the single largest category in the Center’s currentfundraising campaign efforts. (The fund goal is $927,000.) Thiswork, and consequently this campaign goal, are central to all we doat the Center and drives our programs, research and advocacy efforts.If you are interested in changing lives or have questions regardingthis fund, please contact Beth Halloran at 734.998.7698 or email herat bethhall@umich.edu

CEW Counselors Cover a Variety of Topics: Educational Goals, Career Directions, Financial Issues or Rebuilding Lives After a Crisis

Who We See at CEW

■ 53.9% of our clients are between the ages of 25-44

■ 20.7% of our clients are between the ages of 45 and 54

■ 66.1% of our clients are white/European American

■ 22.7% of our clients are women of color

■ 5.5% of our clients are men

■ 43.6% of our clients have never married

■ 35.3 % of our clients are m a r r i e d

■ 41.8% of our clients are students at the University

■ Most frequent presenting issues in counseling:

Career/job issuesFinancial issuesPersonal issuesEducational issues

“I am delighted that you exist. I can’t believe the professionalism and knowledgethat is available to me through your counselors!”T

A gift to the Center for the Education of Women may be part of a thoughtful, comprehensive estate plan that provides a way to complete a lifetime of giving or allows a donor to make a significant gift that was not possible to make at an earlier stage of life.

Ensuring Your Support Through Planned Giving to the Center

Cente r f or the Educat ion o f Women Un iver s i t y of Mich igan Fal l 200 5 P age 4

he Center for theEducation of Women representsdifferent things to different people. For some of our closestfriends, the Center represents asafe haven where they were sup-ported during earlier, difficulttimes in their lives. For others,the Center represents a dynamicorganization dedicated toimproving the lives of women,and that mission resonates withtheir personal passion. For stillothers, the Center offers a wonderful blend of supportingthe University’s mission as wellas reaching out to the communityof Southeastern Michigan to helpensure that all community members have access to academ-ic and career success. Whichevercategory best describes their relationship with the Center, onequestion is central to all friendsof the Center: “How can I turnmy appreciation into action?”

A gift to the Center for theEducation of Women may be partof a thoughtful, comprehensiveestate plan that provides a way tocomplete a lifetime of giving orallows you to make a significantgift that was not possible to makeat an earlier stage of life.“Planned giving” takes into consideration tax advantages,potential income generating gifts,and estate commitments.

In this issue of the newsletter weare providing information onincluding the Center in yourestate plans.

We offer the following broadoverview of a number of optionsthat might be of interest to youas you consider the question,

“How can I turn my appreciationinto action by supporting theCenter financially?”

Life Income AgreementsLife income agreements are giftsthat provide lifetime income toyou. Upon your death, or termi-nation of the agreement, CEWwill use the remaining assets forthe purpose you have specified.You receive a charitable deduc-tion at the time of the gift. Inaddition, you may enjoy capitalgains tax and estate tax savings.These trust and annuity arrange-ments can be structured to pay afixed, guaranteed income, or onethat can grow over time.

Retirement Funds – IRA, 401k or403b accountsMany friends of CEW have accu-mulated retirement funds inexcess of what they need to liveon. Income and possible estatetaxes can erode retirement planassets when they are left to heirs.With careful planning, you canname the Center for theEducation of Women as a partialor full beneficiary of your IRA,401k or 403b plan after your life-time. Gifts to CEW throughretirement funds avoid taxes onthe plan balance.

Creating a Bequest for CEWFor many donors a bequest offersthe opportunity to make a giftfrom a will or living trust with-out affecting their current finan-cial situation. A properly struc-tured bequest allows you to specify the gift amount, the pur-pose of your gift, and to identifythe transfer of certain assets tominimize estate and other taxes.

A Bequest to Support Women’s SuccessAlice Landau has had a life-long concern about the disadvantages that are areality for many women. Along with her late husband, Henry, she has supportedorganizations that help promote education and the well being of women so thatthey may improve their lives and positively impact their futures. Through herpersonal friendship with Molly Dobson (a dedicated volunteer, Leadership Councilmember and financial supporter of the Center), Landau has become increasinglyacquainted with the important work of the Center for the Education of Womenthat helps women achieve their goals. And it is the Center’s success in workingwith women and their specific concerns that inspired her to make a provision inher estate plan for a generous bequest to support the Center’s Counseling andProgram Fund.

World War II interrupted the Landaus’ education in Poland. After emigrating tothe United States, Henry founded a successful business building custom homes.In the early years, Alice Landau enjoyed working in her husband’s business, buteventually stayed home to raise their four children. With her children grownnow, she is proud of their successes and delights in her many grandchildren.

Over the years, Alice Landau became more aware of the discrimination againstwomen. She also knows that many women serve in two roles – they must raisetheir families while also working outside the home. The cost of living is thesame for men and women, so it concerns her that, on average, women earn lessthan 75% of what men earn. “It’s not fair,” she says. “With educational opportu-nities, women can do anything.”

Alice Landau knows that her bequest to CEW, in addition to her annual support, will enable women to get the education they need to succeed, and isconfident that, with help from CEW’s advocacy initiatives, one day inequalitiesthat hold women back will no longer exist. It is her dream that her gift, and others like it, will positively impact the needs of women so that her granddaughters will not know the inequities that women face today.

T

Henry and Alice Landau

Ove r Fort y Yea rs o f Prov id ing S er v i c e , Research and A d v o c a c y P age 5

Your will is your way to disperseyour property after you are gone.A bequest provides for a transferof wealth that happens upon aperson’s death.

For many, a bequest offers theopportunity to make a more sub-stantial gift than would be possi-ble during the your lifetime.Others view a bequest as anopportunity to round out a life-time of giving with a lastinglegacy to the Center for theEducation of Women.

As we reported to you in the fall CEW News, a long time andimportant member of the CEW family, Patricia Wulp, AssociateDirector/Counselor, died in July 2004. Patricia is rememberedfondly as a constant presence in the lives of the women goingthrough transition who turned to the Center for resources andassistance. Many women who came to the Center rememberPatricia not only for her knowledge and advocacy on their behalf,but for the reassurance and confidence she provided them. A longtime friend and colleague to Patricia, Jean Campbell comments,

“Patricia exemplified the best ideals ofthe Center. She saw each woman as aunique individual, on a personal journeyand she supported them in highlypersonalized ways.”

We would like to thank all of you whose liveswere personally touched by Patricia and who

chose to remember her by making gifts to the Center. These fundswill be used to support the counseling and program fund withinthe Center, thereby continuing the very essence of Patricia as wework with today’s clients. A former counseling client and scholar-ship recipient, Professor Brenda Flanagan remembered:

“When I needed a friend, she was presentto listen, encourage, and provide the sup-port that made me into the person I amtoday. Of the women I admire most,Patricia Wulp runs a close second to mymother who lived the faith that if shecould help someone, her living would notbe in vain.”

If you would like to support this memorial to our dear friend,please send donations to the Center and note your intention to sup-port the Wulp Counseling Fund. If you have questions about thisor any other fund within the Center, please call Beth Halloran at(734) 998-7698.

Wulp Counseling Fund Honors CEW Counselor

Friends of CEW may bequeathcash, securities, real estate,works of art or other specificproperty and receive an unlimitedestate tax charitable deductionfor the value of the gift they haveleft to CEW. Certain retirementfund assets, IRAs and savingsbonds may also be used for charitable bequests to derive bothestate and income tax savings.

In future newsletter, look foradditional expanded descriptionsof giving opportunities.

There are four ways that you can give a bequest to the Center for theEducation of Women through your will:

Specific Bequest –a distribution of a specific amount of cash,securities or personal property

Percentage Bequest – a stated percentage of the donor’s estate;

Residue of the Estate Bequest – the remainder of the donor’sestate after specific bequests have been satisfied and taxes and costs have been paid;

Contingent Bequest – ensures that if circumstances make it impossible to carry out a donor’s primary provisions (such as heirs who do not survive the donor), assets then pass to CEW.

The University of Michigan can provide suggested wording to youand/or your attorney for designating your gift to the Center for theEducation of Women. We can also provide more information aboutother types of planned gifts. Please call Beth Halloran at734-998-7698 or email bethhall@umich.edu to discuss planned giv-ing opportunities. There is no cost or obligation and all inquiries arestrictly confidential.

Charitable Contribution Incentives ForCash Gifts Temporarily IncreasedIn late September President Bush signed legi s l ation that will help victims of Hurricane Kat rina and other public ch a rities. This law isdesigned to encourage gifts of cash made during the period Au g u s t2 8 , 2005 through December 31, 2 0 0 5

The new legi s l ation increases the limit for certain outright gifts ofcash from 50% of adjusted gross income to 100% of adjusted gro s si n c o m e. This ch a n ge may present some donors with an at t ra c t iveo p p o rtunity to make outright gifts with assets withdrawn from an IRAor other qualified re t i rement plan.

Cente r f or the Educat ion o f Women Un iver s i t y of Mich igan Fal l 200 5 P age 6

D epending on its subsequent interp re t ation by Mich i gan court s , t h eCEW rep o rt found that the MCRI could have a number of unfo rt u n at eoutcomes. It could ban outre a ch programs to re c ruit men to nu rsing orgi rls and women to science, m ath and tech n o l ogy. It could make i l l egal any sch o l a rships based on ra c e, s ex , ethnicity or national o ri gin. It could prohibit programs to help women and minori t i e sbecome ap p rentices in the skilled tra d e s , wh e re their nu m b e rs re m a i nve ry low. In the decade since the passage of Proposition 209,C a l i fo rnia women have ex p e rienced the fo l l ow i n g :

■ An immediate and dra m atic drop in hiring of women fa c u l t y,with the annual rate only now ap p ro a ching pre-1995 leve l s ;

■ A decline in women and minorities enrolling in and completing m e d i c a l , computer science and tech n o l ogy programs and enter-ing the wo rk fo rce in those fi e l d s ;

■ An immediate decline not only in the direct awa rding of state gove rnment contracts to wo m e n - owned businesses but also in the number of bid opportunities commu n i c ated; and

■ A steep and rapid decline in the number of women employed in the skilled tra d e s .

In add i t i o n , as described in the CEW rep o rt , the Los A n geles ch ap t e rof the National Coalition of Free Men has unsuccessfuly used casel aw arising under Proposition 209 to attempt to close bat t e re dwomen's shelters nd other services. A Coalition lawsuit sought toe l i m i n ate all state funding and support for programs targeted towomen. In other cases, C a l i fo rnia courts have consistently constru e d

faculty who gave birth or when afa m i ly medical emerge n cyre q u i red extended caregiv i n gt i m e. The Mich i gan policiesrega rding tenu re - cl o ck ex t e n s i o n( a l l owing a period of time thatwill not be counted as part oftheir tenu re pro b at i o n a ry peri o d )and modified duties (allow i n gfaculty members a reduction intheir job responsibilities withouta ny reduction in pay – most oftenused in a term in wh i ch they beara child) we re the results of thefocus groups and subsequenta dvo c a cy effo rts.

Recent CEW re s e a rch on the useof Mich i ga n ’s policies since theiri n c eption indicated that the poli-cies can make a significant diffe r-ence in faculty lives and wo rk-place success, but that it isi m p o rtant that dep a rtments sup-p o rt those faculty who decide to

Michigan Civil Rights Intitiative Could Mean Trouble for Women and Minorities (Continued from page 1)

use the policies. This re s e a rchcoincided with a CEW re s e a rchp roject funded by the A l f red P.Sloan Fo u n d ation that ex p l o re dfl ex i ble wo rk policies in highere d u c ation institutions across then ation.

R e s e a rch e rs surveyed a large rep-re s e n t at ive sample of U. S. educa-tion institutions to determ i n ewh at types of fa m i ly - f ri e n d lypolicies and programs are in ex i st e n c e, or under deve l o p m e n t ,who is eligi ble to use them, a n dto wh at extent institutional cl i-m ates support them. The re s u l t sof this re s e a rch have been rep o rt-ed in national journ a l s , a re out-lined in a new CEW publ i c at i o n ,“ Fa m i ly Fri e n d ly Policies inHigher Educat i o n : Wh e re Do WeS t a n d ” and are being ex p a n d e dby a new re s e a rch project thatlooks at the wo rk ex p e ri e n c e s ,

CEW Research and Advocacy Working Together (Continued from page 1)

P roposition 209 bro a d ly, s t riking down not only those progra m sdesigned specifi c a l ly for women or for racial and ethnic minorities but also those seeking to re m e dy documented pat-t e rns of discri m i n ation.

Women have made significant gains in employment and educat i o nd u ring the last thirty ye a rs , helped along by civil rights laws that forbid discri m i n ation and re q u i re effo rts to promote equal opport u n i-t y. The CEW rep o rt fo u n d, h oweve r, t h at Proposition 209 marked areve rsal of that trend in Califo rnia; it has been used to erode lega l ,c o u rt-sanctioned effo rts by state and local gove rnments to reve rse his-t o ric discri m i n ation by re a ching out to women and minorities to pro-vide fair and equal access to opport u n i t y. Programs providing wo m e nand minorities access and ex p o s u re to educat i o n , job tra i n i n g,e m p l oyment and business opportunities have been ch a l l e n ge d, e l i m i-n ated or amended. The CEW rep o rt further found ample evidence tos u ggest that passage of the MCRI in Mich i gan would like ly result in asimilar pat t e rn of lost services and re s t ricted opportunities.

As the CEW rep o rt descri b e s , re d evelopment of the Mich i gan econo-my from a manu fa c t u ring to a know l e d ge base will re q u i re a highlyq u a l i fied and tech n o l ogi c a l ly educated wo rk fo rc e, in wh i ch wo m e n ' stalents and skills will be indispensabl e. Full access to opport u n i t ys t rengthens wo m e n , their fa m i l i e s , c o m munities and the stat e.

For more info rm at i o n , see “ The Gender Impact of the Pro p o s e dM i ch i gan Civil Rights Initiat ive ” on the Center's website atw w w. c ew. u m i ch . e d u / re s e a rch / re s reps.htm.

i n cluding benefits and hiring poli-c i e s , for non-tenu re tra ck fa c u l t y.To request a copy of “ Wh e re DoWe Stand,” email us atc ew. m a i l @ u m i ch . e d u

CEW Director Carol Hollensheadre c e n t ly add ressed an inv i t at i o n a lc o n fe rence convened by theA m e rican Council of Educat i o nand led a discussion of theM i ch i gan ex p e rience that support-ed the confe rence goal of spurri n gother unive rsities to develop andimplement fl ex i ble policies.

To read the entire rep o rt on UMp o l i cy use: “ Te nu re Clock ,M o d i fied Duties, and Sick LeavePo l i c i e s : C re ating A Netwo rk ofS u p p o rt and Understanding fo rU n ive rsity of Mich i gan Fa c u l t yWomen During Preg n a n cy andC h i l d b i rt h ” go to the Center’sweb site: h t t p : / / w w w. c e w. u m i c h /r e s e a r c h / r e s r e p s . h t m

Ms . Foundation Presidentto Speak at CEW MullinWelch LectureSara K. Gould, President and CEO ofthe Ms. Foundation for Women, isscheduled to present the Mullin-Welch Lecture on Monday, January30th, 2006, Michigan League,Hudson Room, 4:00 p.m.

The Mullin-Welch Lecture is part ofCEW’s 2005-2006 focus on women,economics, and (in)equality.Funded by Frances Daseler andMarjorie Jackson, the Mullin-WelchLectures allow us to bring ontocampus speakers addressingimportant topics of the moment.

An expert on women’s economic security, Ms. Gould has workedwith economic development organ-izations as well as women’sgroups. Ms. Gould currently serveson the Twink Frey Visiting SocialActivist Advisory Council for CEW.

Ove r Fort y Yea rs o f Prov id ing S er v i c e , Research and A d v o c a c y P age 7

As a fo rmer English teach e r, A n nArbor New s re s e a rcher and wri t e r,and marketing pro fe s s i o n a l , A n nS ch riber contri butes a ri ch back-ground to the Center for theE d u c ation of Wo m e n ’s Leaders h i pCouncil. Her twe n t y - year historyof wo rking with or serving on theb o a rds of many orga n i z at i o n s ,i n cluding the Unive rsity MusicalS o c i e t y, St. Jo s eph Mercy Hospital,

Ann Arbor A rea Community Fo u n d at i o n , Fa rm and Gard e n , a n dR o t a ry, has also helped make her a valued member.

“Ann Arbor has a multitude of wonderful non-pro fit orga n i z ations inall segments of the commu n i t y, but the ones in need of some specifi ckind of help, s u ch as CEW, a re the most interesting to me,” ex p l a i n sS ch ri b e r. “CEW occupies an important nich e : re a ching out to wo m e nwho wish to continue their education and personal growth. I find it ach a l l e n ge to fit into the circle of pro fessionals at the Center who con-t ri bute in many ways to help women rebound from any number of s i t u ations and obtain the wh e rewithal to become successful.C o u n s e l i n g, s ch o l a rs h i p s , re s e a rch and publishing are all import a n tfa c e t s , and I’m proud to be a part of that circle in my capacity as avolunteer pro m o t e r, fund ra i s e r, and ch e e rleader for the Center.”

S ch riber fi rst discove red CEW during a time when she herself wa sseeking a new direction after her ch i l d ren we re mostly grown. “ Ik n ew I wanted to do something out of the home, but I had no ideawh at that might be!” She came to the Center and was counseled byM y ra Fab i a n , whom she describes as a good listener and guide. “ Ju s tby listening to me, M y ra built my self confidence and guided me tofo rmu l ate ideas and develop my own plan of action, wh i ch I then c a rried out.”

CEW was cl e a rly as impressed with Sch riber as she was with us.Center Director Carol Hollenshead soon asked her to serve on as ch o l a rship applicant rev i ew committee and later invited her to jointhe Leadership Council, wh e re she has been a member for the pastfive ye a rs.

Being “hands on” is important to Sch riber – whether she’s ch a i ring the St. Joe Ball or the Arbor Hospice auction, o ffe ring emotional and social support to members of the community thro u g hC atholic Social Serv i c e s , or helping high school students at StoneS chool get back on tra ck as part of Rotary ’s Strive program. She is ak n ow l e d ge able and dedicated member of our Leadership Council,d o n ating her time to promote the Center’s many outre a ch programs toher large community netwo rk of potential participants and s u p p o rt e rs.

B o rn and raised in Oklahoma, S ch riber attended the Unive rsity ofOklahoma and later completed a Master’s degree in the Te a ching ofEnglish at the Unive rsity of Mich i gan. She and her husband To m , aUM Business School pro fe s s o r, h ave three ch i l d re n : S a ra h , a law ye r ;Jo h n , a human re s o u rces manager; and Mari a , a pro fessional photog-rap h e r. The fa m i ly has lived in Zuri ch and Singap o re, but today wh e ns h e ’s not wo rking in the community or trave l i n g, s h e ’s like ly to be inher kitchen. “I love to cook!”

We are grateful to Ann Sch riber for being such a loyal and effe c t iveCEW ambassador. If you are interested in speaking to her about some aspect of the Center’s activities or how to becomei nvo l ve d, please contact Beth Halloran at 734-998-7698 or b e t h h a l l @ u m i ch.edu.

Leadership Council Member Ann Schriber Talks about CEW

“ C o u n s e l i n g, s ch o l a rs h i p s , re s e a rch and publishing are alli m p o rtant fa c e t s , and I’m proud to be a part of that circle inmy capacity as a volunteer pro m o t e r, fund ra i s e r, and ch e e rleader for the Center.”

Since 1990 the Center has benefited from the guidance and support of a strong Leadership Council. This Council is a know l e d ge abl eb o dy of vo l u n t e e rs who act as guides to the Director and staff as well as ambassadors of the Center within the commu n i t y. Th ey meett h roughout the year to discuss issues facing the Center and help the Center in establishing our objectives to carry out our mission. Th e i rs u p p o rt rep resents a commitment of time, p a s s i o n , k n ow l e d ge and care. We are grateful to each of them for each of these gi f t s .

D u ring this past ye a r, as we celeb rated our 40th annive rs a ry, we took the opportunity to look back over all the wonderful gifts and com-mitments individuals have made to the Center. We re c og n i zed the many contri butions that we re made possible by all the fo rm e rL e a d e rship Council members. We wish to honor them now and in the future by cre ating the Emeritae Council: a group that allows usto re c og n i ze all those that have wo rked for the benefit of the Center through their ye a rs of service on the Leadership Council.

Please note the names of our current Leadership Council and Emeritae Council on page 2 of this new s l e t t e r. We ask you to join us inthanking this dedicated group of individuals who illustrate the true meaning of the Center, people wo rking together to ach i eve thegre ater go o d.

CEW: A strong tradition of volunteer support continues via the Leadership and Emeritae Councils

The University of Michigan, as an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer, complies with all applicable federal and state laws regarding non-discrimination and affirmative action, including Title IX of the EducationAmendments of 1972 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1972. The University of Michigan is committed to a policy of nondiscrimination and equal opportunity for all persons regardless of race, sex, color, religion,creed, national origin or ancestry, age, marital status, sexual orientation, disability, or Vietnam-era veteran status in employment, educational programs and activities, and admissions. Inquiries or complaints may be addressed tothe University's Director of Affirmative Action and Title IX/Section 504 Coordinator, 4005 Wolverine Tower, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1281. 734/763-0235. TDD 734/647-1388. University of Michigan Information 734/764-1817. The Regents of the University: David A. Brandon, Ann Arbor; Laurence B. Deitch, Bingham Farms; Olivia P. Maynard, Goodrich; Rebecca McGowan, Ann Arbor; Andrea Fischer Newman, Ann Arbor; Andrew Richner, GrossePointe Park; S. Martin Taylor, Grosse Pointe Farms; Katherine E. White, Ann Arbor; Mary Sue Coleman (ex officio).

Cente r f or the Educat ion o f Women Un iver s i t y of Mich igan Fal l 200 5

CEW Website Upcoming events, C E W ’s programi n f o r m a t i o n , research and currenti n i t i a t i v e s . w w w. c e w. u m i c h . e d u

CEW Welcomes JeanCampbell Scholar inResidence Jana Nidiffer

With theadvent of thenew aca-demic year,CEW wel-comes Dr.

Jana Nidiffer as the Jean CampbellScholar in Residence. D r. N i d i ff e r, a l s oan Assistant Research Scientist inU M ’s School of Educat i o n , is a lead-ing scholar in the history of educat i o n .Her work on pioneering womend e a n s , the history of women adminis-t r ators in higher educat i o n , and onaccess to higher education is consis-tent with CEW’s longtime focus onw o m e n ’s access to and experiencesin higher education as well as onw o m e n ’s leadership.

As CEW’s Scholar in Residence, D r.N i d i ffer will be able to focus on hernewest project on college womenactivists during the women’s suff r ag emovement at the turn of the twentiethc e n t u ry. D r. N i d i ffer is working on thisresearch in conjunction with a recentCEW scholarship award winner, K a r e nD o w n i n g , who is a UM librarian andgr a d u ate student in the School ofE d u c at i o n ’s Center for the Study ofHigher and Postsecondary Educat i o n .D r. N i d i ffer will present preliminaryresearch findings at CEW onNovember 15 from noon – 1:30.

We welcome this year-long opportuni-ty for CEW researchers and other staffto work collab o r at i v e ly with D r. N i d i ff e r. Recent winner of theHarold Johnson Diversity Serv i c eAward (UM), former Assistant Dean ofBrandeis University; Coordinator of theBrandeis Wo m e n ’s Studies Progr a mand consultant for institutions such asMelbourne University and the Harv a r dG r a d u ate School of Educat i o n ,D r. N i d i ffer brings significant experience and expertise to CEW’sresearch team.

CEW ScholarshipsApplications Available Ap p l i c ations for the 2006-2007UM CEW sch o l a rships are nowava i l able at www. c ew. u m i ch . e d uor at our office at 330 EastL i b e rty in Ann A r b o r.

Ap p l i c ations are due by Ja nu a ry9 t h , 2006. Students from all thre eU n ive rsity campuses are eligi bl e.

The CEW Sch o l a rship Progra mfor re t u rning women studentswas established in 1970 to re c og-n i ze and support the academicp e r fo rmance and potential ofwomen who have ex p e ri e n c e ds i g n i ficant interruptions in theire d u c ation. The 2005-2006re c i p i-ents' interruptions in educat i o nra n ged from four to 26 ye a rs andtheir ages ra n ged from 25 to 50.All CEW sch o l a rships are pri-vat e ly funded.

Please call Roxann Howa rd at 998-7699 with any questions.

Visiting Scholar Leslie Bloom completes research reporton “Beyond Welfare” at CEWAs part of the Visiting Scholar program, Dr. Leslie Bloom completed aresearch report during her Fall 2004 term as CEW Visiting Scholar. Thereport, “Staying in School After Welfare Reform: How Beyond Welfare, Inc.Supports Student Mothers in Higher Education” examines the organization,Beyond Welfare. The report looks at how Beyond Welfare supports participants in higher education who are welfare recipients by consideringthe experiences of a selection of student mothers who are participants ofBeyond Welfare.

The paper then considers whether Beyond Welfare is a meaningful organi-z ation for student mothers and whether the support it provides increasesthese student mothers’ school retention and success. D r. Bloom offers rec-o m m e n d ations gleaned from this study to help other community-basedo r g a n i z ations and policy makers who are concerned with alleviating p o v e r t y.

Dr. Bloom, who serves as Associate Professor, Department of Curriculumand Instruction, and Program in Women’s Studies at Iowa State University,has worked with the Beyond Welfare organization for several years. As aVisiting Scholar at CEW, Dr. Bloom was able to analyze interview andethnographic data she had collected in Iowa and to write her analysis as aresearch report. According to Dr. Bloom, “The time at CEW providedme with an opportunity to focus on a single research project whilenot having teaching responsibilities as well as to interact withother scholars and activists concerned with access to higher edu-cation for welfare recipients.” The full report is available on the CEWwebsite at www.cew.umich.edu/research/resreps.htm