Susan-Metz-UMASS FINAL SLIDES.4.6 · • AcLvely#highlight,#adverLse#and#supportyour#departments# family#accommodaon#policies#for#all#faculty.# • Make#the#use#of#family#accommodaons#standard#operang#

5/23/14

1

©2011 Stevens Ins-tute of Technology P. 2/3 | 01/01/11

| 1 5/23/14


| 2 5/23/14


| 3

Influencing the Culture by Changing the Climate!“Moving Beyond Fixing the Women to !

in Academic STEM Fields”!Changing the Culture!

5/23/14


| 4

OCTOBER 1927 FIFTH SOLVAY INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONS AND PHOTONS, MONDADORI PORTFOLIO VIA GETTY IMAGES

5/23/14

5/23/14

2


| 5

45 minute -‐ ROADMAP

5/23/14

•  Define Terms in Context •  NaLonal Data – Tenure Status in STEM

Ac2ons Framework Background


| 6

ROADMAP

5/23/14


•  Framework Promote Gender Equity Ø  Barriers Women’s ParLcipaLon

STEM


| 7

ROADMAP

5/23/14


•  COACHE Exemplars •  Resources •  Ideas, Comments, QuesLons


|

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

Culture: A pa[ern of shared basic assumpLons that gets passed down over Lme. 1.  ArLfacts 2.  Rituals 3.  Values 4.  Norms

Extremely resistant to change

8

(SCHEIN, 1992)

5/23/14

5/23/14

3


|

ORGANIZATIONAL CLIMATE

Climate: PercepLons of organizaLonal pracLces. 1.  CommunicaLon 2.  Leadership 3.  Work-‐life integraLon

More malleable and more easily studied (VALIAN, 1998)

9 5/23/14


|

SOURCE: NaLonal Science FoundaLon, NaLonal Center for Science and Engineering StaLsLcs. 2013. Women, MinoriLes, and Persons with DisabiliLes in Science and Engineering: 2013. Special Report NSF 13-‐304. Arlington, VA. Available at h[p://www.nsf.gov/staLsLcs/wmpd/.

10 5/23/14

Tenure Status of Women in STEM by Field (2010)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Bio/Life Sci. Comp. & Info. Sci

Math. Sci. Phys. Sci. Psychologist Social Sci. Engineer

Tenured On Tenure Track Not on Tenure Track


|

Tenure Status of Underrepresented Minori2es in STEM (2010)

SOURCE: NaLonal Science FoundaLon, NaLonal Center for Science and Engineering StaLsLcs. 2013. Women, MinoriLes, and Persons with DisabiliLes in Science and Engineering: 2013. Special Report NSF 13-‐304. Arlington, VA. Available at h[p://www.nsf.gov/staLsLcs/wmpd/.

11 5/23/14

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

Tenured On Tenure Track

Black Hispanic Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.

Nat. Hawaiian or other Pac Isl.

Mul2ple Race


|

FRAMEWORK FOR PROMOTING GENDER EQUITY IN ORGANIZATIONS

Frame 1: Equip the Woman Frame 2: Create Equal Opportunity Frame 3: Value Difference Frame 4: Re-‐vision Work Culture

12

CGO INSIGHTS, BRIEFING NOTE NO. 1, SIMMONS GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, HTTP://WWW.SIMMONS.EDU/SOM/DOCS/INSIGHTS_01.PDF. DOWNLOADED MARCH 25, 2014

5/23/14

5/23/14

4


|

Equip (not fix) the Woman

Provide opportuniLes to build skills for success. •  NegoLaLon •  Leadership •  Conflict Management •  AsserLveness Training •  Budget Management •  Public Speaking/PresentaLon Skills

13

Frame 1

5/23/14


| 14

Remove structural and procedural barriers that interfere with access and advancement of specific groups. Processes impacted:

•  Hiring •  Performance EvaluaLon •  PromoLon and Tenure

Create Equal Opportunity: Level the Playing Field

Frame 2

5/23/14


|

What Major Factors Limit Women’s Advancement in Academic STEM Fields?

UC Faculty Family Friendly Edge

Supported by NSF ADVANCE Community Research

•  Lack of family friendly policies (Frame 2) •  Implicit bias (Frame 3)

15

DR. MARY ANN MASON AND DR. JOAN C. WILLIAMS (2013) WWW.TOOLSFORCHANGEINSTEM.ORG

Frame 2

5/23/14


|

UC Faculty Family Friendly Edge Turning a problem into a compe77ve edge….

Conclusion: The University of California’s ability to a[ract and retain the best faculty over the next decade will depend largely on a culture that values and supports both work and family life needs of all faculty over the course of their career.

Department chairs and deans have a central responsibility in understanding the importance of a family friendly department and in implemenLng policies, sharing resources, and reinforcing cultural pracLces to assist all faculty. Given that the tenure clock generally coincides with the biological clock, women faculty onen face parLcular challenges in achieving balance and success.

16

HTTP://UCFAMILYEDGE.BERKELEY.EDU

Frame 2

5/23/14

5/23/14

5


|

Everybody is Very Busy (UC Faculty, ages 30-‐50)

51.2 55.6 59.8 59.1

14.6 11.9 10.6 10.6

35.5 20.3 8.1 8.6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Women with Children

Men with Children

Women without Children

Men without Children

Total H

ours per W

eek

Professional

Housework

Caregiving

N=338 701 248 505

MASON, MARY ANN, ANGELICA STACY, AND MARC GOULDEN. 2003. “THE UC FACULTY WORK AND FAMILY SURVEY.” (HTTP://UCFAMILYEDGE.BERKELEY.EDU).

Frame 2

17 5/23/14


| 18

Use of Family Friendly Policies and Sabba2cals by Eligible UC Assistant Professors*

Frame 2

*At the Lme of the first child’s entry into household at assistant professor rank, post policy implementaLon (August 1, 1988 to present). The faculty member needed to be employed at UC at Lme of child’s arrival into the household and the policy had to be in place.


Men, Assist. Prof.

Women, Assist. Prof.

5/23/14


| 19

Major Reasons Eligible UC Parents Did Not Use Ac2ve Service Modified Du2es (ASMD)

Frame 2

*These quesLons were based on Robert Drago’s Mapping Project Survey Instrument (h[p://lsir.la.psu.edu/workfam/facultysurvey.htm).


Percent Ci2ng Factor as a Major Reason for Not Using ASMD

Men

Women

5/23/14


| 20

Having Fewer Children Than They Wanted: UC Faculty, Ages 40-‐60, by Gender and Number of Children

Frame 2

*This quesLon was based on Robert Drago’s Mapping Project Survey Instrument (h[p://lsir.la.psu.edu/workfam/facultysurvey.htm).

Percent who indicated “Yes,” “I had fewer children than I wanted”


Men

Women

5/23/14

5/23/14

6


|

Leaks in the Pipeline for Women PhDs in the Sciences Frame 2

HTTP://WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG/ISSUES/2009/11/WOMEN_AND_SCIENCES.HTML

21 5/23/14


|

Family Friendly Policies that Mager Most Coache data: n= over 15,000 pre-‐tenure faculty

•  Dedicated personnel to staff work-‐life services offices. •  Wri[en policies:

•  Dual career couples hiring •  Early promoLon and tenure •  Parental leave •  Modified duLes •  Part-‐Lme tenure opLon •  Stop the tenure clock provisions

•  Provide childcare, lactaLon rooms, flexibility, family socials and cafeteria menu of benefits that include eldercare.

(TROWER,2012)

22

Frame 2

5/23/14


|

Department Chairs Role in Crea2ng a Family Friendly Department

•  Make it a priority. •  Become conscious about unconscious bias issues concerning

caregiving and gender. •  Know the family accommodaLon policies and laws. •  AcLvely highlight, adverLse and support your departments

family accommodaLon policies for all faculty. •  Make the use of family accommodaLons standard operaLng

procedures. •  Maintain zero tolerance for discriminatory or disparaging

comments and behaviors. •  ProacLvely recruit and hire diverse faculty, including those

who have temporarily slowed their careers for family reasons. Based on UC Faculty Friendly Edge data -‐ WWW.TOOLSFORCHANGEINSTEM.ORG

23

Frame 2

5/23/14


|

Provide content-‐rich programming for academic leaders, faculty, staff, students that increase understanding, awareness of issues that prevent people from diverse backgrounds from fully engaging in and benefiung from the enterprise; the criLcal value they contribute; and the significant loss to the organizaLon if they are marginalized.

24

Value Difference

Frame 3

5/23/14

5/23/14

7


|

What Major Factors Limit Women’s Advancement in Academic STEM Fields?

•  Lack of family friendly policies (Frame 2) •  Implicit bias (Frame 3)

25

Frame 3

5/23/14


|

Frame 3

26 5/23/14


|

Feelings – Afraid or Angry?

(CONDRY & CONDRY, 1976)

Frame 3

27 5/23/14


|

Debbie Danny

What happened when the baby was named?

CONDRY & CONDRY, 1976

*Afraid* *Angry*

Unconscious Bias

Frame 3

28 5/23/14

5/23/14

8


|

IMPLICIT.HARVARD.EDU/IMPLICIT/

29 5/23/14


|

•  Powerful

•  Beyond awareness and control •  Pervasive •  Affects livelihoods and lives

Implicit Bias

Frame 3

PAYNE, 2006 GOLDIN & ROUSE, 2000

30 5/23/14


|

What func2ons are affected by unintended bias/implicit associa2ons?

•  Hiring and Advancement •  EvaluaLon of CVs •  Le[ers of RecommendaLon •  Service Assignments •  Teaching EvaluaLons •  CitaLons

Frame 3

31 5/23/14


|

What the research says….

“Brian” is preferred 2:1 over “Karen” by psychology professors reviewing resumes. (STEINPREIS ET AL. ,1999)

Brian

Karen

Science faculty regardless of gender, rated male student applicants significantly more competent than idenLcal female applicants. (JO HANDLESMAN ET. AL. 2012)

Applicants with African American sounding names have to send 15 resumes compared to 10 for white-‐sounding names. (BERTRAND & MULLAINATHAN, 2004)

Makayla

Frame 3

5/23/14

9


|

A double-‐blind review process by Behavioral Ecology caused a significant increase in the publicaLon of arLcles with a woman as the first author. (BUDDEN ET. AL., 2008).

In fields where considerable resources are necessary, women publish less. (AMARAL ET AL. 2012)

Confirmed significant disparity especially in STEM fields. (SUGIMOTO ET AL. 2013)

Women professors must do more “emoLonal work” inside and outside the classroom to earn a posiLve student evaluaLon. (CENTRA AND GAUBATZ, 2000; FELDER AND BRENT, 2008; BASOW, 1998)

RecommendaLon le[ers for women are shorter, less posiLve and describe women as students and teachers vs. researchers and professionals. (TRIX & PSENKA, 2003)


Frame 3

33 5/23/14


|

In review of recent law school graduate resumes, mothers are held to a higher standard than fathers or women without children. (FUEGEN & ENDICOTT, 2010)

Women are onen asked to accept more service assignments, onen in the interest of adding diversity and mentoring more students. (GEE AND NORTON, 2009; MIT, 2011)

Women spent much more Lme on service to the university which is recognized as less presLgious than service to the profession. (MISRA ET AL., 2011) !!

Women who exhibit strong leadership skills are rated as less “likeable”. (EAGLY & KARAU,2002; HEILMAN,ET AL,2004; RIDGEWAY, 2001)

Ø Women Don’t Ask (2003): Likeability and negoLaLon – “A delicate balance”


Frame 3

34 5/23/14


|

Widely culturally shared •  Both men and women hold them about gender •  Both whites and people of color hold them about race •  People are onen not aware of them

Applied more under circumstances of: •  Ambiguity (including lack of informaLon) •  Time pressure •  Lack of criLcal mass

Good News! -‐ Implicit associaLons/bias can’t be eliminated but awareness miLgates consequences. Keep talking about it!

ADVANCE U MICHIGAN– FISKE,1998; VALIAN,1998

Frame 3 Implicit Associa2ons/Bias Takeaways

35 5/23/14


|

Consider and address the underlying systemic characterisLcs of an organizaLon that leads to inequity in the workplace for underrepresented groups.

36

Re-‐vision Work Culture

Frame 4

5/23/14

5/23/14

10


|

•  Tenure is necessary to protect academic freedom and is required to a[ract men and women of ability.

•  All faculty must excel in research, teaching and service – and at some insLtuLons outreach.

•  The scholarship of discovery, parLcularly WITHIN the discipline should count the most in promoLon and tenure decisions.

•  Tenure serves all faculty equally well regardless of faculty sex and race.

•  The university is a meritocracy in which the most meritorious are promoted and tenured.

(TROWER, 2012) 37

Frame 4 Examine Core Assump2ons re: Tenure

5/23/14


|

•  Tenure should be “forever” even in the absence of early reLrement and presence of longer lives and careers.

•  Tenure ensures that faculty will remain producLve over an academic career.

•  To be an effecLve faculty member, you must spend your enLre career in academe.

•  The soon-‐to-‐be minority (full-‐Lme T/TT faculty) must have lifeLme employment. The soon-‐to-‐be majority (p/t and f/t faculty and researchers at interdisciplinary research centers) need not.

(TROWER, 2012)

38

Frame 4 Examine Core Assump2ons re: Tenure

5/23/14


|

FRAMEWORK FOR PROMOTING GENDER EQUITY IN ORGANIZATIONS

Frame 1: Equip the Woman Frame 2: Create Equal Opportunity Frame 3: Value Difference Frame 4: Re-‐vision Work Culture

39

CGO INSIGHTS, BRIEFING NOTE NO. 1, SIMMONS GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, HTTP://WWW.SIMMONS.EDU/SOM/DOCS/INSIGHTS_01.PDF. DOWNLOADED MARCH 25, 2014

5/23/14


| 40

Frame 1:

Equip the Woman •  Sample dossiers of tenure-‐track faculty who were

promoted •  InformaLon websites where faculty can find what they

need •  Workshops on geung tenure, running a lab, supervising

students, geung grants

COACHE Data 2005-‐2006: 7 Exemplar Public Ins2tu2ons (Trower, 2012) Supported by ADVANCE Community

5/23/14

5/23/14

11


| 41

Frame 2:

Create Equal Opportunity •  OpportuniLes for networking, instrumental mentoring,

collaboraLon •  Clarity about expectaLons for tenure re: weights, allocaLon

of effort for the relevant components of faculty work •  Meaningful annual and midpoint reviews with wri[en

feedback about performance and progress towards tenure


5/23/14


| 42

Frame 2:

Create Equal Opportunity (cont’d) •  Policies that allow flexibility depending on life

circumstances •  Clear, fair and equitable polices/pracLces re: work/life

ma[ers including family friendly and dual-‐careers •  Support for excellence in teaching and research ($ and non $)


5/23/14


| 43

Frame 3:

Value Difference •  Offices with personnel focused on creaLng an equitable

workplace •  Ongoing professional development for chairs, deans and

senior faculty about issues affecLng tenure-‐track faculty •  Sustained leadership from the top about the centrality of

culLvaLng faculty talent


5/23/14


| 44 5/23/14

TOOLKIT

LAURSEN, S. L., & AUSTIN, A. E. (2014). STRATEGIC TOOLKIT: STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTING GENDER EQUITY AND INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE. BOULDER, CO, AND EAST LANSING, MI.

ACCESS: HTTP://WWW.PORTAL.ADVANCE.VT.EDU/

ACCESS: WWW.STRATEGICTOOLKIT.ORG NSF ADVANCE HRD 0930097

ACCESS: HTTP://GENDER.STANFORD.EDU/

ACCESS: HTTP://WWW.TOOLSFORCHANGEINSTEM.ORG/

Frame 2 Frame 1 Frame 3 Frame 4

5/23/14

12


| 45 5/23/14

TOOLKIT

ACCESS:HTTP://WWW.NDSU.EDU/FORWARD/ADVANCE_FORWARD_INITIATIVES/FORWARD_ADVOCATES_AND_ALLIES/

Advance FORWARD Advocates & Allies Program

ACCESS: HTTP://WWW.NCWIT.ORG/

Frame 3 Frame 4


| 46 5/23/14

TOOLKIT

ACCESS: HTTPS://GENDEREDINNOVATIONS.STANFORD.EDU/

ACCESS: HTTP://VSERVER1.CSCS.LSA.UMICH.EDU/~SPAGE/

Frame 4


| 47 5/23/14


|

How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before star-ng to improve the world.

Anne Frank

48 5/23/14

5/23/14

13


|

Advance. ADVANCE Portal. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.portal.advance.vt.edu/ Advance U Michigan– Fiske (1998). Stereotyping, Prejudice And Discrimination. In Gilbert, Fiske & Lindsey. Handbook Of Social Psychology. 4th Ed. Volume 2 .Pp 357-411); Valian (1998). Why So Slow. Mit Press Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy. (2001). Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling and Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press. Condry, J. & Condry, S. (1976). Sex differences: A study of the eye of the beholder. Child Development, 47, 812-819. Dasqupta,N. & Asgari,S. (2004). Seeing is believing: exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 642-658. Eagly, Alice H. and Steven J. Karau. "Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice Toward Female Leaders." Psychological Review 109, no. 3 (07, 2002): 573-598. Faculty Recruitment Handbook: A Research-Based Guide for Active Diversity Recruitment Practices (2007). NSF ADVANCE at the University of Rhode Island. http://www.uri.edu/advance/recruitment.html Gee, M., & Norton, S. (n.d.). Improving the Status of Women in the Academy. National Education Association. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/TA09WomenAcademy.pdf Gendered Innovations in Science, Health & Medicine, Engineering, and Environment. Stanford University. Retrieved April 3, 2014 from https://genderedinnovations.stanford.edu/ 49 5/23/14

Sources & Resources


|

Goldin, C., & Rouse, C. (2000). Orchestrating impartiality: The impact of “blind auditions” on female musicians. The American Economic Review, 90, 715-741. Goulden, M., Frasch, K., & Mason, M. A. (n.d.). Staying Competitive: Patching America's Leaky Pipeline in the Sciences. American Progress. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2009/11/pdf/women_and_sciences.pdf Greenwald, T., Banaji, M., & Nosek, B. (n.d.). Project Implicit. Project Implicit. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ Heilman, Madeline E., Aaron S. Wallen, Daniella Fuchs, and Melinda M. Tamkins. "Penalties for Success: Reactions to Women Who Succeed at Male Gender-Typed Tasks." Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 3 (2004): 416-427. Heilman, Madeline E., and T. G. Okimoto. 2008. “Motherhood: A potential source of bias in employment decisions.” Journal of Applied Psychology 93:189-198. Hiring for Excellence video (2008). Utah State University.http://www.usu.edu/provost/colleges_and_departments/hiring_faculty/ Kolb, D., Fletcher, J., Meyerson, D., Merrill-Sands, D., & Ely, R. (n.d.). CGO Insights, Briefing Note Number 1. CGO Insights Briefing Notes. Retrieved March 25, 2014, from https://www.simmons.edu/som/docs/Insights_01.pdf

50 5/23/14

Sources & Resources


|

Lariviere, V., Ni, C., Gingras, Y., Cronin, B., & Sugimoto, C. (2013). Bibliometircs: Global gender disparities in science. Nature, 504(7479). Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.nature.com/news/bibliometrics-global-gender-disparities-in-science-1.14321 Mason, M. A., Stacy, A., & Goulden, M. (n.d.). The UC Faculty Work and Family Survey. The UC Faculty Family Friendly Edge. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://ucfamilyedge.berkeley.edu Mason, M. A., & Williams, J. (n.d.). Tools for Change. Tools for Change in STEM. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.toolsforchangeinstem.org/ Misra, J., Lundquist, J., Holmes, E., & Agiomavritis, S. (n.d.). The Ivory Ceiling of Service Work.American Association of University Professors. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.aaup.org/article/ivory-ceiling-service-work#.Uz2imvldWCk Moss-Racusin, Corinne A., John F. Dovidio, Victoria L. Brescoll, Mark J. Grahama, and Jo Handelsman. "Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students." PNAS October 9, 2012 vol. 109 no. 41 16474-16479. National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2013. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2013. Special Report NSF 13-304. Arlington, VA. Available at http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/. Page, Scott, E. (2007) The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools and Societies. Princeton University Press.

51 5/23/14

Sources & Resources


|

Pollack, E. (2013, October 3). Why Are There Still So Few Women In Science?.The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/why-are-there-still-so-few-women-in-science.html?_r=0 Ridgeway, Cecilia L. "Gender, Status, and Leadership." Journal of Social Issues 57, (2001): 637-655. Resources. National Center for Women in Information Technology. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.ncwit.org/resources Roehling, M.V., & Granberry Russell, P. (Eds.) (2012). Faculty search toolkit: A resource for search committees and administrators at Michigan State University . East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.http://www.adapp-advance.msu.edu/files_adapp-advance/content/FacultySearchToolkit-final.pdf Schein, E. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Simmard, Caroline and Denise L. Gammal. (2012) Solutions to Recruit Technical Women. Anita Borg Institute Solutions Series.http://anitaborg.org/files/Anita-Borg-Inst-Solutions-To-Recruit-Technical-Women.pdf Smyth, F. Implicit Bias in Science: The Power of Automatic, Unintended Mindsets. WEPAN. Presentation conducted for WEPAN. Steinpreis RE, Anders KA, Ritzke D (1999) The impact of gender on the review of the curricula vitae of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles 41:509–528. StratEGIC. Ethnograph & Evaluation Research. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://www.colorado.edu/eer/research/strategic.html

52 5/23/14

Sources & Resources

5/23/14

14


|

The Clayman Institute for Gender Research. Stanford University. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://gender.stanford.edu/ The UC Faculty Family Friendly Edge. (n.d.). The UC Faculty Family Friendly Edge. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from http://ucfamilyedge.berkeley.edu Trix, Frances and Carolyn Psenka. "Exploring the Color of Glass: Letters of Recommendation for Female and Male Medical Faculty." Discourse & Society 14, no. 2 (2003): 191-220. Trower, C. A.(2012). Success on the Tenure Track: Five Keys to Faculty Job Satisfaction. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from Project MUSE database. Trower, C.A. Tenure-Track Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey. COACHE Report 2005-2006. Retrieved April 3, 2014, from https://provost.uncc.edu/sites/provost.uncc.edu/files/media/COACHE-Report-2005-06.pdf Valian, V. (1999). Why So Slow?: The Advancement of Women. Cambridge: MIT Press. Woolley, Anita Williams, Christopher F. Chabris, Alex Pentland, Nada Hashmi and Thomas W. Malone. 2010. “Evidence for a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups.” Science 29:686-688. doi:10.1126/science.1193147. Workshop on Faculty Recruitment for Diversity and Excellence. NSF ADVANCE Project at the University of Michigan Strategies and Tactics for Recruiting to Improve Diversity and Excellence (STRIDE). (2008). http://www.advance.rackham.umich.edu/STRIDE-102708.pdf 53 5/23/14

Sources & Resources

Documents

Susan-Metz-UMASS FINAL SLIDES.4.6 · • AcLvely#highlight,#adverLse#and#supportyour#departments# family#accommodaon#policies#for#all#faculty.# • Make#the#use#of#family#accommodaons#standard#operang#