We have updated our Privacy Notice, you can read the updated document here
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Female only professorships

13»

Comments

  • #2


    Asitis2019 wrote: »
    But I still abide that it is a cop out argument because you have not addressed how deficiencies in reliability and/or validity would alter the trend?
    Where are the empirical details that include specific research design, variable operationalisations, collection, analysis, results, and limitations given? You did not specify them, consequently, only generic answers may apply in their absence. Furthermore, in science we can not prove, only suggest, so long as the preponderance of data continues to support your "trend."

    Upon further reflection, I do not know what you are saying above. I'll take a guess in replying, given the nonspecific limitations noted above. Reliability is a necessary but insufficient condition for estimating and explaining validity; i.e., no reliability; no validity. But you can have reliability without validity; e.g., misspelling the same word over and over again is highly reliable but invalid. I can "trend" line (descriptively) such misspellings, but in terms of establishing and explaining validity, we may end up with spurious outcomes.

    In terms of this "trend" you "seem to recall reading in Freakonomics," without specific details as to how this "trend" may have been measured, at this moment in time, it is mere subjective hearsay and anecdotal. You have not given empirical evidence that would suggest if this "trend" was descriptive or inferential, or what independent and dependent variables were measured, or excluded, or controlled, or what the explained and unexplained variance was if inferential.

    Consequently, my nonspecific answers to your nonspecific comments that you "seem to recall" were consistent with each other, and not your cliche and superficial "cop out" ad hominem.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    Where are the empirical details that include specific research design, variable operationalisations, collection, analysis, results, and limitations given? You did not specify them, consequently, only generic answers may apply in their absence. Furthermore, in science we can not prove, only suggest, so long as the preponderance of data continues to support your "trend."

    Upon further reflection, I do not know what you are saying above. I'll take a guess in replying, given the nonspecific limitations noted above. Reliability is a necessary but insufficient condition for estimating and explaining validity; i.e., no reliability; no validity. But you can have reliability without validity; e.g., misspelling the same word over and over again is highly reliable but invalid. I can "trend" line (descriptively) such misspellings, but in terms of establishing and explaining validity, we may end up with spurious outcomes.

    In terms of this "trend" you "seem to recall reading in Freakonomics," without specific details as to how this "trend" may have been measured, at this moment in time, it is mere subjective hearsay and anecdotal. You have not given empirical evidence that would suggest if this "trend" was descriptive or inferential, or what independent and dependent variables were measured, or excluded, or controlled, or what the explained and unexplained variance was if inferential.

    Consequently, my nonspecific answers to your nonspecific comments that you "seem to recall" were consistent with each other, and not your cliche and superficial "cop out" ad hominem.

    You are still deflecting from my question - how would a purported deficiency in reliability and/or validity alter the trend?

    I don't have the answers to your question, though if I did have time on my hands I could write a research paper on said topic :rolleyes:


  • #2


    I'm delighted these posts have been announced. Systemic imbalances can only be addressed head on.


  • #2


    Asitis2019 wrote: »
    Regarding second level teaching, I seem to recall reading in Freakonomics (can't remember of first or second book) that the average IQ of female teachers has been falling over several decades.
    Complete citation for Freakonomics? Author? Year? Which book? Page number(s)?
    Asitis2019 wrote: »
    The reason being is that in the past that most intelligent women went into teaching because there were few other opportunities. Today, however, as there are more opportunities for those comparably intelligent women, the IQ naturally declines.
    Reason how determined? Theory? Or study results? Or both? Study only citied in Freakonomics? Or conducted by Freakonomics? Or by others and cited by Freakonomics? If latter, what study or studies? Citation(s)?


  • #2


    Caquas wrote: »
    18 women-only jobs at the top-level of our Universities
    18 out of how many top-level jobs? Populations of equivalent vacancies by discipline? By university?


  • #2


    Tree wrote: »
    I'm delighted these posts have been announced. Systemic imbalances can only be addressed head on.
    Can't speak for Ireland. US universities get federal grants. OFCCP and EEOC have goals and timetables self-established by universities. Affirmative Action Plans filed annually to OFCCP and EEOC by universities. Plans cover underrepresented demographic categories by discipline, rank, etc. Gender is one of them. If universities fail to show a serious and documented attempt to hire qualified candidates in underrepresented categories, they may lose part of all of their federal funding (examples: NIH; NSF; DOD; EPA; etc.). For flagship universities, this source of funding is huge.


  • #2


    Black Swan wrote: »
    Your link does not load. I've tried it twice.

    .....

    Do you have scholarly peer-reviewed journal articles to suggest this is a problem; i.e., empirical, research based, not news media?

    I can’t get the link to work but just go to independent.ie.

    Do you need scholarly peer-reviewed journal articles to see that these appointments are a problem? Or do you mean the existence of systemic gender bias? If there was such evidence about Irish academic appointments, I’m sure the Minister would have trumpeted it.


  • #2


    Caquas wrote: »
    I can’t get the link to work but just go to independent.ie.
    OK.
    Caquas wrote: »
    Do you need scholarly peer-reviewed journal articles to see that these appointments are a problem?
    Scholarly research and articles may better articulate what would make for an excellent research topic and project, if there is little to find in the literature at present. I have not conducted a search. Certainly, the problem that may or may not exist with this gender preference system would be examined at a greater depth than what news media sources (independent i.e.) may discuss.


  • #2


    Asitis2019 wrote: »
    Regarding second level teaching, I seem to recall reading in Freakonomics (can't remember of first or second book) that the average IQ of female teachers has been falling over several decades. The reason being is that in the past that most intelligent women went into teaching because there were few other opportunities. Today, however, as there are more opportunities for those comparably intelligent women, the IQ naturally declines.

    I expect Freakonomics was referring to:

    'Do Alternative Opportunities Matter? The Role of Female Labor Markets in the Decline of Teacher Quality' by Marigee P Bacolod, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 89, No. 4 (Nov, 2007), pp. 737-751

    Abstract: This paper explores the impact of the expansion in professional opportunities that American women faced on teacher supply and teacher quality. Using standardized test scores, undergraduate institution selectivity, and positive assortative mating characteristics as measures of quality, evidence of a marked decline in the quality of young women going into teaching is documented. In contrast, the quality of young women becoming professionals increased. The more teachers are paid relative to professionals, the more likely educated women and blacks are to choose to teach. When wage opportunities in teaching become relatively less attractive, the quality of teachers and prospective teachers declines. These effects of relative earnings are economically significant.

    Asitis2019 wrote: »
    Regarding this initiative, it is clearly unlawful, and I don't believe there is a glass ceiling in academia.

    The Attorney-General has a different opinion as to legality, it seems. I expect that some tribunal somewhere will be asked to decide between your view and his relatively soon.


  • #2


    Steve456 wrote: »
    'Do Alternative Opportunities Matter? The Role of Female Labor Markets in the Decline of Teacher Quality' by Marigee P Bacolod, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 89, No. 4 (Nov, 2007), pp. 737-751

    Abstract: This paper explores the impact of the expansion in professional opportunities that American women faced on teacher supply and teacher quality.
    Interesting comparative study from America. Any Irish research?


Society & Culture