On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Mark Darrall wrote:
> This idea of form having gender qualities is ancient, ancient, ancient.
Isn't English one of the few languages that neuters?
> By what mechanism? I'm not clear on this. By viewing this picture, I'll be
> prompted to discriminate?
I don't think I said that.
> I've asked you any
> number of times where those positions are going to be filled from, and
> presented a pretty decent argument that the talent pool isn't diverse enough
> yet to support significant numbers of W&M (pardon the shorthand) faculty.
I posted to this list a table showing statistics in the profession in
1992. The most recent ACSA statistics, published this month in ACSA News,
show that, since 1992, the numbers of women faculty (tenured and
non-tenured) approximate the pool, which is based on numbers of women in
the profession. That's an improvement. However, my principal concern was
the status of women already in the teaching profession. I previously cited
the AAUP policy document on tenure, stating (and I paraphrase) that
tenured faculty tend to replicate themselves and exclude different (in
race, gender, national original) from themselves.
BTW I notice that Ball State is running a search for a Chair, Department
of Architecture. Interestingly, a "preferred qualification" is now
"doctorate or Ph.D." Also, significantly, "working knowledge of the
profession" rather than a required license to practice architecture.
> This idea of form having gender qualities is ancient, ancient, ancient.
Isn't English one of the few languages that neuters?
> By what mechanism? I'm not clear on this. By viewing this picture, I'll be
> prompted to discriminate?
I don't think I said that.
> I've asked you any
> number of times where those positions are going to be filled from, and
> presented a pretty decent argument that the talent pool isn't diverse enough
> yet to support significant numbers of W&M (pardon the shorthand) faculty.
I posted to this list a table showing statistics in the profession in
1992. The most recent ACSA statistics, published this month in ACSA News,
show that, since 1992, the numbers of women faculty (tenured and
non-tenured) approximate the pool, which is based on numbers of women in
the profession. That's an improvement. However, my principal concern was
the status of women already in the teaching profession. I previously cited
the AAUP policy document on tenure, stating (and I paraphrase) that
tenured faculty tend to replicate themselves and exclude different (in
race, gender, national original) from themselves.
BTW I notice that Ball State is running a search for a Chair, Department
of Architecture. Interestingly, a "preferred qualification" is now
"doctorate or Ph.D." Also, significantly, "working knowledge of the
profession" rather than a required license to practice architecture.