Close

Complete Captcha

• 1 year - 857 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 3882 Goods vs 1538 No Goods

1. Economist
   66eb
   

   met with the associate dean at my top 10 finance dept. they other day and she intimated only offers will be made to women because of the current faculty ratio.

   is it possible, maybe, just maybe, that the current faculty ratio is low because women have been discriminated against for literally decades? and that current efforts are not trying to give women an advantage, but to simply *address* the *disadvantage* that women face? there is *so much* evidence that this is the case. if you're going to argue that it isn't, and if you're too scared to actually and ask and listen to your colleagues/classmates, at least read/watch the horror stories that yellen, athey, bertrand, and other top economists have shared of the *decades* of discrimination that they've put up with at their 2019 ASSA panel.
   these policies are not designed to give women an advantage. they are designed to *address* existing *disadvantages*. this is not rocket science.

   what are the existing disadvantages?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 Dolphin 0 Shark !

2. Economist
   3c9e
   

   met with the associate dean at my top 10 finance dept. they other day and she intimated only offers will be made to women because of the current faculty ratio.

   is it possible, maybe, just maybe, that the current faculty ratio is low because women have been discriminated against for literally decades? and that current efforts are not trying to give women an advantage, but to simply *address* the *disadvantage* that women face? there is *so much* evidence that this is the case. if you're going to argue that it isn't, and if you're too scared to actually and ask and listen to your colleagues/classmates, at least read/watch the horror stories that yellen, athey, bertrand, and other top economists have shared of the *decades* of discrimination that they've put up with at their 2019 ASSA panel.
   these policies are not designed to give women an advantage. they are designed to *address* existing *disadvantages*. this is not rocket science.

   LOL, playing this card again? We have been waiting and waiting for you to produce a single piece of the "*so much*" evidence on your side, but you never do. Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence on the "females are advantaged" side, such as:

   https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00461520.2017.1396462

   Here is what these hiring audits reveal about the female advantage in real-world hiring of tenure-track applicants in scientific fields in the United States and Canada: There is a female advantage in eight of the nine large-scale studies dating back to the 1980s. However, the magnitude of the female advantage is quite variable. Sometimes it is on the order of 2-to-1 female hiring advantage, but most of the time the female advantage is smaller. Consider: A National Research Council (NRC; 2009) national survey of six scientific disciplines examined faculty hiring experiences and policies related to teaching loads and start-up packages from 1995 to 2003. This audit included more than 1,800 faculty members' experiences in nearly 500 departments at 89 research-intensive universities in the United States. Although a smaller proportion of female PhDs applied for tenure-track positions at these 89 universities, those who did apply were both invited to interview more often and were offered positions more often than predicted by their fraction of the applicant pool. For example, in the field of mathematics, only 20% of applicants for tenure-track positions were female, but 28% of those invited to interview were female and 30% of those offered tenure-track positions were female. Table 1 shows that in all six scientific disciplines studied by the NRC, five of which are GEMP fields, female applicants were invited to interview and offered positions at rates higher than those of men. The largest female advantages were in the math-intensive discipline of engineering which were associated with a 2-to-1 or greater female advantage.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 7 Dolphin 0 Shark !

3. Economist
   8d9d
   

   We will hire a women this year.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Dolphin 0 Shark !

4. Economist
   d81b
   

   assuming women were discriminated in the past (an assumption I share), it does not follow why discriminating men today in the same way will fix anything.

   met with the associate dean at my top 10 finance dept. they other day and she intimated only offers will be made to women because of the current faculty ratio.

   is it possible, maybe, just maybe, that the current faculty ratio is low because women have been discriminated against for literally decades? and that current efforts are not trying to give women an advantage, but to simply *address* the *disadvantage* that women face? there is *so much* evidence that this is the case. if you're going to argue that it isn't, and if you're too scared to actually and ask and listen to your colleagues/classmates, at least read/watch the horror stories that yellen, athey, bertrand, and other top economists have shared of the *decades* of discrimination that they've put up with at their 2019 ASSA panel.
   these policies are not designed to give women an advantage. they are designed to *address* existing *disadvantages*. this is not rocket science.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 15 Dolphin 0 Shark !

5. Economist
   8328
   

   https://nplusonemag.com/issue-34/essays/sexism-in-the-academy/

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Dolphin 6 Shark !

6. Economist
   cad4
   

   https://nplusonemag.com/issue-34/essays/sexism-in-the-academy/

   Propaganda piece.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 4 Dolphin 0 Shark !

7. Economist
   ea9f
   

   Today we have been told to hire a woman this round

   1 year ago # QUOTE 2 Dolphin 0 Shark !

8. Economist
   5034
   

   Today we have been told to hire a woman this round

   Rank of school?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Dolphin 0 Shark !

9. Economist
   0317
   

   Are there emails saying this? Can they be FOIA-d?

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Dolphin 0 Shark !

10. Economist
    ea9f
    

    Today we have been told to hire a woman this round

    Rank of school?

    LRM

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Dolphin 0 Shark !

11. Economist
    a6a8
    

    How about Columbia GSB flyout?

    10 months ago # QUOTE 0 Dolphin 0 Shark !

12. Economist
    85a3
    

    Today we have been told to hire at least three women out of four lines this round

    10 months ago # QUOTE 1 Dolphin 0 Shark !

13. Economist
    7189
    

    Today we have been told to hire at least three women out of four lines this round

    how many schools had four lines open? :O

    10 months ago # QUOTE 1 Dolphin 0 Shark !

14. Economist
    85a3
    

    Yes, turnover is high here. :)

    Today we have been told to hire at least three women out of four lines this round

    how many schools had four lines open? :O

    10 months ago # QUOTE 3 Dolphin 0 Shark !

15. Economist
    edc9
    

    The Norwegian Business School is exclusively flying out women.

    10 months ago # QUOTE 4 Dolphin 0 Shark !

16. Economist
    bc50
    

    The Norwegian Business School is exclusively flying out women.

    Because women are better then men this year

    10 months ago # QUOTE 1 Dolphin 5 Shark !

17. Economist
    2126
    

    The Norwegian Business School is exclusively flying out women.

    Because women are better then men this year

    Did you reach that conclusion by comparing flyouts by gender?

    10 months ago # QUOTE 4 Dolphin 0 Shark !

18. Economist
    edc9
    

    ^
    golden

    10 months ago # QUOTE 0 Dolphin 0 Shark !

19. Economist
    2e46
    

    I advise you to read more in this paper. In Ceci's paper it is written under figure 5: "In Experiment 1 of 5, faculty members of both genders in all four fields expressed a strong hiring preference for female over male applicants with identical qualifications and lifestyles, .... with the exception of male economists, who ranked both genders equivalently.

    "The magnitude of this pro-female preference was similar in most contrasts (...), with a several interesting exceptions in which faculty either expressed no preference (male economists had no preference) or preferred men over identically qualified women (..). Figure 5 shows the means for faculty voters as a function of the gender of the hypothetical applicant in each of the four fields we examined. The sole faculty group that did not show a significant pro-female preference was male economists who showed no reliable preference. (Female economists showed the same pro-female preference that male and female psychologists, biologists, and engineers showed.)"

    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00461520.2017.1396462

    met with the associate dean at my top 10 finance dept. they other day and she intimated only offers will be made to women because of the current faculty ratio.

    is it possible, maybe, just maybe, that the current faculty ratio is low because women have been discriminated against for literally decades? and that current efforts are not trying to give women an advantage, but to simply *address* the *disadvantage* that women face? there is *so much* evidence that this is the case. if you're going to argue that it isn't, and if you're too scared to actually and ask and listen to your colleagues/classmates, at least read/watch the horror stories that yellen, athey, bertrand, and other top economists have shared of the *decades* of discrimination that they've put up with at their 2019 ASSA panel.
    these policies are not designed to give women an advantage. they are designed to *address* existing *disadvantages*. this is not rocket science.

    LOL, playing this card again? We have been waiting and waiting for you to produce a single piece of the "*so much*" evidence on your side, but you never do. Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence on the "females are advantaged" side, such as:
    https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00461520.2017.1396462
    Here is what these hiring audits reveal about the female advantage in real-world hiring of tenure-track applicants in scientific fields in the United States and Canada: There is a female advantage in eight of the nine large-scale studies dating back to the 1980s. However, the magnitude of the female advantage is quite variable. Sometimes it is on the order of 2-to-1 female hiring advantage, but most of the time the female advantage is smaller. Consider: A National Research Council (NRC; 2009) national survey of six scientific disciplines examined faculty hiring experiences and policies related to teaching loads and start-up packages from 1995 to 2003. This audit included more than 1,800 faculty members' experiences in nearly 500 departments at 89 research-intensive universities in the United States. Although a smaller proportion of female PhDs applied for tenure-track positions at these 89 universities, those who did apply were both invited to interview more often and were offered positions more often than predicted by their fraction of the applicant pool. For example, in the field of mathematics, only 20% of applicants for tenure-track positions were female, but 28% of those invited to interview were female and 30% of those offered tenure-track positions were female. Table...See full post

    10 months ago # QUOTE 0 Dolphin 0 Shark !

20. Economist
    79e0
    

    They denied tenure to a couple of men to make room for AA hires.

    Today we have been told to hire at least three women out of four lines this round

    how many schools had four lines open? :O

    10 months ago # QUOTE 1 Dolphin 0 Shark !

Reply »