T/TT Women at 98 US Departments

UPDATE: UW has been in touch to let us know that they are actually at 47%.  They share with Georgia, Iowa, and Penn State the distinction of having at least twice the national average percentage of women.

Julie Van Camp has updated her list of percentages tenured and tenure track women, and there’s both good news and bad news!  First, some congratulations are in order: The University of Georgia has the highest percentage of women in the country, at 53%.  And the University of Washington has given us a first:  For the very first time since Julie’s been doing this (10 years), a Leiter-ranked department has hit the 50% mark for percentage of women.

Now the bad news: When it comes to Leiter-ranked departments, the percentage remains stuck at around 22-23. (Overall percentage 22.7; average percentage 23.84; median percentage 22.22.)

2 thoughts on “T/TT Women at 98 US Departments

  1. On a similar note, the APA has just sent out a message about the “women in philosophy” page. That’s here:


    It looks like a great tool. I skimmed through the list in one of my areas of work- philosophy of law- and learned of several people doing interesting work that I didn’t know of before. It should be a go-to resource for people putting together conferences, panels, anthologies, etc. I’m sure it’s incomplete, but seems to be off to a great start.

  2. Thanks for posting this. I think it is good to keep in mind that there is a systematic reason that the percentages reported in this list OVERstate the percentage of women.

    I checked two Leiter-ranked departments of which I have personal knowledge, to find that the percentages of T/TT women were overstated. In each case, there are women who are neither tenured nor tenure-track, but whom appear as “primary” faculty or some such thing. The counts & percentages reported in this list have included them. These women have fixed term contracts that are renewable, which is not the same as being tenured. (As long as more women than men are offered these kinds of positions in lieu of tenured positions, it will be a systematic error.)

    In each case, the total number of women is so low that the difference it makes in the percentage of T/TT women reported is very large.

    I am not sure what to do about it, as the department may prefer, for image reasons, that the difference be invisible. The women involved may prefer it, too, for professional reasons. I just note that the situation is substantially less good than this list indicates. Substantially.

Comments are closed.