Dina Banerjee

Learning and social change: using interviews as tools to prompt reflection on practice

This article argues that interviewing is a process in which interviewees can reflect on critical decisions about their academic careers. Reflective practice is a course of action where a person ponders significant incidents in her or his life. In so doing, she or he can make critical decisions about her or his own well-being. Drawing on our experiences collecting qualitative data for ADVANCE Purdue, an NSF-funded project to increase the number and success of women faculty in STEM academic disciplines, we illustrate how interviews triggered our interviewees to think differently about accessing or interpreting promotion and tenure policies of the university. Hence, we argue that interviews can be considered as a form of reflective practice where interviewees decide to take alternative actions to enhance their well-being. In this paper, we ask: (a) How do interviews trigger new realizations among interviewees?; and (b) How do interviews act as agents of potential social change? Data are derived from semi-structured interviews with faculty members from science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and agriculture disciplines at Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana. We interpret the data qualitatively in the context of reflective practice.

Gender, race, and perceived promotability among American employees

Purpose – This research examines the effects of gender, race, human capital, work conditions, and organizational characteristics on employees’ current supervisory status at work, and their perceptions of their future promotability. Methodology – Data are drawn from the salaried employees of The National Study of the Changing Workforce in 2002, a nationally representative sample of all U.S. workers. Employees are compared by race and gender using correlation coefficients, t-tests, and multiple regression. Findings – In contrast to earlier research, in 2002 non-white women are as likely as white women and non-white men to have attained supervisory status at work. There also is no gender or race effect on employees’ perception of their future promotional opportunity. Workers who are supervisors, both white and non-white, are more likely than non-supervisors to perceive that they have future promotional opportunity. Having a work context that is supportive, and having supportive coworkers and a supportive supervisor, leads to the perception of greater chances to continue to move up in ones company, as does having greater job demands and union membership. On the contrary, work/family spillover, having a supervisor of the same race, and perceiving racial discrimination at the workplace leads to perception of less chance to continue to move up. Research limitations – Employees’ actual job titles are not known except that supervising others is a major part of their job. Practical implications – Many of the variables shown to be related to supervisory status and promotability suggest directions for the restructuring of workplaces to provide more supportive and less biased environments.