[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

Gender Specific Mentorship Programs Can Help Fill the

Community College Leadership Void, Bridge the Gender Gap
within Leadership, and More Accurately Reflect Students
Currently Attending Community Colleges.

By: Carey Schroyer

Western Washington University – AHE 518, Fall 2017
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

Introduction

Community colleges throughout the nation are and will continue to experience
dramatic losses in senior leadership due to the massive retirements of baby-boomer-
generation employees. The September 2013 issue of Data Points reported that 75% of
community college presidents will retire within the next ten years, with slightly more than
40% of those presidents retiring in the next five years (Rice and O’Keefe, 2014). The
anticipated retirement of senior community college personnel has created a leadership void
that is expected to grow just as the nation has placed high expectations on community
colleges to help increase the number of college graduates by 2020 (Lumina Foundation,
2009). As the Walter Bumphus (the 2013-14 AACC President noted),

“The pool of potential applicants to fill those CEO positions who possess the requisite
skills to ‘hit the ground leading’ is shrinking. In order to develop and implement a
student success agenda, leadership development and faculty engagement are critical”.

The question of who should lead community colleges is important not only for the sake
of increasing diversity and representation but also because of the demographic makeup of the
students served by many community colleges. The AACC fact sheet indicates 56% of
community college students were female in 2017 and many believe that leadership ought to
be more representative of their students. This whitepaper looks at mentorship programs for
women in higher educational leadership positions in order to better understand how gender
specific mentoring programs can help fill the community college leadership void, minimize the
gender gap at the highest levels of community college leadership and more accurately reflect
the students currently attending community colleges.

Gender Gap in Community College Administrative Positions

As illustrated in the graph below, 56% of community college executive, administrative,

and managerial staff were women in 2011. In contrast, only 36% of the community college
presidents were women. This statistic begs the question, why are there so few women at the
top organizational level if more than 50% of the college’s executive, administrative,
managerial staff are women?
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

Further research indicated that although women were roughly equally represented in lower
administrative positions, representation gets worse for increasingly senior positions —
currently, women fill less than 30% of top executive positions (Simon, 2017). In fact,
according to the American Council on Education (ACE) only ~33% of community colleges
were led by women in 2015 (ACE, 2015).

The nationally recognized community college leadership void is concerning and

continues to be a subject of research and study. Breen (2012) identified key issues associated
with the current state of the leadership pipeline, including the lack of a plan for recruitment,
selection, preparation, placement, and professional development. Ebbers, Conover, and
Samuels (2010, 59) concluded that existing leaders need to identify, train, and “grow their
own” to meet the increased need for new leadership. Perhaps Lewis (2004, 4) best observed
the void: “Not only are we losing current executives to retirement, we are losing the leaders
that know how to develop future leaders all the way through retirement.” Much of the
research that has been done regarding the leadership pipeline has suggested there is a lack of
qualified women within it. However, more recent research clearly shows there are women in
the pipeline. Women have earned over half of all baccalaureate degrees for the past 30 years
and have earned over half of all doctoral degrees for almost a decade (Johnson, 2016). Based
on this information, it appears the pipeline is full; however, the higher academic ranks and
leadership positions predominantly go to men so we must challenge the status quo.

Minimizing the gender gap at the highest levels of community college leadership and
accurately reflecting the student population requires hiring more women into leadership
positions, creating systems and programs that support women in leadership positions, and
filling the leadership pipeline with capable and talented women who are prepared to lead.
Actively recruiting and retaining women in the leadership pipeline is essential. Research
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

consistently supports the view that mentorship is a significant contributor to career

development in higher education (Shultz, 2001). In addition, we know women in leadership
roles in higher education benefit significantly from female mentorship relationships (Brown,
2014). Although many individual colleges and several national organizations have begun
working together to address this crisis the number of gender specific mentoring programs
remains surprising small and hard to determine.

The Importance of Mentorship

Mentorship in education has a long history. In fact, the origins of mentoring can be
traced back to Greek mythology, where Mentor is put in charge of training Telemachus, the
son of Odysseus (Mentoring Institute, 2017). While the name is borrowed from this
mythological tutor-student relationship, the present concept of mentoring has expanded and
evolved, it is no longer limited to a tutor-student relationship. Mentoring has evolved, the
specific practices of mentoring and the expectations of a mentor and mentee vary
considerably depending on the setting, objective, members of mentoring relationships,
cultural norms and various other factors that impact a mentor and mentees life and
relationship (Mentoring Institute, 2017).

Research has shown that mentors can have a critical effect on the career paths of
women who aspire to advance in higher education administration (Brown et al., 2001;
Hansman, 1998; Johnson, 1998). Research also suggests that antecedent factors, such as
demographic characteristics, career factors, relationship factors, and types of relationships,
influence the formation and maintenance of mentoring relationships (Brown, 2005). It is well
known that demographic factors, including gender, age, and education, are likely to influence
the mentoring experience between mentors and mentees (Young, 2000). As previously
stated, women in leadership roles and those who aspire to leadership roles in higher
education benefit significantly from female mentorship relationships (Brown, 659). The lack
of literature and research regarding gender specific mentorship programs for women in
higher educational administration highlight the need for additional research. Although the
leadership void and gender gap are openly acknowledged within the community college
system, the number of mentorship programs specific to this population was surprisingly small
even though several national organizations have bonded together address the issue.

Gender Theory

Many different theoretical frameworks could be used to assess and analyze the gender
gap in higher educational leadership positions at community colleges however the
disproportionately low number of female presidents highlights the importance of gender
theory and further supports the importance of gender specific mentorship programs for
women. Even today, the socialization of boys and girls can reaffirm gender specific behaviors
and characteristics that have not traditionally been associated with leadership. Both girls and
boys learn to negotiate the socially embedded gender norms from a young age and most are
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

well socialized to fall within the social constructions build for them before they enter the
workforce.

“Women must not be too much within or too far outside of social constructions of
femininity; the consequence of doing so can be detrimental to the perceived
competence of the woman’s leadership” (Hannum et al., 2015). “

The disproportionately low number of women in the highest leadership position within the
community college system suggests many typical feminine characteristics/behaviors have not
been as highly prioritized and that masculine practices and leadership norms may function to
exclude women.

Consider that until recently, most of the scholarly work on leadership, both inside and
outside the academy, was conducted by men and focused on male leaders (Dunn, Gerlach &
Hyle, 2014). As a result, male behaviors and characteristics in leadership roles have been the
standard against which female leaders are assessed (Wolverton, Bower, & Hyle 2009). For
example, men are sometimes brusque and aggressively plan, negotiate, and play politics with
other bosses and their subordinates in order to get the job done — men separate and
individuate the personal from the professional —qualities that are not generally accepted of
women (Block and Tietjen-Smith, 2016). Women are not typically socialized in this manner
and they are not usually honored or appreciated for behaving in these ways (Block and
Tietjen-Smith, 2016). A 2014 report, Gender and Higher Education Leadership by the
Leadership Foundation for Higher Education backs this view. Worryingly, women’s
experiences pointing to gender bias in senior recruitment “were supported by comments
made by some of the nominating managers” the report observes (Tickle, 2017).

“My experience of interview panels is that they prefer confidence to self-awareness,

and value quick results over decision-making that takes into account minority views
and opinions. The latter takes longer, and I suspect doesn’t look like leadership to some
people.”

Work life balance also appears to impact women and men differently. Johnson (2016)
found that female executives in higher education have different experiences than male peers
when it comes to work–life balance. Current and past statistics confirm that women
executives are less likely to be married and have children at the same rate as men. They also
suggest that women are also more likely to have changed their career pathway for family
reasons than their male peers (Block and Tietjen-Smith, 2016). Some argue that these are
choices made by women but others (Block and Tietjen-Smith, 2016) suggest that women are
not so much “opting out of demanding professional careers as they are pushed out by a
combination of unrealistic workplace expectations, public policies that provide little or no
support for caregiving, and male partners who neither provide significant amounts of help
with household work nor are in a position to forego their own careers (Curtis, 2011, p. 7).

In addition to the overwhelming demands many women feel when balancing the
proposition of leadership, they must also face the reality of the gender pay gap and
educational disparity of women in senior level administrative positions. Although education
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

is often considered a progressive discipline, the gender wage gap exists. Female faculty
members in higher education are paid on average approximately 18% less than males per
academic year. Men earn higher salaries at every rank, in every discipline and at every type of
4-year institution (Block and Tietjen-Smith, 2016) and many community colleges. In addition,
pathways to upper level administration positions indicated female presidents were more
likely to have earned doctorates than their male peers, hold academic rank, and have held
positions through the university chain of command; whereas, males were more likely to have
never been a faculty member, have worked outside a university, or served as an executive in a
division outside of academic affairs (Block and Tietjen-Smith, 2016).

The issues identified highlight the importance of gender specific guidance and support
for women by women in leadership positions. Maxwell (1995) emphasized the importance of
leaders developing other potential leaders through mentorship by arguing there is no success
without a successor. It is crucial that women voice their opinions, help others understand
obstacles, and show appreciation for each other by realizing and supporting women’s
resources, strengths, and skills (Haynes and Hayes (2004)). Existing literature suggests that
mentoring and being mentored are critical career development activities that help women
advance up the academic administrative ladder (Brown et al., 2001) and research shows that
women faculty desire mentorship (Blood et al., 2012). A study of female college presidents
indicated that most had a primary mentor who assisted their move up the administrative
ladder suggesting that mentorship plays a critical role up the administrative ladder (Brown,
2005). The same study also indicated antecedent factors, particularly demographic factors
such as age and gender, support Young’s contention that demographic factors are likely to
influence mentoring exchange between mentors and mentees (Brown, 2005). The need for
gender specific mentorship programs focused on educational leadership is clear.

Developing Gender Specific Mentorship Programs for Women in

Leadership Positions at Community Colleges

Although the literature review did not provide many opportunities for examination of
existing gender specific mentorship programs, it did provide guidelines for development of
these programs. Whether developing formal or informal programs, a relationship grounded
in trust and support was a foundational requirement for meaningful mentor-mentee
interactions. Feminist psychotherapists found that women who were given tools to grow in
connected relationships became more empowered, confident, and psychologically healthy
(Jordan et al., 1991). The practice of culturally related psychology (growing through complex
relationship issues while maintaining a strong sense of self is at the foundation) is akin to
mentoring in that both therapist and patient are touched emotionally by each other, grow in
the relationship, gain something from one another, and risk something of themselves in the
process (Jordan et al., 1991). The critical aspects of RCT are well aligned with the social
constructionist theory which refers to the development of self in relation to interchanges
involving the self, other people, society, and social institutions (Hayes and Koro-Ljungberg,
2011, p. 690). This “dynamic cognitive-affective process of joining with and understanding
another’s subjective experience” (Jordan, 1997, p 15) is the critical aspect of RCT that fits so
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

well with the female mentor/proté gé relationship (Block and Smith, 2016) and social
constructivism. The literature indicated effective mentoring programs are based on
relationships that sustain women in leadership positions by: decreasing feelings of isolation,
understanding how to better manage the work-life balance issues, sharing relevant work
experiences, conveying empathy, communicating feelings of respect for mentees, and simply
be helping women see themselves in leadership positions. Both RTC and social
constructionism have to do with a person’s ability to grow in relationship to others and
construct co-meaning in relationships with others. This is particularly important when
considering the development of a successful mentor-mentee relationship where both parties
bring their own experiences, history, beliefs, etc. that have been used to generate mental
models them to make meaning of their own experiences which may be challenged or
disrupted in a positive mentor-mentee partnership that allows both individuals to grow and
learn. In a phenomenological study of women faculty, Gibson (2006) found five components
of positive mentoring experiences: “(1) having someone who truly cares and acts in one’s best
interest; (2) a feeling of connection; (3) being affirmed of one’s worth; (4) not being alone, and
(5) politics are part of one’s experience” (pp. 67–68). Effective mentorship programs built on
a foundational relationship of trust and empathy allow both mentor and mentee to gain from
one another and create an open system communication that supports and facilitates learning
for both parties.

The National Institute of Health has identified several characteristics of good

mentoring relationships (Block and Smith, 2016). Effective “mentors provide support,
feedback, encouragement, and guidance” (NIH, 2012a, p. 1). Trust and confidentiality,
effective communication, and “creat(ing) a judgment-free zone” (NIH, 2012b, p. 1) are key.
The mentor should motivate and encourage the mentee while “keeping in mind ... mentoring
not just the researcher, but the whole person who likely has competing professional and
personal priorities” (NIH, 2012b, p. 1). Women faculty’s lives are complex, and the mentor
should “be sensitive to this complexity, and be prepared to help with time management
suggestions or tips for overcoming guilt and anxiety” (NIH, 2012b, p. 1). Mentors should
recognize that (their) mentee may have needs, goals, values, and priorities that differ from
(their) own” (NIH, 2012b, p. 1). Mentors should introduce their mentees to others who can
help “to build her network” (NIH, 2012b, p. 1).

The literature reviewed clearly indicates women interested in entering leadership

positions and/or currently in leadership positions benefit from gender specific mentoring
programs. However, it is important to remember that every woman is an individual with
different needs, resources, time constraints, skills, experiences and/or goals. Successful
mentorship programs acknowledge these differences and provide both the structure and
flexibility needed to create meaningful relationships that foster trust, support, and empathy.
The creation of effective gender specific mentorship programs for women who aspire to
and/or are in educational leadership requires the development of programs that meet the
individual and collective goals of a broad based community college and requires:
 Careful planning and training.
 Thoughtful pairing to develop relationships that provide opportunities for
meaningful interactions.
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

 Willing participants who want to engage in the process and don’t feel that this is
another add on.

Conclusion

The need to increase the number of women in leadership positions within the
community colleges is clear. Minimizing the gender gap at the highest levels of Community
College leadership and accurately reflecting the student population requires hiring more
women into leadership positions, creating systems and programs that support women in
leadership positions, and identifying and supporting women in the leadership pipeline so they
are prepared to lead. The leadership pipeline is full of talented and capable woman who have
the potential to lead. Attracting and supporting the development of women through gender
specific mentoring programs will help fill the leadership void, minimize the gender gap at
senior levels of community college administration, and more accurately reflect the student
population. If women perceive they have a place and a path to success in higher levels of
community college administration they are more likely to pursue the path and invest in the
success of their peers.
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

Sources:

AACC American Association of Community Colleges Fast Facts 2017. (2017). [Infographic
illustrating major demographic trends regarding community college students for 2917].
Retrieved from https://www.aacc.nche.edu/research-trends/fast-facts/.

Beltran, W. (2016, Feb 24). Mentoring works: Mentoring women for leadership. [Web log
comment]. Retrieved from https://chronus.com/blog/mentoring-women-for-leadership.

Block, B.A. and Tietjen-Smith, T. (2016). The Case for Women Mentoring Women, Quest, 68:3,
306-315, DOI: 10.1080/00336297.2016.1190285.

Blood, E. A., Ullrich, N. J., Hirshfeld-Becker, D. R., Seely, E. W., Connelly, M. T., Warfield, C. A., &
Emans, S. J. (2012). Academic women faculty: Are they finding the mentoring they need? Journal
of Women’s Health, 21, 1201–1208. DOI:10.1089/jwh.2012.3529.

Breen, T. 2012. Biden touts community colleges in NC visit. Community College Week 24: 16, 5.

Brennan, P. and Powell, D. 2010, Lumina foundation for education 2009 annual report.
Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED512537.pdf.

Brown, T. M. 2005. Mentorship and the female college president. Sex Roles, Vol. 52, Nos. 9/10,
May 2005 (⃝C 2005) DOI: 10.1007/s11199-005-3733-7

Brown, G., Ummersen, C. V., & Sturnick, J. (2001). From where we sit: Women’s perspectives on
the presidency. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Dunn, Dana; Gerlach, Jeanne M.; and Hyle, Adrienne E. (2014). Gender and Leadership:
Reflections of Women in Higher Education Administration, International Journal of Leadership
and Change: Vol. 2: Iss. 1, Article 2. Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&ht
tpsredir=1&article=1010&context=ijlc.

Ebbers, L., K. S. Conover, and A. Samuels. 2010. Leading from the middle: Preparing leaders for
new roles. New Directions for Community Colleges 149: 59–64.

Gibson, S. K. (2006). Mentoring of women faculty: The role of organizational politics and
culture. Innovative Higher Education, 31(1), 63–79. DOI:10.1007/s10755-006-9007-7.

Hannum, K. M., Muhly, S. M., Shockley-Zalabak, P. S., & White, J. S. (2015). Women leaders
within higher education in the United States: Supports, barriers, and experiences of being a
senior leader. Advancing Women in Leadership, 35, 65–75. Retrieved from
http://awljournal.org/Vol35_2015/Hannum_Women_Leaders_within_Higher_Education2.pdf.
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

Holloway, J. (2004). Research Link/Mentoring New Leaders. Educational Leadership, Volume

61, Number 7. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership/apr04/vol61/num07/-Mentoring-New-Leaders.aspx.

Home. (n.d.). Retrieved December 8, 2017, from https://mentor.unm.edu/.

Home. (n.d.). Retrieved December 1, 2017, from https://www.eab.com/daily-

briefing/2015/03/19/one-quarter-of-presidents-are-women.

Johnson, G. G. (1998). African american women administrators as mentors: Significance and

strategies. Initiatives, 58(3), 49– 56.

Johnson, H. (2016). Pipelines, pathways, and institutional leadership: An update on the status of
women in higher education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Jordan, J. V., Kaplan, A. G., Miller, J. B., Stiver, I. P., & Surrey, J. L. (1991). Women’s growth in
connection: Writings from the Stone Center. New York, NY: Guilford.

Lambert, L.D. (2014, January 23). The coming community college exodus. Huffpost. Retreived
from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-d-lambert/community-college-leadership-
exodus_b_4098596.html.

Lewis, B. O. 2004. Performance-based succession planning. Chief Learning Officer.

http://clomedia.com/articles/view/performance_based_succession_planning.

Morris, C. (2015, August 3). Leadership institutes building pipelines of women, minorities.
Diverse: Issues in Higher Education. Retrieved from
http://diverseeducation.com/article/76808/-.

National Institutes of Health (NIH). (2012a). A mentor: Key to career success (NIH Publication
no. 12-7871). NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health. Retrieved from
http://orwh.od.nih.gov/career/pdf/ORWH-Mentee-Factsheet.pdf.

National Institutes of Health (NIH). (2012b). Mentoring women in science-for mentors (NIH
Publication no. 12-7871). NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health. Retrieved from http://
orwh.od.nih.gov/career/pdf/ORWH-Mentor-Factsheet.pdf.

Rice, J. and O’Keefe, S. (2014). Anticipating the community college void with an Internal
Leadership Development Plan. Retrieved from
http://cop.hlcommission.org/Leadership/rice.html.

Searby, L., Ballenger, J., & Tripses, J. (2015). Climbing the ladder, holding the ladder: The
mentoring experiences of higher education female leaders. Advancing Women in Leadership,
35, 98–107.
[AHE 518 – CAREY SCHROYER – FINAL WHITE PAPER (GROUP A1)] December 11, 2017

Shepard, S. (2017). Why are there so few female leaders in higher education? Sage Journals
Volume: 31 issue: 2, page(s): 82-87. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0892020617696631.

Shults, C. (2001). The critical impact of impending retirements on community college leadership
(Research Brief Leadership Series No. 1 AACC-RB-01–5). Washington, DC: American
Association of Community Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED451833).

Simon, C. (2017, March 8). There's a double gender gap in higher education — and here's why.
USA Today College. Retrieved from http://college.usatoday.com/2017/03/08/higher-ed-
gender-gap/.

Tickle, L. (2017, March 8). Why Universities Can’t See Women as Leaders, the Guardian.
Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2017/mar/08/why-universities-
cant-see-woman-as-leaders.

Wolverton, M., Bower, B., & Hyle, A. E. (Eds.). (2009). Leading ladies: Presidents and policy
makers in higher education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.

Young, A. M. (2000). The exchange relationship between mentors and protége ́s: The
development of a framework. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 177–210.