Page 144 - Through the gate of the neoliberal academy • Herschberg
P. 144

142 CHAPTER 5
excerpt, Leo argues that Ed would not move for the position, whereas he thinks that Dora would move. However, in the data I also find examples where the willingness of women candidates to move is questioned. Interestingly, committee members often made assumptions about such willingness to move, but they did not ask the candidates directly during the interviews.
The findings show how committee members discredited women candidates by questioning their truthfulness regarding information provided in their applications. This practicing of gender is less subtle than other practicing gender found in this study. Earlier research has shown that women candidates are considered more risky than men candidates based on the perceived lack of quality of women candidates and the social complications of interactions between men and women (Van den Brink & Benschop, 2014). Yet, the suspicion regarding women candidates, as shown in this study, has not been documented. To date, there is limited evidence of evaluators disqualifying women based on their perceptions of the truthfulness of women candidates. Only one study showed an example in which evaluators vilified a woman employee by questioning her loyalty to the firm and her cooperation style (Van den Brink et al., 2016). In this study I was able to capture a more extensive picture of how gender is practiced in evaluation by analysing how the truthfulness of women candidates is questioned over multiple cases.
(Not) praising ambition
Gender was also practiced in the evaluation of candidates when committee members reflected on candidates’ ambitions. Men were often attributed high levels of ambition, a quality that committee members praised in men but not so much in women candidates.
Harriet: Tobias clearly aspires an academic career.
[Later in the deliberation]
Harriet: [about Tobias] I like it to have someone who really aims for an academic career.
As shown in this excerpt from the SSH3 case, Harriet argues that Tobias pursues an academic career, which she based on the interview with Tobias. Here, she reflects on Tobias’ potential for the future. Later in the deliberation, she brought this up as an argument for hiring Tobias. On the contrary, committee member Thomas said about Maria, one of the women candidates in this case, that he “supposes her priority lies with teaching”, implying that Maria does not pursue a career that involves a considerable amount of research. Here, Thomas might draw on the gender stereotype


























































































   142   143   144   145   146