Gender Perspectives on Academic Leadership in African Universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Women are under-represented in higher education leadership across the globe, with the gender gap in Africa being even more pronounced. This article reports gender-disaggregated statistics for senior academic leadership at 16 African research-intensive universities. The gender gap at the level of Vice-Chancellor (VC), the executive head of the university, is striking and is replicated at each leadership level. Women represented only 13% of VCs, half the universities had fewer than 50% women in their executive teams and half had fewer than 30% female Deans. The article also presents the results of an online survey instrument that was administered to faculty members at Deans’ level and above at six of the institutions spread across South Africa, Ghana, and Rwanda to gain insights into women’s academic leadership. Women ranked competence and experience as the most important factors in their leadership accession, indicative of belief in their own abilities and self-worth. They expressed a need for mentoring, measures to address discrimination and greater visibility. A wide gap was evident in men’s and women’s understanding of obstacles to more women occupying leadership positions. Men placed responsibility for the gender gap on women, stating that few are suitably qualified, and that women do not aspire to senior leadership positions. For their part, women pointed to systemic institutional failures as responsible for their under-representation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".