The educational issue addressed in this document is the persistence of barriers to the advancement of women in higher education administration. Examples of these barriers include individual interpersonal biases (such as sex role stereotypes) and institutional biases (such as discriminatory policies used to recruit, select, retain, and promote employees). This is a problem because these barriers impede women's career advancement and perpetuate significant gender disparities in senior leadership positions in higher education. Although women make up nearly 50% of all administrative positions in higher education, they hold less than 30% of senior executive positions and less than 20% of board seats. It is important to address this issue because of the significant potential benefits of gender diversity in higher education administration. From the students' perspective, the presence of female mentors and role models is an important indicator of success for female college students. From an institutional perspective, gender diversity at senior levels improves the overall talent pool, increases the range of contributions to knowledge and practice, and leads to higher quality decision-making. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Literature Review The purpose of this article is to do a literature review of the most prominent biases that impede the advancement of women to leadership roles in higher education administration. Although women make up nearly 50 percent of all administrative positions in higher education, gender disparities persist in appointments to administrative leadership roles, promotion and tenure rates, and research acceptance rates , in compensation and in other areas. As a result, women are not ascending to senior leadership positions. Women hold approximately 38% of deans, 36% of academic deans, less than 30% of top executive positions, and less than 20% of board seats. It is important to address this issue because of the significant potential benefits of gender diversity in higher education administration. From the students' perspective, the presence of female mentors and role models is an important indicator of success for female college students. From an institutional perspective, gender diversity at senior levels improves the overall talent pool, increases the range of contributions to knowledge and practice, and leads to higher quality decision-making. To remedy leadership disparity and achieve greater gender equity, it is important to review and understand the underlying causes. There are many factors that contribute to gender disparities in leadership positions in higher education. Eagly and Carli (2007) describe women's path to professional leadership as a labyrinth, full of twists and turns and obstacles that must be overcome. Schneider et al. (2011) distinguish between “pull” and “push” factors: “pull” factors are those that can distance women from their work, such as the time required to be a mother, while “push” factors are those that distance women and prevent them from achieving success, such as discriminatory work environments. This review focuses on the most important push factors that hinder women's progress, namely organizational and individual gender biases. Thesebiases help perpetuate significant gender disparities in senior leadership positions in higher education. Organizational gender biases arise from the gendered history and culture of higher education. Most academic institutions were founded and managed by men, and therefore their systems, policies and procedures were created based on traditional male practices and values. For example, long hours and inflexible HR practices are possible when the (male) employee is not burdened by children or has a spouse with primary parental responsibility. Because organizational operations were aligned with men's life experiences, they create an unequal playing field that advantages men over women, who have a different life experience. Individual gender biases also negatively impact women. Although overt discrimination has declined dramatically in recent decades, implicit bias continues to play a role in how women are perceived. A 2007 study exploring the slow progress of women in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) disciplines concluded that implicit gender biases influence perceptions of women's abilities, noting the following: On average, people have fewer probability of hiring a woman compared to another. Men with identical qualifications are less likely to give credit to a woman than to a man for the same results and, when information is scarce, much more often give the benefit of the doubt to a man than to a woman. Similar results have been demonstrated outside of STEM disciplines, including in gender-integrated jobs and even in fields traditionally considered more feminine such as nursing, social work and education. These implicit gender biases are believed to arise from gender stereotypes and schemas. Historical gender-based divisions of labor reflect assumptions about the different skills possessed by men and women and the type of work considered most appropriate for each gender. Because of these stereotypes, women may be considered incapable or unsuitable for traditionally male-dominated positions simply because they do not fit preconceptions of who belongs. This bias is most evident in the context of leadership positions. Male agent traits, such as independence, aggression, and confidence, are traditionally associated with leadership. In contrast, common traits of women, such as compassion and sensitivity, do not fit traditional conceptions of leadership and may even be seen as undesirable professional qualities. As a result, women may be considered less capable in leadership roles because they are assumed to lack the (stereotypically masculine) agentic characteristics deemed necessary for effective leadership. These distorted perceptions of women and their competencies, skills, and stereotypical characteristics can operate at all stages of women's professional academic careers. For example, among lower-level faculty members, women report being asked to perform lower-level tasks than their male colleagues in similar positions, and women believe they shoulder a greater service burden in the form of teaching, contact with students and other stereotypically feminine activities. academic tasks. As a result of this increased service load, women have less time for research and other activities necessary to advance their careers. Gender biases also operate at intermediate levels of academia. The gender-biased variations in the.