Disuguaglianza di genere nel corpo docente universitario italiano e fallimento delle politiche meritocratiche
Informazioni
Autori
- Davide Borrelli (IT) Università Suor Orsola Benincasa di Napoli
- Marialuisa Stazio (IT) Universidad Federico II de Nápoles https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8922-004X
Abstract
L'articolo mostra la disuguaglianza di genere tra i professori universitari italiani e il fallimento delle politiche che si rifanno alle credenze e ai valori neoliberali della competizione accademica, della presunta valutazione oggettiva della qualità della ricerca scientifica e, in generale, della cultura del merito. In primo luogo, documentiamo la persistenza dello svantaggio femminile nell'università, attraverso una analisi di serie storica sui ricercatori e sulle ricercatrici italiani/e. In seguito, facciamo una comparazione dei dati relativi ai professori italiani con quelli dell'Unione Europea nel complesso. Infine, esponiamo i risultati di una ricerca qualitativo, basata attraverso interviste inprofondità a ricercatrici e professoresse incardinate in università italiane, e sottolineiamo i limiti e gli effetti perversi del metodo meritocratico e del femminismo neoliberale nella risoluzione della disuguglianza di genere. Questo tipo di femminismo non mira tanto all'eliminazione delle reali disuguglianze nel sistema, quanto piuttostosino alla promozione della dona al vertice dele istituzioni accademiche e, in generale, della società. No si tratta di transformare il mondo eliminando le condizioni che producono la disuguaglianza, ma di potenziare in ogni donna –secondo l'etica neoliberale– la competitività del relativo capitale umano lasciando intatta la disuguaglianza.
Parole chiave
Downloads
Come citare
Licenza
Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale 4.0 Internazionale.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Arruzza, C., Bhattacharya T. y Fraser, N. (2019). Feminism for 99%. A Manifesto. London-New York: Verso (trad. esp.: Manifiesto de un feminismo para el 99%. Barcelona: Herder Editorial.
Bagilhole, B. y Goode, J. (2001). The Contradiction of the Myth of Individual Merit, and the Reality of a Patriarchal Support System in Academic Careers: A Feminist Investigation. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 8(2),161-180.
Bailyn, L. (2003). Academic Careers and Gender Equity: Lessons Learned from MIT. Gender, Work and Organization, 10, 137–153.
Bara, F. E. (2019). La universidad light. Un análisis de nuestra formación universitaria. Barcelona: Paidós Educación.
Benschop, Y. (2009). The micro-politics of gendering in networking. Gender, Work & Organization, 16, 217–237.
Benschop, Y. y Brouns, M. (2003). Crumbling ivory towers: academic organizing and its gender effects. Gender, Work and Organization, 10, 194–212.
Borrelli, D. (2015). Contro l’ideologia della valutazione. L’Anvur e l’arte della rottamazione dell’università. Milano: Jouvence.
Borrelli, D. y Giannone, D. (2019). Editoriale. La neovalutazione al governo della società. Cartografie sociali, 8, 7-35.
Borrelli, D y Stazio, M. (2018). La «grande trasformazione» dell’università italiana. Rivista Trimestrale di Scienza dell’Amministrazione, n. 1/2018, https://bit.ly/36gyuXY
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Homo academicus. Paris: Éditions de Minuit (trad. esp.: Homo academicus. Madrid: Siglo XXI, 2008).
Bourdieu, P. (1998). La Domination masculine. Paris: Le Seuil (trad. esp.: La dominación masculina. Barcelona: Siglo XXI, 2000).
Brouns, M. (2004). Gender and assessment of scientific quality. In: Delilah Al-Khudhairy, Nicole Dewandre, Helen Wallace, editors, Gender and Excellence in the Making. Brussels: European Commission: 151-157.
Cech, E. A. y Blair-Loy, M. (2010). Perceiving Glass Ceilings? Meritocratic Versus Structural Explanations of Gender Inequality Among Women in Science and Technology, Social Problems, 57, 3, 371-397.
Criado Perez, C (2019). Invisible Women. Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Man. New York: Abrams Press (trad. esp.: La mujer invisible. Descubre cómo los datos configuran un mundo hecho por y para los hombres, Barcelona: Seix Barral, 2020).
Dal Molin, M., Turri; M. y Agasisti, T. (2017). New public management reforms in the Italian universities: Managerial tools, accountability mechanisms or simply compliance? International Journal of Public Administration. 40 (3), 256–269.
Dardot, P. y Laval, C. (2009). La nouvelle raison du monde. Essais sur la société néolibérale. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.
de Gaulejac, V. (2012). La recherche malade du management. Versailles: Éditions Quae.
Deem, R. (2007). Managing a meritocracy or an equitable organization? Senior managers’ and employees’ views about equal opportunities policies in UK universities. Journal of Education Policy, (22), 615–636.
European Commission (2019). She Figures 2018. Brussels: European Commission - Directorate-General for Research and Innovation.
Foschi, M. (1996). Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, (26), 21-42.
Giroux, H. A. (2014). Neoliberalism's War on Higher Education. Toronto: Between the Lines.
Glass Ceiling Commission (1995). Good for Business: Making Full Use of the Nation’s Human Capital. The Environmental Scan. A Fact Finding Report of the Federal Glass Ceiling commission. Este informe se puede encontrar a la siguiente dirección de internet: https://bit.ly/2KUPWdh
Gunter, H. M., Grimaldi, E., Hall, D. y Serpieri R. (Eds) (2016). New Public Management and the Reform of Education. European Lessons for Policy and Practice. London: Routledge.
Herschberg, C., Benschop Y. y Van den Brink M. (2018). Precarious postdocs: A comparative study on recruitment and selection of early-career researchers. Scandinavian Journal of Management, (34), 303–310.
King, M. M., Bergstrom, C. T., Correll, S. J., Jacquet, J. y West, J. D. (2017). Men Set Their Own Cites High: Gender and Self-citation across Fields and over Time. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, vol. 3, n. 1, 1-22.
Larrosa, J. (2020). El profesor artesano. Materiales para conversar sobre el oficio. Barcelona: Laertes editorial.
Madera , Hebl y Martin, (2009). Gender and letters of recommendation for academia: Agentic and communal differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(6), 1591–1599.
McLaughlin Mitchell, S., Lange S. y Brus H. (2013). Gendered Citation Patterns in International Relations Journals. International Studies Perspectives, Volume 14, Issue 4, November 2013, 485–492.
MacNell, L., Driscoll, A. y Hunt A. N. (2015). What’s in a Name: Exposing Gender Bias in Student Ratings of Teaching. Innovative Higher Education, XL, 4, 291-303.
Morgan, G. y Wood, J. (2017). The ‘academic career’ in the era of flexploitation. In Armano, E., Bove, A. y Murgia A., editors, Mapping Precariousness, Labour Insecurity and Uncertain Livelihoods: Subjectivities and Resistance. London: Routledge, 82–97.
Murgia, A. y Poggio, B.(2018). Gender and Precarious Research Careers: A Comparative Analysis. London: Routledge.
Nielsen M. W. (2015). Limits to meritocracy? Gender in academic recruitment and promotion processes. Science and Public Policy, (43), 386–99.
Nielsen M. W. (2017). Scientific performance assessments through a gender lens: A case study on evaluation and selection practices in academia. Science and Technology Studies, 20, 1–29.
Normand R. (2016). The Changing Epistemic Governance of European Education. The Fabrication of the Homo Academicus Europeanus?. Cham: Springer.
O’Connor P., & O’Hagan C. (2016.) Excellence in university academic staff evaluation: A problematic reality? Studies in Higher Education 41, 1943–57.
OECD (2015). Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities. Paris: OECD Publishing, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264239012-en
Picardi, I. (2020). Labirinti di cristallo. Strutture di genere nell’accademia e nella ricerca. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Piketty T. (2019). Capital et idéologie. Paris: Éditions du Seuil (trad. esp.: Capital e ideología. Zalla Bizkaia: Ediciones Deusto, 2019).
Pollitt, C. y Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis: New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Riley Bowles, H.., Babcock, L. & Lai, L. (2007). Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations: Sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 103, issue 1, 84-103.
Rottenberg, C. (2018). The Rise of Neoliberal Feminism. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean In: Women, Work, and the Lead to Lead. New York: Alfred A. Knopf (trad. esp.: Vayamos adelante: las mujeres, el trabajo y la voluntad de liderar. Barcelona: Conecta.
Sandel, M. J. (2020). The Tyranny of Merit. What’s Become of the Common Good?. London: Penguin Books (trad. esp.: La tiranía del mérito. ¿Qué ha sido del bien común?. Barcelona, Debate, 2021).
Spanò, E. (2017). Femina academica. Donne leader nell’università che cambia. Broni: Edizioni Altravista.
Stazio, M. (2015). Il lavoro universitario e l’arte di andare in bicicletta. Prolegomena shandiani a una ricerca sulla vita e sul lavoro nell’Università italiana. Sociologia italiana. AIS Journal of Sociology, (6), 61-86.
Van den Brink, M. y Benschop, Y. (2011). Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: Sheep with five legs. Organization, 19, 507–524.
Van den Brink, M. y Benschop, Y. (2013). Gender in academic networking: The role of gatekeepers in professorial recruitment. Journal of Management Studies, 51, 460–492.
Young, M. (1958). The Rise of Meritocracy 1870-2033: An Essay on Education and Equality. London: Thames and Hudson (trad. esp.: El Triunfo de la meritocracia 1870-2033: ensayo sobre la educación y la igualdad. Madrid: Tecnos, 1964).