Quarantine Mothering and Working at Home: How Institutes of Higher Education Support or Fail to Support MotherScholars

• In Event: Division J Vice Presidential Session. The Faculty Work Life Needs of Mother-Scholars in the Time of COVID-19

Abstract

The authors conducted a larger mixed methods study focusing on university policies that address the presence of children on campus and the ways in which the enforcement/non-enforcement of said policies affects the personal and professional lives of women faculty, or “MotherScholars.” Because this study took place during the COVID-19 global pandemic, both the survey and the interviews addressed whether and how explicit policies, implicit practices, and both internal and external communication from university administrators about MotherScholars’ work lives and expectations changed during Spring 2020. This paper focuses on how the MotherScholar-study-participants’ work and professional lives were impacted by their universities’ COVID-19 policies and practices relevant to working full-time while also quarantined with children and how their experiences differed from “FatherScholars.”

A mixed methods research design was employed in order to incorporate quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques. Purposive sampling was used to distribute a survey in academic social media groups and to professional organization listservs (Palys, 2008). Snowball sampling was also used because participants were asked to forward the survey link to interested others (Patton, 2002). Among other things, the survey asked participants to report how well they thought their university was handling the COVID-19 pandemic. Results indicated that, compared to FatherScholars, MotherScholars reported that their institutions were doing a worse job handling the COVID-19 pandemic. On a scale from 1 (not well at all) to 5 (extremely well), MotherScholars (M = 3.12) reported that their institutions did a worse job of communicating job expectations to faculty during the COVID-19 pandemic than did FatherScholars (M = 3.72), t(138) = -2.07, p = .04. Additionally, MotherScholars (M = 3.00) reported that their institutions did a worse job of communicating that faculty were doing a good job despite the COVID-19 pandemic than did FatherScholars (M = 3.61), t(138) = -1.98, p = .05. Overall, MotherScholars (M = 3.30) reported that their institutions did a worse job of handling the COVID-19 pandemic than did FatherScholars (M = 3.89), t(138) = -2.41, p = .02.

We also interviewed 19 MotherScholars and 3 FatherScholars from a range of academic disciplines, ages, and types of institutions, until we reached theoretical saturation (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The semi-structured interview protocol included questions about the impact of COVID-19-related policies, practices, and messaging regarding children on participants’ job satisfaction, mental/physical health, and work/life balance. We completed the interviews in July 2020 and will complete data analysis in Fall 2020. We will engage in open and axial coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) and then the constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) and will triangulate data by comparing interview and survey findings, engaging multiple researchers in the analysis, and conducting peer debriefings (Denzin & Lincoln, 1994; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Findings will highlight institutional policies and practices that serve or fail to serve faculty in terms of supporting their professional advancement in teaching, research, and service, will identify characteristics of institutional environments that support faculty during times of crisis, and will describe the ways in which gender impacted participants’ experiences.

Authors

• Heather K. Olson Beal, Stephen F. Austin State University

• Lauren E. Brewer, Stephen F. Austin State University

• Lauren E Burrow, Stephen F. Austin State University

• Shelby Laird, North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences

• Chrissy J Cross, Stephen F. Austin State University

• Brittany Fish, Sam Houston State University