View
11
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Modern and Post-modern Women in Landscape
Architecture and the Barriers they have/had to overcome.
June 2007
Modern and Post-modern Women in Landscape Architecture and
the Barriers they have/had to overcome.
A Senior Project/Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Landscape Architecture Program at the University of California, Davis in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the
Degree of Bachelors of Science of Landscape Architecture.
Accepted and Approved by:
Faculty Committee Member, Heath Schenker
Faculty Committee Member, Elizabeth Boults
Committee Member, Cathy Sim
Committee Member, Gloria Bakerian
Faculty Senior Project Advisor, Mark Francis
By Julia Riggins
June 2007
Abstract
The profession of landscape architecture is expected to experience expanded growth in the future while at the same time student enrollment in landscape architecture programs is thought to be declining. This dilemma could lead to a decline in services and growth due to a lack of qualified landscape architects available to meet demands. This study’s research objectives include providing baseline information regarding current and past female landscape architecture barriers and to describe influential factors and reasons associated with these obstacles.
This study will present and describe the findings from the research analysis and outline suggestions for students, landscape architecture programs, and the landscape architecture profession.
This study is important and timely because it provides needed baseline information about landscape architecture women that can be used by landscape architecture departments and professionals in their strategies to increase female involvement.
“I feel there is something unexplored about women that only a woman can explore.”
‐Georgia O’Keefe
ii
Biographical Sketch
“We must be the change we want to see in the world.” ‐ Mahatma Gandhi
Julia Riggins was born in Lübeck, Germany in 1981. She always enjoyed plants and gardening since she was a young girl. Her early education was taught in the European school‐system until she moved to America in September of 1996. She graduated from Novato High School, (Novato, Ca), in June 2000 after getting married that April. The following year she started her higher education at Solano Community College with a few selected classes at Napa Valley College and College of Marin. In March 2003, she gave birth to her daughter Angelina Rose. She
transferred to the University of California, Davis in September 2004 after she was accepted into the landscape architecture program. She is an active ASLA Student Chapter member and has participated in notable activities such as LaBash 2007 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and is involved with the ASLA Northern Chapter. She is planning to be a leader in positioning landscape architecture as the critical environmental planning and design profession of the future ‐ a profession that can solve pressing environmental problems, protect natural and cultural heritage, and create a better world for the future. She wants to assure that landscape architects are on equal footing (licensure, job classifications, pay, etc.) with other professions. In addition, she wants to encourage bright young minds to seek to become landscape architects and to create yet‐unimagined landscapes to meet future needs. Finally, she plans to promote a profession whose diversity more closely reflects the public who use the landscapes we create.
iii
Dedication I dedicate this research to all the women on this planet. Thanks to all of those who laid the steppingstone for my generation—may we not fail to pass it on to our children. May this research provide the knowledge and strength to women who face barriers in their profession and life. Lisa M. Severino, teacher of Women's Studies at Wittenberg University in Springfield, Ohio published ‘WHAT IS FEMINISM?’ I believe feminism is HOPE. It is a belief that we can change. It is a dream of equality, of love, of community. Feminism is a respect – a respect of women, a respect of humanity, a respect of life. Feminism is the life force of the universe – the blue print for procreation. Feminism is a culture – a renewed society. A united society. Feminism is healthy. Feminism is breaking the silence and stopping the violence. Feminism is a reality. It is our past, our present, and our future. Feminism is Earth. It is abstract and concrete all at once. Feminism is beautiful, yet not limited to any standards of beauty. Feminism is self-awareness, self-confidence, self-respect, and self-protection. Feminism is about the self. Feminism is responsibility. Feminism is consciousness, yet must be taught to the unconscious. Feminism is the mind, the body, the soul. Feminism is POWER. Feminism has no sense of color. Feminism has no gender. Feminism has no age.
Feminism is hope…
Frida Kahlo, Roots
"We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men and women are created equal." ‐Declaration of Sentiments, Seneca Falls Convention
iv
Acknowledgements I would like to thank all the people that provided direction, support, and encouragement throughout this process and its related procedures. In particular, I would like to express my true gratitude to the following people: My family for providing support and encouragement in my choice to become a landscape architect: My dad, for giving me all the technical support and more.
My mom for being by my side during late nights.
v
My husband for trying to understand and support me.
And my beautiful daughter who made me strong and gave me the courage to finish with college. Because she is in my life I considered the topic for this research.
vi
In addition, personal expressions of gratitude go to my sister and best friend Gloria for all her emotional, skilled and educational help as well as her thought‐provoking, encouraging input.
Although this thesis is primarily the work of one individual, it would have not been possible without the guidance and support of the members of my committee, Heath Schenker, Elizabeth Boults, Catherine Sim, and Gloria Bakerian. Many thanks for your timely reviews and helpful comments. It would be impossible to consider this thesis complete without thanking Catherine Sim for her expertise in English grammar and punctuation. Professor Heath Schenker for providing excellent guidance, advice, and mentorship. Elizabeth Boults for taking extra time to go over things with me. Mark Francis for his patience, information, and help. To all the professors and students of the UC Davis Landscape Architecture Program that helped and supported me in this study.
vii
Finally, I must thank a particular colleague who has been instrumental in the completion of this thesis and the landscape architecture program.
For support at all levels, I would fail if I did not acknowledge the help of a great friend, Veronica Breien.
THANK YOU!
viii
Table of Contents Title Page Abstract Bibliographical Sketch ii Dedication iii Acknowledgements iv‐vii Table of Contents viii‐x List of Illustrations, Photographs, Tables xi‐xii Preface (Importance or Significance of Study) xiii Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Problem Statement 1 Objectives 3 Chapter 2: What is landscape architecture? 4 The Roots of the Landscape Architecture Profession 4 Chapter 3: What are landscape architects? What do they do? 11
Different Practices in the Profession 13 Timeline of landscape architecture 17
ix
Chapter 4: Women’s history in landscape architecture 21 The Culture of Horticulture and Gardening 21 Chapter 5: Women in the field of landscape architecture & some biographies 27 UC Davis Landscape Architecture women faculty 27 Other great Landscape Architecture women 31 Chapter 6: Personal barriers 50 Chapter 7: Cultural barriers 58
Women of different ethnicities 63 Profiles of UC First‐Time Freshman Applicants,
Admits and Enrollments: Information Source and Data Definitions 74
Campus Trends 1995‐2002: Davis 76 Chapter 8: Educational barriers 79 Tenure 88 Chapter 9: Economical barriers 96 Chapter 10: Political barriers 105 Chapter 11: Resources 110
x
Chapter 12: Conclusion 118
What must be done: A Blueprint for Action 121 Bibliography 123
Web‐site Resources 129 Appendixes 131
A: Accredited Undergrad. Programs in Landscape Architecture 131
xi
List of Illustrations, Photographs, Tables TABLE 1 Population, Income, Education, and UC Eligibility by Ethnicity 70 TABLE 2 Underrepresented Minorities as a percentage of new UC Ca Resident Freshmen and CA Public High School Graduates
1980, 1985, 1990 and 1995 71 TABLE 3 Measures of Access for Admitted students at the Six Selective Campuses from
2001-2003 75 TABLE 4 Number of Applications, Admits and Enrollment For ELC and
Non-ELC California Residents by campus and Ethnicity 78 TABLE 5 Employment comparison compared to education levels 82 TABLE 6 University of California and Public Salary Comparison
Institutions – Student Fee 85 TABLE 7 Percentage of Women in Faculty Positions, by Sector, 2005-06 89 TABLE 8 UC Tenure vs. Non-Tenure University-wide and at UC Davis 93 TABLE 9 Gender Perspectives 97 TABLE 10 Women’s average Salary as a Percentage of Men’s 104 ILLUSTRATIONS Capability Brown’s proposal plan for Petworth, 1752, West Sussex Record Office,
PHA 5177 (photo: Beaver Photography; reproduced by permission of Lord Egremont) 5
Humphry Repton’s watercolor view of the Rosarium and fountain at Ashridge, Hertfordshire, from Fragments on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening (London,1816) 6
Frederick Law Olmsted (1822–1903) 7 New forms of designed landscapes 7 Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. 9 Park (Tree-lined path) 9 Landscape (Terrain) 10 Bench in landscaped location 12 Timetable (Sources noted by text) 17-20 Detail from William Woollett’s engraving of Carlton House Gardens, 1760, showing
the exhedral flower garden with gardeners at work in the foreground (photo: courtesy of John Harris) 22
Women working in the garden. 25
xii
Jennifer Chandler 27 Patsy Owens 28 Heath Schenker 28 Getrude Jekyll (portrait) 31 Getrude Jekyll (picture) 31 Beatrix Jones Ferrand (portrait) 32 Perennial Garden by Beatrix Jones Ferrand 32 Beatrix Jones Ferrand (posing) 33 Elizabeth Lord and Edith Schryver 34 Marian Cruger Coffin 35 Original Landscape Plan, Marian Cruger Coffin 35 Clermont Huger Lee (portrait) 36 Garden Design by Clermont Huger Lee 36 Carol R. Johnson (portrait) 38 Cheryl Love 42 Topher Delaney 45 Andrea Cochran 46 Mother with Child 50 Hand in hand 53 “Ethnicity flag” 63 Ethnicity & Culture 64 Underrepresented Minority Applicants, Admissions and freshmen Enrollment 72 Ethnicity – All Students 73 Total Enrollment vs. Male Enrollment vs. Female Enrollment 80 Grad Hat 83 Graduation Students in Maroon 95 Money Stack 98 Woman wrapped in money 100 Ocean-front Landscape 123
xiii
Preface (Importance or Significance of Study)
It is not an easy task going to college while being a mother. In addition, being
a woman, I’m interested in recognizing my female colleagues and the barriers they had or still have to overcome. I want to make women and men aware of the ‘Barriers for Women in the Profession’ and to promote the status of women in the State of California. I think that a system needs to be set up for monitoring grievance information by gender and to coordinate these activities. This also should enhance the interface with schools to assist the administration, faculty, and students with gender issues and to promote a speaker’s bureau on the issues. I want to complete and conduct a survey relating to the status and/or experience of women in landscape architecture companies.
Next, I plan on examining the results. With the findings I want to encourage and assist women to seek appointment to the offices in local and statewide professional organizations.
Finally, Landscape architecture as a practice just stepped up into a favorable profession. I want to eliminate gaps in wages and improve the representation of women in the field.
1
Chapter 1 Introduction
Problem Statement
Women have encountered many struggles as they have tried to succeed in a
workplace that fails to acknowledge society’s demands on their time as wives,
mothers, and daughters of aging parents. ‘Women landscape architects, like many
women artists, were frequently initiated into their careers through the intervention
of male relatives. Elizabeth Bullard of Bridgeport, Connecticut, learned her art while
assisting her father. Financial circumstances forced her to carry on her father’s work
after his death. But unlike women painters or writers who could quietly conduct
their work in the secluded space of a studio, the intrinsic nature of architecture and
landscape architecture demands public exposure both in the working process and in
the final product. The woman’s work was exposed to a greater scrutiny (Doumato
1988).’
‘The early 20th century saw the rise of women in the profession. Landscape
architect Beatrix Farrand, best known for designing the Dumbarton Oaks gardens in
Washington, D.C., was one of the founders of the American Society of Landscape
Architects. Ellen Biddle Shipman was a champion of women landscape architects
and was known for her grand estate designs and lavish gardens. Florence Yoch
designed early film sets, including the landscape around Tara for ‘Gone with the
2
Wind’. Today, women constitute more than a quarter of the profession of landscape
architecture (http://www.laprofession.org).’
The primary motivation for assembling this information is to encourage
research on the history of women in landscape architecture. The intention is not to
assert in any way women’s superiority to their male colleagues. Rather, this paper is
conceived from the positive standpoint that women have made a vital contribution
to the field and that their efforts are worthy of recognition. Most architects and
landscape architects agree that ‘whether men or women designers’, they use skills
and knowledge important to the project. While women have made great strides,
they still face challenges in their everyday work environment. One of the biggest
challenges women face is achieving equal opportunities and overcoming roadblocks
such as the “boys club” or the glass ceiling in terms of salaries and promotions.
Additionally, women are often faced with exclusion from informal business
networks and suffer from gender‐based stereotypes and a lack of role models.
Despite these issues, women are climbing their way to the top of the landscape
architecture profession one step at a time.
The number of women in the field of landscape architecture has grown
immensely over the last few decades. They have become more active in
organizations such as American Society Landscape Architecture (ASLA), featured in
magazines and television shows, and have received great awards for their designs.
Female students have increasingly more women faculty role models and women
3
classmates. Advancements in the academic field have allowed female students to get
a strong start in their education and their work place by allowing them to adopt a
life style without interruptions. Day care is used on a frequent basis. In addition, the
view of the woman today has changed ‐ she’s no longer just a caretaker; men are
involve in child rearing.
Objectives
The goal of this research is to identify barriers that affect the career decisions
of women in the field of landscape architecture. This study explores the differences
and barriers among women working in landscape architecture full‐time, part‐time,
as students or faculty, and also women educated in landscape architecture but not
practicing in the discipline.
To this day, women face barriers in their development as landscape architects
as well as in many other fields. Surveys show a lower income for women compared
to men. Some women have experienced some form of discrimination in the work
place and others felt left out of the chance for advancement and responsibilities that
promote management skill.
Career compromises, such as commitment to marriage or child‐raising, often
affect a woman’s situation. Their family obligations therefore affect their choice of
job location, work schedule, and types of work. Some decide to limit their practice to
a part‐time schedule, continue after a break, or not practice at all. As a result, many
women have found a balance between home life and work life.
4
Chapter 2 What is landscape architecture?
In the course of its relatively young history, this nation has changed the face of a vast continent. Far too much development has created a formless and grotesque travesty that has changed forever the splendors of much of the pre‐settlement landscape. Yet an ethic for shaping our land has also emerged, and we can claim a remarkable array of outdoor spaces that enrich the human spirit and add immeasurably to our quality of life. This ethic has become an integral part of our countryʹs landscape architectural heritage. William H. Tishler, FASLA The Roots of the Landscape Architecture Profession
Landscape architecture, as it is known today, finds its origin in the early
treatment of outdoor space by successive ancient cultures, from Persia and Egypt
through Greece and Rome. During the Middle Ages, interest in outdoor spaces had
begun to diminish. However, a revival during the Renaissance Period produced
splendid results in Italy and gave rise to ornate villas, gardens, and great outdoor
piazzas (http://www.landscapearchitects.org).
These patterns greatly influenced the chateaux and urban gardens of
seventeenth‐century France, where landscape architecture and design reached new
heights of elegance and formality. The designers became well‐known. Among the
most famous of the early forerunners of todayʹs landscape architects was André le
Nôtre, who designed the gardens at Versailles and Vaux‐le‐Vicomte
(http://www.landscapearchitects.org).
During the eighteenth century, most English “landscape gardeners” rejected
the geometric emphasis of the French, preferring an imitation of the forms of nature.
5
Among them was Lancelot ʺCapabilityʺ Brown, who remodeled the grounds of
Blenheim Palace (http://www.landscapearchitects.org).
Capability Brown’s proposal plan for Petworth, 1752, West Sussex Record Office, PHA 5177 (photo: Beaver Photography; reproduced by permission of Lord Egremont)
Sir Humphrey Repton was an exception to this type of gardening. He
reintroduced formal structure into landscape design with the creation of the first
great public parks: Victoria Park in London (1845) and Birkenhead Park in Liverpool
(1847). These two parks were one important step that would greatly influence the
development of landscape architecture in the United States as well as in Canada
(http://www.landscapearchitects.org).
6
Humphry Repton’s watercolor view of the Rosarium and fountain at Ashridge, Hertfordshire, from Fragments on the Theory and Practice of Landscape Gardening (London,1816)
The beginning of the twentieth century brought exciting new challenges and
opportunities to what was still an emerging profession. Two major achievements
launched the profession into this era. In 1899 the American Society of Landscape
Architects (ASLA) was founded. The following year formal instruction began at
Harvard.
Inspired by new ideals and growing social concerns, early landscape
designers combined agricultural methods, civil engineering techniques and artistic
principles to shape the surrounding terrains. Their work reflected a mission for
beauty and function combined with responsible design
(http://library.nevada.edu/arch).
7
Frederick Law Olmsted has become the acknowledged father of American
Frederick Law Olmsted (1822–1903) was the
founder of American landscape architecture. landscape architecture and it was his vision that established the lofty ideals that will
forever guide the professionʹs underlying philosophy.
Olmstedʹs friend H. W. S. Cleveland was one of the earliest advocates for
conserving large interconnected systems of open space and landscape amenities.
These two landscape architects and numerous others created a more established
profession with new forms of designed landscapes emerging on the American scene
(http://www.asla.org).
8
By the 1920s, architecture and landscape architecture diverged from urban
planning as a separate profession with its own degree programs and organizations.
Landscape architecture continued to remain a major force in urban planning and
urban design (http://www.landscapearchitects.org).
During and after the Depression, the landscape architecture profession
broadened the profession with opportunities to design national and state parks,
towns, parkways and new urban park systems. The American landscape
architecture returned to its roots in public projects—a trend which has continued
throughout the mid‐twentieth century to today
(http://www.landscapearchitects.org).
During the twentieth century, planning entire communities became an
important practice area and the concept of historic preservation grew beyond the
confines of architecture to include the landscape itself, becoming an important field
of study for landscape architects. Recent specialties include the restoration of
disturbed sites to their earlier natural character, and reclaiming quarries, strip‐
mined areas, and landfills for productive purposes. One of the most noteworthy
advancements of landscape architecture in recent times has occurred in large‐scale
landscape planning (http://library.nevada.edu/arch).
9
Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. is credited with the
language in the National Park Service Act. The act was
established ʺto conserve the scenery and the natural
and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to
provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner
and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for
the enjoyment of future generations (http://www.rpts.tamu.edu).ʺ
The concept of master planning arose from the influence of landscape
architects, and the National Park Service today is one of the most significant
embodiments of landscape architectural principles in the federal establishment
(http://www.rpts.tamu.edu).
10
Today, the field of landscape architecture has matured and is expanding into
new and exciting horizons with many following the calling of the profession of
landscape architecture. According to the ASLA, in 1996, 54 colleges and universities
offered 70 undergraduate and graduate programs in landscape architecture that
were accredited by the Landscape Architecture Accreditation Board of the American
Society of Landscape Architects, forming an education system in this field unparalleled
anywhere in the world. Innovative research is beginning to provide important new
knowledge for the practitioner (asla.org). According to the American Society of
Landscape Architects (ASLA), there are approximately 4500 undergraduate students
enrolled in the 46 accredited programs combined (asla.org). A list of these accredited
schools can be found in Appendix A.
In 1996, 45 states of the U.S. required landscape architects to be licensed or
registered which is based on the Landscape Architect Registration Examination
(L.A.R.E.). The Examination is sponsored by the Council of Landscape Architectural
Registration Boards and takes about three days. Currently, 18 States require a State
examination in addition to the L.A.R.E. to satisfy registration requirements. Usually,
depending on the state, a degree from an accredited school and one to four years of
work experience is required to be allowed for admission to the exam (asla.org).
11
Chapter 3 What are landscape architects? What do they do?
Landscape architecture is the art and science of arranging land, structure, and
plant materials to achieve safe, efficient, and pleasant space for human activity.
Landscape architects, along with horticulturists, planners, and engineers, design
public parks and playgrounds, residential areas, urban centers, streetscapes, golf
courses, therapeutic gardens, parkways, industrial and commercial areas, zoos,
campuses, access to natural areas, and transportation corridors across the United
States. They develop storm‐water management plans, historical and cultural
resource surveys, security design strategies, and community visioning programs.
They work in firms large and small, for public agencies at the local, regional, state
and national level, and with non‐profits and in non‐traditional fields. They are
designers, teachers, facilitators, authors, editors, managers, sales people, marketers,
artists. They work at many scales, from the small site (SW 12th Avenue Green Street
project, Portland, OR) to the largest watershed or conservation area (the 77‐million‐
acre Nowitna National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska) (http://www.planetizen.com).
12
At every scale, landscape architects consider the spirit of the site (genius loci)
and what it can tell the observer. They regard its context in relation to what
surrounds it, is over, under and through it. The designers estimate the potential
impacts of use, and the consequences of a particular action. They collaborate as they
engage geologists, ecologists, hydrologists, architects, engineers, economists, soil
scientists, planners, archaeologists, and professionals from many fields. Landscape
architects speak many languages. Their ability to understand and combine many
disciplines make landscape architects particularly well suited to design and
development teams. This explains in part why landscape architecture is the fastest
growing of all the design professions, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics
(http://www.planetizen.com).
13
Different Practices in the Profession
Landscape architecture in the 1990s cannot be described in a few simple
terms. The scope of the profession is too broad and the projects too varied. A variety
of often interconnected specializations exists within the profession, including the
following:
Landscape Design is considered the historical core of the profession. It is
concerned with detailed outdoor space design. This includes residential,
commercial, industrial, institutional, and public spaces. Designs involve the
preparation of detailed construction plans and documents, the selection of
construction and plant materials, infrastructure such as irrigation, the treatment of a
site as art and the balance of hard and soft surfaces in outdoor and indoor spaces
(American Society of Landscape Architect: Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
Site Planning focuses on the physical design and arrangement of built and
natural elements of a land parcel. A project can involve designing the land for a
single house, an office park or shopping center, or a complete residential
community, which all involve the orderly, efficient, aesthetic and ecologically
sensitive integration of man‐made objects with a siteʹs natural features including
topography, vegetation, drainage, water, wildlife and climate. Sensitive design
minimizes both environmental impacts and project costs, and adds value to a site
(American Society of Landscape Architect: Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
14
Urban/Town Planning deals with designing and planning cities and towns. It
uses zoning techniques and regulations, master plans, conceptual plans, land‐use
studies and other methods to set the layout and organization of urban areas. This
field also involves ʺurban designʺ, which develops open, public spaces, such as
plazas and streetscapes (American Society of Landscape Architect:
Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
Regional Landscape Planning merges landscape architecture with
environmental planning. It has emerged as a major area of practice for many
landscape architects with the rise of the publicʹs environmental awareness in the
past thirty years. In this field, landscape architects deal with the full spectrum of
planning and managing land and water, including natural resource surveys,
preparation of environmental impact statements, visual analysis, landscape
renovation and coastal zone management (asla.org‐American Society of Landscape
Architect: Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
Park and Recreation Planning involves landscape architects who create or
redesigning parks and recreational areas in cities, suburban and rural areas, as well
as developing plans for huge natural areas as part of national park, forest, and
wildlife refuge systems (American Society of Landscape Architect:
Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
Land Development Planning provides a bridge between policy planning and
individual development projects. It can be on large‐scale, multi‐acre parcels of
15
undeveloped land and smaller scale sites in urban, rural and historic areas.
Landscape architecture requires knowledge of real estate economics and
development regulation processes, as well as an understanding of the physical
constraints of developing and working with the land. The challenge is to integrate
economic factors with good design to create quality environments. Due to this
blending of expertise, landscape architects are often selected to head multi‐
disciplinary design teams (American Society of Landscape Architect:
Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
Ecological Planning and Design is concerned with interpretation, analysis, and
formulation of design policies, guidelines and plans to ensure the quality of the
environment. It studies the interaction between people and the natural environment.
It specializes, but is not limited to, analytical evaluations of the land and focuses on
the suitability of a site for development. It requires specific knowledge of
environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act,
Federal wetlands regulations, etc. This specialization also covers highway design
and planning (American Society of Landscape Architect: Pennsylvania/Delaware
Chapter).
Historic Preservation and Reclamation may involve preservation or maintenance
of a site in relatively static condition, conservation of a site as part of a larger area of
historic importance, restoration of a site to a given date or quality, and renovation of
a site for ongoing or new use of sites such as parks, gardens, grounds, waterfronts,
16
and wetlands. It involves increasing numbers of landscape architects as growing
populations lead to additional development. Landscape architects often participate
from the research through the actual restoration stage (American Society of
Landscape Architect: Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
Social and Behavioral Aspects of Landscape Design requires advanced training in
social sciences, such as behavioral psychology, sociology, anthropology and
economics because it focuses on the human dimension of design. Work includes
designing for the special needs of the elderly or the disabled. Areas of study include
design evaluation of existing environments, environmental perceptions, and effects
of environments on people (American Society of Landscape Architect:
Pennsylvania/Delaware Chapter).
It has been said that the profession has reached the point where it now has the ability to invent its own future.
William H. Tishler, FASLA
17
A Timeline of Landscape Architecture
1771 Jefferson records his early thoughts on
landscape design in a memorandum book, spurred by his ideas on improving Monticello.
1863 The title "landscape architect" is first used in New York City by Central Park designers Frederick Law Olmsted and Calvert Vaux. ( Photos by Bruce Davidson/Magnum)
1858-91 Between the design of Central Park and his retirement, Frederick Law Olmsted became the acknowledged father of American landscape architecture. It was his vision that established the lofty ideals that will forever guide the profession's underlying philosophy. (Photos courtesy Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site)
1868-70 FLO planned community of Riverside,
Illinois, is an early model of community preserving riverfront for public space.
1872-95 H. W. S. Cleveland becomes an early advocate for conserving large interconnected systems of open space and develops Minneapolis' metropolitan park system.
1850-1900
New forms of designed landscapes emerge: the urban parks, cemeteries, amusement parks, camps, clubs, golf courses, resorts, spas and zoos, and larger housing environments. (Photo by Alan Ward)
1899 The American Society of Landscape
Architects is founded.
1900 Formal instruction in landscape architecture
begins at Harvard, the nation's most prestigious university.
18
1905 U.S.D.A. Forest Service established.
1909 The Blue Ridge Highway gives birth to the
idea of the parkway. (Blue Ridge Parkway photo 11/99 62 Parkway plan)
1916 The National Park Service is formally
established. Landscape architects institute the concept of master planning.
1930s Planning entire communities emerges as
practice area. Drawings courtesy Arnold Alanen; photo by Kenneth Helphand
1933 New Deal programs open new horizons for
landscape architects in the public sector.
1921-42 A vast system of state parks and forests is
founded, remaining unparalleled anywhere in the world. (Photo by Kenneth Helphand)
19
1960 Large-scale landscape planning gains in application.
1963 Institutional and corporate landscapes are
epitomized by Deere and Company Headquarters in Moline, Illinois, and PepsiCo in Purchase, New York. (Photo by Alan Ward)
1964-65 The new towns of Irvine, California; Reston,
Virginia; and Columbia, Maryland offer alternatives to typical subdivision development. (Photo by Walter Calahan)
1969 Ian McHarg's Design with Nature is
published, establishing principles of landscape planning.
1970 The restoration of disturbed sites to their
earlier natural character, and reclaiming quarries, strip-mined areas, and landfills for productive purposes becomes a focus of the profession. (Photos by Jennifer Bates)
20
1974 Forest Service landscape architects develop a
visual resource management process that is applied to 190 million acres of public land. (USFS visual analysis)
1976 The concept of historic preservation grows beyond the confines of architecture to include the landscape itself, becoming an important area of practice for landscape architects.
~1985 Advanced geographic information systems emerge as an important tool, with ecological values and new technology applied to large-scale land planning.
1997 An estimated 30,000 landscape architects
practice in the U.S. alone. More than 70 programs in landscape architecture exist at 53 American colleges and universities, forming an education system in this field unparalleled anywhere in the world. (Photo courtesy EDAW )
Source: library.nevada.edu/arch
21
Chapter 4 Women’s history in landscape architecture
The Culture of Horticulture and Gardening
The arrangement in the garden has to be one of the most satisfying and
pleasurable of all aspects of gardening. It is in this area, that the gardener is able to
find real expression, working with plants to create a living picture which will not
only be aesthetically pleasing to others but which will be a fulfillment of a very
personal, and often frustrating, striving. For unlike the painter who controls the
colors of the palette, the gardener must forever be subject to the variables of the
weather, the caprice of the seasons and the complexity of the plants themselves. But
it is in these very challenges that the thrill and excitement of gardening are found.
Gardeners, like artists, have always had an interest in using color in garden
settings. Gardeners like Gertrude Jekyll made her own innovative ideas on the use
of color public in books like ‘Color in the Flower Garden’ as well as articles such as
‘Color Effects in the Late Summer Border’, have much influenced the way people
think about gardening matters.
Similarly the gardens at Sissinghurst Castle in Kent, England created by Vita
Sackville‐West in the post‐war years, with its garden‐rooms is something which has
become firmly rooted in the gardening history.
Most historians today did not explain the complex social, economic, and
political factors that have shaped gardens in the past. They have focused on work by
22
upper‐class white men and minimized or even ignored work by other class‐
structures, cultures, or women who have practiced garden designs. It is important to
understand gardens from the point of view of women which then expand into
landscape architecture (Howe 1961 & Shteir 1996).
The use of the term “Ladies garden” in English Gardens might imply that
women had some kind of say in gardens, but the terms did not necessarily refer to a
female hand in design.
Detail from William Woollett’s engraving of Carlton House Gardens, 1760, showing the exhedral flower garden with gardeners at work in the foreground (photo: courtesy of John Harris)
On occasion, of course, and especially with husbands deceased, the lady of
the household exercised considerable power in plant collecting or flower gardening.
Inevitably, however, it was a particular group of men, rather than women, who
made decisive innovations in flower garden design. The opportunity for women’s
action was still restricted. Nevertheless, it is clear from the example of the Lennox
sisters, Emily and Louisa, and from a case study of Theresa and Anne Robinson of
23
Saltram House in Devon that there were differentiated roles for women, working
with their husbands or entirely alone, in the management of an estate (Knox 1998–
1999).
Emily Lennox’s involvement in the improvements at Carton, London is
described: “While the Duke was the original designer of the park, its final shape
owed a good deal to Emily’s whims and her famous lack of patience. Moreover,
when in 1755 Arthur Devis painted the couple seated outdoors surveying their
domain, it was Emily and not her husband who was holding the plan of the
grounds” (Tillyard 1995).
Before the early nineteenth century, the private sphere was the woman’s
domain. During the Regency period, middle‐class gardens became part of the newly
defined private sphere. During this time, middleclass women sought self‐definition
in the private sphere where gardens offered opportunity for self‐improvement.
Women discovered gardening as a creative outlet and participated actively in newly
forming horticultural societies (Schenker 2002).
In the early nineteenth century, women were major participants in the
development and distribution of botanical and horticultural knowledge. Between
1790 and 1830, female writers produced a large number of books on botany and
horticulture, contributing to an influential print culture in which women
participated actively as both writers and readers (Schenker 2002).
24
Botany became increasingly more male‐dominated, resulting in women
spilling into the more open subject of horticulture. Gardens gave women access to
this body of knowledge. The English garden became an extension of the private
sphere, a sheltered space for women and children. Horticultural and gardening
knowledge became important to daughters, who would assume responsibility in a
domestic sphere that included gardens. For example, Jane Loudon, author of several
books on gardening, for example, contributed to the transformation of the English
garden into a place where women, particularly middle‐class women, could exert
increasing power and influence (Schenker 2002).
Gardening was an ʺappropriateʺ hobby for women of the elite classes and an
expected activity for middle‐class women, so the profession of landscape
architecture was a seemingly acceptable role for a woman.
At first, gardening was a hobby considered ʺsuitableʺ for women to be
involved with. Women are more ʺlikeʺ nature and the connection to gardening was a
natural one. In this way, the stereotypes of what were ʺacceptableʺ women’s
activities actually ʺworkedʺ for women in getting them into certain professions in
society. Beatrix Farrand stands as the first woman to become a professional
landscape architect thereby paving the way for other women to enter the profession
as well (http://xroads.virginia.edu).
In 1869, Catherine Beecherʹs book The American Womanʹs Home outlined
middle‐class ʺgardeningʺ values for American women. Beecher provided specific
25
information that the middle‐class wife should be able to not only use a spade but
also able to graft trees (http://xroads.virginia.edu).
Women working in the garden Source: (http://xroads.virginia.edu)
Thomas Allen wrote in 1846: ʺWhen I see the humblest dwelling, adorned by
a yard of shrubbery and flowers, however small, laid out and preserved in order
and neatness, I consider it an evidence of better things unseen, the of a gentle heart
and a home of peace.ʺ From suburban home lot to the country seat, women have
designed, cultivated and reshaped the American scene, moving from the ʺharbinger
of a gentle heartʺ to women of power and influence (www.walpole.com).
Before there were established schools of architecture for women, these
women worked under mentors. Beatrix Farrand learned from Charles Sprague
Sargent, Ellen Biddle Shipman worked under the architect Charles Platt. Others like
Marian Coffin had favorable social connections (http://xroads.virginia.edu).
In the early 1900s, three schools of landscape architecture for women started
up. The Cambridge School, the Lowthorpe School, and the Pennsylvania School of
Horticulture opened as a response to the demand by women for proper training.
26
The Cambridge School was founded in 1915 by Henry Atherton Frost in Cambridge,
Massachusetts. Mrs. Edward Gilchrist Low started the Lowthorpe School In Groton,
Massachusetts in 1901, and in 1910, Jane Haines began the Pennsylvania School of
Horticulture for Women in Ambler, Pennsylvania (http://xroads.virginia.edu).
Most historians today did not explain the complex social, economic, and
political factors that have shaped gardens in the past. They have focused on work by
upper‐class white men and minimized or even ignored work by other class‐
structures, cultures, or women who have practiced garden designs. It is important to
understand gardens from the point of view of women which then expand into
landscape architecture (Howe 1961 & Shteir 1996).
27
Chapter 5 Women in the field of Landscape Architecture and some Biographies
UC Davis Landscape Architecture women faculty Elizabeth Boults has a Masters in Landscape Architecture. She specializes in the
creation of small‐scale artful environments. She has an extensive background in
teaching, research, and theory. She and her husband, Chip Sullivan, own Studio B.
Jennifer Chandler is Jack Chandler’s daughter. Jack Chandler has a BA in
Landscape Architecture.
His talents extend to sculpture. Like her father, she is a native Californian, raised in
the Napa Valley. She received her B.A. History‐Literature in 1984 from Reed
College, Portland in Oregon and her Masters degree in Landscape Architecture from
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York in1991. After working on the East Coast for
three years, she returned to California and worked for Jack Chandler & Associates.
In 1997, she formed her own company, Jennifer Chandler, Landscape Architect, in
Napa. Jennifer has a particular interest in community projects which allow local
28
residents access to the larger landscape via parks and trails ‐ projects for which she
frequently volunteers her time and effort. She is an avid cyclist, hiker and
photographer, with a deep appreciation of the natural world.
Patsy Eubanks Owens is Assistant Professor of Landscape Architecture, U.C. Davis.
Professor Owensʹs research focuses on the environmental needs and preferences of
teenagers. She has conducted studies of teensʹ valued places in California, West
Virginia, and Australia; conducted a three‐site case study of community skateboard
parks; and participated in a multi‐disciplinary/multi‐state study on resilience to
violence among at‐risk youth.
Heath Schenker is chair of the Landscape Architecture
Program, Department of Environmental Design, at the
University of California, Davis, where she has been a
member of the faculty since 1990. Her research bridges the
disciplines of landscape architecture and art history,
29
investigating the processes by which concepts of landscape are culturally and
socially constructed‐particularly how landscape representations have historically
worked as agents of cultural power. As a landscape historian, Mrs. Schenker has
long been interested in the history of public parks in the 19th century; she is now
working on a book‐length study of the large, naturalistic parks that appeared in
cities around the world in the 19th century. As a landscape architect, she also has
explored concepts of landscape in a variety of design projects, including gallery
installations and exhibitions, performance art and works on paper. She teaches
courses in landscape history and landscape design. Mrs. Schenker received her
Master of Art History from the University of California, Davis, and her Bachelor of
Landscape Architecture from the Rhode Island School of Design
(http://www.design.iastate.edu/2005programreview.php).
Catherine Wei attended the master’s program of landscape architecture at Harvard
University’s Graduate School of Design. Wei earned her undergraduate degree in
landscape architecture at the College of Landscape Architecture at Beijing Forestry
University. Wei hopes to combine the knowledge she is obtaining from Harvard
with her background in traditional Chinese landscape design. She wants to study
the influence between the Occidental and Oriental landscape design and introduce
Chinese garden design methods to the American landscape profession. Wei is a
30
member of ASLA and the Landscape Architecture Organization of Beijing Forestry
University.
Jocelyn Zanzot graduated from UO in 2003 with a Masters in Landscape
Architecture. While in school she co‐directed the Solar Information Center and the
EDC and managed the Solar Powered EMU project. Her interest in low impact and
regenerative living stretches back many years and she maintains a respect for nature
and hope for future generations at the core of her projects. She continues to practice
regenerative design in Davis, California
31
Other great Landscape Architecture women
Gertrude Jekyll (1843‐1932)
ʺThe love of gardening is a seed, once sown never diesʺ...GJ
Gertrude Jekyll was a horticulturalist and garden designer
born in England. She is a garden legend.
She is most remembered for her bold and colorful English
garden border. Her free form planting created quite a display.
In her youth she was trained as an artist and thought of her garden as a palette. She
referred to her own garden at Munstead Woods as garden pictures to be created,
and her plant shapes as brush strokes. Such were her methods by
clumping large plant material together.
As a great designer she created over 350 gardens in England and
abroad.
One of her most important gardens in the United States was the
Glebe House in Woodbury, Connecticut. It is the birthplace of the Episcopal Church
and was used as a private house for 150 years. The house has been saved and the
garden was restored in 1995‐1996.
Books written by Ms. Jekyll are: ʺWood and Gardenʺ, ʺOld West Surryʺ and ʺColour
in the Flower Gardenʺ.
Information found at (http://www.emilycompost.com/gertrude_jekyll.htm)
32
Beatrix Jones Farrand’s (1872 –
1957) planting plan for Hill‐Stead’s Sunken Garden dates from around 1920. In the
early 1940s, during wartime shortages, the garden was seeded over. In the 1980s,
volunteers from the Connecticut Valley Garden Club and the Garden Club of
Hartford, Connecticut, undertook reclamation of the one‐acre plot. Farrand chose
the colors of the plants to complement the palette of the French Impressionist
paintings in the Pope Riddle house. Most of the 90 varieties of flowers and plants are
perennials.
33
Farrand was one of the finest female landscape designers of her generation. She
trained at Harvard University’s Arnold Arboretum and was one of 10 charter
members of the American Society of Landscape Architects. She designed aspects of
the Yale and Princeton University campuses and left her mark on many private
estates throughout the Northeast. She is perhaps best known for the grounds at
Dumbarton Oaks in Washington, D.C., and the Peggy Rockefeller Rose Garden at
The New York Botanical Garden.
Information found at (http://www.hillstead.org/gardens/beatrix.html)
Elizabeth Lord’s (1887‐1976) mother founded the Salem Garden Club. Edith ʺNinaʺ
Schryver (1901‐1984) spent five years in the office of well‐known New York
landscape architect Ellen Shipman prior to forming a 40‐year partnership with
Elizabeth Lord. Both women graduated from the Lowthorpe School of Landscape
Architecture for Women in Massachusetts. They met on a European tour of famous
gardens in 1927. During their 40‐year partnership, they designed and supervised
34
work in Salem and Portland, Oregon and Seattle and Tacoma, Washington. Lord
and Schryver were commissioned in 1929 to design Deepwoodʹs two and one‐half
acres of English style gardens. The two pioneered landscape architecture in the
Northwest as the regionʹs first professionally trained women landscape architects.
Though the volume of work was relatively small (about 250 gardens with 25 of them
in Salem), the quality of their work was consistently high and earned them regional
and national recognition. Their original drawings and records are archived at the
University of Oregon (Eugene), Knight Library, Special Collections.
Information received from (http://www.oregonlink.com).
35
Marian Cruger Coffin (1876–1957) was born in Scarborough, N.Y.
and was educated at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. At a
time when men dominated the field of landscape architecture, Miss
Coffin served as the University’s landscape architect from 1918–52
and played a significant role in the union of Delaware College and the Women’s
College, now UD.
Miss Coffin was responsible for designing and planting the landscaping on both
campuses. The plan for Delaware College called for two ordered rows of elm and
oak trees, along a Green, emphasizing the order and austerity of the Men’s Campus.
Her plan for the Women’s College called for flowering trees and shrubs, to soften
the architecture and create a “romantic” atmosphere.
Miss Coffin designed a central “recreation area” consisting of a Magnolia Circle and
paths that bordered an oval‐shaped Green. This area was intended to create a
transitional space between the two campuses, where men and women could meet
and relax without leaving the University grounds.
Information received from (http://www.udel.edu).
Original Landscape Plan, Marian Cruger Coffin, Landscape Architect, 1918 Courtesy of University Archives
36
Clermont ʺMontyʺ Huger Lee (1914‐2006)
One of the earliest women active in the
field of landscape architecture in Georgia,
Clermont “Monty” Huger Lee was known as the
foremost expert in re‐creating historic
landscapes in mid‐20th century Savannah. Her
work was meticulously researched, with a particular focus on formal English and
American gardens of the antebellum period. Lee was also responsible for working
to found the Georgia State Board of Landscape Architects, a statewide licensing
board for professional landscape architects. Clermont Lee was the first female
landscape architect registered in Georgia.
Lee got her start working for the U.S. Housing Authority, (later the Federal
Housing Authority), who employed architects that could select their own landscape
architects. She became an assistant to
Talmadge “Bummy” Baumgardner, a
landscape architect associated with the Sea
Island Company, during the war years after
his male assistant was drafted into military
service. While working there, she planned
landscape designs and supervised planting
37
operations for many federal housing projects in Savannah and Brunswick.
Her interest in historic gardens began in the 1940s, when she drew plans for a
small garden at Hofwyl‐Broadfield Plantation, in Brunswick, Georgia based on ca.
1910 photographs. In 1944, she made measured drawings of ten Victorian gardens in
Savannah for Laura Bell and the Georgia Historical Society. She later researched
antebellum plantings to develop a planting plan for the formal garden of the
Andrew Low home newly purchased by the Georgia Chapter of the Colonial Dames
of America. She researched antebellum plantings, and also used the Garden Club of
Georgia’s 1933 book Garden History of Georgia, 1733‐1933, as references to install as
authentic a garden as possible. Both front and rear plans are in the Colonial Dames’
library for future reference. In 1949 Lee left the Sea Island Company to set up her
own practice, thereby becoming the first female professional landscape architect in
private practice in Savannah.
In the early 1950s, Lee began her long and continuing involvement in historic
landscapes. Despite the simplified Colonial Revival viewpoint of historic gardening
that was in favor at the time, Lee did extensive research to provide an accurate
reproduction of a 150‐year‐old landscape for the Owens‐Thomas House on
Oglethorpe Square in Savannah.
In addition to becoming one of the few women in landscape architecture in
Georgia, Clermont Lee also worked for recognition of her profession. The
professional organization, American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), began
38
in 1899 with only one woman among its founding members, New York’s Beatrix
Farrand. Clermont Lee joined the ASLA in 1950, and later worked in conjunction
with Hubert Bond Owens, head of the Department of Landscape Architecture at the
University of Georgia, to establish the Georgia State Board of Landscape Architects.
The first four landscape architects to be registered included both Owens as the first
and Clermont Lee, the first woman, as the fourth. Interestingly, the next 125
registrants were male civil engineers, alarmed that certified landscape architects
might take their commissions. Lee served on the Georgia board for three years.
Clermont Lee and other early landscape architects achieved remarkable
success given the obstacles they had to face. For many years the members of ASLA
were not allowed to advertise, creating a professional handicap. Lee, ever the
crusader, not only made history for women in the landscape architecture profession,
but also had a lasting impact on the quality of Savannah’s historically designed
landscape environment. Clermont Lee died in Savannah on June 14, 2006.
Information received from (http://www.tclf.org by Ced Dolder)
Carol R. Johnson (b. 1929), landscape architect, educator
Carol R. Johnson graduated in 1951 with a Bachelor of
Arts in English. Following Wellesley, she worked in a
commercial nursery in Bedford, Massachusetts. While
there, she met John Frey, Pat Manhart, and Eric Desty, students who were studying
39
landscape architecture at Harvard. With their encouragement, she decided to pursue
a career in landscape architecture, a field she knew little about.
While at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design, Johnson attributed her
personal growth to professors Serge Chermeyoff, Hideo Sasaki, Norman Newton,
and Walt Chambers. From these mentors she gained confidence and an
understanding of design. In particular, her studies under Sigfried Gideon, the
author of Space, Time, and Architecture, would be a great influence on her attitudes
toward urban design. Also during this time, Johnson became familiar with
collaborative design processes and environmentally sensitive landscape design –
two concepts that formed the foundation of her design approach and ethic. She
earned her degree from Harvard in 1957.
In September 1958, she was one of the first landscape architects to be hired by
The Architects Collaborative (TAC), the renowned architectural practice founded by
Walter Gropius in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Despite the prestige of her position,
and with the encouragement of colleagues, she left TAC after only one year to start
her own practice, taking advantage of projects offered to her through her Wellesley
and Harvard contacts.
When she founded her firm in 1959, there were few women landscape
architects, working on urban design and planning issues, and there were few male
landscape architects who would choose to work for a talented woman landscape
architect, when they had opportunities to work for talented men. As a result,
40
Johnson’s earliest employees included artists and sculptors who, under her tutelage,
learned the art and craft of landscape architecture. Very soon, Johnson had
opportunities that were unusual for a woman, such as her first foreign project, the
landscape associated with the U.S. Pavilion at Montreal’s Expo ’67, where she
collaborated with Buckminister Fuller and Cambridge Seven Associates.
With her reputation established, opportunities for Johnson in the 1970s and
1980s increased. In addition to serving on many planning committees, during
President Carter’s administration, she served on the Treasury Department’s
Commission on Small Business, and in the 1980s on the Department’s Committee on
Development Options.
She taught in the Planning Department at Harvard’s Graduate School of
Design from 1966 to 1973 and in 1984. Johnson taught and lectured at several
architecture schools in Taiwan.
Work in the office during the 1980s and 1990s included many of Johnson’s
most important built works. Among them are the Old Harbor Park, where she
created a waterfront linear park between South Boston and the Kennedy Library in
1990; the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, which unites the Charles River
Reservation with nearby Harvard Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts, completed
in 1987; and the Lechmere Canal Park in East Cambridge, the first phase of which
was completed in 1983. In all of these projects, Johnson’s signature design style of
establishing harmony with the setting and surrounds, respecting the site’s natural
41
and cultural history, offering respite to users, and providing elements of delight and
surprise can be seen.
Marshall Park in Washington, D.C. was completed in 1983. This original
conceptual design was integrated into the overall streetscape design for the Avenue
itself and the access to the District Court on one side and the Canadian Chancellery
on the other. Johnson’s new design provides a stronger memorial to John Marshall,
recalling his long tenure in the Supreme Court and its impact on the Federal
Government as we know it today.
Johnson became a Fellow of the American Society of Landscape Architects in
1982, and in 1998 she was the first American woman to receive the ASLA Gold
Medal. She is also a Member of the Boston Society of Landscape Architects, an
Honorary Member of the Boston Society of Architects, a Trustee for the Hubbard
Educational Trust and Chairman of the Board of Designators for the George B.
Henderson Foundation. For ten years, she was a City of Boston Civic Design
Commissioner. She holds honorary degrees from Wentworth Institute of
Technology and Gettysburg College.
Beyond the positive impact of her work on the public, Johnson’s contribution
can be measured by the influence which she has had on new generations of
landscape architects. She is recognized as a role model, especially for young women
entering a profession. Information received from (http://www.tclf.org, 2006).
42
Cheryl Love began to discover her joy for
sketching during her growing up years. Her parents
and grandparents gave her ‘Learn to Draw’ books
on everything from animals to people to landscapes
and it inspired her to sketch in her free time. A love for the outdoors contributed to
her later enjoyment of landscape architecture. According to Love, “landscape
architects often visit sites to inventory the natural site features, which become the
basis for developing a design that is more sensitive and responsive to the land.ʺ
Love began her college years as a horticulture major at Pennsylvania State
University. But a quirk of fate changed that. She soon switched gears ‐ as many
college students do ‐ when she had to fulfill a humanities credit and selected a
course that focused on the history of landscape architecture. The past enjoyments
she experienced from sketching and drawing as a child as well as long walks in
nature in her native town of Warren would take her to what she was meant to do.
ʺAs we learned all the various aspects of landscape architecture and how the
many design styles evolved and changed the designed landscape over time, I
became increasingly interested in landscape architecture,ʺ said Love. ʺAs a result of
that course, I changed my major to landscape architecture and loved every aspect of
the program at Penn State.ʺ
43
In her current position as studio director of ELA Group, Inc. in Lititz, Love is
involved with the design, project coordination, and project management related to
the development of collegiate institutions such as the new parking facility at
Lancaster Theological Seminary and the site layout for an addition to Kline Hall
Science Building at Messiah College in Grantham. She has also utilized her
landscape architecture expertise in the commercial/industrial, recreational,
residential and institutional arenas.
In the 20 years since her college graduation, Love feels that more women are
becoming landscape architects and getting active in the work that involves
coordination with other architects, school districts, municipalities, regulatory
agencies, and contractors.
ʺI believe the public in general is becoming more aware of the roles of
landscape architects,ʺ said Love. ʺAs this general awareness of our profession
increases, women find landscape architecture appealing for the variety of work that
this field provides. I see increasing potential for women to demonstrate their
abilities to organize, prioritize, and fit together all the various tasks that are required
to receive approvals on projects.ʺ
Love admitted that her greatest challenge is juggling a busy career with
raising a family. Many times, Love has to attend nighttime municipal meetings in
order to secure approvals from zoning or planning boards or the board of
supervisors and that has meant coming up with a ʺplan.ʺ
44
ʺWith my husband, John, also being a landscape architect, there were several
times when our children were younger that they would go to those evening
meetings with us,ʺ Love explained. ʺThey have continued to show interest in our
profession by coming to work with us on career shadow days.ʺ
Love feels that women shouldnʹt hesitate to consider architecture as a career
and said that a successful project with few change orders and few, if any, additional
costs are sometimes a matter of good communication.
Information found at (http://www.businesswomanpa.com/2005_march.asp).
Patricia S. Loheed, ASLA, is principal of Pat Loheed Landscape Architect and also
the first program director for a start‐up BLA program at the Boston Architectural
College (BAC). The program, an open admissions degree‐granting evening program,
will offer the opportunity for students to study and work concurrently. BAC has
already recruited its first class, and upon the class’s graduation ASLA’s Landscape
Architecture Accreditation Board (LAAB) will consider the program for
accreditation. In addition to her work to establish the program, Loheed presented a
paper at the September 2005 CELA meetings on BAC’s educational model. She
credits BAC President Ted Landsmark, Associate AIA and current president of the
Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, with “creative leadership that is
agile and inspires program management and support staff.”
Information found at (www.asla.org/land/2006/0710/ppm.html).
45
Topher with her cat-ate-the-canary grin, mugging for the camera.
Topher Delaney is a San Francisco‐based
artist and landscape designer. Her real
name is Christopher Delaney but she is
known in the profession as Topher.
Diagnosed with breast cancer in the mid‐
80ʹs (ʺone on, one off!ʺ), Delaney turned her
prodigious energies to creating healing gardens at hospitals (realizing at the time
she could have used one herself). ʺAll the gardens center around reflection and the
passage of time,ʺ she says. ʺPeople hang on to see the cherry tree blossoms. The
gardens canʹt be static, they must change Ten Landscapes: A Talk with Topher
Delaney.ʺ Here are some thoughtful comments from Topher Delaney: ʺI look at my
work as a spiritual practice. I view it as somewhat of a calling. I try to acknowledge
my conflicts as I work.ʺ ʺO.K., Iʹll say it: Iʹm a control freak! And thatʹs why I do this.
Gardens are humbling; I can have no control. And (knowing) that I have no control
over anything... actually, thatʹs whatʹs kept me alive.ʺ (Ten Landscapes: A Talk with
Topher Delaney interview by Ketzel Levine at npr.org)
46
Andrea Cochran has been practicing
landscape architecture in the San
Francisco Bay area for over twenty
years. After graduating from Harvard
Universityʹs Graduate School of
Design, Ms. Cochran entered the
offices of the architect, Jose Luis Sert.
This experience was pivotal in
informing her approach to landscape design which integrates and mediates the
overlapping boundaries between architecture and landscape.
Ms. Cochran established her office in 1998 after working in collaborative
partnerships for over 10 years. The firmʹs projects range from private residential
gardens to corporate headquarters, institutional and educational campuses,
commercial facilities, urban housing, wineries, hotels and an art museum sculpture
garden.
The work of Andrea Cochran Landscape Architecture translates the narrative of the
client into the built landscape. Relationships between architecture and landscape,
client and designer, project site and larger environment inform each aspect of the
firm’s designs. The work of site‐specific artists is another influence in the design
process, inspiring new perspectives. The firm intentionally has an eclectic variety of
projects to create a cross pollenization of ideas between residential gardens and
47
commercial and institutional projects. As a result, they have gained a national
reputation as an innovative design studio.
Ms. Cochran was recently featured in the January 2005 issue of House & Garden
magazine as one of the 40 Tastemakers for 2005. Her design work has garnered
numerous awards and has been widely published and recognized internationally in
such publications as House & Garden, Dwell, Landscape Architecture, Architectural
Record, Design Quarterly, Harper’s Bazaar, and Metropolitan Home.
Ms. Cochran is a leader in her local design community. She currently serves as a
Commissioner in Civic Design on the San Francisco Arts Commission and on the
executive board for the Architecture and Design Forum at SFMOMA. Past
contributions include serving on the SFMOMA Architecture and Design Accessions
Committee and the U.C. Berkeley Extension Advisory Committee for Landscape
Architecture Curriculum.
Information found at (california‐architects.com).
Beverly Willis counts among the few pioneering women architects practicing in the
United States during the mid‐twentieth century. She forged a distinguished career
spanning the areas of architectural design, research, and leadership.
In 1966, Willis opened her own architectural firm in San Francisco and built it into a
35‐person firm that often competed successfully with the nation’s largest firms.
Among the award‐winning projects of the 700 total in her portfolio are the Union
48
Street Stores (1965), the Margaret Hayward Park Building (1978), and the San
Francisco Ballet Building (1983). Already in the 1970s, Willis was developing
cutting‐edge computer applications for planning large‐scale, multi‐family housing,
which culminated in the design and construction of the Aliamanu Valley
Community for 11,500 residents.
For Willis, a career in architecture has involved more than design. It has meant
assuming leadership positions within the profession as well as for civic and
international causes. In 1980, Willis served as the first woman President of the
California Council of the AIA. She also chaired the Federal Construction Council of
the National Academy of Science, and was one of two architects to represent the U.S.
at Habitat 1 in Vancouver, Canada. Willis was one of a handful of U.S. women
leaders selected to participate in Women for International Understanding, a
delegation sent as emissaries during the 1970s on informational trips to Asia, Eastern
Europe, and the Middle East. Among the distinctions bestowed upon Willis for her
contributions to both the civic and architectural spheres are San Francisco’s Phoebe
Hearst Gold Medal Award, and an Honorary Doctorate degree from Mt. Holyoke
College.
One of the instrumental forces that founded the National Building Museum in
Washington, DC, Willis has served continuously as a founding Trustee on the Board
of Trustees. In 1994, Willis established the Architecture Research Institute, Inc. a
think‐tank for architectural and urban issues based in New York City, from which
49
she wrote Invisible Images: The Silent Language of Architecture (1997), and co‐founded
Rebuild Downtown Our Town (R.DOT), a leading civic voice and design advocate in
the post‐9/11 rebuilding of Lower Manhattan.
Ms. Willis and the Board of Trustees established the Beverly Willis Architecture
Foundation (BWAF) in 2002.
Information found at (http://www.beverlywillisarchitecturefoundation.org)
50
Chapter 6 Personal barriers
It was more by coincidence that women entered the workforce, especially in
such drastic numbers. During World War II, women were introduced to the paid
labor force. They entered men’s jobs, proving that women are quite capable in
accomplishing tasks other than daily housework. This often forced women to find
alternative care for their children. By 1944, three‐quarters of children of women war
workers were found in private childcare (Roberts 1991).
In the twenty‐first century, both women and men spend substantial amounts
of time on paid work. However, women in Canada, for example, perform 62.6
percent of all unpaid work on top of their shares of paid work
(http://waysandmeans.house.gov). Even though womenʹs incomes are considerably
smaller than menʹs, their work weeks are actually longer and their work effort more
fragmented, because of their heavier responsibilities for unpaid work.
51
This means that women spend their lives juggling the complex demands of both
unpaid and paid work. Because women have to work longer hours to earn the
incomes they do receive, they often have to sacrifice so‐called leisure time to meet all
their obligations for unpaid work.
In August 2003, the Catalyst published a series of research articles entitled
Viewpoints. As an independent, nonprofit membership organization, Catalyst uses a
solution‐oriented method that has earned the trust of business leaders around the
world. The organization runs research on all aspects of women’s career
development. Catalyst is consistently ranked number one among U.S. nonprofits on
women’s issues by The American Institute of Philanthropy. Catalyst has offices in
New York, San Jose, and Toronto and is the leading research and advisory
organization working to advance women in business. It offers strategic and internet‐
based consulting services on a worldwide basis to help companies and firms
advance women and build inclusive work environments. In addition, the
corporation honors exemplary business initiatives that support women’s leadership
with the annual Catalyst Award. Among Catalyst’s published Viewpoints, the article
“Workplace Flexibility Is Still a Women’s Advancement Issue” clarifies that during
the last ten years, employers expanded their views of flexible work programs to
serve people of all ages, gender, parents and those who are not, instead of serving
only women with young children. In fact, the common terminology has changed
from “work and family” to “work/life (Catalyst 2003).”
52
This expanded view of flexible work programs has been a positive step
toward creating more wide‐ranging work environments. Catalyst believes change
has occurred for two reasons. First, the concerns of women were addressed, which
was an important strategy for moving these programs and policies forward. Second,
the growing numbers of dual‐career couples in which men take on greater family
responsibilities, and the rising issues around elder care have increased the need to
expand the traditional thinking about work/life issues. As a result, flexible work
policies are now more common and more inclusive (Catalyst 2003).
Women continue to shoulder the majority of household and child care
responsibilities, referred to as the “Second Shift (Hochschild 1990)”. Because the
married women with children are more likely than men to have a full‐time working
spouse, they are less likely to have someone handling the household and child care
responsibilities (Catalyst 2003).
In a Catalyst study, those who have continued their reduced schedules
explain that their husbands’ schedules provide little flexibility and that the child
care demands fall to them. The following quote illustrates one woman’s frustration:
“I cannot count on my husband for anything. If he says, ‘I can come home and be
there for the kids,’ he can’t. And that’s just the way he is. He’s a good father and he
rarely works on weekends. But during the week, even when he’s here, he’s not here
(Catalyst 2003).”
53
Many women think the flexible arrangement has been wonderful for them
because as their family has evolved, they’ve evolved, and the company has been
willing to evolve with them. These women accept the trade‐offs in trying to balance
careers, family, and community involvement and are satisfied with the choices they
have made overall. They credit flexibility with allowing them to slow down yet
remain in the professional world for a period of time when family demands are
high.
Others believe that if they sign up to work on a flexible schedule they are seen
as less committed or less professional even if they show a strong commitment.
In addition, there is a distinction between full‐time and part‐time workers,
the part‐timers receiving fewer types of benefits. Even when part‐time workers do
have access to benefits they receive smaller amounts of benefits. Social security
programs, such as unemployment insurance coverage, retirement benefits, health
insurance coverage, vacation pay and worker compensation coverage, are provided
through legislation. In addition, supplementary coverage of some kinds of
54
employment benefit plans cover health care and hospitalization, dental and eye,
disability, enhanced pension rights, child care or tuition benefits, and even the
purchase of a home or stock option; financing, travel allowances, compassionate
leave and early retirement are all based on company agreement. While rigid
distinctions between part‐time and full‐time employment are now being replaced in
some contexts with more flexible methods of determining eligibility for benefits,
part‐time workers have always had the smallest benefits entitlements (Townson
2000).
The Office of Strategic Communications declared in February 2003 that
policies and practices to accommodate childbearing, childrearing and other family
needs are being strengthened. The UC system has the most generous work/life
policies of any of its comparison institutions. Faculty members expressed concerns
that some may be unable to fully benefit from these policies, which are therefore
being clarified so that every eligible faculty member will be ensured automatic
childbearing leave. In addition, campuses are centralizing family leave funding so
that individual departments are not disadvantaged by faculty who take leave (Office
of Strategic Communications 2003, Feb.).
To ensure the policies can be put into action properly, the faculties are being
surveyed to better evaluate UC’s work/life policies and promote a greater
understanding of these issues at the departmental level. In addition, campus
childcare centers have remained a high priority in the previous two state budgets, in
55
order to further provide family‐friendly policies and incentives, as women
academics may be differentially affected by these policies (Office of Strategic
Communications 2003, Feb.).
On May 14th, 2007, Associate President Linda Williams, Presidential Staff
Fellow Amy Levine, and Interim Director of Faculty Equity Programs Sharon
Washington, from the UC Office of the President, started to visit all the UC
campuses and labs to solicit ideas and collect information on innovative local
programs that address the challenges faced by women at UC. This project is part of a
system‐wide Creating Change Initiative geared toward UC women which develops a
strategic platform focused on addressing the advancement of women in the
University of California. The Forums are divided by faculty, students and staff
input. The purpose of the visit is to gather information on current practices
regarding institutional support of UCʹs women, determine which practices can be
replicated and assess whether a system‐wide approach to these issues would be
useful. The first Forum was held at UC Davis. Questions for students covered their
thoughts on what women students need to be successful at UC! What does it take to
thrive at UC? What are some best practices already in place? What more is needed
(UC Office of the President 2007)?
While attending the session, it was obvious that the issue of pregnancy and
health leave, childcare issues, lack of resources due to funding were serious,
heartfelt issues (UC Office of the President 2007).
56
The National Womenʹs Law Center, which has operated since 1972, was
instrumental in passing laws to prohibit pregnancy discrimination in employment
and to provide compensation for victims of sexual harassment. The Center
improved state and federal tax laws to help millions of families pay for child and
dependent care and secured new federal remedies for women seeking child support.
Women’s role in the workforce is heightened even more by the 2004 study
that Catalyst did and published as “The Bottom Line: Connecting Corporate
Performance and Gender Diversity”. It surveyed Return on Equity (ROE) and Total
Return to Shareholders (TRS) of different companies with regard to gender
diversity. It hypothesized that businesses that employ, retain, and advance women
will benefit for a number of reasons. First, the increasingly educated and skilled part
of the diverse talent group can help employers if they focus on diversity. Women
currently earn more than 57.3% of all bachelor’s and 58.5% of all master’s degrees in
the United States. In addition, they receive nearly 44.9% of doctorates and 47.3% of
law degrees (US Department 2002). Also, women currently comprise about 46.5% of
the U.S. paid labor force (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2003). According to Catalyst’s
censuses of women corporate officers and top earners, women’s representation
within the Fortune 500 senior ranks increased from 10.0% in 1996 to 15.7% in 2002
(Catalyst 1996‐2000).
At the same time, women also make and influence purchasing decisions. In
2001, women earned almost $2.3 trillion in the U.S., an indication of their growing
57
economic power (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2002). As a result, companies which use
their female talents and inputs produce products which appeal to a wider range of
customers. Finally, research on group behavior demonstrates that diverse groups,
when properly managed, make more innovative business decisions than non‐
diverse groups (Bantel 1989 and Tsui 1999).
A key finding that Catalyst’s research found was that the group of companies
with the highest representation of women on their top management teams
experience better financial performance than the group of companies with the lower
women’s representation. This finding show that ROE is therefore 35.15 higher and
TRS is 34.0% higher than the lower diversity companies (Catalyst 2004).
In conclusion, the businesses that maintain diversity and manage it properly
make better decisions, produce better products, and retain advantages over
homogeneous companies, resulting in financial superiority.
58
Chapter 7 Cultural barriers
Whether looking at retirement security programs, unemployment insurance
plans or health insurance plans, the assumption that married women are
dependants, engaged in full‐time reproductive labor is reflected from the beginning
in the extent of such programs (Lahey 2001). As early as the 1920s, womenʹs struggle
to be treated as individuals in their own right in fiscal legislation is highly visible
and publicly controversial (United Kingdom 1920).
During World War II, husbands had been allowed to claim the full spousal
deduction even if their wife was earning her own income; this helped increase
womenʹs work in war industries. In the late 1950s, the new dependency requirement
was designed to make it more expensive for both husband and wife to work. This
meant that the working wifeʹs income was subject to two ʺtaxesʺ: the actual income
tax rates imposed on her income, and the additional ʺtaxʺ arising from the loss of the
spousal deduction that her husband had previously been permitted to claim.
Because most husbands had higher incomes than their wives, the loss of the
husbandʹs deduction cost him more than the value of the wifeʹs new personal
exemption saved her in taxes. In a sense, the difference between the wifeʹs new
personal exemption and the husbandʹs lost spousal deduction was a second tax
stacked on top of the wifeʹs actual tax. In addition, once the cost of child care
expenses, new work‐related expenses, such as transportation, replacement of
59
housekeeping and cooking services, and the loss of the husbandʹs spousal deduction
were deducted from the wifeʹs income, it was shown that she earned practically
nothing (König et al. 1995: Averett et al. 1997).
Since the 1980s, the growing tendency to target various tax benefits of low‐
income families has meant that womenʹs entry into paid work will attract high
drawbacks on social assistance payments, loss of low‐income benefits like the child
tax credit, and inadequate tax support for child‐care expenses (Baker 1995: Solera
2000).
In addition, sex‐role stereotypes assign responsibility for child care to
women, and this responsibility is typically backed up by both child protection and
criminal laws that penalize parents who do not supervise children until at least the
age of 12 (Baker 1995).
As the twentieth century drew to a close, the focus in contemporary tax and
social benefit design began to undergo a huge shift. Many tax and social benefits
that had been considered universal were restructured to target ʺneedyʺ or
ʺdeservingʺ poor people (http://www.swc‐cfc.gc.ca). This eliminated the ʺwomen in
relationshipsʺ while replacing it with ʺwomen as people.ʺ
Cultural assumptions that women are dependent make it easier for a woman
worker to be supported by a partner, another family member or the state. Cultural
assumptions about the ʺproperʺ role of women makes it simpler for both women
and other family members to accept that SHE will devote her time to child care or
60
other unpaid work that is considered to be similar with sex‐role stereotypes.
“There may be exceptional cases in which a man is able to live alone in his
house and to perform all the duties connected with the house, but they are rare. As a
general rule the presence of a woman is essential to the household.” (Allen 1983)
The term glass ceiling was created in about 1984. It refers to situations where
the advancement of a person within the ladder of an organization is limited. This
restraint is normally based upon some form of discrimination, most commonly
being gender and race (http://en.wikipedia.org).
The ʺceilingʺ is referred to as the control blocking upward advancement, and
ʺglassʺ (transparent) because the limitation is not immediately apparent and is
normally an unwritten and unofficial policy. The ʺglass ceilingʺ is characterized by
formal barriers to advancement, such as education or experience requirements
(http://en.wikipedia.org).
“The issue of women barriers is who or what is the enemy. This is a matter of
idea, approach and practice. ‘In the late 1970s a split occurred between socialist
feminists and radical feminists. Socialist feminists saw the dominance of men over
women and class politics as acting together in the oppression of women, whereas
radical feminists argued that male dominance formed the motor force behind
women’s subordination from which men, of whatever class, benefited. Indeed
Delphy, for example, argued that women constituted a class in themselves (Delphy
1970).’ (Roberts 1991).”
61
Concerns are with male stereotyped views of women. There is also an idealist
strand, a belief that if the methods for inequality are exposed, then these can be
changed and from that, men and women will change to make a better society.
In September, 2006, Inside Higher Ed (insidehighered.com) published a story
entitled ‘Bias or Interest’. The report explains that professors don’t agree that
discrimination is the main reason for more men in job positions than women. It
explains that professors overwhelmingly believe that it’s a matter of different
interests between men and women. The data was composed from a national survey
of 1500 professors from different kinds of institutions in the US. Neil Gross of
Harvard and Solon Simmons of Georgia Mason University are sociologists who ran
the survey. The survey asked professors, who were mainly men, the following: “In
many math, science, and engineering fields there are more male professors than
female professors. Do you think this difference is mainly a) because of
discrimination; b) because of differences in ability between men and women; or c)
because of differences in interest between men and women” (Bias or Interest 2006).
The survey showed that 1% referred to differing ability levels, 24% cited
discrimination, meaning 33% of women compared to 17% of men felt that
discrimination was the main factor, while 75% felt that the issue was a difference in
interest (Bias or Interest 2006).
62
Examples illustrating of women being at least equally as capable as men are
numerous. However, just as numerous are examples showing adverse treatment of
those abilities in females.
A case at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology illustrated a female
neuroscientist, considered one of the brightest minds of her generation, who was
discouraged by a senior (male) scholar to accept a job (Jaschik 2006, Oct.). Another
case at Oakland University showed a woman biologist who won big grants and
backing from her department, only to have the provost reject her tenure bid, which
sparked widespread complaints (Bias or Interest 2006). It shows evidence that women
run into obstacles early in their careers that men might not face.
On a positive note, the UC system has steadily increased the number of
women faculty over the past few decades and matched or outpaced other major
universities in hiring female faculty. UC Davis, for example, gained 13% from 1998‐
99 to 1999‐00. In 2000‐01 there were 32% of female registered campus professionals
which increased to 42% in 2001‐02 (Office of Strategic Communications 2003, Feb.).
63
Women of different ethnicities
There are inequalities between women of race and class, and a variety of
experience in terms of sexual orientation, long‐term relationships and motherhood.
It is therefore inaccurate to portray the interests of a white single woman in a
professional job as being coincident with the grandmother in an extended family
from an ethnic minority.
Different cultures have different ideas of family, gender roles, and
family/work relationships. Carter and Cook (1992) claim that in some cultures,
“career” may have a group, not individual meaning. This may explain why some
professions, which may require individualized work, may not appeal to certain
cultures.
Studies have shown that African Americans express greater importance in
home and family than in work (Naidoo 1998). Some literature such as Career
Development and Vocational Behavior of Racial and Ethnic Minorities by F.T.L. Leong
64
(1995) and Career Counseling for Native Youth: What Kind and by Whom? by R.V. Peavy
(1995) point out the great diversity in worldview, ethnicity, and socioeconomic
status within groups such as Hispanic, Asian, African, and Native Americans. They
also show how these differences effect what types of work is acceptable and the
manner in which work is to be done. For example, Mexican American parents are
focused on the role of continuing education in the career development process (Kim
1993), while Korean parents focus on career selection.
Professional surveys such as the ASLA Salary Survey (1998) and The National
Survey of Career Patterns among Women in Landscape Architecture (Nassauer 1983)
illustrate the vast differences between the majority and minority populations in
landscape architecture.
The choice of a career involves access to information and opportunities that
are not as easily attained by some people as by others due to culture, race, gender,
and class. In landscape architecture, minority groups make up less than 10% of the
total professional population and less than 40% of the total profession is female
(ASLA Salary Survey 1998).
65
The two most significant demographic findings concerning landscape
architecture are disparity in gender and lack of ethnic diversity. The lack of cultural
and ethnic diversity is a problem for the profession of landscape architecture. The
problem is not limited to low numbers of people but more importantly the inclusion
of diverse voices and perspectives. According to the ASLA, 96% of its members are
white (ASLA Salary Survey 1998).
Nationally, African American students accounted for 10% of the total
enrollment at colleges and universities in 1995. Hispanics made up 8% of enrolled
students; Asian/Pacific Islanders, 6%; and Native Americans 1% of all students
enrolled at colleges and universities in 1995 (National Center for Education Statistics
2000).
Most previous studies have not provided multiethnic or biracial as a category
for choice and therefore cannot be compared to any previous demographic studies
conducted by the ASLA or the Department of Education.
Improving treatment and graduation rates is a cornerstone of UC’s
commitment to student success. Improvements in persistence and graduation have
been even more significant for under‐represented minority students such as African
American, American Indian and Chicano/Latino students (Office of Strategic
Communications 2003, Nov.).
Persistence rates (student’s continued enrollment at the university one year or
two years after entering) for underrepresented freshmen continuing to their second
66
year at UC have gone up by nearly 5% over five years. Persistence rates for
underrepresented transfer students also increased, from 79.9 percent in 1986 to 90.3
percent in 2001 (Office of Strategic Communications 2003, Nov.).
UC has better graduation rates and persistence than state and national
averages. The Chronicle of Higher Education found that at UC, 77.9 percent of
freshmen who entered in Fall 1996 had graduated by 2001‐02 (Office of Strategic
Communications 2003 Nov.).
A report, prepared by Dennis J. Galligani, Ph.D., Associate Vice President of
the UC Office of the President – Student Academic Services, and the Principal
author Nina Robinson, with assistance from Kyra Caspary, Veronica Santelices, Saul
Geiser, Roger Studley, Charles Masten, Neal Finkelstein, Stephen Handel, Robert
Tacconi, Liz Tamayo, and Scott Bruce, and was published in March 2003. During the
period 1995 through 2002, the University of California was developing and
implementing race‐neutral undergraduate admission and outreach policies and
programs.
The University of California offers an excellent educational experience that is
chosen by California’s most talented students. This makes the University of
California one of the nation’s leading public research universities. By state policy,
only the top one‐eighth of California’s high school graduates are considered eligible
for the University, whereas some campuses can only admit less than a quarter of
those fully qualified candidates who submit an application. In addition, such highly
67
selective institutions find that employing race‐neutral policies leads to a substantial
decline in the proportion of entering students who are African American, American
Indian, and Latino (University of California 2003).
These declines have been partially reduced by programs designed to increase
enrollments of students of families with low‐income, families with little experience
with higher education, and students that graduate from schools that traditionally do
not send large numbers of students on to four‐year institutions (University of
California 2003).
The University of California has classified groups as “underrepresented” and
“underrepresented minority” students, if they were accepted at the University at a
rate below 12.5 percent such as African Americans, American Indians, and
Chicano/Latinos (University of California 2003).
Increases in the numbers of underrepresented minority students graduating
from California high schools, combined with substantial expansion of enrollment
capacity at several UC campuses, have led to overall increases for some groups
within the University of California as a whole. However, underrepresented students
remain a substantially smaller proportion of those admitted to and enrolled at the
University’s most selective campuses than before the elimination of race‐conscious
policies. Additionally, the gap between of underrepresented minority students
graduating from California high schools and the enrolling at the University of
California has widened (University of California 2003).
68
During the 1970s and 1980s, the University pursued an aggressive program to
provide access to the full range of California’s high school students and to racially
and ethnically diversify its campuses. This effort was effective in enrolling
substantial numbers of underrepresented minority students. However, beginning in
the late 1980s, the increased in students applying to the more selective campuses led
to decrease in underrepresented minority enrollments. At the same time, students
from these groups were increasing rapidly as California’s high school graduates
(University of California 2003).
In 1995 and 1996, the UC Board of Regents and the voters of the State of
California adopted measures eliminating race‐conscious practices in University
admissions and in other areas. Soon after, the University saw a drop in applications
and admission rates for African American, American Indian, and Latino graduates,
and the proportion of underrepresented students in the admitted class declined on
all campuses from when race‐conscious admission policies were eliminated
(Atkinson: Pelfrey 2004).
Since then, the University has adopted a number of strategies designed to
enhance the academic preparation of UC students. Also, strategies were enhanced to
maintain access for low‐income students, educationally disadvantaged families and
schools, and those from underserved geographical areas of the state (University of
California 2003).
69
The different ethnic and racial communities that make up California’s
population vary substantially in terms of income and education level. In particular,
California’s Asian American population tends to be well educated and considerably
more likely to pursue higher education, regardless of income. In contrast, African
American and Latino students tend to be from lower income families that are less
likely to have had previous experience with higher education. On average, students
from these groups have less access to educational resources and lag in academic
preparation. Refer to Table below (University of California 2003).
Studies of the rates at which high school graduates from these different
groups meet the University’s eligibility standards indicate that whites are the only
group which tends to achieve eligibility at roughly the one‐eighth (12.5 percent) rate
specified in the Master Plan. Fully one‐third of Asian American high school
graduates are UC‐eligible, while rates for African Americans and Latinos are lower
than 5 percent (Eligibility 1997).
70
Table # 1: Population, Income, Education, and UC Eligibility by Ethnicity
During the decade of the 1980s, the University of California made substantial
progress in diversifying its freshman class. As shown in the table below, in 1980,
underrepresented students constituted just slightly less than 10 percent of the
enrolled UC resident freshman class, while these students comprised roughly a
quarter of the state’s public high school graduates. By 1990, the proportion of
underrepresented freshmen had roughly doubled, to 19.4 percent. During this
period, underrepresented students grew to 31.5 percent of California’s public high
school graduates, so UC effectively reduced the size of the “gap” between
proportional representation among UC freshmen and among high school graduates.
This trend began to change in the early 1990s as campuses became increasingly
selective. During the five years from 1990 to 1995, underrepresented students’
proportional representation among UC California resident freshmen grew
moderately, from 19.4 percent to 21.0 percent. During the same five years,
71
underrepresented students increased from 31.5 percent to 38.3 percent of public high
school graduates and the gap between UC freshmen and high school graduates
increased from 12.1 to 17.3 percentage points—an increase of 43.0 percent
(University of California 2003).
Table # 2: Underrepresented Minorities as a Percentage of New UC CA Resident Freshmen and CA Public High School Graduates 1980, 1985, 1990 and 1995
“First‐Year Implementation of Comprehensive Review in Freshman Admissions: A Progress Report from the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools,” University of California, November 2002. http://www.ucop.edu/regents/regmeet/nov02/302attach.pdf
For the UC system as a whole, and on most campuses, applications,
admissions, and enrollment of underrepresented students followed a similar pattern
over the period from 1995‐2002. As the following display indicates, applications
from underrepresented students fell immediately following the decision to adopt
Resolution SP‐1 (Atkinson: Pelfrey 2004).
72
(University of California 2003)
Regents’ Resolution SP‐1 was adopted by The Regents of the University of
California on July 20, 1995. The major focus of Resolution SP‐1 was to eliminate
“race, religion, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin as criteria for admission to the
University or to any program of study.” In addition, Resolution SP‐1 incorporated
several other components. This resulted in drops in admission and enrollment as
well. In November 1996 the voters of California passed Proposition 209, a
constitutional amendment that eliminated racial preferences in the operation of all
state programs, including higher education. Both new policies took effect for
undergraduate admissions beginning with the class applying for Fall 1998.
Admission and enrollment of underrepresented students dropped further in 1998,
when SP‐1 and Proposition 209 went into effect. In the years since 1998, these
73
numbers have increased, although patterns have differed at various campuses
(Atkinson: Pelfrey 2004).
74
Profiles of UC First‐Time Freshman Applicants, Admits and Enrollments: Information Source and Data Definitions
Campus profiles have been generated using system‐wide admissions data
collected by the University of California and last updated in February 2003. Through
their applications to UC, students provide academic and demographic information
that is subsequently reviewed and standardized. Using data from the system‐wide
admissions process has allowed for consistent field definitions across years and
campuses (http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu).
Campuses profiles only consider students applying to fall semester as “first‐
time freshmen.ʺ In other words, it excludes transfer students and students in early
admission accelerated programs. In terms of admissions, the analyses consider
students who were regularly admitted as well as those admitted by exception
(http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu).
All indicators except underrepresented minorities were calculated as a
fraction of the overall number of students applying and admitted at a given campus.
Following a long‐standing UC reporting practice the proportion of
underrepresented minorities was calculated as a fraction of domestic students only
(http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu).
First‐generation college students have been defined as those students for
whom neither parent completed a four‐year degree. Family income is expressed in
1999 dollars and low‐income students are those whose parents have a combined
75
annual income less than or equal to $30,000 in 1999 dollars (University of California
2003).
Low‐performing schools are those in the 1st and 2nd quintiles of the
Academic Performance Index ranking constructed by the California Department of
Education. California rural students are those attending California rural high school.
Counts for the Eligibility in the Local Context program include all eligible students
and not only “newly” eligible students. Note that admit rates include applicants that
cancelled before being admitted to UC. Thus, ELC admit rates will be less than 100
percent (University of California 2003).
Table 3: Measures of Access for Admitted Students at the Six Selective Campuses from 2001‐2003 (All measures are given as percent of admitted students)
(http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/sept03/302attach.pdf)
76
Campus Trends 1995‐2002: Davis
At UC Davis, admitted students usually enroll at 21 percent. Overall
enrollment rates have fluctuated over the period from 1995 to 2002, but 2002 rates
are within one or two percentage points of those in 1995. In 1995 enrollment rates for
this campus averaged 24.3 percent; in 2002 these averaged 23.7 percent. Rates at
which underrepresented students enroll have also fluctuated, generally in the same
direction as overall trends, but a few percentage points lower. At UC Davis these
rates are slightly below where they were in 1995: admitted underrepresented
students enrolled at rates of 23.2 percent in 1995; in 2002, these enrollment rates
stand at 20.9 percent (University of California 2003).
In terms of the proportion of the total enrolled class that underrepresented
students comprise, the campus shows generally high points in 1994 or 1995,
declining percentages through 1998 or 1999, and increases since then. At UC Davis,
underrepresented students increased as a proportion of the total freshman class
from 1996 through 2001, but fell again in 2002 (University of California 2003).
If the profession of landscape architecture is to increase the diversity within
the profession it will eventually need to determine the needs of different groups of
people and how to best meet these needs as they relate to the profession. For
example, if females find getting job opportunities in the nursery or landscape
construction industry difficult because they are women, it will reduce their access to
career information in terms of related work experience. In fact, it could also
77
discourage them from further considering landscape architecture as a career.
78
Table # 4: Number of Applications, Admits and Enrollments for ELC and Non‐ELC
California Residents by campus and Ethnicity—Fall 2001 Admissions Cycle
79
Chapter 8 Educational barriers
In 1901, the Lowthrope School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture,
which allowed young women to train in landscape architecture, was established. A
little more than a decade later in 1915, the Cambridge School of Architecture and
Landscape Architecture opened (Anderson 1980). These were very successful until
they were closed or combined into other universities or college programs. The
Cambridge School was closed in 1942, and graduated more than 700 female students
in its 26 years of operation (Brown and Maddux 1982).
According to the research by Valorie Hennigan and Jot D. Carpenter of 1998,
‘Women in the ASLA: A Descriptive Analysis’, the enrollment of women in
accredited programs of landscape architecture has increased dramatically since 1942.
While women’s enrollment has increased or remained level over the last thirty years,
male enrollment in landscape architecture has steadily declined over the past 15
years as illustrated in the Table below. The table shows an obvious gap in education
of landscape architecture among women and men right from the beginning
(Hennigan 1998).
80
0
10002000
30004000
50006000
7000
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
Total Enrollment Male EnrollmentFemale Enrollment
Hennigan, Valorie and Jot D. Carpenter. Women in the ASLA: A Descriptive Analysis. Landscape Journal, Vol. 17, 1998.
Today, gender gaps still persist in education, particularly when it comes to
training women and girls for todayʹs technology‐oriented workplace, leveling the
playing field in athletics and other areas essential to the full development of their
potential. The National Womenʹs Law Centerʹs Education program addresses these
gaps by fighting for strong enforcement of Title IX and promoting programs that
remove barriers to girlsʹ educational opportunities. Current priorities include
opening doors to vocational and career education programs that train young women
to enter and succeed in non‐traditional fields with the promise of greater pay and
job opportunities; bringing groundbreaking lawsuits and undertaking other
advocacy efforts to enforce Title IXʹs promise of equal treatment in education,
81
including in athletics, and fighting for strong affirmative action policies that take
race and gender into account to remedy discrimination and promote diversity in
education (http://www.dol.gov).
Previous studies are useful for the comparison of old and new data. The 1982
ASLA National Salary Survey of Landscape Architects (ASLA 1983), which researched
both men and women, provided some of the information for this paper.
Landscape architects who were members of the ASLA were compared with
non‐members and with students and faculty. On educational variables, students
were compared with graduates, and faculties were contrasted with practicing
professionals. On a professional basis, full‐time landscape architects were compared
with part‐time professionals. In addition, women who were educated in the
landscape architecture field but were not practicing because of family commitments
were compared to full‐time workers, part‐time workers, students, and faculties.
Additionally, married versus never married respondents were compared, whereby
students were left out (Nassauer 1983).
In the 1983 – The National Survey of Career Patterns among Women in Landscape
Architecture – performed by the ASLA, current and former undergraduate and
graduate students from eleven landscape architecture programs were compared. It
showed that ‘53.6% of students were 25 or younger, while 41.1% were between the
ages of 26 and 32. It was noticeable that women respondents tended to be older than
the 18‐22 year‐old college crowd. 72.2% of the students were single, about ¼ were
82
married, while 4.7% were married once. One tenth of women were parents of
children under 17 (Nassauer 1983).’
About a quarter of students already had earned non‐landscape architecture or
bachelor’s degrees. The knowledge of students before entering their study of
landscape architecture differed among them. A few students knew some basics of
the field while others had no knowledge (Nassauer 1983).
The Women in the Labor Force in 2006 reported on April 30, 2007, that ‘of
persons aged 25 years and older, 27% of women and men had attained a bachelor’s
degree or higher; 32% of women and 29% of men had completed only high school,
no college (www.dol.gov).’
The study also showed that the higher the education the more likely the
person will participate in the labor‐force and the less likely the person will be
unemployed.
Table #5: Employment comparison compared to education levels. For women age 25 with: Participation in labor
force Unemployment Rate
Less than High‐school diploma
33.2% 7.9%
High‐school diploma 53.8% 4.3% Some college, no degree 64.0% 4.3% Associate degree 71.2% 3.1% Bachelor’s degree or higher 73.1% 2.1%
ʺEducation is an admirable thing, but it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught.ʺ
Oscar Wilde
83
Comparisons of the past studies with current women/male ratios in classes
show an increase of women participants in college studios over the past decades. It
also demonstrates that more women go on to graduate studies in today’s era than in
the past (Nassauer 1983).
Members of ASLA demonstrated that 58% had undergraduate degrees in
landscape architecture, 7.1% had both undergraduate and graduate degrees in the
field, while 24.9% had a graduate degree in landscape architecture; 3.3% of the
remaining affiliates had a degree in another field whereas 6.5% had no college
degree at all. The 1982 Salary Survey showed similar results wherein 97% of ASLA
men and women members had a bachelor’s degree and 30% of these had graduate
degrees (Nassauer 1983).
In the graduating class of 1904, Marian Cruger Coffin, one of four women
students in her class of 500 at MIT School of Architecture, said, ʺWe were thrown in
all our work in competition with the men, and the invasion of their province as well
as our specialty (which was a new and untried architectural development), put us
on our mettle to prove that we too were serious students and competitors (Fleming
1995).ʺ
84
On November 2004, a recent study by Mercer Consulting showed that
increases in student fees will be necessary to achieve the goal to improve
compensation for all UC employees. The Board of Regents voted in favor of a
student fee increase for 2005‐06 (Office of Strategic Communications 2004).
“Mandatory System‐wide Fees:
• Undergraduate students: Mandatory system‐wide student fees will increase by 8
percent above the current fee level. For resident undergraduates, the additional 8
percent will raise fees $457, bringing mandatory system‐wide fees for resident
undergraduates to $6,141. With the additional miscellaneous fees charged by
individual campuses, the total average fees are estimated to be $6,769.
• Graduate students: Mandatory system‐wide fees for resident graduate academic
student fees will increase 10 percent or $628 per year in 2004‐05, bringing the fees for
such students to $6,897. The average total fees (including miscellaneous campus
fees) are estimated to stand at $8,556.
• Professional students: Mandatory system‐wide fees for professional students will
be increased by $628, bringing these fees for professional students to $6,092. In
addition, professional students also must pay professional fees and miscellaneous
campus fees and, as appropriate, nonresident tuition (Office of Strategic
Communications 2004)”
85
To give some comparison, see Table below. Even with the 8 percent increase,
fees for resident undergraduates will be about $1,100 below the projected average
charged at other public universities (Illinois, Michigan, SUNY and Virginia) that UC
uses for fee comparison purposes. Total fees for resident undergraduates at UC will
stand at $6,769, while fees at comparison public universities will average $7,781 for
2005‐06 (Office of Strategic Communications 2004).
Table # 6: University of California and Public Salary Comparison Institutions
Student Fees
Public Salary Comparison Institutions 2004‐05 Fees
Undergraduate Resident Nonresident
Graduate Resident Nonresident
University of Illinois $ 7,944 $ 20,864 $ 8,310 $ 20,310 University of Michigan $ 8,722 $ 26,941 $ 13,585 $ 27,311 State University of New York $ 5,907 $ 12,167 $ 9,455 $ 13,265 University of Virginia $ 6,790 $ 22,890 $ 9,200 $ 20,200 2004‐05 Average fees of Comparison Institutions
$ 7,341 $ 20,716 $ 10,138 $ 20,272
2004‐05 Average UC Fees $ 6,312 $ 23,268 $ 7,928 $ 22,867 2005‐06 Estimated Average Fees for Public Salary Comparison Institutions
$ 7,781 $ 21,958 $ 10,847 $ 21,082
2005‐06 Estimated Average UC Fees assuming increases in system‐wide fees consistent with the Compact*
$ 6,769 $ 24,589 $ 8,556 $ 23,537
*Increases of 8% for undergraduate students and 10% for graduate students in system‐wide fees; and 5% in nonresident tuition for undergraduates.
86
Clearly not all change is bad. In fact, there may be some real opportunities that occur as a result of change. How can we as landscape architects remove some of the uncertainty associated with the changing world around us‐and how can we position our profession to be beneficiaries of that change?
Patrick A. Miller, FASLA
The University of California’s track record shows good news. ‘The UC system
has steadily increased the number of women faculty over the past few decades and
matched or outpaced other major universities in hiring female faculty (Office of
Strategic Communications 2003, Feb.).’
The overall proportion of women faculty being hired continues to increase for
the third consecutive year. In the school year 1999‐2000 the percentage of new
female faculty hired was 25% which rose to 30% in 2000‐2001 and 31.2% in 2002. UC
Davis, for example, gained 13% from 1998‐99 to 1999‐00. In 2000‐01 there were 32%
of female registered campus professionals which increased to 42% in 2001‐02. UC
Berkeley increased hiring of all women faculty from 27% to 32% and assistant
professors from 30% to 37% between 2000‐01 and 2001‐02 (Office of Strategic
Communications 2003, Feb.).
Additionally, the proportion of the total female faculty at the University of
California (24.2 percent) is noticeably higher than at institutions such as MIT (16
percent) and Stanford University (20.3 percent). In addition, UC has shown a
substantial increase in the hiring of women into full professor positions, up from
18.5% of full professor hires in 2000‐01 to 27.1% in 2001‐02. (Office of Strategic
Communications 2003, Feb.)’
87
To fix the problem of faculty gender inequity, UC’s President Richard C.
Atkinson initiated steps to increase the involvement of women faculty members to
develop recommendations that better address gender equity on campuses (Office of
Strategic Communications 2003, Feb.).
Furthermore, individual campuses have made real progress in developing
policies that address faculty gender equity. UC Irvine was the recipient of a National
Science Foundation grant that allowed the campus to restructure committees and
advisors at each school to monitor faculty hiring, which has been very successful so
far in recruiting women to the higher ranks of academic leadership. Six of the 10
deans at UCI are now women (Office of Strategic Communications 2003 Feb.).
UC Berkeley now requires departments asking for new faculty positions to
provide an assessment of their record on hiring of women and minority faculty in
the past five years. UCB also developed a comprehensive web‐based survey for
faculty on career/family issues that will provide important data for evaluating
family accommodation policies (Office of Strategic Communications 2003, Feb.).
The Davis campus made a special effort to re‐examine faculty hiring to assess
the problem of inequality and formulate solutions. It also completed a
comprehensive study of equity in faculty hiring in March 2002 (Office of Strategic
Communications 2003, Feb.).
88
Tenure
Tenure is often associated with senior job titles such as Professor and
Associate Professor. A junior professor has to demonstrate a strong record of
research, teaching, and administrative service before being eligible for tenure.
Typical systems allow only a limited period to establish such a record, by limiting
the number of years that any employee can hold a junior title such as Assistant
Professor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure).
Academic tenure is primarily intended to guarantee the right to academic
freedom: it protects respected teachers and researchers when they disagree with
general opinion, openly disagree with authorities of any sort, or spend time on
unfashionable topics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure).
Universities themselves pay dearly whenever they guarantee lifetime
employment to an individual who proves unworthy of it. Universities therefore
exercise great care in offering tenured positions, first requiring an intensive formal
review of the candidateʹs record of research, teaching, and service. This review
typically takes several months and includes the solicitation of confidential letters of
assessment from highly regarded scholars in the candidateʹs research area. Some
colleges and universities also solicit letters from students about the candidateʹs
teaching. A tenured position is offered only if both senior faculty and senior
administrators judge that the candidate is likely to remain a productive scholar and
teacher for life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure).
89
The decisions are made by the senior faculty and senior administrators who
are often made up mainly of men. The data show that the gaps in employment vary
significantly both by sector and job title. In addition, the gender salary gap is largest
for those off the tenure track (Jaschik 2006).
Table # 7: Percentage of Women in Faculty Positions, by Sector, 2005‐6 Sector and Job Status % of Women
Doctoral institutions
—Non‐tenure track 52.2%
—Tenure track, but not tenured 40.9%
—Tenured 25.8%
—Full professor 19.3%
Master’s institutions
—Non‐tenure track 54.1%
—Tenure track, but not tenured 47.3%
—Tenured 35.0%
—Full professor 28.3%
Baccalaureate institutions
—Non‐tenure track 48.6%
—Tenure track, but not tenured 47.4%
—Tenured 36.1%
—Full professor 29.3%
Community colleges
—Non‐tenure track 52.9%
—Tenure track, but not tenured 53.1%
—Tenured 47.4%
—Full professor 46.9% The American Association of University Professors (AAUP). A report with “gender equity indicators”
90
Despite all these efforts, it is still obvious that gender discrimination exists.
One example of this just made the news at the beginning of the year 2007.
In January 2007 architect Martha Schwartz, the Harvard adjunct1 professor of
landscape architecture at Harvard University, resigned in a letter criticizing the
Graduate School of Design’s gender inequities, including the landscape architecture
department’s utter lack of a female tenure hire in its 106‐year existence (Redden
2007).
Insidehighered.com published her statements in “Twist on Harvard’s Gender
Battles” on their web‐site. She said: “When I was a student [in Harvard’s landscape
architecture program] in 1977, half the students were women. Now it’s 70 percent.”
In spite of that, the department today has six full tenured professors, who are all
men. There are also 11 other non‐visiting faculty members, four of whom, including
Martha Schwartz, are female (Redden 2007).
In 1992, Martha Schwartz declined to become the landscape architecture
department’s first tenured female hire, because she did not want to give up her
landscape architecture firm. The firm, Martha Schwartz Partners, is based both in
Cambridge and London. She decided to teach at Harvard as an adjunct together
with two male colleagues. Soon after her start at Harvard, the University created the
“professor in practice” position – a more flexible tenured position that allows
practicing architects to maintain and advance their professional commitments.
1 An adjunct professor is a teacher who educates classes for lower wages and fewer employment benefits under relatively short-term contracts and usually is non-tenured (Richardson, 1999).
91
Martha observed her two male colleagues advance into the new tenured positions
(Redden 2007).
In 2002, the University searched to fill another professor in practice position.
Schwartz interviewed for this position but without any obvious reasons, the school’s
former dean called off the search after a two‐year search without hiring anyone. “It
was humiliating,” said Schwartz, “I’m not saying I’m the only qualified [professor],
who could do it, but at that point, I’d been teaching for 10 years, and I had a
practice. There was something strange about it and there was absolutely no place to
turn. There were no women who could support me or guide me or mentor me
through the process. We’re on our own (Redden 2007).”
Alan Altshuler, the current graduate school dean wrote in an e‐mail that
while the design school may have proven to be unfriendly territory for the
advancement of female faculty in the past, things have changed since the early 1990s
(Redden 2007).
Martha Schwartz was loaded with professional obligations when another
tenure review process was coming up. She was unwilling to put herself through the
process again. Schwartz resigned and sent a copy of her letter of resignation,
accompanied with her observation of the gender imbalance, to The Harvard
Crimson, which first reported the news. Alan Altshuler and President Bok quickly
contacted her, comvincing Schwartz to withdraw her resignation (Redden 2007).
92
“Over the past dozen years,” Altshuler wrote, “six of the fourteen full
professor appointments at the GSD have been women. During this period there have
been only two such appointments in landscape, both men. On my own watch as
dean since July 2004, all three professor [appointments] — two in architecture, one
in urban planning — have been women, and we are at an advanced stage of
considering Martha Schwartz for tenure right now.” The department expects to
complete that process within the next several months (Redden 2007).
The landscape architecture department has also initiated a competitive search
for up to two tenured full professor positions, and two of the five finalists in that
search are women (Redden 2007).
Schwartz, whose anti‐discrimination was warmly welcomed by her female
colleagues at Harvard, plans to proceed with the tenure review but is not sure if
she’ll be able to fulfill the responsibilities of a tenured position at this point (Redden
2007).
Schwartz feels that there seems to be good will toward reaching greater
gender parity in the faculty of Harvard’s design school. But the relative lack of
female faculty in the graduate school, she said, is a longstanding problem that may
take a long time to fix (Redden 2007).
The incident is the latest development in the gender wars at Harvard, where
the Faculty of Arts and Sciences in October released an internal report which found
that just 20 percent of individuals who accepted tenure‐track offers at the
93
university’s main undergraduate college in 2006 were women, a decline from 40
percent in 2004‐5 (Redden 2007).
Table # 8: UC Tenure vs. Non‐Tenure University‐wide and at UC Davis
94
Some universities, Martha S. West, a professor of law at the University of
California at Davis said, have done more to educate professors about bias, which she
said plays a real role, even if it is not of the “no women need apply” variety of
previous generations. “Discrimination is going to be entrenched until women reach
a critical mass,” she said. Bias “takes place in faculty members’ minds when they are
making individual decisions on whom to make an offer to. In our society and most
societies, women have long been regarded as inferior, but people aren’t aware of
their own biases — men and women have some of the same prejudices,” West said
(Jaschik 2006).
Barbara Taylor, the president of CUPA‐HR and associate vice chancellor for
administration and human resources at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville
said that she believed a variety of factors were at play, including demographics,
personal choices, disciplinary shifts and “old‐fashioned discrimination (Jaschik
2006).”
It proves that it will take time to remove all biases and generational beliefs
about women in the profession before women in the work force are considered to
have the same capabilities as men (Jaschik 2006).
95
However, the profession of landscape architecture faces extra challenges.
Pressure to reduce university costs has resulted in threats to landscape architectural
programs. Monetary cuts result in inefficient funds for hiring additional faculty. In
addition, the landscape architectural programs need increasing numbers of students
to justify their existence. The escalating cost of landscape architecture education is a
potential limiting factor for a new generation of students entering the profession,
and many students who might be attracted to the profession are unaware of it.
Information, research and continuing education within the profession are rapidly
growing needs that are not currently being met.
96
Chapter 9 Economical barriers
On June 1, 2005, the 2005 Salary Survey was distributed by the WinWriters.
The WinWriters Salary Survey reports that although two‐thirds of its respondents
are female, they lag behind their male counterparts in annual salary by an average of
$4,000, or a 7% difference. Looking at hourly wage earners, women contractors
earned an average of $41 per hour compared to $49 for the men (McGee 2005).
Looking at the findings of the 2005 salary survey, the wage gap between men and
women appears to have grown. While average salary for males in executive management
grew from $99,327 in 2003 to $109,042 in 2005, the average salary for females in this job
category slipped from $75,129 in 2003 to $71,561 in 2005. The female executive
management respondents this year not only earned an average $37,481 less than their male
colleagues, they earned $3,564 less than the average for women in this category in 2003
(McGee 2005).
The 2005 salary survey asked respondents what they thought of the statement: “Men
and women in executive management are equally compensated.” (See Table 9). Of women
respondents, 63 percent said they strongly disagreed or somewhat disagreed with the
statement. This compares with 32 percent of men who said they strongly disagreed or
somewhat disagreed with the statement (McGee 2005).
97
TABLE 9: GENDER PERSPECTIVES TABLE 9: “Men and women in executive management are equally compensated.” Males FemalesStrongly disagree 8% 24%
Somewhat disagree 24% 39%
No opinion 23% 12%
Somewhat agree 19% 8%
Strongly agree 8% 1%
No answer 18% 16%
When regarding the statement: “Men and women are equally compensated,”
54 percent of female respondents strongly disagreed/somewhat disagreed versus 29
percent of the males who felt the same way. Clearly the majority of women
respondents in both categories did not feel that women were equally compensated,
while most of the males disagreed (McGee 2005).
Respondents were also asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the
statement: “Men are more interested in reaching executive‐level positions than
women.” Sixty‐six percent of women strongly disagreed/somewhat disagreed with
the statement, while 43 percent of the males felt the same. Twenty‐four percent of
the males (the largest single response category) had no opinion of the statement
(McGee 2005).
“Women are afforded the same leadership opportunities as men.” Of the
female respondents, 60 percent strongly disagreed/somewhat disagreed, compared
to 32 percent of the males, who felt the same way. The largest single response
category for males: 28 percent somewhat agreed with the statement (McGee 2005).
98
There was one area where men and women generally agreed. Respondents
were asked whether they thought that the leadership styles of men and women
differed significantly. The majority of men (55 percent) and women (58 percent)
agreed. Interestingly, 17 percent of women said “no,” while only 10 percent of the
men replied the same (McGee 2005).
To improving compensation for all UC employees, the Office of Strategic
Communications introduced RE‐61 in November 2005. The publication titled “RE‐
61: Improving compensation for all UC employees and strengthening oversight of
and accountability for senior management salaries”, announced that UC salaries, on
average, are behind the comparative market by 15%. Nevertheless, because of the
good health and retirement benefits offered at UC, the overall compensation for UC
employees is considered currently at market level (Office of Strategic
Communications 2005).
The recent study by Mercer Consulting showed, however, that increases in
salaries over the next ten years will be crucial to ensure market‐level compensation
at all levels of the University. This is partially due to the expected increases in health
benefit costs (Office of Strategic Communications 2005).
99
At the September 2005 meeting, UC Regents considered RE‐61, a proposal
consisting of the following three suggestions:
1) Establish goals to increase salaries for all groups of employees over the ten year
period from 2006‐2007 through 2015‐2016;
2) Set compensation levels for senior leadership that are clear and to ensure that
decisions regarding executive compensation are appropriate
3) Augment funding of salaries for amounts in excess of $350,000.
To achieve this goal the Office of Strategic Communications announced in
November 2004, that the student fees will need to be increased. On Thursday, Nov.
18, the Board of Regents voted in favor of a student fee increase for 2005‐06. This
outcome resulted from the agreement made between the Governor and the
University of California in May 2004. For undergraduates, fee increases would
average 10 percent over a three‐year period (14 percent in 2004‐05; 8 percent in 2005‐
06 and 2006‐07). Graduate fees increased by 20 percent in 2004‐05 and 10 percent in
both 2005‐06 and 2006‐07. This increase was to create predictability around fee levels
for students and their parents (Office of Strategic Communications 2005).
100
For the good news on salary and wages, on September 21, 2006, The National
Association of Colleges and Employers reported in “Booming Job Market for
College Grads”, that it is the best job market for graduates in four years. They
reported increased recruiting activities, higher salaries, multiple offers for the class
of 2006 with 2007 looking even better. Economics and finance graduates are faring
the best with a 6.2% increase in average offer (The National Association of Colleges
and Employers 2006).
With consideration to the landscape architecture field, “…it’s a very good
time to be a landscape architect,” said Nancy C. Somerville, executive vice
president/CEO of ASLA. “With only 30,000 landscape architects in the U.S. and the
sustained growth in demand for landscape architecture services, there is significant
opportunity for young people considering entering the profession. The traditional
market sectors—residential, parks and recreation, planning, commercial—have all
remained extremely strong while less conventional fields such as storm‐water
management, green roofs, and security design have grown significantly (asla.org).”
101
Comparing the 1998 ASLA survey data with similar information published on
architects by The American Institute of Architects (AIA), it appears that landscape
architects do better in terms of each profession’s average salaries. ASLA reports a
higher average income of about $6,000. Of all the design professions, engineers earn
the highest wages, especially right out of college and in the early years. After fifteen
years of experience, the difference between the salary of a civil engineer and a
landscape architect is less than $5,000. The average salary of the landscape architect
is right between that of the engineer and the architect. According to the 2006 Salary
Survey report by The American Institute of Architects the average compensation
increase for architects has outpaced price increases by only 15% since the 1990
(asla.org).
For several years, the ASLA researched and surveyed the participation of
landscape architects, their salary, their firms and organizations and their gender
demographic, then published the results. To compare some of these results, this
research looked at the 1998, 2004, and 2006 ASLA National Salary Survey of
Landscape Architects (asla.org).
The average salary of the landscape architect in America in 1998 was $52,886
(6% increase since 1981), 2004 was $74,664 (23.4% increase from 1998), and 2006 was
$89,700 (20.2% increase from 2004) (asla.org).
In the ASLA survey, total compensation rose steadily by years of experience.
In 1998, the average offers to recent graduates from the private sector were running
102
$22,775; and $25,730 from the public sector. With one to three years experience the
offers rose to $26,407 and $30,016 respectively. At four to nine years, it escalated to
$35,042 and $37,377. Finally at ten plus years, the private sector advantage appeared
and the offers were $45,454 for private and $44,096 for public. A person who had
been practicing for 15.9 years received $52,886. The Pacific region led, as it did in
1988, but the South East became the second best earning area, replacing the North
East in that distinction (asla.org).
In the 2004 Survey, most respondents had 21‐25 years of experience with an
average salary of $80,273. The average salary for those with 0‐5 years of experience
was $41,803. Those with 36‐40 years of experience earned the highest average salary
at $97,564. The Pacific region was again the top‐earning region (ASLA 2004).
Finally, the 2006 Survey illustrated that salary peaked for those with
36‐40 years of experience and an average compensation of $167,000. The Pacific
region was again the top‐earning region, with an average compensation of $99,700
(ASLA 2006).
Female respondents increased their involvement in the landscape architecture
field from 1988 till 2006. The ASLA salary survey of 1998 demonstrated that females
represented 24%, which has changed very little since 1988, which then was at
22.5%. In 2004, female respondents rose to 26%. In 2006, female respondents rose to
30% (asla.org).
103
The 1998 Survey provided that racial minorities are almost invisibly low.
African Americans represent 0.8%, Asian American at 1.9%. Hispanic practitioners
continued to rise to 1.1% in 1998 from 0.7% in 1988 (ASLA 1998).
The 2004 Survey illustrated that African Americans practitioners declined to
0.3%, Asian American declined to 1.6%, and Hispanic practitioners rose to 2% in
2004 (ASLA 2004).
Finally, the 2006 ASLA Salary Survey explained that 91% were considered
white; 3% Asian‐American; 1.4% Hispanics; and 1.9% “other (ASLA 2006).”
The 2006 ASLA Business Indicators Survey reveals that there are not enough
landscape architects to meet the demand for services, which is expected to continue
to grow in the next decade. While 62 percent of respondents indicated there was a
good supply of landscape architecture graduates, 38 percent thought there were too
few landscape architecture graduates. Almost half of the respondents (47 percent)
expect to hire landscape architects in the coming 12 months (asla.org).
“The results reflect the significant growth in demand for landscape
architecture services across the board,” said Nancy C. Somerville, executive vice
president of ASLA. “The traditional market sectors—residential, parks and
recreation, planning, commercial—have remained extremely strong, while green
roofs and landscape environmental mitigation are increasing. The profession is
gaining visibility and the increased salaries are an indication of that
(http://www.asla.org/nonmembers/asla_pub.cfm).”
104
At academic levels, when it comes to salaries, the averages for women are
below those for men at all ranks, but the gaps are quite small in certain categories.
Some experts on salary patterns warn that there are many possible explanations for
the disparities. In particular, they say that disciplinary salary differentials, not
gender, may be a key factor in explaining gaps (Jaschik 2006).
Table # 10: Women’s Average Salary as a Percentage of Men’s Average Salary, by Sector, 2005‐6 Sector and Job Title Women’s Salary PercentageDoctoral institutions
—Professor 90.9%
—Associate professor 92.7%
—Assistant professor 91.5%
—All ranks 78.1%
Master’s institutions
—Professor 95.2%
—Associate professor 95.5%
—Assistant professor 97.4%
—All ranks 87.3%
Baccalaureate institutions
—Professor 95.5%
—Associate professor 98.1%
—Assistant professor 97.4%
—All ranks 89.6%
Community colleges
—Professor 95.2%
—Associate professor 95.9%
—Assistant professor 97.5%
—All ranks 95.5% The American Association of University Professors (AAUP). A report with “gender equity indicators”.
105
Chapter 10 Political barriers
“The time has come and the need pressing for the cooperation and heroic aide of women.” ‐San Francisco News Letter, November 30, 1895
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination. It is presented under Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects men and women from unwelcome
sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of
sexual nature, constitute sexual harassment when this conduct explicitly or
implicitly affects an individualʹs employment, unreasonably interferes with an
individualʹs work performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work
environment (http://www.eeoc.gov).
In Fiscal Year 2006, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
received 12,025 charges of sexual harassment. Only about 15.4% of those charges
were filed by males, while 84.6% were filed by women (http://www.eeoc.gov).
In 1964, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act was passed, which prohibits
employment discrimination in hiring, promotion, discharge, pay, fringe benefits, job
training, classification, referral, and other aspects of employment, on the basis of
race, color, religion, sex or national origin. This law is enforced by the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). In addition, Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national
106
origin in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance, which is
enforced by the Civil Rights Center (http://www.eeoc.gov).
In March, 2006, Inside Higher Ed (insidehighered.com) printed ‘Federal
Inquiry on Women in Science’, an article that covers how female undergraduate and
graduate students are being treated. It also incorporates questions about the hiring
of faculty members, promotions and tenure. The National Journal reported that the
reviews are then being examined by the department’s authority to ensure that sex
discrimination in education programs which receive federal funding is banned
under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. This law is enforced by the
Civil Rights Center (http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm).
A Government Accountability Office report of 2004 criticized that in the past
11 years the Education Department had conducted a total of three compliance
reviews, which is inadequate enforcement. Assistant education secretary for civil
rights Stephanie Monroe stressed that the discrimination women face as students or
faculty members in the field of math and science may be “subtle” and may not
include written rules, but “barriers” are still quite real. Policies might include
patterns of “glass ceiling” which exclude women from certain kinds of positions, or
where women with children are considered on “Mommy track”
(www.insidehighered.com).
“It’s important to not simply look at the numbers, but what the intent of the
policy is and how the policy is carried out,” Monroe said. She also said that “our job
107
as a law enforcement agency is not to push or influence decision making in terms of
women and men making choices, but to make sure that women and men have the
same opportunities.” Similarly, Jocelyn Samuel, vice president for education and
employment at the National Women’s Law Center, said that departments should see
if expectations for tenure such as number of publications, where they appear, type of
research grants expected, and so on, support men instead of women
(www.insidehighered.com).
108
ASLA membership
A 1980s investigation concluded that more women participated in the ASLA
membership than had in the 10 years before and anticipated the membership would
grow. One quarter of the associate members were women, who tend to be young
and less experienced than the male ASLA members.
In the 1982 survey, a woman member of ASLA was younger than 35, married
without children. This survey showed that the currently practicing women were a
group of young ladies, which still have a long career path ahead of them. It also
showed that a large percentage of them were unmarried (28%) and an even larger
ratio had no children (66.5%) (Nassauer 1983).
Some evidence was found that indicates that some members of the ASLA wanted the society to discourage female membership. The following excerpt was published in Landscape Architecture from Bremer Pond’s article: …by 1912 some men considered admission to the society a right exclusively of the male sex. Charles Downing Lay, then Secretary of the Society, received the following note from a member;” I have a blank form stating that a young lady is being considered for junior membership in the ASLA. I think it is a mistake to encourage women to enter the society. I hope some action will be taken in this matter (Pond 1950, p.65). “
109
On the other hand there is proof that suggests that women were excellent in
the practice of landscape architecture before 1929.
Not only did women landscape architects enjoy a large and lucrative practice in the field of estate and garden design, but they wrote extensively about it and promoted the profession to a wide audience. Women landscape architects for the most part worked alone rather than forming partnerships with other women and men. Most operated small offices hiring one to two additional staff persons, but some like Beatrix Ferrand had larger staffs (Neal 1973, p. 8)
In 1989, the ASLA included roughly 8,128 women landscape architecture
members (Hennigan 1998). This is a significant increase since the ASLA
establishment in 1899, but women still only represent a small percentage of the
landscape profession.
110
Chapter 11 Resources
ACE Mentor Program
ASLA has launched a partnership with ACE Mentor Program, which introduces
high school students to careers in design and construction, to increase the number
and diversity of students entering the landscape architecture profession.
American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) – www.asla.org
Founded in 1899, ASLA is the national professional association for landscape
architects, representing 14,200 members. Landscape architecture is a comprehensive
discipline of land analysis, planning, design, management, preservation, and
rehabilitation. ASLA promotes the landscape architecture profession and advances
the practice through advocacy, education, communication, and fellowship.
ASLA Committee on Women
In the 1982 Survey, women were asked to suggest what the Committee on Women
could do to help women in their profession:
• “Promote visibility of women in the profession by publicizing accomplishments
of women landscape architects and providing role models for younger women,
• Provide continuing education in management and marketing,
• Work to improve education in construction, and
111
• Become involved in improving salary levels and combating discrimination
within the profession.”
ASLA’s Professional Practice Networks (PPNs)
ASLA’s Professional Practice Networks are sub‐communities where landscape
architects sharing professional interests can communicate and network. ASLA
recently asked all PPN members to allow a glimpse into their unique work
portfolios. Results learned were then printed in LAND Online.
On July 10, 2006, the seventh article in a series that highlights the work PPN
members are doing in their practice specialties was published, entitled “Reports
From the Field: Women in Landscape Architecture and International Practice
PPNs.” The work of members of two PPNs was highlighted.
The Women in Landscape Architecture (WILA) PPN focuses on personal and
professional development for landscape architects. The International Practice PPN
promotes the practice of landscape architecture abroad as an instrument of public
service and as a source for professional opportunities. Together, members of these
PPNs span the universe of landscape architecture in its personal and professional
dimensions.
Two accomplished members of this PPN are Terry W. Ryan, FASLA, of
Jacobs/Ryan Associates and Patricia S. Loheed, ASLA, principal of Pat Loheed
Landscape Architecture (http://www.asla.org/land/2006/0710/ppn.html).
112
The Association for Women in Architecture (AWA)
The Association for Women in Architecture is a non‐profit, educational
organization. Founded in 1978 as a grassroots organization to provide networking
and professional support to local women architects, the AWA has grown to nearly
150 members, including landscape architects and construction managers, since its
incorporation in 1988. In 1994, the AWA was cited by Progressive Architecture as a
leader among grassroots professional associations of architects.
AWA Values:
• Educate ourselves and the community about issues relating to women in
architecture, the architectural profession, and the built environment
• Provide a forum for information exchange among ourselves and other
organizations
• Empower women architects through recognition and support
• Encourage diversity and inclusion rather than separatism
• Promote social responsibility in professional activities
• Collaborate with other organizations toward common goals
• Engage proactively, with emphasis on activities rather than meeting
113
Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation (BWAF)
http://www.beverlywillisarchitecturefoundation.org
The Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation works to advance the scholarly study
and public recognition of the contributions made by women to the architecture
professions in the United States during the middle years of the twentieth century. To
this end, the Foundation supports a variety of programs geared to both professional
and public audiences. BWAF supports other organizations and institutions that
actively acknowledge the contributions women have made and continue to make in
the production of architecture, whether as practitioners of design and urbanism, or
as historians and critics. The institutions and organizations which BWAF currently
supports or with which it has initiated collaborative programs include the Society of
Architectural Historians, the International Archive of Women in Architecture at
Virginia Tech, the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, the National
Building Museum, as well as the Library of Congress.
Acknowledging that women have yet to assume dominant roles in
architectural design, urban planning and civic leadership, Ms. Willis and the Board
of Trustees established the Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation (BWAF) in 2002.
The current historical emphasis supported by the BWAF is largely inspired by the
career of Willis, herself an architect and designer active during the middle years of
the twentieth century. Her career parallels a time when the culture of architecture in
the United States was predominantly male, yet it was also a seminal time for
114
launching careers of women in architecture.
By promoting research that focuses on the contributions of women
practitioners in the fields of architectural design, the building arts, and urban
planning, as well as architectural history and criticism, BWAF hopes not only to
reshape the discourse within the architecture profession and the public realm, but
also to ensure that it takes place within a culture of equality.
The Foundation strongly encourages collaborative participation with
individuals as well as other foundations, institutions and organizations.
Contact: Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation
Director, Wanda Bubriski
2 Columbus Avenue, Suite 3A
New York, NY 10023
Telephone: 212 577 1200 —or— 203 488 9009
Email: director@bwaf.org
Bureau of Labor Statistics
The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the principal fact‐finding agency for the Federal
Government in the broad field of labor economics and statistics.
115
California Women in Environmental Design
California organization of women design professionals and students in planning,
architecture, engineering, landscape architecture, interior design, and related fields.
Formerly known as California Women in Architecture.
They have printed newsletters, membership flyers, and posters and programs
of the organizationʹs meetings in San Francisco in 1991 and Santa Monica in 1992. In
addition, they have thirty‐seven audiotapes of session proceedings at CWED
conferences.
ISI – International Statistical Institute
The National Womenʹs Law Center
Since 1972, the Center has expanded the possibilities for women and girls in the US.
The Center uses the law in all its forms: getting new laws on the books and
enforcing them; litigating ground‐breaking cases in state and federal courts all the
way to the Supreme Court; and educating the public about ways to make the law
and public policies work for women and their families. An experienced staff of
nearly 50 takes on the issues that cut to the core of womenʹs and girlsʹ lives in
education, employment, family economic security, and health ‐‐ with special
attention given to the needs of low‐income women and their families.
116
The Women In Design Network (http://www.architects.org)
The Women in Design Network, sponsored by the Boston Society of Architects, is a
community of women in the design professions, at all levels, in all roles, who come
together for discussion, fellowship and exchange of design and professional practice
ideas.
The Women in Design Network’s mission is to:
• To build a network of connections among women professionals involved in
the built environment through architecture, landscape architecture, interior design,
engineering, urban design, public art, graphic design, planning and construction;
• To use those connections to foster training, mentoring and professional
development;
• To provide a forum for discussion of current issues in design, construction,
practice and management; and,
• To promote a professional environment centered on teamwork, enjoyment
and collegiality.
Women in Landscape Architecture Professional Practice Network (WILA)
Women in Landscape Architecture Professional Practice Network focuses on
personal and professional development for landscape architects. The WILA assists
landscape architects in research on women and the profession of landscape
architecture. Membership in the group is open and encouraged for women and men.
WILA group publishes a newsletter for members, coordinates the WILA mentoring
117
program, and assists members in their search for workmen with similar interests
and expertise for research and design collaboration, sources for speakers, jurors, and
employment opportunities for employers, employees and consultants. It encourages
consideration of workplace and quality‐of‐life issues for all landscape architects
(http://www.asla.org/land/2006/0710/ppn.html).
118
Chapter 12 Conclusion
One of the primary questions in using the information of this research is:
what can female newcomers to the field of landscape architecture learn from women
landscape architects who have fought their way to recognition, who laid stepping
stones for home‐makers, and who paved the way toward equal rights? As young
women increase knowledge and skills in their profession, will it be possible for them
to receive recognition and professional standing at the same pace as men? Will
family commitments be recognized as part of the working environment? To
understand the information of the survey, one must consider the experience of
women who have a long career path behind them together with the possibility for
change in the vocation pattern of landscape architect trainees must be considered.
Catalyst research finds that women as well as men need flexible work
environments where they can vary their day‐to‐day schedules and reduce their
work responsibilities for a time without leaving the workforce entirely and losing
career advancement opportunities. This allows for better personal commitments and
relieves at‐home tensions as well as at‐work tensions. Companies that foster these
flexible work environments will harvest the benefits of a diverse leadership pool and
retaining committed, productive, and experienced talent.
119
The growth of landscape architecture is limited by the amount of students
choosing it as their major. It is crucial for landscape architecture professionals to
promote a student body consisting of quality individuals with diverse backgrounds
and skills. Strategies fostering the growth of a diverse student body need to be
developed to ensure the health of the profession.
The main question is why change is even necessary? The answer is obviously
long and complicated. The US can not afford to under‐perform in academic
institutions and needs to attract the best and brightest minds. It also cannot afford to
under‐appreciate the value that gender variation can bring to the workforce. There
are four reasons for taking action to eliminate gender inequality and bias in
landscape architecture academics and careers.
The first reason is global competitiveness. To remain competitive in a fast
changing global economy, the United States needs to make the best use of its talent
regardless of gender. Other countries are making strong gains copying the successes
of the United States.
Another reason is the law. The United States as a nation has strong anti‐
discrimination laws. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii/html) prohibits employment discrimination based
on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. Title IX, passed in 1972
(http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm), prohibits discrimination or
120
exclusion on the basis of sex from any education program or activity receiving
Federal financial assistance.
The third cause is economics. The individual states, the federal government,
and the private sector invest heavily in training college students. The average
annual support provided for a full‐time student in landscape architecture is about
$7,000, not including research and training expenses. The average landscape
architecture student takes about 5 years to complete the undergraduate study,
bringing the investment to $35,000 per BA. That is a substantial cost. It does not
make sense economically to have highly educated, expensive landscape architecture
students leave the field because they sense a lack of opportunity to succeed.
The fourth and final motive is ethics. Men and women should have equal
opportunity to serve society, work in rewarding jobs, and earn a living.
121
What Must Be Done: A Blueprint for Action
Career barriers for women deprive the nation of an important source of
talented and accomplished landscape architects. Transforming institutional
structures and processes to eliminate gender bias requires a major national effort,
incorporating strong leadership and continuous attention, evaluation, and
accountability. It will require constant care and long‐term patience. The
recommendations are rooted in strategies shown to be successful. They are large‐
scale and interdependent, and require the combined efforts of University leaders
and faculties, professional societies and higher education organizations, funding
agencies, federal agencies, and Congress.
This thesis is a beginning point for eliminating the obstacles women face in
today’s society, workplace, and education. These factors are dynamic and complex.
In the meantime, current students, faculty, professionals, and others
associated with the profession of landscape architecture should do all they can to
promote the benefits and rewards of being a landscape architect to all people;
especially those that will one day become the future of landscape architecture.
Faculty members and administrators at all levels need to correct or eliminate
the policies and practices that lead to or permit gender bias. Strategies need to cover:
How should faculty members interact with students? How should young women
faculty deal with unwelcome social and sexual advances? How should faculty
122
members work with staff? How should institutions and individuals interview and
hire? What are effective, unbiased strategies for evaluating performance?
A comprehensive list of policy actions for improving the retention and
advancement of women in landscape architecture across the educational and career
path needs to be developed.
Improvements in at least some of the areas such as in the workplace deserve
credit. However, there should be zero tolerance of any illegal or inappropriate
behavior in the woman’s environment. Eliminate those barriers. At some point,
hopefully very soon, there will no longer be barriers. But our society is nowhere
near that point yet. There have been so many important technological ʺbreak‐
throughsʺ in the business world just within the past few years, most notably the
Internet. If we can develop highly sophisticated machines, why canʹt we also
develop highly sophisticated people for which biases such as cited in this research
are absent? Itʹs time.
‘And I think women have come a very, very long way, but they have a long way to go.’
Lara Flynn Boyle
123
Bibliography
Atkinson, Richard C. and Patricia A. Pelfrey. (2004, October). Rethinking Admission: US Public Universities in the Post-Affirmative Action Age. University of California, Berkeley. http://ishi.lib.berkeley.edu/cshe Allen, M. (1983). ‘The Domestic Ideal and the Mobilization of Womanpower in World
War II’ Women’s Studies International Forum 6(4): 401-412. American Society of Landscape Architects. (1998). Salary Survey. American Society of Landscape Architects. (2004). Salary Survey. American Society of Landscape Architects. (2006). Salary Survey. American Society of Landscape Architect: Pennsylvania/ Delaware Chapter. Anderson, Dorothy May. (1980). Women, Design, and the Cambridge School. West Lafayette, Ind.: PDA Publishers Corp.: 2. Averett, Susan L., H. Elizabeth Peters and Donald M. Waldman. 1997. “Tax Credits, Labor Supply, and Child Care.” The Review of Economics and Statistics. Pp. 133.
Baker, Maureen. (1995). Canadian Family Policies: Cross-National Comparisons. Toronto: University of Toronto Press: 121.
124
Bantel, Karen A. and Susan E. Jackson. (1989). “Top Management and Innovation in Banking: Does the Composition of the Top Male a Difference?” Strategic Management Journal Vol. 10: 107-124. Brown, Catherine R., and Maddox, Celia Newton. (1982, May). "Women and the Land: 'A Suitable Profession'." Landscape Architecture 76: 68. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2002, March). Annual Demographic Survey (Detailed Person Income). http://www.bls.gov Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2003).Current Population Survey, Annual Averages. Carter, R. T., and Cook, D. A. (1992). “A Culturally Relevant Perspective for
Understanding the Career Paths of Visible Racial/Ethnic Group People.” Adult Career Development (2nd Ed.). Edited by H. D. Lea and Z. B. Leibowitz. Alexandria, VA: National Career Development Association. Pg. 192-217.
Catalyst. (1996-2000). Catalyst Census of Women Corporate Officers and Top Earners. Catalyst. (2003, August). Viewpoints. Workplace Flexibility is still a Women’s Advancement Issue. Catalyst. (2004). “The Bottom Line: Connecting Corporate Performance and Gender
Diversity”
Close, Leslie Rose. (1996). “A History of Women in Landscape Architecture.” Introduction to The Gardens of Ellen Biddle Shipman. by Judith B. Tankard. New York: Sagapress, Inc.: xiii-xix.
Delphy, C. (1970). ‘The Main Enemy: A Materialist Analysis of Women’s Oppression’ in Delphy, C. (1984) Close to Home, London: Hutchinson. Dolder, Ced. A Biographical Profile (1914-2006) of Clermont "Monty" Huger Lee. http://www.tclf.org/pioneers/profiles/lee_clermont/index.htm
Doumato, Lamia. (1988). Architecture and Women: A Bibliography Documenting Women Architects, Landscape Architects, Designers, Architectural Critics and Writers, and Women in Related Fields Working in the United States. New York: Garland Pub.
"Eligibility of California's 1996 High School Graduates for Admission to the State's Public Universities: A Report of the California Postsecondary Education Commission," 1997 December. http://www.cpec.ca.gov/CompleteReports/1997Reports/97-09.pdf. Fleming, Nancy. (1995). Money, Manure, and Maintenance: Marian Coffin Pioneer Landscape Architect, 1876–1957. Weston, Mass.: Country Place Books.
125
Georgia Department of Natural Resources, (2006, Nov.). Historic Preservation Division. Survey and National Register Unit. Georgia: A Women’s Place. A Historic Context.
Griswold, Mac and Weller, Eleanor. (1991). The Golden Age of American Gardens. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc.
Harris, Dianne. (Fall 1994). “Cultivating Power: the Language of Feminism in Women’s Garden Literature, 1870-1920.” Landscape Journal 13:2.
Hennigan, Valorie and Jot D. Carpenter. (1998). ‘Women in the ASLA: A Descriptive Analysis.’
Hochschild, Arlie Russell. (1990). The second shift: working parents and the revolution at home. New York : Avon Books.
Hollingsworth, Sherold D. (1995, October 5-7). “Women Landscape Architects and Their Influence on Southern Gardening.” The Influence of Women on the Southern Landscape. Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on Restoring Southern Gardens and Landscapes. Old Salem, NC. p. 138-153.
Howe, Bea. (1961). Lady with Green Fingers: The Life of Jane Loudon. London: Country Life. Inside Higher Ed. (2006, September). Bias or Interest.
www.insidehighered.com/layout/set/print/news/2006/09/20/women Jaschik, Scott. (2006, July 20). Can’t We All Just Get Along? http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/07/20/colleague Jaschik, Scott. (2006, Oct. 26). New Measures for Gender Inequities.
insidehighered.com Kim, E. Y. (1993). “Career Choice Among Korean American Students.” Anthropology &
Education Quarterly. 24(3): 237.
Knox, Tim. (1998–1999) “Lady Mary Coke’s Garden at Notting Hill House,” in The London Gardener 4: 52-63.
König, Heinz, Francois Laisney, Michael Lechner and Winfried Pohlmeier. (1995). “Tax Illusion and Labour Supply of Married Women: Evidence from German Data.” KYKLOS. 48(3): 347.
Lahey, Kathleen. (2001). The Benefit/Penalty Unit in Income Tax Policy: Diversity and Reform. Ottawa: Law Commission of Canada: Chapter 1.
126
Leong, F.T.L., ed. (1995). Career Development and Vocational Behavior of Racial and Ethnic Minorities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
McGee, Regina. (2005, Jun 1). 2005 SALARY SURVEY.
http://meetingsnet.com/career/salary/meetings_salary_survey/
Martin, Van Jones and Mitchell, William Robert. (1983). Landmark Homes of Georgia, 1733-1983. Savannah: Golden Coast Publishing Co.: 57.
Naidoo, A.V. (1998). “Career Maturity: A Review of Four Decades of Research.” Bellville, S. Africa: University of Western Cape: 23.
Nassauer, Joan Iverson and Karen Arnold. (1983). National Survey of Career Patterns Among Women in Landscape Architecture. American Society of Landscape Architects. National Science Foundation. (2001). Marital status and spousal employment for men and
women scientists and engineers. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/employ.htm.
Neal, Darwina L. 1973. Report of the Task Force on Women in Landscape Architecture.” ASLA Bulletin (July). McLean, VA: American Society of Landscape Architects. Office of Strategic Communications. (2003, February). Facts about the University of California: Moving toward Faculty Gender Equity at UC. Office of Strategic Communications. (2003, November). Facts about the University of
California: UC Graduation Rates, Retention and Academic Performance. Office of Strategic Communications. (2004, November). Facts about the University of California: 2005-06 Student Fees. Office of Strategic Communications. (2005, November). Facts about the University of California: RE-61: Improving compensation of and accountability for senior management salaries. Peavy, R.V. (1995). Career Counseling for Native Youth: What Kind and by Whom?
ERIC Document. Greensboro, NC. ED 399 486. Pond, Bremer W. 1950. Fifty Years in Retrospect.” Landscape Architecture 23 (2) : 65. Redden, Elizabeth. (2007, Jan. 18). Twist on Harvard’s Gender Battles.
insidehighered.com
Richardson, James T. (1999). "Tenure in the new millennium: Still a valuable concept" National Forum.
Roberts, Marion. (1991). Living in a man-made world: Gender assumptions in modern housing design. Routledge, London.
127
Schenker, Heath. (2002). “Women, Gardens, and the English Middle Class.” Chapter in Bourgeois and Artistocratic Cultural Encounters in Garden Art, 1550-1850. Conan, Michael. Ed. Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collections. Shteir, Ann B. (1996). Cultivating Women, Cultivating Science: Flora’s Daughters and Botany in England, 1760 to 1860. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 220–27.
Solera, Cristina. (2000). Income Transfers and Support for Mothers' Employment. Helsinki: International Social Security Association: 8.
Ten Landscapes: A Talk with Topher Delaney interview by Ketzel Levine at npr.org. Tillyard, Stella. (1995, Nov.). .Aristocrats: Caroline, Emily, Louisa, and Sarah Lennox 1740-1832: 198. The National Association of Colleges and Employers 2006. (2006, September 21). “Booming Job Market for College Grads.” Tsui, Anne S. and Barbara A. Gutek. (1999). Demographic Differences in Organizations: Current Research and Future Directions. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. UC Office of the President. (2007). Creating Change Initiative, Associate President Linda Williams, Presidential Staff Fellow Amy Levine, and Interim Director of Faculty Equity Programs Sharon Washington. United Kingdom. (1920). Royal Commission on Taxation. Report. London: HMSO. University of California. (2002, November). “First-Year Implementation of Comprehensive Review in Freshman Admissions: A Progress Report from the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools.” http://www.ucop.edu/regents/regmeet/nov02/302attach.pdf University of California: Office of the President— Student Academic Services. (2003, March). Undergraduate Access to the University of California after the Elimination of Race-Conscious Policies. http://www.ucop.edu/sas/publish/aa_final2.pdf U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). The
Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Digest
of Education Statistics.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Digest of Education Statistics.
128
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, (2005, November). Employment and Earnings. January 2006 and Monthly Labor Review. Weisman, Leslie Kanes. (1992). Discrimination by Design: A feminist critique of the Man- made environment. University of Illinois Press: Urbana and Chicago. Zeisel, John. (1979). Inquiry by Design: Tools for Environment-Behavior Research.
Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
129
Web‐site Resources
http://www.academics.triton.edu/faculty/fheitzman/schach.html Interview: Janice Schach and Mitchell Glass, Landscape Architects 1999& 2000. http://www.asla.org http://www.asla.org/nonmembers/publicrelations/pdf http://www.beverlywillisarchitecturefoundation.org http://www.businesswomanpa.com/2005_march.asp http://www.california-architects.com http://www.design.iastate.edu/2005programreview.php http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm. Title 20 U.S.C. Section 1681-1688. http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/Qf-laborforce-06.htm
Women in the Labor Force in 2006 April 30, 2007 http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/vii/html. Pub. L. 88-352. http://www.emilycompost.com/gertrude_jekyll.htm http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_ceiling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenure http://www.hillstead.org/gardens/beatrix.html http://www.insidehighered.com/layout/set/print/news/2006/03/28/women. http://www.landscapearchitects.org/education.html http://www.laprofession.org/practice/history.htm http://www.library.nevada.edu/arch. Women and Landscape Architecture. Sept. 2005 http://www.oregonlink.com/deepwood/lord_and_schryver.html http://www.planetizen.com/node/23480 http://www.rpts.tamu.edu/Pugsley/Olmstead.htm
130
http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca Women and Employment: Removing Fiscal Barriers to Women's Labor Force Participation. http://www.tclf.org/pioneers/profiles/johnson_carol/index.htm. July 2006 http://www.udel.edu/TheGreen/people.html http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/sept03/302attach.pdf http://www.walpole.com/NewburyportGardens http://waysandmeans.house.gov/hearings.asp?formmode=printfriendly&id=2496
House Committee on Ways and Means. Statement of Lisalyn R. Jacobs, Vice President for Government Relations, Legal Momentum. Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support of the House Committee on Ways and Means. February 10, 2005
http://www.xroads.virginia.edu/~MA99/hall/Dumbartonoaks/women_dum.html
131
Appendix A
Accredited Undergraduate Programs in Landscape Architecture
Arizona St. U Iowa St. U U of Illinois U of Arkansas Kansas St. U Pennsylvania St. U Auburn U U of Kentucky Purdue U Ball St. U Louisiana St. U U of Rhode Island Cal. Polytechnic St. U U of Maryland Rhode Island School
of Design Cal St. Polytechnic U U of Massachusetts Rutgers –
St. U of New Jersey U of Cal at Davis Michigan St. U St. U of New York – Syracuse City College of NY Mississippi St. U Temple U Clemson U U of Nevada, Las Vegas Texas A&M U Colorado St. U North Carolina A&T St U Texas Tech U U of Connecticut North Carolina St. U Utah St. U Cornell U North Dakota St. U Virginia Tech U of Florida Ohio St. U Washington St. U U of Georgia Oklahoma St. U U of Washington U of Idaho U of Oregon West Virginia U
U of Wisconsin
Recommended