Gender Mainstreaming in Higher Education UNIJOS-libre

2009

OLUWAFUNMILAYOJ.PARAMALLAM,PhD

PaperpresentedattheNational

ConferenceonGenderMainstreamingin

HigherEducation,UniversityofJos,

Nigeria

DepartmentofResearch,National

InstituteforPolicy&StrategicStudies,

Kuru

2/26/2009

ImplementingGenderinHigher

Education:AnAnalyticalOverviewoftheUniversityofJosGenderPolicy

ParaMallam,O.J/ImplementingGenderinHigherEducation

2

1. Introduction

It is widely acknowledged that education plays a

cardinal role in accelerating national development. A

major distinctive of the 21st century is the centrality of

knowledge acquisition and utilization in the creation

of wealth and in the attainment of global economic

and, indeed, political power. The Asian Tigers and

China have carved out a comfortable niche in the

global political economy on account of heavy

investments in human resource development. In spite

of its abundant human and natural resource

endowments Sub-Saharan Africa continues to lag far

behind other regions in the mobilization of human

capital and scientific and technological prowess.

Since independence in 1960 successive Federal,

Regional and State governments have put education at

the centre-stage of political rhetoric and programmes.

The YarAdua administration is no exception; it lists

human capital development through investment in

education as a component of its 7-point agenda. There

is no evidence so far that the government is conscious of the gender issues and factors that play a

crucial role in harnessing Africas latent human resource potential namely women. Nor does

the 7-Agenda articulate gender as a critical planning variable in the context of a comprehensive

development strategy. On the other hand, institutions of higher learning like the University of Jos

are seeking to re-orient institutional thinking and behaviour towards the mainstreaming of gender

through new policy guidelines and procedures.

This is a trend that reflect a growing awareness among the makers and implementers of

educational policy that although education plays a key role in promoting sustainable

development and holds numerous potential benefits to individuals, groups and entire societies or

nations it can also be a vehicle for perpetuating those gender discriminatory norms and practices

firmly embedded in socio-cultural customs and institutions. Unless concerted efforts are made to

ensure that all educational settings and processes are non-discriminatory in terms of access,

curriculum, learning environment/procedures, participation and outcomes the full benefits of

education or gender mainstreaming policies will not materialize for women and girls.

This paper uses A Toolkit for Mainstreaming Gender in Higher Education in Africa (WGHE,

2006 hereafter referred to as the Toolkit),1 with some reference to the Gender Mainstreaming

Manual in Education and Employment, to present an analytical overview of the University of Jos

Gender Policy objectives, strategies and focal areas with a view to drawing attention to essential

conditions for its effective implementation. The Toolkit set outs important policy guidelines,

benchmarks and performance checks without which the impressive objectives articulated in any

gender policy document are likely to remain lofty, yet fanciful ideals.

Success can be

measured according to

policy stages and policy

output: good gender

mainstreaming is found

not only in policy and

planning but also in

implementation and

evaluation. European Training Foundation, 2006:9


3

2. Brief Historical Background of Gender Mainstreaming in Education

As a policy framework gender mainstreaming began to gain currency in development and public

policy planning/programming since the early 1990s. Since then certain African educational

institutions, notably Makere University, Uganda and the University of Cape Town, South Africa

blazed a new trail to make important inroads towards the integration of gender perspectives and

good practices into their curricula, training, research and administrative procedures. However,

although the trend has slowly gathered momentum over the last two decades efforts to inculcate

gender issues within academic institutions have usually taken the form of adding gender

courses/modules onto existing university programmes (WGHE, 2006). Gender mainstreaming in

the educational sector was highlighted as a comprehensive global action strategy in1995, first

under the Beijing Platform for Action and then as a strategy for member governments of the

Commonwealth.

The Beijing Platform for Action, to which Nigeria is a signatory, recognizes that access to

education is a critical economic resource, and lists it second among its 12 critical areas of

concern (i.e. Inequalities and inadequacies in and unequal access to education and training) in

relation to the empowerment of women. In fact, the BPfA classifies education as a human right

and an essential tool for achieving the goals of equality, development and peace. The document

highlighted Sub-Saharan Africa as one of the regions in most dire need of addressing gender

disparities in education at all levels. Furthermore, the latest MDG performance measurements

show the region lagging behind all others with regard to school enrolment in primary and

secondary schools. Figure 1 shows persistent gender gaps for 1990, 2005 and projected figures

for 2015.

The Commonwealth Plan of Action on Gender and Development put forward a cross-sectoral

strategy in which it prioritized the development of special and diverse training for women and

the use of gender-inclusive curricula to facilitate their participation in all disciplines with special

emphasis on science, technology and industry. It also specified the institutionalization of gender

mainstreaming policies, measures and frameworks for increasing and improving the delivery of

education through all tiers of government and relevant institutions of learning at all levels.

Taking a cue from this international impetus and in response to the advocacy efforts of

indigenous scholars, activists, and development practitioners the Obasanjo Administration finally

approved the National Policy on Women in July 2001. The NPW identified education (formal,

vocational and informal) as the first priority sector for intervention strategies for women

empowerment, once again with particular emphasis on science and technology for the

development and adaptation of indigenous technology to suit womens needs.

Subsequently, in 2003, 22 years after the University of Jos became a full autonomous University

the Jos-Carnegie Partnership Programme was instituted as a precursor to mainstreaming gender

issues into the Universitys academic and administrative operations. It is noteworthy that prior to

this the University had drawn up a Strategic Plan back in 2000 in which it had expressed an

interest in gender issues.


4Fig. 1

Gross School Enrolment Ratio (Girls/Boys): Regions of the World

050

100

150

SSA

EA&P

EC&A

SA

LA&C

ME&NA

79

89

98

70

99

82

86

99

96

90

101

94

2015

2005

1990

Source: The World Bank, 2008 http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTGLOBALMONITOR/EXTGLO

MONREP2008/0,,contentMDK:21709440~menuPK:4860358~pagePK:64168445~piPK:6416830

9~theSitePK:4738057,00.html

Regions:

ME&NA - Middle East and North Africa

LA&C - Latin America and the Caribbean

SA - South Asia

E&CA - East and Central Asia

EA&P - East Asia and the Pacific

SSA - Sub-Saharan Africa


5Indeed, the second objective of the Plan was specifically concerned with instituting gender

equity and gender mainstreaming practices in the University system. It was the UNIJOS

Strategic Plan that earned it the Jos-Carnegie Project award. The UNIJOS Gender Policy is just

one of the many outcomes of that programme. In 2004 its Gender Issues Team submitted a draft

Gender Policy for assessment by the Jos-Carnegie Partnership Committee2 then to the Vice-

Chancellor for onward submission to the Senate and Governing Council.3 The draft policy

emerged at the end of a broad consultative process among female and male staff and students of

the University and external/international partners. It also considered good practices in sister

African institutions in Tanzania and South Africa. Finally, in 2006, after a period of internal

reviews and intensive advocacy of top-level decision-makers by members of the GIT and other

concerned individuals, the Council ratified the Senates decision to approve the University of Jos

Gender Policy the first of its kind in Nigeria.

Two pertinent questions arise from the involvement of donor funding and foreign participation in

the historical development of the Policy: 1.) to what extent is this a home-grown policy that

addresses critical gendered experiences of women and men in a Nigerian University

environment? 2.) How will gender continue to be institutionalized after the termination of the

Jos-Carnegie Programme? The answer to these questions impinges directly on the extent to

which the policy will achieve its stated objectives and attendant outcomes. This analytical

overview will examine the implementation strategies of the Policy in light of both questions.

The next section provides a brief overview of the Toolkit, its basic assumptions and guidelines,

followed by some conceptual clarifications on gender mainstreaming in Section 4. The rest f the

paper reviews major features of the University of Jos Gender Policy.

3. A Brief Overview of the Toolkit The Toolkit is a home-grown manual that was developed by a team of experts under the auspices

of a collective effort of the Working Group on Higher Education set up by the Association for

the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA) and the Association of African Universities

(AAU).4 Its aim is to provide institutions of higher learning with a synchronized policy approach

to integrating gender into all university functions and programme content. It begins with an

assessment of the general university institutional climate in which gender issues are frequently

regarded with suspicion and fear as a result of ignorance of basic gender concepts and the

misconception that they derive from western donor-driven programmes. Consequently, agenda

for gender equity and justice meet with resistance evidenced by a refusal by university

administrators to face up to blatant and concealed gender-biases that characterize numerous

processes and practices that exist within the ivory towers. These include inter alia violence and

intimidation of female students and staff, sexual harassment, male-centred and/or gender-

stereotyped teaching material and methods, insensitivity to legitimate gender-specific needs and

male-bias in the distribution of resources including appointments, promotions and other official

perquisites.

This section presents an outline of the 10 modules contained in the Toolkit (see list in Box 1).

Each module begins with a concise assessment of factors in the African social and higher

institutional contexts that warrant gender policy design and action.


6

Basic Gender Concepts: The manual goes beyond a mere definition of key gender terminology

to explain their usage and describe

problems that may arise and how they

may be correctly applied in various

institutional contexts. The concepts are

meant to help:

a. Inculcate gender issues into

curriculum and teaching

b. Ensure that understanding of gender

dynamics is factored into learning

and teaching methods

c. Develop indicators for measuring

the extent to which gender justice

and equity are institutionalised

d. Inculcuate gender equity principles

into the professional and personal

lives of staff and students.

Forming Policies and Strategies: The

manual provides a rationale for

developing gender policies in higher

institutions predicated on a human rights

and social justice perspective as well as

a proven efficiency and productivity variable in national development. A gender policy is a

framework for uniting political will with technical know-how for the promotion of gender equity

and equality.

The Role of Human Resource Development and Management: HRD and HRM are deemed

critical intervention points for gender mainstreaming. Here practical and strategic intervention

strategies are suggested to redress gender imbalances in recruitment, appointments, promotions

and staff development, as well as to address gender-specific needs in the allocation of benefits

(e.g. health services, housing, loans, pension).

Mainstreaming Gender in the Curriculum: technically speaking mainstreaming is the

cornerstone, and indeed the essence, of gender policy in that it seeks to incorporate a gender

perspective into every facet of university life (see Section 4 below). However, the Toolkit singles

out curriculum content in recognition of its critical role in the production and reproduction of

knowledge. The curriculum is broadly understood to include formal course/programme content

and unspoken ideas about the roles and value judgements ascribed to men and women and their

appropriate or inappropriate sexual behaviour. Both require structural transformation to create

harmonious gender relations and a more gender-fair society. This requires integrating gender into

all taught courses and research, including science and technology where the manual places

particular emphasis owing to the paucity of female involvement in those areas.

Ten Modules in the Toolkit

1. Basic Gender Concepts

2. Forming Policies and Strategies

3. The Role of Human Resource

Development and Management

4. Mainstreaming Gender in the

Curriculum

5. Research and Gender Sensitive

Methods

6. Faculty and Support Programmes

7. Student Access and Retention

8. Gender Violence and Sexual

Harassment

9. Gender Disaggregated Data

10. Resource Mobilisation for

Gender Equity


7

Research and Gender Sensitive Methods: The Toolkit asserts that the absence of gender as a

critical development variable from mainstream development planning in Africa is one reason for

the continents continued poverty and underdevelopment. It argues that institutionalizing

gendered research through the incorporation of gender concepts and issues into university-wide

research objectives, methodology and methods will help to promote evidence-based development

planning that will have tangible impact on the livelihoods and life chances of boys and girls, men

and women.

Faculty and Support Programmes: Owing to the climate of hostility, ridicule and ignorance

prevalent in most African universities there is need for staff and students to have a structured,

non-threatening environment in which to explore gender issues in a dispassionate and scholarly

manner. This can be done through the establishment and funding of gender institutes, short

courses, ad-hoc gender committees, activities and activism.

Student Access and Retention: This concerns a better understanding of the structure and

processes of poverty in impacting student retention and the development of gender-sensitive pro-

poor indicators to facilitate resource allocation for teaching and learning. It also requires that

staff members are sensitized to recognize and deal with student poverty in a gender sensitive

manner.

Gender Violence and Sexual Harassment: The Toolkit interrogates male-tolerant perceptions

and perspectives that constitute gender violence and sexual harassment as defined by the UN

Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women as, ...any act that

is likely to or results in physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women including

threats or acts of ...coercion, arbitrary deprivations of liberty...private or public, in the family,

community (cited in WGHE, 2006:99). It seeks to institute preventive and punitive measures and

mechanisms to hold perpetrators of such violence accountable for their actions.

Gender Disaggregated Data: A 2005 study entitled, Gender Equity in Commonwealth Higher

Education showed the existence of pervasive gender disparities in learning, teaching,

recruitment, appointments and promotions in African institutions of higher learning all countries

selected except South Africa.5 This underscores the need for systematic quantitative and

qualitative gender databases to provide university gender profiles and in-depth understanding of

how gender impacts on the lives of the campus community in order to initiate positive change in

administrative, regulatory and academic affairs. This may call for a gender audit prior to

designing a gender policy.

Resource Mobilisation for Gender Equity: Universities and colleges in Africa face severe

budgetary constraints that curtail their ability to provide educational services and facilities.

Nevertheless, changing deeply entrenched patterns of gender-insensitive organisational and

institutional behaviour is impossible without the deployment of sufficient financial, material and

human resources. The Toolkit emphasises the need for the institutionalization of gender-

responsive budgeting, as opposed to over-reliance on donor-funded gender programmes, to

ensure their sustainability and long-term impact.


84. A Conceptual Clarifications

The Toolkit (p.3) defines a gender responsive policy as a blueprint or guideline ... [that]

incorporates basic principles for addressing the imbalances and inequalities that have resulted

from culturally or socially-constructed differences between men and women in a given society.

Gender mainstreaming is both a cardinal and an over-arching strategy for ensuring the

effectiveness of gender policy; it threads through all policy components. The concept of gender

mainstreaming is predicated on the Gender and Development analytical and policy framework

and it has assumed widespread usage in government and development policy discourse and

action. Mazey (2001:6) defines gender mainstreaming as, "A multifaceted, holistic and long-

term strategy of integrating gender perspectives into all public policies in order to achieve

equality between men and women in and beyond the workplace." By gender perspectives is

meant the special needs and interests of women and men as a result of their societal roles and the

resultant relations of power and social positioning (i.e. gender hierarchy). It is these role and

power differentials that lead to the gender disparities that gender mainstreaming seeks to address.

According to Leo-Rhynie, (1999:8) gender mainstreaming in the educational sector entails,

The consistent use of a gender perspective at all stages of the development and

implementation of policies, plans, programmes and projects. In the education

sector, this would include not only the activities of governments, but also those of

schools, colleges and education institutions, and, where appropriate, those of

NGOs and the private sector as well. Mainstreaming gender differs from previous

efforts to integrate womens concerns into government activities in that, rather

than adding on a womens component to existing policies, plans, programmes

and projects, a gender perspective informs these at all stages, and in every aspect

of the decision-making process. Gender mainstreaming may thus entail a

fundamental transformation of the underlying paradigms that inform education.

Both definitions preclude the common ad-hoc and compartmentalized approach of adding on

courses and modules, and even departments to the plethora of academic programmes and organs

in existence. Rather it calls for a wholesale structural transformation in the way institutions of

learning mediate the acquisition and transmission of knowledge and skills which must be done in

manner that promote gender equality and equity. Leo-Rhynie (1999:7) asserts that,

Gender equality refers to sameness or uniformity in quantity, amount, value and

intensity of provisions made and measures implemented for women and men.

Equality can usually be legislated. Gender equity refers to doing whatever is

necessary to ensure equality of outcomes in the life experiences of women and

men. Equity is difficult to legislate: identical treatment may satisfy the equality,

but not the equity criterion.

This in turn requires paradigm shifts in institutional culture, organization and behaviour where

deliberate steps are taken, not merely to provide men and women with equal opportunities, but

to remove all forms of gender discrimination created and perpetuated by hidden and overt

patriarchal systems of thought and practice in order to guarantee corresponding and fair

outcomes for females. Leo-Rhynies (1999:9) concise definition of patriarchy is instructive: it


9refers to, the process whereby societal power is generally invested in men and the various

structures of society consistently assign inferior and/or secondary roles to women. Tobin

(1985:291 in Aluko, 1999:66) explains the link between patriarchy and gender inequality:

Patriarchy as a worldview assumes the alienation of women. It places the male on the

centre of reality and makes the masculine normative. In such a world order, women

cannot be anything but inferior since if the male/masculine is normative they are

different (abnormal). Where patriarchy as a worldview is in operation, symbols,

rituals and laws will perpetuate fundamental inequality.

In the context of higher learning this would imply among other things that the allocation of

resources, benefits and opportunities in terms of recruitment, appointments, promotions, training,

facilities, perquisites of office and participation/representation in decision-making bodies and

important events mirrors an unequal distribution of access and control over tangible and non-

tangible assets among women and men. Such gender disparities are neither reflective nor

constitutive of innate human capabilities or incompetence, as the case maybe, but rather of

underlying socio-cultural and organizational barriers and biases that facilitate or obstruct the

educational/career development of men and women respectively. It is pertinent to note, as Para-

Mallam (2006) argues, that patriarchy is not a simplistic categorisation of males against females,

for even females may act as pseudo-patriarchs when they adopt, adapt to and actively

perpetuate patriarchal principles and practices to obtain patronage or approval from the

prevailing system.

The primary effect of a patriarchal construct is that it renders people and organizations blind to

the gender-biases contained in routine social-political norms, regulatory frameworks and

practices; male dominance, male bias and female marginalisation or exclusion are perceived as

normal being the product of natural or divine origins. Consequently, systemic gender

discrimination6 is often obscured by the facade of gender neutrality. Hence, the ultimate aim of

gender policy in higher education is to deliberately build up a gender-sensitive institutional

culture that gives optimal opportunity for the development and utilization of the human

potentials of women and men.

5. The University of Jos Gender Policy

The Toolkit (2006:2) suggests that universities wishing to develop a gender-responsive policy

should use their own vision, mission statements and strategic plans as points of departure.

Accordingly, the preamble to the University of Jos Gender Policy (2006:1) while acknowledging

the gender insensitivity of its original philosophy, cites the need to go beyond its present gender

neutral disposition as a basic rationale for the policys existence. After briefly tracing the

history of womens participation and gender development in the University in Section 3, the

background statement to the Policy states in Section 2 that,

The philosophy of the University is to provide a comprehensive multi-disciplinary

programme for educational and human resource development, taking into consideration

the socio-cultural conditions and the unique higher education needs of the people

within its immediate catchment area.


10

Box A

Summary of UNIJOS Gender Policy

Objectives

To create a gender-friendly and environment

supportive of the identified special learning,

training and professional needs of women

and men as well as diversity and academic

freedom.

To mainstream gender perspectives into all

strategic plans, and institutionalize the

production and use of gender disaggregated

data.

To ensure gender sensitivity and non-

discrimination in University teaching,

research and administrative processes and

procedures (i.e. recruitment, admissions,

employment and service delivery).

To ensure University-wide participation of

the minority gender in all decision-making

organs and processes.

To achieve this overarching aim the University identifies six objectives through which it

commits itself to excellence in research, teaching and community service; the training and

development of highly-skilled manpower to furnish national economic and environmental as

well as catchment area developmental needs, particularly in the humanities and sciences. The

document goes on to observe that despite the featuring of women in top-level university

positions as Professors, Faculty Deans, Deputy-Registrars, University Librarian etc., the

University maintains a gender-neutral disposition that does not provide a level playing field for

women and men.

It is partly the absence of a level playing field that necessitated the establishment of the

University of Jos Womens Association (UJWA) and the National Association of Women

Academics (NAWACS) in 1979 and 1996 respectively as well as various gender sensitization

and capacity-building initiatives under the auspices of the Jos-Carnegie Programme. For

instance, the GIT established the Female Support Initiative for the award of scholarships to

deserving students and it has organized gender training for Principal Officers7 and other key

office holders. Consequently, taking the 1999 Constitution, the NPW and the Convention on the

Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) as points of departure the

University, through its Gender Policy (2006:3) commits to, take extra measures to promote

gender equity as part of its general

development programme.

5.1. General Objectives of

the Gender Policy

Section 4 of the Policy lists 10

objectives which may be summarized

into four as outlined in Box 2. These

objectives are consistent with the

Toolkit guidelines and those set out

as cornerstones of a gender

mainstreaming policy by Leo-Rhynie

(1999:9-10) as follows:

Obtaining a clear quantitative

picture of gender roles and

ratios in various levels and

areas of the educational system

using gender disaggregated

data;

Identifying possible factors

related to any gender gaps and

inequalities identified, and


11

16 FOCAL AREAS OF THE GENDER

POLICY

1. Admissions

2. Recruitment

3. Training and Staff Development

4. Staff Welfare, Including Housing

Accommodation and Loans

5. Student Unionism

6. Gender Disaggregated Data

7. Gender Equity of Principal Officers of the

University

8. Gender and HIV/AIDS

9. Harassment (especially Sexual Harassment)

10. University Strategic Plans

11. Grievance Procedures

12. Personnel and Appointments

13. Publications

14. Gender Sensitization

15. Honorary Degrees and Fellowships

16. Affirmative Action

planning for the elimination of these factors;

Assessing the special educational needs, immediate and practical as well as long term and

strategic, of girls and boys, women and men, and planning specifically to meet these needs;

and

Ensuring that women and men share equitably in the designing, planning, decision-making,

management, administration and delivery of education, and also benefit equitably in terms

of access, participation and the allocation of resources.

Consisting with the guiding principles outlined in the Toolkit both sets of objectives prioritize the

need for gender disaggregated data, needs assessment, non-discrimination through

affirmative/positive action measures and participation in decision-making.

5.2. General Implementation Strategies

To fulfil the stated objectives the Gender Policy in Section 5 details a number of general and

specific implementation strategies that cut across 16 focal areas of coverage as highlighted in

Box B. All strategies and focal areas are to

be operatioinalised within the context of a

Gender Management System (GMS).

Nancy Spence (1999 in Leo-Rhynie p. 5),

Director of the Gender and Youth Affairs

Division at the Commonwealth

Secretariat, defines the GMS as: A

comprehensive network of structures,

mechanisms and processes for bringing a

gender perspective to bear in the

mainstream of all government policies,

programmes and projects. It is the

primary modal put forward for

governments and institutions wishing to

mainstreaming gender in all sectors. The

success of the GMS hinges on broad-based

participation and consultation with all key

stakeholders involved with the change

process.

5.2.1. The University of Jos Gender

Management System

The University of Jos Gender

Management System has eight constituent

parts as displayed in Fig.2. The rest of this

sub-section underlines major factors and


12indicators of success for desirable policy outcomes within the context of the GMS. In addition, it

highlights important benchmarks in relation to some focal areas of the Policy as part of the

Administrative organs, processes and procedures.

5.2.1.1. The Gender Senate Standing Committee: The University of Jos GMS was initially to revolve around a Gender and Diversity Committee charged with

overseeing spearheading and monitoring the implementation of all policy objectives

and strategies. Its functions include identifying the sources of and promoting equal

opportunities in the University, monitoring gender discriminatory practices and

processing complaints of such, organizing an annual gender and diversity week,

stimulating womens interest in direct participation in decision-making, and ensuring

University-wide compliance with the Policy. In reality, as a result of the ongoing Jos-

Carnegie Programme the GIT remains the key driver of gender issues in the

University. Nevertheless, the original idea of the Policy drafters was to have a gender

focal point at the highest level of decision-making. Consequently, the proposed GDC

is now replaced with a Gender Senate Standing Committee which reports to the

Senate/Council through the Vice-Chancellor.

The ADEA Toolkit puts forward a number of suggestions on increasing female

participation in decision-making the primary gateway to promoting gender-balanced

organizational culture and practices. The GSSC needs to liaise with the Gender

Studies Institute (see below) to build a critical mass of female and male gender-

sensitive personnel to place in strategic positions in policy-setting and decision-

making. Qualitative research methods (interviews and focus groups) could be

deployed to determine the psychological, socio-cultural and organizational barriers to

women participating in university governance.

5.2.1.2. The Gender Studies Institute: The GSI is the main organ for creating a gender-friendly learning, research and teaching environment including promoting gender as a

cross-cultural theme and developing academic programmes in gender, capacity

building in gender sensitization and mainstreaming, coordinating advocacy efforts

within the University and serving as a resource centre for government and non-

government sectors. However, as shown in Fig. 2, there is also a Gender Advocacy,

which may cause overlap and duplication of functions.

Three critical intervention areas worth mentioning from both the UDEA Toolkit and

the EDF Gender Mainstreaming Manual (2006) in relation to learning, training and

research cover gender sensitization, gender analysis and curriculum development or

review. Gender training workshops/seminars/programmes must be tailored towards

getting participants to dig deep within their psyches to explore, interrogate, challenge

and change socially learned gender-biased attitudes and beliefs in public and private

spheres. Capacity building in gender mainstreaming must go beyond conceptual

issues to the transmission of professional skills gender-friendly research methodology

and methods, in gender analysis and gender-responsive budgeting (This will be

discussed in more detail in Section 4 below. See Appendix A for an overview of


13gender-budgeting tools proposed by Diane Elson and outlined in Budlinder and

Sharp, 1998).

Finally, concerted efforts should be made to identify remove male-bias inherent in

learning styles and all University curricula. Central to this is the insistence on the use

of gender-inclusive language for example labour power is preferable to the

manpower used in the Gender Policy (Section 2c.)

5.2.1.3. Student Union Government: The University is to ensure compliance by the SUG with all Gender Policy guidelines particularly with respect to the participation and

representation of females in decision-making. The Policy requires that at least 30% of

all executive and legislative positions in the SUG, it committees and all other student

groups are occupied by women.

The 30% quota applies to the Universitys overall affirmative action policy and is

consistent with CEDAW and NPW specifications but falls short of the 35% required

in the National Gender Policy. The lapse provides adequate grounds for policy

review.

5.2.1.4. University Committees: All ad-hoc and standing committees are to exhibit gender equity in membership and structure. This means they are to uphold the principle of

equal opportunity in recruitment, admissions, representation and voice. It includes

search committees. Of particular importance are the three committees set up to

oversee gender issues namely: Sexual Harassment Committee, Gender Advocacy

Committee and Gender and Diversity Grievance Committees which are supposed to

be established in all University Faculties, Institutes and Centres consisting of

members from each department not below the rank of Senior Lecturer. They are to

handle all grievance matters relating to gender discrimination except sexual matters

which are referred to the Sexual Harassment Committee for onward referral to the

GSSC.

Once conspicuous omission with respect to sexual harassment and other grievance

procedures outlined in the Policy, is the exclusion of any discussion on gender-based

violence as highlighted under the Toolkit guidelines (no. 8). This is particularly

significant given the prevalence of violence against women and girls, which is also

and internationally acknowledged phenomenon. This led the United Nations

Committee on the Status of Women to devote its 2007 session to the elimination of

violence against women and girls. Since the Gender Policy objectives seek to

establish a safe, gender-friendly environment the silence on gender-based violence

needs to be broken.


14

The Vice-

Chancellor

Registry & MIS

Department

University

Committees Sexual Harassment Com.

Gender & Diversity

Grievance Committees

Gender Advocacy Com.

All Committees

Student Union

Government

(SUG)

Administrative

Organs &

Procedures Training & Development

Welfare, housing etc.

Recruitment/admissions

Health Services

The Gender

Studies Institute

The Governing

Council

Gender

Senate

Standing

Committee

Fig. 2

The University of Jos Gender Management System


15

5.2.1.5. The Registry and Main Information Systems (MIS) Department: These are the two organs charged with generating and disseminating gender disaggregated data

on the gender composition of all faculties, departments and committees, identifying

gender gaps and maintaining a gender disaggregated database.

The Toolkit emphasizes the need for gender disaggregated data to be all-

encompassing. It must go beyond issues of gender composition to cover tangible and

non-tangible resource allocation to men and women to ensure not just equality of

opportunity but also equality of outcomes i.e. equity. For instance, womens work in

the unpaid care economy where they care for the family, the sick and elderly often

takes a heavy toll on their ability to take advantage of opportunities in public spaces.

There is a need to deploy both qualitative as well as quantitative methods to reflect

the gender disparities and underlying issues that create and perpetuate them. Such

data will provide vital information on the nature and amount of intervention strategies

required for gender balance.

5.2.1.6. The Vice-Chancellor and the Governing Council: The GSSC reports to the Senate and the Council through the Vice-Chancellor. It is important that Principal

Officers of the University, the Senate and the Council are gender-balanced in

composition. This is yet to be a reality in the University; remarkably despite the

existence of a Gender Policy that states a commitment to gender equity among

Principal Officers in Section 7.8, none of them is female.

As noted above a critical mass of gender-sensitized persons is required at the highest

decision-making levels if change in the gender archaeology of institutions is to take

place (Goetz, 1997). This is not about sprinkling a few token women in high

positions, but a general culture of building the capacity of both women and men to

imbibe and practice the principle of gender equality and equity for sustainable

change.

5.2.1.7. Administrative Organs & Procedures: The Gender Policy impinges on all administrative processes, particularly those dealing with recruitment, appointments,

training and staff development, welfare, housing and accommodation and health

service delivery. The intention is to ensure that gender perspectives are mainstreamed

into critical focal areas such as:

Strategic Planning

Grievance Procedures

Publications

Gender Sensitization and Sensitivity

Affirmative Action

HIV/AIDS and gender-specific health services

Support services for womens reproductive roles (e.g. maternity leave).


16

6. Critical Premises for Policy Review

The University of Jos Gender Policy is a laudable step in the direction of social change for

gender equality and equity. If implemented according to the spirit of its designers, and along the

Toolkit policy and system guidelines it would go a long way in impacting on the culture and

development of the catchment area and the society at large. Nevertheless, there are some

fundamental premises for Policy review to increase its efficacy. For instance, areas of repetition

and overlap exist in the Policy such as in the duplication of organs and responsibilities which

need to be specified more clearly to ensure a coordinated approach to gender mainstreaming

efforts. For instance, the roles of the Registry and the MIS in gender disaggregated data

generation, storage and retrieval are not clearly delineated.

The Policy should be reviewed in line with the provisions of the 2006 National Gender Policy,

most notably its specification of 35% affirmative action. Lovenduski (2001:744) contends that a

critical mass of 15% - 40% can turn a skewed minority into a tilted minority that is able to form

alliances and act as a coherent force to affect the dominant culture of their institution and in a

position to perform critical acts [] necessary to the feminisation of political institutions.

This is the essence of affirmative action policy.

The UNIJOS Gender Policy does not address the use of gender-inclusive language as an agent

for effectuating social change. Both the ADEA Toolkit and the Gender Mainstreaming Manual

in Education and Employment of the European Training Foundation underscore the critical role

of gender-inclusive language as a tool for promoting gender equality. Sadar (2008:8) asserts that,

Behaviour acquired in society is the classic definition of culture and language is the cultural

tool par excellence. Consequently, he alludes to a quantitative relationship between language

and change implying that language not only causes action but also constitutes action. The way

we use language is an action in itself. Equally significant, the Policy does not demonstrate

concern over the role of poverty in creating and/or perpetuating gender disparities and bias.

Consequently, it does not specify gender-specific pro-poor programmes to alleviate student

poverty, particularly of females who are more vulnerable to sexual coercion and intimidation.

Finally, to demonstrate its firm commitment to a safe and supportive environment the Policy

must be reviewed to include provision for disciplinary and enforcement measures that depict

zero tolerance for all manifestations of physical and non-physical gender-based violence. This

includes providing a safe haven for females experience violence beyond the confines of the

University environment.

7. Conclusion: Beyond Rhetoric to Bridging Resistance

The essential task of implementing a gender policy is not merely to persuade people, groups or

corporate bodies about the need for change. It is not always possible to persuade all those with

deeply entrenched interests to change their views about gender roles and relationships. But

gender equality/equity protagonists can strategise to transform the operational context such that

opponents come to see it in their own interest to change position. To do this equal opportunity


17employers, and indeed equitable outcome employers, must deploy and allocate resources

responsively to match rhetoric with action.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ASSOCIATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN AFRICA (2006)

A Toolkit for Mainstreaming Gender in Higher Education in Africa prepared by the

Working Group on Higher Education. African Association of Universities: Accra, Ghana.

BUDLENDER, Debbie and SHARP, Rhonda with ALLEN, Kerri (1998). How to do a gender-

sensitive budget analysis: Contemporary research and practice. Commonwealth

Secretariat: UK.

COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT (1999). Gender-Disaggregated Beneficiary Assessment

of Public Service Delivery and Budget Priorities. UK.

FEDERAL MINISTRY OF WOMEN AFFAIRS (2006) The National Gender Policy.

EUROPEAN TRAINING FOUNDATION (2006) Gender Mainstreaming in Education and

Employment. European Communications Unit: Italy.

GOETZ, Anne-Marie (ed. 1997). Getting Institutions Right for Women in Development. Zed

Books: London and New York.

LOVENDUSKI, Joni (2001). Women and Politics: Minority Representation or Critical Mass

in Parliamentary Affairs. Pp. 743-758. No. 54.

LEO-RHYNIE, Elsa (1999) Gender Mainstreaming in Education. A Reference Manual for

Government and Other Stakeholder. The Commonwealth Secretariat: UK.

PARA-MALLAM, O. J (2007) Nigerian Women Speak. A Gender Analysis of Government

Policy on Women. Verlag Dr. Mller: Germany, 2007.

SARDAR, Ziauddin (2008) The Language of Equality. A Discussion Paper. Equality and Human

Rights Commission: Manchester, UK.

THE UNIVERSITY OF JOS Gender Policy.


18End notes

1 The Toolkit was prepared by the Working Group on Higher Education of the Association for the Development of

Education in Africa and published by the Association of African Universities 2 The JCPC consists of a cross-section of senior members of staff of the University of Jos

3 The Senate is the highest policy making body of the University responsible for deciding on general policy

directives and academic programmes and issues. The Governing Council is the highest decision-making authority in

that it is responsible for ratifying the decisions made by the Senate. 4 It was funded by the Work Program Budget of the WGHE and a Ford Foundation grant to the AAU.

5 Other countries selected include Nigeria (UI), Uganda (Makere University), Tanzania (University of Dar es

Salaam), Zimbabwe (NUST) and Ghana (Ho Polytechnic). 6 Article 1 of the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) defines

discrimination against women as, any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the

effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their

marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political,

economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field. 7 The Vice-Chancellor, Administrative and Academic Deputy Vice-Chancellors, Librarian, Bursar and Registrar.

Documents

Gender Mainstreaming in Higher Education UNIJOS-libre