Recent information published in the professional

Transcription

1 The Role of Women in Dental Education: Monitoring the Pipeline to Leadership Michael J. Reed, B.D.S., Ph.D.; Ann Marie Corry, M.A.; Ying W. Liu, Ph.D. Abstract: The purpose of this study was to analyze data collected by the American Dental Association and the American Dental Education Association over the past two decades relating to changes in the number of women active in dental education and dental practice. The concept of a pipeline of women in dentistry was explored by analyzing predoctoral, postdoctoral, dental practice, and dental education domains for the inclusion of women. Statistical analyses show that there has been a consistent and progressive increase in the number of women in all stages of the pipeline. Over the past two decades, the number of female students attending and graduating from dental school has steadily increased. In , 23.7 percent of all predoctoral students were women; in , 45.1 percent were women. Similarly, in 1999, the graduating class was 35.3 percent women; in 2009, it was 46.1 percent women. In the postdoctoral domain, in 1996, 29.9 percent of all residents were women; in 2010, this had increased to 39.0 percent. In dental practice, the number of actively licensed women dentists in 1999 was 15.3 percent of the workforce; in 2010, this percentage had grown to 24.0 percent. In dental education, the number of women clinical faculty members has gradually increased from 669 in to 902 in Until 2000, there had been only two women deans and very few associate/assistant deans, with only sixteen in In 2000, major changes began with three women deans and seventy-two women associate/assistant deans. In , there were 111 associate/assistant women deans and twelve women deans. These data show a progressive increase in the presence of women in all domains of dentistry, especially in leadership positions in dental education. Dr. Reed is Dean Emeritus and Professor, Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-Kansas City; Ms. Corry is Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-Kansas City; and Dr. Liu is Clinical Assistant Professor, Office of Research and Graduate Studies, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-Kansas City. Direct correspondence and requests for reprints to Dr. Michael J. Reed, Department of Oral Biology, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-Kansas City, 650 E. 25 th Street, Kansas City, MO 64108; phone; fax; reedm@umkc.edu. Keywords: dentists, women dentists, women in dental education, dental students, faculty development, dental schools, academic careers, leadership Submitted for publication 8/25/11; accepted 12/12/11 Recent information published in the professional and lay media has indicated some significant changes in the number and percentage of women students at all levels of higher education and, subsequently, in the workforce in general. Of particular interest relating to the broader representation of women students in higher education was an article published in The Chronicle of Higher Education 1 reporting on a recent study released by the U.S. Department of Education. In essence, women account for a significantly large proportion of higher education enrollments, and this number will increase within the next decade. By 2019, women will account for 59 percent of total undergraduate enrollment and 61 percent of postbaccalaureate enrollment at the nation s colleges and universities. 1 A special report in Time magazine 2 in 2009 documented significant increases in numbers of women in the workforce over the last decade or so, leading to near numerical parity in the workforce. More women than previously are primary breadwinners in their families (almost 40 percent) and are providing essential income for the family s bottom line. The Shriver report 3 notes that the phrase women s nation illustrates a fundamental change in American society. According to that report, women comprise half of the workers on employers payrolls. Though our article concentrates on data analysis based on a pipeline concept in dental education and practice, gender issues in academic medicine 4 and the United States as a whole 2,3 have created an awareness of a changing workforce environment as women move to a 50:50 ratio with men as job holders in the workplace. Recent articles have discussed the advancement of women in dental education in the United States in particular, and the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) continues to play a leadership role by placing the issue of the representation of women in dental education at the forefront as a critical issue for the future of dental education for both women and men. 5,6 The data analyzed for this article were presented in part at the Second and the Fourth ADEA International Women s Leadership Conferences. 7,8 Clearly, gender issues and issues relating to the role of women as dental professionals are ubiquitous, and, November 2012 Journal of Dental Education 1427

2 in many countries, the percentage of women in the dental profession is higher than that of men. 9 Other studies have addressed the gender trends in research, leadership, and dental professional organizations, 10 showing some gains in women s authorship in dental research publications, but female involvement in leadership in dental professional organizations remains limited. The purpose of this study was to analyze data collected by the American Dental Association and the American Dental Education Association over the past two decades relating to changes in the number of women active in dental education and dental practice. We have analyzed data, in some cases from the mid-1980s but mostly from the last two decades, relating to the increased representation of women in dentistry and dental education. A pipeline is hypothesized wherein increased numbers of women enter dental school, graduate from dental school, enter postdoctoral programs, enter practice, become faculty members, and become leaders as department chairs, directors of postdoctoral programs, assistant and associate deans, and, finally, deans. We did not follow the pipeline beyond dental school deanships; however, anecdotal information suggests that both women and men dental educators are moving into vice-provost and provost positions. Materials and Methods The following major U.S. data sources from the American Dental Association (ADA) and ADEA were evaluated in this study: the ADA s recruitment and retention reports for active licensed dentists all dentists, , 11 the ADA s recruitment and retention reports for active licensed dentists women dentists, , 11 the ADA s annual survey center reports on predoctoral education, ADEA s reports on U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 16,17 ADEA Center for Educational Policy and Research databases, 18 and ADEA s directories of institutional members and association officers The data were organized into six domains, and each domain was analyzed. The domains were I) predoctoral enrollment; II) dental school graduates; III) postdoctoral enrollment; IV) dental practice; V) faculty; and VI) administration. Data analysis was performed with Statistical Analysis System (SAS, version 9.1.3; SAS Inc., Cary, NC). The Poisson regression, based on count numbers used in collected data, was utilized to investigate the trend of female representation in predoctoral enrollment, dental school graduates, postdoctoral enrollment, dental practice, dental school faculty, and dental school administration. A proportional test was used to determine significance differences in the percentage of females in each domain between the earliest year and latest year in our collected data. In addition, a chi-square test was performed on the number of practicing dentists by age group. Results Domain I: predoctoral enrollment. Dental school enrollment data from through academic year are shown in Table 1. The increase in the number of female predoctoral enrollees was statistically significant (p<0.0001), and the proportion of females in was significantly higher than in (p<0.0001). In the analysis Table 1. U.S. first-time, first-year dental student enrollment by gender, selected academic years ,588 15, % 4, % ,951 10, % 5, % ,926 10, % 6, % ,349 10, % 6, % ,978 10, % 7, % ,308 10, % 8, % ,052 10, % 9, % Note: Due to the significant growth in women dental students, fifteen of fifty-eight dental schools had 51 percent or more women firsttime enrollees in Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Source: González G, Anderson E, Novak KF, Valachovic RW. U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2009 entering class. At: Accessed: July 28, Journal of Dental Education Volume 76, Number 11

3 presented in this article, only this one area (predoctoral enrollment) is approaching female to male numerical parity, but this is an essential step as we look forward to the increased role of women in our profession. Domain II: dental school graduates. The number of dental school graduates by gender over the time period 1999 to 2009 is shown in Table 2. The increase in the number of female graduates from dental schools was statistically significant (p<0.0001), and the proportion of female graduates in 2009 was significantly higher than in 1999 (p<0.0001). Domain III: postdoctoral enrollment. Additional analysis of postdoctoral enrollment from through is shown in Table 3. Statistical analysis showed the increase in number of female postdoctoral enrollment from academic year to academic year was significant (p<0.0001), and the percentage of female postdoctoral enrollment in is significantly higher than that in academic year (p<0.0001). It is clear from further review of data from Domains I, II, and III (Tables 1, 2, and 3) that the overall combined increases in students enrolled in predoctoral programs and graduating and enrolling in postdoctoral programs over the past decade are due to increases in the number of female students, with the number of male students remaining steady over this time. Table 2. U.S. dental school graduates by gender, selected academic years ,095 2, % 1, % ,349 2, % 1, % ,478 2, % 1, % ,796 2, % 2, % ,873 2, % 2, % Note: Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Sources: ADA Council on Dental Education. Annual reports on dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; ADA. Surveys of predoctoral dental education institutions. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; ADA Survey Center. Survey of predoctoral dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; ADA Survey Center. Surveys of dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; Okwuje I, et al. U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2008 entering class. J Dent Educ 2010;74(8):902-25; Gonzales G, et al. U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2009 entering class. At: publications/pages/2009-applicants-and-enrollees.aspx. Accessed: July 28, 2011; and Personal communication with Dr. Laura Siaya, American Dental Education Association, June 15, Table 3. U.S. postdoctoral enrollment by gender, selected academic years ,633 3, % 1, % ,266 3, % 1, % ,257 3, % 1, % ,554 3, % 2, % ,748 3, % 2, % ,095 3, % 2, % Increase from to , Note: Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Sources: ADA Council on Dental Education. Annual reports on dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; ADA. Surveys of predoctoral dental education institutions. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; ADA Survey Center. Survey of predoctoral dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; ADA Survey Center. Surveys of dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, ; Okwuje I, et al. U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2008 entering class. J Dent Educ 2010;74(8):902-25; Gonzales G, et al. U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2009 entering class. At: publications/pages/2009-applicants-and-enrollees.aspx. Accessed: July 28, 2011; and Personal communication with Dr. Laura Siaya, American Dental Education Association, June 15, November 2012 Journal of Dental Education 1429

4 Domain IV: dental practice. From 1999 to 2010, there was a net increase of 21,301 in the number of active licensed dentists in the United States. Of these, only 1,806 were male, and 19,495 were female (Table 4). The total number of dental graduates over the same period of nine years was 45,056; on average each year, 41.7 percent (18,788) were female, and 58.2 percent (26,222) were male. What this appears to show is that the great majority of male graduates replace male dentists who have ceased to practice, whereas the new female dentists have added substantially to their number over the same time period. Statistical analysis showed the increase in the number of female dental practitioners from 1999 to 2010 was significant (p<0.0001), and the percentage of female dental practitioners in 2010 is significantly higher than in 1999 (p<0.0001). Analysis of the age distribution of active licensed dentists between 1999 and 2010 is shown in Table 5. Changes in the number of active dentists in each age group are shown together with the percentage within each age group. Between 1999 and 2010, the highest age group went from forty to forty-nine (31.8 percent) to fifty to fifty-nine (26.7 percent). Table 6 shows the age distribution of active licensed dentists in 2005, 2008, and 2010 by gender. The first year that gender distribution was made available was Table 7 shows the over age fifty and less than age fifty number of dentists for the years 1999, 2005, and This illustrates the increase of female dentists in the under-fifty age group, whereas there is a decrease in the number of males in the under-fifty age group. The chi-square test showed that the number of practicing dentists is not equally distributed among each age group (p<0.001), and more than 50 percent of practicing dentists were from forty to fifty-nine years of age in 1999 (Table 5). Similarly, the dentists are unequally distributed among all age groups at Table 4. Active licensed dentists in the United States, selected years , , % 25, % , , % 29, % , , % 36, % , , % 41, % , , % 45, % Increase from 1999 to ,301 1,806 19,495 Note: Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Source: ADA Survey Center. Recruitment and retention for all dentists, women dentists, Chicago: American Dental Association, Table 5. Age distribution of active licensed dentists in the United States, selected years Age Range Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage No date of birth 12, % 13, % 14, % 11, % 12, % % % % % % , % 5, % 6, % 6, % 7, % , % 19, % 23, % 29, % 33, % , % 45, % 50, % 51, % 50, % , % 50, % 44, % 40, % 39, % , % 29, % 31, % 36, % 36, % , % 7, % 6, % 6, % 6, % Total 166, , , , ,898 Note: Gender distribution by age group was made available from 2005 forward; see Table 6. Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Source: ADA Survey Center. Recruitment and retention for all dentists, women dentists, Chicago: American Dental Association, Journal of Dental Education Volume 76, Number 11

5 overall, female only, and male only (p<0.0001). It is worth noticing that in the sixty to sixty-nine age group, females only accounted for 3.1 percent of total female dentists in 2008, controlling for the number of male dentists, which is significantly lower than the percentage for the corresponding male group (19.5 percent; p<0.0001). For age group thirty to thirtynine, in 2008 the percentage of female dentists (35.2 Table 6. Age distribution of active licensed dentists in the United States by gender, 2005, 2008, 2010 Age Range Total Percentage of 2005 No DOB 14, % 9, % 4, % % % 13 <0.1% , % 5, % % , % 22, % % , % 45, % 5, % , % 33, % 11, % , % 20, % 11, % , % 3, % 2, % Total 177, , % 36, % 2008 No DOB 11, % 7, % 3, % % % 12 <0.1% , % 6, % % , % 27, % 1, % , % 44, % 7, % , % 28, % 11, % , % 23, % 13, % , % 3, % 3, % Total 183, , % 41, % 2010 No DOB 12, % 8, % 4, % % % 17 <0.1% , % 7, % % , % 31, % 1, % , % 41, % 9, % , % 27, % 12, % , % 22, % 13, % , % 3, % 3, % Total 187, , % 45, % DOB=date of birth Note: Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Source: ADA Survey Center. Recruitment and retention for all dentists, women dentists, Chicago: American Dental Association, Table 7. Age distribution of active licensed dentists in the United States, 1999, 2005, All over 50 64,485 80,816 91,246 All under 50 89,495 82,768 82,175 Age distribution by gender Over 50 74,439 6,377 80,917 10,329 Under 50 57,650 25,118 52,582 29,593 Source: ADA Survey Center. Recruitment and retention for all dentists, women dentists, Chicago: American Dental Association, November 2012 Journal of Dental Education 1431

6 percent) was significantly higher than that of the male group (16.8 percent; p<0.0001). A similar situation is evident for the year 2010 (Table 6). Domain V: Faculty. The gender distribution for all full-time clinical faculty members for to in dental education is shown in Table 8. Full-time clinical faculty members represent a welldefined stable majority of the dental faculties and a consistent data point. Despite the overall decrease in total full-time clinical faculty members over the time period considered, this trend was reflected only in the male pool. The female pool showed a continuous increase in total numbers and a significant increase in the percentage of female faculty members over the ten-year period evaluated (p<0.0001). Domain VI: Administrators. The count for the combined numbers of dental school department chairs and postdoctoral program directors by gender over a fifteen-year period is shown in Table 9. The data show that the number of females in these categories significantly increased from thirty-nine (7 percent) to 101 (19 percent) over the fifteen years examined (p<0.0001). The male chairs and direc- tors remained in the majority, but their percentage dropped from 93 percent in to 81 percent in as their number decreased. The distribution by gender of dental school assistant and associate deans over the past two decades is shown in Table 10. In academic year , there were sixteen (7 percent) female assistant/associate deans. In academic year , the number of female assistant/associate deans was seventy-two (24 percent), and in academic year , 111 (32 percent) of dental school assistant/associate deans were female. Over this twenty-year period, the total number of assistant/associate deans has significantly increased from 241 to 353: males from 225 to 242 and females from sixteen to 111 (p<0.0001). In 1980, in the sixty U.S. dental schools, there were two female deans. Prior to 1980, there had been no female dental deans. In , there was one female dean (1.8 percent), and in , there were twelve female deans in sixty-one dental schools (19.6 percent), as shown in Table 11. The number of female deans in dental schools has significantly increased (p=0.0003) from to Table 8. Full-time clinical dental faculty members in the United States by gender, selected academic years ,398 2, % % ,263 2, % % ,357 2, % % ,196 2, % % Note: Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Total numbers include those who did not indicate gender. Sources: AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; and ADEA. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Dental Education Association, Table 9. U.S. dental school department chairs and postdoctoral directors by gender, selected academic years % 39 7% % 56 10% % 86 14% % % Sources: AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; and ADEA. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Dental Education Association, Journal of Dental Education Volume 76, Number 11

7 Table 10. U.S. dental school assistant and associate deans by gender, selected academic years % 16 7% % 47 19% % 72 24% % 71 22% % % Sources: AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; and ADEA. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Dental Education Association, Table 11. U.S. dental school deans by gender, selected academic years Total Schools Number Percentage Number Percentage % 1 1.8% % % 3 6.0% % % % % Note: Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding. Sources: AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; AADS. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, ; and ADEA. Directory of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Dental Education Association, Discussion This study was designed around a logical sequence of the number and percentage of women in various career stages since those stages represent leadership paths of women in dental education. We chose to analyze data using six domains representing stages in the pipeline of women s leadership in dental education. Overall, each of the domains shows significant increases in the number and percentage of women over the periods analyzed. Domain I (Table 1) shows that the total enrollment of women dental students in the United States from 1984 to 2010 has risen significantly in number and percentage, almost doubling over the time period. The class of first-time, first-year enrollees in 2009 was 45 percent women with fifteen of the fifty-eight U.S. dental schools reporting 51 percent or more first-time women enrollees. 20 Although overall population data in the United States and worldwide show a female to male ratio of approximately 50:50, there are several countries in which the number of female dentists is well over 50 percent. 9 Presentations at the Fourth ADEA International Women s Leadership Conference in 2011 reported that 70 percent of practicing dentists in Russia were women 23 and that two-thirds of dentists in Bulgaria were female. 24 In Finland, women make up 69 percent of the dental workforce, 9 while the Puerto Rico School of Dental Medicine reported that 73 percent of its total number of dental students enrolled in 2009 were women. 25 The data for U.S. dental school graduates by gender (Table 2) from 1999 to 2009 show significant increases in the number and percentage of women. The number of women had increased by 805 from 1999 to 2009, whereas the number of male graduates remained stable for that period. This is the same pattern, not unexpectedly, as seen with the predoctoral enrollment data. The next data set (Table 3) analyzed information on U.S. postdoctoral dental enrollment by gender. Both programs in general dentistry and specialty programs were included in these data and, November 2012 Journal of Dental Education 1433

8 again, over the period examined, the increase in the number and percentage of women enrollees was significant. The total increase in annual enrollment over the period examined was 1,462, of which 995 enrollees (68 percent) were women. If we examine the three domains related to U.S. predoctoral graduates and postdoctoral enrollment, it is clear that the number of males in each domain has remained stable, whereas the number of females in each has increased significantly over the periods examined. The overall total increase in these three domains can be accounted for by the significant increase in women in each. Further, a report on new faculty members in dental schools for a five-year period ( ) 26 showed that approximately percent were recruited from advanced education programs, 7 percent from new graduates, and 53 percent from private practice. Clearly, the increases for Domains I, II, and III, showing significant increases in women in each domain, enhance the possibility for an increase in the recruitment of female faculty members, thus increasing the numbers of women in the pipeline to leadership. Fifty-three percent of new faculty members in the period were recruited from private practice, 26 so the percentage of women among actively licensed dentists is relevant to that pool of potential faculty members. The total increase in the number of actively licensed dentists (Domain IV) between 1999 and 2010 was 21,301 (Tables 4 through 7), despite the fact that over 45,000 new dentists graduated in this period. The net increase in male dentists, actively licensed, for those years was 1,806, indicating that a majority of the male graduates (2,622 average per year) replaced male dentists who had ceased to practice due to retirement or other reasons. This is probably related to the Baby Boomer effect that is likely to affect the demographics of the practicing community (and academia) for the next two decades. In fact, if little else changes over the next decade, in , there will be about 208,000 active dentists, 145,000 of whom will be male and 65,000 of whom will be female. s will then be 45 percent of actively licensed dentists. Since not many Baby Boomer females became actively licensed dentists, there are few female dentists leaving practice at the front end of the retirement process of that age group. However, the increase in the number of female enrollees and graduates over the past decade has begun to change the demographics of the practicing community. Table 5 shows the age distribution of all actively practicing dentists in selected years from 1999 to Between 1999 and 2010, the group with the largest number of dentists went from the forty to forty-nine age group (53,041; 31.8 percent) to the fifty to fifty-nine age group (50,396; 26.7 percent). Also of note over the same period, the number in the sixty to sixty-nine age group increased from 18,134 (10.9 percent) to 33,261 (17.7 percent), another reflection of the Baby Boomer effect. Beginning in 2005, age distribution data by gender became available from the ADA (Table 6). These data consistently show a far greater percentage of female dentists in the thirty to thirty-nine and forty to forty-nine age groups than the same age groups for male dentists. However, significantly lower percentages of female dentists were found in the fifty to fifty-nine and sixty to sixty-nine age groups, again reflecting the Baby Boomer effect on the number of male dentists and limited effect on the number of actively practicing female dentists. Table 7 shows a summary of the age distribution over and under fifty years of age for all actively licensed dentists in 1999, 2005, and 2010 and also by gender in 2005 and Analysis of Domain IV from the perspective of the leadership pipeline and the fact that over 50 percent of recruited faculty members come from dental practice are compelling reasons for emphasizing the recruitment of female dental faculty members from private practice. Their numbers are clearly increasing in the practice domain, and they represent an increasing number of potential clinical faculty members. Table 8 shows the numbers of all full-time clinical faculty members by gender in selected years from to (Domain V). As a group, clinical full-time faculty members represent the largest faculty group in a dental school and are well defined for data collection. Statistical analysis of these data revealed a significant increase in the percentage of female faculty members from to Again, the data presented from analysis of Domain IV augur well for future recruitment of female clinical faculty members as the number of women in dental practice continues to increase. Reviewing the leadership pipeline through the first five domains and determining that the two most frequent pathways into dental faculty positions are via postdoctoral programs and/or dental practice, we analyzed data in Domain VI, which looks at the gender distribution in senior faculty leadership positions in schools of dentistry. Table 9 shows the number and gender distribution of department chairs and postdoctoral program directors for selected years in 1434 Journal of Dental Education Volume 76, Number 11

9 the last decade and a half. The increase in the number and percentage of women is significant. In addition, a similar analysis was done on the gender distribution in selected years from to of dental school assistant and associate deans (Table 10). Again, the increases in the number and percentage of women in these senior leadership positions were significant. The final table in this domain (Table 11) shows the gender distribution for deans, the most senior leadership position in dental schools. Here, a similar pattern is seen as with the other leadership positions: a significant increase in the number and percentage of women over the last two decades. At this stage in our research, we believe that the data support the concept of a pipeline to leadership for women in dental education. The opportunities are present for women to follow a logical series of steps through leadership positions to whatever level they wish to pursue. Individual female dentists will make individual decisions about their professional goals, but the opportunities to move into leadership positions are developed through increased knowledge and experience increasingly available to women as well as men. Further analysis of Domains I, II, and IV suggests probable changes in the demographics of the dental profession over the next two decades. The increase in the number and percentage of women enrollees in and graduates from dental school will soon be at least 50 percent across the United States, and there is no indication that this level will be the maximum for female enrollment and graduation. This possibility and the Baby Boomer effect on the profession as a whole could lead to a sea change in the demographics of our profession, such that over the next two decades women could gradually become at least 50 percent of the actively practicing community. The gender demographics of dental education could also change as more women may choose to pursue academic careers as the pipeline increases in diameter. Another factor in this possible sea change is the opening of new dental schools over the past decade and the likelihood that others will open in the future. It is very likely that these schools will have classes that will be 50 percent or more women, especially as the percentage of women attending college 1 has risen to over 50 percent and is predicted to rise to 61 percent by Although this article has described a positive set of steps related to the greater inclusion of women in dentistry and dental education and the growth of women in leadership roles in dental education, there are still gender issues to be resolved in the academic environment. 27 These issues are similar to those reported for academic medicine 4 and include matters relating to the academic environment, faculty/professional development, promotion and tenure, salary, evaluation, mentoring, and the ability of men to better mentor women. Conclusions In dentistry and dental education, changes in gender demographics at the beginning of the pipeline have occurred mainly over the last two decades, with parity of men and women in predoctoral enrollment and graduates from dental school very near to being reached. In addition, the numbers of women in leadership roles in dental education have increased significantly over the past two decades. The pipeline concept documented in this article shows the potential for both women and men to progress in their careers if they seek leadership positions as their goal. Acknowledgments Special thanks to Debbie Gorski and Marisol Barajas at the ADA and Dr. Laura Siaya at ADEA for their assistance in obtaining the databases analyzed for this study. Parts of the data reported in this article were presented at the Fourth ADEA International Women s Leadership Conference: Global Health Through Women s Leadership, Salvador, Brazil, September 5 8, REFERENCES 1. Schmidt P. Men s share of college enrollments will continue to dwindle, federal report says. Chronicle of Higher Education. At: Accessed: August 4, Gibbs N. What women want now (special report: the state of the American woman). Time 2009;174(16):24,passim. 3. Podesta JD. The Shriver report: a study by Maria Shriver and the Center for American Progress. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, Bickel J, Wara D, Atkinson BF, Cohen LS, Dunn M, Hostler S. Increasing women s leadership in academic medicine: report of the AAMC Project Implementation Committee. Acad Med 2002;77(10): Sinkford JC, Valachovic RW, Harrison S. Advancement of women in dental education: trends and strategies. J Dent Educ 2003;67(1): Sinkford JC, Harrison S, Brunson WD, Valachovic RW. Advancement of women in dental education: expanding opportunities, enriching the pool. J Dent Educ 2011;75(5): November 2012 Journal of Dental Education 1435

10 7. Reed MJ. Visioning panel: advancing and creating leadership opportunities for women. J Dent Educ 2004;68(7 Suppl): Reed MJ, Corry AM. The role of women in dental education: monitoring the pipeline to leadership. Abstract O6. J Dent Educ 2011;75(3 Suppl):S Kravitz AS, Treasure ET. Manual of dental practice. Version 4.1. Brussels: Council of European Dentists, Yuan JC, Lee DJ, Kongkiatkamon S, Ross S, Prasad S, Koerber A, Sukotjo C. Gender trends in dental leadership and academics: a twenty-two year observation. J Dent Educ 2010;74(4): American Dental Association, Survey Center. Recruitment and retention for all dentists, women dentists, Chicago: American Dental Association, American Dental Association, Council on Dental Education. Annual reports on dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, American Dental Association. Surveys of predoctoral dental education institutions. Chicago: American Dental Association, American Dental Association, Survey Center. Surveys of predoctoral dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, American Dental Association, Survey Center. Surveys of dental education. Chicago: American Dental Association, Okwuje I, Jones G, Anderson E, Valachovic RW. U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2008 entering class. J Dent Educ 2010;74(8): González G, Anderson E, Novak KF, Valachovic RW. U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2009 entering class. At: Accessed: July 28, Personal communication with Dr. Laura Siaya, Center for Educational Policy and Research, American Dental Education Association, June 15, American Association of Dental Schools. Directories of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, American Association of Dental Schools. Directories of association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, American Association of Dental Schools. Directories of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Association of Dental Schools, American Dental Education Association. Directories of institutional members and association officers. Washington, DC: American Dental Education Association, Maximovskaya L. Russian women in dental education. Abstract O17. J Dent Educ 2011;75(3 Suppl):S Katrova L. Gender impacts on the changing portrait of the dental profession in Bulgaria. Abstract O18. J Dent Educ 2011;75(3 Suppl):S Rivera YM, Dávila AL. Profile of women dentists in Puerto Rico. Abstract O15. J Dent Educ 2011;75(3 Suppl):S Chmar JE, Weaver RG, Valachovic RW. Dental school vacant budgeted faculty positions, academic years and J Dent Educ 2008;72(3): Nesbitt PE, Inglehart MR, Sinkford JC. Work environment perceptions of full-time dental educators: does gender matter? J Dent Educ 2003;67(8): Journal of Dental Education Volume 76, Number 11