Why Does Women's Underrepresentation Transpire in the Leadership of Indonesian State Islamic Universities?

: Underrepresentation of women still occurs in the top-level management of higher education, including in State Islamic Higher Education (SIHE/PTKIN) in Indonesia, a country with the largest Muslim population in the world. This study aims to reveal the portrait of women's underrepresentation in the top-level management of SIHE, the determinant factors that cause the underrepresentation of women in the top-level management of SIHE, and the policies that need to be taken in response to the underrepresentation of women in top-level management of SIHE. A qualitative approach was chosen for this study by collecting data using interviews and document reviews. It objectively shows the inequality between women and men in top-level management. Men still dominate strategic positions such as rector, vice-rector, and dean. This inequity is caused by qualification barriers of female lecturers, patriarchal culture, and gender-biased religious understanding. This inequity has an impact on the slow realization of gender-responsive campuses. Thus, through the Ministry of Religious Affairs, the Government must make affirmative policies to accelerate women's representation at the management level of SIHE so that more women occupy the positions of rector, vice-rector, and dean.


INTRODUCTION
The composition of men and women in higher education management still experiences inequality.Men predominate in top management positions (Hannum et al., 2017).The higher the level of position, the smaller the proportion of women (Aisy & Aisy, 2023;Hidayah & Munastiwi, 2019).Universities in Europe and the United States also exhibit such gender inequality.In Europe, only 21 per cent of women become Chancellors/Presidents/Vice Presidents of higher education institutions, while in America, the number reaches 30 per cent (O'Connor, 2019).The same inequality also occurs in South Asian countries (Morley & Crossouard, 2015) and Southeast Asian countries such as Vietnam (Nguyen, 2013), Egypt (Mousa, 2021), and Saudi Arabia (Alsubaie & Jones, 2017).In Indonesia, there are 58 State Islamic Higher Education (SIHE/PTKIN) (Kementerian Agama Republik Indonesia, 2022).However, the candidates for Rector/Chairperson of 2019-2022 were 283 male candidates (87.62%), while only 40 female candidates (12.38%) and only eight institutions (13.80 per cent) were led by women (Author Compilation, 2022).This data indicates that female lecturers are still marginalized in the management structure of higher education in various countries.
Studies of the underrepresentation of women in higher education management levels fall into three categories.First, a study that examines differences in access and the proportion of women in senior management positions in higher education institutions (Alsubaie & Jones, 2017;Chance, 2021;Fitzgerald, 2020;Hashim et al., 2006), including how policies and interventions reduce tension between men and women (Morley & Crossouard, 2015;O'Connor, 2019).Second, studying the perceptions of male and female university leaders towards representation, status, and the obstacles experienced by female leaders (Mousa, 2021;Nguyen, 2013), as well as how the construction of various identities, identity interactions, and the influence of broader social discourse about gender and leadership in women's positions (Zhao & Jones, 2017).Third, studies capture the career paths of women leaders and their experiences and achievements as women leaders (Carvalho & Diogo, 2018;Haidar, 2018;Hannum et al., 2017).These studies have not identified religious factors and government policies on the underrepresentation of women in higher education management and have yet to reveal the implications of this underrepresentation for gender-responsive campus life.
This study seeks to fill the space by describing the underrepresentation of women in SIHE management.This study wants to address three questions.First, what is the portrait of the underrepresentation of women in SIHE management?This question focuses on the map of female lecturers who occupy strategic management positions in higher education from 1951 to 2022.Second, why does the underrepresentation of women occur in SIHE?This question is related to the determinants that lead to the underrepresentation of women in SIHE management.Third, what policies need to be taken in response to the underrepresentation of women in SIHE management?These three questions will be addressed in the results and discussion of this study.
This study departs from three arguments.First, the underrepresentation of women, which has been going on for decades, needs to pay more attention to female lecturers' access to strategic positions in SIHE management.Second, there must have been determinant factors that led to the underrepresentation of women in SIHE management so that gender treatment and injustice continued for decades.Despite the increasing number of women in SIHE management, bureaucratic reforms and campus responsiveness discourse have remained unchanged.Third, the current government and university leaders must affirm to accelerate the increase in women's representation in SIHE management.

RESEARCH METHODS
This study used a qualitative design with a type of phenomenology.This study aims to reveal the views of SIHE lecturers on the underrepresentation of women in the top-level management of SIHE.Sources of information for this study were female and male lecturers.Their positions are rector, vice-rector, dean, head of the unit, and lecturer.With that position, they can provide the information based on the research focus.
The data were collected through desk reviews and interviews.A desk review was used to identify the name, gender, origin of higher education institution, and period of leadership of the rector/chairperson of SIHE.This desk review obtained some information related to the number of positions held by women, how long they have held the position of rector/chairperson of SIHE, and how many women will lead in 2022.Other documents reviewed were the Regulation of the Minister of Religious Affairs Number 68 of 2015 as amended to become Regulation of the Minister of Religion Affairs Number 17 of 2021 on Appointment and Dismissal of Rector/Chairperson of Religious Higher Education Organized by the Government, which regulates the appointment and dismissal of the rector/chairperson of the state religious education institution.Meanwhile, interviews with 11 informants, as mentioned above, were conducted to obtain information about the determinants of gender under-representation and their implications for gender-responsive campus life.The interview was conducted via video call and simultaneously recorded.This was done because the sources were spread across different provinces.
The research data was analyzed through three stages following Miles and Huberman (Miles & Huberman, 1994), which began with data reduction and display and ended with data verification.The three stages of analysis were intended to change the data to be more substantive and meaningful.This analysis stage resulted in an analytical understanding of the underrepresentation of women in the management of Indonesian State Islamic Higher Education.Data reduction was then carried out based on the research questions, followed by thematic sorting of the data collected.Data display in this article was done with tables, graphs, and interview excerpts.Comparison techniques and data contextualization were done through data verification as an analysis stage.Lastly, the data was returned to the social context to gain more meaningful information from the data itself.Although there has been an increase in the number of female rectors in the last ten years, the proportion of male and female rectors is unequal.Table 1 demonstrates that eight female lecturers served as rectors in 2022 (13.80%) compared to 50 men (86.20%).In the view of Nina Nurmila, Professor at UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, this number is still far below the UN Women's projection, which targets female leadership to reach 50% by 2030 (Asrori, 2020), as well as demonstrating the continued dominance of men in the top-level management of higher education (FB, 40 years)."Women in higher education institutions are still lagging due to the culture and structure which men still dominate," emphasized Musdah Mulia (2014), a professor and gender activist at UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Cultural norms are shifting, but "think leader, think male" remains true (Hannum et al., 2017;Morley, 2013).The Almanac of Higher Education released data that only 22% of all four-year university presidents were women, 40% of all academic section heads, and 43% of all senior administrators (Dunn et al., 2014).While female leaders in higher education institutions have increased slightly in several countries, women remain underrepresented in senior leadership internationally (Morley, 2013).Globally, the proportion of men and women in education management is five to one (Uwizeyimana & Mathevula, 2018).
The position of rector/chairperson of SIHE has implications for the proportion of leadership structures at the top level (Vice-Rector et al.Generally, the number of top and middle-level leaders in SIHE led by women is more significant than in universities led by men (Figure 1).The proportion of top and middle-level leaders at the eight women-led SIHEs reached an average of 21.26 per cent.In comparison, only 15.81% of the leaders at 50 SIHE administered by men were female.2019) and Aisy and Aisy (2023) that the higher the position level, the smaller the proportion of women.The increase in an academic career is not directly proportional to the increase in the representation of women in management structures (Machado-Taylor & ÖZKANLI, 2013).More women are placed in middle and lower management positions which are unpopular and less profitable in increasing their leadership positions (Carvalho & Diogo, 2018).This is known as stereotypical masculinities (Carvalho & Diogo, 2018;Coate & Howson, 2016;Nguyen, 2013).They perform simple tasks and make small policies, making their role and contribution insignificant.This proves the existence of vertical segregation between men and women by being over-represented in high-level positions and women in low-level positions (Sayer, 2011).Unsurprisingly, men gain more professional prestige and high social recognition than women (Carvalho & Diogo, 2018), while women require adequate recognition.

Factors Causing Underrepresentation of Women Leadership in State Islamic Higher Education Qualification Barriers of Female Lecturers
One of the reasons for the underrepresentation of women in SIHE leadership is constraints on the aspects of academic qualifications and positions.Regulation of the Minister of Religion Number 17 of 2021 Article 3 confirms that the requirements for candidates for rector/chairperson of SIHE are graduates of a doctoral program and have the available position of Professor for candidates for University Rectors and, at a minimum, Associate Professor for candidates for Rector of Institutes and Chairperson of Colleges.In the opinion of some informants, this condition prevented some female lecturers from participating in the contest of candidates for rector/chairperson.
"The demographic condition of female lecturers in terms of fulfilling administrative requirements, work performance, and being up to date in carrying out higher education three Dharmass (tri dharma) tends to be unbalanced with the demographics of male lecturers," said IW (45 years) a rector in Sumatra Island.
"Most female lecturers on campus do not meet the requirements, for example, the doctoral or professor requirements, which are indeed one of the requirements to become a rector," said MNH (44 years), a dean in East Java.
"Not many women meet administrative requirements compared to men," said FI (40 years), a lecturer in North Sulawesi.
In addition, the number of civil servant lecturers at SIHE is dominated by women.Based on the Education Management Information System (EMIS) page of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, there were 8,593 male lecturers (64.37%) and 4,753 female lecturers (35.63%).There are 6,613 male and female non-civil servant lecturers.In terms of academic positions, lecturers, both civil servants and noncivil servants, are 433 professors (2.46%), 3,677 Associate Professors (20.88%), 5,455 Lectors (30.98%), 2,426 Expert Assistants ( 13.78%), and Lecturer Candidates 5,618 (31.90%) (Kementerian Agama Republik Indonesia, 2022).This difference restricts women's access to top-level management of higher education to be more limited than men's (Herdiyanto, 2017).It has been proven that the candidates for Rector/Chairperson of 2019-2022 were 283 male candidates (87.62%) while only 40 female candidates (12.38%) (Source: compilation of researchers from various online sources, 2022).

Patriarchal Culture
An informant with the initials MD (37 years), a young lecturer at State Islamic University in East Java, explained that men still dominate the mobility of higher education and academic careers.This is understandable, given that the dual role of women in the household is also considered a factor in women's slow progression into academic professions.Moreover, in the opinion of IW (45 years), the work performance of the rector, vice-rector, and dean at SIHE is very dynamic.It cannot be separated from full or unlimited work, including external services.This condition tends to be more prevalent in males than females.This assumption of leadership compatibility with men reinforces what Seo et al. (2017) call cultural stereotypes toward gender, involving status beliefs-artificially promoting men's status and competencies in organizations.
As said by Amin Abdullah (2010), a former rector of UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, gender differences are not seen as a concern as long as they do not result in gender inequality.However, the problem of gender differences has spawned numerous injustices against both men and women.For example, the chair of a committee is often considered appropriate for men, while being treasurer is more appropriate for women.Furthermore, men are considered more entitled to be leaders than women.The standardization of this role can cause harm to women because their actual space is limited.
Morley and Crossouard's research entitled Women in Higher Education Leadership in South Asia: Rejection, Refusal, Reluctance, Revisioning identified ten barriers to women's leadership: the power of the socio-cultural, social class and caste, Lack of structured capacity-building or career advice in women, organizational culture, perceptions of leadership, recruitment and selection, family support, gender and authority, and corruption (Morley & Crossouard, 2015).Women are more likely to be assigned to the domestic sector of the household and to care for children, while men are often positioned as the person in charge of family history (Seo et al., 2017).Jobs seem to be designed by and for men, which in turn causes discrimination and gender stereotypes (Cahyati et al., 2021;Selzer & Robles, 2019;Sidani et al., 2015;Terjesen & Singh, 2008).Malecentric leadership models and norms have limited women's aspirations and access to academic leadership roles (Dunn et al., 2014;Morley, 2013).
Musdah Mulia (2014), a UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta professor, admits that she is concerned about the existence of patriarchal and feudalistic cultural values in higher education.In fact, in her view, higher education institutions should teach the values of equality and democracy.As a result of these patriarchal and feudalistic cultural values, there is discrimination and a negative stigma against women.She gave an example, "In the election of the rector at a state university, the only female candidate was bullied with several gender bias statements, for example, 'This university is very masculine culturally and sociologically, making it difficult to access a feminine style of leadership.'"This discrimination demonstrates patriarchal understanding and attitudes that do not want women to hold strategic positions in higher education leadership.
There is a misunderstanding of women's identity.Women are considered unsuitable for senior management positions in higher education because they are physically and psychologically weak and tend to be emotionally and interpersonally sensitive, graceful, and gentle (Nguyen, 2013).Gender prejudice appears due to people's negative stereotypes and attitudes towards women because of their gender membership, regardless of their skills and competencies (Koburtay & Abuhussein, 2021).This prejudice causes difficulties for women to occupy strategic positions in higher education management (O'Connor, 2019).The combination of an academic career, the support of a patriarchal culture, and the legitimacy of religious arguments mean that the senior management of higher education will continue to be dominated by men.This is a male-dominant reproduction (Morley et al., 2017).
The results of Eagly and Johnson's research (Seo et al., 2017) corrected misunderstandings about women.They found no significant difference between the male and female leadership approaches.These empirical findings have shown that, since previous studies were based mainly on self-reported data rather than objective observer ratings or standardized instruments of leadership behaviour, the tendency of gender differences in leadership performance seems to have been overemphasized.Moreover, recent meta-analysis research conducted by Koenig and his colleagues (Seo et al., 2017) proved that leadership today incorporates more feminine relational qualities, such as sensitivity, tenderness, and understanding, than in the past.

Gender-Biased Understanding of Religion
The underrepresentation of women in higher education leadership is influenced, among other things, by gender-biased understanding factors.Among the religious texts that are often used, according to IW (45 years), are pieces of Q.S. An-Nisa: 34, which textually means "Men are leaders for women..." and the hadith of the Prophet that "There will not be happiness for a people who leave their affairs to women."AN (46 years) does not deny the reality.The observation of the Head of the Center for Gender Studies at SIHE East Java, "The understanding of leadership is still more in favour of men.Generally, they refer to classic religious texts about not allowing women to become leaders.So, this doctrinal reason often hinders women from being in the top positions in academic and political careers.This reason is significantly more compelling than the gender reason."This theological argument minimizes the opportunities for women to be involved in university leadership.
This finding is consistent with Afiouni's study (Koburtay & Abuhussein, 2021), which found that although some views and interpretations support gender equality, others contribute to gender prejudice and bias.The view of conservative scholars who prohibit women from becoming leaders in public institutions, including educational institutions, is a barrier to women's leadership.Deconstructing these interpretations can provide ample religious legitimacy for women's leadership qualifications (Alsubaie & Jones, 2017).
Although there is no data on what percentage of the academic community and society reject women's leadership, theological arguments can limit the space for implementing gender mainstreaming concepts and policies in SIHE.In Amin Abdullah's observations (Aruan, 2017), religious mindsets often reappear when electing deans, postgraduate directors, and rectors.As a result, female lecturers are outperformed by males." Musdah Mulia (2014) asserts that serious efforts are required to reinterpret religious teachings that marginalize women to change the gender-biased religious mindset.The reinterpretation is critical in transmitting and transforming religious understanding that aligns with human values and is friendly to women.This reinterpretation is one of the main ideas in the discourse on gender equality and justice (Umar, 2010).It can provide a broad space for religious legitimacy for women's suitability for leadership (Alsubaie & Jones, 2017).

Affirmative Action for Gender Equity
Gender equity and gender equality are two familiar and interrelated concepts.Nevertheless, they have different meanings.Figure 2 quickly illustrates the difference between the two terms.Figure 2a shows three people trying to watch a baseball game over a fence, while Figure 2b illustrates three people picking apples from a tree.Everyone is given the same box to stand on in the equality picture.They are treated the same because each gets the same number and type of boxes.With the same treatment, each will get different results.
On the contrary, each person is given a different box in the equity picture to create an equal outcome.This is called equity leads to equality (www.iucn.org,2015).Gender justice is, therefore, the process of being fair to women and men by recognizing that women are not in the same "starting position" as men.The differences are mainly due to social, cultural, or even religious interpretations of disadvantage.Treating women and men equally is unfair and can further disadvantage women.The principle is that gender equity is the process of achieving gender equality.

Figure 2a
Figure 2b For example, Article 3 regarding the requirements for candidates for rector/chairperson is still gender neutral, i.e., it gives men and women equal treatment and opportunities without considering the different circumstances and needs of men and women.For Nina Nurmila (Asrori, 2020), a Professor of UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, this equality remains a barrier to women's leadership.According to FB (40 years) and MNH (44 years), the number of female lecturers who fulfil administrative requirements is far less than that of male lecturers.Therefore, as long as regulations remain gender-neutral, women's representation in higher education management will not increase significantly.Nurmila suggested that the gender-neutral regulation should be changed into an affirmative policy to increase the number of female rectors.The affirmation that can be done is to require women's representation of at least 50% of all rector candidates.The 50% quota for women can encourage women to contest to become rectors.The affirmative policy can abort male domination.If the Ministry of Religion has objections to at least 50% affirmation, the first step can start from 30%.So, for example, if there are seven male candidates, there must be at least three female candidates.Three male candidates can only run if there is one female candidate.This kind of gender equity can accelerate the representation of women in higher education management at the top level (rector) and lower levels, such as vice-rector, deans, and others (Asrori, 2020).
In comparison, the number of female DPR members increased from 11.8% (2004) to 17.86% (2009), 17.31% (2014), and 20.8% (2019) (https://www.bps.go.id), among other things, because of Law Number 10 of 2008 concerning General Elections for the Parliament members (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat), Regional Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Daerah), and Regional Parliament (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah) which regulates the representation of women at least 30 per cent.Moreover, Article 55, paragraph (2) requires a minimum of one woman for every three potential candidates.Lies Marcos (2019), an expert on gender studies in Indonesia, believes that affirmative policies are needed to increase women's representation, especially in leadership.Representing women in leadership elements is essential to ensure that every higher education policy accommodates gender equity.In the context of SIHE, if a regulation stipulates that there must be at least one woman for every three candidates for rector and dean candidates, then all SIHE must carry it out as an obligation that cannot be refused.Gender-affirmative regulations provide more opportunities for accelerated representation of women in SIHE management than gender-neutral regulations that do not consider the differences in situations, conditions, and needs between men and women.
Morley and Crossouard (Morley & Crossouard, 2015) put forward three areas of recommendation to increase gender equity: policy, women's development, and research and learning.The selection and recruitment policies for senior leaders must be reviewed to make them more transparent and accountable.At the same time, the government must invest in women's capacitybuilding initiatives, such as omen-only leadership development programs; access to doctoral degrees; training and continuous professional development opportunities, mentorship programs, and networks (Brabazon & Schulz, 2020;Chen & Hsieh, 2019;Morley & Crossouard, 2015) that help define success, increase skills, and improve confidence (Hannum et al., 2017).Equally important is research on women's leadership as a basis for formulating policies that provide justice for women, as well as systemic efforts for socio-cultural change through gender-sensitive curricula and programs (Hannum et al., 2017).Structured, systemic, and sustainable efforts to institutionalize changes to the structural foundations of organizations and society have the potential to significantly impact gender equity at top-level management (Rauhaus & Carr, 2020;Seo et al., 2017) Future universities will require sustainable and gender-sensitive leadership, so we must capitalize on this momentum (Morley, 2013).Evi Muafiah (48 years), Rector of IAIN Ponorogo and the youngest female rector in State Islamic Higher Education, sees the need for a good policy in which universities must fully support gender-responsive policies (Humas IAIN Ponorogo, 2021).Nur Syam, Professor at UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya and Secretary General of the Ministry of Religious Affairs for 2014-2018, stated the need for a shared vision in gender mainstreaming in Islamic Higher Education.Suppose there is no shared vision, as in some gender theories.In that case, women will always be marginalized, pressured, or oppressed, as stated in the theories of the relationship between men and women (Humas DIKTIS, 2018).
The same thing was stated by Musdah Mulia (2014), who called on all parties to encourage the development of higher education institutions that have a good sense of gender, among others, through increasing the quantity and quality of women's leadership.Achieving gender equity requires internal fundamental organizational changes in the culture and climate of higher education (Mabokela & Mlambo, 2017;Seo et al., 2017).Academics must realize that empowering women's leadership is very important not only for achieving gender equity but also for increasing organizational productivity and human resource development (Cheung & Halpern, 2010;Seale et al., 2021).
All parties must provide more substantive support so that women can overcome various obstacles, whether due to religious, structural, cultural, traditional, or personal values that hinder personal and professional development.That way, more women become leaders in higher education institutions.Seo et al. (2017) believe that systematic and sustained efforts to institutionalize changes to the structural foundations of organizations and society promise to create differences in gender equality at top-level management.Morley et al. (2017) believe that women's underrepresentation in senior leadership positions in higher education might lead to fewer women in decision-making positions.Thus, women's issues may need more consideration.

CONCLUSION
The presence of women in the management of educational institutions has yet to be proportionally accommodated.The underrepresentation of women in the top-level management of State Islamic Higher Education reinforces gender bias.This study proves that the underrepresentation of women is not only caused by the personality and culture of a society but also caused by qualification barriers of female lecturers, patriarchal culture, and gender-biased religious understanding.
Likewise, government policies that have not been affirmative on gender awareness have resulted in women's leadership being ignored.In other words, women's involvement in developing educational institutions can only be partially felt due to the paradigm that has been built, which is still dominated by men.
This study complements the results of the previous study regarding efforts to increase women's access, representation, and recognition in higher education management, especially the management of state Islamic higher education.This effort must be outlined in a policy of positive affirmation of women through regulations that bind all higher education institutions, starting from academic, administrative, and minimum proportion requirements at each level of higher education management.
This study is limited by its reliance on physical objects, which only represent institutions of SIHE.For this reason, further study is needed, including public and private higher education institutions, religious and non-religious higher education institutions, or a combination of all.In addition, the method used is only through a qualitative approach with relatively small data coverage, considering the dynamics of the problems faced by SIHE are varied.Thus, a contextual approach is required to obtain more comprehensive and in-depth results that can serve as a policy basis.
) and middle level (Head of the Quality Assurance Institute, Head of Research and Community Service Institute, Head of Library, Head of Internal Control Unit, Head of Technology Information and Database, and Head of Language Development).

Figure 1 .
Figure 1.Top and Middle Level Female Leaders at States Islamic Higher Education (%) (Source:Author Compilation, 2022).
Figure1confirms the findings ofHidayah and Munastiwi (2019) andAisy and Aisy (2023) that the higher the position level, the smaller the proportion of women.The increase in an academic career is not directly proportional to the increase in the representation of women in management structures(Machado- Taylor & ÖZKANLI, 2013).More women are placed in middle and lower management positions which are unpopular and less profitable in increasing their leadership positions(Carvalho & Diogo, 2018).This is known as stereotypical masculinities(Carvalho & Diogo, 2018;Coate & Howson, 2016;Nguyen, 2013).They perform simple tasks and make small policies, making their role and contribution insignificant.This proves the existence of vertical segregation between men and women by being over-represented in high-level positions and women in low-level positions(Sayer, 2011).Unsurprisingly, men gain more professional prestige and high social recognition than women(Carvalho & Diogo, 2018), while women require adequate recognition.

Figure 2 :
Figure 2: Illustration of Differences in Equality and Equity (Source: www.iucn.org )