Abstract

Women in theological education and leadership require much perseverance and firm grounding in their calling as they contribute to the growth of the kingdom of God in Africa. Denominational and theological issues regarding the spiritual authority of women to teach often carry over into theological institutions. While overt bias is easy to spot (for example, a woman is being told she is not allowed to teach biblical subjects), subtle and unconscious bias are harder to identify while being just as “effective: in discouraging women from full participation in theological education.  

This article relays quantitative as well as qualitative research findings regarding the challenges female faculty in theological education face across Africa. Statistical figures from 51 African theological seminaries and Christian universities are presented showing that women constitute only 22.8% of faculty in theological departments. Female faculty discuss their balancing act of managing family and faculty responsibilities while confronting cultural and societal role expectations. Additionally, as women are often excluded from male informal networks, there is a need for more networking opportunities. This relates both to mentoring and publishing so that female faculty can grow their leadership skills as well as make the female voice heard in theological publishing. Overall, this article presents a call for purposeful action by theological institutions to engage with their female faculty in open discussion to ensure true equity and representation. 

Introduction

Education is often called the “great equalizer” of gender, race, and class. However, this has not necessarily been the case for theological education (TE) in Africa, where the teaching of theology has been almost exclusively male “with female voices absent from theological discourse” (Rutoro 2012, 165). Yet, if we only hear male voices describing God, how can we ever receive a full picture of the God who created both male and female in his likeness? It is encouraging to see that more women have come to serve as faculty in theological institutions across Africa. However, they are still an outright minority in senior teaching and TE leadership roles. Hence, the statement by Nigerian Protus Kemdirim from the late 1990s still rings true today: “There is a need, therefore, to reflect on their position and the barriers to their participation in theological education because the number of professional women theologians is really small” (Kemdirim 1999, 42). This article, therefore, explores the challenges female faculty face in African theological institutions. Observations and survey results regarding female faculty in TE are presented. Based on these, recommendations for how to better support women to flourish and reach their God-given potential in African TE institutions are discussed.

Observations Regarding Women in Higher and Theological Education in Africa

An ‘absence of suitable female candidates’ is usually given as the reason when asked about the lack of women in leadership or full-time faculty positions at theological institutions. N’Dri Assié-Lumumba, an Ivorian Professor of Africana Studies at Cornell University, points to the “politics of exclusion in higher education” in Africa and the historical factors that have led to women being ostracised (Assié-Lumumba 2006, 39). She concludes that “the overwhelming majority of African countries are characterized by under-representation of the female population in their respective education systems” (Assié-Lumumba 2006, 10). Marike Blok-Sijtsma, a senior lecturer in missiology at Justo Mwale University in Zambia, further observes that “higher priority for men’s education and the emphasis on female responsibility for the family and the domestic chores seem to hinder” the participation of female students (Blok-Sijtsma 2021, 116; see also Boateng 2018, 22). She continues by saying that “stereotype expectations of their environment do not encourage women to enrol in theological education. […] Compared with other academic studies, theology attracts a tiny percentage of women” (Blok-Sijtsma 2021, 116). Consequently, women are even less represented in theology than in other tertiary study.

Women face obstacles at most stages in their careers due to likely career disruptions of having children and the demands of family life (Tsikata 2007, 35; Adusah-Karikari 2008, 40). They often fall victim to the “leaky pipeline,” which means that they are “dropping out of academic programs at different stages along the way from undergraduate to senior researchers/professors” (Rathgeber 2013, 10; see also Tsikata 2007, 31). Therefore, it is not surprising that female candidates for leadership and faculty positions are few and far between. Priscille Djomhoue, a lecturer in New Testament studies from Cameroon, lamented in 2015 that “in the whole country [Cameroon] of our thirteen theological institutions and seminaries, we have only two women recruited as full-time lecturers” (Djomhoue 2015, 642). Even after 14 years, the words of Dr Isabel Phiri, formerly serving as the Deputy General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, still apply: “(a) There are more theological institutions in Africa that have no women on their staff than those that recruit women. b) Among the few women who are recruited to teach in theological institutions in Africa, the majority are teaching non-theological subjects” (Phiri 2009, 112).

Women are often faced with “tokenism” in TE as only symbolic efforts are made to include women and other marginalized groups. As seminaries admit a small number of women into leadership and full faculty positions, there is no felt need to make the necessary changes to the system. Therefore, barriers for others are maintained. Successful female faculty and leaders are then typically viewed as “special” or “different,” rather than intelligent individuals who can make significant contributions (Boateng 2018, 25). As a result, those women who succeed somehow do not represent women in general but are viewed as an anomaly. Because of that, they become a token. Linda Naicker of the University of South Africa puts it as follows: 

A form of benevolent paternalism dictates, in veiled undertones, that women ought to remember their subservient position. As a result, they must still navigate the often hostile terrain of higher education because, irrespective of how hard they work, and how much they are able to prove their competence, theirs are regarded as token appointments, appointments based on race, class and gender. (Naicker 2013, 330)

A consequence of the pattern of decreasing representation at a higher level is that senior women frequently find themselves isolated in predominantly male hierarchies. It also means that female voices and interests may not be heard in the right places if women are not represented in committees (Adusah-Karikari 2008, 109).

In closing, cultural and societal expectations regarding the role of women often hinder their full and long-term participation in TE. This results in an under-representation of women as faculty in theological institutions across Africa. A lack of purposeful action on the part of the institutions to counter this has contributed to its persistence. But as it is never good practice to simply accept assumption as fact, we will now consider some statistics on female faculty in TE in Africa before moving on to hear from them in their own words.

Statistical Overview of Female Faculty in Theological Education in Africa

The Overseas Council (OC) has worked in partnership with a significant number of theological institutions across Africa. Most of the figures provided below were taken from personal communication with the respective OC-related institutions in January 2023, which gave permission for their data to be shared. A secondary round of inquiries was sent to otherwise known TE institutions as random samples. The figures show numbers for male and female faculty in theology departments.

While a handful of schools are doing quite well by approaching the 40–50% mark, the average for all schools together is 21.8% part-time and 23.9% full-time with an aggregated average of 22.8% female faculty. Although these figures are not representative of all of Africa, they still provide a significant and useful cross-section. Yet sometimes it is rather difficult to imagine what these figures mean in real life. To have 10% of women as part of the faculty means that in a meeting of 10 people, there would only be one woman present. To have 20% female faculty still means that in a meeting of 10 people, eight would be male and only two would be female. It is therefore not surprising that Zipporah, an academic dean from Southern Africa, states that “being the only female on the faculty makes it sometimes lonely and I must work so much harder than the men” (Zipporah, personal communication #53, July 2022).

Women in Male Spaces

The scarcity of female faculty at theological institutions across Africa became apparent during consultation visits to various seminaries. Due to the low numbers of female faculty, their voices are also not easily perceptible in African theological publications. It became clear that strategic and purposeful engagement was necessary by taking pointers from existing female faculty regarding the challenges they face in TE to ease the way for the next generation.

In June 2022, the Overseas Council organized an online workshop on “issues facing women in theological education” for female faculty serving in our partner schools in Africa. Following this workshop, an email survey of 25 questions was sent out to all participants enquiring about the challenges they face as female faculty at their respective institutions. It began with demographic questions and then invited participants to respond to open-ended questions. Besides demographic data such as age, marital status, and education level, the survey sought to generate data in the following areas: challenges faced regarding promotions, research/publication, and balancing family with faculty responsibilities; gender prejudice; and committee representation. It was anonymous but asked for a title and job description. The survey was in English, with faculty from lusophone countries being fluent enough to participate. A total of 81 women serving as faculty at 35 theological seminaries from 12 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa responded (Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda, Madagascar, Zimbabwe, Zambia, South Africa, Angola, Namibia, Nigeria, Ghana, Liberia). While coding the results, a female biblical name was given to every respondent as a pseudonym to make the report more personable and readable. A “Dr” was then added in front of the name for those participants with a doctorate. The participants’ countries were replaced by a regional description (e.g., Zambia would be turned into Southern Africa) if naming the country would put a respondent’s anonymity at risk.

The following section will present the survey results. Participants will be quoted at length to allow their own voices to be heard. We will hear of the balancing act of managing family and faculty responsibilities while confronting cultural and societal role expectations. We will also hear about the need for more networking opportunities as these relate to mentoring and publishing after which recommendations will be presented.

The Balancing Act

Participants were asked to choose the three main challenges they face as female faculty at their institutions. The top answer was ‘balancing family with faculty responsibilities’ (54%). Almost 80% of the participants reported being married, with about 50% still having children at home. This was followed shortly by challenges faced ‘regarding research publications’ (50%) and ‘barriers to promotions’ (44%). Mara, a scholar in Christian-Muslim relations from East Africa, sheds light on the fact that these three are frequently intertwined:

In a fast-paced world, attending to motherhood, children and family sometimes lead to spending little/or no time for children. Employment into faculty requires proof of academic publications, so for the male counterparts competing for the same positions they earn higher marks and becomes difficult to compete for available opportunities. (personal communication #16, July 2022)

Dr Ahira, lecturing in educational studies in Kenya, comments that “the unpredictability of lengthy meetings being called with little notice on the institution side” makes it difficult to balance work with family (personal communication #35, July 2022). Similarly, Candace, an instructional designer from South Africa, shares that her workday usually starts at 4 am with getting the children ready for school. She reflects on her balancing act as follows:

It is exhausting. I use my personal leave days to study, and I often have to catch up on my studies over weekends as well. I never get to rest — it feels like male faculty have it much easier in this respect since they are not responsible for their children or for maintaining their households. My husband helps when he can, but he also has a demanding job and often comes home late in the evening. I do the work of two full-time human beings. (personal communication #62, July 2022)

The challenge of multiple roles women fulfil is further illustrated by Dr Grace, a lecturer in practical theology from Nigeria: “In an African context having to take care of a husband and other family member’s needs, including playing the role of a pastor’s wife and adviser of the women’s fellowship, and having to receive uninvited guests, pose a great challenge” (personal communication #69, July 2022).

In a similar vein, South African scholar Reitumetse Mabokela comments that “there are very few women in leadership positions in institutions of higher education. These few women tend to be on every committee and end up being over-extended” (Mabokela 2002, 202). But for many, doing less is not an option. Due to the small number of well-trained women in TE in Africa, those currently active invariably feel the need to fill the female gap and speak on behalf of those, who do not have a voice yet. This need is felt even more at institutions, which do not have clear policies in support of women.

Disparity of policy and practice

When it comes to policies and guidelines regarding gender equity, Ghanaian Augustina Adusah-Karikari asserts that the “onus lies on institutions to create environments and policies that are supportive of women’s attempts to combine career and family” (Adusah-Karikari 2008, 173). Some of the difficulty lies in a misguided understanding of equality. This views academics as gender-neutral persons with the right qualifications, thereby failing to distinguish between the different needs of men and women. By being gender-neutral on matters of childbearing/family and not having support measures or policies in place, institutions are in fact actively putting women at a disadvantage (Tsikata 2007, 35-36). It is therefore essential that theological institutions in Africa review their current policies in open discussion with their female faculty to ensure true equity and representation. As Dr Zemira from Ghana concluded “I think there must be intentional engagement with female faculty and not play politics with us” (personal communication #32, July 2022).

But as the saying “paper is patient” reminds us, only having policies on paper is not enough. As more women become faculty members at predominately male theological institutions, the schools need to deliberately include and make space for them. But this is often easier said than done when theological and cultural issues spill over into the seminary. As Agnes, teaching religious studies in Nigeria, attests:

I am not sure the issues about treatment of women in my institution here are a policy thing. I feel it is more or less an unwritten bias especially as a Seminary considering some of the gender issues we have in most denominations. The policies already existing do not show any marginalization against any gender. (personal communication #77, July)

Similarly, several participants shared that women were excluded from speaking at chapel or devotional sharing and that there was a noticeable lack of women in decision-making positions. Some revealed a general feeling of not being listened to while others shared of having been intimidated by their male colleagues in the past, or of male comments targeting their clothing and insisting on a dress code for women (personal communication #7, July 2022; personal communication #16, July 2022).

A more concrete example of exclusion in the area of professional development was given by Dr Rayna, a lecturer in missiology from West Africa, who shared that “the institution has sent and sponsored only male faculty [for further studies]. I was denied sponsorship and approval when I gained admission for PhD. I had to resign to pursue it while about six male faculty have been trained. Two are currently pursuing their PhD abroad” (personal communication #80, July 2022). Though exclusion can sometimes be quite obvious, other times it is covered by the continuous workings of the school, and it takes deliberate effort to work towards more equity as the following example will show. The participants were asked about their highest degree and regular teaching level. While 36% already have a doctorate, and another 20% are in the process of gaining one, 74% of all participants teach at undergraduate and vocational levels. This would suggest that their respective institutions are not utilizing them to the fullest extent of their capacities and degrees, thereby following the secular trend of keeping women in lower levels and positions (Assié-Lumumba 2006, 11).

The question is also to what extent female faculty have learned to tolerate prejudice as a “regrettable inevitability” (Barnes 2007, 16). Doris Boateng, a senior lecturer in gender issues at the University of Ghana, notes: “Women who venture into male dominated fields and excel are often ‘sanctioned and disliked’ by their fellow women as well as men. The punishments often take the form of name calling, low evaluation at work, and outright rejection as being ‘un-feminine’” (Boateng 2018, 22). One of the female faculty members interviewed by South African Mabokela put it quite astutely: “When it comes to prejudice and discrimination among people who are highly educated, it becomes very difficult to have any tangibles. People are very subtle. […] With academics, they always have counter-arguments to convince you that ‘I did not mean it that way’” (Mabokela 2002, 200; see also Tsikata 2007, 36). Or as Dr Lois, a lecturer in African Christianity from Uganda, concluded: “Over time I have been able to work with my male colleagues and God has given me the grace and skills to deal with negative sexist attitudes and discrimination” (personal communication #71, July 2022).

Networking and mentorship

Another challenge for women in African TE is their lack of networking and mentoring opportunities. Rachel, teaching theology in South Africa, shares: “I don’t really have a network in this area” (personal communication #22, July 2022). Boateng highlights that “regrettably, women face greater challenges initiating or developing informal mentoring than men” (Boateng 2018, 28). Eva Rathgeber, a gender specialist, recounts her research in Kenya, which “found that male academics often hesitate to mentor or work collaboratively with female colleagues for fear of being seen as having a sexual relationship with them” (Rathgeber 2013, 7). She then summarizes her research by saying that “women have fewer contacts than men outside their institutions. They were less likely to travel outside their home countries for further training or conferences and they had fewer ties to other professionals working in their own area of interest” (Rathgeber 2013, 7). Augustina Adusah-Karikari researched female faculty in Ghana. One of her interviewees shed significant light on the difficulties of networking for female faculty:

There is an “old boys” network that the women are not a part of. They meet in the Senior Common Room and different places on campus […]. You do not have similar things happening with the women. […] If you are not the one cooking, you have to go home to make sure that the food is cooked, and the children get fed. The husbands go to these gatherings because they know that their wives are taking care of the household. It is there that a lot of discussions take place, professional/career and personal issues. I find out issues from a male friend who goes there and hangs out and I ask him, “How do you know this?” and he will say “we were talking about it last evening.” (Adusah-Karikari 2008, 115-116)

The significance of such meetings in terms of their networking value cannot be emphasized enough. Adusha-Karikari concludes that “because there are few women in the top echelon of the academic ladder, women have little access to female role models and networks, which works to their disadvantage” (Adusah-Karikari 2008, 115-116). Similarly, Boateng notes that mentors can greatly influence the progression of a woman’s career, but then determines that “due to the limited number of women in top positions, women have not benefitted much from mentorship in their careers” (Boateng 2018, 27). The issue of lack of mentorship and networking particularly affects women in the area of speaking engagements, publishing, and collaborative writing.

Obstacles to publication

Most universities have a publication requirement if one wants to advance or even just hold the current position (following the old dictum “publish or perish”). But this does not necessarily apply to theological seminaries or Bible schools teaching at a lower level. These tend to have been established as teaching instead of research institutions. Nevertheless, a lack of publications would usually work against a faculty member when a new role is discussed. Isabel Phiri confirms: “Without publications, a staff member will not progress academically” (Phiri 2009, 112; Adusah-Karikari 2008, 101).

There was a common thread throughout most responses regarding the issue of publications: lack of time and funding. Even though lack of time could also be claimed as an obstacle to publication by male faculty, the picture is more complex for women due to their additional family and household responsibilities. Furthermore, they are frequently relegated to more administrative work at institutions reflecting a somewhat secretarial attitude towards female faculty. Dr Merari, teaching intercultural studies in West Africa, shared: “I am overburdened with institutional committee work. Either as the lead person or the secretary of these committees, I found myself working much harder than my male colleagues” (personal communication #17, July 2022). South African scholar Reitumetse Mabokela comments that “while department and institutional service are important elements of these women’s professional lives, they create a barrier for upward mobility when they are not acknowledged as significant contributions and recognized appropriately” (Mabokela 2002, 200; Rathgeber 2013, 33).

Lack of time is usually coupled with a lack of funding for original research. Many institutions do not have set-aside budgets for research (Adusah-Karikari 2008, 45). But even those that do, often do not give women their fair chance, as Dr Sapphira from East Africa, a scholar in biblical studies, confirms. She reported that all requests for publication at her institution go through the (male) department head and even though she had submitted requests for many years, they had all been turned down, while those of her male colleagues were approved. She concludes: “Therefore, since I have not published, I have never been promoted! While my supervisor has solicited funds for some of my male colleagues who even got their PhDs after me” (personal communication #72, July 2022). The lack of a provision to take sabbatical leave for writing also plays into the two issues of time and funding as Ruth from Southern Africa shares: “The opportunities for publication are very hard as sabbaticals are non-existent, while publication funding is not available” (personal communication, #25, July 2022).

It is only human to pay more attention to people with titles and positions. Hence, discussing the advancement of female faculty also fits within the scope of making their voices heard. It seems very little has changed since South African scholar Reitumetse Mabokela, serving as the Vice Provost at the University of Illinois, conducted her interviews in South Africa in 2002. She interviewed female faculty who reported the following common elements: “(a) the arbitrariness and subjectivity of promotion proceedings, (b) their confusion about this process, and (c) the fact that they must outperform their male counterparts to even be considered” (Mabokela 2002, 195). In our survey, one common issue reported by several female faculty members was the lack of structure and guidelines regarding promotions. Kaia from West Africa remarks that there is “no proper structure that guides staff promotions and development,” which Dr Rayna, a teacher in mission studies from West Africa confirmed. She comments that “the leadership assigns people to level with criteria known only to them” (personal communication #79, July 2022; personal communication #80, July 2022). One of those criteria — whether openly stated or not — might be that a faculty member ought to be ordained, which is what Hagar from West Africa found: “The school gives preference to title ministers above secular degrees. This affects me because I am not yet a reverend, and my secular degree did not count” (personal communication #47, July 2022). Dr Daphne from Kenya echoes “my credentials don’t seem to carry the same weight as my male colleagues even though they are often better” (personal communication #56, July 2022). It can be concluded that if criteria for promotion and their proceedings are not discussed openly, it causes significant distrust and unnecessary competition amongst faculty members.

Much of what has been discussed in this section are issues related to a minority group (women) entering the space of a majority group (men). For younger female faculty many things are enveloped in the questions surrounding how to best balance family and faculty responsibilities. But for many it would go beyond that: As they come into this historically male space of theological education, female faculty have to find their own ways of networking and making their voices heard against the backdrop of more or less subtle prejudice due to cultural and societal role expectations. The common thread running through this discussion is the need for purposeful action, which we will discuss in the following section.

Recommendations

Having presented and analyzed the research results, this section will now put forward recommendations based on the key findings focusing on the following areas: 1) regulation and affirmative action, 2) family-friendly policies, 3) networking and mentoring, 4) research, publishing, and promotions, and 5) professional development.

Regulation and Affirmative Action

There are no shortcuts to increasing the number of female faculty in TE as it requires action at all levels, from purposefully encouraging women to study theology, to identifying academically gifted women as they study and offering financial support throughout their studies from BA through to PhD. The UNESCO policy brief regarding The Representation of Women in Academia and Higher Education Management Positions found that the use of gender quotas at all institutional levels is a “particularly self-evident regulatory policy to support gender equality” (Galán-Muros, Bouckaert, and Roser 2023, 5). Quotas have proven successful when properly enforced and combined with “complementary measures to address the cultural and structural barriers that underpin gender inequalities in higher education” (Galán-Muros, Bouckaert, and Roser 2023, 5). Institutions ensure that female voices are heard by deciding on a certain minimum percentage of female representation across the institution and particularly in decision-making committees and key leadership positions. This should be monitored, and the percentage increased over time based on a feasible multi-year plan for implantation accompanied by gender-equity training for all leadership positions. 

Family-friendly Policies 

The term “family-friendly policies” refers to “policies and practices that make it easier for employees to balance and integrate the demands of the workplace with the demands of home or family life” (Center for the Education of Women). The most common and effective family-friendly policies include flexible work arrangements, reduction in responsibility without paycut for a set period of time (typically one semester/term), childcare subsidies, or the provision of childcare at the institution, maternal leave, and excess unpaid leave (Center for the Education of Women; see also Galán-Muros, Bouckaert, and Roser 2023, 5). The work/family balancing act usually applies to female students in similar ways to female faculty. It is therefore important that institutions also take specific steps to support women while they are still studying to avoid the “leaky pipeline.” Above all, there is a need for open discourse and instituting a culture of listening to the concerns of female faculty members. Instead of male faculty deciding what they think female faculty might need or want, it is important to include female faculty in the discussion and ask what would be helpful.

Networking and Mentoring

As female faculty are often excluded from the more informal male networks at their institutions, they need to start connecting, networking, and supporting each other. More country-wide and regional networks for faculty are needed so that women can connect with others outside of their institutions as well. This would allow more mentoring to happen and for more exposure to research and publishing opportunities. For a systemic impact, mentoring should become an integral part of an institution’s culture. Without role models for younger female educators, it is unlikely that the pipeline will stop leaking anytime soon.

Research, Publishing, and Promotions 

For theology to become more balanced to reveal God’s image, female faculty have to be encouraged and enabled to research and publish. To that end, faculty need space and time to learn the ropes of publishing, whether that be how to find the right journal, how to find writing partners for collaborative writing, or how to put existing material into a publishable format. This can happen through individual mentoring, but also through organized workshops — of which there are few. Impartial policies on sabbatical leave for writing purposes have to be created. These should also include part-time faculty (adapted to their working hours). Furthermore, institutional and committee work should either be required of both male and female faculty or should be duly considered when it comes to promotions. Finally, promotion proceedings should not only include quantitative measures, such as publication metrics or citation counts, as these disadvantage women with family responsibilities. They “should be balanced with more qualitative performance measures such as peer evaluations, teaching evaluations or community engagement to provide a more comprehensive view of academics’ contribution to their field and promote a more inclusive and diverse academic community” (Galán-Muros, Bouckaert, and Roser 2023, 8). Promotion proceedings should also not be veiled in mystery — neither for male nor for female faculty. Clear equitable guidelines have to be developed and made available to the school community. 

Professional Development

It is vital for female faculty to be given the opportunity to attend conferences in their specific scholarly area, staff exchange programs, and seminars, in addition to accepting outside speaking engagements. Besides scholarly conferences, more general leadership development is advisable. The 2021 “The State of Women Leading Report” by Education Sub Saharan Africa (ESSA) names professional and leadership development among the top three interventions to strengthen women’s roles in higher education (Education Sub Saharan Africa 2021, 18-19). The following areas of professional development are outlined as being most helpful: “1) Promotion of global awareness and analysis of major societal challanges, 2) development of transferable and professional skills, 3) cultivation of self-awareness and self-knowledge, with a focus on ethics, values, and gender, 4) mentorship and role models, 5) and networking support” (Education Sub Saharan Africa 2021, 19). Female faculty are not usually excluded based on lack of funding per se, but how the available funds are distributed and allocated. Institutions can further support their female faculty by reaching out to international partners on their behalf to seek grants.

Conclusion

Theological education in Africa can “become a medium for women to develop and utilize their intelligence, strength of will and steadfastness of purpose towards realizing their own destiny in Christ” (Nwagwu 1998, 89). Yet, based on the African schools surveyed, female faculty only comprise 22.8% of the teaching staff. To a large extent, this low figure is due to the balancing act of harmonizing family, church, and faculty responsibilities. This results in a ‘leaky pipeline’ when women drop out of “academic programs at different stages along the way from undergraduate to senior researchers/professors” (Rathgeber 2013, 10). Due to their low number, they have fewer networking and mentoring opportunities also resulting in fewer publishing prospects. Consequently, their theological contributions are not easily recognizable over against their male counterparts, which also affects their chances of advancement.

It is therefore essential that theological institutions in Africa review their current policies in open discussion with their female faculty to ensure true equity, support, and representation and to work against any (un)conscious bias regarding the role of women. Furthermore, purposeful action is required to increase the number of female faculty by granting scholarships from lower to higher levels. More country-wide and regional networks are needed for female faculty in TE as women are often excluded from the more informal male networks at their institutions. This becomes particularly relevant regarding research and publishing opportunities. The need for more publishing is not just about enhancing a woman’s ministry, but also about broadening theology to include female voices so that the God, who incorporates both the male and female, is more fully present in all theological discourse.

Author Bio: Verena Schafroth has served in theological education in Africa for many years, first in South Sudan and then in Mozambique, training pastors for the African Church. She now works as the ACTEA Engagement Director for Women in Theological Education in Africa in addition to being the Regional Consultant for Theological Education in Africa with the Overseas Council Europe.

Note: Primary source data in the table, “Statistical Overview of Female Faculty in Theological Education in Africa,” comes from the following personal communications and article:

  Alberto Alberto, personal communication, 12 January 2023.

  Adelaide Catanha, personal communication, 14 January 2023.

  Elvira Moises, personal communication, 9 January 2023.

  Matumona Lunfunankenda, personal communication, 9 January 2023.

  Simão Adolfo, personal communication, 20 January 2023.

  Lidetu Kefenie, personal communication, 5 January 2023.

  Bruk Ayele, personal communication, 11 January 2023.

  John Avorgah, personal communication, 11 January 2023.

  Communication with school administration, November 2021.

  Bedamloa Cubala, personal communication, 14 January 2023.

  Eliane Mensah, personal communication, 12 January 2023.

  Silpa Akomo, personal communication, 18 January 2023.

  Paul Kamunge, personal communication, 4 January 2023.

  Patience Wanzala, personal communication, 5 January 2023.

  Gladys Maritim, personal communication, 16 January 2023.

  Rick Calenberg, personal communication, 14 January 2023.

  Communication with school administration, November 2021.

  Seheno Randrialiva, personal communication, 15 January 2023.

  Ndamyo Mwanjabe, personal communication, 18 January 2023.

  Takuze Chitsulo, personal communication, 6 January 2023.

  Chimwemwe Harawa, personal communication, 5 January 2023.

  Jones Mawerenga, personal communication, 6 January 2023.

  Misseline Gordon, personal communication, 9 January 2023.

  Isaac Olukomogbon, personal communication, 22 January 2023.

  Emiola Nihinlola, personal communication, 10 January 2023.

  Justina Damap, personal communication, 17 January 2023.

  Samuel Olugbenga Akintola, personal communication, 23 January 2023.

  Mercy Chukwuedo, personal communication, 5 January 2023.

  Gyang Pam, personal communication, 5 January 2023.

  Moses Audi, personal communication, 6 January 2023.

  Academic office, personal communication, 9 January 2023.

  Laurent Loubassou, personal communication, 19 January 2023.

  Nathan Chiroma, personal communication, 14 January 2023.

  Jesse Kipimo, personal communication, 4 January 2023.

  Marieke Brand, personal communication, 27 January 2023 

  Liisa Zondervan, personal communication, 19 January 2023.

  Warren Fornah, personal communication, 20 January 2023.

  Nicodeme Biesse, personal communication, 11 January 2023.

  Ezekiel Mwakajwanga, personal communication, 20 January 2023.

  Rose Ekirunga, personal communication, 16 January 2023.

  Philip Wandawa, personal communication, 8 February 2023

  Margit Schwemmle, personal communication, 10 January 2023.

  Hendriks 2012, Chapter 2, 30.30.

  Raymond Motsi, personal communication, 16 January 2023.

  Simbarashe Munamati, personal communication, 12 January 2023.

References

Adusah-Karikari, Augustina. “Experiences of Women in Higher Education: A Study of Women Faculty and Administrators in Selected Public Universities in Ghana.” PhD diss., Ohio University, 2008. 

Assié-Lumumba, N’Dri Thérèse. Empowerment of women in higher education in Africa: The role and mission of research—Paper commissioned by the UNESCO Forum Secretariat. UNESCO Forum Occasional Series Paper No. 11. Cape Town: University of Cape Town, 2006.

Barnes, Teresa Ann. “Politics of the mind and body: gender and institutional culture in African universities.” Feminist Africa 8 “Rethinking Universities I” (2007): 8–25.

Blok-Sijtsma, Marike A. “Women with Capacity: Gender and Theological Education.” Chapter 7 in Making Connections: Integrative Theological Education in Africa, edited by Marilyn Naidoo, 113–128. Stellenbosch, South Africa: SUN PReSS, 2021.

Boateng, Doris Akyere. “Experiences of Female Academics in Ghana: Negotiation and Strengths as Strategies for Successful Careers.” African Journal of Social Work 8, no. 1 (2018): 21–30. 

Center for the Education of Women. Family friendly policies in higher education: Where do we stand? Michigan: University of Michigan, 2005. Accessed at https://cew.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Family-Friendly-Policies-in-Higher-Education.pdf

Chebet, Dorcas, and Beatrice Cherop. “Teaching gender and theology in the Reformed Institute for Theological Training (RITT) in Eldoret, Kenya.” Chapter 14 in Men in the Pulpit, Women in the Pew? Addressing gender inequality in Africa, edited by H. Jurgens Hendriks, Elna Mouton, Len Hansen, and Elisabet le Roux, 171–182. Stellenbosch, South Africa: SUN Press, 2012.

Djomhoue, Priscille. “Mainstreaming Gender in Theological Institutions in Francophone Africa: Perspectives from Cameroon.” Chapter 60 in Handbook of Theological Education in Africa, edited by Isabel Apawo Phiri and Dietrich Warner, 639–646. Regnum Studies in Global Christianity. Oxford: Regnum Books, 2015. 

Education Sub Saharan Africa, “The State of Women Leading Report,” 2021. Accessed at  https://essa-africa.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/ESSA%20Women%20Leading%20
Report_July%202021.pdf

Galán-Muros, Victoria, Bouckaert, Mathias, and Roser, Jaime. The Representation of Women in Academia and Higher Education Management Positions. UNESCO-IESALC Policy Brief Series, March 2023. Accessed at https://www.iesalc.unesco.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/PB-Gender_final_EN.pdf

Hendriks, Jurgens. “Churches, seminaries and gender statistics.” Chapter 2 in Men in the Pulpit, Women in the Pew? Addressing gender inequality in Africa, edited by H. Jurgens Hendriks, Elna Mouton, Len Hansen, and Elisabet le Roux, 25–32. Stellenbosch, South Africa: SUN Press, 2012.

———. “HIV&AIDS, curricula and gender realities.” Chapter 3 in Men in the Pulpit, Women in the Pew? Addressing gender inequality in Africa, edited by H. Jurgens Hendriks, Elna Mouton, Len Hansen, and Elisabet le Roux, 33–48. Stellenbosch, South Africa: SUN Press, 2012.

Kemdirim, Protus O. “The need to empower women through theological education.” African Ecclesial Review (AFER)41, no. 1 (1999): 41–50.

Mabokela, Reitumetse Obakeng. “Reflections of Black Women Faculty in South African Universities.” The Review of Higher Education, 25, no. 2 (2002): 185–205.

Naicker, Linda. “The Journey of South African Women Academics with a Particular Focus on Women Academics in Theological Education.” Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae 39, suppl. 1 (2013): 325–336.

Nwagwu, Mary Gerald “Relevance of theological education for women.” in Women, Culture, and Theological Education: Proceedings of West African Association of Theological Institutions (WAATI) Conference, Ilishan-Remo, Nigeria, 28th July-3rd August, 1996, edited by Mercy Ama Oduyoe and Protus O. Kemdirim, 86–98. Enugu, Nigeria: West African Association of Theological Institutions, 1998.

Phiri, Isabel Apawo. “Major challenges for African women theologians in theological education (1989–2008).” International Review of Mission 98, no. 1 (2009): 105–119.

Rathgeber, Eva M. Gender Barriers Faced by African Women in Graduate Programmes and Research in the Social Sciences. Nairobi, Kenya: Partnership for African Social & Governance Research, 2013.

Rutoro, Esther. “Gender transformation and leadership: On teaching gender in Shona culture.” Chapter 14 in Men in the Pulpit, Women in the Pew? Addressing gender inequality in Africa, edited by H. Jurgens Hendriks, Elna Mouton, Len Hansen, and Elisabet le Roux, 159–170. Stellenbosch, South Africa: SUN Press, 2012.

Tsikata, Dzodzi. “Gender, Institutional Cultures and the Career Trajectories of Faculty of the University of Ghana.” Feminist Africa 8 (2007):  26–41.