IoPP onscreen PowerPoint slides

1
Women in University Science Departments
Peter MainDirector, Education and Science, IOP
Gender Equality Event UCL18th March
2008 peter.main_at_iop.org, www.iop.org
2
Plan of Talk

• Diversity Programme
• Site Visit Scheme
• JUNO Code of Practice
• Working with other organisations

3


Diversity Programme

4
Diversity Programme

• 1.5 FTE staff
• Katharine Hollinshead Programme Leader
• Saher Ahmed Programme Coordinator
• Examples of Activities
• Career breaks guidance
• Women in university physics departments report
• Diversity in HE (with the RSC)
• Best practice guide on Disability

5
Physics nationally
6
Physics nationally
7
Physics nationally
8


Site Visit Scheme

9
Background

• Wrote to each department in the UK and Ireland
  (copied to the VC)
• Visits by invitation only and there was no charge
• Visited 17 (out of 46) physics departments in
  all.

10
The Visit

• Paperwork (sent beforehand) included admissions
  statistics, gender disaggregated student numbers,
  pass rates, staff handbook etc.
• Meeting with departmental management , admissions
  tutor, director of teaching, HR representative
  etc
• Meetings with
• Female academic staff (where none, women staff
  from cognate subjects)
• Male academic staff
• Female RAs and PGs
• Male RAs and PGs

11
The Visit

• Lunch with female UGs. No staff were present
• Laboratory tour
• Informal feedback at the end from the chair of
  the panel to the HoD
• Confidential written report is sent to HoD with
  recommendations.

12
Observations

• Women underrepresented in seminars and colloquia
• Most departments were not monitoring statistics
• Departments without women suffer in many ways (eg
  admissions, role models). Male staff are usually
  aware of this but are very reluctant to do
  anything about it.
• The fact that the visit took place meant that
  gender issues were discussed, perhaps for the
  first time.
• Situation on the ground is often very different
  from what management believe.

13
The Best Departments

• Sympathetic Head of Department (they were all
  male). In some cases, it was clear that former
  HoDs had been very biased.
• Male participation in family-friendly policies.
  If they did not, women felt they were perceived
  as letting the side down by, for example,
  taking maternity leave or fitting their hours
  around the nursery.
• A high fraction of young staff. Young fathers
  appreciate the problems but younger men are
  generally more sensitive to gender issues.

14
The Best Departments

• Women involved in senior management. But women
  were often disinclined to get involved because
  they found the prevailing attitudes so
  unpleasant.
• Strong, informal social networks for women. (In
  some places found that men had unconsciously
  created an uncomfortable atmosphere by being so
  friendly among themselves).

15
Important Issues

• Formal, transparent procedures at all levels.
• Recruitment (no secret discussions, women on
  interview panels)
• Promotion (major issue)
• Appraisal (particularly for RAs)
• Workload allocation
• Women on serious committees
• Career breaks

16
Important Issues

• Even successful female RAs and PGs did not want
  an academic career
• Not consistent with starting a family
• Average age of academic appointment is 35.
• Effect of multiple short term contacts
• Lack of a well-defined career structure
• Lack of good careers advice
• Lack of role models
• Long hours culture

17
Important Issues

• Childcare facilities were usually thought to be
  inadequate and, where they were good, did not
  have enough places. The best matched their hours
  to those of the university.
• Harassment. Although almost every place had a
  procedure for dealing with harassment, the panels
  were told of several cases, almost none of which
  had been dealt with in a satisfactory manner.

18

General Report

• General report highlighting the issues and
  disseminating good practice has been published
• Created a lot of interest amongst other learned
  societies

19


JUNO Code of Practice

20

JUNO Code of Practice Principles

• A robust organisational framework to deliver
  equality of opportunity and reward.
• Appointment, promotion and selection processes
  and procedures that encourage men and women to
  apply for academic posts at all levels.
• Departmental structures and systems which support
  and encourage the career progression of all staff
  and enable men and women to progress and continue
  in their careers.

21

JUNO Code of Practice Principles

• A departmental organisation, structure,
  management arrangements and culture that are
  open, inclusive and transparent and encourage the
  participation of all staff.
• Flexible approaches and provisions that
  encompass, the working day, the working year and
  a working life in SET and enable individuals, at
  all career and life stages, to maximise their
  contribution to SET, their department and
  institution.

22
Two levels of engagement

• Supporter
• Physics department endorsing the 5 principles
  set out in the Code of Practice
• Champion
• Physics departments confirmed as meeting the 5
  principles set out in the Code of Practice
• Launched June 14th 2007

23


Working with other organisations

24

SPIDER

• STEM Professional Institutions Diversity and
  Equality Resources
• Core members IOP, RSC, RAEng RCUK (sec)
• Four strands
• HE and research institutes
• Business private and public sector
• Professional bodies internal organisation
• Public engagement

25

SPIDER HE and Research Institutes

• Athena Partnership IOP, RSC and UKRC
• Promoting resources and activities
• Benchmarking and checklists
• Using good practice guides ( e.g. RCUK Research
  staff concordat)
• Department site visits
• ASSET Survey
• JUNO
• SWAN awards
• Enabling other professional societies to get
  involved

26

Virtuous cycle
27


Promoting physics, supporting physicists