Athena SWAN Scientific Women’s Academic Network 28 th October 2014

Dr. Ita Richardson

Equality Challenge Unit Established in 2001 Promotes equality for staff and students in higher education in the UK & colleges in Scotland Funded by the 4 UK higher education funding Councils, UniversitiesUK and GuildHE Established to advance the representation of women in science, technology, engineering, medicine and mathematics (STEMM)

Athena SWAN Recognition scheme of excellence in women’s employment in STEMM in Higher Education and Research Institutes 2005:10 founder members 2014:114 members FUNDED BY ECU Royal Society Biochemical Society Dept of Health Scottish Funding Council Dept of Business Innovation and Skills STEMM = Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths and Medicine

Athena SWAN Ireland January 2014 proposal supported by the HEA, the IUA HR Directors group and the IUA Vice Presidents/Deans of Research group May 2014 HEA Funding agreed - in line with Government STEMM & Shared Services Strategy Athena SWAN National Steering Committee Formal launch – 5 th February 2015

The six principles Commitment and action Changing cultures and attitudes Absence of diversity at top levels High loss rate of women in science Short-term contracts Transitions to sustainable academic careers in science

Benefits of Athena SWAN Highlights areas in which to make positive changes Provides a focal point to formalise and communicate existing informal good practices Increases awareness of career progression issues Demonstrates good working environment to potential job applicants Encourages increased transparency Opportunity for departments to work together

AS Evaluation Report 2014 Driver for improving gender diversity Evidence of sustainable change Positive differences between departments who achieve awards

Athena SWAN awards – University Bronze Institution Award Issues identified Solid foundation Developing inclusive culture

Athena SWAN Awards Silver - Institution Activities underway Evidence of achievement in promoting gender equality Addressing challenges across the full range of STEMM Requires awards from majority of STEMM departments At least one of the award-holding departments must have a Silver award.

Athena SWAN awards – Department BRONZE Identified challenges Planned activities for the future SILVER On-going activity Evidence of impact Gold Significant record of activity and impact Beacons for gender equality Champions of Athena SWAN and good practice

Current AS Gold & Silver 5 Silver Institution Awards 7 Gold Departments UU Bronze Institution Award November 2013

Silver UniversitiesDate of award Imperial College LondonMay 2006 (renewed Nov 2012) Queen's University BelfastNov 2007 (renewed Nov 2011) University of NottinghamNov 2012 University of WarwickApril 2013 University of CambridgeApril 2014 Gold departments Date of award University of YorkDepartment of ChemistryNov 2007 (renewed 2010) University of EdinburghSchool of ChemistryApril 2012 Queen's University BelfastSchool of Biological SciencesNov 2012 Imperial College LondonDepartment of ChemistryApril 2013 Queen's University BelfastSchool of PsychologyNov 2013 University of CambridgeDepartment of Physics - The Cavendish LaboratoryNov 2013 University of YorkDepartment of BiologyNov 2013

PREVIOUS & CURRENT EU GENDER RELATED FUNDED PROJECTS Atlantic Philanthropies and Science Foundation Ireland €500,000 over 3 years. SFI (Science Foundation Ireland) 2008 – Gender Audit of S&E Equality Authority Mainstreaming Unit – 2011 – LEAD (Living Equality & Diversity Programme) UL HR Lead Partner FP7 FESTA €2.5m UL allocation €450,000 over 5 years – UL key partner PROGRESS – GEM Project €250,000 – over 2 years (Oct 2014) – UL HR Lead Partner

MARIE CONNOLLY Award Criteria

a solid foundation for eliminating gender bias and evidence of developing an inclusive culture an assessment of where the institution is regarding gender equality, in quantitative (staff data) and qualitative (policies, practices, systems and arrangements) terms a plan that builds on the assessment, any activities that are already in place and what has been learnt from these an organisational structure to carry proposed actions forward Bronze institutional award criteria

Overview of institutional application Letter of endorsement from President Self-assessment process The team, who we are, how we work A picture of the institution and its composition Description of institution, general data and analysis for staff Supporting and advancing women’s careers Data and analysis for staff specifically regarding career issues Any other comments Action plan Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound (SMART)

Data requirements Three years’ data or explain why not Key issues for action identified Staff pipeline plotted, identify problematic transition points Benchmark data where possible Dealing with data issues Easy action point: start collecting data going forward Augment data with staff/student surveys and focus groups Pool data between all institutions for a national benchmark – HEA UK HESA data if appropriate

Types of Data- Sample Proportion of all categories of academic staff by gender Leavers by grade and gender Proportion of men and women academic and research staff on fixed-term, open-ended, zero-hour and permanent contracts – whole institution compared with STEMM Evidence of Equal Pay Audits

Types of Data - Sample Gender Profile of UG/PG Degree classification Academic staff profile by gender, job family, full and part time, contract type, male ratio etc. Promotions by grade, gender and job family Profile of new starters Maternity, Paternity, Adoptive Leave - Maternity Leave return rates etc.

Key Transition Points Recruitment Processes – comment on job application, short-listing, offer and acceptance rates by gender and grade. How the institution’s recruitment processes encourage women to apply? Induction Personal Development Reviews Promotions Processes Selection Committees

The judging process Two submission rounds each year 30 th April 2015 & 30 th September 2015 Notice of intention to submit, by 28 th November 2014 Usually grouped by subject area, judged by a panel 5 panellists, 1 Chair – academics, E&D/HR, subject specialists 1 moderator, 1 note taker – ECU staff

Next Steps