Athena SWAN Silver Department award renewal
application
Name of institution:
UCL
Date of application: April 2013
Department : Division of Psychology and Language Sciences
Contact for application: Dr Anna Cox
Email: anna.cox@ucl.ac.uk
Telephone: 020 7679 0687
Departmental website address: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/psychlangsci/
Date of previous award: Bronze Award for Psychology Department March
2006 & Silver Award for Division of Psychology and Language Sciences
August 2009
Date of university Bronze and/or Silver SWAN award: Bronze Award for
UCL April 2013
Level of award applied for:
Silver award renewal
Athena SWAN Silver Department award renewals recognise that in addition
to university-wide policies the department has made progress in promoting
gender equality and addressing challenges particular to the discipline. It is
expected that after three years Athena SWAN Bronze Department award
holders should be at the stage to make a new application for a Silver
Department award. However, in exceptional circumstances a Bronze
Department renewal award submission can be made.
Not all institutions use the term ‘department’ and there are many equivalent academic groupings with different names, sizes and compositions. The
definition of a ‘department’ for SWAN purposes can be found on the Athena
SWAN website. Where the department unit that made the original application
has changed, it is up to the new unit for submission to decide whether a
renewal application is appropriate or whether a new award application should
be made. If in doubt, contact the Athena SWAN Charter Coordinator well in
advance to check eligibility.
It is essential that the contact person for the application is based in the
department.
At the end of each section state the number of words used.
Click here for additional guidance on completing this template.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Letter of endorsement from the head of UCL’s Psychology and Language Sciences
Table of abbreviations
Submission document
The action plan
Previous updated action plan
1
1. Letter of endorsement from the Head of Department – maximum 500
words
An accompanying letter of endorsement from the Head of Department should
explain how the SWAN action plan and activities in the department have and
will in future contribute to the overall department strategy and academic
mission.
The letter is an opportunity for the Head of Department to confirm their
support for the renewal application and to endorse and commend any women
and SET activities that have made a significant contribution to the
achievement of the departmental mission.
2
LONDON’S GLOBAL UNIVERSITY
UCL DIVISION OF PSYCHOLOGY &
LANGUAGE SCIENCES
Ms Sarah Dickinson
Senior Policy Advisor (Athena SWAN)
28 April 2013
Dear Ms Dickinson,
The UCL Division of Psychology and Language Sciences comprises nearly 300 staff
and 1600 students, and the majority in both groups are female, hence attention to
gender equality is of immense importance to us to ensure a productive workplace
culture and achievement of our major strategic goals in relation to research and
teaching. We were an early recipient (in 2006) of a Bronze award and this together
with our 2009 Silver award provided significant impetus to these efforts.
Although UCL Psychology has changed considerably during the subsequent years
(enlarging into a Division in 2008), I have continued to be Head throughout this
period. It is my firm belief that this continuity has permitted us to maintain and
enhance our commitment to gender equality and to ensure steady focus on our
previous Action Plans. My membership of our self-assessment team, and of the
Division’s Academic Careers and Development Committee (ACDC) which oversees it, sends a clear signal to staff that we value the principles embodied in the Athena
SWAN Charter.
A particular success – highlighted in our 2009 Action Plan – was to address the bias
in our staff appointment process whereby the proportion of females dropped
between application and interview, and between interview and appointment. Data
from the most recent years demonstrate that we have been quite successful in
fulfilling this commitment, although we recognize that it is an issue we need to keep
under close scrutiny. In 2011-12, for instance, 70% of applicants and 65% of
appointees were female, which represents a near two-thirds reduction in the ‘bias gap’. A contributing factor has been the policy of requiring recruitment panels to include female members. UCL has recently upgraded this to a formal requirement
that 25% of members be female, while our own most recent figures show that we
attain 50% female membership.
In the past 3 years (2009-12) 40 members of academic staff have been promoted, 19
males and 21 females. These numbers are almost in line with the proportion of
3
females amongst our academic staff (55%) indicating considerable success in
achieving equality in the promotions process.
We employ a sophisticated online workload monitoring system both to collect
comprehensive data about teaching, administrative, enabling, and research activities
and their distribution across staff, and to inform decisions by the Head of Division
and other senior managers regarding workload allocation. The results of the annual
assessment are published internally, permitting staff to compare their workloads
with those of their peers. The system has been very effective in eliminating gender
bias – figures from 2011-12, for example, reveal no gender differences.
The ACDC will play an important role in the next period in ensuring that the aims and
values of Athena SWAN continue to be embedded in Divisional decision making. A
particular focus will be on enhancing our mentoring arrangements for younger staff.
Yours sincerely,
David Shanks
Professor of Psychology
Head of Division
4
Table of abbreviations
SAT
Self Assessment Team
PALS
Division of Psychology and Language Sciences
ECR
Early Career Researchers (PhD students, PDRAs, Lecturers)
PDRA
Post-Doctoral Research Associate
ACDC
Academic Careers & Development Committee
HORD
Head of Research Department
PGR
Post Graduate Research Students
PGT
Post Graduate Taught Students
CEHP
Clinical, Educational, and Health Psychology
CPB
Cognitive, Perceptual and Brain Sciences
DevSci
Developmental Science
ICN
Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience
L&C
Language & Communication
Ling
Linguistics
SHaPS
Speech, Hearing and Phonetic Sciences
UCLIC
UCL Interaction Centre
5
2. The self-assessment process – maximum 1000 words
Describe the Self-Assessment Process. This should include:
a) A description of the self assessment team: members’ roles (both within the department and as part of the team) and their experiences of worklife balance, parental leave, flexible working etc;
The SAT consists of 10 members of PALS, includes men and women, a
variety of nationalities, ages, and experiences of parenthood (currently from
babies to adult):
Anna Cox (Senior Lecturer and Deputy Director of UCLIC) chairs the SAT.
She and her partner (also an academic) have two children and both work
full-time. She is an active member of the UCL 50:50 equality group, and
has contributed to both the UCL and Computer Science SATs in 2012 and
the PALS SAT in 2009. She leads an EPSRC funded project exploring the
impacts of technology on work-life balance.
As the child of two academics, including a former Dean of Women at
University College, University of Toronto, Zoë Belk (first-year MPhil/PhD
student in Linguistics) has long been interested in the challenges facing
women in academia.
Andrew Faulkner (Reader and HORD of SHaPS) started work at UCL in
1988 a few months before the birth of the younger of two daughters. His
partner also has a full-time academic career at the Open University. He
contributed to the previous PALS SWAN application and to the 2012 UCLwide SWAN Bronze application.
Cristina Gardini is the PaLS Human Resources Team Manager. She is
also the Divisional Equal Opportunity Liaision Officer and a UCL trained
Coach. She is currently piloting an AUA awarded Mentoring scheme for
administrative staff. UCL’s flexible working policies permit her to combine being a mother, and working part-time whilst studying.
Kate Jeffery (Professor of Behavioural Neuroscience and HORD of CPB)
is the founding director of the Institute of Behavioural Neuroscience. She
has three children and has worked full-time throughout her career, taking
advantage of UCL’s flexible working arrangements She co-led (with Jan
Atkinson) the SAT team for the 2009 SWAN Award and has an on-going
interest in advancing female careers via mentoring, the new ACDC and
various ad hoc activities including social networking and a recent panel
discussion at the Royal Society (http://bit.ly/RwUr8p).
Jiri Kaspar (PhD student in Linguistics) is one of the Student Academic
Representatives for his department where his role has been to represent
views and concerns of doctoral students.
Andrea Santi (Lecturer in Linguistics since 2012) and her partner, also an
6
academic, work full-time and have a young son. A flexible work schedule
enables her to balance child-care responsibilities with full-time work,
especially with both extended families being abroad.
David Shanks is Head of PALS and a Professor of Psychology with
research interests in learning, memory, and decision making. He works fulltime and is a single parent with three children, two of whom were born
since he joined UCL. During 10 years as head of department he has
introduced numerous equality-related policies and been involved in the
recruitment of many female staff at all levels of seniority.
Katrina Scior (Senior Lecturer and Academic Director of UCL's Doctorate
in Clinical Psychology) has had two children since joining UCL in 1999, and
currently has a 0.8 fte appointment. She has been involved in efforts to
increase access to clinical psychology training and has researched
potential selection biases in relation to gender and ethnicity within the
profession of clinical psychology. She contributed to the Division's previous
SWAN application. Her research focuses on intellectual disability and
literacy among different cultural and religious groups and stigma and
discrimination directed at people with intellectual disabilities.
Jyrki Tuomainen (Senior Lecturer in SHaPS) joined UCL in 2005 and has
been responsible for coordinating statistics modules for two undergraduate
courses. He is a father of four grown-up children who all live in Finland.
Additional contributions were made by Klaus Abels, Janette Atkinson, Sam
Green, Celia Morgan, Andrew Nevins, Kriszta Szendroi, Anita Wagner, and
Amanda Williams. Sarah Guise, Fiona McClement, and Harriet Jones
served as HR consultants.
b) an account of the self assessment process, with reference to year-onyear activities since the original Department award application, details
of the self assessment team meetings, including any consultation with
staff or individuals inside or outside of the university, and how these
have fed into the submission;
The PALS Athena SWAN SAT has met approximately once per term since
being founded in 2008. In past twelve months activity has intensified to the
point where we have been having monthly meetings to discuss progress.
The members of the SAT have changed due to alterations in the personal and
professional responsibilities of individuals over time.
We received our original Silver award in 2009. In autumn 2012 we requested,
and were granted, an extension to the deadline for application for renewal of
our Silver Award.
In addition to completing the actions in our plan we have conducted a number
of additional activities such as a maternity and parental survey and interviews
7
with members of staff about their perceptions of attitudes towards flexible
working with the division. Progress on our actions has been reported at the
Divisional Staff Meeting alongside other committees.
We recognise that consistent engagement with the Athena SWAN agenda is
important for progress in advancing the careers of women and have therefore
taken important steps to further integrate the Athena SWAN process into
Divisional decision-making via the creation of a new committee, the ACDC
(section 2c). [Action 2.1]
SAT members have contributed to SAT meetings in other departments and at
University level, have attended Going For Silver training and have discussed
our progress and plans with Prof Teresa McCormack from Queens University
Belfast.
c) Plans for the future of the self assessment team, such as how often the
team will continue to meet, any reporting mechanisms and in particular
how the self assessment team intends to monitor implementation of the
action plan.
From April 2013, the SAT will continue as a formal Divisional committee, the
ACDC, and will
1.
maintain a formal timetable for meetings (once per term)
2.
have a formal reporting structure: it will publish minutes on our intranet
alongside other key committees and give a termly report on progress to
the Divisional staff meeting
3.
have responsibility for future Athena SWAN applications,
4.
monitor progress on implementation of the action plan
5.
consider the types of data presented in this application, split by gender,
on an annual basis
6.
have oversight of all the policies and practices related to staff and
students, ensuring that new and existing policies are effectively
implemented and monitored
7.
have a wider role in terms of organizing mentoring, overseeing
workload distribution and promotion progress
8.
consider and respond to issues raised in the staff survey
9.
organise events that raise the profile of the Athena SWAN agenda e.g.,
the Women’s Champion Celebration Lecture
(1000 words)
8
2. A picture of the department – maximum 2000 words
a) Provide a pen-picture of the department to set the context for the
application, outlining in particular any significant changes since the
original award.
PALS was formed in 2008 by the merging of 3 existing departments. We
currently have approximately 286 staff, about 55% of whom are female (160).
We have 639 undergraduate students (81% female), 570 PGT students (76%
female), and 408 PGR students (75% female).
The Division brings together researchers in a range of disciplines such as
cognition, neuroscience, linguistics, education, communication, medicine,
health, phonetics, and development to understand both basic and applied
problems. PALS is divided amongst 8 Research Departments:
Clinical, Educational, and Health Psychology
Cognitive, Perceptual and Brain Sciences
Developmental Science
Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience
Language & Communication
Linguistics
Speech, Hearing and Phonetic Sciences
UCL Interaction Centre
Over the past 4 years we have worked hard to address differences in practice
across the different departments in order to create a unified Divisional culture.
This process has been facilitated by regular meetings of the Divisional level
committees with responsibility for management of teaching, research,
administration, IT, etc, and termly staff meetings.
b) Provide data and a short analysis for at least the last five years (where
possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the following,
commenting on changes and progress made against the original action
plan and application, and initiatives intended for the action plan going
forward.
Student data
(i) Access and foundation male and female numbers
None
(ii) Undergraduate male and female numbers
PALS offers three undergraduate degree courses: BSc Psychology, BSc
Psychology & Language Sciences, and BA Linguistics. Due to the very
small numbers of part-time students (e.g. only one on the BSc Psychology
9
degree), the following numbers include both full- and part-time students.
Over the last five years, females have outnumbered males by an average
of about 5:1 which is consistent with the national picture for Psychology
(~81% female).
In our 2009 SWAN application we noted that “occupational feminization” is ultimately detrimental to women as, historically, work that is mainly
performed by women has been undervalued. In addition, the imbalance in
the numbers of males and females on our courses raises general
equalities issues. We therefore explored the evidence surrounding
occupational feminization and its effects on female career structures,
status and pay [2009Action1]. As a result of that review, we implemented
another action: to reduce the ratio of females to males on our courses
[2009Action1a].
In line with that action, this ratio has been falling (from 5.81 females for
every male in 2007/08, to 5.42:1 in 2009/10 and to 4.1 by 2011/12). In
2011 BSc Psychology changed its admission criteria to one, but preferably
2, science subjects at A-level (biology, chemistry, physics, maths and
psychology), which further tends to encourage male students. The
proportion of males in first year undergraduate degrees within PALS has
significantly (χ2(4)=11.34, p=0.023) increased from the year 2007/2008 to
2011/2012 from 0.15 to 0.20.
As the two graphs below indicate, males and females appear to have
similar levels of attainment, with on average 31% of (approx. 535) female
students and 29% of (approx. 112) male students obtaining a first class
degree.
10
As a result of the previous action plan we have been collecting exit data
from our undergraduate students [2009Action6]. Ongoing analysis of this
data set is required in order to monitor whether different proportions of
males and females choose academic and clinical (or other) careers.
[Action 3.4]
(iii) Postgraduate male and female numbers on and completing taught
courses.
PALS offers over 20 taught Masters programmes. There are still
significantly more PGT females than males, but the imbalance is less than
at undergraduate level. This is indicative of a leaky pipeline from
undergraduate to postgraduate level, which we address in section iv
below, and in Action 3.1.
11
Across the last six years, the ratio of females to males has been rising
(from 2.55 females for every male in 2007/08, to 3.2 by 2012/13) with both
male and female student numbers increasing since 2007/08.
The data below demonstrate that similar proportions of male and female
students successfully complete taught postgraduate degrees. The figure
shows the percentage of students who started in each academic year who
have completed to date. The lower percentage of those from the 2011/12
cohort who have completed is explained by those studying part-time
across 12+ months.
12
(iv) Postgraduate male and female numbers on research degrees and
completion times
PALS offers five professional doctoral courses in addition to opportunities for
research degrees leading to a PhD award.
Females continue to outnumber males at the PGR level. In 2007/08 there
were 4.25 female research students to every male. This number peaked in
2008/09 at 5.81:1 but has been declining since. In 2011/2012, there were 3.33
female PGR students to every male. Again this is lower than the ratio at
undergraduate level.
PGR numbers have increased over recent years, but male student numbers
have increased more rapidly than female numbers, accounting for the
declining female to male student ratio. One cause of this appears to be the
recruitment process which we discuss below.
Neither the proportion of students completing their doctorate, nor the length of
time taken to submission differs between the genders.
13
We have completed a survey of the destinations of PhD students who have
left (from 2007-2012). Of a total of 96 PhD graduates in this time period, 64%
were female (61 females and 35 males). We were able to obtain data for all
but 4 of these students. Following their PhD, 83% of males and 64% of
females were successful in gaining academic positions (postdoctoral
researchers or university lecturers). In addition, 10% of females and 3% of
males are employed in clinical positions. A further 11% of males and 7% of
females work within other employment.
14
Our data suggest that there is a trend towards a gender difference in exit
destinations of our PhD students (p=0.08). If this is a national (or even
international) trend then it may explain some of our under-recruitment of
female staff at Lecturer level, as female PhD students are more likely to enter
clinical practice than male students, with the converse being the case for
academic (postdoctoral and lecturer) positions.
Our previous self-assessment suggested that there was a fall-off of females at
the transition from post-graduate taught to post-graduate research level. We
hypothesised that one contributing factor may be that females find the
prospect of an academic career less appealing than males and so we
instituted an action to address this by providing more support for PhD
students via an ECR forum. The ECR forum was seen as largely successful.
However, when one organiser left and the other took maternity leave, no
volunteers were found to continue organising the forum. This coincided with
the creation of the UCL Neuroscience ECR Forum which we viewed as being
a good alternative. Our ECRs have been encouraged to attend but some feel
that the content is not always relevant and that the title of the forum suggests
that it is not relevant to those not working directly in Neuroscience. We will
survey ECRs to determine whether there is support to re-establish the PALS
ECR forum [Action 4.4]
As shown below, an assessment of our current student pipeline shows a
gradual decline of women from undergraduate to PGT and PGR levels.
15
We will take action to encourage confidence and take-up of academic careers
by creating materials for workshops on academic careers to be embedded
within all taught programmes, including undergraduate programmes [Action
3.1].
16
(v) Ratio of course applications to offers and acceptances by gender for
undergraduate, postgraduate taught and postgraduate research degrees.
The figure below shows data from the undergraduate recruitment process,
averaged across 6 years from 2007/08 to 2012/13. Females made up 80.3%
of the applicants, received 82.4% of the offers made, and accepted 82.3% of
the places.
The figure below shows data from the PGT recruitment process, averaged
across the same period. Females made up 78.13% of the applicants,
received 73.3% of the offers made, and accepted 73.5% of the places.
17
These data suggest that females are somewhat less likely to be made an offer
for PGT courses compared to males.
The figure below shows data from the PGR recruitment process, averaged
across the same period. Females made up 80.5% of the applicants, received
72.5% of the offers made, and accepted 74.5% of the places.
These data suggest that females are less likely to be made an offer compared
to males, and that this trend may be somewhat more pronounced for the offer
stage at post-graduate research programme level than for post-graduate
taught programmes. In particular, this translates to a higher proportion of male
PGR students than one might expect, given the percentage of males in the
applicant pool. This could account for the drop in the ratio of females to
males from PGT to PGR level.
18
Whilst the percentage of female
applicants has remained fairly
stable over the past 6 years at
around 80%, the percentage of
offers made to females has been
lower, at around 70% in recent
years.
Note - the 2008/09 PGR
applications figures are much
lower than previous and
subsequent years. This is likely
to be a systematic problem on
the data held on the UCL Student
database and may have been
caused by the restructuring of the
Division that occurred in that
year.
These data suggest that the
recruitment process may be a
contributing factor to the lower
number of female PGRs than
might otherwise be expected.
In order to address this under
recruitment of female PGRs we
will investigate whether females
tend to apply disproportionately
for more selective programmes,
whether the issue is with a
particular doctoral programme
(e.g. PhD student recruitment or
on one of the professional
doctoral programmes), or exists
more generally across the board.
We will also investigate whether
changes in recruitment of PhD
students into specific areas such
as Cognitive Neuroscience,
which tend to be more popular
with male students, may play a
role [Actions 3.2a and 3.2b].
Staff data
19
(vi) Female:male ratio of academic staff and research staff
The Division of Psychology and Language Sciences was restructured in 2008
and therefore we only have four years of data that includes staff in the current
Division. The data included in our previous submission are not comparable.
Females outnumber males at PDRA and Lecturer levels, while males
outnumber females at Senior Lecturer, Reader and Professor levels. This is
indicative of a leaky pipeline across the academic grades. The ratio of
females to males has stayed relatively stable within each of the five grades
over the 4 years, and the average ratio of females to males is indicated in the
figure below.
The ratio of females to males in 2012 is indicated in the graph below.
It is clear from the graph above that there is a large fall-off from Lecturer to
Senior Lecturer, and again from Senior Lecturer to Reader. 63% of those at
20
Lecturer or equivalent are women and this falls to 47% at Senior Lecturer or
equivalent.
One possible explanation for the fall off from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer is
that the 87 members of staff currently at Lecturer level or equivalent include
29 teaching fellows. Nineteen of these staff are on funding-limited contracts
and are either combining a part-time teaching role with a clinical role
elsewhere, or are actively seeking post-doctoral or full faculty positions. In
both cases, it is likely that these staff members do not remain in the Division
long enough to progress to a more senior position. We will investigate
whether these members of staff have a slower than expected progression of
their academic careers [Action 3.3].
Removing the teaching fellows from the data set suggests that there is still a
10% drop from Lecturer (58%) to Senior Lecturer (47%) and therefore does
not completely explain the fall-off.
A thorough analysis of data on workload (specifically teaching and
administrative load) and research productivity (the primary criterion for
promotion) [2009Action2] suggests that it is unlikely that lower levels of
productivity for women is the cause of the drop-off. As discussed in the
sections below, we have found no evidence of biases in recruitment and
promotion processes. Actions to address this are discussed in the following
sections.
Currently, only 27% of Readers are female. Just two years ago the ratio was
50:50 demonstrating that the ratio can change dramatically year on year due
to the small numbers of staff at this level, On average, across the past four
years, female staff have made up 37% of Readers and 40% of Professors.
There is no drop-off at this transition suggesting that those who make it to
Reader are subsequently promoted to Professor.
21
(vii)
Turnover by grade and gender
Levels of turnover are very low, particularly at more senior grades. In the past
four years 29 females and 24 males have left the Division.
Raw numbers of staff leaving
Female
2009
Male
2010
2011
2012
Total
Professor
0
Reader
0
Senior
Lecturer
2009
2010
2011
2012
1
Total
1
0
1
1
1
1
2
Lecturer
1
1
4
4
10
1
4
1
1
7
PDRA
2
6
4
6
18
2
4
4
4
14
[1997 words]
22
Supporting and advancing women’s careers – maximum 5000 words
Please provide a report covering the following sections 4 – 7. Within each
section provide data and a short analysis for at least the last three years
(including clearly labelled graphical illustrations where possible) on the data
sets listed, commenting on changes and progress made since the original
application, and including details of successes and where actions have not
worked and planned initiatives going forward.
Please also attach the action plan from your last application with an additional
column indicating the level of progress achieved (e.g. zero, limited, excellent,
completed).
4. Key career transition points
(i)
Job application and success rates by gender and grade
During 2009-2012, 173 people were appointed to roles across the PDRA,
Lecturer, Senior Lecturer/Reader, and Professor levels. There were a higher
number of female applicants in all years (72.5% of applicants) as expected.
Recruitment of academic staff
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
Male
Female
total
Male
Female
total
Male
Female
total
Applicant
594
1654
2248
297
805
1102
428
1007
1435
Interview
49
73
122
40
83
123
56
89
145
Appointed
37
46
83
13
25
38
18
34
52
23
As reported in our 2009 application, statistical analysis of recruitment data
from 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 identified that fewer females were being
appointed than would be expected given the numbers applying and being
interviewed. The imbalance identified had declined steadily over the previous
three years.
Analysis of recruitment data for 2009 to 2012 [2009Action3] demonstrates
considerable success in reducing this bias still further. The graph above
shows that in 2009-10 female applicants were not being appointed at the rate
that one would have expected given the number of applicants. In contrast,
statistical analysis of the data from 2010-11 and 2011-12 demonstrates that
there is no significant evidence of a marked gender imbalance in numbers of
women interviewed or appointed. We attribute this success to our policy of
requiring recruitment panels to include female members.
It is possible that these data hide a gender bias to recruit male members of
staff at more senior levels. We will explore these data in more detail in order
to identify whether this is the case [Action 4.1c].
However, we have collected anecdotes of low and zero numbers of female
applicants for some posts. We recognise that this is a serious problem which
we hope to address by monitoring the recruitment of women in the Division.
The ACDC will require Research Departments to collect and return data on
the gender split of applicant pools, shortlists, and appointments. Panels will
be required to justify why shortlists deviate from the gender split of the
applicant pool [Action 4.1a].
24
(ii)
Applications for promotion and success rates by gender and
grade
Our promotions process relies on staff to self-nominate for promotion in
response to a communication from HR asking all staff to consider whether
they are candidates for promotion. In order to increase the numbers of female
staff considering promotion we have amended the Divisional guidelines for
appraisers in the formal Staff Appraisal process to encourage them to
specifically consider whether appraisees are near the top of their scale and to
incentivise progression for those who might not otherwise seek it. We now
expect discussion about promotion to be a part of all appraisal meetings
(including for professorial staff, for whom a UCL pay banding system applies)
and will be monitoring that this occurs as part of Action 5.2.
Approximately 10% of Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Readers in the
Division are promoted each year. The figure below demonstrates that,
although there is a small amount of variance year on year, approximately
equal numbers of males (19) and females (21) have been successfully
promoted over the last three years. Given that female staff make up
approximately 55% of staff at these levels, these numbers suggest that male
and female staff are equally likely to be promoted. Statistical analysis shows
no gender difference across all three years or within each year.
This conclusion is supported by our analysis that demonstrated that there are
no statistically significant differences between males and females in the
Division in terms of number of publications, number of citations, h-index,
current grant value, or cumulative grant values [2009Action6].
(iii)
Impact of activities to support the recruitment of staff – how the
department’s recruitment processes ensure that female candidates are attracted to apply, and how the department ensures its short listing,
selection processes and criteria comply with the university’s equal opportunities policies
25
Attracting female candidates: We include details about family–friendly policies
on both our recruitment adverts and our website, where the Athena SWAN
logo is prominently displayed. We will be creating a template for future
recruitment advertisements to support Research Departments in creating
advertisements that do not use language that may be more appealing to men
than to women [Action 4.2].
Ensuring compliance with university’s equal opportunities policy: we believe
the policy of requiring recruitment panels to include female members (recently
upgraded to a formal requirement that 25% of members be female) has
contributed to the reversal of the gender imbalance in numbers of women
interviewed or appointed, as outlined in section 4(i).
We have conducted an analysis of the gender split of interview panels.
It would appear that we have missing data for calendar year 2009 and 2010
as only very small numbers have been recorded. The data for 2012 only
currently includes panels that were held between January and May 2012.
The graph above shows that in 2011 40% of panel members were female,
and that in the first 5 months of 2012, 50% of members were female. We will
ensure that these data are recorded more comprehensively in future [Action
4.1b] and reviewed annually.
Representatives from all Research Departments in the Division attended an
unconscious bias workshop in 2012. Feedback on the workshop suggested
that it was useful but issues existed in terms of the way in which the workshop
was delivered. This has been fed back to the organisers and will help the
planning of future workshops.
(iv)
Impact of activities to support staff at key career transition points –
interventions, programmes and activities that support women at the
26
crucial stages, such as personal development training, opportunities for
networking, mentoring programmes and leadership training.
The key transition point at which gender ratios begin to change unfavourably
is from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer, through to Reader.
Support for those at lecturer level
As discussed in Section 2, we will survey ECRs in order to evaluate whether
there is a desire to re-establish the PALS ECR forum [Action4.4].
The Neuroscience ECR forum organised and publicised a number of
workshops on grant-writing and writing research papers. Our staff survey
demonstrates that these have been received positively by many PALS staff.
In order to ensure that all Lecturers attend such events, we will make it a
requirement of probation that members of staff at Lecturer level attend these
(or similar) workshops. [Action 4.3a]
We have a policy of annual teaching peer observation whereby staff can
request any other member of staff to conduct that observation. In addition, in
order to provide support and mentoring for all aspects of the job of
probationary lecturing staff, we will ensure that individuals are allocated a
teaching partner. The teaching partners will observe each other’s teaching
and provide a report about teaching aims, feedback on good practice and any
improvements that could be made. [Action 4.3b]
In response to our 2009 action plan, we piloted a mentoring scheme that
attracted 14 female mentees and 11 mentors (male and female). We
conducted a survey to evaluate the scheme in autumn 2010, and again in
summer 2011. Feedback on the scheme was positive and we are therefore
expanding the Divisional mentoring scheme to make it more widely available.
The expansion of the scheme will be launched in December 2013. Female
lecturers will be strongly encouraged to take advantage of the scheme.
[Action 4.3c]
Additional support for those at senior lecturer level
On promotion to Senior Lecturer, women will be encouraged to attend the
Springboard Women's Development Programme. This will be included in the
guidance to appraisers. [Action 4.4a]
Any Senior Lecturers who have not already done so will be strongly
encouraged to take advantage of the Divisional mentoring scheme. [Action
4.4b]
5. Career development
(i)
Impact of activities to support promotion and career development –
appraisal, career development process, promotion criteria.
Performance at all levels is appraised on a biennial basis as part of the
obligatory UCL Staff Appraisal process which is a confidential face-to-face
27
meeting at which goals are set in all domains of professional service. A signed
report is produced agreeing objectives for the coming period and including
comments on performance by both the reviewee and reviewer. We
disseminated new Divisional guidance to all appraisers [2009Action5]
requiring appraisers to explicitly discuss promotion prospects, additional pay
increments for those at the top of their scale, and the impact of work-life
balance issues on working life and career progression.
Data on the value of the appraisal process were collected as part of the UCL
Staff Survey, and is shown in the table below. The figures indicate the
number of staff (split by male and female) who gave a positive response to
the statements in the survey. Although there are no gender differences, the
results are somewhat disappointing as they indicate that over 19% of staff
believed they had not been appraised in the preceding 24 months (a figure
which is considerably higher than the true number, <10%) and that 50% of
staff did not feel that their appraisal led to skill or performance enhancement.
The ACDC will request a report from the Divisional HR team on an annual
basis in order to monitor gender differences in appraisals to check that female
members of staff are not more likely to go for a significant period without
appraisal [Action 5.1]
number of respondents:
I have had an appraisal within the last 24
months
My last appraisal led to my developing my
skills and/or improving my performance
My last appraisal accurately acknowledged
my performance
Div of Psychology &
Language Sciences
% Positive score
229
Male
91
Female
130
81
83
79
50
48
52
75
76
74
Our current guidance to appraisers and appraisees lists topics that should be
discussed within the context of the appraisal, including work-life balance and
promotion. As the formal record of appraisal is confidential we do not
currently have any mechanism for monitoring whether this actually happens.
We will therefore require appraisers to confirm that they have discussed these
issues in the appraisal by requiring a form to be completed and returned to
the Divisional HR team. [Action 5.2a]
The ACDC will augment the current appraisal process by taking a more proactive position, monitoring the career progression of staff members [action
5.2b] and identifying those who should be considered for promotion. Those
who have been at a grade point for an unusually long time and those who are
at the top of the scale for a particular grade will be identified and reported to
the HoD for consideration in the next promotion round. [Action 5.2c]
28
Questions regarding staff perceptions of the promotions process are included
in our staff survey and are reproduced below:
number of respondents:
I believe I have the opportunity for personal development
and growth at UCL
There are sufficient opportunities for me to receive training
to improve my skills in my current job
I am given a real opportunity to improve my skills at UCL
I am encouraged to show initiative and be proactive at UCL
The promotion process at UCL is applied fairly
The grading review process at UCL is applied fairly
%
Positive
score
229
Male
91
Female
130
70
75
68
68
60
68
31
28
69
67
72
40
29
68
55
67
24
27
A very low percentage of staff felt that the promotion process and grading
review process is applied fairly. In addition, there appears to be a difference
in the perceptions of males and females on these items – in particular, only
24% of females responded positively that the promotion process is applied
fairly, compared to 40% of males. It is worth noting that our success rate for
academic promotions is close to 100%. We will invite all female staff to a
meeting with the Divisional Management Group to discuss the promotions
process and criteria. Aims of the meeting are a) to encourage female staff to
apply and b) to dispel any fears that the process is not applied fairly. [Action
5.3a]
When staff are in the process of applying for promotion, the Division facilitates
the preparation of applications by suggesting that staff obtain copies of
applications from others who have recently been successful. The ACDC will
collate a set of successful applications for promotion to each grade and make
these available to all staff. By doing so we hope to make the criteria and
variety of routes to promotion more visible to staff. [Action 5.3b]
(ii)
Impact of activities to support induction and training – support
provided to new staff at all levels, and any gender equality training.
UCL offers a recruitment briefing which is compulsory for those on recruitment
panels. This covers Equalities and Diversity and the Equality Act. It is also
now compulsory for all new staff to undertake the online Equalities and
Diversity training provided by UCL HR. However this is a relatively new
development and therefore some staff may not be adequately trained. We will
require all staff (including those who have been here for many years) to
complete this course in order to ensure that they have adequate gender
equality training. [Action 5.4]
In addition to UCL induction days for new staff, we maintain a staff handbook
on the web with all the relevant information about the Division and how it
operates. This includes information regarding family friendly policies,
29
maternity and paternity leave and sabbaticals, support for working at home
and details about formal flexible working arrangements. This will be updated
with details of the Divisional mentoring scheme and support for new staff
members as outlined in our action plan. Maintenance of this handbook is the
responsibility of the Divisional HR team. [Action 5.5]
(iii)
Impact of activities that support female students – support (formal
and informal) provided for female students to enable them to make the
transition to a sustainable academic career, particularly from
postgraduate to researcher, such as mentoring, seminars and pastoral
support and the right to request a female personal tutor.
All taught students at undergraduate and postgraduate level have a personal
tutor with whom they can discuss career choices. Our planned careers
workshops will provide further support for these students. [Action 3.1].
Research students on the professional doctorates also have personal tutors.
Each Research Department has a Graduate Tutor who has responsibility for
the progression of PhD students. Graduate Tutors meet quarterly at the PGR
Committee to discuss issues arising and to report on progress of students
within their Department. Student representatives are part of this committee.
In addition to the PALS ECR Forum and the UCL Neuroscience ECR forum
already mentioned, four female PGR students currently run a Postgraduate
Peers Group (PPG) that holds weekly events at which PhD students can
practice their MPhil-PhD upgrade talks. They also organise social events and
an annual residential conference at which students give spoken or poster
presentations. These events support networking and the development of
confidence in presenting research. They also circulate details of relevant
training opportunities to members of the group. We do not currently have
mentoring support for this group. We will therefore extend our mentoring
provision to PhD students. [Action 4.2c]
We have a number of key staff who provide support for female students:
 3 Divisional Equal Opportunity Liaison Officers (DEOLOs), one of
whom has a specific remit to provide students with formal or informal
advice about equal opportunities issues such as discrimination,
harassment, or disability access.
 Female students’ tutor.
6. Organisation and culture
(i)
Male and female representation on committees – provide a
breakdown by committee.
30
The following table shows the number of female academic staff on each
Divisional level committee. All numbers are female/male (total).
Divisional Committee
Divisional Management
Undergraduate Taught
Post-Graduate Research
Post-Graduate Taught
Professional Doctorates
Divisional Safety
Divisional Ethics
Divisional IT
ACDC
Committee Chairs/co-chairs
Chair
M
F
F
M&F co-chairs
M
M
F
M
F
2012/13
3/8 (11)
9/11 (20)
14/8 (22)
27/13 (40)
5/5 (10)
5/6 (11)
4/4 (8)
4/14 (18)
6/6 (12)
5/5 (10)
The smaller number of women on the Divisional Management Team is a
natural consequence of the gender breakdown of senior academics in the
Division. Although female staff comprise just over 51% of the members of
Divisional committees, there is a tendency for women to be over-represented
on committees that relate to students (e.g., Post-Graduate Research & PostGraduate Taught) and under-represented on the Divisional IT committee. We
will write to the chairs of these committees to raise awareness of this
imbalance and to request that gender balance be considered when roles
rotate. [Action 6.1a]. The ACDC will monitor gender balance on committees
on an annual basis [Action 6.1b].
(ii)
Female:male ratio of academic and research staff on fixed-term
contracts and open-ended (permanent) contracts
In the Division, fixed term contracts are only used for staff who will be
employed on a short-term basis (typically a year or less) to cover maternity or
sabbatical leave, etc. We currently have only 1 person (female) on a fixed
term contract (at PDRA level). There are no staff on fixed-term contracts from
lecturer upwards.
Whilst the vast majority of academic and research staff are now on permanent
or open-ended contracts, the reality for researchers and teaching fellows is
that these are still usually funding-limited. Thus there continue to be
challenges with non-renewal of research posts linked to grants in highly
specialized research areas where the individual cannot be placed in a
different research team when their funding runs out. All staff at risk in this
category are put onto the UCL redeployment database and are given priority
access to new posts, if considered suitable.
(iii)
Representation on decision-making committees –evidence of
gender equality in the mechanism for selecting representatives.
31
It is important to ensure that women are not ‘overloaded’ with committee work,
while also making sure that they have a voice in decision-making. From
2013, Committee membership in the Division will be reviewed annually and
additional advice/monitoring related to equal opportunities will be provided by
the ACDC [action 6.1a & b].
Committee work is a section on the workload analysis form, and is taken into
account when assessing workload distribution.
(iv)
Workload model – describe the systems in place to ensure that
workload allocations, including pastoral and administrative
responsibilities (including the responsibility for work on women and
science) are transparent, fairly applied and are taken into account at
appraisal and in promotion criteria.
For a number of years, the Division has monitored workload annually using a
formal online system to collect information on teaching activity, administrative
and enabling roles, and research output. The data are made available to all
staff for comparison and are used to balance duties fairly across staff. When
output is affected (or potentially so) by maternity leave etc, this is indicated.
Statistical analysis shows no differences between genders [2009Action2].
Data from our staff survey results demonstrate that despite 62% of women in
the Division feeling that they are given realistic deadlines and targets, 55%
report that they regularly work excessive hours (see below). A higher
percentage of males (63%) reported regularly working excessive hours than
females (55%). Our analysis of a number of different indicators of research
performance does not suggest that there is any difference between genders in
terms of research success [2009Action6]. We will continue to monitor the
gender split on teaching, administration and research output and explore
32
whether there are any differences between Research Departments [Action
6.2a]. The workload model will be amended to include the time spent on
SWAN SAT and ACDC matters [Action 6.2b].
number of respondents:
I am given realistic deadlines and targets to work to
I can meet the requirements of my job without regularly
working excessive hours
I can rely on my line manager/academic leader to help me
out with a work problem
%
Positive
score
229
62
Male
91
63
Female
130
62
41
37
45
76
82
71
Whilst 71% of women feel that they can rely on their line manager to help
them with a work problem, this is still lower than the 82% of male staff in the
Division that feel they can. We will explore whether these gender differences
differ across the Research Departments [Action 6.3].
(v)
Timing of departmental meetings and social gatherings – evidence
of consideration for those with family responsibilities, for example what
the department considers to be core hours and whether there is a more
flexible system in place.
Divisional staff meetings are held quarterly and run from 2-4pm.
Each research department (except for CEHP) has its own seminar series. We
were pleased to discover that all seminars are scheduled to finish before 5pm.
However, UCL has recently stated that “core business should be within core hours” which are defined as being 10am to 4pm. We will ensure that this is effectively communicated to those organising each of the seminar series and
encourage them to reschedule their seminars within core hours [Action 6.5a].
In addition to seminars, across the Division there are a range of meetings that
are held at various times of the day: Breakfast journal club, tea-time talks,
UCLIC brown bag lunches, and LingLunches.
Many social events tend to be organised to follow on from seminars. These
largely occur at the end of the day, e.g., from 5.00pm. We recognise that the
timing of these events may restrict participation and will request that research
departments and the organisers of seminar series record and return data on
timing of social events. Heads of Research Departments will be expected to
ensure that at least one third of such events fall within core hours (i.e.
between 10am and 4pm). [action 6.4]
(vi)
Culture –demonstrate how the department is female-friendly and
inclusive and ensures visibility of women, for example external
speakers. ‘Culture’ refers to the language, behaviours and other informal interactions that characterise the atmosphere of the
33
department, and includes all staff (academic, technical and support)
and students.
We have requested data on the gender split of speakers from the organisers
of each of the departmental seminar series as a first step in raising awareness
of the issue. Departments do not currently have any archival data from
previous years regarding the gender split of those who were invited to, and
who accepted invitations, to give seminars and we are therefore unable to
assess this as we would like. The ACDC will therefore request that these
data be collated and returned on an annual basis. [Action 6.5b]
Although the staff questionnaire refers to UCL, we believe that the Divisional
culture is likely to have a strong influence on how happy people are at work.
The table below details the percentage of respondents who gave a positive
score to each of the items, and also lists these by gender. Our staff survey
results suggest no differences related to gender regarding how happy people
are at work.
number of respondents:
I would recommend UCL as a good place to work
I am proud to work for UCL
I feel a strong sense of belonging to my
department/division
I feel a strong sense of belonging to UCL
I suggest ideas to improve our ways of doing things
I am happy to go the “extra mile” at work when required I believe that action will be taken on problems identified
in this survey
% Positive
score
229
83
86
Male
91
84
90
Female
130
84
84
73
68
68
95
76
69
67
93
73
67
66
97
42
43
45
We are a large Division which raises some challenges when considering how
to support staff across a number of Research Departments. We have a social
space in the Division where undergraduates, postgraduates and staff come
together for coffee which is also used to host post-seminar social events.
Each year we host a range of Christmas events for staff and students
including the creation of an annual Staff Christmas YouTube video which
features as many members of the Division as would like to take part (the 2012
video has already received nearly 2500 viewings). We plan to organise an
annual work-life balance week which will consist of a number of events aimed
to support staff in achieving an effective balance between work and life
outside the workplace. Our current ideas include providing guidance and
events on a range of topics including: how to use ICT to support flexible
working whilst not becoming a slave to your mobile phone; physical
ergonomics advice for using mobile technologies; managing stress; keeping
fit; formal arrangements for flexible working; and sabbatical policies [Action
6.7].
In order to ensure the visibility of women and the Athena SWAN agenda, we
have been raising awareness of events featuring women, like Soapbox
Science and our own Divisional Women’s Champion Celebration lecture. We 34
raised awareness of International Women’s Day 2013 by circulating details of
a number of related activities to staff via email. We will continue to host an
annual Women’s Champion Celebration Lecture, and aim to host an additional event in coming years to raise awareness of International Women’s Day. [Action 6.6]
(vii)
Outreach activities – level of participation by female and male staff in
outreach activities with schools and colleges and other centres, and
how the department ensures that this is recognised and rewarded (e.g.
in appraisal and promotion).
We record outreach activities and recognize them in our promotion process.
We undertake in excess of 20 activities each year, approximately evenly
divided between female and male staff members.
Our outreach activities are diverse as well as extensive and include open
days, school conferences and visits, school career talks, taster sessions, and
public engagement activities which aim to inspire women to consider a career
in science. Examples include:
Dr Carolyn McGettigan in ‘I’m a Scientist, Get Me Out of Here!’, a web-based
public engagement event in which school pupils post questions to, and
participate in live web chats with, scientists working around the UK.
Prof Sarah-Jayne Blakemore gave a BBC Radio 3 talk on changes in the
teenage brain. Teenagers often act on impulse, are lazy, emotional and get
into trouble with the police and parents. Using recent research about the
radical changes taking place in the adolescent brain, she argued that we need
to rethink our attitudes towards youth and the place of teenagers in society.
Several staff contributed to the Royal Society’s Summer Science Exhibit ‘Listening and Speaking in a Noisy World’. The exhibition was aimed primarily at secondary school children, and visited by some 14,000 people over a
week. Leading contributions to this event were reflected in the annual
appraisals of Prof Stuart Rosen and Prof Valerie Hazan.
Professor Sophie Scott took her laughter lab to the Royal Society’s Summer Science Exhibit ‘LOL: The Science and Art of Laughter’ and also contributed to coverage on BBC Radio 4 and the Daily Mail.
7. Flexibility and managing career breaks
(i)
Maternity return rate
35
We currently have data regarding the number of female staff taking maternity
leave over 3 calendar years. All but two of the 32 staff who took maternity
leave have returned to work.
(ii)
Paternity, adoption and parental leave uptake
Paternity/Adoption leave policy is always discussed at Induction with new
starters. In addition, we ensure that female employees who apply for
maternity leave entitlement are aware that UCL is encouraging and promoting
shared maternity/paternity leave with partners whether they are working at
UCL or at another organisation.
From 1 April 2013 (fully) paid paternity leave at UCL will increase from two
working weeks to four working weeks, although we have been offering this
arrangement to our own staff for over four years. Since Jan 2009 we have had
only 4 applications for paternity leave: 1 from a member of support staff and 3
from academics. All applications were fully supported and employees were
encouraged to take longer than two weeks if they felt they needed that time.
Existing policies enable men to take extended paternity leave but they do not
currently qualify for sabbatical leave when returning. In response we have
extended UCL's policy of sabbatical leave for those returning from maternity
to men/partners (including same sex partners) who have taken 3 months or
more of Additional Paternity/Adoption leave. Our aim is to provide women
with an easier transition back to work by supporting the choices of male and
same-sex partners who wish to take an active role in the care of infants, and
thereby supporting longer term benefits by encouraging even distribution of
childcare responsibilities at home. We will ensure staff are aware of this
policy on an annual basis and monitor uptake. [Action7.1]
(iii)
Numbers of applications and success rates for flexible working by
gender and grade
36
No central records are held of applications for and success rates for flexible
working arrangements. It is therefore not possible for us to determine the
number of academic staff who have applied for flexible working. We will
therefore identify a method for recording and monitoring this at the divisional
level [Action 7.2b]
(iv)
Flexible working –numbers of staff working flexibly and their grades
and gender, whether there is a formal or informal system, the support
and training provided for managers in promoting and managing flexible
working arrangements, and how the department raises awareness of
the options available.
Many staff work flexibly on an informal basis, making use of IT to enable
working from home. However, we have no current method for recording the
number of people who work flexibly on an informal basis. We will therefore
use an anonymous annual questionnaire to record this. [Action 7.2a]
Data that support the uptake of this informal flexibility within the Division
comes indirectly from items in our staff survey results (see table below).
number of respondents:
I am able to take sufficient breaks during working hours
My working time can be flexible
As long as I get my work done, I have a choice
deciding how I do my work
% Positive
score
229
76
91
Male
91
80
98
Female
130
74
87
93
98
90
However, there appears to be a smaller percentage of female than male staff
who feel that their working time can be flexible (98% male, 87% female). This
may be due to the fact that female staff are more likely to hold junior positions
within the Division.
(v)
Cover for maternity and adoption leave and support on return –
what the department does, beyond the university maternity policy
package, to support female staff before they go on maternity leave,
arrangements for covering work during absence, and to help them
achieve a suitable work-life balance on their return.
Staff discuss arrangements for maternity leave with their HORD. The
discussion includes arrangements for cover of duties, maternity sabbatical,
and keeping in touch days.
On return, staff members have sometimes renegotiated their working hours or
agreed greater flexibility. This has been supported by the introduction of a
one-term teaching sabbatical policy for maternity returners which has been
taken up by several women in the Division, who have provided highly positive
feedback on the scheme. PALS has extended this scheme to all those who
37
take parental leave of 3 months or more, including males and same-sex
partners as discussed in 7.ii above.
As a result of our previous action plan [2009Action4] we now (i) routinely
collect data on requests for parental and adoption leave and monitor return
rate, (ii) include information on parenting support as part of the ACDC
webpages, and (iii) provide staff who are parents the opportunity to subscribe
to a mailing list. Most people felt that parenthood impacted on their ability to
do research, with some feeling more able to compensate for this than others.
About half the respondents who felt this way had discussed this with their
Mentor or HoRD. Everyone who knew of it praised the maternity sabbatical
scheme as being extremely helpful in terms of helping mothers to get back to
work after maternity leave.
In order to further support women taking maternity and adoption leave we will
develop a maternity and adoption leave pack which will be hosted on the
ACDC webpages. [Action 7.3]
[4790 words]
38
8. Any other comments – maximum 500 words
Please comment here on any other elements which are relevant to the
application, e.g. other SET-specific initiatives of special interest implemented
since the original application that have not been covered in the previous
sections.
Staff from within the Division have contributed to a number of gender equality
events and initiatives across UCL.
 Sarah-Jayne Blakemore was an invited panel member at the UCL
Women kick-off event discussing career progression and how to
combine career with a family.
 Anna Cox, Geraint Rees, and Andrew Faulkner are all members of the
UCL 50:50 gender group and contributed to the UCL institutional
Athena SWAN SAT..
 Anna Cox also contributed to the Computer Science department selfassessment team and Silver submission.
 Several female staff have attended the UCL Women’s Network events and the Springboard course.
[95 words]
9. Action plan
Provide a new action plan as an appendix. An action plan template is
available on the Athena SWAN website.
The Action Plan should be a table or a spreadsheet comprising actions to
address the priorities identified by the analysis of relevant data presented in
this application, success/outcome measures, the post holder responsible for
each action and a timeline for completion. The Plan should cover current
initiatives and your aspirations for the next three years.
Appendix 1: 2013 action plan
Appendix 2: 2009 action plan with details of progress as requested
10. Case study: impacting on individuals – maximum 1000 words
Describe how the department’s SWAN activities have benefitted two individuals working in the department. One of these case studies should be a
member of the self assessment team, the other someone else in the
department. More information on case studies is available in the guidance.
Case study one: Kriszta Szendroi
Kriszta Szendroi completed a PhD at UCL in Linguistics in 2001, and then
spent five years as a postdoctoral researcher at Utrecht University on an
individual grant from the Dutch Science Foundation. In 2006 she returned to
UCL as a postdoctoral researcher on an AHRC grant, only to be appointed
Lecturer in Linguistics/Psycholinguistics less than three months into the job.
39
“I became pregnant with my first child very soon after being appointed, and
was a little bit afraid about how my new colleagues would react to this, but
these worries turned out to be completely unfounded. I took only 18 weeks
maternity leave, but my then-HORD agreed a flexible-working arrangement in
which I came back early to be there for the start of the term, but in return
would be allowed to work many days from home during the first term. The
Department was also kind enough to buy me a table-top fridge to help with
storing expressed milk. (This was a particular issue, as I commute to work
from Oxford.) The fridge was later passed on to other mothers within the
Division and has become a nice symbol of a common shared experience.
After coming back to work, I was also allowed to schedule my maternity
sabbatical term to match with my husband’s sabbatical so that we could actually go away and use the time efficiently. Taking a term entirely focused
on research was the key for me to remain research active while having a
young child. I managed to kick start several new projects.
Three years later my second child was born, by which time I was already in
the Linguistics Research Department, due to reorganisation of the Faculty. My
new HoRD was even more supportive. In fact our small Research Department
(11 members of staff) has had seven children born to various faculty members
in the last five years. I know I speak for all of us when I say that the HoRD, a
father of two himself, has been very understanding and attentive to our
varying needs (e.g., timetabling requests, temporary relief from some teaching
or administrative loads). All the mothers were encouraged to take a sabbatical
term. (I myself took a second term after my second leave.) The culture is very
positive: child-care related issues can be openly raised and one can always
expect flexibility and support in dealing with them. Importantly, support is not
given in a patronising way. Rather, at my regular appraisals, the HoRD has
always encouraged me to think about my mid-term career development goals.
He also involved me in important administrative roles, such as sitting on
appointment committees.
My efforts boosted by UCL’s support have borne fruit: This year I was a speaker (and a poster-presenter) at one of the most prestigious international
linguistics conferences, GLOW. I was also promoted to Senior Lecturer, in
less than two years after the birth of my second daughter. I feel that my career
has not suffered a ‘dip’ in the past five years, which I anticipate would be the
hardest time in terms of combining family life and work. In the next few years I
am going to work towards promotion to Readership: I am currently involved in
five different research projects, have two doctoral students and am planning a
grant application.”
Case study two: Anna Cox, Senior Lecturer & Chair of Self-Assessment
Team
I gained my PhD in 2002 and after 2 years as a Lecturer in a teaching
intensive university I joined UCLIC as a temporary Lecturer in 2004.
40
I was assigned an academic mentor as soon as I arrived. This proved to be
extremely helpful. I was able to meet my mentor whenever I felt I needed
support which provided the opportunity to discuss issues that had cropped up
in an informal way. Nine years later, I still consult my mentor quite frequently
about career development and research strategy issues and he is an
invaluable source of good advice.
My post was soon made permanent and in 2006/07 I applied for promotion to
Senior Lecturer which was successful. This also coincided with a period of six
months maternity leave following the birth of my first child. Whilst on leave,
HR informed me of the introduction of the new maternity sabbatical. On my
return to work I discussed this with my HORD who arranged cover of my
duties for a term. This was incredibly helpful at facilitating me to get my
research back up to speed whilst also coping with the demands of a very
young child (and little sleep).
In 2008 I was expecting my 2nd child but also suffered with a pregnancy
related condition that limited my mobility. My HORD was very understanding
and agreed to me working from home for 4 out of 5 days a week on an
informal basis. This enabled me to continue working through this difficult
period.
I took a second period of maternity leave in 2008/09. This time, because we
knew in advance about the existence of the maternity sabbatical policy, cover
was arranged for my teaching and administrative duties for the period of my
maternity leave and my sabbatical which I took immediately on my return to
work. I made full use of my Keeping In Touch days to enable me to stay
involved with my PhD students and research projects. Our meetings were
arranged at a convenient time and place so I could bring along my baby.
On my return from maternity leave in 2009 I took on the role of Deputy
Director of UCLIC. This has provided me with the opportunity to play a more
active role in the running of the Research Department and provided an
introduction to leadership roles.
[956 words]
41
Action#
2
2.1
2.2
3
Problem identified
action already taken in addition to those futher actions planned
on 2009 action plan
The Process
Progress in implementing the previous action
plan has been sporadic. In addition, a small
number of people were made responsible for
many of the actions in the previous action plan.
This division of labour was not maintainable in
the long
term.
Whilst
data
collection is ongoing, regular
analysis has not been embedded in divisional
procedures
responsibility [named individuals with (ACDC)
indicated where member of ACDC & SAT]
time scale 2013 2016
measure of success
Creation of the Academic Careers Development Committee (ACDC) with remit to
champion and monitor implementation and success of SWAN actions
David Shanks, Head of Division & Anna Cox,
Chair of Athena SWAN SAT (ACDC)
Apr-13
Termly meetings of the ACDC with
termly reports to the Divisional Staff
meeting
ACDC to ensure annual analysis and review of all data
Anna Cox(ACDC)
Aug-13 and annually Annual evaluation of all data sets
thereafter
that feature in Athena SWAN
application, enabling tracking of
progress towards achievement of
targets outlined in action plan and
development of further actions in
response to analysis.
Workshop/lecture series aimed at undergrads and master’s students to encourage confidence and take-up of academic careers
Zoe Belk (ACDC) to collate a document outlining Sep-13
the aims of the workshops. Katrina Scior (ACDC)
to communicate document to appropriate
committees to ensure sessions on research
careers are offered across all undergraduate and
postgraduate programmes.
Student & staff data collection and analysis
3.1
There is a slow decline of women from UGto
PGT and PGR
3.2
apparent under-recruitment of female
postgraduate research students over past six
years
3.3
There is a major fall off in the proportion of
explored whether recruitment or
women between Lecturer and Senior Lecturer, promotion are a problem
and Senior Lecturer and Reader.
3.4
We have not analysed the exit data from the
undergraduate students.
4
4.1
4.2
Key Career Transition Points
we have identified instances of applicant pools
without any female applicants & instances of
shortlists that did not include any women
when there were female applicants
we want to make our recruitment
advertisements as appealing to women as
possible.
requested data from individual
programmes in order to investigate
where the apparent under-recruitment
lies
All teaching programmes and
undergraduate and postgraduate
level offering advice of research
careers including positive female
role models.
a) investigate whether the problem exists on a particular programme or more generally, Katrina Scior(ACDC), Shelley Channon (Divisional Dec-13
b) investigate whether changes in research areas might account for male applicants
Postgraduate Tutor) & other postgraduate
being more appropriately qualified
programme leaders
understanding of apparent underrecruitment of female postgraduate
research students. Action to
address this if appropriate.
Will explore the make up of these two cohorts of staff in more detail to determine
whether it includes large numbers of staff who might not intend to progress their
academic careers, and if so, identify support mechanisms for those who are not on a
traditional career path to ensure progression
Ongoing analysis of this data is required in order to monitor whether different
proportions of males and females choose academic and clinical (or other) careers
Crisitna Gardidni (HR&ACDC) & Anna Cox (ACDC) Apr-14
understanding of apparent fall off in
the proportion of women from
Lecturer through to Reader.
Jyrki Tuomainen (ACDC) and Jo Strange
(undergraduate administrator)
Dec-15 and annually
thereafter
report on whether there is
evidence of different proportions of
males and females choose academic
and clinical (or other) careers
new policies start
May 2013. Review of
data annually (in
May) by ACDC
proportion of women recruited to
be in line with proportion of female
applicants. 50% of interview panels
to be female
Sep-13
all recruitment advertisements to be
using the new template.
for all positions regardless of level, a) require interview panels to report gender ratios of Cristina Gardini (HR&ACDC)
applicant pool and shortlist together with information on gender of successful candidate
to ACDC. Where necessary, panels will be required to explain why shortlist may have
diverged from proportional (e.g. why no women on the shortlist when 30% applicants
were women). b) require and ensure accurate recording of gender of recruitment
panels. c) investigate whether gender bias exists at different levels of appointment.
inclusion of verbiage on family-friendly
we will create a template for recruitment advertisements for use by research
policies on job adverts & development of departments to support the use of language and terminology that is appealing to
the ACDC webpages that are publically
women.
accesible. unconscious bias training
workshop to highlight potential issue.
Cristina Gardini (HR&ACDC)
4.2
additional support required for those at
lecturer level in order to encourage and
support promotion to SL
4.3
additional support required for those at senior
lecturer level in order to encourage and
support promotion to Reader
a) encourage women to attend the Springboard Women's Development Programme, b) a) Cristina Gardini (HR&ACDC) to add details of a) Oct-13, b) Dec13
encourage women to take part in the Divisional Mentorship Programme
Springboard Women's Development Programme and annually
into guidance for appraisers, b) Kate
Jeffrey(ACDC) to lead the expansion of the
mentoring scheme, promote to female staff at
Senior Lecturer and monitor uptake
average gender split at Reader 20092013 is 37%. Initial target is 50:50.
4.4
PALS ECR forum ceased to exist in 2011. It was
replaced by Neurosicence ECR forum, but some
don't feel it is relevant.
a) survey of staff in order to identify whether there is a need to re-establish PALS ECR
forum. B) If need for forum is identified, re-establish PALS ECR forum
a) Jiri Kaspar (ACDC) to initiate survey of ECRs & a) Sept 2014, b) Dec
Anna Cox(ACDC) to discuss need for ECR forum 2014
with PALS PostGraduate Peer Group (PPG)
representatives. Report to ACDC. B) Jiri Kaspar &
Zoe Belk to work with PALS PPG representatives
expand remit of PPG or re-establish ECR forum
ensure that any gap identified as
result of loss of PALS ECR forum has
been filled
ACDC to consider an annual report from Divisional HR team that details staff who have
not been appraised within the last 24 months and monitor gender differences in
appraisals to check that female members of staff are not more likely to go for a
significant period without appraisal.
a) Cristina Gardini (HR&ACDC) to identify staff
Jan-14 and annually
who have not been appraised within last 24
thereafter
months and report to ACDC, b) ACDC to consider
gender split of data provided and report
outcome to Department heads
all staff to be appraised within
previous 24 months. To have moved
to annual appraisal of all staff by
2015
5
5.1
Career Development
appraisals are not being conducted within 24
months.
ECR forum provided support for those at a) compulsory attendance at workshops on grant writing and writing research papers, b) a) Cristina Gardini (HR&ACDC) to amend
a) Oct-13, b) Oct-13 2013 gender split is 50:50. Target is
lecturer level and access to relevant
allocation of teaching partner for duration of probation, c) expand the Divisional
guidance to line managers on requirements for & annually, c) Dec13 60 female: 40 male
workshops and training
mentoring scheme for all levels from Professor to PhD student.
probation, b) Anna Cox(ACDC) to assign teaching and annually
partners and monitor participation, c) Kate
Jeffrey(ACDC) to lead the expansion of the
mentoring scheme, promote to female staff at
Lecturer, and monitor participation
5.2
current promotion procedure relies on staff
self-nominating. We have no mechanism for
monitoring whether appraisers are conforming
to the Divisional guidelines.
a) to require appraisers to confirm they have discussed each of the issues mentioned in a, b & c) Crisitna Gardini (HR&ACDC) and Anna
the Divisional guidelines, and to return this data to the Divisonal HR service, b) to collect Cox (ACDC), d) David Shanks (ACDC), Head of
and monitor data on individuals on length of time spent at each career point, c) identify Division
those who have either been at a grade point for an unusally long time and those who
should be nearing promotion in next 12 months and report to Head of Division for
consideration in next promotion round, d) encourage all staff to report to HORD as to
whether they wish to be considered for promotion, and if not, why not.
July-13 and annually
thereafter
5.3
fewer female staff than male staff consider that
the promotions process is applied fairly
a) invite all female staff to a meeting with Divisonal Management Committee to discuss a) David Shanks (ACDC), Head of Division; b)
July-13 and annually
promotions process and criteria. Aims of meeting are i) to encourage female staff to
David Shanks (ACDC), Head of Division & Andrew thereafter
apply and ii) to dispel any fears that process is not applied fairly; b) collate a set of
Faulkner (ACDC)
successful applications for promotion to each grade and make these available to all staff
via the intranet
5.4
some staff may not have had equalities and
diversity training
we will ensure that all staff in the division undertake the UCL online equalities and
diversity training
reduction of fall-off so that ratio of
m-f at senior grades (Reader, Prof) is
50%
a) meeting held, good turnout, no
gender difference in results of next
staff survey, b) 5 successful
promotion applications for LtoSL,
SLtoReader, and ReadertoProfessor
on the intranet
David Shanks (ACDC), Head of Division to inform Apr-14, and annually record of all staff having taken the
all staff of requirement to undertaking this
thereafter
online equalities and diversity
training, Crisitna Gardidni (HR&ACDC) to monitor
training.
uptake
5.5
activities to support induction
6.1
Organisation & Culture
no specific mechanism for ensuring gender
balance on Divisional committees
6
a) write to committee chairs to highlight importance of considering gender balance of
committees when roles are rotated and define requirement of 50:50 gender split on all
committees, b) collate and monitor gender representation on divisional committees
Retrospective analysis of data conducted. a) Annual analysis of data by research department. B) adding a clause to the Divisional
Demonstrates no existing bias in
Workload model to explicitly take into account the time spent on SWAN SAT work and
allocation of teaching and admin duties. other equality matters
Head of Division has already emailed all
staff to emphasise that work on SWAN
SAT and other equality matters will be
viewed favourably in applications for
promotion.
Andrea Santi (ACDC)
Apr-14, and annually current, up-to-date, and useful
thereafter
handbook and webpages. To be
evaluated by an annual
questionnaire evaluation to all new
starters.
Anna Cox(ACDC)
Sept-13 and annually a) 50:50 gender split on all divisional
thereafter
committees, b) annual report on
gender balance of divisional
committees.
a) Jyrki Tuomainen (ACDC) b) Anna Cox (ACDC)
to liaise with John Draper
Dec-13 to report on evidence of continued lack of bias in
previous academic
allocation of teaching and admin
session and annually duties
thereafter
Anna Cox(ACDC)
Apr-15
No gender differences in next staff
survey on this item
Apr-14
30% of all social events to be held in
core hours
6.2
Although data on workload has been routinely
collected, it has not been analysed regularly to
monitor effect of gender on teaching and
admin duties
6.3
Fewer female staff feel that they can rely on
their manager/academic leader to help with a
work problem
We will explore whether there are differences across research departments and report
any identified to HORDs. We also hope that the planned expansion of our mentoring
programme will serve to support those who find working relationships with their
manager/academic leader.
6.4
Lack of data regarding timing of social events
6.5
Lack of data regarding gender split of seminar
speakers
Collect and monitor data on timing of social events held at both Divisional and Research Jyrki Tuomainen (ACDC) & HORDs
Department level. HORDs will be expected to ensure that at least 30% of social events
occur within core hours (i.e. before 4pm).
b) In order to ensure an appropriate level of female role models we will inform
Zoe Belk (ACDC) & Anna Cox (ACDC) & seminar
organisers of the various seminar series that there is expectation of a 50:50 gender split organisers from all Research Depts
of speakers. We will collect and monitor data on the gender split of those to whom
invitations are sent, and who accept invitations as seminar speakers on an annual basis.
c) We will collect and monitor data on an annual basis to ensure that the timing of
seminars will fall within core hours of 10am to 4pm.
6.6
Insufficient profile of Athena SWAN principles
within division.
6.7
7
creation of the divisional staff handbook regular maintenance of the divisional staff handbook and Athena SWAN webpages
and Athena SWAN webpages
a) As an initial step we have requested
data from each research department on
the timing of seminars and the gender
split of speakers.
Women's Champion Celebration Lecture, organise two annual events to raise profile of Athena SWAN principles a) Annual
International Women's Day events poster Women's Champion Celebration Lecture (October: to coincide with start of academic
year) and b) Annual event to raise awareness of Internation Women's Day e.g. invite
Prof Mike Noon, Queen Mary University of London or Prof Curt Rice, University of
Tromsø to give talks.
Enhancing the work-life balance of the diverse
Work-Life Balance week: to raise awareness of UCL policies and benefits that can
staff population within the Division
support staff in achieving an effective balance between work and life outside the
workplace
Flexibility & Managing Career Breaks
a) receive data on
ACDC to have current data on
2012-13 seminar
gender split of speakes and timing
series by July 2013, b) of seminars across PALS. 50:50
report analysis of
gender split of speakers in all
2012-13 gender split seminar series within PALS
and timing data to
seminar organisers by
Aug 2013, together
with outline
expectation of
expectations for 201314, c) July 2014, and
annually thereafter,
request data from
seminar organisers
across PALS
Kate Jeffrey (ACDC), Jiri Kaspar (ACDC) &
PostGraduate Peer Group
Annually in October
and March
two events to raise awareness per
year
Kate Jeffrey (ACDC) & Cristina Gardini (ACDC) &
Jiri Kaspar (ACDC)
March-2014 and
annually
annual awareness raising week
7.1
"Generous maternity leave policies without
equally generous paternity leave polices can
enforce career disadvantage to women, as well
as a family disadvantage to men." (O'brian &
Hapgood 2012) Existing policies enable men to
take extended paternity leave but they don't
currently qualify for sabbactical leave when
returning
extension of UCL's policy of sabbatical
ensure all HORDs, and those requesting paternity or adoption leave, are aware of the
leave for those returning from maternity policy on sabbaticals following Additional Paternity leave. Monitor uptake.
to men/partners (including same sex
partners) who have taken 3 months or
more of Additional Paternity leave
7.2
Academic roles enable a great deal of flexibility
without the requirement to request it formally.
This has the unexpected effect of hiding the
supportive nature of the division in enabling
flexible working.
we conducted a survey about
parenthood and its effects on scientific
output. All 13 respondents were
overwhelmingly positive, some very
positive, about the division's attitude to
parenthood. Almost everyone praised
the division's flexibility in terms of
working hours. In our survey on
maternity those who requested flexible
or part-time hours officially (25% of
respondents) were all allowed to take
them.
7.3
Provide additional support for women taking
adoption and maternity leave.
Crisitina Gardini (HR&ACDC) & Divisional HR
team
May-14 and annually annual report on uptake of
sabbaticals following Additional
Paternity Leave.
Administer an annual questionnaire in which staff are requested to disclose a)informal Crisitina Gardini (HR&ACDC) & Divisional HR
flexible working arrangments (e.g. working at home, working compressed hours) and
team
b)formal flexible working applications, success rates and arrangements at division level.
questionnaire
distributed
electronically Sept-13
and annually
thereafter
Develop a “Parental leave Information Pack” which will be hosted on the ACDC webpages. These pages will be maintained and updated at least annually.
parental leave pack Report on annual updates to ACDC
online by April 2014. webpages.
Annual updates to
ACDC pages April
2014 and annually
thereafter
Andrea Santi (ACDC)
annual report on % of males and
females who report a) working
flexibly on an informal basis and b)
have formally requested flexible
working arrangements and c)
currently work flexibly formally (i.e.
part-time, consolidated hours, set
work-at-home days, etc)
ACTION#
ACTION
2009Action1
To review the gender 6 months
imbalance at
undergraduate level
2009Action1a To increase
TIME
SCALE
3 years
proportion of male
undergraduates
2009Action2
To determine reason 1 year
for progressive fall-off
in female numbers
with increasing grade
PERSON(S)
DELIVERABLE
RESPONSIBLE
ACTION TAKEN 2009-2012
Jenni Rodd
Deliverable: A
Decision to initiate action 1a
report by the
subcommittee
regarding
occupational
feminization and
its effects on
female career
structures, status
and pay, to be
delivered to the
Undergraduate
Teaching
Committee.
Jenni Rodd
Data showing an
increase in the
proportion of male
applicants and
male
offers/acceptance
s across the three
years.
Kate Jeffery, with A report on career
Jan Atkinson and progression in
Alastair
PaLS
McClelland
In 2011 Psychology C800 changed
its admission criteria to one, but
preferably 2, science subjects at A
level (biology, chemistry, physics,
maths and psychology).
MEASURING SUCCESS 2009-2012 comment at april 2013
indicating level of progress
achieved (e.g. zero, limited,
excellent, completed).
2011
COMPLETED
Analysis conducted 2012: The
COMPLETED
proportion of males in first year
undergraduate degrees within PALS
has significantly (χ 2 (4)=11.34,
p =0.023) increased from the year
2007/2008 to 2011/2012 from 0.15
to 0.20.
A thorough analysis of data on
July 2012 report presented to SAT
workload (specifically teaching and and to UCL 50:50 committee
admin load) and research
productivity (primary criteria for
promotion) suggest that it is unlikely
that under-promotion of women is
the cause. Possible cause is a
pipeline effect smaller numbers of
females entering academia in the
past combined with the fact that
many professorial appointments are
internal.
EXCELLENT The reason for
progressive fall-off is still unclear.
It may be in part due to underrecruitment of female staff.
Futher actions to address this
problem appear on our new
action plan
2009Action3
To determine reason 3 years
for apparent underrecruitment of female
staff over past three
years
Kate Jeffery, with A report on
Alastair
recruitment in
McClelland and PaLS
David Shanks
A thorough analysis of recruitment Mar 2013 report presented to SAT
data for 2009 to 2012 demonstrates
a replication of this pattern of under
recruitment for 2009-10 only. In
2010-11 and 2011-12 there is no
evidence of implicit/unconscious
bias that favours males in
recruitment. However, we have
collected anecdotes of low and zero
numbers of female applicants for
posts. We recognise that this is a
serious problem which we hope to
address.
EXCELLENT Further actions to
address this problem appear on
our new action plan
2009Action4
Parenting support
3 years
Essi Viding
(i) Database (ii)
Webpage
(iii) Email list
(i) we now routinely collect data on Implemented in 2009
requests for parental and adoption
leave and monitor return rate,
(ii)information on parenting support
is included as part of the divisional
Academic Careers Development
Committee (ACDC) webpages, (iii)
the opportunity to subscribe to a
mailing list is included on the ACDC
webpages ,
EXCELLENT: Maintenance of the
ACDC pages must be ongoing.
Included on new action plan
2009Action5
Promotions
procedure
3 years
Kate Jeffery
Altered appraisal
form and/or
appraisal
procedure
New divisional guidance is provided Implemented October 2012.
to all appraisers. Appraisers are
Revised December 2012.
guided to explicitly discuss
promotion prospects, additional
increments for those at the top of
the scale and the impact of work-life
balance issues on equal
opportunities to engage in working
life at UCL and to progress in their
career.
COMPLETED
2009Action6
To collate statistics
on female vs. male
research output
1 year
Kate Jeffery and Report on male
Alastair
vs. female
McClelland
research output in
PaLS
Analysis conducted by Kate Jeffrey Report given July 2012
showing no dfferences in npubs,
ncitations, h-index, current grant
value, cumulative grant values
COMPLETED
2009Action7
To collect
undergraduate exit
data
3 years
2009Action8
To evaluate pilot
mentoring scheme
2009Action9
To evaluate Early
1 year
Career Researchers'
Forum
Kate Jeffery and A database of exit
Joanna Strange destinations for
PaLS
undergraduates
18 months Wendy Best, in
conjunction with
HR and external
consultant
Lorna Halliday
and Nivi Mani, in
conjunction with
the Early Career
Researchers'
Forum
Committee
We now maintain a database of exit undergraduate student database
destinations for all undergraduate
implemented 09/10. PhD student
students. This has recently been
exit destinations database
extended to include PhD students.
implemented in 2012.
COMPLETED Ongoing analysis of
this data is required in order to
monitor whether different
proportions of males and females
choose academic and clinical (or
other) careers
Summary of views
and outcomes,
recommendations
for future
mentoring
schemes
The mentoring scheme attracted 14 Report submitted to SAT November COMPLETED. Plans to expand the
female mentees and 11 mentors
2011.
mentoring scheme are included
(male and female). All were
on our action plan.
positive about the scheme and
expressed hopes that the scheme
would be expanded in the future.
A report on
events,
attendance, and
blog usage.
Recommendation
s for the
continuation of the
Early Career
Researchers'
Forum
The ECR forum was seen as largely ECR forum was started in 2009 and
successful. However, one
ran to 2011.
organiser left and the other took
maternity leave and no volunteers
were found to continue organising
the forum. This coincided with the
creation of the Neuroscience ECR
Forum which we viewed as a
possible replacement. Our ECRs
have been encouraged to attend
but views have been expressed that
the content is not always relevant,
whilst others feel that the title of the
forum suggests that it is not
relevant to those not working
directly in Neuroscience.
COMPLETED. Plans to re-establish
the ECR forum are included on
our new action plan.