Athena SWAN Bronze department award application
Name of university: University College London
Department:
Chemistry
Date of application: 29 November 2013
Date of university Bronze and/or Silver SWAN award: Bronze renewed in 2012
Contact for application: Professor Ivan Parkin
Email: i.p.parkin@ucl.ac.uk
Telephone: 020 76794637
Departmental website address: www.ucl.ac.uk/chemistry
Athena SWAN Bronze Department awards recognise that in addition to university-wide policies the
department is working to promote gender equality and to address challenges particular to the discipline.
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. If in doubt, contact the Athena SWAN Officer well in advance to check
eligibility.
It is essential that the contact person for the application is based in the department.
UCL CHEMISTRY
th
29 November 2013
Ms Sarah Dickinson
Athena SWAN Charter
Equalities Challenge Unit
Queen’s House
55 – 56 Lincoln’s Inn Fields
London WC2A 3LJ
Dear Ms Dickinson
It gives me great personal pleasure to write this endorsement for the application made by the Department of
Chemistry at UCL for an Athena SWAN Bronze award. This application has my full backing; I value the contribution of
all members of my department – irrespective of background, colour, sex or sexual orientation. I always strived to
make the most of my ability and also encouraged others to do the same. In particular I feel that women, because of
the inherent culture, may leave science too early and do not make the most of their potential.
I do feel that despite government improvements in maternity provision and improvements within the university system
– some women are discouraged due to family career duration from pursuing an academic career. I want this changed
and for all people to achieve as much as they can – especially talented women from dropping out from what can be a
very rewarding career.
In terms of straight demographics, female staff are well represented in chemistry and the degree programmes are all
well aligned to match with the outputs of the education system. Our intake of males and females at undergraduate
level is almost equal. This has resulted, in part, from adoption of fair policies and establishment of an open culture.
Intakes and awareness are all bolstered via our active promotion of campaigns such as WISE, in which one of our
senior female staff was an initiator.
I have recognised that with a significant proportion of young academic staff that more should be done to encourage a
family-friendly and accepting culture. New modes of working have been adopted such as allowing people to work off
site and scheduling departmental meetings between core hours. The benefits are becoming very clear. There is more
to do but the most striking message is that staff feel empowered to make the changes and are supported to achieve a
diversity of working arrangements.
My vision is to work with staff as a team in the creation of a department in which each feels capable and supported in
making their full contribution towards the whole endeavour. This relies upon ensuring that women in particular are fully
involved in all of the departmental processes essential for our future health and development.
The management team of the department currently has 10 members of whom 5 are female. We have offered two
lectureship positions to female staff in the last year. Both of whom were the most talented in the interview field. I was
disappointed that neither of them felt able to take up the position at UCL – mainly due to issues with partners with
equivalent jobs elsewhere. Both candidates remarked how they saw the department as friendly and welcoming and
how they appreciated the “family” atmosphere. I am also proud of the way I have encouraged women to further their
careers at UCL and that since I have been HOD two women have been promoted to full professor.
I fully support the Athena SWAN ideals and this application.
Yours sincerely
Professor Ivan Parkin
Head of Department
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 work-life balance.
The team’s members’ selection was based on the need for diversity in gender (3 men, 6 women), academic level,
parenthood responsibilities as well as previous gender equalities experience via involvement in the RSC “Good
Practice in University Departments” Programme.
Nicola Best is Executive Assistant to the Head of Department and a member of the HR team, she attended SWAN
workshops run by UCL and attended team meetings. Since joining the department she has been diagnosed with a
disability and has a flexible working arrangement to work from home twice a week.
Claire Carmalt joined the department in 1997 on a Royal Society Dorothy Hodgkin Fellowship. She was offered a
lectureship and has subsequently been promoted. In 2009 she became a Professor. Claire has had two maternity
breaks in her period with the department and is an exemplar of how women academics can manage a successful
career and family life.
Sacha Noimark, Anna Roffey and Meetal Hirani were appointed to the team to give the views of future chemists.
They have set up surveys and analysed the results to inform the action plan with reference to their peer groups. All
three are PhD students with no childcare commitments.
Ivan Parkin joined the department in 1993 and was promoted to Senior Lecturer in 1997, then Reader and in 2000 to
Professor; he became Head of Department in 2010. He believes strongly in a work-life balance and shows leadership
in this area. He has a dual career family with his wife also in academia, his early start 7am work pattern enables him
to leave work by 4pm to collect his children from school.
Liz Read is the departmental manager and DEOLO. Liz attended UCL SWAN workshops, supported the SAT when
writing the final application and contributed at SAT meeting. Liz has two adult sons
Tom Sheppard joined the department as a postdoctoral researcher in 2004. In 2007 he was awarded an EPSRC
Advanced Research Fellowship and subsequently appointed to a lectureship in the department. Tom was promoted
to reader in 2013 and has analysed the data for our submission.
Andrew Wills joined the Department as a Fellow and is now a Reader and Director of Learning and teaching for the
Department. His wife is currently expecting twins. (374)
b) an account of the self assessment process: details of the self assessment team meetings, including any
consultation with staff or individuals outside of the university, and how these have fed into the submission.
Interest in Athena SWAN was initiated by Professors Parkin and Fielding, and although we did have a few discussions
about gender and chemistry we did not start meeting regularly until February 2013 After February 2013 the SAT
met on a monthly basis to initiate activities and monitor progress, some meetings focussed on a particular topics,
e.g. June focussed on recruitment. At another meeting, members were sent a link to take a short test on
unconscious bias as an introduction to this issue and to start a debate. The meetings were held in the head of
department’s office. Team members were given specific roles and most were asked to write part of the submission.
The Departmental profile was assembled from data supplied by UCL Equalities Team and UCL Student Records, as
well as data held by the Department. Student and staff surveys were actioned and the results were used when
creating the Action Plan. Many of the documents involved in this project are or will be made available on the
Chemistry Athena SWAN web page. Outside of UCL we spoke with our colleagues at Imperial to get an insight into
their good practice. Within UCL we met with Mathematics, who are also in our faculty, to share ideas and attended
UCL organised networking/training events.( 213)
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.
The team will be refreshed to include Post-Doctoral Research staff and other staff who are able to contribute from
their own experiences (action 1). Initially the expanded team will meet on a monthly basis to ensure that we move
forward with the actions on the action plan, these meetings have already been added to the Departmental annual
calendar. The HoD will no longer chair the team but will continue to attend the meetings. The new Chair will be Prof
Helen Fielding, Helen was the member of staff who initially raised SWAN, she has since been on maternity leave and
returned and is a fervent supporter of the SWAN guiding principles. Helen is a member of the RSC council and a
strong advocate of women in science. We will continue to promote SWAN issues by ensuring it becomes a relevant
item on all Departmental meeting agendas and not just as a standing item. e.g. the resources committee will
consider whether any allocations are equitable during decision making processes for funding. This is using the proforma used by the Royal Society of Chemistry. (Action 18, 19)(181)
3 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 and relevant features.
The Chemistry Department at UCL is the oldest in England, being founded at the same time as UCL in 1826. It has
one of the highest proportions of female academic staff of any chemistry department in the UK and boasts the
highest number of female chemistry professors in the country (6). Five of these female professors were
appointed at more junior grades and have achieved promotion whilst in the department. All have been
supported in balancing successful careers with childcare. We attribute this in part to the policies,
encouragement and mentoring we have put in place for all staff, coupled with our family orientated approach.
The Chemistry Department is one of the most successful in the UK (7th on volume terms in the last RAE).
Chemistry is the eighth most cited discipline at UCL based on web of science citations. It is ranked 122 in world
terms on citations and sixth in the UK behind Oxford, Manchester, Bristol, Cambridge, and Imperial. The
chemistry department is also particularly strong in materials science and makes up over half the citations of UCL
in this discipline. Other particular research strengths include computational chemistry, chemical physics
measurements, organic synthesis and chemical biology. The department is housed in two locations. The
Christopher Ingold building (CIB) and the Kathleen Lonsdale building (KLB). The infrastructure in both buildings
has been greatly improved by the college and we have very good laboratories and social space for both staff and
students.
The department currently holds more EPSRC research council income and more EPSRC grants than any other
department at UCL and more EPSRC research income than any other Chemistry department in the UK . It has
buoyant undergraduate recruitment (450 students currently registered), with the largest undergraduate intake
in its history last year (110 home and 30 overseas students, 51% female). This intake was also the highest
qualified judged on A-level scores (130 students had better than AAA). It also has the largest number of
postgraduate students with 190 (150 Ph.D./Eng.D.; 40 MSc/MRes) in its history.
The research in the department is organised in four major research sections- Computational Chemistry,
Inorganic and Materials Chemistry, Physical Chemistry and Chemical Physics and Organic Chemistry and
Chemical Biology. These sections hold regular colloquia and meetings. One feature of the department is that
research is encouraged across traditional boundaries and most staff collaborate with at least one other person
from a different section or department in the college. In fact this is probably the major strength of the
department- the ability to seek new opportunities for work through collaboration. This is reflected in our ability
to attract significant research funding across research councils, European funding agencies, charities and
industry.
The department has a centralised management structure. Professor Ivan Parkin is the current head of
department. He is supported by three deputy heads; Prof Derek Tocher is responsible for administration
activities, Prof Nora de Leeuw for research and Dr Simon Banks for teaching. Three heads of section- Profs Claire
Carmalt, Helen Fielding and James Anderson- manage activity in inorganic, physical and organic chemistry,
respectively. All of these together with the Department Manager (Elizabeth Read), and HoD Executive Assistant
(Nicola Best) meet weekly as the Senior Management team. On a monthly basis an extended management group
including the head of teaching, a computational representative and the head of technical services meet to
discuss wider issues. . (561)
Student data
(i)
Numbers of males and females on access or foundation courses – comment on the data and
describe any initiatives taken to attract women to the courses.
UCL chemistry does not offer any access or foundation courses. (9)
Undergraduate male and female numbers – full and part-time – comment on the female:male ratio compared with
the national picture for the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the impact to
date. Comment upon any plans for the future.
All undergraduate students are full time. Our undergraduate chemistry courses consistently have a higher
percentage of female students than the national average (HESA 2010/11). The long term trend over the past six
years has seen the number of female students rise to just over 50%, with a small decline in the most recent
academic year which can perhaps be attributed to a somewhat anomalous intake during the first year in which larger
student fees were introduced (see below) (65)
Female
163
51.10% 179
50.60% 185
48.40%
UK Average
(HESA
2010/11)
45.00%
Male
156
48.90% 175
49.40% 197
51.60%
55.00%
2010/11
2011/12
2012/13
Russell Group
(HESA
2010/11)
43.60%
56.40%
Fig 1 UG student number totals by year
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Female
Male
2010
(ii)
2011
2012
National
Average
10/11
Russell
Group
average
10/11
Postgraduate male and female numbers completing taught courses – full and part-time – comment
on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture for the discipline. Describe any
initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the
future.
Until recently student numbers on postgraduate taught courses were very small (<5 students). However, this has
changed with the introduction of a number of new postgraduate courses that have attracted larger numbers of
students. At present there is not enough data to be able to identify any statistically significant trends in pass rates or
recruitment. As part of the Action plan recruitment, completion and results will be monitored over the coming years
to ensure gender equality across the courses for these areas. (action 2,3 and 4)
Female
Male
Female
Male
Entry
Entry
% successful completion
% successful completion
2009/10 2010/11
3
5
1
6
100.0% 100.0%
100.0%
83.3%
2012/13
2011/12
13
13
16
9
76.9%
88.9%
Final results for 12_13 have not yet been verified (123)
(iii)
Postgraduate male and female numbers on research degrees – full and part-time – comment on
the female:male ratio compared with the national picture for the discipline. Describe any initiatives
taken to address any imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.
Whilst our undergraduate student numbers show a consistently even male/female split, the proportion of female
postgraduate students is lower. Nevertheless, the percentage of female postgraduate research students has been
rising steadily as the overall number of PGR students has increased, so we are approaching the national average.
This has been without any specific initiatives to recruit women but we apply the same practice as for UG recruitment
in terms of visibility and contributions from women and BME staff and students at all recruitment events
The department hosts an EPSRC funded Industrial Doctoral Training Centre (DTC) and these students are included in
our totals. This centre recruits 10-15 students a year onto a four year engineering doctorate (Eng. D.) degree. This
degree programme was judged as excellent and has just had it’s funding renewed. It is used as an exemplar model
for other programmes in Europe. The Eng.D.was conceived and is run through the hard work and dedication of
Professor Nora De Leeuw.
For the DTC a snapshot of the gender split for the current academic year is 38 male and 18 female which is a lower %
of women than overall. So we will consider this when reviewing our PG recruitment .
We will review our PG recruitment process including considering why there may be a difference between the Eng
Doc and PhD programmes offered. We will increase the profile of women and students on our recruitment
webpages, most of the pictures are science and there are few images of people. We will survey students on the
different courses
This is included in our action plan (actions 2,8,6,9,10).
Total Numbers of PGR Students
2010/11
Female
Male
49
101
32.7%
67.3%
(268)
2011/12
2012/13
58
101
70
108
36.5%
63.5%
39.3%
60.7%
UK Average
(HESA 2010/11)
39.4%
60.6%
Figure 2: PGR student total numbers by year
120
100
80
Female
60
101
108
101
40
20
70
58
49
Male
0
2010/11
2010/11
2012/13
(v) Ratio of course applications to offers and acceptances by gender for undergraduate, postgraduate taught and
postgraduate research degrees – comment on the differences between male and female application and success
rates and describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and their effect to date. Comment upon any plans
for the future.
Undergraduates
2010/11
Applications
Offers
Acceptances
No.
382
437
244
260
113
97
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
2011/12
%
46.6%
53.4%
48.4%
51.6%
53.8%
46.2%
No.
399
471
245
259
81
94
2012/13
%
45.9%
54.1%
48.6%
51.4%
46.3%
53.7%
No.
379
383
250
246
101
89
%
49.7%
50.3%
50.4%
49.6%
53.2%
46.8%
Figure 3 Undergraduate Recruitment
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Women
2010
2011
2012
Acceptances
Offers
Applicants
Acceptances
Offers
Applicants
Acceptances
Offers
Applicants
Men
2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
%Applicants Receiving an
Offer
%Offers Accepted
Female
Male
Female
Male
63.9%
59.5%
46.3%
37.3%
61.2%
55.2%
33.2%
36.2%
66.0%
64.2%
40.4%
36.2%
The % of female applicants is consistently in the 45-50% region. A slightly higher percentage of female applicants
receive an offer (66% vs 64% in most recent year). In general more female applicants than male applicants accept
this offer, although there was an anomalous drop in 2011/12 when a much smaller number of applicants of both
genders accepted the offer made to them (33% female vs 36% male). This data refers to applications made in
2011/12 and coincided with the introduction of £9,000 tuition fees which may explain the sudden change in
acceptance rates. This has returned to a higher acceptance rate in the most recent statistics, with a larger proportion
of female applicants accepting a place. (117)
Postgraduate taught recruitment
The numbers are not large enough to draw conclusions, recruitment is over 4 courses and there is diversity across
the courses in both content and recruitment process (Action 2,3,4)
Examples of two of the courses are given below
MSc Chemical Research
All applicants are asked to list five potential supervisors based on the advertised projects. If a supervisor can be
found based on academic assessment of the candidates CV and cover letter, then the applicant is offered a place.
Numbers are limited by the number of projects; There is a high conversion rate of offers to students enrolling.
MSc Materials for Energy and Environment
Applications are assessed by course director and offers made on the basis of the CV and cover letter. Most, if not all,
meeting the academic requirement are offered a place. There is a low conversion of offers to students enrolling,
principally due to the very high proportion of overseas students who apply. (156)
Postgraduate research
Applications
Offers
Acceptances
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
2010/11
No.
63
105
35
54
31
47
%
37.5%
62.5%
39.3%
60.7%
39.7%
60.3%
2011/12
No.
97
132
34
52
28
44
%
42.4%
57.6%
39.5%
60.5%
38.9%
61.1%
2012/13
No.
127
186
50
67
37
54
%
40.6%
59.4%
42.7%
57.3%
40.7%
59.3%
Fig 4 Postgraduate Research Student Recruitment
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Women
2010/11
2011/12
Acceptance
Offers
Applicants
Acceptance
Offers
Applicants
Applicants
Offers
Acceptance
Men
2012/13
Around 40% of applicants are female and the % of offers made is also around 40%
This translates into a 40% level of female students accepting places.
Overall numbers of applicants and offers/acceptances are increasing.
The issue we need to address is how to increase the number of applications from women students.
2010/11 2011/12 2012/13
%Applicants Receiving an
Offer
Female
Male
Female
Male
%Offers Accepted
(iv)
55.6%
51.4%
88.6%
87.0%
35.1%
39.4%
82.4%
84.6%
39.4%
52.8%
74.0%
80.6%
Degree classification by gender – comment on any differences in degree attainment between males
and females and describe what actions are being taken to address any imbalance.
We offer two levels of undergraduate entry to either a 4year MSci degree or 3 year BSc. There is the option to
change after year 1 and entry to the final year of the MSci is dependant on examination results at the end of year 3.
.
Male No
Female- No.
Male (%)
Female (%)
Male 1st
Female 1st
Male 2(i)
Female 2(i)
Male 2(ii)
Fermale 2(ii)
2013
2012
2011
2010
Percentage
Msci Graduates
MSci
45
36
30
48
25
18
16
28
20
18
14
20
56
50
53
58
44
50
47
42
44
72
50
32
50
33
57
25
48
28
38
50
45
50
36
65
8
0
12
18
5
17
7
10
Female No.
Male (%)
Female (%)
Male 1st
Female 1st
Male 2(i)
Female 2(i)
Male 2(ii)
Fermale 2(ii)
2013
2012
2011
2010
Male No.
Percentage
BSc Graduates
BSc
32
28
36
38
14
8
19
19
18
20
17
19
44
29
53
50
56
71
47
50
14
27
32
32
28
35
24
16
50
27
26
16
39
18
41
31
36
46
42
34
33
47
35
53
The Departmental Tutor has been reviewing these figures for over 10 years and although there are fluctuations year
to year he has seen no discernible difference in attainment by gender at either BSc or MSci. There are no third class
degrees awarded because under the harmonised scheme for the award of honours it has become virtually
impossible to award a 3rd class degree
With effect from 2014 the exam board will receive information on all results by gender, this is already done by some
other Universities. (134)
Postgraduate PhD submission rates:
The majority of our studentships were 36 months and for the results we have below there is little difference in the
time to submission between genders. The PG tutors have worked hard to ensure all students complete on time.
Students prepare an MPhil to PhD transfer report in their second year and have a short viva to ensure progress is
satisfactory before the upgrade. The viva also checks that the student has given some thought about the work
necessary to complete their PhD.
In the last year of their PhD, students submit a Table of Contents and time schedule, showing how much of the thesis
has been completed, and how much work remains. The remaining work has to be achieved in 12 months or less and
the time plan is approved by the DGT and the supervisor before CRS status can be obtained. The DGT writes to all
CRS students who have not submitted early in their CRS year and if necessary arranges appointments to obtain a
time schedule leading to submission. (172)
PhD Years to submission
Year of Entry 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09
Female
3.81
3.77
3.60
Male
3.50
3.97
3.33
Staff data
(v)
Female:male ratio of academic staff and research staff – researcher, lecturer, senior lecturer,
reader, professor (or equivalent). comment on any differences in numbers between males and
females and say what action is being taken to address any underrepresentation at particular
grades/levels
Researcher
Senior Researcher
Lecturer
2011
2012
2013
2011
2012
2013
2011
Male
32
48
42
12
18
11
11
Female
7
11
11
4
3
5
2
Total
39
59
53
16
21
16
13
Male
82%
81%
79%
75%
86%
69%
85%
Female
18%
19%
21%
25%
14%
31%
15%
Senior Lecturer
Reader
Professor
2012
2013
2011
2012
2013
2011
2012
2013
2011
2012
2013
12
10
6
6
7
6
7
9
17
17
18
2
0
0
0
0
3
2
1
4
5
6
14
10
6
6
7
9
9
10
21
22
24
86%
100%
100%
100%
100%
67%
78%
90%
81%
77%
75%
14%
0%
0%
0%
0%
33%
22%
10%
19%
23%
25%
Figure 5 Staff pipeline
100%
80%
60%
Female
40%
Male
20%
0%
201120122013201120122013201120122013201120122013201120122013
Researcher
Lecturer
Senior Lecturer
Reader
Professor
There have been no significant changes over the past three years. Overall the % of female academic and research
staff is around 20% and this compares with a UK average of 25.9% (HESA) but what is most concerning is the lack of
mid-term career staff i.e. Lecturer to Reader level
The highest female representation is at professorial level (24%) whereas the UK average for chemistry professorial
staff is 2% (HESA). Although our professorial staff is well represented by women, this is not sustainable with only
one other member of academic staff who is female although we have 3 female research fellows (2 EU and 1 NERC
funded). (107)
Our action plan needs to include a process for reviewing our recruitment and promotion of academic staff (Action
points 14,15,17,22)
(vi)
Turnover by grade and gender – comment on any differences between men and women in turnover
and say what is being done to address this. Where the number of staff leaving is small, comment on
the reasons why particular individuals left.
The numbers of staff resigning are quite low, the majority are post-doctoral researchers who leave when the funding
comes to an end.
Table showing destination of research staff by gender who resigned Jan 2010-Aug 2013
Destination
Male Female
Researcher
10
2
Fellow
1
Lecturer
4
Industry
3
1
Research Management
1
Other
Not known
1
1
From this it appears that men are more likely to pursue an academic career but the numbers are fairly small
particularly for women and we do not have complete data for staff who left due to end of funding. We can say there
looks to be a trend but that is all
During this period we had 5 Academic staff resignations a male proleptic took a post in the City at the FSA and cited
pressure of an Academic career particularly the funding of research. A female proleptic is now in Research
Management at Brighton, her partner worked in Brighton, she had a young child and was commuting. A female
lecturer is now a Lecturer at Oxford, her partner is also a lecturer at Oxford, she has a young child and was
commuting. A female reader is now a Professor at Sussex, she resigned for a promotion. A male lecturer took a
lectureship at Imperial.
This information was obtained because all academic staff have a leavers meeting with the HoD. All leavers both
voluntary and those whose funding has ended are offered the opportunity to hold an exit meeting (223)
4. Supporting and advancing women’s careers: maximum 5000 words
Key career transition points
a) Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the
following with commentary on their significance and how they have affected action planning.
(i) Job application and success rates by gender and grade – comment on any differences in
recruitment between men and women at any level and say what action is being taken to address
this.
PDRA Recruitment
2010
Applicants
Interviewed
Appointed
Male (No.)
279
29
10
Male (%)
69.58
67.44
62.50
Female (No.)
122
14
6
Female (%)
30.42
32.56
37.50
Total
401
43
16
Male (No.)
270
52
16
Male (%)
76.49
71.23
72.73
Female (No.)
83
21
6
Female (%)
23.51
28.77
27.27
Total
353
73
22
Male (No.)
355
58
19
Male (%)
75.37
75.32
79.17
Female (No.)
116
19
5
Female (%)
24.63
24.68
20.83
Total
471
77
24
2011
Applicants
Interviewed
Appointed
2012
Applicants
Interviewed
Appointed
Fig 6 Postdoctoral Recruitment
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Women
2010
2011
Appointed
Interviewd
Applicants
Appointed
Interviewd
Applicants
Appointed
Interviewd
Applicants
Men
2012
The number of applications received from male candidates has increased 279, 270 then 355 whereas for women the
trend shows no increase 122,83,116. So the number of women appointed remains the same 6,6,5 when the number
of men appointed has doubled 10,16,19
For lecturers and proleptic appointments posts there have been 3 recruitment exercises and in every case the
appointee(s) were male, 7 appointees. In two cases posts were first offered to female candidates and after
consideration they both declined. One received a Royal Society university research fellowship and chose to take it at
Liverpool where her partner worked. The second also held a Fellowship and after consideration decided to accept a
post at Imperial because her husband was already employed by UCL Chemistry as a lecturer.
During the past few years the Faculty has also made some appointments to support new initiatives and these staff
are now or will be members of Chemistry staff. One female professor as Director of the Materials discovery centre
(starts Feb 14) and two male professors plus one Fellow and one proleptic lecturer both male (181)
(ii) Applications for promotion and success rates by gender and grade – comment on whether these
differ for men and women and if they do explain what action may be taken. Where the number of
women is small applicants may comment on specific examples of where women have been through
the promotion process. Explain how potential candidates are identified.
Figure 7 Progression graph figures averaged over the last three years
120.0%
100.0%
80.0%
60.0%
Female
40.0%
Male
20.0%
0.0%
Promotions – Summary table
Promoted
Male
Female
2010
6
2
2011
6
2
2012
7
3
Total Staff
Male
Female
2010
85
22
2011
90
25
2012
90
21
% Promoted
Male
Female
2010
7.06
9.09
2011
6.67
8.00
2012
7.78
14.29
Although the percentages might suggest a slightly higher % of female staff have been promoted each year the
numbers are small. All staff who reach the top of Grade 7 i.e PDRAs and early career lecturers are automatically
considered for promotion to grade 8 (lecturer and senior PDRA) and provided they fulfil the criteria in the UCL
guidelines, staff are then promoted. Additionally each year all staff are advised of the opportunity to apply for
promotion. For consideration for senior staff promotions i.e. to senior lecturer, reader or professor the department
has a well-developed process, which promotes on merit and achievement and has no caps for promotion numbers.
Consideration of all proposals for promotion involve the assessment of an individual's overall contributions to UCL in
terms of research, teaching, KT and enabling. After consultation with their HoS, candidates submit their CV to a
meeting of all the departmental professors, who consider the applications, give advice and appoint a mentor to
develop the case. All staff who apply for promotion have an individual interview with the HoD after the professors
meeting. This process works well with 15 academic promotions in the last five years, including 4 women have been
promoted to professor. Staff who are not supported by the Department are able to submit their own proposal for
promotion (218)
b) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken
to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be
needed.
(i) Recruitment of staff – comment on 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
Currently all our recruitment processes follow the university good practice and equal opportunities policies on
advertising, shortlisting and interviewing monitoring through all stages of the process. Candidates apply online and
appointment panels comprise only staff who have been trained and at least 25% are female. The issue is that female
candidates are not applying for the posts particularly for academic posts.
One area we are addressing is the UCL requirement that 25% of all recruitment panels should be female, we
understand this is a positive measure but do not wish to overburden our female academic staff. So when
appropriate we are using experienced female staff from our administrative and technical teams to undertake this.
We propose to ask PDRAs and Fellows if they would like to undertake this, this will be a development opportunity,
offering experience of recruitment and the requirements for appointments. (action 23).
We must be more proactive and encourage more applications from women. We have added a clause onto all our
job descriptions that highlights we are working towards a SWAN award, we have added a link to the family friendly
guidance on the UCL website. We have improved our departmental website and again included a link to the family
friendly guidance. The Mathematics department advised that they obtained permission to include a clause on
women being under represented at this level on their adverts and we plan to request this. We will survey all PDRAs
and ask their opinions on our recruitment procedure and what made them chose to apply to UCL. (Action 11, 12, 13)
(259)
Support for staff at key career transition points – having identified key areas of attrition of female staff in
the department, comment on any interventions, programmes and activities that support women at the
crucial stages, such as personal development training, opportunities for networking, mentoring programmes
and leadership training. Identify which have been found to work best at the different career stages
We have already introduced mentoring for all new academic appointments and we propose to set up mentoring
at other levels. This will involve having a mentor who is in the next career stage eg PDRAs will be mentored by
fellows or early career academics.
The PDRAs have an informal support network, this is a fairly new initiative there is a Wiki page and quarterly
lunchtime meeting (with lunch provided) are planned with invited speakers at a to provide information on
matters that will help their academic careers progress e.g. How do I apply for a Fellowship. The department has
provided the budget for this.
Fellowship application opportunities are circulated and anyone who wishes to apply is allocated a mentor to
help with the application. (Action 17)(124)
Career development
a) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken
to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be
needed.
(i)
Promotion and career development – comment on the appraisal and career development process,
and promotion criteria and whether these take into consideration responsibilities for teaching,
research, administration, pastoral work and outreach work; is quality of work emphasised over
quantity of work?
The department has over the last few years adopted a new model to support career development for
research fellows and early career lecturers. This involves the assignment of an academic mentor who is
unconnected with their research and assists them with career development including grant applications, CV
improvement and interview techniques. The same is applied when PDRAs wish to submit a Fellowship
application. The success of this process has been shown by the large number of fellows and PDRAs to
progress to academic appointments either at UCL or other universities. Since 2008 11 have been appointed
to academic positions in other universities and 6 at UCL.
The department has adopted an annual appraisal process, which is conducted either by the head of
department (HoD) or head of section (HoS). This is going beyond UCL policy which states appraisals should
take place every-other year. Staff performance is monitored at these appraisals where clear measurable
objectives are set for all aspects of teaching, research, enabling and knowledge transfer (KT) activity. For
grant applications objectives are set in terms of number and quality of applications. HoS and HoD give
extensive advice on improving applications that are unsuccessful and academic staff are strongly supported
by grant facilitators at the faculty level, these are staff with substantial experience of funding they have all
worked for the research councils or similar and are highly experienced in the grant application process. All
new non-proleptic appointments supported by fellowships are not obliged to carry a teaching load.
However, most chose to deliver at least one lecture course to obtain teaching experience. The priorities for
individual staff training are set at the annual appraisals. Staff at all grades are required to attend at least
three training courses a year from an extensive college list and new lecturing staff take an accredited higher
education teaching qualification. Popular courses include research group management, PhD mentoring,
appraisals and grant writing.
Appraisal completion rate is one of the KPI reported to Senior Management team and Chemistry is
consistently over 95% completed. (338)
Induction and training – describe the support provided to new staff at all levels, as well as details of any
gender equality training. To what extent are good employment practices in the institution, such as
opportunities for networking, the flexible working policy, and professional and personal development
opportunities promoted to staff from the outset?
We have looked at our staff induction process and in addition to the checklist provided by UCL have written our own
to cover departmental processes and items of more personal interest. We have also produced a short ‘How to’
document that is in hard copy and on our intranet and covers who to contact and how to arrange things so there is a
‘one-stop shop’ this includes training and development.
We plan to be able to give all new PDRAs a meeting with a member of administrative HR staff for a thorough
induction, currently this is done for all academic and support staff and some researchers .( Action 16)
Gender equality training is covered by the UCL mandatory online training for all new staff. (141)
(ii)
Support for female students – describe the 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. Comment on whether these activities are run by female staff and
how this work is formally recognised by the department.
Following the analysis of female chemistry career progression a key challenge is to increase the number of female
postgraduates and enhance retention beyond the doctoral level. All postgraduate students are supervised/advised
and mentored by their first and second supervisors and the Graduate Tutor provides a pastoral care role.
The current Graduate Tutor (Professor Helen Hailes) provides an excellent role model for female graduates and
would be available to advise on career progression, as have the two previous Graduate Tutors (also both women).
We additionally have two Deputy Graduate Tutors (male), one who is responsible for providing pastoral roles at our
off-site Harwell campus. All of our 7 female academic staff provide role models and can provide advice, of whom one
is the Deputy Head of Department and two are Heads of Section. Providing a more formal mentoring system for
women postgraduates is not something that has been considered in the past. However, in light of the recent
reduction in female academic staff at UCL and the Royal Society of Chemistry survey findings that women have less
satisfactory PhD experiences than men [e.g. http://www.rsc.org/images/womensretention_tcm18-139215.pdf] this
is something that we plan to put in place. Specifically, we plan (actions5,6,7,9,10,23):
 Quarterly lunches for female academics, postdocs and postgraduates to provide a mentoring forum.
Following a meeting with the Maths Dept we propose to invite their female staff and students as
well.
 Technical support to postgraduate students (and supervisors) to maintain projects during maternity
leave.
 To provide an external role model for female postgraduates we have recently requested that our
seminar programme has at least 30% female speakers (30% has been chosen as it is slightly above
the national average of female academics of 25%)
 One of the outcomes from a survey was that the PGR students felt they can contribute more
proactively to the recruitment of students

We have already started arranging that all UG finalists having an interview with the HoD in term 1 of
their final year so that if they are interested in PGR they can be encouraged and given the best
support. (347)
4 Organisation and culture
a) Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the
following with commentary on their significance and how they have affected action planning.
(i)
Male and female representation on committees – provide a breakdown by committee and explain
any differences between male and female representation. Explain how potential members are
identified.
The Department has several standing committees and membership is usually associated with role or as a
section representative, a breakdown of the Teaching committee is given to show this. Membership on
committees is accounted for in the workload model and is balanced against other activities to ensure female
staff are not overburdened. To date we have never fixed a proportion of female members for each
committee, however, we have female representation on committees, as shown below. As part of the action
plan we propose that a member of each committee is given responsibility for SWAN and equality issues,
their role will be to ensure that equality issues are considered during any discussions. Action 18
Committee Name
Management Working Group (weekly)
Extended Management Working Group
(monthly)
Teaching Committee (Termly and when
necessary)
Resources Committee (monthly)
Professors Committee (termly)
Research Committee (Termly and when
necessary)
Safety Committee(Termly and when
necessary)
SWAN SAT
Number of male
members
4
7
Number of female
members
4
5
% female
9
3
25%
6
20
8
2
7
2
25%
26%
20%
7
1
13%
3
6
67%
50%
42%
(184)
(ii)
Female:male ratio of academic and research staff on fixed-term contracts and open-ended
(permanent) contracts – comment on any differences between male and female staff
representation on fixed-term contracts and say what is being done to address them.
In the past five years we have had no staff on fixed-term contracts. UCL does not use fixed term contracts unless in
very short term positions, for example maternity cover. All of our PDRAs and those holding Fellowships are on openended contracts with grant/project end dates and so are dependent on further funding becoming available through
a new grant or extension of a project. However because they are given open-ended contracts this means they
benefit from the opportunities available to all staff on open ended contracts, this also includes being added to the
UCL redeployment register when their funding is coming to an end.
Table showing funding for all staff
Male
Fixed funding
50
Non Fixed funding
47
Female
15
8
Total
65
55
Male
77%
85%
Female
23%
15%
These results reflect the imbalance of female staff with appointments as lecturer or higher
Staff with ‘true’ open ended contracts are those who have an academic appointment and these differences have
been commented on previously. Those on funding limited positions are given priority through redeployment , the
Department HR team are aware of vacancies due to arise and inform researchers whose funding is due to end.
Bridging funding is also available when we know other grant funding will follow. (209)
b) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken
to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be
needed.
(i)
Representation on decision-making committees – comment on evidence of gender equality in the
mechanism for selecting representatives. What evidence is there that women are encouraged to sit
on a range of influential committees inside and outside the department? How is the issue of
‘committee overload’ addressed where there are small numbers of female staff?
Currently there is no specific gender considerations when appointing to departmental committees, appointment is
based on expertise. However appointment to a committee or working group is recorded on the workload model and
so any additional demands on women for committee work should be addressed by a reduction in other duties. This
will continue to be monitored through the workload model (Actions 20 and 21)
As the majority of our female staff are professorial they serve on many influential committees a few examples of
current membership are given below
Member of Executive Committee of UK Association of Engineering Doctorates AEngD
Royal Society International Networks Panel
EPSRC National Crystallographic Service Management Panel
Editorial board: Journal of Chemical Biology
Member of RSC Council
Chair of RSC Publishing Board
Chair of the Royal Society of Chemistry Theoretical Chemistry interest group,
Faraday Council of Royal Society of Chemistry.
EPSRC panel "Defining a Strategy for UK Materials Science" which involves a review of materials science priorities.
UCL's "Internationalisation of the Curriculum".
UCL Research Computing Working Group
UCL Diversity Workstream for Gender issues in Academic Promotions
External examiner for BSc and MSci Chemistry, Oxford University (184)
(ii)
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 taken into account at appraisal and in promotion criteria. Comment on the rotation of
responsibilities e.g. responsibilities with a heavy workload and those that are seen as good for an
individual’s career.
The department’s workload document records all teaching and enabling activities. These are collected at the
sectional level; the teaching by the sections teaching committee representative and the administrative
duties by the head of section. In addition external activities are also listed. Every effort is made to ensure
that academic staff make an equitable contribution to the department. This is tensioned against some
academics who have bought out a certain amount of their time by some mechanism e.g. hold a fellowship or
are early career appointees. There is also a reduction in teaching load for very large administrative roles,
such as being head of department. The workload document is circulated to staff to ensure accuracy and
transparency.
Teaching loads are monitored and discussed between the Head of a Section and their teaching
representative. Loads are balanced between the main teaching duties of lecturing, tutorials/workshops and
laboratory demonstrating. These are discussed with individual members of staff at their annual appraisal and
over the summer when many decisions on teaching duties have to be made.
Small administrative duties are assigned by the head of section, who try to maintain a balanced load across
the section. Major departmental administrative roles, such as UCAS coordinator, head of teaching
committee, graduate tutor etc., are assigned by the Management Working group (Head of department,
heads of section and undergraduate tutor) by using the workload document across the whole department.
Minor administrative roles are shifted if the group decides they need a specific individual with a certain set
of skills to undertake a large administrative role. Every effort is made to ensure that academic staff have a
roughly equitable combined load of teaching and administration. Early career staff (less than 5 years) in
general have a number of minor enabling roles and gradually between years 5 and 10 may take on a
departmental administrative role. This enables the academic staff member to start contributing to the
running of the department, introduce fresh ideas and also to strengthen their case for senior promotion.
Some account of particularly large research groups and a significant external enabling activity is sometimes
made, although every academic contributes to teaching as it is considered as a core activity. Individual
enabling roles are reviewed annually at staff appraisal. Authorised leave of absence of staff, through say
sabbatical, maternity leave or other, are discussed at management group. The redistribution of duties is
made at sectional level, especially for teaching, but enabling duties may be distributed across the
department.
We are beginning to think about succession planning so that large administrative roles, which are rotated on
a 3 year basis, may have the next academic shadowing the former before change over. The Management
group monitors how much teaching and enabling each section does at the annual strategy meetings and
again tries to balance this when a change over of enabling roles appears. We are conscious of not pigeon
holing females in pastoral or organisational roles. For instance, two out of the three heads of section are
currently female, as is the head of the research committee. Two of the three sectional teaching
representatives, the head of the teaching committee and the undergraduate tutor are all male.
Knowledge transfer (KT) is an important activity recognised in appraisal and promotion. Currently no
mechanism exists for monitoring the level of KT and no allowance given for major KT activities. This could
change with a move to managing impact from research, but needs further discussion at management group.
Currently we do offer sabbaticals to focus on impact. (586)
(iii)
Timing of departmental meetings and social gatherings – provide 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.
The department operates core hours for all staff of 10am – 4pm. There are obviously times when staff have
to be here outside of these hours in order to fulfil their work commitments but all meetings are held within
these hours, and all effort is made to accommodate and enable staff to work flexibly. The regular seminar
series are held on Wednesday afternoons, All Staff meetings are held on Wednesdays at 1pm to enable all
staff (academic and support) to attend and all business meetings are held within the core hours. We were
conscious that we were holding meetings at lunch-time so carried out a survey and the overwhelming
response (86 of 93 respondents (92.5%), results were not split by gender but of the 79 who did reply to the
survey and disclosed gender 23 (29%)were women) was that this was the preferred time. Other suggestions
were between 10 and 12 (but this would exclude those with teaching commitments) and that they should be
shorter. The times and dates of all meetingsare circulated in advance of the beginning of the academic year
and we have a unified departmental calendar so that all staff know well in advance when meetings are
scheduled so if they need to make alternative arrangements to enable them to attend they are able to do so.
We have a common room for staff and research students which has a coffee machine and is most popular at
lunchtime. We hold staff lunches termly one for academic staff and one for support staff, these are social
events. We also hold termly departmental socials which start at 4pm and a monthly ‘bun’ day on the last
Friday providing coffee and cakes which is incredibly well attended particularly by the PDRAs and PGR
students. (293)
(iv)
Culture –demonstrate how the department is female-friendly and inclusive. ‘Culture’ refers to the
language, behaviours and other informal interactions that characterise the atmosphere of the
department, and includes all staff and students.
A wide range of extra curricular activities are organised by the department’s Chemical and Physical Society.
This is run by students with a staff member acting as President. They organise weekly lectures with
doughnuts and coffee, meals, various social and sports events, a particular highlight is the annual sports day
in Regents Park that includes the hotly contested staff v student cricket match. All students and staff in the
department are encouraged to join the society.
We work to ensure that all staff and students are able to contribute and be fully involved in all the
opportunities we are able to offer whatever their personal circumstances through tailored support provision.
We have a high percentage of BME students and are conscious of religious observance requirements eg that
our Jewish colleagues need to leave early on Fridays and the prayer requirements of our Islamic students,
although these are not specifically female friendly they demonstrate our inclusive culture. (156)
Outreach activities – comment on the level of participation by female and male staff in outreach activities
with schools and colleges and other centres. Describe who the programmes are aimed at, and how this
activity is formally recognised as part of the workload model and in appraisal and promotion processes.
The department runs an extensive schools and outreach programme. This includes the Salters festival of
Chemistry, AIMS (adventures in molecular science), teachers’ symposia, spectroscopy courses for year 13
pupils and the Daniell lecture. and visits by student ambassadors. Outside of the Department, we have
academic staff and student ambassadors visiting schools and colleges delivering talks and demonstrations.
All of these events are publicised on our website and are open to all schools and colleges. We have also run
events in the science museum’s Dana centre, involving students such as Pragna Kiri, a (female) postgraduate.
The department web site also hosts a wide range of chemistry videos and a series of science blogs. One of
our postgraduate students Penny Carmichael has produced a very large number of scientific blogs.
In addition to this we have also been highly active in the media. Several of our lecturers, professors and
graduate students have contributed extensively to TV programmes, radio broadcasts and general media
enquiries. Eg Sujata Kundu appearing in the UCL sponsored ‘bright club’ stand up comedy as well as ‘science
show-off’. One of our colleagues, Prof Andrea Sella (male), described as Chemistry’s answer to Brian Cox.
Aside from his personal media work, he has been encouraging all under and post graduates to contribute to
outreach including, for example, setting up a primary school science club.
Currently apart from the Co-ordinator these duties are not in our workload model. This will be addressed
(action 19 and 20) (225)
4 Flexibility and managing career breaks
a) Provide data for the past three years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the
following with commentary on their significance and how they have affected action planning.
(i)
Maternity return rate – comment on whether maternity return rate in the department has
improved or deteriorated and any plans for further improvement. If the department is unable to
provide a maternity return rate, please explain why.
In the last 3 years, 3 female academic staff have taken maternity leave. All three returned to full-time work
in the department and were supported in doing so. (28)
(ii)
Paternity, adoption and parental leave uptake – comment on the uptake of paternity leave by
grade and parental and adoption leave by gender and grade. Has this improved or deteriorated and
what plans are there to improve further.
Until recently paternity leave was limited to two weeks and we have not kept accurate records of the
uptake. We have asked staff to advise us if they have taken paternity leave in the last three years and had
replies from 12 fathers given the paucity of our records we will be monitoring this going forward
Paternity leave provision has recently been increased, by UCL, to 4 weeks, The monthly HoD newsletter
(emailed to all staff and PG students) was used to advise staff of this change and we have already had three
fathers make use of this.
We have had one member of staff whose wife had been awarded a fellowship at another HEI, she wished to
return to work before her full statutory maternity leave had been used up. Ricardo was able to make use of
the additional paternity leave that allows partners to use the remaining maternity leave. This member of
staff then also took unpaid parental leave for another month and made use of the keeping in touch days
provision.
We have just approved a request for parental leave to enable another father to accompany his wife to a
conference so that she can take their baby and he will be the carer whilst she attends the meeting.
We have had no requests for adoption leave and will accommodate them as they arise .(228)
Numbers of applications and success rates for flexible working by gender and grade – comment on any
disparities. Where the number of women in the department is small applicants may wish to comment on
specific examples.
Flexible working is arranged both formally and informally, we have staff working compressed hours,
annualised hours and with working from home arrangements. We have agreed it for not only carers of
children but also for staff with carer’s responsibility for elderly parents and partners with health issues and
for staff with no caring responsibilities.
We currently have two male members of staff whose families live in Germany and they are both offered
flexibility in their working patterns to enable them to spend long weekends and more time with their
families.
We have parents who commute long distances who appreciate the informal flexibility we allow.
Currently we have 8 formal agreements for academic staff (in the table below)
Gender
Female
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Grade
Professor
Professor
Reader
Reader
Senior Lecturer
Lecturer
Fellow
Senior PDRA
Arrangement
Work from home 1 day per week
Work from home 1 day per week
Work from home- variable averages 1 day per
week
Work from home 1 day per week
Work from home 1 day per week
Work from home 1 day per week
Work from home 1 day per week
Work from home 1 day per week
For anyone we have provided a budget to pay for software to enable staff to work from home when the
College provision of a system that allows access to one’s work desktop is not suitable. (231)
b) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken
to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be
needed.
(i)
Flexible working – comment on the 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.
As previously mentioned we have staff working flexibly on both formal and informal patterns. All staff speak
to their immediate line manage in the first instance and depending on the request it is either immediately
agreed locally or it is referred to the Departmental HR team who can give advice not only on the options
available but also on how this might impact financially eg superannuation. We plan to improve on our
promotion of the options (action 16). We have also had several PGR students take maternity leave and have
worked with them to ensure they are able to return and complete their theses. This includes arranging
extensions and in one case the department paying additional stipend. (117)
Cover for maternity and adoption leave and support on return – explain 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.
As soon as any member of staff or student wishes to disclose their pregnancy they are advised to talk to the
Departmental manager. She is able to give advice on the options available both during pregnancy and for
returning to work. They are given full advice on the options for maternity leave and pay and we ensure they
are aware that annual leave accrues and this can be taken whenever they wish. Approval will be given by
the Head of Department for any annual leave accrued but not taken to be carried over to the next leave
year, this is above the college policy that it can be requested. We also ensure they know that the Employee
assistance plan can give advice on issues relating to both pregnancy and childcare and the childcare voucher
scheme.
As a Department the fact we operate core hours enables pregnant staff and parents who bring children to
the nursery to travel outside of the ‘rush’ hour making the commute more bearable.
We look upon any request as flexibly and sensibly as possible and are happy to make any changes requested
concerning not only the date maternity leave starts but also the date of return eg one member of staff
revised her return date three times.
We have agreed that moving forward all staff who return from maternity leave will automatically be given a
6 month sabbatical from all teaching duties as opposed to the one term standard offered by UCL and
technical support during their maternity leave to ensure research programmes are not adversely affected
(action 24)
Of the three staff who have returned two were able to take advantage of a College initiative that gives £10k
towards additional support on their return. One used this to pay a researcher salary for three months and
for her mother to accompany her to a conference so she could take her baby daughter with her.
Currently we have no breastfeeding mothers but previously we have made provision for staff to be able to
express breast milk whilst at work by providing a suitable chair in a room that was rarely used at that time
and identifying an appropriate fridge that can be used to store it. (correct temperature, used for food only
and not opened more than once or twice a day).
Although not specifically for maternity returners since becoming head of department Professor Parkin has
put into place a new sabbatical leave system in which academic staff can have 12 months with no teaching
or enabling duties. Staff who wish to go on sabbatical write a one page case to the HoD, this is modified on
consultation with the HoD and then put to the college for approval. This is in line with UCL practice except
that in Chemistry we offer 12 months against the College standard of 1 term. Since 2010 this has resulted in
8 staff going on sabbatical leave. An interview is held at the end of the sabbatical period with the HoD to
match achievements against objectives. We have found that this opportunity to focus full time on research
has been used by staff to reinvigorate their research giving them the opportunity to develop a new research
direction and to apply for funding (527)
5. Any other comments: maximum 500 words
Please comment here on any other elements which are relevant to the application, e.g. other STEMMspecific initiatives of special interest that have not been covered in the previous sections. Include any other
relevant data (e.g. results from staff surveys), provide a commentary on it and indicate how it is planned to
address any gender disparities identified.
The Department is fairly large and a result of a departmental survey with 97 respondents was that people
wanted improved communication of relevant information only, that 95% read our weekly bulletin, 93%
agree with our meeting times. As a result of this we have created accurate generic email lists so that staff
receive relevant information in a timely manner. We have also initiated a HoD newsletter which is now in
edition 3. We are also promoting the use of a unified Departmental calendar that includes all activities,
events and meetings in the Department, this is being updated from the weekly information bulletin. The aim
is that staff will only have to look at one place and we will reduce clashes.
A key stage to focus on is PG student to Researcher where the % women drops from 40% to 20%. A survey
was distributed amongst both male and female postgraduate research students, asking whether they would
consider a career in academic chemistry and the reasons for and against
43 % of women that responded to the survey indicated that they did not wish to remain in academia. Most
didn’t mind the career-progression time length, were happy with the salary and enjoyed the flexibility that
research provides, they disliked the competitive environment and high competition for academic jobs, in
addition to the solitary /unsociable working environment. Some felt it was a very demanding career and they
didn't have enough passion for the subject. Working hours and environment were not noted as key
drawbacks, but impact on family-planning was a chief concern
Many of the survey responders were not aware of the benefits available regarding maternity/paternity
leave, sick leave, flexible working hours etc. Lastly, the survey suggests that the male-dominated nature of
the field did actually impact on the decision to leave academia in roughly 50 % of the cases.
50 % of the women that answered were unsure whether they wished to remain in academia. For these, the
career-progression time length was a key negative factor as was intense competition for academic jobs.As
before, family planning considerations, the competitive research environment, the demanding nature of the
career path in addition to the solitary /unsociable working environment, all impacted negatively. Conversely,
both flexibility in research and work hours ranked favourably. In contrast to the previousgroup, the academic
lifestyle was not considered to be a drawback. However, salary, job-location, family-planning and the
working environment were all negative factors. The male dominated nature of the field did not impact on
the decision to remain or not remain in Chemistry, however, there was little full awareness of the benefits
made available within the department with regard to flexible working conditions and maternity/paternity
leave.
Only 7 % of responses were definitely sure that at this stage they wished to pursue a career in Chemistry
research. However, the family aspect was considered a drawback, although they acknowledged the flexibility
within the working hours and the research
Table of Abbreviations
CIB
Christopher Ingold Building
CRS
Completing research status
DEOLO
Departmental Equal Opportunities Liaison Officer
DGT
Departmental graduate tutor
DTC
Doctoral Training Centre
HoD
Head of Department
HoS
Head of Section
KLB
Kathleen Lonsdale Building
KT
MWG
PGR
PGT
RSC
SAT
knowledge transfer
Management Working group
Postgraduate Research
Postgraduate taught
Royal Society of Chemistry
SWAN team
UCL Department of Chemistry Action Plan - November 2013
Issue and/or area for action identified
Self- Assessment Team
Action
Responsibility
Timescale
Measure of Success
1
Review membership for areas of
under-representation eg currently
there are no PDRAs
Ivan Parkin &
Helen Fielding
Dec-13
Wider membership that generates
new ideas for action plan
2
. Review staff and student
recruitment websites - ensure
women are well represented by
use of profles and pictures and
that there are clear links to
family-friendly pages
PGT Tutor, SET
Jan-14
Our recruitment profile shows no
gender bias
3
Monitor PGT Recruitment data applications, offers and
acceptances
PGT Tutor, SAT
Jan-14
Our recruitment profile shows no
gender bias
4
Monitor PGT progression and
results
PGT , Teaching
Committee
Jan-14
Gender equality in results
Oct-13
Increase in the number of our female
UG undertaking a PhD
Review seminar programmes
Postgraduate Taught Students
This is a fairly new area for the
Department and we need to ensure
that in all areas there is no gender bias
Postgraduate Research Students
50% of our undergraduates are female
but only 40% of our PGR students
We need to increase the % of women
undertaking doctoral training either
PhD or Eng Doc
5
6
7
Increase awareness of female role
models -Increase % of female
speakers at seminars to 30%
Increase awareness of female
role models - Initiate a quarterly
lunch female network for all PG
students and staff
HoS
Liz Read and
Helen Fielding
Annual
Annual review of progress from PGR
to PDRA - increase in number of our
students remaining in academic
chemistry and an increase in the % of
female PdRAs
Set up a forum for female final
year Undergraduates to meet
with female PGR students
PGR students
on SAT
Jan 14 then
quarterly
Increase in the number of our female
UG undertaking a PhD
8
Survey current female PGR
students on why they chose to
undertake a PhD and what they
do or don't like and feed results
into our recruitment process look
at differences between EngDoc
and PhD
SAT
Mar-14
Increase in the number of our female
UG undertaking a PhD, increase
number of female students on
EngDoc programme
9
Invite all finalists to meet with
Head of department i. To obtain
feedback from Students, ii. to
improve final destination
monitoring
HoD,
Nov-13
An increase in our graduates
undertaking PGR
10
Send personal invitations to
Departmental PG open days and
recruitment events
SAT & PG
Administrator
Dec-13
Increase in attendance from our own
female UGs at PG recruitment events
11
Survey current staff and future
staff where to advertise, what
attracted them to work at UCL
SAT
Jun-14
Increase in number and % of female
applicants
12
Ensure adverts exceed good
practice
Improve promotion of family
friendly policies in documents and
web pages
Dept HR team
Feb-14
Dept HR team,
SAT
Dec-13
Increase in number and % of female
applicants
Increase in number and % of female
applicants
14
Ensure shortlisting criteria do not
adversely affect female applicants
HoD , SAT
15
Ensure adverts exceed good
practice
Dept HR team
Induction Interviews - Ensure staff are
aware of all the opportunities available
16
Offered to all new staff
Dept HR team
Full roll-out
by end of
2014
Increased uptake of family friendly,
work-life balance and training
opportunities
Promotion of Fellowship Opportunities
17
To ensure all PDRAs and early
career academics are informed of
Fellowship opportunities and
offered support for their
application
Research
committee
April 2014,
after
Research
Administrator
post is filled
Increase in number of fellowships
awarded
Staff
PDRA Recruitment
PG Students are not choosing to
continue in academic research
13
Academic Recruitment
To encourage and increase the number
of applications from female candidates
Feb-14 for
next lecturer
appointment
Feb-14
Increase in number and % of female
shortlisted if current criteria are
biased
Increase in number and % of female
applicants
Career Development
Organisation and Culture
Embed Swan values in the department
18
Ensure all Committees have
equality issues on the agenda,
identify one person already on
each committee to have this as a
personal responsibility
Implementation of RSC equality
guidelines when allocating
resources
Liz Read to
meet with
Committee
chairs
Oct-13
Equality initiatives and/or monitoring
considered at all Dept mtgs.
Measured by the notes or minutes
taken
Embed Swan values in the department
19
Liz Read to
raise with
committee
chairs
Heads of
Sections &
MWG
Jan-14
Impact of decisions on equality
recorded in notes or minutes
Review female representation on
departmental committees -- ensure
female staff are not over-burdened
20
Review composition of current
committees and increase the
number of women if appropriate,
balancing against workload
Aug-14
Increase in the number of women on
decision making committees in the
Department
Female Staff contributing to key
committees external to UCL- ensure
female staff are not over-burdened
21
To ensure this is being properly
accounted for in the workload
model so women are not deterred
form undertaking these roles
Heads of
Sections &
MWG
Organise unconscious bias training
22
Work with HR-OSD and Equalities
team to organise
Dept HR team
Over next
two year
then ongoing
All recruiters trained,
Review recruitment panels – ensure
female staff are not overburdened
23
Invite PDRAs to sit on interview
panels
Liz Read and
HoS
April 2014
PDRAs are members of recruitment
panels
24
The Department to provide some
technical support during
maternity leave to ensure
research programmes are not
adversely affected
DM, Resources
Committee
Increase in the number of women on
decision making committees external
to UCL
Flexibility and Managing Career breaks
Maternity cover for Staff and students
Feb-14
Every February - allowance is
included in next budget