Athena SWAN Bronze department award application
Name of university:
University of Warwick
Department:
Mathematics
Date of application:
April 2013
Date of university Bronze and/or Silver SWAN award:
Contact for application:
Professor Colin Sparrow
Email:
C.Sparrow@warwick.ac.uk
Telephone:
024 7652 3083
Departmental website address:
August 2010
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/maths
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.
Sections to be included
At the end of each section state the number of words used. Click here for additional guidance on
completing the template.
1. Letter of endorsement from the head of department: [500 words used]
1
30 April, 2013
Ms S Dickinson
Senior Policy Advisor
Athena Swan
Dear Ms Dickinson
I write to convey my full personal support for the application from Warwick Mathematics for an Athena SWAN Bronze
award, and to pledge my continued personal involvement in achieving the goals we have thereby set ourselves.
It requires almost no analysis to see that the issue of gender equality is a very difficult one for Mathematics. This is true
in Warwick, in the UK, and worldwide. However, EPSRC’s 2010 International Review of Mathematics in the UK says:
“The Panel can state that, compared to other countries, the proportion of women is strikingly small” (section 16.5). It
goes on to recommend, to EPSRC, to learned societies, to universities, and to departments, that urgent action is
required. And Warwick Mathematics is not better (and in some respects is worse) than many other UK mathematics
departments.
Warwick is a leading department of mathematics in the UK, and we intend to try to lead on this issue, as on others. We
welcome the national initiative of the LMS (London Mathematical Society) and initiatives of other bodies including our
own University, and look forward to working closely with them. But we have, in preparing this application, also come to
understand very clearly that (a) there is much we have to do to put our own house in order, and (b) that we have people
and resources and possibilities and the motivation to make progress.
We did discover some good news: the number of permanent female staff in the Department has risen from two in 2001
to three in 2005 to six today; there is no significant difference between the class of degree obtained by men and women
on our degrees. But our attention was also drawn to some bad news: the number of female professors in the Department
is the same now as it was in 2001; in recent years, with changing policies for admission, the proportion of our UG intake
which is female has declined steeply. Perhaps most significantly, we discovered that there are many things that we do
not know accurately about how the department contributes to the national and international picture: how many of our
female UGs go on to a PhD, how many of our female PhDs obtain postdoctoral positions, and how many of our female
postdocs obtain academic positions?
The working group generated much new data, many new conversations, and a good number of ideas for action. We are
very fortunate that it is chaired by Professor Caroline Series who has considerable previous experience of engaging with
issues of gender equality at both a national and international level, and that women and men from all parts of the
Department contributed both energy and ideas. I look forward to working closely with it in the future, so the Department
can build on what is already good, deal with what is currently bad, and learn more about how we affect the international
picture and how we can contribute to redressing the gender imbalance in Mathematics.
Yours sincerely,
Colin Sparrow
Professor Colin Sparrow FIMA
Head of Department
Department of Mathematics
The University of Warwick
Coventry CV4 7AL United Kingdom
Tel: 024 7652 3450
Email: C.Sparrow@warwick.ac.uk
2
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 Department’s Athena SWAN Group comprises 18 members (7 women and 11 men) as
described in the table below. The Group is larger than the norm at Warwick because we are a
large department and we wanted to ensure we had representation from all staff and student
categories and also all stages of work-life balance. The latter may not be apparent in the Table
below as not all members wanted information about their personal life made public which we
respect.
Professor Caroline Series
Chair of Departmental Athena
SWAN Group, Management
Committee, Graduate Studies
Committee.
Dr Claude Baesens
Associate Professor.
Admissions Tutor.
Jenny Cooley
PhD student, Postgraduate
Representative.
Georgina Copeland
PA to Head of
Department/Departmental
Secretary.
Caroline Series joined Warwick in 1979 and became one of the first
(if not the first) women professors in Pure Mathematics in the UK
in 1992. She has taken a leading role in encouraging women
mathematicians. She was a founder member of European Women
Mathematicians, a support network for women mathematicians
which she continues to support. She ran a focus group for women
mathematicians in Warwick in the 1980's and was instrumental in
the establishment of both British Women Mathematician's Day and
the London Mathematical Society Women in Mathematics
Committee. She is currently Chair of the European Mathematical
Society Women in Mathematics Committee. She has organised
several international panel discussions on gender issues and
currently chairs a group organising majority female summer
schools in Stockholm.
Claude Baesens has a PhD from Belgium and has previously worked
in Brussels, Paris, Dijon and Cambridge. Having served as an
Erasmus Coordinator in the department for 10 years, she brings a
European perspective to UK higher education. She is currently
Undergraduate Admissions Tutor and therefore plays a key role in
Open Days and discussions about admissions criteria. She has an
11 year old son.
Jenny Cooley is currently a Ph.D. student having completed her
B.Sc. in Mathematics with Intercalated Year at Warwick.
She has undertaken voluntary work in mainstream and special
educational needs state schools and helps to run outreach
workshops.
Georgina Copeland has been involved in University discussions on
the Athena process since the submission of the University's Bronze
Award in 2010. She is a member of the University’s Equality and
Diversity Network. A primary function of her role encompasses
recruitment and other HR issues.
3
Dr Leon Danon
Postdoctoral Research Fellow.
Professor Charlie Elliott
Management Committee,
Promotions Committee,
Graduate Studies Committee,
Teaching Committee.
Heather Knowles
Further Mathematics Centre,
Area Coordinator for FMSP.
Dr Xue-Mei Li
Associate Professor – Reader.
Dr Richard Lissaman
[EXTERNAL]
Programme Leader for the
national Further Mathematics
Support Programme.
Dr David Loeffler
Assistant Professor.
Professor Robert Mackay, FRS
Management Committee,
Promotions Committee,
Graduate Studies Committee.
Dr Mario Micallef
Associate Professor – Reader.
Teaching Committee.
Dr Nav Patel
Departmental Administrator.
Management Committee,
Teaching Committee,
Graduate Studies Committee.
Leon Danon joined the department in 2007. After working in Life
Sciences at Warwick and then Harvard, he returned to the
department in 2011 and holds a Leverhulme Early Career
fellowship.
Charlie Elliott joined the department in 2007 and is currently the
Director of the Mathematics and Statistics Doctoral Training
Centre. Previous appointments include Sussex (20 years as
professor), Imperial College (8 years as lecturer) and Oxford (6
years as a PhD student and postdoc).
Heather Knowles joined the Further Maths Centre in 2009. She is
Area Coordinator for the Further Maths Support Programme
(FMSP) which aims to extend access to AS and A level Further
Mathematics. She has many years teaching experience. A key
element of her role is to run events for both students and teachers.
Xue-Mei Li has worked at a number of universities in the US and
Germany. She has given invited courses to graduate students in
various countries and has supervised research projects at all levels.
Richard Lissaman has extensive experience of working with
teachers and students in schools and with universities to provide
‘outreach’. He works with a number of universities to provide
support for STEP/AEA Mathematics.
David Loeffler completed his PhD in 2008, and joined the
department in 2010 as a Warwick Zeeman Lecturer; he currently
holds a Royal Society fellowship. He has recent experience of the
department's induction and training programmes.
Robert MacKay is Director of Mathematical Interdisciplinary
Research at Warwick and of the Centre for Complexity Science. He
is currently President of the Institute of Mathematics and its
Applications, a UK society for promoting mathematics. In all these
roles he strives to promote equal opportunities. He has a son at
school.
Mario Micallef has spent 25 years at Warwick having previously
spent 12 years in the USA/Australia. His enthusiasm for
teaching/development has been recognised by a University
Teaching Award. He served as Admissions Tutor for 15 years and is
currently Examinations Secretary. He has four sons; the youngest
being 24.
Nav Patel joined the department in 2008, after serving in various
central administrative roles at Warwick and Birmingham. He is a
member of the University’s Athena Swan Network Group. He has a
child at nursery.
4
Professor James Robinson
James Robinson joined the department in 1998, and was promoted
to Professor in 2010. His work has been supported by personal
research fellowships, which allow for reduced teaching and
administrative responsibilities. He was president of Warwick’s UCU
in 2006/07. He lives locally and has two children (6 and 8); his wife
works in Oxford, commuting two days a week.
Professor Colin Sparrow
Colin Sparrow has been Head of Department since 2005. He moved
to Warwick in 2001. His partner is a full-time academic and they
have one daughter, currently studying at University.
Head of Department.
Management Committee,
Promotions Committee.
Dr Damiano Testa
Assistant Professor.
Jessica Whiting
Undergraduate Student.
Chair of SSLC.
Dr Dave Wood
Director of Undergraduate
Studies.
Management Committee,
Teaching Committee, SSLC
Staff representative.
Damiano Testa completed his PhD in 2005 and was a postdoc in
several universities before becoming an assistant professor at
Warwick in 2011. He brings a fresh perspective on the induction
and training programs.
Jessica Whiting is a final year undergraduate. She chairs the
Mathematics SSLC and is well placed to inform the group of the
experience of the wider student body, elicit student views and
gather ideas for improvements.
Dave Wood completed his undergraduate degree and PhD at
Warwick before moving to Oxford. He returned after 2 years and is
currently a Principal Teaching Fellow, the Director of
Undergraduate Studies and the Chair of the Sub-Faculty of Science.
He shares responsibility for students with extenuating
circumstances with the Senior Tutor and therefore has an
appreciation of specific issues affecting women. He has 2 children
in primary education.
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.
The Department began its involvement with Athena SWAN following the University’s bronze
award in Summer 2010. Initially, a departmental representative attended meetings of the
University’s Athena SWAN Network Group and provided regular feedback on Athena SWAN
matters to senior members of the department. During this period, two gender-related issues
focused the department’s minds – namely, a worsening gender balance for undergraduate
students and a survey of our second year undergraduate students in 2011 which highlighted
specific gender-differences in the survey responses. Gender issues were therefore discussed in
some detail at various Committees and meetings, and the department’s Athena SWAN Group was
formally convened in Autumn 2012. The Group has since met formally five times to discuss the
submission and action plan. This includes a well-attended special Open Meeting for staff and
postgraduate students in December 2012 which was timed to take place in one of the weekly
colloquium slots.
Work outside the formal Group meetings was divided into a number of sub-groups with crossmembership, which allowed significant progress to be made quickly. Sub-groups included for
5
example, outreach, undergraduate admissions, current undergraduates (welfare, support, etc.),
postgraduate matters, and various staff sub-groups. Consultation was undertaken by a number of
methods including a Women in Mathematics networking event organised by the Group’s student
representatives for fellow students, the aforementioned Open Meeting, Staff Graduate Student
Liasion Committee, and in addition between members of the Group and colleagues in the
Department.
Consultation also took place with individuals outside the University including Dr Lissaman (see
table above) who was asked to be a member of the Group from the outset and who provided
invaluable advice throughout the whole process. Discussion also took place with colleagues in
other universities via informal contacts of the Group’s members and with Alison Rodger (Professor
in chemistry) and Sandra Beaufoy (HR) who acted as internal consultants throughout the process
from early in 2011. Departmental representation at the Warwick Athena SWAN Network Group
meetings continues to provide an effective forum for sharing best practice across the STEMM
departments.
An intranet page has been established where all agenda, minutes, statistics, useful links and other
information are posted.
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/maths/intranet/maswan/maswan
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 Group will meet termly, in order to discuss, develop and monitor the implementation of the
action plan. Sub-groups may meet more frequently to address particular issues. Regular reports
will be made to the departmental Staff Meeting and other relevant Committees as required
[Action Plan 1.1]. The Group will continue to consider both internal and external benchmarking
data as it becomes available [Action Plan 1.2]. It will continue to integrate with university activities
via the Warwick Athena SWAN network. In the future, and building on previous discussions, we
anticipate working more closely with the Department of Statistics, particularly on issues relating to
widening the undergraduate applicant pool.
[541 words]
6
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.
Warwick’s Department of Mathematics is one of the top mathematics departments in the
UK. Teaching and research cover a wide spectrum of topics in pure and applied
mathematics. [The Statistics Department is a separate entity at Warwick and is not
considered in this application.]
In the 2008 RAE over 70% of the department’s research was rated either 4* (world-leading)
or 3* (internationally excellent). The undergraduate programmes have one of the largest
intakes in the country and are noted for their breadth, innovative approach, high quality
students and high standards. In many independent rankings covering teaching and
research, the department does exceptionally well.
The Department enjoys continuing growth which includes an expansion in permanent
posts and rising numbers of postdoctoral researcher positions. There are currently 73
academic staff, 31 postdoctoral staff, 16 support staff, 120 graduate students and 940
undergraduates.
Committee membership and minutes are published on the intranet and the latter may be
discussed further at termly Staff Meetings (main decision making forum attended by all
departmental staff and student representatives).
b) 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.
Student data
(i)
Numbers of males and females on access or foundation courses
None.
(ii)
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.
7
The proportion of female undergraduates has declined from 25% to 19% over the last 5
years, compared to the preceding 5-year period when the gender-ratio was 25-30%. This
follows a reduction in intake proportions in 2010,2011 and 2012 (21%,22%,17%
respectively).
UNDERGRADUATE POPULATION
Gender Balance - Warwick (W) & Sector (S)
100%
80%
Males
60%
Females
40%
20%
0%
08/09 08/09
W
S
09/10 09/10
W
S
10/11 10/11
W
S
11/12 11/12
W
S
12/13 12/13
W
S
Undergraduate Population
Year
Females
Males
Total
% Female
Sector Percentage
2008-09
264
782
1046
25%
40%
2009-10
276
784
1060
26%
40%
2010-11
273
889
1162
23%
40%
2011-12
237
842
1079
22%
40%
2012-13
177
768
945
19%
The following table includes universities selected by UCAS tariff scores (numerical score for
qualifications to establish equivalence). Warwick and Cambridge have the greatest gender
imbalance and are the only two universities with a mandatory STEP1 requirement (Warwick
applicants can substitute STEP with a distinction in AEA2). Our analysis suggests that the
STEP requirement is contributing to the gender imbalance [Action Plan 2.1, 2.2].
1
STEP papers I, II and III – examination used for admissions. Graded S (outstanding),1,2,3 &U. STEP papers do not
count in tariff scores.
2
AEA - examination used for admissions. Graded as Distinction, Merit or Fail.
8
INSTITUTIONAL COMPARISON - % FEMALE [Undergraduate Population]
Heads
2010/11
Female
2010/11
Male
The University of Cambridge
786
162
624
21%
1
The University of Warwick
869
200
669
23%
4
The University of Oxford
650
191
459
29%
2
The University of Nottingham
795
254
541
32%
11
Imperial College
876
281
595
32%
3
The University of Edinburgh
639
211
428
33%
10
University of Durham
705
236
469
33%
6
The University of Bath
878
309
569
35%
11=
The University of Bristol
591
223
368
38%
9
London School of Economics
324
128
196
40%
7
University College London
652
282
370
43%
8
The University of St Andrews
378
173
205
46%
4=
8143
2650
5493
33%
University
TOTAL OF ABOVE
2010/11 Tariff
% Female Score Ranking*
* NB: Demonstrative Only. Based on Complete University Guide Mathematics Subject Tables 2013
[underlying data uses HESA 2010/11 tariff score data i.e. EXCLUDES STEP scores]
The female-ratio is higher for overseas fee-payers (36% of 2012 intake) than for Home/EU
students (14%). This however has a relatively minor impact on overall proportions as overseas
students only contribute around 13% of our total intake:
Undergraduate Intake Home/EU v Overseas [Warwick Mathematics]
Year
Overseas
Home/EU
Total
% Overseas
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
Total
27
46
37
36
37
156
313
235
309
251
263
1058
340
281
346
287
300
1214
8%
16%
11%
13%
12%
13%
We believe from discussions with other HEIs that our low proportion of overseas fee-payers may
be a contributory factor to our greater gender imbalance. Reasons for the low proportion based
on student feedback include location, short history and the high mathematical content of our
degrees (a course with Economics does comparatively well in gender terms). The Statistics
department also manages a successful joint degree (MORSE3) with a high proportion of overseas
students that is able to attract a higher proportion of female students.
3
MORSE=Mathematics, Operational Research, Statistics and Economics. Maths teaching represents over 40% of the
first year. Intake is around 140 students.
9
Our current offer is :
A* (in Maths), A* (in Further Maths), A (in a 3rd A level) + STEP (grade 2) / AEA (Distinction)
OR
A* (in Maths), A (in Further Maths), A (in a 3rd A level) + STEP (grade 1)
We overshot our intake target in 2008 and 2010 and consequently had to raise our offer.
Progressive changes include the introduction of a third A grade A level, making STEP grade 2 (or
AEA) mandatory, requiring AEA Distinction as an alternative to STEP, and introduction of a
requirement for A* grades for Maths and Further Maths. We believe these have had a detrimental
impact on female intakes.
The sector-wide achievement of students taking Further Maths is shown below. A* in Further
Maths has been a compulsory element of our offer since 2011 entry. Whilst female and male
candidates are almost equally likely to obtain an A* grade, the lower number of females means
that the proportion of females achieving an A* is around 31% of the total i.e. the applicant pool is
31% female.
FURTHER MATHEMATICS A LEVEL GRADES [SECTOR]
Academic year
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
A*
A
Other
Total entries
MALE student entries - percentage achieving grade**
28%
29%
43%
8633
28%
31%
41%
7819
30%
29%
41%
7369
59%
41%
6493
FEMALE student entries - percentage achieving grade**
29%
31%
40%
3747
27%
32%
41%
3589
28%
32%
40%
3444
59%
41%
2950
% Females achieving grade out
of total cohort achieving grade
2011/12
2010/11
2009/10
2008/09
A*
31%
31%
31%
** Source – DfE
A
31%
32%
34%
31%
Females achieving the grade
(approx. heads)
A*
1090
960
950
-
A
1160
1130
1100
1730
Another factor in the increased gender imbalance appears to be the replacement of AEA Merit
with a requirement for STEP grade 2 (or AEA Distinction) in our offer.
We believe that the reduction in female enrolments can be largely explained by a reduction in
female applications and a reduction in the proportion of females who choose to hold the Warwick
offer once it has been made. Both these effects are discussed in section (v).
10
Feedback from students, staff and available literature suggests,


there may be societal factors that influence students choices e.g. maths is still seen to be a
male subject and females are not always encouraged to apply,
females may be less confident of their own abilities (and teachers and parents may also be
less confident in their ability).
The lack of confidence was highlighted in a comprehensive survey of 180 [46 females] Warwick
second year students in 20114.
*
Survey Question = I tend to be surprised when I get things right.
** Survey Question = I think I have a good mathematical mind.
*** Survey Question = If I can understand a mathematics problem, then it must be an easy one.
* Survey Question = Most students on my course are better at mathematics than I am.
** Survey Question = Now that I am at university I realise I am not very good at mathematics.
We believe that the high offer contributes to the reduced number of female applications and
offers held (as first choice or insurance) because of the confidence issue. Steps are being taken to
address this [Action Plan 2.3].
4
Survey conducted by T.Hawkes (ex-Warwick maths academic) and R.Bhakta (Loughborough).
11
(iii)
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.
POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT POPULATION
Year
Females
Males
Total
Percentage
Female
Sector Percentage
2008-09
13
42
55
24%
32%
2009-10
4
11
15
27%
38%
2010-11
8
30
38
21%
36%
2011-12
5
31
36
14%
35%
2012-13
7
32
39
18%
-
POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT POPULATION
Gender Balance - Warwick (W) & Sector (S)
100%
80%
60%
Males
40%
Females
20%
0%
08/09 08/09
W
S
09/10 09/10
W
S
10/11 10/11
W
S
11/12 11/12
W
S
12/13 12/13
W
S
The proportion of female taught students is low compared to the sector average. This is a
relatively recent phenomenon partly explained by a number of changes during the above period.
In 2009/10 the admissions for a well-established Financial Maths course moved to the Business
School for administrative reasons, hence the large drop in population that year. The vocational
course continues to recruit 40 students p.a. (38% female over the last 5 years). The course, had it
continued to be administered in the department, would have had a significant positive impact on
our figures with sector averages exceeded in two of the years shown. Other changes include the
introduction in 2010/11 of two new MSc programmes. We will launch a new master’s level
programme soon and we will be analysing the profile of all our course intakes, together with
reviews of our recruitment and marketing practices [Action Plan 2.4, 4.1, 4.2].
12
(iv)
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.
POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH POPULATION
Year
Females
Males
Total
Percentage
Female
Sector Percentage
2008-09
19
49
68
28%
28%
2009-10
20
59
79
25%
28%
2010-11
16
58
74
22%
27%
2011-12
15
68
83
18%
28%
2012-13
12
69
81
15%
-
100%
POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH POPULATION
Gender Balance - Warwick (W) & Sector (S)
80%
60%
Males
40%
Females
20%
0%
08/09 08/09
W
S
09/10 09/10
W
S
10/11 10/11
W
S
11/12 11/12
W
S
12/13 12/13
W
S
The proportion of female research students has declined which may partly be due to an increased
reliance on UK studentships. We are committed to analysing recruitment data more closely and
seeking feedback from potential and actual applicants to establish some of the reasons for the
decline with a view to reversing the trend [Action Plan 2.4, 4.1, 4.2].
(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.
13
UNDERGRADUATE
1800
Undergraduate [A]
1600
1400
Total Number of Students
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Applications
F 760 639 714 563 488
M 1537 1503 1623 1403 1344
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Offers
684 526 647 494 402
1404 1263 1472 1243 1152
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Enrolments
96 80 74 64 50
258 205 275 228 253
Undergraduates Offers Enrolled [C]
Undergraduates Applicants Offered Places [B]
94%
25%
92%
20%
90%
15%
86%
Percentages
Percentages
88%
84%
82%
80%
10%
5%
78%
76%
0%
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Female Offers as % of Female Applications
Female Enrolments as % of Female Offers
Male Offers as % of Male Applications
Male Enrolments as % of Male Offers
Chart A demonstrates that whilst male applications have reduced by 13% over five years, the
reduction for females is 36%; a consequence is that the percentage of female applicants has fallen
from 33% in 2008/09 to 27% in 2012/13. In the same period, the percentage of female enrolments
has fallen from 27% to 17%. Interviews are not used and all applicants who meet a minimum entry
requirement are made an offer. There is therefore little opportunity for unconscious bias in this
process and the percentage of applicants made an offer (chart B) are similar for both genders. For
14
the same reason, the graphs for applications and offers (charts D, E) look similar. The transition
between being made an offer and becoming enrolled is perhaps more worrying, since it is clear
(chart C above, charts E and F) that the drop-out rate for women post-offer has become
significantly worse.
UG - Offers Change [E]
UG - Applications Change [D]
10%
UG - Enrolments Change [F]
10%
0%
10%
0%
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
0%
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
-10%
-10%
-10%
-20%
-20%
-20%
-30%
-30%
-30%
-40%
-40%
-40%
-50%
-50%
-50%
Female: % Change from 2008
Female: % Change from 2008
Female: % Change from 2008
Male: % Change from 2008
Male: % Change from 2008
Male: % Change from 2008
We have analysed the transition from application to enrolment by also considering the proportion
of women who choose to hold our offer (penultimate column, below):
Entry
Year
Applicants
- % female
Offers
- % female
Held offers as First
Choice or Insurance
- % female
Enrolments
- % female
2011
29%
28%
24%
22%
2012
27%
26%
20%
17%
In both years, more than half of the slippage in the proportion of females occurs at the stage
where candidates have to decide whether or not to hold the Warwick offer, and this effect seems
to be a consequence of the new and tougher offers recently introduced.
We are very concerned about all of the trends illustrated above, which together have a significant
impact on our gender profile. Of major concern are the decreasing number of female applicants,
the decreasing proportion of applicants who are female, and the decreasing proportion of females
who choose to hold our offer.
The department is reviewing and implementing changes to recruitment practices including greater
use of female role models. More emphasis will be given to the flexible nature of our programmes,
in particular the ability to take non-mathematical modules in most years. Student feedback
suggests this is particularly important to women. [Action Plan 2.4, 2.5].
We will be taking steps to analyse and understand all of our data in greater detail [Action Plan
2.1]. Efforts to tackle the issues include increased outreach activity in schools and on campus
(directed at females) and increased support for STEP/AEA examinations. Some of these activities
will have a wider benefit to the sector rather than an immediate local benefit [Action Plan
2.6/2.7/2.8].
15
POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT
Postgraduate Taught [A]
Number of Students
250
200
150
100
50
0
08/0909/1010/1111/1212/13
08/0909/1010/1111/1212/13
Applications
F
68
08/0909/1010/1111/1212/13
Offers
Enrolments
122
26
63
48
42
10
15
15
28
13
4
8
5
7
M 210
57
171 210 161
86
23
67
84
82
42
11
30
31
32
Postgraduate Taught Applicants Offered Places [B]
Postgraduate Taught Offers Enrolled [C]
70%
60%
60%
50%
50%
40%
Percentages
Percentages
40%
30%
20%
30%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Female Offers as % of Female Applications
Female Enrolments as % of Female Offers
Male Offers as % of Male Applications
Male Enrolments as % of Male Offers
The proportion of female applications has reduced from 37% to around 25% in recent years (chart
A). The principal factor is the aforementioned transfer of the Financial Maths course to Warwick
Business School.
The proportion of applicants offered a place was significantly lower for females in 2010/11 and
2011/12 (chart B). All applications are looked at by at least two staff to reduce potential bias.
Female enrolments are low and fluctuate; it is however disappointing to see that female
enrolments as a proportion of offers is lower in most years (chart C). Potential reasons will be
explored [Action Plan 4.1, 4.2].
16
POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH
Postgraduate Research [A]
160
Number of Students
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Applications
Enrolments
F
17
26
28
40
32
8
12
7
4
9
6
5
4
2
3
M
63
98
134
114
136
28
39
35
29
33
17
18
16
13
16
Postgraduate Research Offers Enrolled [C]
Postgraduate Research Applicants Offered Places [B]
50%
80%
45%
70%
40%
60%
35%
50%
Percentages
30%
Percentages
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Offers
25%
20%
15%
10%
40%
30%
20%
10%
5%
0%
0%
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13
Female Offers as % of Female Applications
Female Enrolments as % of Female Offers
Male Offers as % of Male Applications
Male Enrolments as % of Male Offers
The proportion of applications by females fluctuates between 17 and 26% (chart A). Offers made
to males and females are similar in most years (chart B), discounting the unexplained difference in
2011/12. Enrolments by gender again fluctuate with no clear bias shown (chart C). For all
postgraduate programmes, non-enrolment is largely due to the personal choice of the offer-holder
rather than not meeting the offer condition.
We recognise that the low proportion of female applications may partly be explained by the small
proportion of higher quality UK female maths undergraduates and the low proportion of female
supervisors. We will continue to monitor this and review our marketing/recruitment processes
including the use of appropriate role models [Action Plan 4.1, 4.2].
17
(vi)
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.
There is no significant difference between the degree classifications by gender. Males tend to have
a slightly higher proportion of firsts than females for the period shown but this is not a consistent
phenomenon. The proportion of 1st/2.1s for the overall period is identical.
Student feedback regarding our use of supervision groups (weekly meetings led by PhD students)
is uniformly positive, especially by those who lack confidence.
100
Undergraduate Degree Classification by Gender (Heads)
90
80
1st
70
30
Upper
2nd
Lower
2nd
3rd
20
Pass
60
50
40
10
0
08/09 M 08/09 F
09/10 M 09/10 F
10/11 M 10/11 F
11/12 M 11/12 F
Undergraduate Degree Classification by Gender (%)
100%
Pass
80%
3rd
60%
Lower
2nd
40%
Upper
2nd
20%
1st
0%
08/09 M 08/09 F
09/10 M 09/10 F
10/11 M 10/11 F
11/12 M 11/12 F
MEAN MMEAN F
Virtually all of our MSc and PhD students achieve their qualification aim and there is insignificant
gender difference in attainment, including that at MSc level (Distinction/Pass/Merit).
18
Staff data
(vii)
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
Academic and Research staff at 1st August each year
Staff Level
FA 6,
Research
Fellow
FA 7,
Assistant
Professor
FA 8*,
Associate
Professor
[includes
Reader]
FA 9,
Professor
Year
Female
headcount
Male
headcount
Total
% Female
% Male
2007
2
16
18
11%
89%
2008
1
10
11
9%
91%
2009
2
11
13
15%
85%
2010
2
16
18
11%
89%
2011
3
15
18
17%
83%
2012
4
20
24
17%
83%
2007
0
13
13
0%
100%
2008
0
10
10
0%
100%
2009
0
7
7
0%
100%
2010
0
13
13
0%
100%
2011
0
9
9
0%
100%
2012
0
10
10
0%
100%
2007
3
19
22
14%
86%
2008
4
20
24
17%
83%
2009
4
21
25
16%
84%
2010
4
21
25
16%
84%
2011
4
23
27
15%
85%
2012
4
24
28
14%
86%
2007
1
28
29
3%
97%
2008
1
30
31
3%
97%
2009
1
28
29
3%
97%
2010
1
28
29
3%
97%
2011
1
27
28
4%
96%
2012
1
30
31
3%
97%
* In Warwick, Grade 8 covers both Associate Professor (equivalent to Senior Lecturer
elsewhere) and Associate Professor Reader (equivalent to Reader elsewhere).
19
Academic & Research Staff by Gender and Grade
Female headcount
Male headcount
28
20
28
27
30
4
4
4
4
FA 6, Research Fellow FA 7, Assistant Professor FA 8, Associate Professor
1
1
1
1
1
1
2012
4
2011
3
2010
0
2009
0
2008
2012
0
2007
2011
0
2012
2010
0
2011
2009
0
2010
2008
23
2009
3
21
2008
2
2012
2
21
28
10
2011
1
9
7
2010
2
4
13
10
2009
13
20
2007
15
11
2007
10
19
2008
16
2007
16
30
24
FA 9, Professor
The proportion of females over all grades is 10%. Whilst at postdoctoral and associate professor
level the proportion is higher (17% and 14% respectively), in 2012 we had no females at assistant
professor level and only one female professor5. Three of the four current female associate
professors have been appointed since January 2007, and one of these has been promoted to
Reader. [A female assistant professor has been appointed in 2013 but is not included in the data
or commentary].
Sector-wide data includes Statistics (a separate department at Warwick) so direct comparisons are
difficult. Nevertheless sector-wide data places Warwick in the middle of the Russell Group, but
below the overall average of around 23%. The figures are a matter of ongoing concern and we will
endeavour to better understand the data in comparison with competitor institutions where
available and review and update our recruitment strategy [Action Plan 5.1, 5.2].
5
The London Mathematical Society report (February 2013) “Advancing Women in Mathematics: Good practice in UK
University Departments” shows that 6% of UK nationals at Professorial level are women.
20
(viii)
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.
Data up to 31st July each year
FEMALE
Level
FA 6,
Research
Fellow
FA 7,
Assistant
Professor
FA 8,
Associate
Professor
FA 9,
Professor
Year
2009
Average
headcount
2
Number
of leavers
0
Turnover
0%
2010
2
1
2011
3
2012
2009
Number of
Voluntary
leavers
0
Voluntary
Turnover
0%
50%
1
50%
0
0%
0
0%
4
3
86%
1
29%
0
0
0%
0
0%
2010
0
0
0%
0
0%
2011
0
0
0%
0
0%
2012
0
0
0%
0
0%
2009
4
0
0%
0
0%
2010
4
0
0%
0
0%
2011
4
0
0%
0
0%
2012
4
0
0%
0
0%
2009
1
0
0%
0
0%
2010
1
0
0%
0
0%
2011
1
0
0%
0
0%
2012
1
0
0%
0
0%
2
Voluntary
Turnover
19%
MALE
Level
FA 6,
Research
Fellow
FA 7,
Assistant
Professor
FA 8,
Associate
Professor
FA 9,
Professor
Number of
Voluntary
leavers
Year
2009
Average
headcount
11
Number
of leavers
6
Turnover
57%
2010
14
10
74%
2
15%
2011
16
5
32%
0
0%
2012
18
5
29%
1
6%
2009
9
2
24%
0
0%
2010
10
1
11%
1
11%
2011
11
3
27%
2
18%
2012
10
1
10%
0
0%
2009
21
1
5%
1
5%
2010
21
0
0%
0
0%
2011
22
0
0%
0
0%
2012
23
2
9%
2
9%
2009
29
2
7%
0
0%
2010
28
1
4%
0
0%
2011
28
3
11%
2
7%
2012
29
0
0%
0
0%
21
Staff Turnover
100%
Turnover %
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012
FA 6
F
FA 7
0% 50% 0% 86% 0%
0%
0%
FA 8
0%
FA 9
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
M 57% 74% 32% 29% 24% 11% 27% 10% 5%
0%
0%
9%
7%
4% 11% 0%
Voluntary Staff Turnover
100%
Turnover %
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012 2009 2010 2011 2012
FA 6
F
FA 7
0% 50% 0% 29% 0%
M 19% 15% 0%
6%
0%
0%
FA 8
FA 9
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0% 11% 18% 0%
5%
0%
0%
9%
0%
0%
7%
0%
There is no pattern in staff turnover for grade 6. All staff employed at this level are on fixed term
contracts funded by external grants. Numbers of voluntary early leavers are low and are all due to
promotion to more senior positions in the department or elsewhere. In the case of the two female
voluntary leavers, both were promoted to permanent positions elsewhere.
It is perhaps notable that although overall numbers are low, no female staff on permanent
contracts (level 7 and above) have chosen to leave the department in the above period. The only
woman to leave in the last 15 years was in 2006 to take up a professorial position abroad, after
being appointed in 2002 as a lecturer and subsequently being promoted to senior lecturer and
Reader.
[1999 words]
22
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.
APPLICATIONS
a
b
SUCCESSFUL APPLICATIONS
c
d
e
f
g
%M
[b/a]
%F
[c/a]
Total
h
i
j
k
l
m
M
F
%M
[h/b]
%F
[i/c]
% of
successful
who were
male
[h/g]
% of
successful
who were
female
[i/g]
Year
Level
Total
M
F
Not
known
09/10
FA 6
106
89
14
3
84%
13%
7
5
2
6%
14%
71%
29%
10/11
FA 6
102
73
27
2
72%
26%
5
3
2
4%
7%
60%
40%
11/12
FA 6
178
134
40
4
75%
22%
15
9
6
7%
15%
60%
40%
09/10
FA 7
90
67
16
7
74%
18%
1
1
0
1%
0%
100%
0%
10/11
FA 7
110
93
13
4
85%
12%
2
2
0
2%
0%
100%
0%
11/12
FA 7
726
582
124
20
80%
17%
7
7
0
1%
0%
100%
0%
10/11
FA 9
54
48
3
3
89%
6%
3
3
0
6%
0%
100%
0%
11/12
FA 9
77
64
7
6
83%
9%
2
1
0
2%
0%
50%
0%
09/10 –
11/12
grades
6-9
1443
1150
244
49
80%
17%
42
31
10
3%
4%
74%
24%
23
% Male and Female Applications
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
% Male Applications
% Female Applications
FA 6
FA 6
FA 6
FA 7
FA 7
FA 7
FA 9
FA 9
09/10
10/11
11/12
09/10
10/11
11/12
10/11
11/12
Male and Female Success Rates
16%
14%
12%
Male appointments as %
of all male applicants
10%
8%
6%
Female appointments as
% of all female applicants
4%
2%
0%
FA 6
FA 6
FA 6
FA 7
FA 7
FA 7
FA 9
FA 9
09/10
10/11
11/12
09/10
10/11
11/12
10/11
11/12
Over the last three years, around 17% of total applicants for posts at all levels (postdoctoral to
professorial) have been from women. Of those appointed, roughly 24% have been women.
There have not, however, been any female appointments to permanent positions at any level
over the above three years (although one woman has since been appointed).
The female applications ratio fluctuates in all grades, and show no appreciable pattern. Female
applications for professorial-level appointments are significantly lower than male. In the last
two years in which we have advertised such jobs, only 10 out of 131 applicants were female
(8%).
Academic staff are invited to participate in the shortlisting for grade 7-9 posts and to attend
presentations by shortlisted candidates. This invariably means the majority of female
academics make a significant contribution to the recruitment process. Views gathered from
these stages are carried forward to the panel interview. The composition of the interview
panel will be dependent on the requirements of the post and will include a woman with the
24
appropriate seniority and expertise where possible. Such panels also include an independent
senior member of the University – the Faculty Chair (currently female) or a Pro-Vice Chancellor
(some of whom are female). Postdoctoral post recruitment processes are less likely to include
academic female representation due to the smaller panels, narrower research focus of the
posts and low numbers of women in the department.
The department has in the recent past included prose in advertisements regarding familyfriendly policies that we hope will encourage more women to apply. This applied to an advert
for a post which has recently been filled by a female academic. We will review the impact of
such changes more systematically together with gender information on applications (where
such information is disclosed), shortlisted candidates and interviewees [Action Point 5.1].
(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.
YEAR
LEVEL
Professorships
Associate
2010/11 Professors
(Readers)
Associate
Professors
Professorships
Associate
2011/12 Professors
(Readers)
Associate
Professors
Professorships
Associate
2012/13 Professors
(Readers)
Associate
Professors
APPLICATIONS PROMOTED APPLICATIONS PROMOTED
FEMALE
FEMALE
MALE
MALE
1
1
-
-
2
2
-
-
2
1
2
1
-
-
3
3
-
-
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
-
-
2
2
Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor occurs automatically upon successful
completion of probation (5 years or less), as measured by a set of well-defined criteria. Explicit
allowance is made in university regulations for those who have had career breaks, for example for
maternity leave, allowing additional time to satisfy the promotion criteria.
Further promotion, from Associate Professor to Reader, or from Reader to Professor, is made by
individual application to the University. This may be on the basis of a self-nomination, or on a
nomination supported by the Department. Associate Professors are eligible for further promotion
to Reader (normally after at least three years), and may then apply for further promotion to
25
Professor (again, normally after at least three years). Promotion is a rigorous process with explicit
criteria set by the University, and a successful case for promotion relies heavily on support of
external referees.
The Department Promotion Committee (formally the Academic Staff Progress Committee) consists
of 8 professorial-level staff and meets annually to consider staff progress, to decide which eligible
staff should be supported for promotion, and to discuss any necessary feedback, support or
encouragement to be offered to other staff. Staff are invited to propose themselves for more
careful scrutiny, and committee members are also invited to propose possible candidates for
support for promotion. In all cases reported above, candidates received Departmental support for
their promotion applications, and nobody has felt the need to self-nominate themselves for
promotion for a considerable number of years. The Committee considers it a major element of its
work to support staff who are not yet ready for promotion with appropriate advice and guidance,
and to encourage staff who are ready to apply but who lack confidence. The Committee’s
expressed intent is to be aggressive in supporting staff for promotion as soon as it feels they have
a strong case to make.
Discounting the automatic promotion at the end of probation, the above shows that 10 men have
been promoted in the last 3 years out of an eligible population of 26. In the same period, 1 woman
has been promoted out of an eligible population of 4. Whilst the small number of female staff
make statistical comparison difficult, we recognise that with only 2 females currently at the reader
or professorial level, promotion is an area that will continue to require careful monitoring [Action
Plan 5.3]. Since promotion is not time-limited (unlike probation) no explicit allowance is made for
career breaks; but such breaks would naturally be taken into account as appropriate, e.g. when
judging productivity levels. Comprehensive information on the promotion process is available on
the University’s HR website, but we recognise the need to ensure that the process is continuously
and completely transparent and intend to make more explicit departmental advice available
[Action Plan 5.4]. The University also runs sessions on the subject of promotion aimed at women.
Staff are encouraged to attend and and some staff have done so.
Promotion decisions are analysed annually by the University to identify any evidence of
discrimination. University policies and procedures for promotion are in line with its Equality and
Diversity Policies.
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
All departmental recruitment activities are managed by the Departmental Administrator, aided by
the Departmental Secretary who has over 10 years of relevant HR experience and is a member of
the University’s Equality and Diversity Network. The department is further supported by an
assigned member of the University’s HR team.
The department’s primary concern is to attract and appoint the best candidates for all advertised
26
positions, and to do this the Department follows the University’s Recruitment and Selection Policy
which provides a formal framework for ensuring equality of opportunity for all applicants and
compliance with the University policies and relevant legislation. The Policy provides guidelines on
writing job descriptions and advertisements, shortlisting, conducting interviews and making
appointments. Training and guidance for members of staff on interview panels is provided which
aims to ensure that all members are familiar with relevant university policies.
All posts are as a minimum advertised on the University website, jobs.ac.uk and on the
department’s web-site. The University’s vacancies website includes an Equal Opportunities
statement in addition to the University-wide Athena Swan logo. As previously noted, the
department has recently included prose in adverts that we hope will encourage more women to
apply. The impact of all our promotional material will be monitored [Action Point 5.2].
All permanent appointments are typically open to applicants with research interests across all of
mathematics (sometimes split into Pure and Applied at the more senior levels), thus sending a
message of inclusivity to potential applicants.
(ii)
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.
The department has a low number of women above the postdoctoral level. Happily, the level of
attrition for this group is low, with only one permanent female academic choosing to leave in the
last 15 years (for an overseas professorial position). At postdoctoral level, some women do (for
good and positive reasons) leave before the end of their fixed-term funded contracts.
Whilst the careers of postdoctoral leavers are not systematically tracked [Action Point 5.5],
feedback from line-managers regarding their subsequent destinations is generally very positive
with many going onto tenured positions. We recognise the importance of this group and
encouragement to take up the many development and networking opportunities organised
through the University has been stepped up and will be monitored – a recent example is
attendance by a researcher at a 2-day course “Communication & Impact for Female Early Career
Researchers”. Department support is provided by more senior academic staff acting as mentors
and this seems to work well, with very positive feedback.
Departmental funding is made available (for staff and students) for specific events targeting
women, such as those organised by the London Mathematical Society, Newton Institute or
European Women In Mathematics. We will more systematically advertise such opportunities and
monitor take-up and feed-back. [Action Point 5.6]
All postdoctoral researchers and junior staff have a Department mentor. Mentoring is largely an
informal process in the department, which takes into account individual needs and circumstances.
At a more senior level, advice and mentoring is provided by members of the Department
Promotion Committee or other senior colleagues (including the Head of Department). Feedback
during the consultation process suggests that this seems to work well. However we recognise
there are risks in such informal processes and we will be advertising the mentoring options more
27
transparently in future. Our female Associate Professors will immediately benefit from the greater
accessibility of this information [Action Point 5.7].
The Department is participating in the EPSRC Career Returners Scheme which has provided limited
postdoctoral funding for a new member of staff who took a significant career break to start a
family and now seeks to re-engage with her research. This member of staff is assigned a research
relevant mentor as a formal part of the scheme.
Postdoctoral staff are encouraged to teach (as appropriate, and where allowed by their funding).
Feedback has been very positive and it is the intention to monitor take up of this opportunity by
gender [Action Point 5.8]. All staff who teach participate in a peer observation scheme operated
by the department which provides encouragement and feedback for development purposes. We
believe this is particularly beneficial to staff who may lack confidence in their teaching.
We also recognise that progression of females from undergraduate to postgraduate level and
thereafter to postdoctoral posts requires further investigation so that they may be appropriately
supported. Whilst around 25% and 17% of our female and male finalists, respectively, continued
to MSc or PhD studies last year, this requires further analysis, together with progression data from
PhD to postdoctoral work. [Action Plan 2.9, 4.3]
The department has a recognised, vibrant research culture including a large number of seminars
and conferences – these provide many research-focused training and networking opportunities.
We are endeavouring to include more female speakers in the programmes.
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?
Annual Reviews are the principal mechanism for staff formally to discuss their performance and
career development needs with a senior colleague. Annual Reviews are undertaken by all nonprobationary staff and involve reflecting on previous achievements and identifying objectives for
the coming year. Whilst research, teaching and administration all play an important part of the
discussions, the emphasis is dependent on particular circumstances e.g. the close proximity to the
REF has increased the emphasis on research quality and where appropriate, quantity. Reviewees
are also encouraged to raise any issues that may have an impact on their work, with the process
intended to be primarily supportive. Research staff are reviewed by their supervisors, junior
academics by a nominated professor, and the head of department reviews all senior staff. While
individual reviewers are carefully selected, any individual who would prefer to have another
reviewer can request a change; such requests are uncommon but are invariably granted.
Probationary academic staff have formal annual meetings with the Head of Department and these
are summarised for consideration by the University Probation Group as part of the probation
28
process. Probationary postdoctoral staff follow the University’s probationary process for such staff
which ensures that regular progression meetings are held with the line-manager. Support is also
available from other senior staff in the department.
Specific consideration of promotion prospects is not emphasised (by the University) as a topic for
Annual Reviews, but advice on career progression more generally does form part of the process
and inevitably, if there are concerns, the topic is discussed.
All staff are encouraged to take up development opportunities offered through the University’s
Learning and Development Centre (LDC). These opportunities are targeted to different groups of
staff (including some specifically aimed at females) and at different career stages. The range of
opportunities is large and communicated to all staff through a weekly bulletin.
Fixed term staff also meet with the Head of Department (or authorised deputy) before the end of
the contract period. This provides the opportunity, where appropriate, to provide additional
advice on development and career options, and to highlight University options for training and
redeployment. It also provides the opportunity for a leaving member of staff to raise any issues
they have about the support they received during their time in the Department. Whilst
information on career plans and progression have not systematically been documented for each
researcher leaving the university, the department is committed to doing so in the future in order
that any conclusions can be acted upon for the benefit of future staff [Action Point 5.5].
One aspect of career progression that has proved to be particularly beneficial at Warwick is the
opportunity provided by individual research fellowships awarded by external bodies. The
department has a strong record of supporting applications for such grants as well as for more
general grants from both internal and external candidates. The Department spends a considerable
amount of time and effort encouraging and advising staff to apply for grants appropriate to their
career-stage. Invaluable advice is also provided by a member of research support staff whose
specific role is to assist all staff with their grant applications. For example, four of our female staff
above post-doctoral level have had significant assistance with fellowship and grant applications in
recent years.
(ii)
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?
The department aims to provide an induction process that feels fairly informal (to reflect a friendly
environment and to encourage ongoing dialogue between new staff and key colleagues) but
simultaneously ensures that key policies, procedures and processes are covered. It fulfills these
requirements by introducing new staff members to a number of key colleagues who will be best
placed to provide initial support and advice. Further colleagues are subsequently introduced via
formal and informal meetings and gatherings e.g. individual staff meetings, organised social
events, etc. Line managers play a key part in the induction process, outlining expectations for the
role and defining objectives for the probationary period. Training and development opportunities
are highlighted and these may be gender-specific for female staff.
The information provided by the department is augmented by an induction programme offered by
the University and available via the HR web-site; this highlights, for example, family friendly
29
policies and recruitment and selection requirements for relevant staff. Whilst such information is
brought to the attention of all new staff via various channels including the offer letter, feedback
has suggested that such information could be better signposted by the department [Action Point
5.9]. Overall feedback on current practice from new staff was very positive.
The LDC offers support for academic progression with training in teaching. The Postgraduate
Certificate in Academic and Professional Practice (PCAPP) is a requirement for all early career
academic staff (and is a condition of completing probation). The Departments of Mathematics and
Statistics, with the support of the University, have developed a variant of this programme
reflecting the special needs and circumstances within the mathematical sciences. Support and
guidance is provided by module mentors for the initial modules taught by the member of staff.
The LDC also offers a full programme of training courses for all levels and categories of staff. These
opportunities are circulated via a weekly bulletin [Action Point 6.0].
(iii)
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.
Support for students is provided in a number of different ways. All students have access to the
Careers Centre which provides a range of workshops and tailored one-to-one support. Bulletins
provide regular updates of opportunities. The department has additionally recruited a female
administrator to a relatively new post (Taught Programmes Manager), whose role, together with
Careers and Skills, includes the development of events and programmes for students on career
planning. The department has an established Tutor for Women, a position held by a female
academic to provide confidential advice. A female academic has also held the “PG Professional
Development Advisor” role in recent years. All administrative roles in the department are
advertised on the intranet and are taken into account when teaching and other duties are
allocated.
All undergraduate and taught postgraduate students are assigned a tutor. Given the gender
balance, it is not possible to allocate a female tutor to all female students (and nor do we attempt
to do so). Students are however permitted to request a change of tutor (without explanation) and
such requests are always granted. The department also runs a system of supervisions for groups of
4 or 5 undergraduate students. These are led by PhD students who also act as informal mentors to
the students. Feedback from discussions held during the Athena SWAN consultation process
suggests that these supervisions are extremely valuable and particularly beneficial for lessconfident students (often female) due to the less formal nature of the sessions.
Undergraduate students are exposed to research activities throughout their degree. Aside from
such activities embedded within a number of modules, fully assessed essay modules are offered in
the second and third years and there is a compulsory project in the fourth year. The relevance of
these for females continuing in an academic career is recognised and the second year module
coordinator, as well as one of two fourth year Project Coordinators, are women. Such roles are
publicised on the web and are accounted for in the allocation of teaching and administrative
duties.
30
The University runs a competitive Undergraduate Research Scholarship Scheme that provides
opportunities for students to gain experience of research. We will review the level of
departmental funding that we make available to increase the numbers of students who are able to
participate. As part of this review, we will consider options to target a proportion of the funding to
female applicants to encourage wider participation from this group [Action Plan 3.0].
Postgraduate research students have one or two supervisors and a separate mentor who provides
both pastoral and academic advice. The aforementioned Tutor for Women and PG Professional
Development Advisor provide further support.
Research students also have the option of studying for the accredited Postgraduate Certificate in
Transferable Skills in Science (PGCTSS). Whilst the course is compulsory for our Doctoral Training
Centre students, discussions about its suitability for our PhD students is ongoing, together with
new initiatives that have been introduced recently by the academic responsible for departmental
postgraduate training. These initiatives include PhD modules on Expert Speaking for
Mathematicians and Advanced Mathematical Writing. These are compulsory for PhD students and
have been designed to encourage those who may be inhibited by personal confidence levels. The
department will monitor the success of these courses [Action Plan 6.0].
A strong feature of the department is the high number of research seminars and workshops. These
are a critical part of a student’s development and a small but growing number of these are led by
the students themselves, supported by staff in our Mathematics Research Centre. The national
Young Researchers in Mathematics conference was held at Warwick in 2011 (first time outside
Cambridge) and was managed by a student committee with a strong representation of females.
Financial assistance is made available for events elsewhere such as the two day careers-related
event “LMS Women in Mathematics Day”. Three PhD students and our female outreach officer
attended this year.
Finally, the student “Maths Society”, with the assistance of the department, is currently in the
process of setting up a series of talks by alumni. In choosing speakers we recognise the importance
of female role models [Action Plan 3.1].
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.
31
Female
Male
%
Female
Male
% Female
(non(nonFemale
(academic) (academic) (academic)
academic) academic) (total)
Committee*
Management Committee
Academic Staff Progress
Committee
REF Group
Undergraduate Teaching
Committee
Graduate Studies
Committee
Computing Committee
Library Committee
Undergraduate Student
Staff Liaison Committee
Postgraduate Student
Staff Liaison Committee
TOTAL
1
7
13%
0
1
11%
0
8
0%
0
0
0%
1
2
33%
0
0
33%
1
5
17%
2
2
30%
1
9
10%
1
2
15%
0
0
3
2
0%
0%
0
1
1
1
0%
25%
0
2
0%
5
11
28%
0
2
0%
3
6
27%
4
40
9%
12
24
20%
* Committee membership is for 2012/13 - it is also representative for the previous 2 years.
Selection for Committees is based on individual roles in the department, expertise, interests and
workload considerations.
The overall difference between male and female academic representation reflects the gender
balance in the department, so there are rather few academic women represented in the above
figures. However, the department does not and should not overburden women with committee
work simply to increase the number of women on committees. The Academic Staff Progress
Committee (Promotion Committee) is a case in point. This Committee’s members are all at
professorial level and the single female Professor has many external responsibilities and other
duties; she is consulted (as are other Professors who are not on the Committee) but is not a
member.
Student female representation on committees is higher, reflecting the higher number of female
students.
(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.
32
Fixed Term Contract (FTC) and Open-Ended Contract (OEC) Staff
HEADS
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012
FA6
FA7
FA8
FA9
Male OEC headcount
0
0
0
8
3
3
21
23
24
28
27
29
Male FTC headcount
16
15
20
5
6
7
0
0
0
0
0
1
Female OEC headcount
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
4
4
1
1
1
Female FTC headcount
2
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Fixed Term Contract (FTC) and Open-Ended Contract (OEC) Staff
PERCENTAGE
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012
FA6
FA7
FA8
FA9
OEC Male
0%
0%
0%
62%
33%
30%
84%
85%
86%
97%
96%
94%
FTC Male
89%
83%
83%
38%
67%
70%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3%
OEC Female
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
16%
15%
14%
3%
4%
3%
FTC Female
11%
17%
17%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Fixed-term contracts (FTC) in the department are used for:




grant-funded research assistant posts (Grade 6)
some externally-funded personal fellowships (Grade 7)
temporary lectureships to cover staff on research leave (often funded by personal
fellowships), and
the department’s three-year Zeeman Lectureships, intended as a staging post between
a postdoctoral position and a permanent lectureship.
Open-ended contracts are used for all other posts, i.e. those with indefinite funding.
The diagrams show that the proportion of women at Grade 6 level (FTC research fellows)
and Grade 8 (OEC Associate Professors) are comparable at around 14 - 17%. There were
not any female appointments at Grade 7 level (Assistant Professor) in the period. Male
appointees on fixed term contracts at Grade 7 are a combination of those on externallyfunded personal fellowships and 3 year advertised lectureships. We are very disappointed
33
that there have not been any female appointments at this level (or higher) in the years
shown above. As previously noted, a permanent (OEC) female appointment has however
been secured more recently.
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?
As noted above, Committee membership is determined by role, interest and workload.
Academic female representation is low but reflective of the gender split for the
department. Membership is published on the intranet. The department is careful to avoid
committee overload when choosing female members.
Academic staff are invited or elected to sit on many university committees. Take up from
Mathematics of these opportunities is low (for both genders).
(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 does not use an overarching workload allocation model that attempts to
quantify the value of all the various contributions made by different staff. Teaching,
tutoring and administrative tasks are allocated with reference to standard norms (two
modules per year, so many personal tutees, etc.) adjusted to accommodate individual staff
circumstances (sabbatical leave, research fellowships, other responsibilities, etc.). Research
activity (publications, PhD supervision, grants, workshop organisation, supervision of postdocs, etc.) is taken into consideration. Staff give feedback on their overall workload during
annual reviews and in discussion with the Head of Department; they are all encouraged to
propose changes to their teaching each year.
Duties are distributed as fairly as possible, taking into account an individual’s
circumstances; for example, staff on probation are given a reduced teaching load. Staff
with prestigious personal research fellowships have reduced loads, although most still
prefer to continue to undertake a reduced teaching load and to remain involved in
strategic decision making in the Department. Duties are rotated, though this is dependent
on available staff and expertise. All teaching and administrative duties including Committee
membership are published on the intranet. The allocation may not be as transparent as
with a detailed quantitative model, but staff feedback generally suggests the methodology
works well.
In the case of individual roles, the responsibility for work on women and science currently
sits with the (female) Professor whose other workload is protected to compensate. The
34
department currently has 2 admissions tutors (one female and one male). We recognise
that whilst the associated workload is large, having a female tutor may be important,
especially given our low female proportion of undergraduate students.
(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.
Staff meetings (for all grades, academic and non-academic) are held at 1.30 on the second
Wednesday of term ensuring that staff attendance is maximised. Committee meetings are
similarly held in standard working hours and are scheduled as far in advance as possible at
times convenient to members.
Social events such as the Christmas meal are held at lunchtime. Weekly colloquia followed
by refreshments start at 4pm (staff are free to bring children along and this is sometimes
the case). The summer barbecue starts at 6pm and is very popular with families – children
are invited and many attend.
(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.
Feedback from the Athena Swan consultations suggests the department is family-friendly
and flexible. This is also emphasised by results from anonymous university-wide staff
surveys where the department consistently does well overall (within the top few
departments) including on themes such as “working environment and work-life balance”
and “equal opportunities and diversity”.
Staff with caring responsibilities are generally able to work around their commitments.
Timetabling for our undergraduate programmes is constrained due to a high degree of
optionality and limited lecture space. Nevertheless where staff have children to drop
off/pick up, timetabling changes are nearly always possible to accommodate requests.
University-wide Saturday Open Days can be more of a challenge for parents but are few in
number and scheduled well in advance. Academic staff are also able to work from home as
long as necessary work obligations are met.
The department is fortunate to be housed in a relatively new building focussed around a
large common room and adjoining maths library. The common room is extensively used by
all of our staff, postgraduates and fourth year undergraduates, for seminar and workshop
breaks/lunches, postgraduate lunches etc. The friendly environment enables a high degree
of interaction between academic staff and students. Staff often work from home to ease
logistics of holiday child care.
Postgraduate students also organise a weekly common room lunch. By allowing staff at all
levels to gather informally, whether to discuss research, developments in the University, or
current affairs, these events foster a friendly and pleasant work environment for all.
Feedback from Athena Swan focus sub-groups suggest that more could be done to
encourage interaction amongst the female students and this is being taken forward [Action
Plan 3.1].
35
(v)
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 organises its outreach activities via a number of inter-linked approaches.
The main hub of activity is the department’s Further Maths Centre (FMC), funded by Maths
in Education and Industry (MEI), departmental funds and any other funds won through
competitive bids. Two female staff (including an ex-teacher) manage the Centre which
began as a local Warwick–MEI initiative and has since expanded to the national Further
Maths Support Programme (FMSP).
Aside from the FMSP activity, the Further Maths Centre manages two STEP/AEA days for
our applicants (150-200 students per day, 33% female in 2013), on-line resources (500
students) and CPD STEP/AEA activity for teachers (44% female). Twelve Saturday Royal
Institution Masterclasses have been introduced this year for interested Coventry and
Warwickshire students (48 participants, 50% female). Two new problem-solving days are
planned for local sixth-formers, including one dedicated to females. An additional Maths
and Beyond day has also been introduced (50% female). Many of the above have been
introduced in light of our admissions gender ratios and Athena Swan discussions. Other
new activity is under consideration for next year [Action Point 2.2, 2.6-2.8].
The Department has an academic Widening Participation (WP) Officer who engages with
colleagues and the university on various WP matters and undertakes outreach activity as
well as managing most Open Day activity. Other outreach activity in the UK, and more
globally, includes work with the International Gateway for Gifted Youth
(IGGY: https://www.iggy.net/ ) – the academic leader is the department’s Director of UG
Studies whilst the academic principal is a mathematician and ex-employee who continues
to work closely with the department. Warwick in Africa (WiA:
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/giving/priority/responsibility/wina) is another initiative which
started in the department and continues to have significant input from the department.
A number of staff and students undertake outreach activity to varying degrees, either as
part of the FMC or individually visiting local schools, etc. Recognised roles as in the
paragraph above are taken account in workload allocation. Other activities can be
discussed as part of the annual review process and if significant, can be considered as part
of the promotion process.
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.
36
Year
2006/07
2009/10
Number on
Return Rate
Maternity Leave
1
1
100 %
100 %
There have been only 2 instances of academic staff taking maternity leave in recent years.
In both cases, the staff members have returned to work. The first instance shown above is
of a research fellow on a fixed term contract who returned after maternity leave to
complete her contract before moving to a permanent academic position at another HEI.
The second case is of a current permanent member of staff who is very satisfied with the
support provided by the department.
(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.
Year
2004/05
2005/06
2010/11
Number on Paternity Leave
1
1
1
The number of formal applications for paternity leave is small as shown above; all are for
grade 7 (Assistant Professor) level. There have been no instances of adoption or parental
leave. Given the flexibility of the department, a larger number of staff did not make a
formal request for paternity leave but did, nonetheless, make desired adjustments to their
patterns of working.
(iii)
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.
The University has a flexible working policy that permits staff to request to work for
reduced hours or alternative options including flexi-time or seasonal hours. The very
informal culture of the department together with the nature of mathematics academic
work does however mean that such formal requests are few in number as most staff work
around their commitments. Such requests by academic staff in the last five years have
been restricted to retired staff or those approaching retirement who wish to reduce their
hours (and responsibilities). All requests have been granted.
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.
37
See previous section. Policies such as flexible-working are not necessarily as well
advertised as they could be. The department’s web-pages and links to such policies
will be reviewed [Action Plan 6.1].
(ii)
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.
There have only been two cases of maternity leave in recent years. In the case of a
permanent academic member of staff, she was not given any teaching or
administrative duties for a period of 18 months after returning from maternity
leave (including a period of 6 months for sabbatical leave). Whilst it was the choice
of the staff member to continue to teach until going on maternity leave, teaching
slots were carefully rearranged to suit her specific needs. The department remained
in touch with the member of staff during maternity leave and the Head of
Department met with the returnee to discuss working arrangements to ensure a
suitable transition back into academic life. Feedback from the staff member on her
experiences is positive.
PhD supervision is undertaken by a second supervisor during periods of leave,
whilst undergraduate tutees are re-assigned to other staff.
All staff have access to the University Nursery and a (summer) holiday-scheme for
school-children is also being piloted this year. The department will review its
support for maternity leave including that provided before, during and after a
period of leave [Action Plan 6.1].
[4966 words]
5. Any other comments: maximum 500 words
Please comment here on any other elements which are relevant to the application, e.g. other SETspecific 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 one of the most successful and well-regarded departments in the
University. Staff and students are enthusiastic and there is a convivial and welcoming
atmosphere; this description came across very strongly from both men and women in the
various discussions of the focus group, sub-groups, and the many interactions with the
wider staff and student population (individually or in groups). As previously noted the
department has consistently scored highly in PULSE (University wide staff survey) on most
themes; current year’s results are awaited.
We are, however, very concerned about the gender imbalance at both staff and student
level and hope that the steps being taken and planned for the coming years will have a
positive impact on our staff and student profile. The department has grown rapidly over
the last decade and we are giving serious consideration to employing a person to help to
manage and implement the changes described in this document and action plan and other
growing needs [Action Plan 1.1].
[165 words]
38
Athena SWAN Action Plan
Department of Mathematics, University of Warwick
Bronze award application [April 2013]
Description of Action
1
1.1
1.2
Implementation and Benchmarking
Implementation
Athena SWAN Group to meet termly
to review and monitor
implementation of action plan
including baseline data and
evidence.
Benchmarking
External: Consider our own data and
information in the light of the
national benchmarking information
provided in the LMS report.*
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
Initial discussions
held by members of
Management
Committee.
1. Formalise remit and membership of
the Group following the application.
2. Regular reports to wider Staff
meeting and other relevant
Committees.
3. Consideration of a new post that
includes support for the work of the
Group in its portfolio.
Head of
Department,
Chair of
Athena SWAN
Group [ASG],
Department
Administrator.
1. Revised remit
and
membership by
Autumn 2013.
2. Termly reports.
3. Bid for a post
by Autumn
2013.

1. Group to discuss LMS report as part
of its on-going agenda.
2. Consideration of the PULSE survey
results when released at gender
level (if available).
Chair of ASG
1. By Autumn
2013.

LMS report recently
reviewed by
individual Group
members.



Outcomes of individual
actions.
On-going discussion of
issues and positive
outcomes.
Wider knowledge of
issues, policies and
processes.
Improved
understanding of the
sector-wide position.
Better-informed staff.
Internal: Consideration of
University –wide Staff Survey
(PULSE).
*LMS: London Mathematical Society.
Report “Advancing Women in
Mathematics: Good Practice in UK
University Departments”. Circulated to
Maths Departments during March 2013.
39
Description of Action
2.1
2.2
Action taken
Further action planned at April 2013
already and
outcome at April
2013
Undergraduate Matters [this section may include higher levels where relevant]
Undergraduate Data:
Available central
1. Annual report to the Group and
a) Regular report of Admissions
and local data
relevant Committees.
gender-related data to the
analysed in some
2. Discuss the gender issues with
Group.
detail and discussed
institutions with similar gender
b) Further investigation of reasons at the Group and
profiles and non-standard entrance
for the gender imbalance for
more widely.
examinations as part of the offer.
admissions.
3. Seek/develop standard trend
reports on offers made, offers held
as first choice, offers held as
insurance and offers accepted, in
addition to the standard data
already provided.
4. Survey of incoming students to
understand positive and negative
factors when choosing the
Department.
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
Chair of ASG,
Admissions
Tutors,
Department
Administrator.
1. Autumn 2013
onwards for
reports.
2. On-going for
discussions
with other
institutions.
3. By summer
2014.
4. Autumn
2013.

STEP/AEA Support for Applicants
Further Maths
Centre [FMC].
1. On-going.
2. Dependent
on the future
of AEA.
3. January 2014.

Increased level of support and
take-up to encourage female
applicants.
Series of 12 short
videos on the STEP
papers introduced.
New CPD event for
STEP introduced
with agreed
funding.
1. Seek feed-back on existing and new
resources from users, teachers and
presenters (of other STEP events)
and enhance where possible.
2. Consider extending support
available for the AEA.
3. Target CPD opportunities for
teachers who have students on the
STEP/AEA course [subject to
funding].



Increased understanding
of the reasons for the
gender imbalance.
Improved gender ratio.
Positive feedback from
users, etc.
Increased number of online users.
Improved female ratios
for admissions.
40
Description of Action
2.3
Mechanisms to Support
Undergraduate Students [related to
conclusions of 2011 survey]
Additional advice to supervisors,
tutors and lecturers.
2.4
Undergraduate and Postgraduate
Admissions Literature
Overhaul departmental admissions
web-pages to encourage female
applicants.
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Survey results
discussed in Spring
2012 Teaching
Committee and as
part of the Athena
Swan process.
Minor changes
implemented.
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
1. Review and update information
packs for supervisors of small-group
teaching (PhD students) i.e.
additional advice on
encouragement of students, study
for exams, additional available
support mechanisms, not being
over-concerned about losing small
proportion of marks on
assignments.
2. Provide advice to academic tutors
on suggested activities for tutorials,
emphasis on making maths
enjoyable and avoiding stress.
3. Remind lecturers of the importance
of announcing due dates of
assignments well in advance.
Maximise period to complete
assignments.
Director of UG
Studies and
Senior Tutor
1. September
2013
2. September
2013
3. September
2013

Positive feedback from
student surveys and
SSLC.
1. Review and revise web-pages.
2. Introduce podcasts by students and
(possibly) recent alumni, with an
appropriate balance of male and
female role models.
3. Seek feedback on revised webpages/literature.
Admissions
Tutors,
Director of
Postgraduate
Studies,
Department
Administrator.
1. Revised webpages by
Summer
2014.
2. Summer 2013
for UG
podcasts.
3. On-going.

Positive feedback from
users.
Increased use of female
role models on web-site.
Increased numbers of (i)
female applicants and (ii)
applicants holding
Warwick’s offer.
Senior Tutor
Senior Tutor
and Director
of UG Studies


41
Description of Action
2.5
Undergraduate Open Days:
Ensure Open Days have appropriate
balance of male and female role
models.
2.6
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Presentational
material updated.
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
1. Continue to encourage and monitor
female staff and student
involvement.
2. Introduce a new session about STEP
with female participation to
increase confidence of potential
applicants.
3. Seek formal feedback from
attendees on their views of
individual sessions and implement
changes as required.
4. Review and implement further
presentational material changes.
Admissions
Tutors
1. On-going.
2. Spring 2014.
3. Spring 2014.
4. On-going.

Discussions with
FMSP initiated.
1. Raise relevant issues with teachers
through the Warwick Further Maths
Centre and national Further Maths
Support Programme [FMSP].
Initial meeting with
University
Management
regarding Outreach
activities.
2. Discussion of wider issues and
examples of good practise amongst
STEM subjects at Warwick.
Further Maths
Centre [FMC],
Programme
Leader for
FMSP,
Admissions
Tutors,
Department
Administrator.
Increased presence
of females at Q & A
sessions.
Review format of the Open Days
and presentational material to
ensure less confident students are
not put off by STEP etc.
Open Day session
included with a
female presenter.
Stress flexibility and optionality of
programmes.
New STEP session
discussed.
Outreach - Awareness
Raising the wider issues of female
under-representation in
mathematics including those taking
STEP.


1. On-going.
2. Initial
exploratory
meeting in
May 2013.
On-going
discussion.



Positive feedback from
Open Day attendees.
Appropriate level of
female staff and student
involvement in Open
Days.
Increased numbers of (i)
female applicants and (ii)
female applicants
holding Warwick as First
Choice/Insurance.
Increased understanding
of the issues by teachers.
Increased understanding
of the issues at the
university.
Good practice shared
between University
STEM departments.
42
Description of Action
2.7
Outreach – Positive Female Role
Models
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Initiated for recent
events.
Increase female presenters and
postgraduate helpers.
2.8
Outreach – Increasing female
school-children attendance
Introduce new events. Increase
female attendance on existing
events.
Funding agreed by
department for
new events. Initial
planning underway.
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
1. Recruit increasing number of female
presenters at Departmental and
FMSP Outreach events including
Keynote speakers. Monitor and
take action as required.
Further Maths
Centre [FMC],
Widening
Participation
Officer.
March 2013
onwards.

Increased level of female
representation.
1. Introduce two new problem-solving
events for local sixth-formers. One
exclusively for females.
2. Introduce an additional enrichment
event for 15/16 year olds.
3. Encourage schools to send female
students to events.
Further Maths
Centre [FMC],
Widening
Participation
Officer.
1. July 2013
onwards.
2. Spring 2014
onwards.
3. On-going.

Monitor attendance
rate.
Feedback from
participants at new
events.
1. Analyse transition data from
undergraduate to postgraduate
(here and elsewhere) by gender.
2. Consider trends & differences to
identify potential reasons and any
necessary actions.
Taught
Programmes
Manager
1. Autumn 2013
onwards.


First Master-classes
held in Spring 2013.
2.9
Transition from Undergraduate
Degrees to MSc or PhD
Investigate trend data to identify
any support, training needs etc
2012 DLHE* survey
data reviewed.
Improved understanding
to provide support as
necessary.
*DLHE = Destinations of Leavers from
Higher Education
43
Description of Action
3.0
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Departmental-Funded Summer
Research Project Bursaries aimed at
Female Undergraduates
Increase female participation.
3.1
Events for Female Undergraduate
and Postgraduate Students
Facilitate internal networking
meetings/discussion groups/social
events aimed at female students.
Discussion groups
between staff and
female students
held as part of
Athena Swan
process.
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
1. Review the level of department
funding provided for additional
Summer projects administered
under the University Research
Scholarships Scheme.
2. Consider options to target some of
the (enhanced) funding to
encourage further applications from
females (subject to agreement from
the University).
Departmental
Administrator,
Head of
Department.
January 2014

Increased female
participation.
1. Organise annual event for students
with a female role model (speaker)
followed by panel discussion.
Refreshments provided.
2. Organise other events (to be
discussed).
3. Organise series of talks by alumni
(including female role models).
Undergraduate
and
postgraduate
Athena Swan
coordinators.
1. Autumn
Term 2013
onwards.
2. Ongoing.
3. Summer
2013
onwards.

Monitor attendance and
discussion.
Positive feedback from
events.
More knowledgeable
student body.
Student Society.


Wider student
discussion/social
event held for
female students.
44
Description of Action
4.1
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Postgraduate Matters [including 2.4 and 2.9 above]
Postgraduate Data
Regular report of postgraduate
admissions gender-related data to
the Group.
4.2
Data discussed at
the Group and
more widely.
Postgraduate Recruitment
Ensure Open Days have appropriate
balance of male and female role
models.
New recruitment
event discussed at
Graduate Studies
Committee
Review format of the Open Days
and presentational material.
Introduce a new recruitment event.
4.3
Transition from PhD to Postdoctoral
Research
Investigate trend data to identify
any support, training needs etc
Data collected for
recent years.
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
1. Analysis of data & annual report to
the Group and relevant
Committees.
2. Annual survey of incoming students
to understand positive and negative
factors when choosing Warwick.
Director of
Graduate
Studies.
1. Autumn
Term
onwards for
reports.
2. Autumn
2013
onwards.

1. Encourage and monitor female staff
and student involvement.
2. Seek formal feedback from
attendees on their views of
individual sessions and implement
changes as required.
3. Review and implement further
presentational material changes.
4. Consider any special requirements
for the new Masters programme.
Director of
Graduate
Studies,
Postgraduate
Coordinator,
CDT
Administrator.
1. Ongoing.
2. Autumn/
Spring 2014.
3. Autumn/
Spring 2014.
4. Ongoing.

1. Analyse transition data from PhD
study to postdoctoral research by
gender.
2. Consider trends & differences to
identify potential reasons and any
necessary actions.
Postgraduate
Coordinator, PG
Training Lead,
PG Professional
Development
Advisor.
1. Summer
2013
onwards.
2. Summer
2013
onwards.




Increased understanding
of the reasons for the
gender imbalance.
Improved gender ratio.
Positive feedback from
recruitment event
attendees.
Appropriate level of
female staff and student
involvement at events.
Increased numbers of (i)
female applicants and (ii)
applicants holding
Warwick offers.
Improved understanding
to provide support as
necessary.
45
Description of Action
5.1
5.2
Action taken
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
already and
outcome at April
2013
Staff Matters [this section may also include undergraduate and postgraduate matters where relevant]
Staff Data
1. Annual report to the Group and
Department
relevant Committees.
Administrator,
Analysis of recruitment and
Provided HR data
2. Systematically collect further
PA to Head of
promotions data.
discussed at the
gender information on applications Department.
Group and more
(where available), short-listed &
widely.
interviewed candidates, reasons for
declining an offer, etc.
Timescale
Success Measure
1. Spring term
2014 for
reports.
2. Autumn
2013
onwards.

Staff Recruitment
Improving the recruitment process
including awareness of equality and
diversity policies.
5.3
Some process
changes
implemented in
Autumn 2013 to
make the shortlisting process
quicker, more userfriendly/ inclusive.
Promotion Rates
Closely monitor promotion rates by
gender.
5.4
Process discussed
in detail at October
2012 Staff Meeting.
Promotion Guidance
Enhanced guidance on web-site.
Data considered
during Athena
SWAN process.

Increased understanding
of the reasons for the
gender imbalance.
Improved gender ratio.
1. Remind panel members of relevant
policies and obligations.
2. Consider recruitment strategies e.g.
timing of advertisements, where we
advertise, family-friendly policies in
adverts/further particulars/webpages, encouragement of potential
candidates etc.
3. Review of process including changes
implemented in Autumn 2013, with
implementation of further changes
as necessary.
Head of
Department,
Chair of
interview
panels,
Department
Administrator,
PA to Head of
Department.
1. On-going.
2. Spring 2014.
3. Spring 2014.

1. Continue to monitor promotion
rates.
Academic Staff
Progress
Committee.
1. Annually
from
Summer
2014.

Greater transparency
across the department.
1. Introduce webpages on
departmental processes including
relationship with the University
promotion process.
Chair of
Academic Staff
Progress
Committee,
Department
Administrator.
1. March 2014

Greater transparency
across the department.

Well-informed panel
members.
Improved process and
positive feedback from
staff.
46
Description of Action
5.5 Postdoctoral Staff
Support for Early Career
Researchers.
5.6 Departmental Support for Events
aimed at Women (all levels).
Specific networking/training
opportunities for female students
and staff.
5.7 Mentoring
Review mentoring process and
increase transparency.
5.8 Teaching Opportunities by ECRs
Analyse teaching opportunities for
postdoctoral staff by gender.
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
Recent leaver
information
collected.
1. Analyse transition data from a
departmental postdoctoral position
to their next post, by gender.
2. Systematically collate leaver
information.
3. Consider trends & differences to
identify potential reasons and any
support, training needs etc.
Head of
Department,
Department
Administrator,
PA to Head of
Department.
1. Autumn
2013
onwards.
2. Ongoing.
3. Spring 2014.

1. Advertise events aimed at women
systematically (including financial
support if available).
2. Seek feedback on the events
attended.
Chair of Athena
Swan Group,
Postgraduate
Athena Swan
coordinator.
Ongoing.

Better trained female
students and staff.
1. Review the current mentoring
options.
2. Ensure that all new and existing
staff are aware of the options
(including university-wide
mentoring schemes) through the
induction process and the intranet.
Promotion
Committee,
Chair of Athena
Swan Group.
1. Summer
2013.
2. By Spring
2014 (for
intranet).

Positive feedback and
awareness.
1. Monitor the take-up of teaching
opportunities by ECRs by gender.
2. Establish any trends and identify
potential reasons and any support,
training needs etc.
Director of
Undergraduate
Studies, PA to
Head of
Department.
1. Autumn
2013

Greater understanding
of take-up of teaching
opportunities.
Better supported ECRs.
Funding increased
for some recent
events.
Some take-up of
opportunities.
Feedback on
current options
sought from staff at
different stages of
their career.


Improved
support/training for
ECRs.
Positive feedback from
ECRs.
47
Description of Action
5.9
Action taken
already and
outcome at April
2013
Induction
Introduce departmental web-pages
on induction.
6.0
Learning and Development Centre
[LDC] and other training
opportunities
Monitor staff and student
attendance of training courses by
gender.
6.1
Promotion of Policies and Support
Ensure that staff are aware of
Flexible Working and Other relevant
Policies such as Maternity and
Paternity Leave and available
Support.
Awareness already
improved through
Athena SWAN
process.
Further action planned at April 2013
Responsibility
Timescale
Success Measure
1. Review and replace current
departmental induction booklet by
web-based information, with
integrated university induction webpages, highlighting key policies e.g.
family-friendly.
Department
Administrator,
PA to Head of
Department.
December 2013

1. Monitor attendance of LDC training
courses and seek feedback from
attendees.
2. Seek feedback on the new PhD
modules on Expert Speaking and
Advanced Mathematical Writing.
3. Use information from above and
general feedback to determine gaps
in training requirements.
4. Organise be-spoke events via
Careers and Skills/LDC/other if
there is a demand.
Taught
Programmes
Manager, PG
Training Lead,
PG Professional
Development
Advisor.
Autumn 2013
onwards
1. Review and implement any
necessary changes to the formal
and informal support provided for
staff going on maternity leave.
2. Ensure that new staff are made
aware of the policies and support
available in the department.
3. Develop relevant web-pages to
advertise the policies.
Department
Administrator,
PA to Head of
Department.





1. Summer
2013.
2. October
2013
onwards.



Web-based induction
information.
Positive feedback from
new staff.
Increased attendance on
optional provision.
Greater collective
understanding of
training needs.
Positive feedback from
staff and students.
Better prepared
students and staff for
next career stage.
Greater level of
awareness across the
staff.
Appropriate support
mechanisms in place.
Positive feedback on
information provided
and level of support.
48