Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Women in University
Science Departments
Peter Main
Director, Education and Science, IOP
Gender Equality Event
UCL
18th March 2008
peter.main@iop.org, www.iop.org
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Plan of Talk

Diversity Programme

Site Visit Scheme

JUNO Code of Practice

Working with other organisations
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Diversity
Programme
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Diversity Programme

1.5 FTE staff



Katharine Hollinshead: Programme Leader
Saher Ahmed: Programme Coordinator
Examples of Activities




Career breaks guidance
Women in university physics departments report
Diversity in HE (with the RSC)
Best practice guide on Disability
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Physics nationally
19.0
20
16.8
18
% female staff
16
14
13.6
12
9.5
10
8.1
8
6
4.7
4
2
0
All grades
Lecturer and
above
Researchers
Lecturers
Senior Lecturers
Professors
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Site Visit
Scheme
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Background

Wrote to each department in the UK and
Ireland (copied to the VC)

Visits by invitation only and there was no
charge

Visited 17 (out of 46) physics departments in
all.
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
The Visit

Paperwork (sent beforehand) included admissions
statistics, gender disaggregated student numbers,
pass rates, staff handbook etc.

Meeting with departmental management , admissions
tutor, director of teaching, HR representative etc

Meetings with:
 Female academic staff (where none, women staff
from cognate subjects)
 Male academic staff
 Female RAs and PGs
 Male RAs and PGs
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
The Visit

Lunch with female UGs. No staff were
present

Laboratory tour

Informal feedback at the end from the chair
of the panel to the HoD

Confidential written report is sent to HoD
with recommendations.
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Observations

Women underrepresented in seminars and colloquia

Most departments were not monitoring statistics

Departments without women suffer in many ways (eg
admissions, role models). Male staff are usually aware
of this but are very reluctant to do anything about it.

The fact that the visit took place meant that gender
issues were discussed, perhaps for the first time.

Situation on the ground is often very different from
what management believe.
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
The “Best” Departments

Sympathetic Head of Department (they were all male).
In some cases, it was clear that former HoDs had
been very biased.

Male participation in family-friendly policies. If they did
not, women felt they were perceived as “letting the
side down” by, for example, taking maternity leave or
fitting their hours around the nursery.

A high fraction of young staff. Young fathers
appreciate the problems but younger men are
generally more sensitive to gender issues.
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
The “Best” Departments

Women involved in senior management. But
women were often disinclined to get involved
because they found the prevailing attitudes
so unpleasant.

Strong, informal social networks for women.
(In some places found that men had
unconsciously created an uncomfortable
atmosphere by being so friendly among
themselves).
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Important Issues

Formal, transparent procedures at all levels.

Recruitment (no secret discussions, women on interview
panels)

Promotion (major issue)

Appraisal (particularly for RAs)

Workload allocation

Women on “serious” committees

Career breaks
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Important Issues
Even successful female RAs and PGs did not want an
academic career:







Not consistent with starting a family
Average age of academic appointment is ~ 35.
Effect of multiple short term contacts
Lack of a well-defined career structure
Lack of good careers advice
Lack of role models
Long hours culture
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Important Issues

Childcare facilities were usually thought to be
inadequate and, where they were good, did
not have enough places. The best matched
their hours to those of the university.

Harassment. Although almost every place
had a procedure for dealing with
harassment, the panels were told of several
cases, almost none of which had been dealt
with in a satisfactory manner.
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
General Report

General report highlighting the
issues and disseminating good
practice has been published

Created a lot of interest amongst
other learned societies
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
JUNO Code of Practice
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
JUNO Code of Practice: Principles

A robust organisational framework to deliver equality of
opportunity and reward.

Appointment, promotion and selection processes and
procedures that encourage men and women to apply for
academic posts at all levels.

Departmental structures and systems which support and
encourage the career progression of all staff and enable
men and women to progress and continue in their
careers.
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
JUNO Code of Practice: Principles

A departmental organisation, structure, management
arrangements and culture that are open, inclusive and
transparent and encourage the participation of all staff.

Flexible approaches and provisions that encompass, the
working day, the working year and a working life in SET
and enable individuals, at all career and life stages, to
maximise their contribution to SET, their department and
institution.
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Two levels of engagement

Supporter:
Physics department endorsing
the 5 principles set out in the
Code of Practice

Champion:
Physics departments confirmed
as meeting the 5 principles set
out in the Code of Practice

Launched: June 14th 2007
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Working with other
organisations
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
SPIDER

STEM Professional Institutions: Diversity and
Equality Resources

Core members: IOP, RSC, RAEng & RCUK (sec)

Four strands:




HE and research institutes
Business: private and public sector
Professional bodies: internal organisation
Public engagement
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
SPIDER: HE and Research Institutes

Athena Partnership: IOP, RSC and UKRC

Promoting resources and activities







Benchmarking and checklists
Using good practice guides ( e.g. RCUK Research staff
concordat)
Department site visits
ASSET Survey
JUNO
SWAN awards
Enabling other professional societies to get involved
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Virtuous cycle
Evidence
Where are we
now?
DO
Action
plan
What are we
going to do?
Business case
Communicate
Be inclusive
Celebrate success
Get recognition
What could we do to improve?
Knowledge base
How does that
compare with
others?
Benchmarking
Promoting physics, supporting physicists
Promoting physics,
supporting physicists