Athena SWAN Bronze and Silver Department award application

Transcription

1

2

3 Athena SWAN Bronze and Silver Department award application Name of institution: University of Nottingham Date of application: 28 April 2011 Department: School of Mathematical Sciences Contact for application: Professor D S Riley david.riley@nottingham.ac.uk Telephone: Departmental website address: Date of university Bronze and/or Silver SWAN award: 2009 Level of award applied for: Silver Athena SWAN Bronze and Silver 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 Charter Coordinator well in advance to check eligibility. It is essential that the contact person for the application is based in the department. At the end of each section state the number of words used. Click here for additional guidance on completing this template. 1

4 1. Letter of endorsement from the Head of Department maximum 500 words An accompanying letter of endorsement from the Head of Department should explain how the SWAN action plan and activities in the department contribute to the overall department strategy and academic mission. The letter is an opportunity for the Head of Department to confirm their support for the application and to endorse and commend any women and SET activities that have made a significant contribution to the achievement of the departmental mission. 2. 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; There are nine members of the self-assessment Team (5 females and 3 males from the School). The Team was selected to reflect a range of staff experiences, both personally and professionally. It includes key decision makers and representatives across all levels from PhD student to Professor. Professor Helen Byrne is a Professor of Theoretical Mechanics. She joined the University as a lecturer in 1998 and was promoted to reader in 2002 and to professor in She is married and has two children, aged 9 and 7. Professor David Riley is Professor of Theoretical Mechanics and Head of School. He joined the University in 1994 as a professor and has two grown-up children. Dr Ivette Fuentes is lecturer and research fellow. She joined the University in She is a single parent and has one son, aged 5. Dr Huiling Le is Associate Professor and Reader in Probability and Director of MSc courses in statistics. She joined the University in 1991 as a Lecturer. She has one grown-up son. Dr Sara Jabbari is a postdoctoral research fellow in applied mathematics. She first joined the school in 2003 as a postgraduate research student and began her employment in She is currently following the University of Nottingham's APPLE (Academics' and Administrators' Professional, Personal and Leadership Experience) women's development programme. Dr Simon Preston is a RCUK Research Fellow. He was an undergraduate student within the School from , and has been at the University since returning in 2003 to study for a PhD. He lives with his partner, who is an academic in the School of Biosciences at the University. Dr Wilhelm Winter Dr Wilhelm Winter is a lecturer in pure mathematics who joined the University in 2007, after finishing his PhD and Habilitation in Germany. He is married with two children, aged 4 and 7. Ms Karen Strung is a postgraduate research student in the pure mathematics division. She joined the postgraduate programme in 2009 after transferring to the University of Nottingham as an undergraduate student in She hopes to continue in research upon the completion of her degree. 2

5 Dr Tony Stevens is the Athena Project Officer and also co-ordinates the Women in Science, Engineering and Technology Group at the University. 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 School of Mathematical Sciences (SoMS) created a family-friendly group (FFG) in May 2008, under the leadership of Professor Helen Byrne. The FFG decided that a key first stage should be to assemble views of colleagues within the School and so a satisfaction survey was undertaken. Pleasingly the outcome was that there was a high degree of satisfaction in the School. The survey also led to some initial changes such as a move to more family-friendly timings for School meetings. This group met on four occasions and their remit was: To identify possible issues associated with gender, work-life balance and career developments within SoMS; To investigate the potential for SoMS applying for Athena Swan Silver Award. The core team membership remained largely unchanged when the group was reconstituted in March 2010 as the Athena Swan Group (ASG), which was again led by Professor Helen Byrne. The group membership was increased and also included Professor David Riley, who re-assumed the Headship of the School in 2009, replacing the previous Head of School, Professor Oliver Jensen. The key stage for the ASG was to assemble the hard data required for the submission (overseen by Tony Stevens) and then to draft a commentary on it for other members to critique, amend and append this drafting was mainly undertaken by Sara Jabbari, Andrea Blackbourn (School Manager), Jane Mason, who also provided invaluable administrative support to the group, Simon Preston and David Riley. In parallel all members of the self-assessment team contributed drafts on their perceptions and concerns under each of the headings. The group met in committee regularly (on six occasions) to discuss the development of the application and to identify actions for the School, some of which have been implemented along the way. 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. It is intended to keep the ASG together within the School to oversee implementation of the plan and promote further work. The group, which will meet once a semester, will require reports from colleagues who have been assigned responsibility to progress the actions. The Head of School will be ultimately accountable for ensuring that the plans are delivered or alternative actions are identified, if appropriate. The Chair of the Group will provide regular progress reports to the Women in Science, Engineering and Technology Group (WinSET) and give an annual report on the work of the group to the School Meeting. [763 words] 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. 3

6 In the 90s, the University decided to create larger units called Schools on a systematic basis. In 1998 the Department of Theoretical Mechanics and the Department of Mathematics merged to become The School of Mathematical Sciences. The leadership of the Departments of Mathematics and of Theoretical Mechanics readily identified benefits in the form of, for example, economies of scale, richer student choice, the opportunity to develop higher level teaching programmes and new research opportunities. In the years since the merger the School has grown and thrived. The School of Mathematical Sciences forms part of the Science Faculty, one of six faculties in the University of Nottingham. Predominantly, the School teaches mathematics to students in the Science and Engineering faculties, and enjoys productive research collaborations with staff in these faculties. In particular the School is a full partner in the highly successful interdisciplinary Rolls-Royce Centre for Gas Turbine Technology and Centre for Plant Integrative Biology, as well as undertaking fundamental research in mathematics. Currently, the School has over 80 academic and research staff, 15 support staff, 90 postgraduate research students and about 650 students on its own taught undergraduate and postgraduate degree programmes; the School teaches about 1000 students registered in other Schools. The School has a broad mix of international and UK staff and postgraduates. It is currently developing new programmes at the University s China and Malaysia campuses to further enhance its student mix. 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 - comment on the data and describe any initiatives taken to attract women to the courses. The School does not run Foundation or Access Programmes. The School enthusiastically contributes to the University s foundation-year programmes in both Science and Engineering, and also to the newly launched Natural Sciences degree. The School actively tries to attract non-traditional groups by participating in outreach activities and by hosting the region s Further Mathematics Centre. Our female post-graduate students readily volunteer to participate in these events thus providing excellent role models for female students. The School also has specialist staff (Ria Symonds and Sally Barton) to support students transition to University mathematics study. (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. In the last four years, the proportion of female full- and part-time students in the School increased from 37% to 40%, primarily because of increasing female numbers. This positive increase brought the School into line with the corresponding 2007/8 national proportion [see Chart 1 and Table 2]. School initiatives include running Master Classes and Summer Schools for A level students, taking care to involve female lecturers as good role models. Given the improvement in the proportion and number of females choosing to study with us, the School feels that the activity is having a positive effect. 4

7 / / / / Female Undergraduates (%) Male Undergraduates (%) Total number Chart 1 School of Mathematical Sciences undergraduate numbers (full and parttime) by gender Table 2 National numbers of Mathematical Science Students in Higher Education Numbers of females Numbers of males Female (%) Male (%) Total numbers First degree Other UGs PGs Total number (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. The development of PGT courses in Mathematics at Nottingham is quite recent and the numbers on our courses are not stable enough to draw major inferences about trends. The proportion of female full- and part-time PGT students, however, is 43% in 2010/11 pleasingly higher than the 31% in 2007/8, this being mainly attributable to an increase in the number of female PGTs [see Chart 3]. 5

8 / / / / Female PG Taught (%) Male PG Taught (%) Total number Chart 3 School of Mathematical Sciences taught postgraduate numbers (FT/PT) by gender (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. The proportion of female full-time PGRs fell from 35% to 28% between 2007/8 and 2010/11, moving the School closer to, but still ahead of, the national proportion for full-time students in 2006/7 which is 24% [see Charts 4 and 5]. This drop in the proportion of females was due mainly to a 21% increase in male numbers. The proportion of PGT and PGR females is currently 32% which is the same as that nationally [see Table 2]. Undergraduate student destination data is not currently available and is historically difficult to collect. The School will be more proactive in collecting destination data and will investigate the introduction of a more formal procedure for students to meet with their personal tutors at the end of each year to assist with their career plans. The School will develop a holistic plan for promoting the progression of female undergraduate students right through to academic posts (it is pleasing that one element of this developing strategy, namely the School s drive to increase the number of externally-funded summer bursaries, enabling undergraduates to sample research activity, has had a positive effect. The majority of these bursaries (five out of six in the current year) have been secured by females and has contributed to a positive increase in applications for PGR places from our own 6

9 female undergraduates). It is also hoped that the development of the PGT programmes will lead to more students staying on to undertake a PhD given the growth of females on the PGT programmes, this should lead to a positive effect on the PGR ratio. It is further planned to develop the undergraduate tutoring system to strengthen relationship-building and encourage our talented female undergraduates to take research degrees / / / / Female PGR(%) Male PGR (%) Total number Chart 4 School of Mathematical Sciences research student numbers (FT/PT) by gender FT/PT 5000 (79%) 5400 (76%) (21%) 1700 (24%) 0 Females 02-3 Males 02-3 Females 06-7 Males 06-7 Chart 5 National Mathematical Sciences research student numbers (FT/PT) by gender and mode of study ( and ) 7

10 (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. Undergraduate Courses The School is, relatively speaking, a selector rather than a recruiter of undergraduates. The proportion of females to males registered on UG courses is around 40:60 which is consistent with the proportions applying [see Tables 2 and 6]. Over the last two years, the rate of acceptances by females has moved ahead of that for males [see Chart 7]. Postgraduate Taught Courses The data for applications and offers for PGT and PGR are distorted by large numbers of speculative applications from international students which leads to a depressed conversion rate across the University. It is more meaningful to look at applications and registrations rather than offers. The number of PGT applications from female students has doubled between 2007 and 2010, as has the number of registered female students. The proportion of female students has also increased and the rate of acceptance for females is comparable with that for males [see Table 8]. The School now monitors the cumulative totals showing the gender balance in current applications/offers/acceptances. Postgraduate Research Courses After a couple of years when numbers increased, PGR applications from both males and from females fell in 2010 to below the levels of The data is limited, but consistently females form 20-25% of the total PGR population and accept places at a rate slightly lower than males [see Table 9]. The School will monitor the cumulative totals showing the gender balance in current applications/ offers/acceptances. Table 6 UG course applications, offers and acceptance by gender Applications Offers Acceptances Male applications Female applications Male offers Female offers Male accepts Female accepts (61%) 596 (39%) 871 (60%) 570 (40%) 146 (60%) 98 (40%) (61%) 615 (39%) 867 (61%) (64%) 561 (36%) 732 (63%) 565 (39%) 439 (37%) 156 (63%) 139 (59%) 90 (37%) 98 (41%) 8

11 Mathematics Male Mathematics Female Combined Courses Male 5 Combined Courses Female Chart 7 Acceptances as % of UG applications by gender for Mathematics and Combined Mathematics courses at the University of Nottingham Table 8 PGT course applications, offers and acceptance by gender Applications Offers Acceptances Male Female Male Female Male Female Acceptances as % of applications - male Acceptances as % of applications - female (62%) (64%) (65%) (57%) 99 (38%) 88 (36%) 147 (35%) 205 (43%) 90 (64%) 80 (61%) 152 (63%) 155 (57%) 50 (36%) 51 (39%) 90 (37%) 117 (43%) 44 (75%) 31 (70%) 62 (58%) 53 (62%) 15 (25%) 13 (30%) 45 (42%) 33 (38%) Table 9 PGR course applications, offers and acceptance by gender Applications Offers Acceptances Male Female Male Female Male Female Acceptances as % of applications - male Acceptances as % of applications - female (74%) (71%) (69%) (73%) 57 (26%) 52 (29%) 68 (31%) 49 (27%) 63 (68%) 46 (71%) 51 (73%) 49 (75%) 30 (32%) 19 (29%) 19 (27%) 16 (25%) 39 (72%) 25 (78%) 27 (79%) 26 (76%) 15 (28%) 7 (22%) 7 (21%) 8 (24%)

12 (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. Over the four years, a higher percentage of females obtained first and 2i BSc/ MMath classifications than males and a higher percentage of males were awarded 2ii degrees than females. This trend was also evident for 3 rd class and Ordinary degrees but the differences at the lower end of the scale are not significant [see Chart 10]. Higher student attainment will be encouraged by inviting alumni to address current students as positive role models / /8 2008/9 2009/ Female -Female Female - Female Female - Other Male - 1 Male Male Male - 3 Male - Other Chart 10 School of Mathematical Sciences undergraduate degree class by gender 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 The current distribution of female:male ratios across the grades is aligned with the snapshot of the national picture in 2006/7. The School has reflected deeply on the issue but has failed to identify any action that will lead to a positive step change in the situation whereby the proportion of females continuing in mathematics at each stage (undergraduate; postgraduate taught; postgraduate research; post-doctoral research; lecturer; senior lecturer; professor) continuously declines. Women in the School are very positive about the 10

13 environment here; we are taking small, but we trust, effective steps to make inroads on this challenging problem. The School has thus decided to change the wording on its future job advertisements to encourage more women to apply for posts in the School, and to promote more role models by endeavouring to invite more female seminar speakers. No substantial issues have been identified with the School s promotion procedures: pro rata women do better than men in securing promotion (although the data is very limited) [see Tables 11 and 12]. The main promotion panels, at Faculty and University levels, offer gender balance; all staff are entitled to have their applications considered by these committees. Therefore the fact that the School itself cannot currently assemble a panel offering gender balance is not in itself an impediment. The Head of School ensures that, when possible, females are included in the list of referees that is suggested to the Dean for applications from female candidates that are sent out for external assessment. Table 11 Staff (Academic and research) by gender and grade Females Grade 4 Males Grade 4 Females Grade 5 Males Grade5 Females Grade 6 Males Grade 6 Females Grade 7 Males Grade (29%) (25%) (31%) (25%) 22 (71%) 24 (75%) 20 (69%) 12 (75%) 3 17 (15%) (85%) 1 (5%) 20 (95%) 1 (5%) 21 (95%) 2 (9%) 21 (91%) 2 18 (10%) (90%) 2 19 (10%) (90%) 1 (5%) 18 (95%) 2 18 (10%) (90%) 1 (5%) 18 (95%) 1 (6%) 17 (84%) 1 (6%) 17 (84%) 1 (6%) 17 (84%) Table 12 Full time academics in Mathematical Sciences at UK HEIs by gender and grade ( and ) Females Grade 4 Males Grade 4 Females Grade 5 Males Grade5 Females Grade 6 Males Grade 6 Females Grade 7 Males Grade /4 335 (15%) 2006/7 340 (16%) 1870 (85%) 1735 (84%) 40 (10%) 60 (17%) 375 (90%) 300 (83%) 35 (6%) 60 (11%) 570 (94%) 510 (89%) 15 (3%) 35 (5%) 450 (97%) 625 (95%) (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. In the whole period since the formation of the School in 1998, retirements and resignations led to the departure of 25 males (7 professors, 8 senior lecturers/ readers, and 10 lecturers) and 3 females (1 senior lecturer and 2 lecturers) two of the female staff moved to Oxford, while the other re-located to the USA. In the last three years, four males have left the School (three lecturers and one professor), but no females. The resulting vacancies were filled by three males and one female. Exit questionnaires reveal that academic staff who resign from the School are leaving mainly to move abroad or to advance their careers by moving to larger research groups. Only one has moved stating discontent (with the University s requirement for inexperienced staff to undertake the University s Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice). All have been very positive about their experience and support in the School. [1477 words] 11

14 Supporting and advancing women s careers maximum 5000 words 4. 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. Over the last four years, the School received 232 applications from males and 39 from females for vacant lectureship posts and four males and one female were offered the posts (thus the success rate was 1:39 for females and 1:58 for males - see Table 13). As regards recruitment during the whole period of the School s existence, 42 males (11 professors, 3 senior lecturers/readers and 28 lecturers) and 5 females (all lecturers) were appointed. In order to encourage more women to apply for positions within SoMS, all future advertisements for research and teaching opportunities will include the following text (or some variant thereof): As part of our commitment to promoting diversity we encourage applications from women. This will be trialled over a twelve-month period and to determine whether there has been an increase in the number of female applications. Given the small number of female staff, the School struggles to achieve a gender balance on its appointing committees. The School endeavours, however, to ensure that female staff attend the presentations of candidates invited for interview, give their views on all candidates and meet informally with the candidates (typically) over a buffet lunch. Table 13 Job application and success rate by gender and grade Applications and job offers Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Total apps Total apps Total apps Male Female M/F Male Female M/F Male Female M/F 2008 Applications Offers Applications Offers Applications Offers

15 (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. The notional success rates are 22% for men and 40% for women [see Table 14]. The number of individuals involved is so small (3 females and 12 males) that it would be misleading to draw strong inferences. Moreover the data includes unsuccessful applications that are resubmitted in later years. Candidates are identified for promotion during their annual Activity Review and through an annual staff development exercise. Table 14 Promotion application and success rates by gender and grade Applications to Applications to Successful applications School University Female Male Female Male Female Male 2007/ / / / 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 In order to encourage more women to apply for positions within SoMS, all future advertisements for research and teaching opportunities will include the following text (or some variant thereof): As part of our commitment to promoting diversity we encourage applications from women. This will be trialled over a twelve-month period and to determine whether there has been an increase in the number of female applications. Interview panels include females where possible (the School is conscious that it needs to continue to strive to achieve much better gender balance on its panels). The University is an Equal Opportunities Employer and the School is committed to equality of opportunity generally, including within the recruitment process all School staff involved in the recruitment process are required to be trained in equal opportunities. All adverts are drafted according to the guidelines set by our Human Resources Department (HR) and all are sent to HR for a final check before being advertised. The School considers a job share option for all posts. The University booklet Information for Parents gives an overview of the key policies and benefits that working parents can access within the University and this is made available to all candidates. It can be found at 13

16 (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 major attrition of female staff that the School has suffered is due to their being attracted to posts at Oxford. All have been very happy in the School and have been very complimentary about the School and the University. We attract very talented staff and we endeavour to give them all outstanding support, we therefore interpret individual s successes as a success for the School and the individual. University good practice is supplemented by School-specific activities. Schoolspecific initiatives relevant to all levels are: Peer Observation of Teaching Scheme participants observe teaching and highlight effective delivery and opportunities for further development. Action: currently the opportunities offered to postdoctoral staff to undertake teaching are very limited. The School intends to ensure its support and training structures are extended more proactively to postdoctoral staff to provide teaching experience. Mentoring Scheme for academic staff on permanent contracts integrates newly appointed staff and supports and facilitates their continued development. Grant Mentoring Scheme our Research Facilitator identifies and promotes new opportunities for research and knowledge transfer funding and mentors colleagues on research grant submissions and management. Academic mentoring is delivered by a floating body of academics depending on the subject areas of the grants under consideration. The gender balance of this group varies but it is inclusive of all academic staff. The group advises on grant proposals under construction. Sabbatical policy study leave is encouraged particularly at key transition points if time away from normal duties will enhance an application for promotion (e.g. allow time for paper or grant writing, or for developing a new module). The School has a small fund to support sabbaticals, but is developing a scheme whereby greater numbers of staff may apply for leave by accumulating six (say) semesters of service since their last leave. The above initiatives lead staff both to and through key transition points in conjunction with the Activity Review. Different advice will be given to staff at different transition points, e.g. emphasis will be placed on grant and paper writing if an Associate Professor is aiming for a Professorship, whilst a Postdoctoral Researcher might be advised to gain some lecturing experience and participate in the Peer Observation of Teaching Scheme if aiming for a Lectureship. The University runs Career Workshops for Researchers: workshops have covered Career Planning, CVs, Interview skills and Academic and Non-academic Career Issues. 14

17 Depending on previous experience, newly appointed academic staff are normally required to undertake the Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education, which is delivered centrally by the University. While staff take this accredited training they are allocated reduced workloads within the School. Away days assist with personal development and are a valuable source of feedback that leads changes in School support processes. All members of academic staff are expected to take on an administrative responsibility, which is an opportunity to acquire management and organisational skills. Several distinct seminar series are run, thus assisting with networking. Each year there is a staff development exercise in which those who are considering submitting a promotion application are invited to submit a draft promotion case and receive feedback from a small group of senior colleagues. The Head of School is ultimately responsible for identifying and developing the potential of staff for promotion (this is believed to be good for women who may be less inclined to put themselves forward). Further actions: Establish a research-staff forum, and more actively encourage participation in women s development programmes including APPLE and WAND (Women s Advancement Networking and Development) run by the University. 5. Career development a) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed. (i) Promotion and career development comment on the appraisal and career development process, and promotion criteria and whether these take into consideration responsibilities for teaching, research, administration, pastoral work and outreach work; is quality of work emphasised over quantity of work? The annual Activity Review (appraisal) enables staff to be rewarded for their efforts and it is during this process that appraisers encourage staff to apply for promotion if appropriate, or discuss flexible working or other development processes if required and/or necessary. Activity Review has a clear focus on quality across the full range of activities and the process is wholly transparent. As a consequence of the Review, staff are advised on ways to improve publication and grant profiles, encouraged to register for staff development programmes (e.g. the APPLE course) and supported in applications for leave. Specific individual training needs are identified during the Review - the University s Professional Development Unit and the Graduate School offer courses, including women s development programmes, which are designed to assist and encourage women to prepare for career progression and advancement. The School s Staff Development Officer plays an active role in supporting these and other courses. The School is keen to encourage good working practice for all staff in order to maintain a healthy working environment for both women and men. Equal consideration for promotion is given to staff on maternity leave. All administrative 15

18 roles within the School are clearly described within the School s Staff Handbook and there is an annual exercise of seeking feedback to keep the role descriptions up-to-date. As a result of the work of the ASG, the desirability of developing a mentoring scheme for early-career researchers has been highlighted this development will be undertaken by the Staff Development Officer. (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? Newly appointed academic staff are allocated an established mentor who has a role in the personal and professional development of the new staff member. All mentors are trained and this training includes gender awareness. The School participates in Equality and Diversity Training and all staff regularly attend events irrespective of length of employment. Action: the School will develop improved induction processes for all its staff. Moreover, it will investigate whether there is scope for developing a mentoring scheme for its postdoctoral staff. Staff benefit from the School s formal Grant Mentoring scheme. The mentoring is delivered by a floating body of academics depending on the subject areas of the grants under consideration. The gender balance of this group varies but it is inclusive of all academic staff. The group advises on grant proposals under construction. The formal Activity Review ensures that new staff are encouraged to develop their profiles during their first two years. For example, a new lecturer is assured a reduced workload in order that the University s PGCHE may be completed. School and University Staff Handbooks provide comprehensive guides to procedures. Early career staff who supervise research students do so in conjunction with a more senior member of staff to provide experienced assistance. New staff are made aware of several distinct seminar series which encourage networking. An online equality and diversity training package has been developed by the University - the Staff Development Officer is charged with encouraging all staff to use it. Staff involved in appointing panels are required to have undertaken the training. (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. 16

19 UG to PhD Summer bursaries are proving popular with female undergraduates and the School has had several successes in terms of the experience leading on to successful applications for funded PGR places. In the current year six applications have been made for funding from Nuffield, of these five are from females. PhD to Postdoctoral Fellowship The School has a female tutor to whom female PhD students can turn for advice and personal support. The School has again had notable successes in terms of mentoring and supporting (for example, by undertaking mock interviews) our best female PGRs into successful postdoctoral applications. PhD/Postdoctoral to academic positions The School does not have a record of staff progressing from early-career research positions at Nottingham to academic positions at Nottingham. In part this is because we believe that it is strongly beneficial to people s careers to experience different research environments and practices. We have, however, appointed several of our graduates to academic positions after a period away from Nottingham. 6. 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. Committee membership is rotated and not confined to staff at higher levels, allowing all staff to gain experience. The differences between male and female representation are simply a reflection of the relatively low number of females among the School s staff, namely 4 out of 59. One of the females holds a longterm fellowship and is therefore concentrating on her research, another senior colleague is on many national committees and so she is again given compensating relief within the School. Heads of Divisions and of School identify potential committee members based on work load and an individual s interest in the role. The School will seek to increase UG/PG/PDRA female representation on committees. (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. About 17% of the School s current 23 fixed-term staff are female. 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. 17

20 (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? The Head of School (in consultation with Head of Divisions) selects committee members based on workload and interest in the role. Requirements and work load are discussed with individuals when invited to become a Committee representative. The process is transparent and details of Committee membership are published on the School intranet. The only committee that has restricted membership is the School Management Group (comprising Head and Deputy Head of School, Directors of Teaching and of Research, Heads of Divisions and School Manager). The School protects female staff from committee overload by sacrificing the achievement of gender balance, but ensures female input by having committees report to the School Meeting. (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 School does not have a formal quantitatively based workload model, preferring instead to draw on the experience and judgement of its senior people to ensure equity, fairness and responsiveness. Individual workloads are, however, formally recorded and shared with individuals and any concerns resolved through discussion. The School has developed a central (Access) database so that all workloads can be viewed by all staff. The workload data recorded includes teaching duties, numbers of undergraduate tutees and of project supervisions, details of PhD students and postdocs supervised, main administrative roles (which includes pastoral, outreach and committee obligations) and information relating to research grants. Staff have the facility to enter on a common workspace any other activities that they wish to put on record so as to ensure transparency. Individuals are given a copy of their individual reports, which are used at appraisal to provide data around which performance is considered. Achievements are discussed, and outstanding performances recognised via promotion or exceptional performance payments, or by personal acknowledgement. The new system trialled in August 2010 and was implemented in October There is no evidence that staff feel unfairly loaded, but it is hoped that the increased transparency will further secure staff s confidence in their senior colleagues judgement. (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. Following a recommendation from the School's Family Friendly Working Group, the formal School Meeting now commences at 9.30am rather than 9am; this has been in effect for more than a year. Most other meetings start at this time, or later, in consideration of staff with child-care commitments. Family responsibilities are also taken into account in timetabling. At the start of the timetabling process the School Manager sends an to all members 18

21 asking whether they have any child-care commitments. If, for example, a member of staff asks not to lecture at 5pm because they need to pick up their child from nursery then this will be factored in when the timetable is drawn up. Members of the School organise fortnightly social events; these are held either immediately after work, or later in the evening. The events tend to alternate between early and later starts to make them accessible to as many staff as possible. The School held its most recent Christmas meal at lunchtime on a work day to enable all members to attend, and it held a family BBQ on a Sunday afternoon so that staff could bring along their families. (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. The culture of the School is people friendly with the Head of School operating an open door policy, which induces a feeling of self-worth among all staff and students. The environment is friendly, welcoming and supportive; discriminatory or antagonistic language or behaviour is certainly not tolerated. The School avoids hierarchical systems whenever possible if one is good enough then one is senior enough - so that all staff enjoy opportunities to develop and progress (and thus potentially accelerate their promotion). Regular informal socials are organised by the Research Facilitator for all staff and students and are designed to be family-friendly and all-inclusive. In addition, frequent informal socials are arranged by PhD students and postdoctoral researchers, who are also encouraged to participate in entertaining visitors, seminar speakers, etc. All staff are invited to a Christmas lunch. A Women-in-Mathematics day was hosted at Nottingham on 8 March 2007 on a relatively informal level to create a supportive structure where female role models are visible. Three inspirational female speakers of differing levels addressed the delegates who included postgraduates, postdocs and academic staff. Similar events are envisaged in the future and a small working group has been set up to coordinate. Helen Byrne has been pro-active in promoting action by the London Mathematical Society (LMS) to support national events of a similar nature (one is to be held in London on 6 May 2011). More locally, Helen has received positive feedback from Katherine Smart, Chair of the University s WinSET Committee and from Gwyneth Stallard (Chair of the LMS Women in Mathematics Committee). The School s Research Facilitator ensures that funding schemes to support females are well advertised, for example from the charity Funds for Women Graduates and from the British Federation of Women Graduates. (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. In 2008, the School set up an Outreach Group with the remit to co-ordinate and encourage Outreach participation across the School. The School s Outreach activities include prominent involvement in annual University Community Days, 19

22 running Master Classes for the Gifted and Talented Scheme and Sutton Trust Summer Schools, posting popular maths talks on itunes U, and hosting a local Further Maths Support Programme. These activities, which fit directly with the University s Widening Participation agenda, are organised by a mixture of male and female staff, whose Outreach work is formally recognised in the staff Activity Review process. The School also runs a Communicating Mathematics module giving 3 rd year undergraduates the opportunity to work at local schools alongside maths teachers, fostering the enthusiasm of schoolchildren to pursue their interest in mathematics. We are pleased that a consistently high proportion of our undergraduates opt for this module; currently the female proportion is 91%, thus female role models are provided for schoolchildren. The discipline of Mathematics has traditionally suffered from proportionally small number of females at school and college level choosing to continue to study. The prominent roles played by female students and these staff in Outreach activities are important in offering strong role models to aspiring female mathematicians. 7. 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. The University HR Department does not record maternity return rates. However, data are available from School line managers. Within the last 3 years, no academic staff have taken maternity leave. As far as we are aware, the maternity return rate in academic grades is 100% and has neither improved nor deteriorated over the last 10 years. A member of the support team returned to work on a part-time basis and the School has subsequently agreed to a change in the hours worked per day to best fit childcare requirements. (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. The University HR Department does not record paternity return rates. However, data are available from the School s Manager. No members of staff have taken adoption leave. Within the last 3 years, formal paternity leave was taken by three lecturers, though quite a few made informal arrangements; all returned to work. (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. Data are not available from the Human Resources Department and the School only keeps these records as part of Activity Review, thus they are confidential. 20