athena swan bronze department award application swan bronze department award application name of...

1

Athena SWAN Bronze department award application Name of university: University of Bath

Department: Architecture & Civil Engineering

Date of application: April 2015

Date of university Bronze award: 2009/ renewed 2014

Contact for application: Dr Marion Harney

Email: [email protected]

Telephone: 01225 383977

Departmental website address: http://www.bath.ac.uk/ace/

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.

2

a) 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 STEMM activities that have made a significant contribution to the achievement of the departmental mission.

Sarah Dickinson, Senior Policy Adviser (Athena SWAN)

Athena SWAN Charter,

Equality Challenge Unit,

Queen's House,

55-56 Lincoln's Inn Fields,

London WC2A 3LJ

27th April 2015

Dear Sarah,

As Head of Architecture & Civil Engineering (ACE), and an active member of the Department Self-Assessment Team (DSAT), I can confirm that our Departmental Executive Committee (DEC) is fully supportive of our Athena SWAN Bronze Award application. The application process has already delivered improved processes for promotion, increased effectiveness of Staff Development and Performance Reviews (SDPRs) (USAT AP.C1), the development of mentoring systems (USAT AP.E2) and support for women’s networking and leadership training events (USAT AP.E6). However, the DSAT and our Culture Survey have identified areas for further enhancement, particularly in the recruitment, retention and advancement of female staff. Our Action Plan sets out how we will address these issues over the next three years.

We already have a good gender balance in our undergraduate population. We have two undergraduate programmes and the female: male student profile is consistently above the national average for both departmental disciplines (architecture and civil engineering), however, our proportion of female academics is lower than we would like, and below our national benchmarking targets. Moreover, my female academic colleagues are under-represented at Senior Lecturer/Reader/Professorial level. There is a strong departmental ambition to support female colleagues in achieving their full potential as educators, researchers and discipline leaders. In particular, we mean to deliver the University’s strategic aim (USAT AP.B1) of attaining the same proportion of women in ACE as the national average for both disciplines.

3

As a first step, we have ensured that female colleagues fill key academic roles in the department. I have: (1) co-opted 2 women to the Departmental Executive and Research Committees; (2) recruited a female Chair of the DSAT to lead our Athena SWAN application; and, (3) appointed a woman as Chair of the Learning, Teaching Quality Committee. The University’s Athena SWAN target is to have at least 33% women on all decision-making committees by 2015 (USAT AP.A3). Recruitment shortlists are scrutinised to include women (USAT AP.B4) and all interview and shortlisting panels have a gender mix (USAT AP.B2), thus ensuring that women are in influential positions at all levels of our activities. Our submission includes case studies illustrating how engagement with the Athena SWAN process has had a positive impact on women’s career progression in the department. It has also led to: (1) enhanced communication within the department concerning equality matters, in particular the sharing of survey findings and proposed solutions; (2) greater support for women academics applying for promotion: and, (3) ensuring the voice of postdoctoral researchers is heard and acted upon. Our Athena SWAN activity is reflected in our departmental workload model to ensure that it gets appropriate recognition and we have provided financial support for Women’s Engineering events.

Our Action Plan highlights further steps we will be taking to embed the Athena SWAN principles into our departmental culture. I fully and enthusiastically endorse these and will work closely with the DSAT and other colleagues to fulfil these. I will place all of the necessary resources under my control to help achieve this. (496)

Yours sincerely

Professor Pete Walker

Head of Department, BRE Trust Professor of Innovative Construction Materials

4

List of Acronyms used in this document

ACE Architecture and Civil Engineering

DEC Department Executive Committee

DSAT Department Self-Assessment Team

FT Full Time

FTC Fixed Term Contract

FTE Full Time Equivalent

HoD Head of Department

OC Open Contact

PDRA Post-Doctoral Research Assistant

PT Part time

SDPR Staff Development and Performance Review

SSLC Staff Student Liaison Committee

USAT University Self-Assessment Team

WEng Women in Engineering Network

WES Women’s Engineering Society

WLM Workload Model

Please note: That Athena SWAN agreed a 1000 word increase for this application on 18th August 2014 because the Department of Architecture & Civil Engineering is a Joint Department which meant that much of the statistical analysis and discussion had to be completed separately for the 2 disciplines.

b) The self-assessment process: maximum 1000 words (999)

Describe the self-assessment process. This should include:

= 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 core DSAT comprises academics and research staff at different career stages as well as support staff and student representatives. Overall there is a balance of gender and seniority, academic expertise and career perspective.

5

Core Department Self-Assessment Team

Name Role in Team

Role in Department

Work-Life balance Other relevant

information

Yasmin Booker Provided UG CE Student perspective

2nd Year Civil Engineering Student

Mrs Monika Brindley (Grusova)

Provided perspective on PhD experience

PhD student/doctoral researcher

FT, PhD student; married, dual career family

Set-up Focus Group of other Doctoral Research students to feed into AS submission and Action Plan

Dr Mark Evernden

Analysis of staff and student CE data

Lecturer in Structures; DoS; UG Civil Engineering programmes

FT, Lecturer, PhD supervisor, dual career partner

Former Departmental Equalities and Diversity Officer

Mr Iain Forster Data collection and analysis

Supporting DSAT Chair and HoD

Director of Administration Faculty of Engineering & Design

FT, responsible for all support staff in the Faculty

Member of the Association of University Administrators

Mr Martin Gledhill Student data and admissions Consultation with UG (SSLC)

DoS; M.Arch programme

4th year studio coordinator

FT, Senior Teaching Fellow, personal tutor, recently promoted, dual career partner

Chair SSLC; ACE Widening Participation representative

Dr Marion Harney Chair; lead author and coordinator of application form and Action Plan. Developed, administered and analysed staff surveys and staff and student data.

DoS; Member DEC; Chair DTLQC Member SSLC PGT; ACE shortlisting and recruitment panels

Formerly PT PhD Student 2007-11, PT Probationary lecturer, then FT lecturer. Recently applied for promotion to SL, 2 children, dual career family

Attended Gender, Leadership and STEMM Conference. Member USAT; WEng; Academic Liaison WESBath student group

Claire Hogg Collating and analysing data; Secretariat

Department Coordinator

FT, support staff representative, dual career family

ACE Social Events Organiser

6

Molly Price Provided UG Architecture Student perspective

5th Year MArch student

Dr. Danielle Wain

Data Analysis, AP Lecturer in Water Quality Engineering; Department Equality Co-ordinator

FT lecturer, Early Career researcher, probationary lecturer

Member of WEng; participant Aurora leadership development programme

Professor Peter Walker

HoD; Developing all aspects of submission and implementing Action Plan

HoD; Director Research Centre; Chair ACE shortlisting and recruitment panels

FT, 2 children, dual career family

Dr. Jun Zang Data analysis; case study

Reader, Director of WEIR Research Unit; DEC; DRC; ACE shortlisting and recruitment panels

FT, 3 children, mentored, recently promoted (twice), dual career family

Member WEng; Participant Academic Leaders Programme

Other members of the department and central services contributed to the data analysis. Members of the USAT provided guidance on the alignment of the departmental and University Athena SWAN goals.

= 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.

A core DSAT was established in 2012 and commenced an analysis of the department’s gender equality performance, identifying potential barriers to the recruitment, retention and promotion of women in ACE. This initial review also gathered insight and information from external and internal experts to inform the overarching departmental strategy. Data gathering included the identification of good practice from other institutional Athena SWAN applications and liaison with the USAT to identify sector good practice.

DSAT members regularly attended Faculty Women in Engineering Network meetings and the Chair attended the Student Women in Engineering Society meetings to gain insight into the issues of concern at key transitional stages in the careers of female Engineers. DSAT met regularly, with the frequency increasing to monthly in the immediate lead up to the submission. Specific tasks were delegated to working groups/individuals, including non-DSAT members, to broaden departmental engagement with the submission. The development of the submission

7

throughout has been an iterative process, with DSAT responding to feedback. The 2013 submission was used as a starting point and was circulated to all staff. The ACE Culture Survey involved the whole Department and had a formative influence on the revised submission, particularly the identification of key issues for the Action Plan (AP). A high response rate of 73% was achieved by asking colleagues to complete the Survey at a Departmental Away Day, held in September 2014. 89% of respondents (38) supported the Athena SWAN submission and the goal of increasing the participation of women academics in STEMM, 11% were neutral. 84% (36) reported an existing positive working culture; 77% (33) agreed colleagues in ACE treat each other with respect, regardless of gender; and 70% (30) agreed or strongly agreed that it was easy to have their opinion heard within the department, 21% were neutral and 9% disagreed. Satisfaction levels flagged the need for further consideration of our existing working culture: 62% agreed or strongly agreed that there was a long-hours’ work culture in the department, 31% were neutral and 7% disagreed; 71% believed it should be easier for those with caring responsibilities to move into key roles; and 46% agreed that having a mentor would improve people’s chances of being promoted, 34% were neutral, 15% disagreed and 9% strongly disagreed.

The DSAT also undertook a detailed analysis of the results of 3 recent University-wide surveys carried out in 2010, 2011, and 2013. The Head of Department (HoD) convened a facilitated workshop following the 2013 staff survey to identify issues and make recommendations for our Action Plan. Examples of the issues identified were the need for better flexible working arrangements, actions to improve the gender balance and plug the ‘leaky pipeline’ and promotion criteria to value quality not quantity of outputs.

A HE STEM Culture Survey was carried out in 2014 and all staff were encouraged by the HoD to participate. Key issues raised were greater consistency in workload allocation, and strong support for individual mentoring.

Further qualitative information was gathered from an on-line exit survey completed by 4 academic staff that left the department 2009-13. The Survey results, draft submission and AP were analysed and reviewed by the DSAT and shared across ACE. Further consultation took place at the All Staff Meeting in March 2015. The application was further revised and circulated for feedback to ACE staff, DEC, SSLCs (UG, PGT, PGR and Research Officers) the USAT Chair, Equality Manager, Dean of Faculty, WEng and WESBath student groups.

The Athena SWAN national team contributed recommendations, and former colleagues (now at other institutions) and a key female industrial adviser were contacted for feedback.

Final revisions were made in April 2015 and the institutional approval process involved the DEC, the Dean of Faculty and the Vice Chancellor’s Group, ensuring that our submission has support at the highest level of university leadership.

8

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 DSAT will continue to meet bi-monthly to monitor implementation of the action plan. Harney will continue to chair and the DSAT will report progress 6-monthly to the DEC and Dean of Faculty who is charged with reviewing Athena SWAN developments. The Department and Faculty will provide administrative support for these activities. To sustain our current DSAT activities and fulfil the AP, the HoD has allocated 250 hours for the chair and 50 hours for each DSAT member in their workload allocation.

Each action in the AP has a nominated individual or group responsible for its implementation and making a yearly progress report for discussion at DEC, All Staff Committee, SSLC and to the University. The University has committed to an annual STEMM Staff Survey (USAT AP E.1) and the DSAT will carry out an annual ACE Athena SWAN Culture Survey which will help to monitor changing perceptions/levels of satisfaction. The ACE Survey will be widened to include all students and from 2015 the membership of DSAT will be expanded to include PGT representation. AP 4.1

Athena SWAN and Equality and Diversity are standing agenda items at bi-monthly All Staff Meetings. The submission, AP and progress will be published via the refreshed Departmental website, staff notice boards, ACE newsletter and SSLCs. Our Facebook page and blog will be regularly updated with information and progress and we will create a link to the University AS webpages. AP 2.2.

We will monitor progress against the AP and ensure that the Athena SWAN process is one of continuous improvement and renewal. Responsibilities for delivery are formally embedded within departmental committee structures. The DSAT will refresh the AP agenda as part of our Annual University Equality and Diversity Return. These annual reports from departments enable the DSAT, Executive and Council to be aware of progress made at all levels of the University. (USAT AP A.1) AP 4.1

3 A picture of the department: maximum 2000 words (2993) (an additional 1000 words allocated for this submission)

= Provide a pen-picture of the department to set the context for the application, outlining in particular any significant and relevant features.

9

Figure 1. ACE Departmental Structure - part of the Faculty of Engineering and Design

Figure 1 illustrates the departmental structure of ACE, which brings together two traditionally distinct professional disciplines. Its joint nature remains unique in the UK. Our reputation is based on the simple philosophy that if architects and civil engineers are to work together, they will benefit from being educated together. The strong female recruitment onto ACE programmes is seen as a consequence of the ethos of the Department and its welcoming culture on Open Days.

Our aspiration is to be a centre of teaching and research excellence in the built environment. We recruit top quality staff from the UK and internationally and in the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF) ACE came top in unit of assessment C16: Architecture, Built Environment and Planning with 90% of our research graded either at the top 4* or at 3*. During 2013/14 ACE was home to: 1. 792 UG students: 344 Female (43%); 448 Male (57%). 2. 255 PGT students: 89 Female (35%); 166 Male (65%). 3. 61 PGR students: 22 Female (36%); 39 Male (64%). 4. TOTAL: 1,108: 455 Female (41%); 653 Male (59%).

We take pride in our teaching quality and our supportive learning environment; our undergraduate programmes scoring 94% in student satisfaction (National Student Survey 2014); Number 1 for Architecture (CUG & UG 2015) Number 1 for teaching satisfaction - Civil Engineering (GUG 2015) 2nd for teaching satisfaction - Architecture (GUG 2015).

10

We offer a comprehensive range of Architecture & Civil Engineering undergraduate programmes. We also offer a wide range of PGT programmes and a PG Certificate in Professional Practice - RIBA part 3.

The student experience is enhanced through input from leading practitioners as guest lecturers and studio tutors, combined with a significant industrial contribution to many programmes. The total number of external tutors in 2013-14 was 221 - 46 women (20.8%) and 175 men (79.2%).

The department operates a thin sandwich system where placements in professional practice are undertaken throughout academic programmes. ACE also undertakes advanced research and offers supervision for PGR students wishing to study for a PhD, MPhil and EngD. We have recently established the Centre for Doctoral Training in Decarbonisation of the Built Environment, which offers up to ten fully-funded PhD places each year.

The fundamental drivers for our research are climate change, innovative and holistic design and historical interpretation. There are 76 members of staff. Research is led by 51 academics, supported by 10 Visiting Professors, 6 Research Officers, 6 Research Associates and a Research Assistant. In addition, we have a Project Manager, 4 Visiting Research Fellows and visiting lecturers. Our academics include 9 Professors (male), 2 Readers (1 female), 9 Senior Lecturers (male), 17 Lecturers (4 female) 1 Prize Fellow (female) and 61 research postgraduates (22 female). In addition, there are 27 (9.82FTE) members of teaching staff, including a Professor of Architecture and Head of Group (male), 2 STFs (male), 24 TFs (5 female), and 12 support staff (2 female).

Each of our research centres is responsible for mentoring and supporting its researchers and monitoring of research targets. All PGR students become members of an appropriate centre.

The UG and PGT Civil Engineering programmes have Industrial Liaison Panels (6 women; 18 men). Membership includes Jane Wernick (CBE), a champion for women in engineering.

= 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

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.

ACE does not run access or foundation courses.

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.

11

Please note: there are two main reasons why the HESA data does not always match the internal data. Firstly, the internal data is headcount, whilst the HESA data is FTE and does not include Distance Learning Students. Secondly, the internal data relates to the number of students on courses within a department, whilst the HESA data is compiled on a module basis, so can include students from other departments who are taking Architecture/Civil Engineering modules.

ACE does not offer PT UG degrees.

Table 1. Total ACE Architecture Undergraduate Students by Gender and Academic Year

Table 1. TOTAL ARCHITECTURE

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS BY GENDER AND ACADEMIC YEAR

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 205 183 53% 47% 220 180 55% 45% 230 191 55% 45%

Full time 205 183 53% 47% 220 180 55% 45% 230 191 55% 45%

Part time 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - -

Table 2. ACE Architecture Undergraduate Students by Gender Proportion and Academic year

Table 2. % ARCHITECTURE UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS BY GENDER AND ACADEMIC YEAR 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total UG - Arch Total UG - Arch Total UG - Arch Female 53% 55% 55% Male 47% 45% 45%

12

Figure 2. ACE Architecture Undergraduate Students by Gender and Academic year

Table 3. ACE UG Architecture students and HESA Sector Data by Gender

Table 4. Total ACE UG Architecture students and HESA Sector Data

F, 53%(205)

F, 55%(220)

F, 55%(230)

M, 47%(183)

M, 45%(180)

M, 45%(191)

13

Figure 3. % Female UG Architecture Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Tables 1-4 and Figures 2&3 show the BSc Architecture cohort is consistently marginally more female than male with a ratio of 1: 1.2F: 1M in 2012/13/14. The percentage of females ranges from 53% to 55% over the review period. Just over one third of Architecture students in the UK are female so we compare favourably with the national average of 64%M to 36%F (FTE Ratio 1.8M: 1F). The successful recruitment of female Architecture undergraduates is seen positively within the Department. Female applicants may partly be attracted by our focus on group working and partly by the welcoming culture of the Department on Open Days.

Although only 21% of professional architects are women, we ensure female design studio tutors (20.83%) form a significant part of the tutoring staff to act as role models. As the numbers of women increase to at least the national average (32%) for the discipline so will the visibility of professional women role models.

14

Table 5. Total UG Civil Engineering Students in ACE

Table 5. TOTAL CIVIL ENGINEERING UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 88 206 30% 70% 102 238 30% 70% 114 257 31% 69%

Full time 88 206 30% 70% 102 238 30% 70% 114 257 31% 69%

Part time 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - -

Table 6. % Civil Engineering Students by Gender and Academic Year Table 6. % CIVIL ENGINEERING UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS BY GENDER 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total UG - Civil Total UG - Civil Total UG - Civil Female 30% 30% 31% Male 70% 70% 69%

Figure 4. % Civil Engineering Students by Gender and Academic Year

F, 30%(88)

F, 30%(102)

F, 31%(114)

M, 70%(206)

M, 70%(238)

M, 69%(257)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total UG - Civil Total UG - Civil Total UG - Civil

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

15

Table 7. Total ACE Civil Engineering UG Students and HESA Sector Data by Gender

Table 8. % ACE Female Undergraduate Civil Engineering Students and HESA Sector Data

Figure 5. % Female Undergraduate Civil Engineering Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Tables 5-8 and Figures 4&5 demonstrate that the ratio of civil engineering females to males has remained fairly constant over the review period at 1F:2.3M, with a slight improvement from 2.34 to 2.25. Nationally the rate of female/male civil engineers is 17%F to 83%M (FTE Ratio 1F:

FTE

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 98 194 34% 66% 102 211 0 33% 67% 117 241 0 33% 67%

Full time 98 194 34% 66% 102 211 0 33% 67% 117 241 0 33% 67%

Part time 0 0 - - 0 0 0 - - 0 0 0 - -

Total 2,528 12,566 17% 83% 2,452 12,026 3 17% 83% 2,474 12,107 1 17% 83%

Full time 2,452 11,873 17% 83% 2,382 11,328 2 17% 83% 2,395 11,400 1 17% 83%

Part time 76 693 10% 90% 70 698 1 9% 91% 79 707 0 10% 90%

2013/14

Table 7. Female : Male Numbers for University of Bath and HESA SectorCivil Engineering Subject Data

University of Bath

Sector

2011/12 2012/13

Table 8. % FEMALE UNDERGRADUATE CIVIL ENGINEERING STUDENTS IN ACE AND HESA SUBJECT DATA2011/12 Total UG - Civil 17% 34%2012/13 Total UG - Civil 17% 33%2013/14 Total UG - Civil 17% 33%

16

4.9M), whereas at Bath almost one-third of our students are women (HESA sector benchmark for female UG students is 17%; Bath claims 33%). This is probably due to the distinctive combination of Architecture and Civil Engineering and the good gender balance in the UG population supporting female Civil Engineers. The high proportion of women mean that they are seen as the norm. The trend shows a steady increase in the proportion of female undergraduate Civil Engineers.

Table 9. ACE and HESA Civil Engineering Sector Data by Domicile

Many other countries have a better gender balance in engineering than in the UK - probably as a consequence of societal attitudes. However, Table 9 demonstrates that Bath recruits female students from outside the UK with significantly more success than the sector overall, probably due to our more equal gender balance which makes our department culture particularly attractive to international as well as home women students.

(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.

Table 10. Total Architecture PGT Students by Gender and Academic Year Table 10. TOTAL ARCHITECTURE POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT STUDENTS BY GENDER AND ACADEMIC YEAR

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 55 80 41% 59% 61 53 54% 46% 67 59 53% 47%

Full time 30 22 58% 42% 35 20 64% 36% 31 16 66% 34%

17

Table11. Architecture PGT Students by Gender and Mode of Study

Figure 6. Architecture PGT Students by Gender and Mode of Study

F, 58%(30)

F, 30%(25)

F, 64%(35)

F, 44%(26)

F, 66%(31)

F, 46%(36)

M, 42%(22)

M, 70%(58)

M, 36%(20)

M, 56%(33)

M, 34%(16)

M, 54%(43)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Full time Part time Full time Part time Full time Part time

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Part time 25 58 30% 70% 26 33 44% 56% 36 43 46% 54%

Table 11.

% ARCHITECTURE POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT STUDENTS BY GENDER AND MODE OF STUDY

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14


Female 58% 30% 64% 44% 66% 46%

Male 42% 70% 36% 56% 34% 54%

18

Table 12. Total Female/Male Architecture PGT students and HESA Sector Data

Table 13. % Female PGT Architecture students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Figure 7. % Female PGT Architecture students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

FTE

POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT STUDENTS

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 26 34 43% 57% 35 36 0 49% 51% 29 33 0 47% 53%

Full time 16 15 52% 48% 19 11 0 63% 37% 15 10 0 60% 40%

Part time 10 19 34% 66% 15 25 0 38% 63% 14 23 0 38% 62%

Total 3,625 5,362 40% 60% 3,454 4,999 0 41% 59% 3,661 5,020 0 42% 58%

Full time 2,684 3,574 43% 57% 2,628 3,470 0 43% 57% 2,868 3,501 0 45% 55%

Part time 941 1,787 34% 66% 826 1,530 0 35% 65% 772 1,470 0 34% 66%

Not applicable 0 0 - - 0 0 0 - - 20 50 0 29% 71%

2013/14

Table 12. Total Female: Male PGT Students for University of Bath and HESA: Architecture, built environment & planning subject data

University of Bath

Sector

2011/12 2012/13

Table 13. Sector Bath% POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT ARCHITECTURE STUDENT NUMBERS IN ACE AND HESA SUBJECT DATA

Full time 43% 52%Part time 34% 34%Full time 43% 63%Part time 35% 38%Full time 45% 60%Part time 34% 38%

2012/13

2011/12

2013/14

43%

34%

43%

35%

45%

34%

52%

34%

63%

38%

60%

38%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

% fe

mal

e

Sector

Bath

19

Tables 10-13 and Figures 6&7 show that Bath is comparable or better than the sector for both PT and FT PGT architecture students, and the FT programmes have consistently more women than men. There is an increase in PT female students with the percentage of males steadily reducing from 70% to 54%.

In 2013 ACE offered 3 PGT programmes in Architecture; 2 of which attract a higher ratio of women. The FT ratio in 2011/12 is 1M: 1.06F, which compares favourably with the 2011/12 sector average of 1.33M: 1 F. In 2012/13 the ratio of females increased further to 1M: 1.7F while the sector remained steady at 1.32M: 1F. The PGT PT options attract more students than their FTE. The ratio of female students in 2011/12 for PT architecture is lower than the FT mode, but consistent with the national average, both having ratios of 1F:1.9M. In 2012/13 Bath had improved slightly with 1F:1.7M, while the sector remained at 1F:1.9M. The 2 conservation Masters attract large numbers of females (one has a woman DoS).

Table 14 Total PGT Civil Engineering in ACE by Gender and Academic year

Table 15. Civil Engineering PGT students by Gender and Mode of Study

Table 15. % CIVIL ENGINEERING POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT STUDENTS BY GENDER AND MODE OF STUDY

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14


Female 10% 13% 8% 15% 13% 18%

Male 90% 87% 92% 85% 87% 82%

Table 14. TOTAL CIVIL ENGINEERING POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT STUDENTS BY GENDER AND ACADEMIC YEAR

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 29 189 13% 87% 19 116 14% 86% 22 107 17% 83%

Full time 1 9 10% 90% 1 12 8% 92% 2 13 13% 87%

Part time 28 180 13% 87% 18 104 15% 85% 20 94 18% 82%

20

Figure 8. Civil Engineering PGT students by Gender and Mode of Study

Table 16. % Female/Male Civil Engineering PGT Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

F, 10%(1)

F, 13%(28) F, 8%

(1)

F, 15%(18)

F, 13%(2)

F, 18%(20)

M, 90%(9)

M, 87%(180) M, 92%

(12)

M, 85%(104)

M, 87%(13)

M, 82%(94)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

FTE

POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT STUDENTS

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 21 70 23% 77% 18 39 0 32% 68% 20 40 0 33% 67%

Full time 10 12 45% 55% 12 15 0 44% 56% 13 16 0 45% 55%

Part time 12 59 17% 83% 6 24 0 20% 80% 6 24 0 20% 80%

Total 890 2,559 26% 74% 863 2,286 1 27% 73% 906 2,359 1 28% 72%

Full time 704 1,913 27% 73% 717 1,726 0 29% 71% 775 1,856 0 29% 71%

Part time 186 647 22% 78% 146 561 0 21% 79% 122 468 0 21% 79%

Not applicable 0 0 - - 0 0 0 - - 8 35 0 19% 81%

2013/14

Table 16 % Female : Male Numbers for University of Bath and HESA: Civil Engineering PGT by subject data

University of Bath

Sector

2011/12 2012/13

21

Table 17. % Female PGT Civil Engineering Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Figure 9. % Female PGT Civil Engineering Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Tables 14-17 and Figures 8&9 demonstrate that the percentage of female PGT Civil Engineering students is significantly higher for FT students compared to the sector. In 2011/12 Bath was slightly below the PT sector average with 17% compared to 22%. However, significant improvement can be seen in 2012/13/14 where Bath is only 1% below the sector average of 21%.

Overall the data indicates that ACE is doing a little better than the sector average for PGT female students. We have achieved this through the high visibility of women students on our Graduate webpages and our activities at Open Days where women have an interactive presence.

The gender ratios for the PGT PT programmes (1F: 4.9M in 2011/12) show significant variation from the FTE (1F:1.2M). The sector ratios in 2011/12 were 1F:3.5M for PT and 1F:2.7M for FT. The ratio of females is good for our PGT FT but slightly below average for PT. In 2012/13 the

Table 17. Sector Bath% POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT CIVIL ENGINEERING STUDENTS NUMBERS IN ACE AND HESA SUBJECT DATA


2011/12

2012/13

2013/14

27%

22%

29%

21%

29%

21%

45%

17%

44%

20%

45%

20%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

% fe

mal

e

Sector

Bath

22

sector remained consistent as did Bath’s FT ratios, however our PT ratio improved to 1F:4M. PGT programmes show an average 50/50 gender balance across 5 out of 7 PGT programmes for 2013, with the overall ratio of females to males on the 2 conservation programmes at 2.6F:1M. Our distance learning Masters in International Construction traditionally attracts large numbers of PT overseas males, 85%M to 15%F (Ratio 5.7M: 1F) which significantly skews the averages for ACE (Ratio 1F:4M) and these are not included in HESA benchmarking data.

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.

Table 18. Total Architecture PGR Students by Gender and Academic Year

Table 19. Architecture PGR students by Gender and Mode of Study

Table 19 % ARCHITECTURE POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS BY GENDER AND MODE OF STUDY

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14


Female 45% 43% 57% 33% 55% 11%

Male 55% 57% 43% 67% 45% 89%

Table 18. TOTAL ARCHITECTURE POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS BY GENDER AND ACADEMIC YEAR

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 15 19 44% 56% 17 18 49% 51% 12 17 41% 59%

Full time 9 11 45% 55% 13 10 57% 43% 11 9 55% 45%

Part time 6 8 43% 57% 4 8 33% 67% 1 8 11% 89%

23

Figure 10. Architecture PGR students by Gender and Mode of Study

Table 20. Architecture PGR Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

F, 45%(9)

F, 43%(6)

F, 57%(13)

F, 33%(4)

F, 55%(11)

F, 11%(1)

M, 55%(11)

M, 57%(8)

M, 43%(10)

M, 67%(8)

M, 45%(9)

M, 89%(8)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

FTE

POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Other

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 10 11 48% 52% 10 9 0 53% 47% 10 9 0 53% 47%

Full time 7 6 54% 46% 8 5 0 62% 38% 8 4 0 67% 33%

Part time 3 5 38% 63% 2 4 0 33% 67% 1 4 0 20% 80%

Not applicable 0 0 - - 0 0 0 - - 1 1 0 50% 50%

Total 717 1,068 40% 60% 713 1,076 0 40% 60% 767 1,099 0 41% 59%

Full time 560 778 42% 58% 546 792 0 41% 59% 585 821 0 42% 58%

Part time 157 290 35% 65% 168 284 0 37% 63% 125 193 0 39% 61%

Not applicable 0 0 - - 0 0 0 - - 56 84 0 40% 60%

2013/14

Table 20. POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS IN ACE AND HESA SUBJECT DATA: ARCHITECTURE, PGR STUDENTS BUILT ENVIRONMENT & PLANNING

University of Bath

Sector

2011/12 2012/13

24

Table 21. % Female Architecture PGR students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Figure 11. % Female Architecture PGR students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Tables 18-21 and Figures 10&11 show that PGR Architecture has recruited an average of 21 FT and 11 PT students over the review period. In 2012/13/14 the percentage of women was 53%, compared to a sector average of 41%, an improvement on 2011/12 48% (the sector remained at 40%). A noteworthy trend is towards more women FT students at the expense of PT students (45% FT versus 43% PT in 2011-12; 57% FT versus 33% PT in 2012-13; 55% FT versus 11% PT in 2013-14). The numbers are small but this is a positive development suggesting that women are securing a FT trajectory, often thanks to success with funding. We advertise specific named funded projects through our FindaPhD feed. We also award studentships to excellent candidates.

During the review period (2011-14) ACE awarded funding of £1,574,909.00 to 20 women (55.5%) and 16 men (44.5%). In all cases funding is competitive and awarded to the best candidates.

Sector BathTable 21. % POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH ARCHITECTURE STUDENT NUMBERS IN ACE AND HESA SUBJECT DATA


2011/12

2012/13

2013/14

42%

35%

41%37%

42%39%

54%

38%

62%

33%

67%

20%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

% fe

mal

e

Sector

Bath

25

Table 22. Total Civil Engineering PGR Students by Gender and Academic Year

Table 22. TOTAL CIVIL ENGINEERING POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS BY GENDER AND ACADEMIC YEAR

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 13 18 42% 58% 12 16 43% 57% 10 22 31% 69%

Full time 12 17 41% 59% 10 15 40% 60% 8 19 30% 70%

Part time 1 1 50% 50% 2 1 67% 33% 2 3 40% 60%

Table 23. % Civil Engineering PGR students by Gender

Table 23. % CIVIL ENGINEERING POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDENTS BY GENDER 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total PGR - Civil Total PGR - Civil Total PGR - Civil Female 42% 43% 31% Male 58% 57% 69%

Figure 12. % Civil Engineering PGR students by Gender

F, 42%(13)

F, 43%(12) F, 31%

(10)

M, 58%(18)

M, 57%(16) M, 69%

(22)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total PGR - Civil Total PGR - Civil Total PGR - Civil

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

26

Table 24. Total Civil Engineering PGR Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Table 25. % Female Civil Engineering PGR Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

29% 29%30%

38%

41%

30%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Total PGR - Civil Total PGR - Civil Total PGR - Civil

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

% fe

mal

e

Sector

Bath

27

Figure 13. % Female Civil Engineering PGR Students in ACE and HESA Sector Data

Tables 22-25 and Figures 12&13 show that PGR Civil engineering has recruited an average 27 FT and 3 PT students over the review period. In 2012-13 the percentage of female students was 41%, compared to a sector average of 29%, but was the same as the sector average 2013/14.

(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.

Table 26. Total Architecture Students: Ratio of Applications, Offers, Acceptances by Gender Table 26. ARCHITECTURE TOTAL: RATIO OF APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, ACCEPTANCES

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Apps

Offers

Accepts

Apps:Offers

Apps:Accepts

Apps

Offers

Accepts

Apps:Offers

Apps:Accepts

Apps

Offers

Accepts

Apps:Offers

Apps:Accepts

Undergraduates 995 267 136 3.7 7.3 938 298 159 3.1 5.9 986 349 175 2.8 5.6

Female 496 154 68 3.2 7.3 513 184 96 2.8 5.3 524 206 95 2.5 5.5

Male 499 113 68 4.4 7.3 425 114 63 3.7 6.7 462 143 80 3.2 5.8

Postgraduate taught 525 338 133 1.6 3.9 531 377 128 1.4 4.1 515 305 133 1.7 3.9

Female 268 175 51 1.5 5.3 301 226 63 1.3 4.8 275 162 63 1.7 4.4

Male 257 163 82 1.6 3.1 230 151 65 1.5 3.5 240 143 70 1.7 3.4

Postgraduate research 42 19 18 2.2 2.3 48 22 14 2.2 3.4 66 20 16 3.3 4.1

Female 15 8 7 1.9 2.1 25 11 7 2.3 3.6 31 9 8 3.4 3.9

Male 27 11 11 2.5 2.5 23 11 7 2.1 3.3 35 11 8 3.2 4.4

Table 27. Ratio: Architecture UG Applications, Offers, Acceptances by Gender

Table 27.

RATIO: UNDERGRADUATE ARCHITECTURE APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, ACCEPTANCES BY GENDER Female Male

UG - Arch 2011/12

Apps : Offers 3.2 4.4 Apps: Accepts 7.3 7.3

UG - Arch 2012/13


UG - Arch 2013/14

Apps : Offers 2.5 3.2 Apps : Accepts 5.5 5.8

28

Figure 14. Ratio: Architecture UG Applications, Offers, Acceptances by Gender

Tables 26-27 and Figure 14 indicate that, in general, the balance of offers and accepts in Architecture is in favour of women. We use female student ambassadors at our Open Days and make every endeavour to portray our learning environment as supportive of women students and this is reflected in our encouraging UG recruitment data.

2011/12 show almost equal numbers of female (496) and male (499) applicants with 3.2:1 (496 apps/154 offers) of women receiving an offer compared with 4.4:1 (499 apps/113 offers) for men. 2012/13 figures indicate that women were more likely to convert their applications into accepts with 5.3:1 (513 to 96) for women and 6.7:1 (425 to 63) for men. For 2013/14, there were more women applicants than male (524 to 462, or 53% F to 47% M). Offers to women were at a ratio of 2.5:1 (524 apps/206 offers) compared with the male ratio of 3.2:1 (462 apps/143 offers). In 2013 the conversion rate to accepting an offer were similar with a ratio of 5.5:1 (524 to 95) for women and 5.8:1 (462 to 80) for men.

3.2

7.3

2.8

5.3

2.5

5.5

4.4

7.3

3.7

6.7

3.2

5.8

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

Apps : Offers Apps: Accepts Apps : Offers Apps: Accepts Apps : Offers Apps : Accepts

UG - Arch2011/12

UG - Arch2012/13

UG - Arch2013/14

Female

Male

29

Table 28. Ratio Architecture PGT Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender Table 28. RATIO: POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT ARCHITECTURE APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, ACCEPTANCES BY GENDER Female Male

PGT - Arch 2011/12


PGT - Arch 2012/13


PGT - Arch 2013/14


Figure 15. Ratio: Architecture PGT Applications, Offers, Acceptances by Gender

Table 29. Ratio Architecture PGR Applications, Offers, Acceptances by Gender

Table 29. RATIO: POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH ARCHITECTURE APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, Female Male ACCEPTANCES BY GENDER

PGR - Arch 2011/12


PGR - Arch 2012/13


PGR - Arch 2013/14


1.5

5.3

1.3

4.8

1.7

4.4

1.6

3.1

1.5

3.5

1.7

3.4

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0


PGT - Arch2011/12

PGT - Arch2012/13

PGT - Arch2013/14

Female

Male

30

Figure 16. Ratio: Architecture PGR Applications, Offers, Acceptances by Gender

Tables 26-27 and Figures 15&16 indicate that in the previous three years the rate of applications to offers and applications to acceptances has risen marginally for both sexes maintaining the general parity between men and women.

Table 30. Ratio: Total Civil Engineering Students Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender Table 30. TOTAL CIVIL ENGINEERING RATIO: APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, ACCEPTANCES

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Apps

Offers

Accepts

Apps:Offers

Apps:Accepts

Apps

Offers

Accepts

Apps:Offers

Apps:Accepts

Apps

Offers

Accepts

Apps:Offers

Apps:Accepts

Undergraduates 706 564 98 1.3 7.2 554 453 101 1.2 5.5 664 484 107 1.4 6.2

Female 166 139 24 1.2 6.9 143 120 34 1.2 4.2 177 146 39 1.2 4.5

Male 540 425 74 1.3 7.3 411 333 67 1.2 6.1 487 338 68 1.4 7.2

Postgraduate taught 81 57 57 1.4 1.4 147 101 72 1.5 2.0 377 258 98 1.5 3.8

Female 19 15 15 1.3 1.3 23 16 8 1.4 2.9 69 41 12 1.7 5.8

Male 62 42 42 1.5 1.5 124 85 64 1.5 1.9 308 217 86 1.4 3.6

Postgraduate research 78 25 13 3.1 6.0 57 24 11 2.4 5.2 81 29 15 2.8 5.4

Female 15 9 6 1.7 2.5 21 7 4 3.0 5.3 18 8 2 2.3 9.0

Male 63 16 7 3.9 9.0 36 17 7 2.1 5.1 63 21 13 3.0 4.8

1.92.1

2.3

3.63.4

3.9

2.5 2.5

2.1

3.3 3.2

4.4

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0


PGR - Arch2011/12

PGR - Arch2012/13

PGR - Arch2013/14

Female

Male

31

Table 31. Ratio: Civil Engineering UG Student Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender

Table 31. RATIO: UNDERGRADUATE CIVIL ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, ACCEPTANCES BY GENDER Female Male

UG - Civil 2011/12


UG - Civil 2012/13


UG - Civil 2013/14


Figure 17. Ratio: Civil Engineering UG Student Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender

On Open Days, we have increased presentations from women graduates, and female students help with tours. Since 2014, female students have led the design activities to provide role models for prospective candidates. As a result of these initiatives, the proportion of applications, offers and acceptances for female students all increased significantly over the review period. The acceptances indicate that women were more likely to accept offers than men.

Entry requirements for UG civil engineering programmes were raised, especially with the introduction of the A* at A-level. Tables 30-31 and Figure 17 demonstrate that the number of offers to female applicants has remained generally consistent over the review period with 139 in 2011/12, 120 in 2012/13 and 146 in 2013/14 while the equivalent numbers for male applicants (425, 333, 338) are reflected in an overall drop. While the ratio of applications to offers made to female students has remained consistent at 1.2:1, the ratio of applications to

1.2

6.9

1.2

4.2

1.2

4.5

1.3

7.3

1.2

6.1

1.4

7.2

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0


UG - Civil2011/12

UG - Civil2012/13

UG - Civil2013/14

Female

Male

32

acceptances for female students has decreased from 6.9:1 in 2011/12 to 4.5:1 in 2013/14. This indicates that women are more likely to accept offers. For male students the ratio has remained unchanged with 7.3:1 applications to acceptances in 2011/12 and 7.2:1 in 2013/14.

Table 32. Ratio: Civil Engineering PGT Student Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender

Table 32. RATIO: POSTGRADUATE TAUGHT CIVIL ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, Female Male ACCEPTANCES BY GENDER

PGT - Civil 2011/12


PGT - Civil 2012/13


PGT - Civil 2013/14


Figure 18. Ratio: Civil Engineering PGT Student Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender

Table 32 and Figure 18 show that n 2011/12 and 2012/13 the rate of applications to offers and applications to acceptances remained low and consistent for both men and women. However, in 2013/14 the rate of applications to acceptances increases markedly for men and even more for women with 3.6:1 (male) and 5.8:1 (female). This probably reflects an upturn in the construction industry worldwide and more opportunities for women. Our WEng webpages are proactive in profiling female staff, students and alumni discussing their experiences of studying

1.3 1.3 1.4

2.9

1.7

5.8

1.5 1.5 1.5

1.9

1.4

3.6

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0


PGT - Civil2011/12

PGT - Civil2012/13

PGT - Civil2013/14

Female

Male

33

and working in engineering, and contain information on female graduate destinations which has undoubtedly helped achieve this increase.

Table 33. Ratio: Civil Engineering PGR Student Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender

Table 33. RATIO: POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH CIVIL

ENGINEERING APPLICATIONS, OFFERS, Female Male ACCEPTANCES BY GENDER

PGR - Civil 2011/12


PGR - Civil 2012/13


PGR - Civil 2013/14


Figure 19. Ratio: Civil Engineering PGR Student Applications, Offers, Accepts by Gender

The figures for PGR shown in Table 33 and Figure 19 have fluctuated more than for PGT, though this is in part due to fluctuation in the number of male applicants, the number of female applicants varying much less. While the ratio of applications to acceptances has fallen year on year for males, the opposite is true for women. In 2013/14 there were 9 applications per acceptance for females. The construction industry is striving to demonstrate that there are no

1.7

2.53.0

5.3

2.3

9.0

3.9

9.0

2.1

5.1

3.0

4.8

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

10.0


PGR - Civil2011/12

PGR - Civil2012/13

PGR - Civil2013/14

Female

Male

34

barriers to women; we are supporting these schemes by offering networking events, links to industry, resources, bursaries, scholarships, funding conference attendances and advertising other funding opportunities targeted specifically at women through our WEng and WESBath webpages.

a) 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.

Table 34. Architecture UG Degree Classification by Gender Table 34. ARCHITECTURE UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE CLASSIFICATION BY GENDER

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female

Male

% of fem

ales

% of m

ales

Female

Male

% of fem

ales

% of m

ales

Female

Male

% of fem

ales

% of m

ales

1st 13 18 26% 38% 12 13 22% 28% 14 21 22% 35%

2.1 35 26 70% 55% 38 31 69% 67% 47 36 75% 60%

2.2 2 3 4% 6% 5 1 9% 2% 2 3 3% 5%

3rd 0 0 0% 0% 0 1 0% 2% 0 0 0% 0%

Unclassified 0 0 0% 0% 0 0 0% 0% 0 0 0% 0%

Total 50 47 - - 55 46 - - 63 60 - -

Table 35. Architecture UG Degree Classification by Gender and Percentage Table 35 % ARCHITECTURE UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE CLASSIFICATION BY GENDER AND PERCENTAGE

ARCHITECTURE 1st 2.1 2.2. 3rd Uncl

Arch 2011/12

Female 26% 70% 4% 0% 0%

Male 38% 55% 6% 0% 0%

Arch 2012/13

Female 22% 69% 9% 0% 0%

Male 28% 67% 2% 2% 0%

Arch 2013/14

Female 22% 75% 3% 0% 0%

Male 35% 60% 5% 0% 0%

35

Figure 20. Architecture UG Degree Classification by Gender and Percentage

Tables 34-35 and Figure 20 indicate that over the review period women Architecture students consistently attained good degrees with 96%, 91% and 97% against 93%, 95% and 95% for men. However, there is a statistically significant imbalance in 1st and 2.1 degree outcomes by gender to the disadvantage of women. The ratio of women achieving 1st class honours degrees remains fairly constant over the period but there was a 7% increase for men in 2013/14, which also warrants further investigation and action.1

We ceased marking architectural ‘crits’ as this appeared to be a form of assessment that disadvantaged females and we are piloting anonymous marking wherever possible. We will now review assessment/outcome trends over the entire UG degree programme to establish if there is (un)conscious bias and determine if women do better in collaborative/team working projects. AP 1.1

1 A chi-square test was performed for both architecture and civil engineering awards. This showed a statistically significant relationship between degree classification and gender, 2 (3, N = 321), p =0.031. Examination of the standardised residuals showed that this statistically significant association with gender holds for 1st and Upper-second (2:1) degrees for architecture awards, and not for the other degree classifications. There was no statistically significant association with gender in the civil engineering programme awards.

26%(13)

38%(18)

22%(12)

28%(13) 22%

(14)

35%(21)

70%(35)

55%(26)

69%(38)

67%(31) 75%

(47)

60% (36)

4% (2) 6% (3) 9% (5) 2% (1) 3% (2) 5% (3)2% (1)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Female Male Female Male Female Male

Arch2011/12

Arch2012/13

Arch2013/14

Uncl

3rd

2.2.

2.1

1st

36

Cohorts have risen annually with an observable trend towards a majority female gender balance of around 5%. In the past 2 years, we have proactively addressed the issue of gender imbalance in our studio teaching staff and have been keen to promote successful graduate role models for female students. In addition, we have tried to identify and recruit women tutors. In the past 3 years, we have appointed 3 new female PT TF and substantially increased the FTE fraction of two of our existing female TFs which means that 5 of the 24 fractional TFs are women. We continue to strive to reach an equitable balance; for example in ACE’s flagship group design project 3 out of 4 of the architectural tutors are women.

We have also appointed women external examiners for the BArch and MArch programmes so that the gender ratio is now 50/50 (1F:1M). In the final year review panels the gender balance we achieve currently is well above the gender balance of female architects within the UK profession as a whole, however, more needs to be done to achieve a similar balance in all Review Panels. AP 1.2

Table 36. Civil Engineering UG Degree Classification by Gender Table 36. CIVIL ENGINEERING UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE CLASSIFICATION BY GENDER

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female

Male

% of fem

ales

% of m

ales

Female

Male

% of fem

ales

% of m

ales

Female

Male

% of fem

ales

% of m

ales

1st 1 3 6% 10% 7 9 32% 22% 4 9 21% 19%

2.1 11 21 65% 72% 13 23 59% 56% 11 28 58% 60%

2.2 5 4 29% 14% 2 5 9% 12% 4 7 21% 15%

3rd 0 1 0% 3% 0 3 0% 7% 0 3 0% 6%

Unclassified 0 0 0% 0% 0 1 0% 2% 0 0 0% 0%

Total 17 29 - - 22 41 - - 19 47 - -

Table 37. Civil Engineering UG Degree Classification by Gender and Percentage Table 37. % CIVIL ENGINEERING UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE CLASSIFICATION BY GENDER AND PERCENTAGE Female :Male 1st 2.1 2.2. 3rd Uncl

Civil 2011/12

Female 6% 65% 29% 0% 0% Male 10% 72% 14% 3% 0%

Civil 2012/13

Female 32% 59% 9% 0% 0% Male 22% 56% 12% 7% 2%

Civil 2013/14

Female 21% 58% 21% 0% 0% Male 19% 60% 15% 6% 0%

37

Figure 21. Civil Engineering UG Degree Classification by Gender and Percentage

Tables 36-37 and Figure 21 demonstrate that there is no statistically significant association with gender in the Civil Engineering programme awards.

Staff data

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

ACE currently employs 12 women staff out of a total of 76 and is consistently below the sector average (currently 32%) for female academic staff in Architecture (currently 23%) with the overall number of women academics in the department decreasing from a high of 6 to a low of 2 during 2012. In Civil Engineering, we were well-above the sector average of 21% in 2012/13 at 33%, however during 2013/14 this decreased to 22% but was still slightly above the sector average of 21%.

A promotion of 1 woman from lecturer to SL then to Reader has recently increased the representation of women at senior level and is solely responsible for the large fluctuation shown in Figure 25. However, female staff are underrepresented at all levels and there are

6% (1)10%(3)

32%(7) 22%

(9)21%(4)

19%(9)

65%(11)

72%(21)

59%(13)

56%(23)

58%(11)

60%(28)

29%(5)

14%(4)

9% (2)

12% (5)

21%(4) 15%

(7)

3% (1)7% (3)

6% (3)2% (1)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Female Male Female Male Female Male

Civil2011/12

Civil2012/13

Civil2013/14

Uncl

3rd

2.2.

2.1

1st

38

none at Professorial level. The Reader grade is under-used, perhaps because the promotion criteria are not well understood.

Our recruitment data demonstrates that we attract and appoint women applicants but we lose them at key career progression points suggesting that ACE has a ‘leaky pipeline’ with two male and 3 female academics leaving in the past 4 years for promotion to Reader/Professor at other academic institutions.

The Athena SWAN application has been a valuable process and has already provided impetus for positive gender work in ACE. We have implemented and improved the processes for promotion, increased the effectiveness of Staff Development and Performance Reviews (SDPRs) (USAT AP.C1), engaged with the development of mentoring systems (USAT AP.E2) and supported the development of women’s networking and leadership training events (USAT AP.E6).

Our AP sets out how we will: (1) adopt a more pro-active approach to recruiting, mentoring and promoting women staff; and, (2) improve career satisfaction, provide opportunities for training and development, disseminate knowledge of promotion processes and ensure fairness in workload allocation. It sets out our long-term strategy for supporting and retaining existing female staff and refining recruitment practices to attract the ablest women. We aim to enhance our Staff Development and Performance Review (SDPR) process to encourage women to seek promotion by identifying training needs and leadership development opportunities.

The SDPR process will assist in identifying gaps in CVs and facilitate guidance on actions to address them. In future, where Professorial vacancies arise we will urge women to apply and tailor recruitment adverts accordingly. AP 2.1

The Faculty offers Prize Fellow and Future Award positions and these are an opportunity for outstanding post-doctoral researchers to develop their academic career in a supportive and well-resourced environment. The Department actively engages in competing for these fellowships and we currently have 1 Prize Fellow in ACE. However, as part of our overall strategy, we will identify and recruit more women through this and the Future Awards route so that in the longer-term we will increase the number of women able to progress into senior roles. Our aim is to attain the same proportion of females in ACE as the national average for both disciplines. (USAT AP B1) AP 2.2

Tables 38-39 Total ACE Staff by Role, Gender and Percentage Table 38. 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

TOTAL ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH STAFF

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 9 45 17% 83% 9 53 15% 85% 12 64 16% 84%

Research 4 3 57% 43% 1 7 13% 88% 2 12 14% 86%

39

Teaching 2 13 13% 87% 4 14 22% 78% 5 18 22% 78%

Lecturer 1 12 8% 92% 3 14 18% 82% 4 13 24% 76%

Senior Lecturer 1 8 11% 89% 1 8 11% 89% 0 9 0% 100%

Reader 1 1 50% 50% 0 1 0% 100% 1 1 50% 50%

Professor 0 7 0% 100% 0 8 0% 100% 0 9 0% 100%

Other 0 1 0% 100% 0 1 0% 100% 0 2 0% 100%

Figure 22. Total ACE Staff by Gender

F, 17%(9)

F, 15%(9)

F, 16%(12)

M, 83%(45)

M, 85%(53)

M, 84%(64)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total staff Total staff Total staff

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Table 39. % Total STAFF by Gender 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Total staff Total staff Total staff Female 17% 15% 16% Male 83% 85% 84%

40

Table 40. Total ACE Staff by Role and Gender 2 Table 40 Numbers of Academic and Research staff by Gender and Grade Female Male % Female

Research 2011/12 4 3 57% 2012/13 1 7 13% 2013/14 2 12 14%

Teaching 2011/12 2 13 13% 2012/13 4 14 22% 2013/14 5 18 22%

Lecturer 2011/12 1 12 8% 2012/13 3 14 18% 2013/14 4 13 24%

Senior Lecturer

2011/12 1 8 11% 2012/13 1 8 11% 2013/14 0 9 0%

Reader 2011/12 1 1 50% 2012/13 0 1 0% 2013/14 1 1 50%

Professor 2011/12 0 7 0% 2012/13 0 8 0%

2013/14 0 9 0%

2 The job roles in Tables 38-40 and Figure 21 for the Research and Teaching Categories are as follows: 2011/12: Research: 2 x Research Assistant; 5 x Research Officer- Teaching: 11 x Teaching Fellow; 1 x Senior Teaching Fellow; 2 x Studio Leader/Teaching Fellow; 1 x Studio Leader/Senior Teaching Fellow. 2012/13: Research: 1 x Research Assistant; 6 x Research Officer. Teaching: 16 x Teaching Fellow; 1 x Senior Teaching Fellow; 1 x Studio Leader/Teaching Fellow. 2013/14: Research: 1 x Marie Curie Fellow; 1 x Prize Fellow; 1 x Research Assistant; 7 x Research Associate; 4 x Research Officer. Teaching: 21 x Teaching Fellow; 1 x Senior Teaching Fellow; 1 x Studio Leader/Teaching Fellow.

4

12 2

45

1

34

1 10

10

10 0 0

3

7

1213

14

18

12

1413

8 89

1 1 1

78

9

57%

13% 14% 13%

22% 22%

8%

18%24%

11%11%

0%

50%

0%

50%

0% 0% 0%0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

Research Teaching Lecturer Senior Lecturer Reader Professor

Female

Male

% Female

41

Figure 23. Total ACE Staff by Role, Gender and Female % over time

Figure 24. Total ACE Staff by Role and Gender

Table 41. % Female Academic Staff HESA Cost Centres

Table 42. % Female Staff ACE

41 2 2

4 5

13 4

1 1 1 1

37

12 13

14

18

12

14 13

8 8 9

11

1

7 8 9

1 1 20

5

10

15

20

25

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

Research Teaching Lecturer Senior Lecturer Reader Professor Other

Male

Female

Table 41 % Academic Staff FemaleHESA cost centres

F Total % F F Total % F F Total % FArchitecture, built environment & planning

1180 3845 31% 1165 3760 31% 1245 3870 32%

Civil engineering 360 1795 20% 360 1750 21% 390 1880 21%

2013/14ALL HEIs

2011/12 2012/13

Table 42 % Academic Staff FemaleHESA cost centres

F Total % F F Total % F F Total % FArchitecture, built environment & planning

10 55 18% 15 65 23% 15 65 23%

Civil engineering 5 35 14% 10 30 33% 10 45 22%

2013/14UNIVERSITY OF BATH

2011/12 2012/13

42

Table 43. Snapshot of ACE by Gender 2013/14

Figure 25. Snapshot of ACE by Gender and Role 2013/14

(i) 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.

Tables 44 and 45 show that during the review period 24 permanent staff (6 women and 18 men) have left ACE, representing a significant loss to the gender balance. All the women moved to a more senior position; either senior lecturer or professor. An exit survey of 8 leavers in 2012 achieved a response rate of 50% (3F:1M). Lack of recognition and opportunities for career progression were cited as the main reason for seeking promotion elsewhere.

344

89

222 5 4 0 1 0

448

166

3912 18 13 9 1 9

43%

35% 36%

14%

22%24%

0%

50%

0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

UG PGT PGR Research Teaching Lecturer SeniorLecturer

Reader Professor

Female

Male

% Female

Table 43 Snapshot of ACE 2013/14 2013/14 Female Male % Female UG 344 448 43% PGT 89 166 35% PGR 22 39 36% Research 2 12 14% Teaching 5 18 22% Lecturer 4 13 24% Senior Lecturer 0 9 0% Reader 1 1 50% Professor 0 9 0%

43

Turnover is higher among PDRAs, who leave when fixed-term funding finishes, however the numbers are higher for male than female researchers.

Table 44. Turnover of Staff by Grade and Gender

TABLE 44. TURNOVER OF STAFF BY GRADE AND GENDER

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2011/12 - 2013/14

LEAVERS

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 1 8 11% 89% 5 5 50% 50% 0 5 0% 100% 6 18 25% 75%

Research 0 4 0% 100% 4 2 67% 33% 0 1 0% 100% 4 7 36% 64%

Teaching 1 3 25% 75% 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 1 3 25% 75%

Lecturer 0 0 - - 0 2 0% 100% 0 2 0% 100% 0 4 0% 100%

Senior Lecturer 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 2 0% 100% 0 2 0% 100%

Reader 0 0 - - 1 0 100% 0% 0 0 - - 1 0 100% 0%

Professor 0 1 0% 100% 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 1 0% 100%

Other 0 0 - - 0 1 0% 100% 0 0 - - 0 1 0% 100%

Table 45. Number of Leavers by Grade and Gender 2011-14 TABLE 45. NUMBER OF LEAVERS BY GRADE AND GENDER LEAVERS 2011/12 - 2013/14 Female Male Research 4 7 Teaching 1 3 Lecturer 0 4 Senior Lecturer 0 2 Reader 1 0 Professor 0 1 Other 0 1

Supporting and advancing women’s careers: maximum 5000 words (4939)

Key career transition points

(i) 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.

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.

44

Tables 46-47 and Figure 26 illustrates that overall there are significantly more male applications than female with the ratio of male to female applicants 4:1 in 2011/12; 5:1 in 2012/13 and 3.7:1 in 2013/14. The success rate for female applicants was higher than for their male counterparts in 2011/12 at 10% compared to 5% for males, in 2012/13 it was 6% against 4%, however female success rated dropped to 3% in 2013/14 against 6% for males. The percentage success rates are based on the number of appointments compared to the number of applications. So, for women, in 2011/12 there were 6 appointments from 60 applications; in 2012/13, 4 appointments from 66 applications; and in 2013/14, 1 appointment from 40 applications. To counteract this downward trend we have updated Department adverts to encourage a wider mix of applicants, adapted the wording to indicate that we particularly welcome applications from women, and increased the gender mix on recruitment and shortlisting panels. In future we will publish the Athena SWAN logo and our commitment to SWAN on our website, indicate that flexible working is applicable, and encourage more women to apply for positions through individual contacts. AP 2.2

45

Table 46. Job Application and Success Rates by Role and Gender

TABLE 46. JOB APPLICATION AND SUCCESS RATES BY GENDER AND GRADE

Applications Shortlisted Appointments Success rate

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

Total

2011/12 Total 60 263 19% 81% 10 31 24% 76% 6 12 33% 67% 10% 5% 6%

Research 19 53 26% 74% 4 10 29% 71% 2 3 40% 60% 11% 6% 7%

Teaching 12 29 29% 71% 3 5 38% 63% 3 5 38% 63% 25% 17% 20%

Lecturer 20 131 13% 87% 3 13 19% 81% 1 3 25% 75% 5% 2% 3%

Senior Lecturer 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Reader 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Professor 9 50 15% 85% 0 3 0% 100% 0 1 0% 100% 0% 2% 2%

Other 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

2012/13 Total 66 332 17% 83% 13 41 24% 76% 4 13 24% 76% 6% 4% 4%

Research 25 93 21% 79% 6 18 25% 75% 1 6 14% 86% 4% 6% 6%

Teaching 7 9 44% 56% 1 4 20% 80% 1 4 20% 80% 14% 44% 31%

Lecturer 32 217 13% 87% 5 18 22% 78% 2 2 50% 50% 6% 1% 2%

Senior Lecturer 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Reader 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Professor 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Other 2 13 13% 87% 1 1 50% 50% 0 1 0% 100% 0% 8% 7%

2013/14 Total 40 148 21% 79% 3 19 14% 86% 1 9 10% 90% 3% 6% 5%

Research 11 48 19% 81% 1 9 10% 90% 0 5 0% 100% 0% 10% 8%

Teaching 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Lecturer 27 88 23% 77% 2 8 20% 80% 1 2 33% 67% 4% 2% 3%

Senior Lecturer 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Reader 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Professor 2 12 14% 86% 0 2 0% 100% 0 2 0% 100% 0% 17% 14%

Other 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - - - -

Table 47. Success Rates by % and Gender

Table 47. SUCCESS RATES BY % and GENDER 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female success rate 10% 6% 3%

Male success rate 5% 4% 6%

46

Figure 26. Job Application and Success Rates by % and Gender

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.

As shown in Table 48 during the review period there was a 100% success rate for women’s promotion applications compared to 80% for men. Candidates for promotion are identified using the annual SDPR system. SDPRs are usually conducted by the HoD or other senior staff and provide an opportunity for constructive feedback on securing career advancement. The HoD can also approach candidates. While the promotion rates for women are positive the low numbers of women in ACE means that candidates eligible for promotion remains the key issue.

10%

6%

3%

5%

4%

6%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

Female success rate Male success rate

47

Table 48. Applications for Promotion and Success Rates by Role and Gender

Table 48. APPLICATIONS FOR PROMOTION AND SUCCESS RATE BY GRADE AND GENDER

2011/12 1 Male promoted to Senior Teaching Fellow

1 Female promoted to Senior Lecturer

1 Male promoted to Reader

1 Male unsuccessful promotion to Professor

2012/13 1 Male promoted to Professor

2013/14 1 Male promoted to Senior Lecturer

1 Female promoted to Reader

(ii) 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.

a) 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

Job advertisements carry the University’s Athena SWAN Bronze award logo. Further, ACE recruitment material now includes the following statement: ‘We are working to improve the present gender balance within the Department, and particularly welcome applications from women, who are currently under-represented in academic posts.’ This will be updated to include information on flexible working opportunities. AP 2.2

All applicants are made aware of our policies and procedures relating to work-life balance, including job sharing, onsite nursery provision, Fideliti voucher scheme and other benefits. All ACE recruitment panel members have been trained. (USAT AP B.3) All supervisory/managerial staff are required to complete mandatory Diversity in the Workplace and Unconscious Bias training. All other staff are encouraged to undertake the training and those who complete the on-line courses successfully are able to record this as evidence of professional development. To date 24 members (32%) of staff and 11 managers have passed Diversity in the Workplace and 6 members of staff have passed Unconscious Bias on-line training. AP 2.2

Prior to interview, measures are taken to avoid all-male shortlists. (USAT AP B.4) HR are refining this process for implementation across all academic roles by the end of the current academic year. AP 2.2

Since April 2014 we have ensured a gender balance on our recruitment panels for all academic roles at grades of Lecturer and above (USAT AP B.2). AP 2.2

ACE DEC has agreed a date of 2020 to meet the targets of attaining/retaining the national average for the disciplines of Architecture (30%) and Civil Engineering (20%). AP 2.2

48

The annual equality return will include the target we have set and record progress. AP 3.7

A WEng Network was formed in 2013 to support women academics and to promote and publicise women in engineering roles. All current women academics in ACE actively participate in the WEng network which ACE, the Faculty, and the University fully endorse (USAT AP G.3). All new women academics will be encouraged to become members. AP 2.1 The Faculty have helped us to develop WEng and WESBath webpages, a valuable forum and resource for female staff, students and alumni.

The Faculty and University AS webpages have been enhanced with female STEMM role models and publicity for a programme of STEMM seminars and other networking opportunities. (USAT 2014 AP C.2) and we have linked this to the webpages of both groups. We will update and publish the Athena SWAN logo and our commitment on updated Department webpages. AP 2.2

Feedback from the ACE Culture Survey indicated that there are no straightforward answers to recruiting more females, however, updating advertising, publicity, webpages, and utilising peer networks and mailing lists may all offer opportunities for better representation and encourage more women and research staff to apply for new posts. AP 2.2

b) 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 USAT AP commits the university to a personal AP for all academics who apply unsuccessfully for promotion from April 2014. (USAT AP F.1) This will be fully implemented in ACE, helping staff to acquire the skills they require for promotion. We will also seek to understand why strong candidates fail to apply for promotion. AP 2.1

Following comments in the ACE Culture Survey the HoD will arrange to have a presentation at a future staff meeting on the SDPR and promotions processes to ensure that SDPRs are more effectively used as a career development tool and to encourage women to plan for promotion. AP 3.1

Following requests in the ACE Culture Survey SDPRs are now offered to PT Teaching Fellows as well as FT teaching staff. We are also encouraging female academics to participate in leadership programmes such as the Academic Leaders' Programmes and Aurora which seek to redress the deficit in women at senior level (USAT AP E.6) so that women are qualified to seek promotion to Reader and ultimately towards promotion to Professor. Two women have already completed leadership programmes and another has been accepted for 2015. AP 3.2

49

PDRAs are fully integrated into the department. They are included in the SDPR process, attend staff meetings and research presentations and are actively engaged in recruitment. PDRAs are mentored by the Director of their research centre and encouraged to apply for vacancies (3 current FT academics in the department were formerly PDRAs). Further targeted guidance, mentoring and pastoral support for women wishing to make the transition from PDRA to career academic will be provided. AP 3.6

The RDU has launched mentoring circles for researchers (USAT AP E.2) and the University plan to offer an individually trained mentor to staff on request (USAT AP E. 3). Almost half of our survey respondents (46%) agreed or strongly agreed that having a mentor would enhance promotion prospects. ACE will actively encourage women to participate in the mentoring scheme. AP 3.2 ACE also encourages and supports female staff and students to attend the regular Equality and Diversity and women in STEMM Athena SWAN lectures and Women's Development Network events which are open to all members of the university community. Case Studies Our engagement with the Athena SWAN process has initiated several changes in current practice which have had a positive impact on women’s career progression. Zang has been mentored by senior academics and her professional development has seen her promoted from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer then Reader in the last 3 years. In 2013 she was encouraged by the Dean and HoD to establish a new Research Unit and given the opportunity to be part of the university’s first Academic Leader’s programme. Harney has been supported and mentored from PT Research Officer, PhD student and probationary lecturer through to full-time research academic, Lecturer and Director of Studies. She has led the Athena SWAN Bronze Award application, Chairing the DSAT and the DLTQ Committee and as part of an overall University Athena SWAN strategy. Both Harney and Zang are involved in decision making committees both having been co-opted to the Departmental Executive Committee and Zang to the Departmental Research Committee. Holley joined ACE in 2012 as a PDRA and was encouraged to apply for a FT lecturing position by her mentor and was subsequently promoted to lecturer in 2014.

Career development

(i) 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.

50

(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?

ACE is keen to ensure that it offers staff a supportive, inspirational and ambitious environment in which to undertake research and our research centres consolidate this.

The promotions process, published on the university website, is a transparent approach assessed by submission of a CV and further written evidence, rather than interview. The criteria for evaluation are grouped into three categories of equal value, namely Management & Leadership, Research & Scholarship, and Teaching. Supporting information includes evidence of research publications, research funding applications, teaching, and curriculum development, wider engagement activities,

The University’s promotion processes were enhanced following the 2009 AS submission, and included guidance from HR on consideration of part-time candidates. The new criteria for promotion clarify that a reduction in output thresholds is appropriate when considering academics who have been working PT or who have been on maternity or other leave. Academic Staff Committee explicitly considers achievements in the context of PT contracts. The quality requirements remains the same as for other academic staff but the quantity is reduced proportionately for female staff with ‘gaps’ in their employment for maternity or other leave or where the member of staff has been working PT.

Twice each year, the HoD invites applications by any non-professorial academic colleague for promotion. As part of this invitation, the HoD will always encourage an initial meeting in order to discuss the criteria, evidence required and the probability of promotion. This meeting is in addition to the annual SDPR meeting, at which bespoke discussions take place in order to facilitate early career progression.

Eligible candidates are encouraged to put together a full application, reviewed by senior colleagues in ACE. However, as a result of feedback applications are now restricted to DEC members. At this stage, where applicable, all colleagues are reminded of the fractional nature of the post-holder's position and given any relevant non-confidential additional information. It is very rare for comments from colleagues not to be entirely supportive. The HoD forwards a précis of all comments to the Academic Staff Committee (ASC) together with a personal recommendation and that of a further senior colleague.

In addition, the Faculty is piloting a project to explore mechanisms for assisting academics with the applications process and ACE fully supports this initiative. AP 2.1

(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

51

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?

An informal induction process currently exists whereby all new staff meet the HoD and their RCD at the earliest opportunity. However, following feedback from the ACE Culture Survey the HoD will arrange a formal induction process and develop our webpages to specifically communicate flexible working policy, career development opportunities, networking and social integration, information on the WEng groups and the WDN workshops and seminars, an induction list and a list of key people in the Department. AP 4.2.

Probationary staff are allocated a mentor to support them through the 3-year probationary process with the option of a women mentor where possible (if requested). Measurable probationary targets for performance in research, teaching and administration are agreed before ratification by the ASC. Induction includes a comprehensive overview of ACE, Faculty and the University, administrative procedures, finance, sources of support, health and safety requirements and meeting key personnel.

ACE actively seeks to appoint and support early career researchers. Regular meetings with mentors and senior staff including quarterly sessions with the Deputy HoD are organised. Financial assistance for conference attendance and pilot study funding plus a reduction in administrative duties (less than 5% of WLM) confirm a departmental commitment to research training and development.

The University’s RDU has a specific remit to support early career researchers and academic staff. A range of training providers across campus deliver a coherent package of researcher development, aligned to the RDF, sharing best practices and resources. All staff within the department are allocated time to participate in these activities for CPD and personal development. Thus career development is actively promoted.

52

Figure 27. Full range of skills development available

Attendance by ACE staff at RDU training in 2011/12 was 5M: 7F, for 2012/13; 6M: 3F.11 and in 2013/14 (8M: 3F).

The university holds WDN workshops and seminars focusing on academic and personal development topics, as well as providing networking opportunities. Female STEMM academics are well-represented at these events. In 2013, the President of RIBA Angela Brady delivered the annual Athena SWAN lecture, before meeting staff and students in ACE. There were 65 participants of which 31 were from ACE.

(iii) Support for female students – describe the support (formal and informal) provided for female students to enable them to make the transition to a

53

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.

Formal sources of obtaining academic support and advice open to PGR students are:

• PhD Supervisor(s). • Academic Mentor. • Departmental Postgraduate Tutor. • Departmental Director of Postgraduate Studies. • Head of Department. • Departmental Student Representative. • Faculty Student Representative.

ACE did very well in our recent REF environment statement for the support and development of staff and PGRs and the Students’ Union has recently successfully piloted a PGR peer mentoring scheme within the Faculty of Engineering & Design. All PGT students are allocated a DoS and personal tutor, PGR students are allocated supervisors and all students are required to attend a compulsory Induction Day where they meet key staff. They are also provided with a Handbook containing essential information including information on the University’s E&D Policies.

PGR students are assigned 2 supervisors who regularly review their work and training needs. Progress is formally reviewed on a bi-annual basis and monthly supervisory meetings are mandatory with further meetings encouraged. All supervisors operate an ‘open door’ policy to maximise accessibility.

Informal support and cross-group assistance is provided by individual research groups. This is currently ad-hoc but, under the AP, ACE will oversee a more formal system. AP 4.3

Evolving from the WEng initiative WESBath was formed in April 2014 with financial support from benefactors to support current students within the FoD and encourage more young women engineers. They highlight funding opportunities, strengthen links between alumni and engineering companies and offer help for job interviews. WESBath recently become formally affiliated with the Women’s Engineering Society (WES).

As a consequence of setting-up this female group Ford are supplying a £10k scholarship every year for a female UG engineer.

The Faculty are also being considered by Caterpillar as one of their tier 1 universities. This will result in a number of scholarships and there would be one specifically for a female engineer. WESBath are also working in collaboration with our Widening Participation office in a venture to produce a ‘Girls into Engineering’ promotion video.

54

An email was circulated in October 2014 inviting all UG/PG women to join the student WES group. Everyone who joins is referred to a Women’s Engineering ambassador. Women in Science and Engineering (WISE) campaign is also currently offering free student membership to all of our UG, PGT and PGR students. The HoD also match-funded a further final year student in addition to a WESBath representative to the annual WES student conference in November 2014.

Attendance at conferences and seminars are encouraged. Existing resources will be augmented from 2015 by a new scheme whereby approximately twenty grants of up to £250 are available to PhD/EngD students in any Faculty and awards will be based on the merit of the application submitted.

Formal training for PGR students is offered by ACE as well as the University. Students are also encouraged to get actively involved in teaching within ACE and can attend lectures in subjects they wish to teach in future. The same level of informal support provided by supervisors to PGR students is extended to PG and UG students through encouraging student/staff communication.

The RDU also runs an extensive selection of workshops and development courses (PG Skills) for PGR students who are expected to undertake at least 10 days (5 for PT) of skills training activities each year. 53 students from ACE attended PGR workshops in 2013/4 (32M: 21F) but we will encourage further participation. AP 3.4

The support available for all PG students to progress from postgraduate to researcher within ACE is outstanding. The FGS offers scholarships, which cover fee waivers for PhD students and these are open to all students. We offer around 12 to 15 of these each year across the Faculty.

These formal support roles are recognised in the WLM and for appraisal and performance purposes in the SDPR process. At present, there is no formal procedure or guidelines in place to help any student to make the transition to an academic career, although a number of PGR students in ACE have become PDRAs. AP 3.4

However, in practice a number of PGT students have progressed to PGR on successful completion of their taught programme. This has proved a particularly successful on the Conservation of Historic Gardens and Cultural Landscapes Programme where the DoS is female and 6 students (3 Female) have progressed to PGR.

We will encourage students to engage with research and enable them to make the transition to an academic career by inviting PGT students to attend the weekly research seminars held in ACE. AP 3.4

ACE will consider the gender mix of those presenting at internal departmental seminars and will confirm the gender balance in future equality returns. We will agree an increasing year on-year target to meet the university’s target so that the percentage of internal and external women invited to present departmental seminars will reach at least 30%. (USAT AP G.4) AP 3.4.

55

Organisation and culture


1. 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.

Table 49 shows that here were some changes of membership within a year with the number in brackets showing the updated figure. A co-option increased the female representation on DEC to 2 and the DLTQC has a woman Chair and includes student representation. All Staff Committee and Staff Student Liaison Committee figures exclude part-time appointments who are not expected to attend if they are not in the university.

Table 49 Total Committee Membership by Gender Table 49 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP BY GENDER

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Female

Male

% Fem

ale

% M

ale

Total 20 139 13% 87% 34 177 16% 84% 29 192 13% 87%

Executive Committee 0 6 0% 100% 0

(1) 6 0% 100% 1 (2) 7 (8) 13% 88%

Research Committee 0 7 0% 100% 1 7 13% 88% 1 7 13% 88%

Dept Learning Teaching Quality Committee 1 13 7% 93% 2 16 11% 89% 2 16 11% 89%

Architecture Group 1 13 (15) 7% 93% 1 14 (15) 7% 93% 1 14 (13) 7% 93%

Civil Engineering Group 2 20 9% 91% 2 20 9% 91% 2 23 8% 92%

Staff Committee 8 40 17% 83% 13 50 21% 79% 10 54 16% 84%

Staff Student Liaison Committee 8 40 17% 83% 13 50 21% 79% 10 54 16% 84%

Faculty Executive Committee - - - - 1 7 13% 88% 1 9 10% 90%

Faculty Research Committee - - - - 1 7 13% 88% 1 8 11% 89%

Membership of committees has traditionally been defined by roles and for the DEC and Research Committee by role and seniority. However, Table 49 demonstrates that during the last 2 years the HoD has co-opted female representation to DEC and Research Committee during 2013 and a further woman to the DEC during 2014. For 2013/14 DEC representation is 2F:8M and DRC 1F:7M. In order to avoid overloading women academics and to meet our objective of 33% female representation on influential committees, wherever possible, we will continue to appoint or co-opt women but mitigate the potential effects of ‘committee overload’ by including committee membership in their WLM. AP 3.3

56

Table 50. All ACE committees by Gender

TABLE 50. Year Female Male ALL COMMITTEES BY GENDER 2011/12 20 139 2012/13 34 177 2013/14 29 192

Figure 28. All ACE committees by Gender

2. 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.

Tables 51-52 indicate staff by contract type and gender. In 2011/12 and in 2012/13, all those on FTC were in Research posts. In 2013/14, 13 of the 14 on FTC were in Research posts, the other was a KTP post.

20 (13%)34 (16%) 29 (13%)

139 (87%)

177 (84%) 192 (87%)

0

50

100

150

200

250

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14

All Committees

Male

Female

57

Tables 51 All Staff by Contract Type and Gender

Figure 29. % Staff in ACE by Contract Type and Gender

Table 52 STAFF by CONTRACT TYPE and GENDER

Year Gender FTC Open contract

2011/12 Female 44% 56%

Male 7% 93%

2012/13 Female 11% 89%

Male 13% 87%

2013/14 Female 17% 83%

Male 19% 81%

44% (4)

7% (3)

11% (1)

13% (7)

17% (2)

19% (12)

56% (5)

93% (42)

89% (8)

87% (46)

83% (10)

81% (52)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Female

Male

Female

Male

Female

Male

2011

/12

2012

/13

2013

/14

FTC Open contract

58

Owing to the small number of female staff members the determination of a ratio of female to male staff by contract type provides little meaningful information. Figure 29 shows that the ratio of M:F staff on OC increased from 4.9M:1F in 2009 to 6.75M:1F in 2012 due to the loss of several female staff and the addition of new male staff. In 2013/14 the ratio of all staff was 6.3M:1F. FTCs are issued where this reflects the nature of the funding for a particular activity. There are very few Professors, Readers, Senior Lecturers, or Lecturers on fixed term contracts: those that are, are male.


a) 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?

Membership of some university committees is determined by election but the university is committed to improving the gender balance and a specific target to have a minimum of 33% of women on all decision-making committees by 2015 is being implemented. If necessary this will be achieved through co-options where elections result in very few women (USAT AP A.3). ACE has been proactive in co-opting Zang to the ACE Executive and Research Committees in 2013 and Harney to the DEC in 2014. Harney was also made a member of the Equality & Diversity Network (a sub-committee of the Equality and Diversity Committee) in 2013 and was replaced by Wain in 2014. Harney is also a member of USAT and with Zang, Wain and Hales the WEng Network. Further co-options will be made to achieve the targets set and avoid committee overload by including a realistic time allocation, balanced against other duties within their WLM. AP 3.3

Influential university Council and Senate committees have already succeeded in improving their gender balance significantly, however no female staff from ACE are represented. 55% of respondents in our survey would welcome having the option of a mentor to help advance their influence in the institution. Going forward we will support women from the department to put themselves forward for election. AP 3.3

The USAT have committed that by the summer of 2014 each faculty/school will have a transparent process for making appointments to key departmental roles. (USAT AP F.4). Our Culture Survey revealed that 71% of staff thought that it should be made easier for those with caring responsibilities to move into key roles and 45% agreed that it wasn’t clear how to get onto important committees. Presentations at all future Staff Meetings will encourage individuals to apply for roles where women are under-represented. AP 3.3

59

The HoD has agreed to circulate material examining committee structures and how members of staff can move into positions of influence and discuss this in the context of the SDPR process. AP 3.3

b) 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 ACE WLM makes allocations across the following areas of activity:

(i) Teaching – Data from HOD where a fraction FTE is allocated for each unit taught;

(ii) Other Teaching & Supervision – fractional FTE allocated to tutor duties; (iii) Research Grants – Data taken directly from RS2 submitted; (iv) General Research Allocation – Research active staff in ACE are allocated

400 hours (around 0.25fTE) in the WLM, unless on probation where the allocation is 0.67FTE;

(v) PGR Supervision – Data taken directly as per Registration/Candidature forms;

(vi) Management & Admin – Fractional FTE allocated to different responsibilities within the department.

All significant administration roles are considered in the WLM an administrative contribution to the University is recognised in appraisals and promotion criteria. Senior roles rotate every 3 years and in the Culture Survey 55% agreed that roles such as HoD should rotate around senior staff in the department. To sustain our current DSAT activities and fulfil the AP the HoD has allocated 250 hours for the Athena SWAN DSAT Chair and 50 hours for each member in their WLM. There is also an allocation of 50 hours for Equality Co-ordinator duties.

In the Equality Impact Assessment in 2010 ACE reported that there was no unfair workload allocation based on gender. All summary EIAs are published on the web. However, in the Culture Survey staff expressed the need for increasing understanding of workload allocation processes and we will also publish anonymised WLMs. AP 4.5

The recent WLM will be subjected to critical analysis/review and the HoD will circulate findings and discuss at a future staff meeting. Directors of Studies are given significant allocations in the WLM and their teaching load is reduced accordingly. DoS duties are recognised in the promotion process and are supported by specific training and DoS forums where best practice is shared. The HoD will scrutinise the WLM and see if some workload redistribution can take place. This review of individual WLM will be conducted at annual SDPRs with a view to assessing

60

balance of activities and rotation of responsibilities as a career progression tool. We will continue to develop transparent procedures for allocating workload so that the practice and utility of the WLM are better understood. AP 4.5

Our Annual University Equality Return will report on how we ensure that any long-hours issues that disproportionately affect women. Our Culture Survey showed 62% agreed or strongly agreed that there was a long-hours work culture in the department) are addressed by the department to improve work/life balance. (USAT AP G.7) AP 4.6

c) 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.

Although not monitored, essential hours in ACE are considered to be those times required for teaching and these are adjusted via annual teaching exemptions/hours forms through the HoD/timetabling. Individual staff timetabling is subject to periodic review to avoid any unfair allocation of duties.

All ACE committee and research group meetings are scheduled well in advance generally taking place at 1.15pm (except DLTQC and Engineering Group which takes place at 4.15) ensuring maximum attendance for those with caring responsibilities. A significant majority (67%) of our survey respondents agreed that departmental meetings were timed so that everyone could attend them.

ACE social gatherings are all-inclusive events and widely attended by both staff and research students building a strong sense of community within the department. The HoD recently invited all staff to celebrate recent successes within ACE and this was scheduled well in advance to accommodate those with caring responsibilities and it was well-attended by male and female staff. Following the 2014 Culture Survey in ACE the Departmental Coordinator joined the DSAT team and with additional support staff help will act as Social Events Coordinator to arrange more and more family friendly events (including children) from Spring 2015.

Prior to the ACE 2014 Departmental Culture Survey there was no formal mechanism for quantitative or qualitative data gathering to ascertain the perception of staff or students regarding the organisation and culture of the department or Equality and Diversity issues. To rectify this the number of Away Days will be increased to facilitate greater interaction and socialising and networking opportunities between colleagues. We will develop and conduct a yearly staff Culture Survey at Away Days to encourage participation and widen the survey to include students. AP 4.1

The lack of social space within ACE was identified as an issue in staff surveys with 61% of respondents indicating that the creation of more social spaces would improve the culture of the department. A recent development has seen the introduction of the weekly, informal ‘cup of tea and a chat’ with invitations extended to all staff in ACE. The University’s investment in an additional building will enhance our potential for providing further social space.

61

d) 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.

ACE is inclusive, collaborative and female-friendly and this is supported by a respondent in our recent culture survey: ‘The culture in the department is incredibly open, relaxed and friendly compared to previous departments I have worked in, making it a very pleasant place to work’.

All ACE publicity material is illustrated with both sexes and students are selected on published merit-based criteria. Support services are equitable and available to all UG, PG students and staff. ACE staff and students are invited to participate in organised academic, careers-related and social events. We also host post-graduation parties and events for staff and students centred on the presentation of joint projects such as the flagship group design project (Basil Spence).

ACE and the FGS have Facebook and webpages and, in addition, ACE communicates events, issues and news through a departmental newsletter, Twitter account and Linkedin.

e) 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.

ACE holds regular UCAS Open days presenting to A-level students involving all members of staff. A gender-balanced panel of undergraduate student ambassadors for such key days demonstrates our commitment to equality.

ACE runs various WP activities on campus for pupils from local schools and colleges with significant numbers of students from poorer socio-economic backgrounds taking part in hands-on design activities and lectures to inspire them to think about Architecture & Civil Engineering as a subject for study at University and as a career. The WESBath group has already been engaged with WP for a school video aimed at years 8/9 using current students on placement and PGs. A generic video on ‘What is engineering’ is included. They also helped out with the TeenTech event in Bristol in mid-October 2014. Wherever possible, we involve women academic staff in Outreach activities.

Individual members of academic staff also engage with schools and colleges on a regular but ad-hoc basis. A male staff member is the lead for Outreach, which involves a few thousand children per year (research-council funded) and he is currently engaged in a science project with BRLSI and local children based on the active research in our department. Civil Engineering students in ACE, fully supported by the HoD and DSAT, are also currently developing an initiative to collaborate with Engineers Without Borders in visiting schools and giving more girls and youths an insight into engineering. Historically the activities of staff involved in this area were not recorded; there is currently no formal allocation in the WLM and Outreach was not formally recognised in Staff Appraisals. Going forward, data will be collected through the

62

appraisal/personal development system and WLM time allocated for Outreach activities as part of our AP. We will also actively participate in the Public Engagement Network. AP 4.5

Flexibility and managing career breaks


a) 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.

There were no applications for maternity leave over the past three years.

b) 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.

A new Flexible Working and Leave Policy came into effect from 1st May 2013, which consolidates a number of existing policies including a revision to include adoption. Requests for paternity leave must be notified a minimum of 15 weeks before the applicant wishes to take two weeks paid leave. There were no applications for parental or adoption leave over the past three years. There was one successful application for Statutory Paternity Leave by a Male Grade 8 in Feb 2011.

c) 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.

There were no applications for flexible working in ACE over the past three years.

63


4. 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.

Flexible working is a key thread of our University Athena SWAN AP and the HoD ensures that all staff are aware of the policy (USAT E.7) with senior managers having undergone training. Most academics already work flexibly on an informal basis. ACE presently has 4 members of staff with long-term childcare needs and every effort is made to accommodate their needs within the Flexible Working & Leave Policy.

Flexible working requests are submitted to the HoD and no reasonable request has been refused. When immediate short-term parental care has been required in each case short-term leave was allowed. In addition, a new female academic was initially appointed part-time on 0.8FTE when the position was advertised as 1FTE because of childcare issues. As part of our AP we will raise awareness of flexible working opportunities. AP 5.1

5. 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.

On receipt of a formal notification for maternity leave the HoD informs HR, liaises with the individual to discuss arrangements for covering work during absence, reallocates duties and makes necessary adjustments to timetables. If there are no available staff to cover the absence of academic staff, additional posts are arranged to ensure continuity of teaching. For PDRAs, arrangements are governed by their funding bodies.

64

Figure 30. The University Maternity Package

All medical appointments are accommodated with appropriate paid time allocated. The University operates Keeping in Touch (KIT) days which are fully-funded and optional during maternity leave and mailing lists help to keep such staff in-touch with departmental activities. Achieving a work-life balance for returners is facilitated by the option of arranging flexible working if required, including the option of working on a PT basis.

The Departmental HR Advisor, HoD, DoS and Director of Administration make appropriate arrangements to support and advise staff returning to work. Information on childcare provision is provided to all new staff at Induction.

We have, however, identified a need for more awareness of flexible working and support for staff returning to work, including phased return, reduced workload and ensuring timetables reflect caring responsibilities. Line managers will now formally advise staff of such policies when notified of pregnancy and we will implement a return to work interview for all staff to improve support in ACE. AP 5.1 & 5.2

65

Any other comments: maximum 500 words

This table lists the “Would like to see” feedback provided by the Athena SWAN panel in response to our previous application, and references the part(s) of this document addressing each point.

Athena SWAN ACE Bronze Award Feedback November 2013

Department and institution name:

University of Bath - Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering (ACE)

Level of award applied for: Bronze Letter of endorsement from Head of Department

Would like to see Better link to and information on the university strategy.

HoD letter; throughout the application and Action Plan.

The self-assessment process Would like to see

More specific actions. More information on the open forum. Consideration of more frequent meetings than quarterly.

Agreed and implemented in current submission Section 2 (a) (b) (c)

A picture of the department Would like to see

Raw numbers as well as percentages presented on the figures. AP2.2 more detailed, clearer and quantifiable e.g. how many more and at what level? The panel would have liked to know what the current picture is. The plans to address ACE’s leaky pipeline feeding into the department and university strategy. For example, AP3.1 could include plans to improve the issues with the website. ACE taking more responsibility for the leaky pipeline.

Section 3b. (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) (viii) Section 3b (ii) (iii) V (i). 4a (i) AP 1.2. 2.2 3b (vii) (viii). 4a (i) (ii) HoD letter. AP 2.1. 3.1. 3.2. Agreed and implemented prior to current submission. 3b (vii) (viii). 4a (i) (ii) HoD letter. AP 2.1. 2.2. 3.1. 3.2

Supporting and advancing women’s careers Key career transition points

Would like to see

66

Further information about how ACE plans to attract more women to apply for positions. Action to proactively encourage women to apply for promotion. More information on the WEng Network (AP 3.3). More actions to address the problems identified, other than just promoting schemes more publicly.

4a (i) (ii) 4b (i) (ii) AP 2.1. 2.2. 3.1. 3.2 4a (i) 4b (i) (ii) AP 3.1. 3.2 4a (i) (iii) 4b (i) AP 2.1 4a (i) (ii) 4b (i) (ii) AP 2.1. 2.2. 3.1. 3.2

Career development Would like to see

An action to prevent the female mentors from being overloaded with work. The panel suggested that the department could try to have reciprocal arrangements with other departments to spread out the workload. Whilst the promotion system seems transparent, the panel strongly queried the process outlined on pg 33, where applications are seen by all staff in ACE. They would have liked to see this reflected upon, such as any issues associated with confidentiality. Staff consultation on the promotions process.

Agreed and implemented in current submission. HoD letter. AP 2.1. 3.2 (USAT AP.E2) This statement is incorrect. The submission stated that applications were seen by staff at or above the grade being applied for. However this practice has been reviewed and implemented in the current submission so that only members of the DEC now see applications. 4a (i) (ii) Agreed and implemented in current submission. 4a (i) AP 3.1

Organisation and culture Would like to see

Why no data prior to 2013 was presented for the committees. An action to address the data collection of committee membership. More women on decision making committees.

Implemented in current submission. 4a Implemented in current submission. 4b(i) Implemented in ACE prior to current submission and ongoing. AP 3.3

Flexibility and managing career breaks Would like to see

More identification of the issues in this section, with actions relating them, not just data on the numbers using the flexible working scheme. More formal policy for flexible working so that it is not dependent only on line managers.

4a (iii) AP 5.1. 5.2 There already is a formal flexible working scheme 4b (i) AP 5.1. 5.2

67

Any other comments Would like to see

Consideration of conducting a survey specific to ACE.

Completed for 2014. Findings agreed and implemented in current submission/Action Plan.

Notes Action plan

Would like to see The action plan being more Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound (SMART), particularly in terms of success measures and prioritisation around the key issues. More numerical/quantifiable targets, with more information on how they will be implemented and what the success of the action would be. The evidence of positive feedback from female staff in AP 1.1. How more lectures will be given by women (AP2.2). Specific targets for APs 3.1 and 3.3, perhaps split into separate actions, with each one having its own rationale and success criteria. What is meant by ‘promoting the Athena SWAN principles’ and how the success of this will be measured. More consultation to inform the actions.

Agreed and implemented throughout current submission/ Action Plan.

Final Comments The panel felt that the action plan needs to be improved and made more SMART overall. They felt that AP3.1 is very large and may not be achievable and that it should be reconsidered in order to make positive changes, because it covers many of the key issues. The action plan should have clearly defined targets so that the department will be able to measure the levels of success of the actions in the future. The panel would have liked to see development of policies and support for those taking maternity leave beyond those of the university. They also felt that the promotion process needs to be improved and the application lacked positive actions to change this. They suggest that there is staff consultation about the promotions process (and other aspects of the school’s culture), especially relating to applications being available to all staff to see.

Agreed and implemented throughout the current submission/Action Plan.

68

Action plan

Provide an action plan as an appendix. An action plan template is available on the Athena SWAN website.

The Action Plan should be a table or a spreadsheet comprising actions to address the priorities identified by the analysis of relevant data presented in this application, success/outcome measures, the post holder responsible for each action and a timeline for completion. The plan should cover current initiatives and your aspirations for the next three years.

The action plan does not need to cover all areas at Bronze; however the expectation is that the department will have the organisational structure to move forward, including collecting the necessary data.

69

University of Bath, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Athena SWAN Bronze Submission Action Plan 2015-2017

Action Issue Identified Proposed Action Responsibility Timescale Measurable Outcome

1. STUDENT DATA AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

1.1 Gender imbalance in 1st and 2.1 class degree awards

1. Following review, identify causes through discussion/focus groups spanning support/methods to improve degree classification for women

DoS;

BSc, MArch unit convenors

2017 1. Improvement in degree classifications for women

2. Identify, assess and monitor methods of teaching and assessment currently used and based on the results work towards providing teaching which will improve degree classification for women

Head of Architecture; DoS;

Unit Convenors

Spring 2016 2. Extend guidance in unconscious bias/best practice in the classroom at Tutors Forums to include all teaching staff. Leading to improvement in degree classifications for women

1.2 Gender imbalance on Review Panels

1. Actively recruit more women to participate in Review Panels to provide positive role models for students

Studio Unit Convenors

Spring 2017 1. All review panels to be comprised of 30% women to present a gender mix


2. STAFF DATA AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

70

2.1 Evidence indicates that ACE has a “leaky pipeline” for women in the education and research job family, with women choosing to leave at key career progression points

1. Assist with compiling evidence for applications for promotion

HoD Immediately for all new promotion applications

1-7 Increase in the retention of women and applications for promotion in the education and research job family

2. Put a mentoring scheme in place for all staff in ACE as part of the University’s strategy to offer an individually trained Mentor to staff on request (USAT AP E.2 E3)

Staff Development; HoD; RDU

Identification of mentors and mentees by December 2015

2. 20% participation in mentoring partnerships

3. Offer and support Leadership Training to all female staff.

Staff Development; HoD; RDU

Implementation by October 2015

4. Use revised SPDR process to assist in identifying gaps in CV

SDPR reviewers Revised process by August 2015; Implementation by October 2015

5. Create personal action plans for all staff who apply unsuccessfully for promotion

Heads of Group Immediately for all unsuccessful promotions

71

6. Publicize within the department to remind staff how the SPDR and promotion process works through a presentation by the HOD and member of Academic Staff Committee at staff meetings annually

HoD; ASC

Annually

7. Encourage and support all women in the education and research job family to join the Women in Engineering (WEng) Network

HoD; DSAT; RDU Immediately 7. All women in the education and research job family become members of the WEng network.


2.2 ACE has a lower percentage of female academic staff than the national average for Architecture

1. Maintain updated wording on

Department adverts to encourage a wider mix of applicants. ‘We are working to improve the present gender balance within the Department, and particularly welcome applications from women, who are currently under-represented in academic posts.’

HR; HoD; DEC

Immediately for all new searches

1.100% of adverts use the agreed wording

72

2. Publish the Athena SWAN logo and our commitment to SWAN on our website

Web Editor; Department coordinator

By August 2015

2. Faculty and Department Webpages with Athena SWAN information and links

3. All adverts for full-time jobs in the education and research job family to indicate that flexible working is applicable

HR; HoD;


3. Increase in percentage of female applicants at all grades some of whom will have caring responsibilities

4. Develop and maintain webpages publicising women in engineering roles in the department and faculty

Web Editor; Faculty Administration Director

In process for faculty; department page by January 2016

4. Webpage highlighting women in the department with Athena SWAN information and links

5. Actively encourage women to apply for positions through individual contacts

All senior academic staff

Immediately and continuous

5-6. Gender mix in application success rates (both to shortlisting and to offer). An increase in the number of female applicants and appointments, particularly for SL/ Reader/Professor level posts

6. Identify and encourage more women to apply for Prize Fellow and Future Awards opportunities

All senior academic staff


73

7. Increase the gender mix on recruitment and shortlisting panels

HoD; Heads of Group

7. 30% female representation on recruitment and shortlisting panels (aligned with university committee target)

8. Shortlists scrutinized and lengthened where possible to avoid all male shortlists (all appointments on merit)

HoD; Heads of Group

Beyond the life of this action plan -2020

8. Attain the national average for the discipline of Architecture (32%) and maintain or increase the number of female Civil Engineering academics by 2020


3. CAREER DEVELOPMENT

3.1 The ACE Culture Survey identified that many staff were unsure of the promotions process, supporting evidence required and how applications are reviewed

1. Head of Department to hold an All Staff Meeting to describe the current SDPR and career progression/ promotion processes and elicit the views of staff on current practice

HR; HoD;

Chair of DSAT.

Meeting by Sept 2015

1. Staff become familiar with the promotions process and openly discuss issues

2. Head of Department to produce and disseminate summary document on the

HoD; ASC

Sept 2015

2. Increase in members of staff understanding the process and successfully applying for promotion

74

promotion process to the whole department

3. Implement an Annual Culture Survey which includes specific questions on the promotions process to gather quantitative and qualitative data

DSAT; Department Coordinator

Ongoing, 2015 and Annually

3. Carry out Annual Culture Survey to assess the impact of changes and understanding and/or satisfaction with the process

Based on data collected from survey propose and implement specific actions/changes to the process, if necessary


3.2 Women under/not- represented at 1. Develop and implement the university’s mentoring scheme

HoD, DEC;

ASD;

Mentoring

system planned

1. Create a record of all active mentoring relationships in the

75

Senior Lecturer/Reader/ Professor level. There are no female professors in the Department.

for all academic staff (USAT AP E2. E3)

Department

coordinator

and participants

identified by Jan

2016

Department. Update regularly.

Increase in the

number of women

applying/achieving promotion to SL/

Reader/Professor

2. Organise training for all mentors and mentees through Academic Staff development Unit

Deputy HoD; ASD;

Department

coordinator

Mentors and mentees fully-trained

April 2016

2. All mentors and mentors successfully complete training relevant to their role

3. Monitor uptake and effectiveness of Departmental mentoring system

Department

coordinator

Annual

report to DEC

Oct 2016 and on

an annual basis

3. Increase in the number of staff who become mentors and mentees

4. Ensure the search process actively looks for women applicants and ensure women are involved in the search process

HR; HoD; Heads of Group;

Deputy Head of

Department

Starting 2015 and

continuous

4. The search process increases the rate of application of women to be at the sector average or above by 2016

76

5. Develop Personal Action Plans for senior staff to identify what experience, skills and knowledge they need to become a Professor

Heads of Group Starting 2015 and

continuous

5. 100% of Senior Lecturers and Readers have a career development Personal Action Plan by 2016

6. Encourage women who meet the criteria to apply for promotion

Heads of Group 6. Increase in the number of female applicants

7. Encourage and support women to utilize the University mentoring scheme

Heads of Group;

Deputy Head of

Department

7. All staff who request a mentor are provided with one by 2016

8. Encourage and support lecturers and Senior Lecturers to apply for the Aurora Programme

Heads of Group 8. 50% female L, SLs apply for Aurora Programme by 2016

9. Encourage Readers to

apply for the University’s Academic

Leaders Programme

HoD; DEC 9. 50% of female Readers apply for in-house Academic Leaders Programme by 2017


77

3.3 Women are currently underrepresented on influential department and university committees (partly due to low numbers)

1. Increase number of female academic staff onto committees, without overloading women in ACE to reduce potential committee overload. (Related to 3.1 and 3.2)

HOD; committee chairs

ongoing since 2014 - January 2018

1. Increase the number of female representatives on influential committees. 33% of committee members are female (aligned with university targets)

2. Publicize the role of various departmental and university committees and how to become a member through a presentation at a future All Staff Meeting and publicised on the department website

HoD: committee chairs; Web Manager; Department Coordinator

Presentation at staff meeting by August 2015; Roles; Structure and criteria for membership October 2015

2. All staff more aware of influential committees and how to become a member, as indicated by annual culture survey results

3.4 Although there is a dedicated careers advisor for research staff there is no formal procedure or guidelines to help postgraduate students and PDRA staff to make the transition into an academic career

1. Initiate a formal procedure to provide guidance, mentoring and pastoral support for those who wish to make the transition from postgraduate to researcher and researcher to career academic, in line with the University’s commitment to the HE Excellence in Research staff.

Associate Dean for Graduate Studies; PGR DoS; PIs

Summer 2016 onwards

1. Formal sessions on Postgraduate studies and careers in academia led by Associate Dean for Graduate Studies and Postgraduate Director of Studies in place and well-attended by female PGTs and PGRs

78

2. Hold focus groups with female

PDRA staff and post graduate research students in relation to career development and work-life balance.

Make more use of the Research Staff Working Group and the CROS Survey to identify issues.

PIs;

Associate Dean for Graduate Studies; RDU

2. Identify ways that the Department can support career planning for PDRAs and postgraduate research students on completion of their Post Doc/PhD, key transition steps identified and actions implemented.

Monitor attendance by gender on optional provision of career planning activities

3. RDU offer a variety of careers and PG skills courses but we need to

encourage take-up of the opportunities provided and make more use of Careers support available to PGRs

PGR DoS, RDU

3. More women making the transition from PGT to PGR and PGR to career in academia

4. Invite PGT students to the weekly Research seminars held in the Department

Postgraduate Director of Studies;

4. Monitor by gender PGT students attending research seminars and encourage an increase in those attending.

79

Increase the percentage of internal and external women invited to present departmental seminars

Graduate School Manager and Officers; Department Coordinator

30% of internal and external women presenting departmental seminars

4.Organisation and Culture


4.1 Prior to the ACE 2014 Departmental Culture Survey there was no formal mechanism for quantitative or qualitative data gathering to

ascertain the perception of staff or students regarding the organisation and culture of the department or Equality and Diversity issues

1. Further develop the Culture Survey with more in-depth questions on the issues identified through The Athena SWAN process

DSAT; HOD; Department Coordinator; Faculty Director of Admin; DEC; DoF

Start in autumn 2016 and yearly

1. Achieve a 75% return rate in ACE SWAN Culture Staff Survey

6-monthly progress report prepared for DEC and DoF

2. Conduct the Staff Survey at All Staff Away Days to encourage maximum participation

2. Compare and analyse survey data year-on-year to measure outcomes

3. Widen the Culture survey to include all students in ACE

3. Achieve a 40% return rate in ACE SWAN Culture student Survey

80

4. Collect all data and reach conclusions

4. Produce a yearly report on progress for discussion at DEC All Staff Committee, SSLC and to the University via the Annual Equality Return

5. DSAT to implement actions from surveys

5. Annual survey results widely circulated and actions

Implemented by DSAT


4.2 The current informal department induction process for new staff and postgraduate students is inadequate

1. Produce a revised Departmental induction booklet and webpages for new academic staff, postgraduate students, and postdoctoral research staff

Graduate School; Department Coordinator and support staff

Evaluate current procedure by October 2015

Revisions

complete by Jan

2016

1. Revised induction information produced resulting in increased satisfaction with

induction processes evident in staff and student survey results

2. Compile a timetabled induction schedule for all new academic staff and PDRAs with appropriate contacts list to enable them to meet key

Heads of Research Groups; Department Coordinator and support staff

Implement new timetabled induction procedure by October 2016

2. Implement new checklist for completion of key activities, for review by line managers

81

personnel and understand procedures which should enable them to quickly and efficiently integrate into the department

Improved induction process implemented

4.3 The need for formal and informal support for female academics and students

1. Promote, support and encourage all women in ACE to join the Women In Engineering Faculty (WEng) network or the WESBath student group

DSAT; WEng and WESBath groups

Immediate 1. Increase in the number of women from the E&R family in the department become members of WEng network and students join the WESBath student group

4.4 PGR support groups currently operate in an for ad-hoc manner

1. Instigate a more formal student-led system, supported by ACE

DSAT; Director of research; PGR DoS; WEng and WESBath groups

Summer 2016 1. Increase in the % of female PGRs who become members of the PGR support Group


4.5 The workload allocation processes is not well understood.

1. Review of individual WLMs undertaken at SDPRs

HoD; DEC; Department Coordinator

Begin in Summer 2016

1. Anonymised WLMs are published Annually

2. Include Outreach and Widening participation in WLM allocations

2. Specific hours are allocated in WLMs for those staff undertaking Outreach and Widening participation activities

3. Publish anonymised WLMs. 3. The culture survey results show increased satisfaction with

82

understanding and fairness in the Workload Allocation Model

4.6 A long hours culture has been identified

1. Review individual WLM at annual SDPRs with a view to assessing balance of activities and rotation of responsibilities as a career progression tool

Reviewers. HOD; DEC

2016 SDPRs;

On-going Annual Culture Survey

1. The Culture Survey results indicate a reduction in the long-hours worked and increased satisfaction with the fairness of the WLM allocation

2. Develop transparent procedures for allocating workload so that the practice and utility of the WLM are better understood and work is allocated fairly.

2. Female academic staff report a better work/life balance in culture survey results


5. FLEXIBILTY AND MANAGING CAREER BREAKS

5.1 Raise awareness of flexible working practices

1. Reiterate information to all staff on flexible working policies and how to initiate a change in working arrangements

DEC; HOD; HR

Summer 2015 onwards

1. Increased awareness of flexible working policies evident in the staff survey

2. Provide information on flexible working policies and how to make these

DEC; HOD, PIs 2. Increase in staff reporting appropriate support mechanisms are

83

arrangements for discussion with all staff prior to taking a career break.

in place in staff survey, especially for return work after career break


5.2 Improve support to all staff returning from a career break

1. Hold meetings with academic and postdoctoral staff who have had a career break to follow up from Departmental survey in relation to work-life balance on returning to work

Head of Group; Director of Research/Directors of Research Centres

Summer 2016 onwards

1. Devise a new Departmental return to work procedure that builds on the University’s procedures specifically focusing on managing work-life balance and change in working patterns

The results of meetings circulated to DEC and acted on

2. Implement a return to work interview with PI/Head of Group/HoD to consider workload issues on return to work and the need for any change in working arrangements

2. 100% implementation of return to work interviews which also include WLM considerations

athena swan bronze department award application swan bronze department award application name of...

Documents