athena swan bronze university award renewal application · 1. letter of endorsement from a...

Athena SWAN Bronze award form www.athenaswan.org.uk 1

Athena SWAN Bronze university award renewal application Name of institution: University of Reading Year: April 2016 Contact for application: Ellie Highwood (Dean for Diversity and Inclusion) Email: [email protected] Telephone: 0118 378 6688 or 7103 Date of previous award: 2012, renewed for one year in 2014 List of SET departments (highlighting those that currently hold Bronze, Silver or Gold department awards): Faculty of Science

School of the Built Environment: Silver

School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences: Silver

School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science: Silver (awarded April 2016)

School of Systems Engineering: No award; School closing in August 2016 in University re-organisation Faculty of Life Sciences

School of Biological Sciences: No award; applying for bronze in November 2016

School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences: Bronze (renewed April 2016)

School of Chemistry, Food and Pharmacy: Bronze (renewed April 2016)

School of Agriculture, Policy and Development: No award; applying for bronze in 2017 Total number of university departments: 16 academic Schools

http://www.athenaswan.org.uk/


Percentage of SET departments as a proportion of all university departments: 50% of Schools are SET, there are two other faculties, Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (7 Schools) and Henley Business School. This will fall to 47% at the start of 2016/17 academic year.

Abbreviations

AD HR Assistant Director of Human Resources

AHSSBL Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences, Business and Law

AIT Athena Implementation Team

AP Action Point

ASSG Athena SWAN Steering Group

BAU Business as usual

COO Chief Operating Officer

D&I Diversity and Inclusion

DISG Diversity and Inclusion Strategy Group

DISO Diversity and Inclusion Support Officer

ECR Early Career Researcher

ECU Equality Challenge Unit

FW Flexible Working

HBS Henley Business School

HR Human Resources

HRP Human Resources Partner

HoD Head of Department

HoS Head of School

KIT days Keeping in Touch days

L&D Leadership & Development

LGBT Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender

PDR Performance Development Review

PGR Post Graduate Research

PI Principal Investigator



PSO Planning and Strategy Office

PVC Pro-Vice-Chancellor

RS Research Staff

RUSU Reading University Students’ Union

SAGES School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science

SAPD School of Agriculture, Policy and Development

SAT Self-Assessment Team

SBE School of the Built Environment

SBS School of Biological Sciences

SCFP School of Chemistry, Food and Pharmacy

SET Science Engineering and Technology

SMPS School of Mathematics and Physical Sciences

SPCLS School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences

SPLIT days Shared Parental Leave In Touch days

SSE School of Systems Engineering

TOIL Time off in lieu

UBRI University Board for Research and Innovation

UBTL University Board for Teaching and Learning

UCEA Universities and Colleges Employers Association

UCU University & College Union

UEB University Executive Board

UKRC UK Resource Centre

UoR University of Reading

VC Vice-Chancellor



Section Total Word Count Used

Word Count break-down (from: standard allowance + extra 1000 word allowance*)

Word Count Limit

Letter of endorsement

500 500 500

Self-Assessment Process

1066 1000+66 1000

Description of the University

906 906 1000

Supporting and Advancing Women’s Careers

S4:1536 + S5:1423 + S6:1550 + S7:901 = 5410

4500+910 4500

Any other comments 436 436 500

Action Plan 2016 n/a

Action Plan 2011 n/a

*An extra 1000 words have been allowed by ECU (email confirmation sent with the submission) to use across the application in order to provide a fuller explanation of the changes to the academic structure which have taken place in 2015 at UoR, in addition to significant restructuring of Diversity and Inclusion responsibilities. Total extra words used: 976

An Athena SWAN Bronze University award renewal recognises that not only does the university overall have a solid foundation (the policies, practices, systems and arrangements) for eliminating gender bias and an inclusive culture that values female staff, but that clear progress has been made since the previous Bronze university award application, as measured against the goals set in the action plan.



At Bronze renewal level the focus is on:

The action taken and planned which demonstrates the university’s commitment at a senior level to the 6 Athena SWAN principles; and

Progress that has been made on the journey to which the university has committed itself in order to achieve a significant improvement in women’s representation and career progression in SET, with:

o Recognition of the current situation compared with that at the time of the original award; o The resources needed to continue to make progress; o People to lead and support; and o The means to monitor future progress (e.g. the action plan).

Evidence of progress and learning since the previous application. At the end of each section state the number of words you have used. Click here for additional guidance on completing the application. Contents:

Section Number Title Pages

1 Letter of endorsement 7-8

2 Self-assessment process 9-23

Staff survey results 18-20

3 Description of the institution 24-33

4 Key career transition points 35-49

5 Career development 50-67

6 Organisation and culture 68-80

7 Flexibility and managing career breaks 81-86

8 Any other comments 87-89

9 New action plan

Old action plan


http://www.athenaswan.org.uk/html/athena-swan/about-the-charter/principles/

http://www.athenaswan.org.uk/html/athena-swan/about-the-charter/principles/


1. Letter of endorsement from a Vice-Chancellor – maximum 500 words (500 words used) An accompanying letter of endorsement from your Vice-Chancellor (or equivalent) should explain how SWAN plans and activities have and will in future contribute to the overall university strategy and academic mission. The letter is an opportunity for the Vice-Chancellor to confirm their support for the renewal application and to endorse and commend any activities which have made a significant contribution to the achievement of the university mission in relation to science, engineering and technology (SET).


LIMITLESS POTENTIAL | LIMITLESS AMBITION | LIMITLESS IMPACT 7

-

Vice-Chancellor Sir David Bell KCB

Vice-Chancellor’s Office

Whiteknights House

Whiteknights, PO Box 217

Reading RG6 6AH

phone +44 (0)118 378 6226

fax +44 (0)118 987 4062

email [email protected]

Dear Ms Dickinson

UNIVERSITY OF READING: ATHENA SWAN BRONZE UNIVERSITY AWARD

I am writing to provide my full support for the renewal of the University of Reading’s Athena

SWAN Bronze Award.

I joined the University in 2012. Since then there has been significant change, including a new

Executive Board and senior Leadership Group, a new University strategy, and new international

operations. In the context of these developments, I have personally championed the increasing

focus on diversity and inclusion. We must ensure that we provide a positive environment that

embraces diversity so that we achieve our strategic aims and build on our proud history in the

field of gender equality.

Many of the activities that formed part of our Promoting Excellence Project had their genesis in

the Athena SWAN 2011 Action Plan, including our new Performance Development Review,

significant changes to our Personal Titles process, our new Rewarding Excellence processes, and

new approaches to appointments to our Leadership Group. I am delighted to report in this

submission significant progress, including that 38% of our Leadership Group are women, and that

we substantially outperform the sector in the female % in our professoriate, in SET Schools and

University-wide.

Despite progress in some key areas, there remain real challenges to address. In particular, I am

disappointed that, since August 2014, we have an all-male University Executive Board (UEB). To

address this, and other issues, UEB recently publicly committed to tough targets, against which

we will be held accountable. Crucially, these will form part of the University Strategy’s Key

Performance Indicators (KPIs) which are monitored by our Council. The targets for gender in

Figure 3.1 include a commitment to at least 30% women on the Board by 2020. These targets are

Ms Sarah Dickinson

Project Manager

Athena SWAN

Equality Challenge Unit

7th Floor, Queens House

55-56 Lincoln’s Inn Fields

London, WC2A 3LJ

28 April 2016

mailto:[email protected]

8

mirrored by School-level KPIs, visible to all staff, that are an integral part of our new School-

level Sustainable Planning Process.

In the past year, we have enhanced our University-level leadership by creating a new role of Dean

for Diversity and Inclusion (appointed as a job share) to drive change. In addition, the Executive

Board has committed to reimburse fully Schools (and from August 2017 our support functions)

for costs of maternity/shared parental leave cover, with 25% ring-fenced to support return to work

for the individual. And I have, with my Board colleagues, gone out to talk about targets on

diversity to large audiences across the University.

While much remains to be done, I believe that there is real energy and momentum in the

University to embed diversity and inclusion in all that we do, not least because of our history and

heritage. The University was the first of any in the country to appoint a female professor – Edith

Morley in 1908 – an achievement that will be permanently recognised with our main Library

being named after her following its refurbishment. A hundred years on, we are determined to be

true to the trail blazed by Edith Morley and make the University of Reading an exemplar in all

aspects of diversity and inclusion.

Best wishes.

SIR DAVID BELL KCB


2. The self-assessment process – maximum 1000 words (1000 + 66 from extra words used)

Describe the Self-Assessment Process. This should include:

a) a description of the self assessment team: members’ roles (both within the university and as part of the team) and their experiences of work-life balance, and how and why the team has changed since the original Bronze application;

The SAT for this application was formed in October 2015 following a major restructuring of the D&I responsibilities at UoR, (due to the continual work of the Diversity and Inclusion Strategy Group (DISG) since the 2011 Athena SWAN submission). As part of the recommendations, in August 2015, Professors Ellie Highwood and Simon Chandler-Wilde were appointed as Dean for Diversity and Inclusion under a job-sharing arrangement (a first for a leadership role in the University), and Frances Raimo in September 2015 as Diversity and Inclusion Support Officer (DISO). The Deans reviewed SAT membership: several members of previous SATs have left the University and membership was broadened to include staff from across academic Schools and Professional Support Services, and representatives for PGR students, research staff and the students’ union RUSU. UEB is represented directly via the Gender Champion, PVC Professor Robert Van de Noort. The SAT membership (see Table 2.1) is 66.6% female, consistent with our University target that key committees have at least 30% of either gender by 2020.



Table 2.1 - SAT membership for 2015 application

Name

Position Background Area of expertise and role in SAT

Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde

Professor of Applied Mathematics Dean for Diversity and Inclusion At Reading since 2003

Simon is, since August 2015, Dean for Diversity and Inclusion (job-share with Ellie Highwood) and a 0.5FTE Professor of Applied Mathematics in the School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences (SMPS). He was Head of that School for five and a half years until January 2016 - including through a successful bid for Athena SWAN Silver renewal - and remains a member of the SMPS Diversity and Equality Committee. Simon is married to Rebecca, a Dean at another local University. They have two daughters, the oldest in her last year at University.

Expertise: Enabling promotion and progression Role: Co-Chair, responsible for overall submission

Dr Claire Collins Associate Professor of Leadership Development and Behaviour Director of the DBA Programme, HBS At Henley Business School since 2007

Claire researches and teaches Leadership, and Leadership Development, with a special interest in Coaching Leaders, Leadership Derailment, and Women in Leadership. She has experience of working with a variety of organizations from the private and public (including academic) sectors. Claire enjoyed a significant career outside academia before joining HBS. As part of her portfolio, Claire is an accredited and experienced Business Coach working with a wide variety of senior clients.

Expertise: Non-STEM view, active research in women in leadership, mentoring and coaching Role: Research expert, comment on narrative, women’s development, mentoring and coaching

Alison Hackett Assistant Director HR (People and

Alison joined the University as Assistant Director HR, with a remit for Diversity and Inclusion. She is in a dual career

Expertise: HR policy and process, women in



Talent) At Reading since 2015(September)

marriage and her husband has responsibility for Environmental Strategy and Health and Safety for a large Housing Association; they have no children. Alison previously worked in local government, not for profit, and the private sector, and her background is in Organisational and People Development.

leadership, training and development Role: Analysis of staff data

Nina Hager

RUSU Welfare Officer At Reading since 2013

Nina is originally from Vienna. She first got involved in student representation when she was elected to be Students’ Union President at Cirencester College. She came to the University to study Psychology and became the Welfare Representative for her Hall of Residence at the end of her first year. She was elected into office as the Students’ Union Welfare Officer in 2015 and will continue her final year of undergraduate study at the end of this academic year.

Expertise: RUSU welfare rep and Psychology student Role: Student voice, comment on analysis of results from student survey

Dr Nathan Helsby

Head of Planning and Reporting At Reading since 2009

Nathan is from a dual career family with two school-age children. He has experience of working on gender, equality and HR issues through oversight and delivery of data on diversity and inclusion, and the University’s REF 2014 submission, which included work on the collection of individual staff circumstances, and the University’s Code of Practice and Equality Impact Assessment.

Expertise: Data provision and analysis Role: Provision of data and support of analysis

Professor Ellie Highwood

Professor of Climate Physics Dean for Diversity and Inclusion At Reading since 1993

Ellie works part-time and divides her 30 hours per week between being Dean for Diversity and Inclusion (job share with Simon Chandler-Wilde) and a Professor of Climate Physics. She runs a research group on atmospheric particulates, teaches, and is a STEM ambassador. She is part of a two-career family and she and her husband share the school runs for their 2 primary school aged sons. She is particularly interested in support for flexible working, workload models and mentoring.

Expertise: Promotion process, flexible working including part-time, women in leadership, workload models, outreach Role: Co-Chair, responsible for overall submission



Dr Justin Hutchence

Research Staff Development Manager At Reading since 1996

Justin has responsibility for the development of early career research staff. He is part of a dual career family with two daughters aged 10 and 5. He also has responsibility for caring for the generation above him. Justin is due to leave his current position at the University of Reading (and therefore the SAT) on March 18th to take up a new position at the University of Oxford.

Expertise: Staff development (especially ECR) Role: Contribute to staff development narrative and actions

Joanna John

Doctoral Training Partnership Support Officer At Reading since 2006

Joanna combines a 0.8 FTE post in the University Graduate School with a part-time PhD (0.5 FTE) and raising two small children. Her previous work includes ethnic diversity in postgraduate teacher training and researcher development. She has taken two periods of maternity leave (the second split 60/40 with her husband). She is interested in structural barriers to academic careers, parity of experience for part-time students and intersections with ethnicity and socio-economics.

Expertise: Part time, PGR students Role: PGR “lens”, comment on PGR analysis and development sections, PGR focus groups

Frances Raimo

Diversity and Inclusion Officer At Reading since September 2015

Frances joined the University as the Diversity and Inclusion Officer, having spent 25 years in the Civil Service, working both in tax compliance and HR as a Diversity Policy Expert. Frances is the holder of a gender ‘Meerkat award’ for her contribution to progressing transgender equality in the Civil Service. She is married, with a 19 year old son. In the past she has taken a 5 year career break and has held several part-time roles.

Expertise: Diversity & inclusion, Flexible working, parental leave, project management Role: Coordinating the overall submission, Secretary to SAT

Professor Patricia Riddell

Professor of Applied Neuroscience At Reading since

Patricia joined the University first as a lecturer and since then has been promoted through Senior Lecturer and Reader to Professor and Head of Psychology (2011). She is the main breadwinner and has two adult stepchildren, one of whom is soon to give birth. She contributes experience of promotion and

Expertise: Women in leadership, STEM School where men students are the minority



1995 family life later in career. Role: Help with career development section and survey analysis

Dr Calvin Smith

Lecturer in Mathematics At Reading since 2008

Calvin is a lecturer in Mathematics; in addition, he is a School Athena SWAN Champion and Senior Tutor in the School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences. He also Chairs the staff network LGBT Plus and is part of a two career, same-sex couple who have adopted two children.

Expertise: Students , LGBT+ Role: Analysis of student data and narrative, LGBT+ intersectionality issues

Rachel Thorns

HR Partner for Science Faculty At Reading since 2014

Rachel is an HR-Partner, providing HR advice and support to Schools in the Faculty of Science. She was previously a member of the 2015 Race Equality Charter Self-Assessment Team. Before joining the University, Rachel worked for Thames Valley Police in an HR role. In her spare time, Rachel volunteers for a charity that supports young disabled people.

Expertise: Athena SWAN, Equality and Diversity, HR Partner for Science Faculty Role: Discussion of staff data, policies and practice across Schools.

Professor Robert Van de Noort

PVC Academic Planning and Resource Gender Champion

Robert is PVC Academic Planning and Resource. He is the University’s Champion for: Gender; Marriage and Civil Partnership; Pregnancy and Paternity. He developed his career as part of a dual career family and has two sons aged 22 and 19.

Expertise: UEB Gender Champion, workload models, financial model Role: Comment on overall application (especially



At Reading since 2014

from UEB leadership perspective) and broader experience), input into “picture of institution”

b) an account of the self assessment process, with reference to year-on-year activities since the original Bronze award application, details of the self assessment team meetings, including any consultation with staff or individuals outside of the university, how these have fed into the submission and been reported within the institution, and how the team has worked with departments to engage them in the Athena SWAN awards process;

The Athena SWAN Steering Group (ASSG) have been responsible for monitoring progress against the University action plan. The ASSG (see Table 2.2) comprises the leads from School-level SATs (all SET Schools are actively involved in the ASSG thanks to engagement by the Chair with Heads of Schools (AP2011:16)), HR-representatives, the UEB Gender Champion and the D&I Deans (formerly it was chaired by the Dean of Life Sciences). The ASSG has met on a termly basis to review University-level progress and to share good practice and consider the progress of School-level applications. The ASSG Chair provided termly updates to the DISG – who were responsible for the Diversity and Inclusion activities prior to the Dean appointments (see Table 2.2 and section c below), and, via the Assistant Director of HR, to the University’s Staffing Committee. UEB is represented directly on the ASSG, SAT and DISG. Further, in 2013 members of UEB were identified as “champions” for each of the protected characteristics, including gender. The DISG, informed in part by the Athena SWAN action plan, developed tough targets in connection with gender representation. These were committed to publicly by UEB in November 2015.



Table 2.2 - 2015-16 DISG membership and ASSG membership

DISG members (10f, 5m, 33% m) ASSG members (12f, 3 m, 25%m)

Professor Dianne Berry Dean of Postgraduate Research Studies

Jenny Berger Centre Manager for EPSRC TSBC Centre for Doctoral Training

Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde Professor of Applied Mathematics Dean for Diversity and Inclusion

Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde Professor of Applied Mathematics Dean for Diversity and Inclusion

Professor Ben Cosh Head of School-SMPS

Dr Claire Collins Associate Professor of Leadership Development and Behaviour Director of the DBA Programme in HBS

Professor Richard Ellis Dean of Life Sciences

Dr Joanne Elliott Associate Professor Physical Chemistry

Professor Abby Ghobadian Dr Hilary Geoghegan Lecturer in Human Geography

Professor Ginny Gibson Deputy Dean HBS Professor of Management

Alison Hackett AD of HR (People & Talent)

Professor Roberta Gilchrist Research Dean

Professor Julie Hawkins Professor of Plant Systemics and Evolution

Alison Hackett AD of HR (People & Talent)

Professor Ellie Highwood Professor of Climate Physics Dean for Diversity and Inclusion

Nina Hager RUSU Welfare Officer

Professor Rachel McCrindle Professor of Computer & Human Interaction

Charles Heymann Head of News

Frances Raimo Diversity and Inclusion Officer

Professor Ellie Highwood Professor of Climate Physics Dean for Diversity and Inclusion

Professor Patricia Riddell Professor of Applied Neuroscience

Professor Elizabeth McCrum Dr Joy Singarayer



The formal SAT activities for this application are shown in Table 2.3. Responding to feedback from the 2014 application we conducted a staff survey in SET schools in November 2015. The survey was cascaded via email from the Deans via Heads of School to all staff (academic and support) in the 8 SET Schools with the results analysed by PSO before scrutiny by the SAT. The response rate was 11%, lower than we had hoped, possibly because of major structural change within the University at the time. UEB have agreed that a full staff survey will take place in Spring 2017 and regularly thereafter. Members of the SAT are on the working group designing the survey, and will ensure that it contains specific Athena SWAN-related questions (e.g. monitoring protected characteristics, engagement with D&I activities and experience of inclusive culture) (AP2016:B4). Table 2.4 shows the results from the survey of academic staff (information from the support-staff survey will be used in future gender charter mark applications). The survey returns suggested the following topics for focus groups:

‘I am encouraged and given opportunities to represent my Department externally and/or internally’ and ‘My University uses

women as well as men as visible role models (e.g. in staff inductions, as speakers at conferences, at recruitment events)’ (for

SET academics)

‘Staff who work part-time or flexibly in my University are offered the same career development opportunities as those who

work full-time’ (for SET academics)

In my Department, work is allocated on a clear and fair basis irrespective of gender’ (for SET Heads of School)

Noting that the percentage of female researchers has remained constant since the last application (see section 3), we

undertook to run two focus groups specifically for PGR students from both SET and AHBSSL Schools. Comments

from focus groups are referenced throughout as relevant.

Teaching and Learning Dean Associate Professor in Atmospheric and Oceanic Science

Janis Pich Estates and Facilities Director

Dr Calvin Smith Lecturer in Mathematics

Frances Raimo Diversity and Inclusion officer

Rachel Thorns HR Partner for Science Faculty

Dr Paddy Woodman Director of Student Development & Access

Professor Robert Van de Noort PVC Academic Planning and Resource Gender, maternity, marriage and civil partnership UEB Champion



The key points of our proposed action plan have been presented for feedback to the Leadership Group (including

UEB, Heads of School and Heads of Professional Services) in January 2016, and at 4 open meetings for staff (March

2016).

Table 2.3 - SAT activities and milestones for this Athena Application

Date Activity/milestone Purpose

2nd November 2015

SAT meeting 1 Feedback from 2014 Brainstorm forward action plan

November 2015 Staff survey Staff survey circulated to all staff in SET schools.

2nd December 2015

SAT meeting 2 Detailed discussion of forward action plan

11th January 2016 SAT meeting 3 Discussion of survey responses and decision on focus group topics

20th January 2016 Leadership Development Session

90 minute session with Leadership group describing Athena SWAN, promoting good practice and discussing possible action plan items. Workshop discussion on attitudes towards flexible working.

8th February 2016 SAT meeting 4 Comment on bullet points from data written by core group Finalising focus group questions, timeline

9th February to 1st March

FOCUS groups Total of 25 staff (6m,17f) and 16 PGR students (3m,13f) involved

15th March 2016

SAT meeting 5 Feedback on first draft of narrative, future of SAT and other groups Revisiting and prioritising the forward action plan

6th April 2016 SAT meeting 6 Finalising forward action plan, cross referencing.



Table 2.4 - Autumn 2015 HE STEM Staff Culture Survey at UoR

Question

All academic respondents (% Agree)

(113 Respondents)

All academic respondents (% Neither)

(113 Respondents)

Females (% Agree)

(52 Respondents)

Females (% Neither)

(52 Respondents)

Males (% Agree)

(58 Respondents)

Males (% Neither)

(58 Respondents)

Participation and Promotion and Practices 68% 12% 63% 11% 74% 11%

1.1. In my University, staff are treated on their merits irrespective of their gender (e.g. both women and men

are actively encouraged to apply for promotion and take up training opportunities). 80% 5% 75% 4% 84% 5%

2.1. In my Department, work is allocated on a clear and fair basis irrespective of gender. 79% 4% 71% 4% 88% 3%

3.i. My Department values the full range of an individual's skills and experience (e.g. research, pastoral

work, outreach work, teaching, administration and technical support) when carrying out performance

appraisals.

73% 4% 68% 4% 77% 4%

3.i. My Department values the full range of an individual's skills and experience (e.g. research, pastoral

work, outreach work, teaching, administration and technical support) when considering promotions. 59% 11% 58% 8% 64% 10%

4.1. I understand the promotion process and criteria in my University. 75% 6% 69% 6% 83% 7%

5.1. I am actively encouraged to take up career development opportunities. 68% 10% 65% 10% 72% 10%

6.1. I am encouraged and given opportunities to represent my Department externally and/or internally (e.g. on committees or boards, as chair or speaker at conferences).

70% 14% 62% 13% 76% 16%

7.i. My University provides me with useful mentoring opportunities (as mentor or mentee). 68% 17% 73% 12% 67% 17%

7.ii. My University provides me with useful networking opportunities. 65% 17% 65% 17% 67% 14%

7.iii. My University provides me with a helpful annual appraisal. 67% 9% 65% 12% 71% 7%

8.1. Staff who work part-time or flexibly in my University are offered the same career development

opportunities as those who work full-time. 51% 26% 43% 25% 61% 23%

9.1. Meetings in my University are completed in core hours to enable those with caring responsibilities to

attend. (core hours are 9.30 a.m. to 12 noon and 2.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m.). 64% 10% 63% 6% 65% 14%

10.1. I believe that in my University, men and women are paid an equal amount for doing the same work or

work of equal value. 59% 14% 42% 15% 76% 10%

11.1. My University takes positive action to encourage women and men to apply for posts in areas where

they are under-represented (e.g. encouraging appropriately qualified colleagues of both sexes to apply for

posts; including images of female and male staff in recruitment materials; including a statement in job adverts that applications are welcomed from under-represented groups).

72% 17% 63% 20% 79% 16%



Question


(113 Respondents)


(113 Respondents)

Females (% Agree)

(52 Respondents)

Females (% Neither)

(52 Respondents)

Males (% Agree)

(58 Respondents)

Males (% Neither)

(58 Respondents)

Workplace Culture 81% 13% 76% 15% 85% 12%

13.1. My University makes it clear that unsupportive language and behaviour are not acceptable (e.g. condescending or intimidating language, ridicule, overly familiar behaviour, jokes/banter that stereotype

women or men or focus on their appearance).

78% 13% 73% 17% 82% 11%

14.1. Inappropriate images that stereotype women or men are not acceptable in my University (e.g. in

calendars, newspapers and magazines; on computers and mobiles). 82% 14% 75% 17% 88% 12%

15.1. Work related social activities in my University such as staff parties, team building or networking events, are likely to be welcoming to both women and men (e.g. consider whether venues, activities and

times are appropriate to both women and men).

82% 12% 79% 12% 84% 14%

16. I have undertaken training in: i. Equality and diversity; ii. Understanding unconscious bias N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Question


(113 Respondents)


(113 Respondents)

Females (% Agree)

(52 Respondents)

Females (% Neither)

(52 Respondents)

Males (% Agree)

(58 Respondents)

Males (% Neither)

(58 Respondents)

Leadership and Management Commitment 83% 10% 82% 9% 84% 10%

18.1. My University has made it clear to me what its policies are in relation to gender equality (e.g. on

discrimination, parental leave, carer's leave, flexible working). 77% 11% 71% 12% 81% 10%

19.1. I understand my University's reasons for taking action on gender equality. 86% 9% 77% 13% 93% 5%

20.1. I understand why positive action may be required to promote gender equality. 88% 5% 94% 2% 83% 9%

21.1. My line manager/supervisor is supportive of requests for flexible working (e.g. requests for part-time working, job share, compressed hours).

79% 19% 83% 13% 76% 22%

22.1. My line manager/supervisor ensures that there is an inclusive environment for both women and men. 88% 8% 85% 10% 89% 7%

23.1. During my time in this University, I have experienced a situation(s) where I have felt uncomfortable

because of my gender. 22% 3% 33% 2% 12% 2%

24.1. I am confident that my line manager/supervisor would deal effectively with any complaints about

harassment, bullying or offensive behaviour. 82% 7% 83% 6% 84% 5%



Question


(113 Respondents)


(113 Respondents)

Females (% Agree)

(52 Respondents)

Females (% Neither)

(52 Respondents)

Males (% Agree)

(58 Respondents)

Males (% Neither)

(58 Respondents)

Reputation and Social Responsibility 78% 10% 77% 11% 80% 10%

26.1. My University uses women as well as men as visible role models (e.g. in staff inductions, as speakers

at conferences, at recruitment events). 83% 11% 73% 17% 91% 5%

27.1. I am kept informed by my Department and/or Institution about gender equality matters that affect me

(e.g. changes to maternity/paternity leave entitlements, flexible working opportunities, gender equality

legislation). 68% 16% 63% 13% 72% 17%

28.1 I feel that my University is a great place to work for women. 80% 6% 83% 6% 79% 7%

28.2 I feel that my University is a great place to work for men. 82% 7% 88% 6% 77% 9%

Question


(113 Respondents)


(113 Respondents)

Females (% Agree)

(52 Respondents)

Females (% Neither)

(52 Respondents)

Males (% Agree)

(58 Respondents)

Males (% Neither)

(58 Respondents)

Overall Satisfaction 73% 11% 69% 11% 76% 11%



c) plans for the future of the self assessment team, such as how often the team will continue to meet, any reporting mechanisms and proposed consultation processes, and how the team will engage with SET departments to encourage them to apply for awards.

Recognising the increasing commitment of leading School-level SATs, we will be changing the way we implement and monitor University-level Athena SWAN actions going forward. The current SAT will be renamed as the Athena Implementation Team (AIT), and its members invited to serve on the group. Additional members will be recruited as necessary in May 2016, in particular to represent the postdoctoral researchers, and we will invite the RUSU women’s officer and the newly-created full-time RUSU Diversity Officer. The AIT will meet quarterly throughout the rest of 2016 and 2017, before beginning the process of defining a new SAT in 2018. It will work closely with the ASSG (which will become a community-of-practice) to engage with Schools and to enable the spread of good practice; both will report termly to the DISG (Figure 2.1). UEB will continue to be directly represented on the AIT, ASSG and DISG.

The ASSG will expand as we encourage more AHSSBL School applications. We will monitor the gender representation on this group and will be visiting Heads of School and encouraging them think more broadly when appointing the proposed D&I champions in order to increase the representation of male staff on the ASSG. (AP2016:A3)

Since October 2015 we have formalised and substantially enhanced our engagement with Schools by:

Setting up a series of regular face to face meetings of School-level SAT leaders with the DISO, starting a year ahead of the planned submission (to ensure that their internal processes and SATs are in place and to advise on data collection and University activities). The first meeting involves Deans and Heads of School (see Figure 2.2).

Providing internal peer review of applications prior to submission by those with experience on Athena SWAN panels.

Feedback is given directly to the Head of School (HoS) and School-level SAT lead, by the Dean and HR-partner.

We are embedding Athena and Diversity more broadly into our School-level planning and reporting. From August 2016

Schools will report annually on Athena SWAN status as one of several diversity related key performance indicators (KPIs),

and complete an equality and diversity section of their rolling 5 year plans (AP2016:A3). The Deans will have overview of

these, and support Heads of School in developing their plans.



Figure 2.1 - Reporting organogram for Diversity and Inclusion at the University of Reading

UEB DIVERSITY CHAMPIONS

Enzo Raimo David Bell Robert Van de Noort David Savage Richard Messer Gavin Brooks

Race and Religion Sexual orientation Gender, pregnancy, maternity Offshore Campuses Disability Age

Gender reassignment marriage and Civil Partership

DEANS FOR DIVERSITY

AND INCLUSION:

Ellie Highwood and

Simon Chandler-Wilde

STUDENTS

Dean of Postgraduate Research Studies

Director of Student Access and Attainment

Widening Participation Office

Student Services

Disability Advisory Services

RUSU Officers

STAFF

Assistant Director of HR (People and Talent)

Diversity and Inclusion Support Officer

Research Staff Developer

Leadership and Talent Development Manager

HR Partners

Planning and Strategy Office

DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION STRATEGY GROUP (DISG)

Athena Implementation

Team (AIT)

Women@

Reading

Race and Ethnicity

Consultative Group

Professional Services

Reps

Research

Deans

Athena SWAN Steering Group

(ASSG)

Teaching and

Learning Deans

Heads of School

LGBT+ Network

Disability consultative

group

Groups with dashed lines do not yet exist but are planned to begin in 2016.



Figure 2.2 - Memo from Dean describing new Athena School support mechanism



3. Description of the institution – maximum 1000 words (906 words used) Provide a summary of your institution, including information such as whether it is research or teaching focussed, the number of students and staff (academic and support staff separately), association with university mission groups (e.g. 1994 group, Russell Group, Million+), the size of the SET departments and any other relevant contextual information such as recent restructuring. Provide data and a short analysis for at least the last three years (including clearly labelled graphical illustrations where possible) on the Female:male ratio of FTE academic staff and research staff– researcher, lecturer, senior lecturer, reader, professor (or equivalent) – across the whole institution and in SET departments, commenting on changes and progress made against the original action plan and Bronze university application. The University of Reading is in the top 1% of Universities worldwide and in the top 30 UK universities in three 2016 league tables. In REF 2014 98% of the University’s research was internationally recognised, 78% internationally excellent. Our research income was £50m over the past year. The University was a member of the (now disbanded) 1994 Group but is currently not associated with any mission group. In 2014/15 the University had 1645 academic staff, of whom 830 (50.4%) are in SET schools, and 3353 professional services and support staff. The University has two Reading campuses (Whiteknights and London Road), plus its nearby Greenlands campus in Henley-on-Thames, home to the Executive Education side of Henley Business School. The University has a small campus in South Africa and offers degrees in partnership with several institutions in China. Its own Malaysia campus opened in 2015 with SET subjects including Construction Management and Pharmacy as part of the early offering. The University has 17,000 students from over 150 nations, offering 350 undergraduate and postgraduate courses and conducts world-leading research in a wide range of disciplines, with well-known strength in several SET areas: climate science, meteorology, food science and agriculture. The Henley Business School is one of the few business schools in the world to hold triple-accredited status and is ranked 2nd in the UK by The Economist. Our research-led approach to teaching has helped to ensure that our graduate employability record is excellent with 94% of our graduates in work or further study 6 months after graduating. Since the renewal of the Athena SWAN Bronze Award in 2012 there has been significant change to the University’s leadership, direction and governance. In 2012, a new Vice-Chancellor, Sir David Bell, joined the university and the new HR Strategy was published, responding to the emerging strategic direction of the University, the Athena SWAN 2011



Action Plan (AP2011:2,5,7), and the 2011 Staff Survey results. A core element of the HR Strategy is the commitment to “embrace diversity, recognising the many ways in which colleagues can contribute to the University’s growth, and removing barriers to success”. Building on this, UoR has in 2016 set diversity and inclusion targets for 2020 and 2026, the gender-related targets for 2020 are in Figure 3.1. The academic structure of the UoR relating to the development and management of research, and of University staff undertaking research, changed in October 2015. All research-active academic staff), as well as belonging to an academic School, now belong to one of 32 Research Divisions, which are themselves grouped into 5 Research Themes (Figure 3.2). Research Division Leaders, Research Deans, and Heads of School will all have important roles to play in supporting women’s development and our training actions will focus on these “gatekeepers” (AP2016:E3). The number of academic staff at UoR has grown from 1485 in 2010/11 to 1645 in 2014/15: see Table 3.1, and Figures 3.3a (all staff) and 3.3b (SET). An impressive success story is that we have increased the number of female professors by 30 in this time compared to 15 additional male professors, reaching 31.3% female professors, substantially outperforming the sector, the Russell group, and - our most appropriate benchmark - the former 1994 group, and increasing the gap between us and the sector from 3.3% to 8.2% over this period. Similarly, in SET schools we have gained 20 female and only 10 male SET professors, taking us from below sector-average female representation to outperforming the sector here too. Our gender balance for non-professorial roles has matched the sector university-wide, and exceeded our comparator groups. In SET we now match the former 1994 group, though remain below the sector average, reflecting the recruitment of more men than women to roles below professorial level since 2010/11. The large increase in numbers of female professors in 2013/14 may reflect actions in 2012/13 regarding promotion procedures as a development of AP2011:2 (see Section 4(i)(c)).



Figure 3.1 - Gender targets developed by the Diversity and Inclusion Strategy Group and announced by the Vice-Chancellor in February 2016.

Key University boards and committees, including the

University Executive Board to comprise at least 30% men and at least 30% women.

The overall University Leadership Group (comprising UEB, Deans, Heads of School and Heads of

Functions) to be comprised of at least 45% men and at least 45%

women.

A gender-balanced professoriate, with at least

40% of professors men and at least 40% being women.

Current baseline is 30%.

A reduction in or effective removal of the gender pay gap (currently

senior level paygap is 11%).

University of Reading 2020 Gender Targets

Achieve University-wide Athena SWAN Gender Charter Mark Silver, with all STEM Schools holding awards and all other Schools working

towards them.



Figure 3.2 - Research Structure at UoR from August 2016. 2015/16 has been a transition year between having Faculties, and moving to themes

UoR 2020 Research Strategy

Environment Food HealthHeritage and

CreativityProsperity and

Resilience 5 RESEARCH DEANS

32 RESEARCH DIVISION LEADERS

1 PVC RESEARCH



Table 3.1 – Number of all academic staff (including sessional) by gender and professorial status (with sector, 1994 Group and Russell Group benchmarking) [Data source: HESA Staff Return)

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Female Male

% Female Female Male




% Female

UoR

Total Professor 45 150 23.1% 50 145 25.6% 50 140 26.3% 70 165 29.8% 75 165 31.3%

Non-Professor 640 650 49.6% 665 665 50.0% 695 720 49.1% 690 750 47.9% 685 720 48.8%

SET Professor 15 90 14.3% 15 85 15.0% 20 90 18.2% 30 100 23.1% 35 105 25.0%

Non-Professor 270 385 41.2% 275 370 42.6% 265 400 39.8% 275 425 39.3% 280 410 40.6%

Sector

Total Professor 3455 14010 19.8% 3790 14670 20.5% 3870 14010 21.6% 4415 15335 22.4% 4535 15065 23.1%

Non-Professor 76635 87080 46.8% 76985 85935 47.3% 78795 88905 47.0% 82180 92320 47.1% 84695 94045 47.4%

SET Professor 1590 8630 15.6% 1795 9125 16.4% 1925 8920 17.8% 2175 9605 18.5% 2275 9545 19.2%

Non-Professor 37190 49655 42.8% 37425 48830 43.4% 38615 50175 43.5% 40895 52775 43.7% 42635 54620 43.8%

Russell Group

Total Professor 1670 7700 17.8% 1940 8345 18.9% 2185 8555 20.3% 2435 9235 20.9% 2560 9175 21.8%

Non-Professor 25225 32510 43.7% 26000 32340 44.6% 27350 33800 44.7% 29390 36415 44.7% 31505 38635 44.9%

SET Professor 915 5345 14.6% 1075 5785 15.7% 1270 6020 17.4% 1430 6445 18.2% 1510 6450 19.0%

Non-Professor 17400 24560 41.5% 17940 24405 42.4% 18590 25135 42.5% 20160 27195 42.6% 21510 28855 42.7%

1994 Group

Total Professor 430 1400 23.5% 440 1420 23.7% 445 1330 25.1% 515 1440 26.3% 530 1435 27.0%

Non-Professor 6425 7210 47.1% 6400 7260 46.9% 6330 7380 46.2% 6575 7470 46.8% 6390 7085 47.4%

SET Professor 115 710 13.9% 120 710 14.5% 140 675 17.2% 160 710 18.4% 165 710 18.9%

Non-Professor 2515 3655 40.8% 2490 3610 40.8% 2530 3765 40.2% 2615 3830 40.6% 2475 3625 40.6%



Figure 3.3a – Percentage of female academic staff (including sessional) by year across all subjects. [Data source: HESA Staff Return] Note that sector data for non-professorial staff is co-incident with 1994 Group except in 2012/13

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

% of Professorial staff who are female

UoR Sector Russell Group 1994 Group

38%

40%

42%

44%

46%

48%

50%

52%

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

% of non-professorial staff who are female

UoR Sector Russell Group 1994 Group



Figure 3.3b – Percentage of female academic staff (including sessional) in SET subjects. [Data source: HESA Staff Return]

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

% of SET Professorial staff who are female

UoR Sector Russell Group 1994 group

38%

40%

42%

44%

46%

48%

50%

52%

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

% of non professorial SET staff who are female

UoR Sector Russell Group 1994 group



Table 3.2 – The academic pipeline by gender and year. [Data source: HESA Staff Return]

October 2011 October 2012 October 2013 October 2014 October 2015

Female Male





% Female

UoR Academic Staff

All 429 602 41.6% 455 614 42.6% 502 697 41.9% 513 678 43.1% 548 699 43.9%

SET Departments 245 405 37.7% 250 412 37.8% 270 470 36.5% 270 458 37.1% 284 483 37.0%

Non-SET departments 184 197 48.3% 205 202 50.4% 232 227 50.5% 243 220 52.5% 264 216 55.0%

Professor

All 51 151 25.2% 57 167 25.4% 75 196 27.7% 76 189 28.7% 81 189 30.0%

SET Departments 19 90 17.4% 23 99 18.9% 34 113 23.1% 34 115 22.8% 38 115 24.8%


Associate Professor (i.e.

Senior Lecture/Reader)

All 74 123 37.6% 94 119 44.1% 107 132 44.8% 112 130 46.3% 124 137 47.5%

SET Departments 31 64 32.6% 40 63 38.8% 39 72 35.1% 45 70 39.1% 48 78 38.1%


Lecturer (Including Clinical Academics/HMCs)

All 155 143 52.0% 158 149 51.5% 174 164 51.5% 187 166 53.0% 184 169 52.1%

SET Departments 62 73 45.9% 59 78 43.1% 63 88 41.7% 65 92 41.4% 56 93 37.6%


Researcher

All 149 185 44.6% 146 179 44.9% 146 205 41.6% 138 193 41.7% 159 204 43.8%

SET Departments 133 178 42.8% 128 172 42.7% 134 197 40.5% 126 181 41.0% 142 197 41.9%


Table 3.2 and Figure 3.4 show the pipeline of academic staff from 2011 through to 2015. For UoR overall the Associate Professor level has become close to gender-balanced, stemming the leaky pipeline for women as a whole through to this level. For SET staff, the pipeline is now more level from researcher through to Associate Professor. But, both for UoR as a whole and for SET, the female proportion at researcher level has changed little over time, prompting us to organise focus groups for PhD students in 2015, leading to a number of actions relating to the bottom of the academic pipeline (AP2016: C1-5).



Figure 3.4 - Pipeline in 2015 compared to 2011 for all UoR academics, and for SET academics. [Data source: HESA Staff Return] Support staff: There are 3353 non-academic staff employed at UoR, of which 62% are female. This percentage has been approximately stable for the past 3 years. There are some sections in which male staff dominate - IT (73.9% male), International Business and Strategy (62.5%), ICMA centre (56% male) - and many others where female staff dominate. A better understanding of this group of staff will be enabled by several actions on data development (AP2016:B1,3,4,6). Students: Although students are not the main focus of this report, Table 3.3 shows that at undergraduate level we outperform the sector and other comparators in terms of % female in SET subjects, and that this has increased since 2010/2011. We have also seen increases in female representation in PGT and PGR in SET schools, continuing to outperform the sector. We attribute this to changes in advertising and recruitment materials (AP2011:1) and additional initiatives by School Athena SWAN teams. We have met the target set in AP2011:1.



Table 3.3 – Number of all students and level of study (with sector, 1994 Group, and Russell Group benchmarking) [Data source: HESA Student Return]

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

F M %F F M %F F M %F F M %F F M %F

First Undergraduate

All Subjects

UoR 4525 3960 53.3% 4680 4020 53.8% 4750 3920 54.8% 4990 3960 55.8% 5265 4025 56.7% Sector 804000 660080 54.9% 846915 694445 54.9% 840795 687595 55.0% 844595 689145 55.1% 842255 681790 55.3% Russell Group 182120 163270 52.7% 186705 167330 52.7% 188285 168520 52.8% 193355 172420 52.9% 199660 176205 53.1% 1994 Group 44785 39795 52.9% 46480 42085 52.5% 46730 42065 52.6% 48350 43040 52.9% 48910 43090 53.2%

SET Subjects


Other Undergraduate

All Subjects


SET Subjects

UoR 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 0 #DIV/0! 0 0 #DIV/0! 10 10 50.0% 15 5 75.0% Sector 121925 62750 66.0% 105465 57195 64.8% 77795 44300 63.7% 64165 39245 62.0% 58980 37880 60.9% Russell Group 13375 3025 81.6% 10985 2420 81.9% 9320 2280 80.3% 7780 2185 78.1% 7260 2050 78.0% 1994 Group 3200 2025 61.2% 2890 1895 60.4% 2985 1840 61.9% 2575 1495 63.3% 2230 1185 65.3%

Postgraduate Taught

All Subjects


SET Subjects


Postgraduate Research

All Subjects


SET Subjects


All levels All Subjects

UoR 7035 6160 53.3% 7260 6245 53.8% 7370 6065 54.9% 7530 6055 55.4% 8050 6295 56.1%

Sector 1411090 1090195 56.4% 1406945 1089685 56.4% 1314820 1025035 56.2% 1289095 1010030 56.1% 1273335 992360 56.2%

Russell Group 306785 263395 53.8% 309345 265745 53.8% 305115 263005 53.7% 311510 268050 53.7% 319145 270910 54.1%

1994 Group 82730 66985 55.3% 85655 69525 55.2% 82160 66620 55.2% 82055 66500 55.2% 82680 66045 55.6%

SET Subjects

UoR 2570 2595 49.8% 2620 2575 50.4% 2755 2515 52.3% 2825 2535 52.7% 3060 2535 54.7%

Sector 530570 510005 51.0% 533495 514575 50.9% 510525 497920 50.6% 498090 499465 49.9% 514390 502315 50.6%

Russell Group 141645 143430 49.7% 142115 145720 49.4% 142110 146775 49.2% 141980 150815 48.5% 148955 154405 49.1%

1994 Group 24075 26245 47.8% 24680 27015 47.7% 24920 26650 48.3% 25140 27370 47.9% 25425 27290 48.2%



Supporting and advancing women’s careers – 4500 words in total (4500 + 910 extra words used) Please provide a report covering the following sections. Within each section provide data for at least the last three years (including clearly labelled graphical illustrations where possible) and a short analysis of the data sets listed, commenting on changes and progress made measured against the original action plan and Bronze application, including details of successes and where actions have not worked. Comment on plans for the next three years, which should also feature in your new action plan. Please also attach the action plan from your last application with an additional column indicating the level of progress achieved (e.g. zero, limited, excellent, completed for each action



4. Key career transition points (1536 words used) (i) Comment on the effectiveness of policies and activities in your institution that are supportive to women’s career

progression in your SET departments at key career transition points as demonstrated by the following data. a) Female:male ratio of academic staff on fixed-term contracts vs. open-ended (permanent) contracts –

across the whole institution and in SET departments. Table 4.1 – Number of academic staff by gender and term of contract [Data source: Trent October snapshot]


Female Male

% Female

Female Male


% Female

Female Male


% Female

UoR

Permanent 303 443 40.6% 317 457 41.0% 352 509 40.9% 373 501 42.7% 394 508 43.7%

Fixed term 198 196 50.3% 194 187 50.9% 191 208 47.9% 189 211 47.3% 192 230 45.5%

% Fixed term 39.5% 30.7% 37.9% 29.0% 35.2% 29.0% 33.6% 29.6% 32.8% 31.2%

SET Schools

Permanent 145 264 35.5% 142 275 34.1% 152 310 32.9% 155 300 34.1% 151 304 33.2%

Fixed term 154 165 48.3% 150 160 48.4% 149 175 46.0% 142 180 44.1% 148 194 43.3%

% Fixed term 51.5% 38.5% 51.4% 36.8% 49.5% 36.1% 47.8% 37.5% 49.4% 39.0%



Figure 4.1 – Percentage of female academic staff on contract type, with labels for number of females by category [Data source: Trent October snapshot]

30

3

31

7

35

2 37

3 39

4

14

5

14

2

15

2 15

5

15

1

19

8

19

4

19

1

18

9

19

215

4

15

0

14

9

14

2

14

8

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%


Permanent UoR

Permanent SET

Fixed Term UoR

Fixed Term SET



Across UoR the percentage of fixed-term (FT) contracts for females has decreased as a result of increases in permanent female staff (303 in 2011 to 394 in 2015). During the same period, ~30% of males have been on fixed-term contracts despite fluctuations in numbers employed (Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1). However, over the same time period, the percentage of females on fixed-term contracts in SET schools has remained unchanged at ~50% and higher than the percentage of males on fixed-term contracts (~38%). A new finance process was introduced in 2015/2016 such that Schools have greater control over budgets. This allows longer term planning and therefore might reduce the need for some FT contracts. We will monitor the impact this has on the proportion of FT contracts and the number of requests for change from FT to permanent contracts (AP2016:C3iv). There is currently no institution-wide approach to redeployment and this is an issue highlighted in our HR Excellence in Research action plan, particularly in relation to research staff (AP2016:C3iii). There are examples of good practice in Science Schools including gaining approval from the research council for a contract to be extended following a researcher’s maternity leave. This is progress against AP2011:11. We need to review the different approaches in place in Schools, identify best practice and put this into practice across the University (AP2016:C3ii). In January 2016 a focus group identified key challenges around FT contracts. Feedback indicated that the ability to mitigate the effects of income insecurity resulting from FT contracts was largely dependent on having a high-earning partner. Challenges around mobility were also a factor, particularly for those who had families. While FT contracts are a sector norm for research staff, some FT contracts are in place for teaching staff too. We don’t currently have the data available to determine the balance between different contract types within individual schools, leading to AP2016:C3i.



b) Female:male ratio of academic staff job application and appointment success rates – across the whole institution and in SET departments. Comment on any positive action taken to ensure diverse applicant pools and short lists.

Table 4.2 – Job applicants and outcome by gender for UoR [Data source: Trent October snapshot]

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total

Female Male Unspecified Female Male Unspecified Female Male Unspecified Female Male Unspecified

UoR

Applied 1124 1986 102 1430 2248 103 954 1458 61 3508 5692 266

Appointed 58 65 - 63 82 - 86 77 - 207 224 1

% Appointed 5.2% 3.3% - 4.4% 3.6% - 9.0% 5.3% - 5.9% 3.9% 0.4%

Table 4.3 – Job applicants and outcome by gender for SET Schools [Data source: Trent October snapshot]

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 Total

Female Male Unspecified Female Male Unspecified Female Male Unspecified Female Male Unspecified

SET

Applied 527 994 31 830 1302 54 493 792 22 1850 3088 107

Appointed 31 53 - 47 59 - 53 62 - 131 174 1

% Appointed 5.9% 5.3% - 5.7% 4.5% - 10.8% 7.8% - 7.1% 5.6% 0.9%



Figure 4.2 – % of successful job applications by gender for UoR and SET Schools, with labels for number of applications [Data source: Trent October snapshot]

Women applying for positions at UoR over the past 3 years had a success rate 1.5 times that of men (Tables 4.2 and 4.3

and Figure 4.2). 43% of new academic appointments in SET schools were female, where women were a factor 1.2 more

successful. This suggests that our appointment and selection processes are on average robust; we have a number of

actions surrounding training of interview panels and gender diversity expectations for shortlists to ensure we maintain this

11

24

19

86

52

7

99

4

14

30

22

48

83

0

13

02

95

4

14

58

49

3

79

2

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

Female Male Female Male

UoR SET

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15



(AP2016:C9,E4). However, there have been 1.6 times more applications from men, though this ratio has fallen slightly

over the past 3 years, perhaps as a result of encouraging adverts that include statements about flexible-working

introduced in some parts of the University. We aim to increase the volume of applications from women through a variety of

actions including changing the wording of advertisements, person specifications and further particulars (AP2016:C8),

publicising career role-models (AP2016:D2), and enabling flexible-working (AP2016:F5).

It is currently difficult to obtain recruitment data that relates to short-listing. We are currently building a new applicant-

tracking system to address this, enabling us to track applicants and their diversity data, through the recruitment process

(AP2016:B6).

c) Female:male ratio of academic staff promotion rates across the institution and in SET departments –

comment on the effectiveness of the process by which staff are identified and recommended for promotion. Academic Titles Process. This process governs academic promotions from Lecturer to Associate Professor (before 2012 the AP grade was split into SL/Reader), and from AP to Professor. The process has 3 stages: 1) Academic staff are identified and put forward from Schools, either nominated by a HoS or (rarely) self-nominated. Following a review (AP2011:5), internal review panels now operate in all Schools to identify candidates and judge the quality of applications. 2) Proposals put forward from stage 1, the ‘applicants for promotion’, are considered by Faculty level committees 3) Stage three is a University level committee that makes the final decision. As a development of AP2011:2, the University abolished the distinction between SL and Reader and established a single AP Grade in July 2012, at the same time broadening the criteria to place equal weight on: research and scholarship; teaching; and “other activities aligned to the strategic aims and common good of the University” - making explicit that candidates need not qualify for promotion in all three areas. Simultaneously a mechanism for flagging circumstances such as periods of part time working, parental leave, and career breaks, was introduced (AP2011:2). As per AP2011:3 promotions workshops have been offered each year. Following disappointing uptake in 2012-14 these are now flourishing (Table 4.4). Follow-on mentoring support with applications (AP2011:4) has been offered successfully



to attendees: two of the several supported in this way in 2014/15 achieved AP promotion in the 2014-15 round. Feedback has been excellent for all promotion sessions run in the last two years, and female attendance has been 59%. Some Schools have also run their own version of this session, e.g. a session for > 50 staff in SMPS in 2014. Table 4.4 – Attendance at promotion workshops [Data source: Trent] Academic Year Workshop Title

Female attendees (SET numbers in brackets)

Male attendees (SET numbers in brackets)

2010-2011 Portfolios for promotion 15 (9) 9 (3)

2011-2012 Preparing for promotion to professor 11 (9) 17 (11)

2012-2013 Preparing for promotion Cancelled due to lack of attendees

2013-2014 Preparing for promotion Cancelled due to lack of attendees

2014-2015 Preparing for promotion to Professor/Associate Professor (x2 due to demand) 32 (8) 25 (11)

2015-2016 Preparing for promotion to Professor/Associate Professor (x2 due to demand) 18 (9) 9 (6)

Tables 4.5a,b show numbers of promotion applications by year and gender for SET and UoR as a whole. Notable is a marked SET and UoR increase in female professorial applications and successes in 2012/13, following actions associated with AP2011:2. This is a large contributor to the hike in female professorial numbers in Figure 3.3a,b. Tables 4.5a,b and 4.6, and Figures 4.3-4.7, explore whether there are SET or UoR gender differences in rates of application, or in rates of successful application. For SET promotions to AP successful applications and overall applications are in line with the % in the cohort, suggesting men and women are equally likely to apply and be successful (Figures 4.6 and 4.7). There is variation from year to year at SET professorial level where application numbers are smaller (Table 4.5a), but no particular gender bias is evident. SET Female success rates at stage 2 over the past four years are 8.9% higher for Professor, and 11.5% higher for AP suggesting that female applicants are somewhat stronger. It is possible, at least in some SET schools, that we are setting the bar slightly higher for female staff in selecting applicants. Across UoR the professorial picture is a little less positive: in 3 of the last 4 years the % of successful applications as a proportion of the baseline is lower for women than men (Figure 4.5), and the same is true for the % of applications (Figure 4.4). Across UoR the application success rate for women is 4.3% lower than that for men.



Table 4.5.a – Outcome of personal titles process for Professor by gender [Data source: Governance Office]

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 4-Year Total

Applicants Successful %

Successful Applicants Successful %




Successful

UoR Female 5 3 60.0% 12 10 83.3% 8 5 62.5% 5 4 80.0% 30 22 73.3%

Male 12 12 100.0% 9 9 100.0% 23 16 69.6% 12 7 58.3% 56 44 78.6%

SET Female 4 3 75.0% 9 8 88.9% 3 3 100.0% 3 3 100.0% 19 17 89.5%

Male 5 5 100.0% 6 6 100.0% 14 10 71.4% 6 4 66.7% 31 25 80.6%

Table 4.5.b – Outcome of personal titles process for Associate Professor by gender [Data source: Governance Office]

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 4-Year Total

Applicants Successful %





Successful

UoR Female 22 19 86.4% 22 17 77.3% 20 13 65.0% 20 18 90.0% 84 67 79.8%

Male 19 13 68.4% 23 14 60.9% 26 20 76.9% 26 19 73.1% 94 66 70.2%

SET Female 8 8 100.0% 9 7 77.8% 7 6 85.7% 10 9 90.0% 34 30 88.2%

Male 10 9 90.0% 15 9 60.0% 12 10 83.3% 19 15 78.9% 56 43 76.8%



Figure 4.3 – Outcome of personal titles process by gender, for UoR and for SET [Data source: Governance]. Shown is the number of successful applications, and this number expressed as a % of the total number of applications.



Table 4.6 – For UoR as a whole, the % of applicants (to Prof or to AP) who are female, and the % female in the corresponding baseline cohort, i.e. in the same grade as the applicant. [Data source: Trent]

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Professor

Associate Professor Professor



Associate Professor

Applicants 29.4% 53.7% 57.1% 48.9% 25.8% 43.5% 29.4% 42.2%

Baseline 38.7% 50.7% 42.4% 47.4% 44.6% 47.3% 48.1% 52.1%

Ratio Apps./Base. 0.76 1.06 1.35 1.03 0.58 0.92 0.61 0.81

Figure 4.4– For UoR as a whole, the % of applicants (to Prof or AP) who are female, and the % female in the corresponding baseline cohort, i.e. in the same grade as the applicant. The actual numbers of applicants, and the numbers in each baseline cohort, are shown above each bar. [Data source: Trent]



Figure 4.5 – Successful applications as a percentage of the corresponding baseline, for UoR as a whole. Above each bar is the number in the relevant baseline cohort. [Data Source: Trent]



Figure 4.6 – For SET, the % of applicants who are female, and the % female in the corresponding baseline, i.e. in the grade below. The actual numbers of applicants, and the numbers in each baseline cohort, are shown above each bar. [Data source: Trent]



Figure 4.7 – Successful applications as a percentage of the corresponding baseline, for SET. Above each bar is the number in the relevant baseline cohort. [Data Source: Trent]

Comparing applications to baseline numbers (Figs 4.4-4.7) suggests there is approximately equal gender balance in the outcomes of current academic promotions processes - AP2011 actions may be having impact. However, although AP2011:5 has led to change, and there is evidence of much good practice in AS Silver submissions from SET Schools, there is variation in quality of practice, and we do not currently have data regarding the important first stage of the promotions process within Schools. In our November 2015 SET Survey not all academic staff (75% overall, 69% female, 83% male) agreed that they understand our promotion processes and criteria. With the aim of making further improvements in the transparency, clarity, and fairness of processes and criteria for academic promotion, including at the initial stage, a review of the Personal Titles process has been started (July 2015) and an initial report sent to UEB following a workshop in November 2015 to share best practice and discuss the way forwards with HoSs and Deans. AP2016:C7 will complete and achieve the aims of this review.



Rewarding Excellence Processes. The separate processes governing promotion for other staff, including the key ECR promotion from Research Grade 6 to 7 (Grade 7 equivalent to Lecturer) were substantially revised in July 2012. The changes introduced: i) moved decision making to Faculty Management Boards (Deans + HoSs), i.e. to a group with a strong understanding of the roles; ii) introduced transparent and clear criteria for promotion, and a standard pro forma for presenting the information; iii) made the process bi-annual, rather than annual. In parallel some of the SET Schools with the largest proportions of research staff (SMPS, currently 34.4%, SAGES, 7.6%) introduced biennial promotion workshops for Grade 6 staff (in 2011, 2013, 2015 in SMPS, 2014 in SAGES) led by gender-balanced role models at the next stage up and at leadership levels. As a further helpful development, following evidence from the Research Staff Forum that promotion rates were higher in Schools where there was a policy that Research staff promotions should be blind to availability of funds to pay additional costs, the University Staffing Committee made the decision in July 2013 that “no justifiable promotion should be turned down or refused on the basis of funding”. As we move to a new financial system in August 2016 where Schools hold all the income, the PVC Resource has written in April 2016 to remind Schools of this policy. The impact of these measures has been very positive on rates of Research Staff Grade 6 to 7 promotion, and on gender balance in promotion rates. In Table 4. 7 we see that only 1 woman was promoted and 7 men in the 4 years 2008-2011 inclusive. In the subsequent 4 promotion periods (green shading) 10 men and 11 women have been promoted. However, 69% of the Science Faculty Rewarding Excellence Cases put forwards (for Research staff + support and P&M staff) and 13 of the 17 successful promotion cases have come from the same SET School (albeit a SET School with 34.4% of the University’s research staff), leading to AP2016:C4-6.



Table 4.7 – Outcome of promotion proposals from Research Grade 6 to Research Grade 7in SET Schools [Data Source: Trent]

Year Research Staff Promotions from Grade 6 to Grade 7 in SET Schools

Male Female

Number submitted Number successful Number submitted Number successful

2008 1 0 0 0

2009 2 1 2 0

2010 4 4 0 0

2011 2 2 1 1

2012 2 2 2 2

2012/13* 1 1 2 2

2013/14 3 3 3 3

2014/15 4 4 4 4

*In 2012 we moved from cycles in calendar years to bi-annual cycles based on academic years, and from decisions made centrally to the creation of Faculty Reward Committees that make provisional decisions with a final, central sense-check for consistency.



5. Career development (1423 words used) (i) Comment on the effectiveness of policies and activities in your institution that are supportive to women’s career

development in your SET departments.

a) Researcher career support and training – describe any additional support provided for researchers at the early stages of their careers, such as networks and training, staff appraisal scheme, and whether the institution is signed up to the Concordat.

The University was one of the first ten UK HEIs to be awarded the European Commission’s HR Excellence in Research Award in 2010 and has retained this on subsequent re-assessments, demonstrating commitment to the development of research staff (RS) and recognising the excellent support and training provided.

Table 5.1 - Gender breakdown of Committees

Research Staff Working Group 4 women (50%), 4 men (50%)

Staffing Committee 5 women (42%), 7 men (58%)

Board for Research & Innovation 9 women (39%), 14 men (61%)

The University is signed up to the Concordat and has a RS Working Group (RSWG), which meets termly and oversees its implementation. It reports to the University’s Staffing Committee and the Board for Research and Innovation (Table 5.1). The RSWG’s Chair is Professor Dianne Berry (Dean of Post-Graduate Studies). The Research Staff Committee, which represents RS, sends delegates to the RSWG. Other research support services sit on the RSWG plus senior PIs. Central support for RS includes:

Online induction information linking to Vitae’s Researcher Development Framework;

Email reminders for new RS and their PIs to discuss induction topics, agree work targets, and arrange a mentor;

Local Concordat: a one page agreement between the University and its unions concerning career management and conditions of employment for RS;



Bi-annual Research Staff Conference aimed at ECRs. The last Conference in February 2015 was attended by 78 staff (21% of the entire RS population), of which 52.5% were female (43.8% of RS are female across UoR).

Supplementing local training (e.g. within Doctoral Training Centres), we provide central training (Table 5.2). Attendance numbers on many of these courses are small and the People Development Team (who have lead responsibility for the development of RS) are working closely with the leaders in our new research structures (Figure 3.2) to ensure that courses meet development needs, with appropriate take-up levels (AP2016:C10). Table 5.2 – Development Sessions Aimed at Research Staff and their PIs (sessions for PIs, many of which are senior RS, shown in italics), totals from 12/13, 13/14, 14/15 and 15/16 (to date) [Data Source Trent]

Course Female Male AN INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT 65 66.3% 33 33.7%

AN INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH IMPACT 39 60.0% 26 40.0%

CERTIFICATE IN RESEARCH CAREER MANAGEMENT: AN INTRODUCTION 11 47.8% 12 52.2%

CERTIFICATE IN RESEARCH CAREER MANAGEMENT: AN INTRODUCTION (1-1 TRAINING) 6 54.5% 5 45.5%

COMMUNICATION SKILLS FOR RESEARCH STAFF 28 49.1% 29 50.9%

DEVELOPING YOUR PRESENTATION SKILLS 10 90.9% 1 9.1%

ENGAGING WITH END USERS OF YOUR RESEARCH 19 54.3% 16 45.7%

ENTREPRENEURSHIP FOR RESEARCH STAFF 4 28.6% 10 71.4%

ESSENTIAL GUIDE FOR NEW PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS/APPLICANTS 7 38.9% 11 61.1%

FACE YOUR FEARS AND DEAL WITH THEM FOR ACADEMICS 16 76.2% 5 23.8%

INDUCTION FOR NEW RESEARCH STAFF 47 54.0% 40 46.0%

INTRAPRENEURSHIP IN A UNIVERSITY 3 27.3% 8 72.7%

INTRODUCTION TO WRITING SUCCESSFUL RESEARCH PROPOSALS FOR RESEARCH STAFF

21 55.3% 17 44.7%

MANAGEMENT SKILLS FOR RESEARCH STAFF 12 52.2% 11 47.8%

MOVING TO A UNIVERSITY LECTURESHIP 10 47.6% 11 52.4%

MOVING TOWARDS A CAREER IN INDUSTRY 11 55.0% 9 45.0%

NETWORKING FOR RESEARCH STAFF 17 73.9% 6 26.1%



PDR TRAINING FOR REVIEWERS 102 51.5% 96 48.5%

PDR TRAINING FOR REVIEWERS (SCHOOL BASED) 125 42.8% 167 57.2%

RESEARCH DATA MANAGEMENT: AN INTRODUCTION 18 62.1% 11 37.9%

RESEARCH STAFF: USING SOCIAL MEDIA TO ENHANCE YOUR RESEARCH 10 66.7% 5 33.3%

RESEARCH STAFF: USING SOCIAL MEDIA TO MANAGE YOUR CAREER 3 50.0% 3 50.0%

SUCCESSFUL MENTORING WORKSHOP 15 78.9% 4 21.1%

SUPERVISING RESEARCH STUDENTS FOR POSTDOC RESEARCH STAFF 15 57.7% 11 42.3%

THE ART OF JOB APPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH STAFF 14 58.3% 10 41.7%

TIME MANAGEMENT 71 63.4% 41 36.6%

TIME MANAGEMENT (SCHOOL BASED) 8 72.7% 3 27.3%

UNCONSCIOUS BIAS IN DECISION MAKING 89 71.2% 36 28.8%

UNCONSCIOUS BIAS IN DECISION MAKING (SCHOOL-BASED) 113 48.9% 118 51.1%

WRITING FOR PUBLICATION FOR RESEARCH STAFF 25 62.5% 15 37.5%

PLANNING IMPACT ACTIVITIES FOR GRANT APPLICATIONS (PATHWAYS TO IMPACT) 11 64.7% 6 35.3%

Grand Total 945 54.9% 776 45.1%

A gender balance is achieved in most courses (Table 5.2), with a slightly higher percentage of females overall attending. For some courses female representation is below 50%, with ‘intrapreneurship’ and ‘entrepreneurship’ particularly low (27.3% and 28.6%). As we review our provision of training in the new research-structures (Figure 3.2), we will work on promoting our courses to achieve more equal participation across all programmes (AP2016:C10). As AP2011:7 we redesigned our annual review processes for all staff, including our RS, launching our new Performance Development Review (PDR) in 2014, with accompanying training – see Section 6f. As part of its Silver AS action plan one of our SET Schools has introduced a pro forma to be used in RS PDRs that aids identification of concrete activities to be undertaken to support career development and transition to the next academic level. This School has subsequently seen substantially larger and gender-balanced rates of RS promotion: Section 4c. We will replicate this across the University (AP2016:C5). Other actions to enhance research staff promotion and career development, building on best practice, are described in Section 4c.



b) Mentoring and networking – describe any mentoring programmes, including any SET-specific mentoring

programmes, and opportunities for networking. Mentoring: All new staff receive a mentor for 6 months. In the first of the new 5-year-plans (2015), several Schools and Functions identified a need to review this scheme to ensure consistency (AP2016:E5i). SET Schools (SAGES and SMPS) have expanded a range of mentoring provision (contributing to AP2011:4) to all staff at all career stages and this good practice will be shared (AP2016:5iii). Probationary academic staff are provided with a mentor for up to 3 years; participants on the Aurora programme are provided with a mentor for the duration. We recently established an internal coaching scheme, although we are still establishing a sufficient number of coaches to be able to offer the facility University-wide (so far 15 female out of 18, and supported via supervision meetings with the coaching programme leader from HBS) (AP2016:E5). The varied ownership and management of mentoring and coaching across the University has prevented us from tracking mentoring pairs (AP2011:4). We have recently consolidated the management of these programmes and will be requesting that Schools return records of numbers of mentoring pairs annually to the DISO (AP2016:E5i). Networking: There are a range of networking opportunities for staff across UoR (Table 5.3). Women@Reading will be an important mechanism by which we raise the visibility of gender issues. To build capacity in this network we are seeking new members for the steering group and moving from a targeted email approach, to advertising on the staff portal and in “In Brief” (AP2016:E6).

Table 5.3 - Networking Opportunities

Network Remit

Bi-annual Research Staff Conference ECR

Social Media networking groups for research staff (e.g. Facebook, LinkedIn)

Peer support for all research staff

School Research staff associations School-based peer support for all Research staff

Annual Graduate School PhD Conference. All PhD students

Termly breakfast clubs for PhD students All PhD students (run by Graduate School)

Networking training course for research staff All research staff



Social networking training course All research staff

LGBT+ Network An inclusive staff support network for individuals identifying as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, as well as other sexual and gender identities, and their allies. Social and representative function

Women@Reading (addressing AP2011:13) A staff group that provides support and acts as a champion for issues of gender equality across the University. Strands of activity both for all staff and for women in leadership roles. Topics for the next 2 years include: Building your network, Imposter syndrome, Career planning, Getting your voice heard, Juggling everything, recruitment & avoiding gender bias, handling conflict, leadership identity. We will also focus on encouraging men to attend – ‘bring a bloke’ events.

We offer staff two national development programmes for women. Springboard: we have supported 2 cohorts locally per-year since 2013 (total 217). Annual briefing sessions help women decide whether Springboard is for them. Follow-up events are well attended (Table 5.4). Springboard attendees report the ability to translate the learning into all aspects of life, and appreciation of an increased support network of likeminded women. These comments suggest a more resilient workforce contributing to our strategic aims. Aurora: We have sent 10+ delegates to each cohort of this Leadership Foundation programme. We have three times as many applications as UoR-supported places; these are considered by an internal panel on the basis of whether the programme will meet candidates identified development needs and leadership aspirations. Participants are provided with a mentor, and the institution provides role models to the national workshop sessions. The UoR Aurora cohort has a mid-point meeting with the VC to discuss progress, give feedback and raise queries about application of their learning to the UoR context. In 2015, this led to the VC inviting Prof Jacky Lumby (University of Southampton) to speak to Aurorans about her research concerning micro-politics in HE. We also run an ‘end of programme’ celebration event for delegates, role models and mentors attended by the VC, and UEB Gender Champion.



Table 5.4 – Springboard Programme cohort data

Cohort number

Dates Number of attendees

1 Feb – May 2013 28

Follow up event Nov 2013 14 (50% of cohort 1)

2 Nov 2013 – Feb 2014 31

3 Mar – June 2014 31

Follow up event June 2014 41 (66% of cohorts 2&3)

4 Nov 2014 – Feb 2015 32

5 Mar – Jun 2015 31

Follow up event Sept 2015 35 (55% of cohorts 4&5)

6 Jan – April 2016 32

7 March – June 2016 32

Total attendees

217

In 2015/16 we supported individuals to attend the StellarHE leadership programme for BAME staff, and the Leadership Foundation Diversifying Academia programme pilot. The attendees (both women), were identified via competitive process. Whilst these opportunities remain popular, and we collect feedback systematically, we have no clear way to assess long-term impact at both an individual and organisational level. Participants have expressed a desire to maintain their networks after the end of the programmes and share their experiences University-wide (see AP2016:E7).



(ii) Comment on the effectiveness of activities in your institution that raise the profile of women in SET generally and also help female staff to raise their own profile such as:

a) Conferences, seminars, lectures, exhibitions and other events. b) Providing spokeswomen for internal and external media opportunities.

c) Nominations to public bodies, professional bodies and for external prizes.

a) Conferences, seminars, lectures, exhibitions and other events.

The University celebrates and promotes the success of women in SET and across the whole University on its webpages and via social-media. In the15 months to March 2016, 45% of the messages on our staff news portal celebrating academic success featured women academics. Since 2014, an important event for the University in raising awareness of women role models and their achievements is the annual Edith Morley Lecture, held to coincide with International Women’s Day (IWD) (Table 5.5, Fig 5.1). Another regular event on IWD is ‘Heroines of Science’, hosted by SCFP. School students, alongside staff from Chemistry, present stories of their favourite female scientists.



Table 5.5 - Edith Morley lectures

Year Edith Morley Lecturer Notes

2016 Karen Blackett OBE, Chairwoman of Mediacom UK

First woman to top the ‘PowerList 100’ of most influential black Britons. Brought up and attended schools in Reading.

2015 Laura Tobin, ITV Meteorologist and Weather Presenter & Rhianna Dhillon, Radio 1 Film Critic

Graduates of Reading: Tobin, BSc Physics and Meteorology 2003; Dhillon, BA English and Film & Theatre 2011, and Reading Alumnus of the Year 2013.

2014 Joan Smith, columnist, author, and human rights activist.

Graduate of Reading. Recent publications include ‘The Public Woman', Westbourne Press, 2013.

We ensure that the profile of our female academics is raised through our popular Public Lecture Series - speakers have been gender balanced in 3 out of 5 years since 2011/12 (Table 5.6) and SET women are well represented. The new Fairbrother lecture, specifically to be delivered by a doctoral researcher, has to date been delivered exclusively by women (2 out 3 being SET researchers) (Table 5.7). The UoR PhD Researcher of the Year Award, promoting the profile of women doctoral students, was won by women in 2013 and 2014.



Figure 5.1 - Annual IWD events at the UoR: The Vice-Chancellor ‘In conversation with’ Karen Blackett OBE on IWD 2016 and the Heroines of Science event from SCFP IWD 2015



Table 5.6 -Public Lecture Series UoR

Year Gender balance of speakers (SET speakers gender balance)

Female SET Speakers Topics

2011/12 3m, 3f (2m,1f)

Professor Roz Shafran Charlie Waller Institute

Managing Our Minds

2012/13

3m, 3f (1m, 2f)

Professor Janet Barlow Department of Meteorology and Director of the Centre for Technologies for Sustainable Built Environments (TSBE)

Hot in the City. Urban Heat Islands Explained

Professor Julie Lovegrove Department of Food and Nutritional Sciences and Institute for Cardiovascular and Metabolic Research (ICMR)

Dietary Dilemmas. Is There an Optimum Diet to Prevent Heart Disease

2013/14 5m, 1f (2m, 1f)

Professor Shirley Reynolds Director of the Charlie Waller Institute

Tackling Teenage Depression

2014/15 2m,2f (1m,1f)

Professor Lynne Murray School of Psychology & Clinical Language Sciences

The Psychology of Babies

2015/16 2m, 1f (2m, 1f) ALL 3 lectures were SET based in this year

Dr Ciara McCabe, School of Psychology & Clinical Language Sciences

How Chocolate Can Help Us Understand Depression


http://www.reading.ac.uk/charliewaller/cwi-home.aspx

http://www.reading.ac.uk/charliewaller/cwi-home.aspx


Table 5.7 -The Fairbrother Lecture

Year Name & department Gender Lecture topic

2013/14 Isabelle Peres (final year PhD student: School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences and the School of Pharmacy)

F ‘Can cannabis be used to treat epilepsy’

2014/15 Dr Nadya Ali (BA and MA at UoR and doctoral research in Dept. Politics & International Relations).

F ‘British Governments' counter-radicalisation policies in the UK over the last ten years’

2015/16 Sammie Buzzard (Final year doctoral researcher: Department of Meteorology)

F 'A slippery situation: melting ice in Antarctica'

Women across SET are involved in a wide range of high profile events outside the University (Table 5.8). Table 5.8 – Selected Keynote lectures and prestigious seminars given, and prestigious events organised by our female SET academics.

Name Description

Professor Julie Lovegrove

Keynote Plenary Presentation: Nutrition Society’s Annual Summer Meeting

UK July 2015

Dr. Tabarak Ballal Keynote Speech at the International Symposium for Infrastructure and

Construction Development in Sudan December 2015

Professor Cathy Creswell Invited State of the Art Lecture, European Society of Child and Adolescent

Psychiatry (ESCAP) Madrid, Spain, June 2015.

Professor Parveen Yaqoob Organiser of major exhibition for the BBSRC’s Great British Bioscience

Festival in November 2014 (London) as a result of a Science Communication



Award

Dr Philippa Darbre Invited closing plenary lecture and opening ceremony speaker: World Breast Cancer Conference UK, August 2015.

Professor Julie Hawkins

Organized and presented at the Medplant Midterm meeting (EU-funded Marie Curie Initial Training Network) UK, August 2015

Dr Orla Kennedy

Led a cross university student mentoring workshop, which led to the

development of Thrive career mentoring in 14/15 and STAR student

mentoring in 15/16

Dr Kath Ryan

Keynote invited speaker at conference on Women's Health and Breastfeeding

in Jeddah in December 2015 by the National Guard Health Service of Saudi

Arabia

Professor Runming Yao Organised and Chaired the 7th International Conference (Sustainable

Development of Building Environment) in partnership with University of

Cambridge, UK and Chongqing University, China. 2015

Dr Libby Schweber Keynote Address, 8th Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB)

Postgraduate Conference. Johannesburg, South Africa, February 2014

Dr Ciara McCabe Psychopharmacology Award Winners Talks. British Association of

Psychopharmacology Annual conference, Bristol July 2015, UK.

The 2016 focus groups, discussing ''encouragement/opportunities to represent my department internally/externally'', reported improved transparency in selection processes for profile-raising opportunities but that workload models failed to sufficiently reflect the time needed for involvement, this feedback contributing to the rationale for AP2016:D1.



b) Providing spokeswomen for internal and external media opportunities.

The UoR Press Office supports women in developing their media-profiles: “When approached for an expert commentator, we always ask if the broadcaster is looking for a woman expert, to provide gender balance. This both increases the likelihood of gaining media exposure and specifically highlights expert women at UoR”. The press office made videos to support women scientists taking part in the national SoapboxScience scheme (Ellie Highwood https://youtu.be/18m126TkTCk and Louise Johnson https://youtu.be/gE8fKOozG40), and has helped prominent female academics develop strategic media profiles (Table 5.9 & Figure 5.2), including actively highlighting twitter users. Table 5.9 -Ten women academics at UoR who have an active media profile. About 1/3 of the Press Office “Media Stars” are women

Professor Roberta Gilchrist (Archaeology)

Winner of Archaeologist of the Year 2016 (the only woman ever to win this award), has had high-profile research on Glastonbury Abbey featured across international media in recent months.

Professor Hannah Cloke (Meteorology/SAGES)

Flooding expert. Extensive comment on UK and worldwide flooding. Was seconded to government in 2014 floods after making high-profile comment in media.

Professor Ellie Highwood (Meteorology)

Climate/pollution expert. Comments on air quality, climate change to national media and on TV, radio.

Professor Shirley Reynolds (Psychology)

Head of the Charlie Waller Institute. Has commented on depression and anxiety among teenagers, including a recent R4 Today Programme interview.

Dr Jane Parker (Food) Director of the Flavour Centre, makes regular appearances in media, including several TV documentaries, including C4 Food Unwrapped and others, recently quoted in Sunday Times, and appeared on BBC R4 Kitchen Cabinet.

Professor Orla Kennedy (Food) Food scientist and regular commentator on diet and health in national media, including Sky News, BBC Horizon.

Professor Julie Lovegrove (Food) Food scientist who is member of the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Council on Nutrition (SACN) and comments on sugar and health in particular.

Dr Helen Dacre (Meteorology) Meteorologist, comments on extreme weather events and storms.

Dr Ciara McCabe (Psychology) Neurologist and depression expert, has appeared in C4 Dispatches documentary on depression, commented on depression stories, and took part


https://youtu.be/18m126TkTCk

https://youtu.be/gE8fKOozG40


in the Backstage at Reading Festival ‘research at the festival’ project.

Professor Christine Williams (Agriculture/Food)

Food scientist and expert on fat, has commented on numerous food stories and appeared on BBC Inside Science, has written for New Scientist.

Figure 5.2 UoR SET Women in the Media Spotlight



c) Nominations to public bodies, professional bodies and for external prizes.

OBEs were awarded to two of the University’s most prominent female leaders and scientists Professor Dianne Berry (2012) and Professor Christine Williams (2013) – such awards being publicized on the staff portal - and we have a strong record of SET women being elected to public/professional bodies (Table 5.10) and serving on national and international committees (Table 5.11). Table 5.10 Selected Nominations of Women in SET schools to Public/Professional bodies and for External Prizes/Awards

Name Description

Professor Roberta Gilchrist Archaeologist of the Year 2016 (first woman ever to win the award-winner chosen

entirely by public vote)

Professor Hannah Cloke Guardian Research Award 2016 (pending) research impact category

Should I eat meat? The big health dilemma Dr Orla Kennedy 2014 on BBC Horizon



Dr Philippa Darbre

External appointment by the European Commission: advisor to the Scientific Risk

Assessment Advisory Committee on Health and Environmental Risks –current

Professor Lynne Murray Newton International Fellowship, Royal Society, 2015-2017

Dr Annemarie Verkerk

(Postdoc) awarded the prestigious Otto Hahn Medal by the Max Planck Society.

Professor Parveen Yaqoob

Member of a British Nutrition Foundation Task Force; Fellowship of the Association for

Nutrition (2014)

Dr Anna Horwood

Dept. of Health Allied Health Professions Clinical Expert in Paediatrics

Dr Ciara McCabe Council Member, British Association for Psychopharmacology (BAP), 2014-2019;

(BAP) Lilly Fellowship winner, July 2015

Professor Julie Lovegrove

Trustee of the Association for Nutrition (AfN) Council (2011-date)

Dr. Libby Schweber Research Paper prize (merit), CIOB Innovation and Research Awards prize in 2014

and 2015

Professor Jennifer Whyte 2015 Shimizu Visiting Professorship in the Department of Civil and Environmental

Engineering at Stanford University

Table 5.11 –Selected National & International Committees

Name Description

Professor Susan Todd Council of the Royal Statistical Society

Professor Beatrice Pelloni Council of the London Mathematical Society



Professor Ellie Highwood Vice-President (and President-Elect) of the Royal Meteorological Society

Professor Christine Williams Chair of BBSRC Food Security Strategic Advisory Panel and Chair REF 2014 Sub-

panel 6: Agriculture, Veterinary and Food Science

Professor Dianne Berry Chair of REF Equality and Diversity Panel, Vitae’s External Advisory Board, and

member of HEFCE Strategic Research Committee

Professor Hannah Cloke DEFRA Research and Development Programme, Floods Theme

Professor Roberta Gilchrist REF 2014 Sub-panel 17: Geography, Environmental Studies and Archaeology

Dr Orla Kennedy

Scientific advisory committee on Nutritional composition of Foods

Professor Claire Williams Invited member of international cannabinoid society education committee (2013-

present)

Professor Judi Ellis Member of Home Office Science Advisory Committee 2010-present

Professor Sue Walker Member of the All Parliamentary Design and Innovation Group

Professor Sue Grimmond World Meteorological Organization, Chair of the Expert Team on Megacity

Implementation Plan

Professor Flora Samuel Nominated by RIBA to be member of scientific committee for Seoul 2017, UIA

conference.

Professor Julie Hawkins

British Pharmacopoeia (BP) Commission’s Working Party DNA: Identification

Techniques



Despite, these efforts, in the 2015 staff survey 91% of men but only 73% of women (academics) agreed that ‘women are used as well as men as visible role models at UoR’. Our “Faces of Reading” campaign will be used to raise women’s profile at Reading both internally and externally (AP2016:D2).



6. Organisation and culture (1550 words used) (i) Comment on the effectiveness of policies and activities in your institution that show a supportive organisation and

culture in your SET departments as shown by the following data. a) Female:male ratio of Heads of School/Faculty/Department across the whole institution and in SET

departments.

Table 6.1 – Gender balance of senior academic roles [Data source: PSO]

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/6

Female Male %

Female Female Male %




Female

Deans 3 6 33.3% 3 7 30.0% 2 8 20.0% 3 7 30.0% 7 11 38.9%

SET Deans 1 3 25.0% 1 3 25.0% 1 3 25.0% 2 2 50.0% 2 2 50.0%

Heads of School 2 19 9.5% 2 18 10.0% 4 17 19.0% 6 15 28.6% 9 12 42.9% SET Heads of School 0 8 0.0% 1 7 12.5% 1 7 12.5% 2 6 25.0% 2 6 25.0%

UoR Total 5 25 16.7% 5 25 16.7% 6 25 19.4% 9 22 29.0% 16 23 41.0%

SET Total 1 11 8.3% 2 10 16.7% 2 10 16.7% 4 8 33.3% 4 8 33.3%

Our senior academic roles – HoSs and Deans, now considered equivalent in status - are 41.0% female (33.3% in SET). There has been significant increase in female leadership in all categories over the last four years (Table 6.1). Our Dean roles are varied and include Deans for Research, Teaching and Learning, D&I, and Graduate Research. Whilst three of the five T&L Deans are female, only one of the five Research Deans is female. At the next level down (Figure 3.2) 43% (18.2% in SET) of the 34 Research Division Leaders are female. More transparent processes for appointing to HoS (inviting applications from across the University) were introduced in 2013, and for Dean in 2015, and adverts from 2015 have made clear that applications to hold positions as job-shares are



welcomed. This has resulted in more women applicants, more successful applications from women, and the first job-share senior appointment.

b) Gender balance on the senior management team at university level.

The University Executive Board (UEB) comprises 7 men (Table 6.2), placing UoR well below the sector average (34%. Women Count 2016 report), although we are not alone in having no female board members. UEB have acknowledged that this is not consistent with our values and ambition, and have committed to change (Figures 3.1 and 6.1). The next level of leadership, “The Leadership Group”, comprising Deans, HoSs, and Heads of Functions (55 total), is 38% female - a substantial female pool from which to attract and develop future UEB members. The VC has commissioned from the Deans D&I a proposal of measures to increase UEB diversity, in particular to lead to 30% women on UEB by 2020 (AP2016:E2ii).

Role Male/Female Term of appointment Notes

Vice-Chancellor M Permanent, appointed in January 2012 Champion for Sexual Orientation & Gender Reassignment

DVC and PVC,Research

M DVC 2 years from August 2014

PVC 4 years from August 2014

PVC,Teaching and Learning

M 4 years from August 2015 Champion for Age

PVC,Academic Planning & Resource

M Permanent, appointed in August 2014 Champion for Gender; Pregnancy & Maternity; Marriage & Civil Partnership

PVC,Global Engagement

M Permanent, appointed in August 2014 Champion for Race; Religion & Belief

Chief Strategy Officer & University Secretary

M Permanent, appointed in August 2015 Champion for Disability

Chief Operating Officer

M Permanent, appointed in August 2012 Diversity Champion for Offshore campuses

Table 6.2 - University Executive Board (UEB).



Figure 6.1 - Vice Chancellor’s view of our current non-diverse UEB, and public commitment to change.

“I am clear we cannot be complacent nor find excuses about this being a sector wide, rather than a Reading only problem. I have also been honest that an all male, all white University Executive Board, along with the lack of gender and racial balance on other decision-making committees, sends out the wrong message about our values and ambition. Real culture change starts at the top”.



c) Gender balance on influential committees at university level.

Table 6.3 – Gender balance on key University committees [Data source: PSO]

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/6

Female Male





% Female

Council 7 23 23.3% 9 21 30.0% 7 22 24.1% 7 22 24.1% 10 19 34.5%

Senate 17 67 20.2% 31 57 35.2% 32 55 36.8% 35 53 39.8% 31 59 34.4%

UEB 1 14 6.7% 1 11 8.3% 1 7 12.5% 0 7 0.0% 0 7 0.0% Strategy and Finance Committee 2 10 16.7% 2 10 16.7% 2 10 16.7% 1 11 8.3% 1 11 8.3%

University Board of T&L 5 13 27.8% 7 13 35.0% 7 13 35.0% 9 12 42.9% 10 10 50.0% University Board of Research 3 11 21.4% 4 10 28.6% 4 9 30.8% 3 9 25.0% 9 14 39.1% UoR Malaysia Executive Board N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 3 40.0% 3 2 60.0%

The female percentage on Council (our executive governing body) has risen to 34.5% in 2015/16, exceeding the

University’s 2020 target, and heading towards the 40-60% target advocated in Women Count 2016. Contributing to this

change has been open advertising for council members in the last year, this as Council has signed up to the CUC

concordat, committing to improve diversity on Council and other University committees. Work, notably, is needed on

diversity of the Strategy and Finance Committee of Council (and UEB, as discussed above). The Deans D&I will present

progress on actions to achieve 30% female representation on committees annually to Council from July 2015 and will

work with Council to address the composition of its own committees (AP2016:E2iii).

Female representation on Senate has improved, but peaked in 2014/15. The decrease in 2015/16 (Table 6.4) is mainly

due to changes in the elected “Professors” and “Academics (not Professors)” groups, changes in the student membership,

and introduction of Research Deans. Five women left the “Academics” group last year and were replaced by 6 men.

Further investigation suggests communication with elected members of Senate whose terms are coming to an end has

been poor and some of the women lost would have reapplied if this had been explicitly suggested (and there remain



current vacancies). This intelligence will be fed into proposals to improve committee gender balance to be developed by

the University Secretary (AP2016:E2).

2014/15 2015/16

Member of Senate through Role

Male Female % Female Male Female % Female

Ex-officio members of UEB

5 0 0.0% 5 0 0.0%

Deans 4 0 0.0% 5 1 16.7%

Faculty Directors of Research

0 1 100.0% 0 1 100.0%

Research Deans N/A N/A N/A 4 1 20.0%

T&L Deans 3 2 40.0% 2 3 60.0%

Heads of School 16 5 23.8% 12 9 42.9%

Elected to Senate

Academic staff (1 from each School)

12 5 29.4% 10 7 41.2%

12 Professors 6 5 45.5% 6 2 25.0%

12 Academics, not Profs 2 9 81.8% 8 4 33.3%

RUSU 1 4 80.0% 4 1 20.0%

Students 3 2 40.0% 2 2 50.0%

Co-opted 1 2 66.7% 1 0 0.0%

Totals 53 35 39.8% 59 31 34.4%

Table 6.4 - Senate composition.



d) Evidence from equal pay audits/reviews. Table 6.5 – Year on year gender pay gap by Grade (1 January 2013/2014/2015) [Data source: PSO Claire Eckett]

2013 2014 2015

Grade

Female Male Pay Gap (%)



No. of

Staff

Average Salary (mean)

No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


Framework Grade 1 109 13,819.57 62 13,793.45 -0.19 110 13,947.87 61 13,930.31 0.13 110 14,215.55 58 14,209.83 -0.04 Framework Grade 2 35 14,792.11 52 14,734.08 -0.39 33 14,909.97 48 14,928.58 0.12 32 15,157.44 48 15,247.40 0.59 Framework Grade 3 117 16,948.98 73 17,081.56 0.78 124 16,928.52 71 17,130.97 1.18 108 17,366.05 72 17,398.24 0.19 Framework Grade 4 343 21,280.78 108 21,747.95 2.15 354 21,339.91 116 21,815.62 2.18 355 21,816.59 120 22,014.08 0.9 Framework Grade 5 185 25,349.88 93 26,212.94 3.29 193 25,536.61 105 26,134.39 2.29 204 26,087.22 108 26,309.47 0.84 Framework Grade 6 346 32,508.82 257 32,645.28 0.42 378 32,849.85 270 32,760.13 0.27 384 33,432.84 285 33,404.95 -0.08 Framework Grade 7 314 43,184.02 292 43,784.20 1.37 324 43,473.97 308 44,153.26 1.54 344 44,298.27 298 44,976.58 1.51 Framework Grade 8 131 51,763.37 163 52,197.47 0.83 140 52,263.30 177 53,001.78 1.39 154 53,479.70 177 53,764.23 0.53 Framework Grade 9 15 71,081.20 18 80,386.17 11.58 20 72,526.82 22 82,385.27 11.97 19 72,665.25 28 91,361.59 20.46 Professor Zone 1 29 57,191.17 37 58,436.84 2.13 31 57,060.52 47 58,362.36 2.23 27 58,600.44 53 58,987.28 0.66 Professor Zone 2 18 72,452.00 92 74,346.61 2.55 31 70,412.95 98 77,409.39 9.04 38 71,677.52 95 80,304.60 10.74 Professor Zone 3 11 86,640.55 33 86,797.15 0.18 11 88,572.60 35 88,708.95 0.15 12 89,898.88 36 91,660.18 1.92

Professor Zone 4 2 109,032.00

15 102,551.93 -6.32 3 104,758.57 13 106,889.00 1.99 3 99,562.06 10 115,234.83 13.6



Table 6.6 – Year on year gender pay gap for Academic and Research staff in SET schools by Grade (1 January 2013/2014/2015)

2013 2014 2015




No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


No. of

Staff


Framework Grade 6 103

31,288.52

129 31,819.67 1.67 104 31,487.68 137 31,812.75 1.02 99 32,257.21 134 32,693.00 1.33


42,893.80

117 42,899.46 0.01 73 43,194.88 127 43,368.58 0.4 78 44,061.83 124 44,493.81 0.97


51,375.95

71 51,923.89 1.06 43 51,452.60 80 52,461.06 1.92 46 52,862.02 77 53,346.55 0.91

Professor Zone 1 10

56,998.00

19 56,056.05 -1.68 16 57,272.94 27 56,802.63 -0.83 13 58,345.15 30 58,134.37 -0.36

Professor Zone 2 9

74,496.89

52 71,551.10 -4.12 11 75,717.87 53 73,198.46 -3.44 15 74,986.38 55 77,617.06 3.39

Professor Zone 3 4

84,339.75

23 79,609.39 -5.94 4 89,008.48 22 80,734.50 -10.25 5 88,113.30 21 83,055.46 -6.09

Professor Zone 4 0 9 106,156.00 N/A 1 83,052.00 8 110,488.19 24.83 2 95,169.00 7 117,408.87 18.94



As in previous submissions, the gender pay gap is less than 5% in the majority of the grades across the University. However, significant pay gaps remain for senior staff (Professorial zones 2 and 4, and Grade 9). A Professorial rezoning was completed in summer 2013 (progress against AP2011:6) -13 women were moved from zone 1 to bottom of 2 (compared to 6 men). This positive action in promoting female professors reduced the average female zone 2 salary leading to an apparent increase in the zone 2 pay gap at Jan 2014. Otherwise, the UoR zone 2 pay gap is dominated by spot salaries for several men in HBS. The SET school Professorial pay gap (Table 6.7) has decreased in Zone 4 (small numbers) and increased in zone 2 over the past 2 years – again this is the result of the positive action of promoting women into zone 2. We have also gone from a negative pay gap (women being paid more than men) in zone 3 to a significant positive pay gap, although numbers here are small. There is still more to do; much clearer criteria have been introduced for the professorial review process in 2016, and the relevant committees are now explicitly reminded about the current gender pay gap at the start of meetings. Expectations have also been clarified regarding normal progression through the subgrades of professorial zone 1, and committees consider all submitted forms for pay reward regardless of whether a case has been made in order to account for any gender bias in the “putting yourself forward” process. We are also pro-actively working to assign “ad-hoc” professors, most of whom are on spot salaries, currently included in zone 2 by default, to the correct zone based on zone criteria such as international recognition, research outputs and other contribution. We expect a combination of improved promotion of women, and increased transparency of process and salaries to reduce this gender pay gap in future years (AP2016:E1i-ii). In August 2015 we introduced sub-zones for the Professional Grade 9 which reportedly has reduced the pay gap during 2015 to around 13% but an in depth analysis of the effect, and of the grade 8 pipeline remains to be completed, reporting to UEB in summer 2016 (AP2016:E1iii).



e) Female:male ratio of staff in the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise/ Research Excellence Framework –

Table 6.7 – Eligibility and inclusion in 2008 Research Assessment Exercise and 2014 Research Excellence Framework [Data source: Planning and Strategy Office ]

RAE 2008 REF 2014

Female Male % Female Female Male % Female

Eligible population 268 493 35% 282 471 38%

Returned population 228 444 34% 233 405 37%

% of eligible population returned @UoR 85% 90% - 83% 86% -

% of population returned nationally 47% 67% - 51% 67% -

Unlike the sector as a whole, UoR had no significant differences in submitted and non-submitted populations with respect to gender at the institutional level, and Reading had a much higher submission rate than the sector overall. Additional analysis of % of available pool submitted by gender in faculties reveals that there is no significant gender difference in % of available staff selected in Science or Life Sciences (Figure 6.2).

Figure 6.2 - % of staff pool selected by gender for each faculty at Reading.

020406080

100

% Female

% Male



f) Transparent workload models – describe the effectiveness of the systems in place to ensure that work, including

pastoral and administrative responsibilities, is allocated transparently and equitably, and is rewarded and recognised in appraisal and promotions.

The design and operation of workload models is delegated to individual Schools, recognising that Schools and their balance of activities vary hugely. The University provides guidance and training to encourage consistency of culture across the University; the introduction in 2014 of the new PDR appraisal process (AP2011:7) was accompanied by mandatory training for all reviewers, training available for all reviewees, plus specific guidance notes for Heads of Schools and Functions. The general guidance notes for the PDR scheme make clear on page one the aim “to recognise and acknowledge the diversity of contribution made by all staff, identifying excellence and success in all areas”, and encourage discussion of “Workload allocation (what is the balance and focus of your work – is this right?)”. A range of activities are also referred to in the new promotion criteria for AP (see also section 4). The University ensures consistency and transparency in allocation of the largest administrative responsibilities, including HoS and School Director of Teaching and Learning, through University-wide guidelines and a standard application and interview process, and since summer 2015 has made explicit that large administrative roles may be undertaken as job-shares building on experience of successful job-shares at HoD level in SET Schools since 2011, leading to better gender balance at leadership levels. We have made some limited progress in sharing of practice in workload models across SET schools since 2011 (AP2011:9) through evangelisation by Athena SWAN Silver Schools (e.g. SBS is adapting an SMPS workload model to its local needs). The Deans D&I have recently (Feb 2016) run a SET HoSs focus group on workload models, sharing current practice and as a first consultation on good practice guidelines for workload to be used across the University, re-igniting the work on AP2011:9. The need for substantial further action in this direction (AP2016:D1) was highlighted by feedback from another Feb 2016 focus group on Part-Time and Flexible Working, which provided compelling evidence of the need for stronger guidance and more work on sharing of best practice, not least as it relates to part-time working. g) Work-life balance – describe the measures taken by your institution to ensure a healthy work-life balance including,

for example, that meetings and other events are held during core hours and to discourage a long hours culture.



Many parts of the University have adopted “core hours” between 10am and 4 pm, holding meetings within these hours. This has become more complex given the need for meetings with Malaysia-based staff. Additionally, there remain meetings, particularly those involving senior staff, that continue outside the 10-4 core hours, e.g. UEB and HR senior team meetings at 8.30, COO briefings for HoSs at 5-7 pm. We will move these to within core hours as soon as possible, and where it is not possible we will establish good practice (e.g. a minimum period of notice) (AP2016:F4ii). Teaching staff complete a “Lecturer Unavailability” form ahead of each year, blocking out time affected by caring responsibilities, which is sent to timetabling. Analysis of these forms completed by staff in SMPS for the session 2015-2016 supports a more meaningful definition of “core hours” being 10-3 and we will extend this data collection and analysis in AP2016:F4.

h) Publicity materials, describe policies for production of publicity materials including the institution’s website or images used.

The 2014 student recruitment campaign featured “Are you ready to break the glass ceiling?” - a public demonstration of the University’s commitment to equality. The 2015 campaign featured two advertisements targeting women (Figure 6.3): “Dig Deeper” speaking to women who make the decision to look further, work harder and go the extra mile, while “Gloves Off” is about expressing themselves in a bold and liberating sense, deliberately challenging assumptions and stereotypes. All these advertisements have appeared on external poster sites in London, Reading and extensively across our digital media platforms. The Athena SWAN logo is used in University-wide publication material/web pages. Delivering on AP2011:1, for SET courses where women are historically under-represented, we now use positive images of female students in all recruitment material (web-pages, flyers and booklets, Figure 6.4).



Figure 6.3 - 2014 and 2015 student recruitment campaign.



Figure 6.4 - SET recruitment materials

. .



7. Flexibility and managing career breaks (901 words used) (i) Comment on the effectiveness of policies and activities in your institution that are supportive of flexibility and

managing career breaks in your SET departments as shown by the following.

a) Flexible working– describe how eligibility for flexible and part-time working is advertised to staff.

Table 7.1 M/F Academic Staff on Full-time/Part-Time contracts (data source TRENT)

We have 232 part-time academic staff, 132 within SET. Women are more likely to be part-time overall (Table 7.1) but there is no differential within SET Schools, perhaps reflecting School-level Athena SWAN actions. The University HR-webpages outline how a flexible approach to working (part-time, term-time only, compressed-hours, annualised-hours, job-sharing, working at/from home) brings benefits for both the University and employees, although the examples mainly relate to Grades 1-5. HR-Partners actively promote consideration of flexible-working practices; flexible-working information is also included in the staff induction. The University has been working to improve its policies and processes as follows:

new online annual leave system (implemented February 2016) - we have identified 477 different working patterns (including part-time/part-year and job-share arrangements, and full-time roles where employees have a contractually agreed work pattern to meet their work-life balance needs).


Female Male



% Female Female Male % Female Female Male % Female

UoR

Full- time 336 538 38.4% 355 548 39.3% 404 609 39.9% 404 591 40.6% 425 595 41.7%

Part- time 95 67 58.6% 104 68 60.5% 101 91 52.6% 110 89 55.3% 126 106 54.3%

SET Schools

Full- time 194 363 34.8% 200 372 35.0% 217 415 34.3% 215 403 34.8% 219 416 34.5%

Part- time 49 43 53.3% 48 40 54.5% 52 53 49.5% 52 54 49.1% 66 66 50.0%



improved ability for academic staff to obtain flexibility to meet childcare responsibilities through timetabling requests approved by a HoS (Table 7.2); these capture informal flexible working arrangements. We will use these more systematically across UoR to inform decisions (AP2016:F4)

a change to our HR-data-system (TRENT) to enable collection of instances when flexible-working requests are refused by managers. New online-forms have been made available to staff and, to raise awareness with managers, a reminder was issued via the University’s communication ‘In Brief’ (4/12/2015) to reinforce the requirement to inform HR of all flexible-working decisions (agreed/refused) and allow monitoring for the first time (AP2016:F3).

since December 2015, all job advertisements have included wording shown in Figure 7.1, and attitudes to this were explored with the Leadership Group on 20/1/16. We will make this more explicit during 2016/17 (AP2016:F6i).

improved levels of training for managers (and other staff) to raise awareness of diversity issues and improve their ability to manage diverse teams as promised in AP2011:10 (Table 7.3)

Table 7.2 - Non-availability timetabling approvals in subset of SET Schools for which data is available

School Total requests Women Men

SAGES 21 9 12

SCFP 20 12 8

SMPS 9 4 5

Figure 7.1 - Screenshot of extract from standard UoR Recruitment advert form

.



Table 7.3 - Diversity Training for leaders, managers and all staff

Title Description Requirement Delivery

Diversity in the Workplace

online training which addresses each protected characteristic and includes case studies

mandatory for all staff

Completed by 41% staff (1,905) at 18 April 2016 (up from 11% at 1 November 2015)

Unconscious Bias in Decision Making (developed by UoR Psychology Department)

Classroom delivery of a workshop to enable individuals to understand and reflect on their unconscious biases and impact on decision-making

mandatory for leaders

encouraged for all managers and desirable for all staff

Delivered to all University Executive Board in Autumn 2014 and a total of 356 staff to date

These actions have led to 79% of academics agreeing with the statement ‘My line manager/supervisor is supportive of requests for flexible working’ (19% neither agreeing/disagree) in the 2015 SET academic staff survey. However, comments from the survey and the Feb 2016 part-time/flexible-working focus groups indicate that we need greater awareness and consistency in approach from managers. We will tackle this through a range of actions with the ultimate goal that flexible-working is a normal part of a successful career AP2016:F3-F6.

b) Parental leave – the uptake of leave entitlement (including maternity, parental, adoption and paternity leave) and the return rates and support offered to those returning to work.

In 2015, UoR made a significant commitment to supporting those taking parental leave, agreeing to reimburse the full cost of Maternity/Shared Parental Leave to Schools from a central fund, with 25% ring-fenced specifically to aid return to work in a way to be agreed with the individual (e.g. research leave, additional conference costs etc). With this single step, we



will improve consistency of treatment across the University, specifically support individuals AND recognise the impact of parental leave on the wider team. Due to the considerable financial commitment involved, this applies from 2016/17 for academic staff and 2017/18 for non-academic staff (AP2016:F1,F2). Since our last application, we have also reviewed and updated our guidance on Keeping-In-Touch and Shared-Parental-In-Touch Days (KIT/SPLIT) (AP2011:12). Our online guidance and forms now make it clear to staff that we take the same approach for remunerating KIT and SPLIT days; i.e. anyone attending work for a KIT/SPLIT day will receive full pay or offered Time-off-in-lieu (TOIL) at their preference. Our HR- data-system (TRENT) captures all paid KIT/SPLIT days, while any taken as TOIL is recorded locally. Table 7.4 - Uptake of maternity, paternity and adoption leave (data source TRENT)

Uptake of

maternity leave

Maternity Leave

return rate *

Uptake of

paternity leave

Uptake of

adoption leave

2010/11 University 65 100% 28 0

SET Schools 23 100% 17 0

2011/12 University 52 100% 33 0


2012/13 University 67 100% 26 0


2013/14 University 61 100% 27 1


2014/15 University 63 100% 31 0


*(non-returner defined as: resignation coinciding with return due date) The number of women taking maternity leave has been stable over the past 5 years and 100% return to work. Numbers taking paternity leave are lower – anecdotally many men take holiday rather than claim paternity leave. We want to do



more to support fathers and encourage them to take up parent-related entitlements (AP2016:E8). Our first member of staff took shared parental leave in 2016. HR-Advisors have developed and delivered a workshop entitled ‘An overview of childcare and parenting policies’ giving an overview of parental/family-leave policies (including entitlement to KIT/SPLIT days) and our flexible-working policy. This has now been delivered to HR-staff in order that they can support all staff more effectively in relation to queries received and piloted to staff in SCFP, and will be rolled-out to all Schools over the next 12 months (AP2016:F5iii). The 2016 focus groups indicated that support from managers to returners from parental leave varies. While some returners had positive experiences, with managers engaging and implementing appropriate adjustments, others felt that more needs to be done in developing manager-awareness, particularly surrounding fairer work allocation and improved training on managing diverse teams (AP2016:D1, E3, E4). c) Childcare – describe the institution’s childcare provision and how it is communicated to staff. Figure 7.2 UoR Little Learners Nursery

Details of childcare provision at the University are accessible via the HR-webpages and included in ‘Further Particulars’ for job adverts. The Little Learners Nursery, run by RUSU was purpose built in 2009 and accepts the children of students and staff of UoR in the age range 3-months to 5-years. In its most recent Ofsted inspection it was graded as ‘good’ in all areas.



The nursery can take 106 children and overall occupancy at February 2016 is 70%. The Pre-School part of the nursery (ages 3-5) has high demand and is currently full – this is an area we will continue to monitor (following from AP2011:8). The nursery offers 15 hours Government funding per week for all 3-4 year olds and to eligible 2-year-olds; Childcare Vouchers (CV) are accepted. There has been a big rise in participants in the CV Scheme with 274 parents in the scheme at January 2016 compared to 80 in 2014. We promote this Scheme at the new-staff induction event and on our HR-webpages.



MY JOURNEY: Dr Chimene Daleu

“I have benefited hugely by having supportive mentors and PhD supervisors. I was the PhD Researcher of the Year 2013, Faculty of Science winner and the second best PhD researcher of the University of Reading”

MY JOURNEY: Professor Parveen

Yaqoob “ I maintained my 0.9FTE contract when I was appointed Head of School and, although challenging, a house move to be closer to work and a very supportive work environment have been critical in terms of work-life balance.’’

MY JOURNEY: Professor Ellie Highwood

“… my Department takes flexible work and equality of opportunity very seriously and this has allowed me to take on leadership roles on my terms”.

8. Any other comments – maximum 500 words (436 words used) Please comment here on any other elements which you think relevant to the application, e.g. other SET-specific initiatives of special interest since the original application that have not been covered in the previous sections, and promoting the Athena SWAN Charter. Our SET staff (both men and women) play a role in promoting gender equality in SET nationally (Table 8.1). Most recently, three Reading SET women (Parveen Yaqoob, Ellie Highwood and Chimene Daleu) were featured in The Royal Society’s 2016 publication Parent Carer Scientist - a collection of personal stories from scientists combining a career in research with roles as parents/carers. All three described a supportive work environment at UoR.



Table 8.1-External Engagement activity on gender equality

Name Description

Professor Ellie Highwood Meteorology

Interviewed by International Innovation in 2015 on her research and

recent appointment as Dean for Diversity and Inclusion and joined the

Guardian newspaper blogging team in 2013, Athena SWAN seminar

in Lancaster 2015, STEM Ambassador

Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde Mathematics and Statistics

Shared best practice in 2014/15 on Athena SWAN (as HoS in School

holding a silver award) at University of Bath and Queen Mary London.

Professor Patricia Riddell Psychology

Led a session at the inaugural HBS Women’s Forum event 29th

January 2015 and frequent Aurora Programme mentor

Dr Tabarak Ballal School of the Built Environment

Keynote Speech on Women in Engineering: Marine and Off-shore

Engineering Technology Conference, The Public Authority for Applied

Education and Training, Kuwait in March 2014

Dr Calvin Smith Mathematics and Statistics

Member London Mathematical Society Women in Mathematics

Committee

Professor Beatrice Pelloni Mathematics and Statistics

Chair, European Mathematical Society Women’s Committee, 2016-

2019.

Dr Louise Johnson Ecology and Evolutionary Biology

The L’Oréal-UNESCO for Women In Science Roundtable Lunch and

Media Woman FWIS Fellows Training media event for women

scientists January 2015

Dr Hilary Geoghegan SAGES

Leading Gender in Fieldwork workshop at RGS


http://www.reading.ac.uk/search/search-departmental-staff.aspx?id=1016


We are also beginning to work with external organisations to promote gender equality, for example Chatham House will be filming at UoR in May 2016 to launch an international competition for 18-25 year olds to make a video entitled “What would you do to make the world a better place for women”. This is an initiative relating to the W20, similar to the G20 but a new initiative gender inclusive growth that helps to close the gender gap and create more economic opportunities for women. New Athena Principles – Transgender policy/guidance UoR signed up to the new Athena principles in 2015 and our first School level application under the post-May2015 principles will be submitted in April 2016. University wide, we are moving towards the new principles, and in particular have made some progress on Transgender policy and guidance on which we will build. The University has had online guidance to support staff and students going through gender reassignment since 2010. This is comprehensive guidance, covering: how to support the individual, time off for medical procedures, changing personal information, return to work/studies, student admissions/staff recruitment, sources of expert help. In all our policies/processes across the University, we now want to ensure that the specific needs of transgender staff and students are considered as normal practice by policy owners. An example of this working effectively is the development of digital campus-maps which will be available soon on our website. The maps will indicate a range of facilities across campus including gender neutral toilets which will enable staff and students to locate these easily.



Action plan

Provide a new action plan as an appendix. An action plan template is available on the Athena SWAN website. This should be a table or a spreadsheet comprising plans to address the priorities identified by the data and within this application, success/outcome measures, the person responsible for each action and a timeline for completion. It should cover current initiatives and your aspirations for the next three years.


UoR Athena SWAN Action Plan: April 2016 to November 2019

1

Action

Ultimate goal/long term aspiration

Description of action Rationale (i.e what evidence is there that prompted

this action/ objective?)

(Cross Reference to application)

Measurable outcomes

Timeframe (start/end date) and

milestones

Persons responsibl

e (including job title)

Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High

Initial Progress with dates

SET A AS Self-Assessment Process – Governance and Organisation

A1 The D&I governance model drives forward change and embeds diversity and inclusion permanently, facilitating recognition via the Athena SWAN Charter Mark

i. Annually review the structure which governs and supports Athena SWAN and gender equality at the UoR to make sure it is fit for purpose, resilient to change in personnel and includes all key stakeholders

ii. Athena Implementation Team (AIT)formed and meets termly to implement action plan and monitor progress

iii. Expansion of the Athena SWAN Steering group as all Schools join Athena SWAN and apply for awards

iv. New SAT formed in January 2019 for Institutional application in November 2019

Discussion at the first meeting of the new SAT team concluded that the chain of leadership on Diversity and inclusion and the governance structure of committees needs to be clear to everyone and to more proactively drive forward Athena SWAN throughout the whole of the period of the award. Application section 2c

i. Existing committees and membership reviewed amended and publicised annually

ii.Athena Implementation Team meets in June 2016 and termly thereafter, minutes, reports made to DISG, minutes available openly on website.

iii.represent-atives from all schools on ASSG by 2018

iv.SAT membership for 2019 publicised on web.

New overall D&I structure in place as Business as usual by August 2016

Ongoing expansion & embedding of Athena SWAN across the University during life of action plan

New SAT January 2019

Vice- Chancellor (Sir David Bell) Deans for D&I (Professor Ellie Highwood and Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde)

1 August 2015: Deans for Diversity and Inclusion in post Sept 2015: D&I Officer in post

October 2015: new Diversity and Inclusion leadership and governance structure approved by the Diversity and Inclusion Strategy ( Application Fig 2.1)

A2 The May 2015 Athena SWAN principles are being achieved across the University.

i. Extend the Athena SWAN Charter Award beyond SET Schools, to include AHSSBL Schools

ii. New application for Institutional Silver award to include staff in functions, transgender and intersectionality considerations

A recognition that our commitment on gender equality a needs to be embedded across all Schools and that

i. All SET Schools holding an award, at least 2 at Silver status. At least 2

First AHSSBL School application in 2017

Deans for D&I (Professor Ellie Highwood and

1 On November 5th 2015 Sir David Bell, Vice-Chancellor of UoR sent a letter to Athena SWAN, making a personal commitment to the May 2015 Athena SWAN principles


2

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


effort in all Schools and Functions should be recognised by Athena SWAN. Application sections 1 and 8

AHBSSL Schools holding an award and all Schools working towards some level of recognition by 2019 ii. Make an Institutional Athena SWAN Gender Charter Mark Silver level application in November 2019

All SET Schools holding an award by November 2017 Ongoing throughout life of Action Plan

Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde)

D&I Officer (Frances Raimo)

HBS formed a SAT in March 2016.

A3 Schools and Functions are held accountable for achieving against gender targets, including charter mark

i. All Schools and Functions to have Diversity & inclusion Champions with time for this activity recognised and allocated transparently

ii. Schools and Functions to adopt formal KPIs and report annually on:

Gender balance by grade

Gender pay gap by grade

Athena SWAN recognition

Our experience in Athena SWAN silver Schools is that engaged and visible leadership is crucial to progress.

Local measures are paramount as well as the need to ensure consistency across Schools

Application section 2c

i. D&I Champions in all Schools with time allocated and formally recognised in workload models

All Functions to have D&I champions with time allocated and formally recognised in workload models ii.Schools and Functions reporting on

August 2016

August 2017

First reporting November 2016,

PVC Academic Planning & Resource (Professor Robert Van de Noort)

Deans for D&I (Professor Ellie Highwood and Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde)

All Heads of School

1


3

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


KPIs annually in 5 year plan, and reference to Diversity and Inclusion documented in Boards of Studies and School or Function management committees or equivalent

annually thereafter in 5 year plan.

and Functions

SET B

Understanding the Institution

B1 Equality data is clear, transparent and accessible; and its use to inform our policies and processes is normal practice.

Provide a comprehensive set of diversity data through an interactive dashboard display tool, to be updated annually, which all Schools and Functions will use to interrogate their data and which will enable them to consider gender equality issues, as well as the intersection of gender with other protected characteristics.

A recognition, that across the University, Schools and Functions need to understand their diversity profile in order to identify equality issues and to take appropriate action, and that previous systems have not been able to provide accurate data regularly Previous feedback from Schools that data has been a major issue for Athena applications Application section 2c & 3

All Schools and Functions are demonstrating how they have used the data dashboard to track gender equality progress in their area and for benchmarking in the Equality and Diversity sections of their 5 year plans

Diversity Data Dashboard demonst-ration by PSO to ASSG (15 June 2016) Data dashboard in use by Schools and Functions (start of 2016/2017 academic year)

Head of Planning and Reporting (Dr Nathan Helsby) HR Systems Manager (Richard Speight) D&I Officer (Frances Raimo) Heads of Schools and Functions

1 Work undertaken already to put this in place has included: i. monthly meetings between data owners and D&I Officer/AD of HR since September 2015 to discuss immediate diversity data requirements of Schools and the University as a whole. ii.workshop on 27 January 2016 between data providers , Dean for D&I, AD of HR and D&I Officer to identify diversity data requirements under the May 2015 Athena SWAN gender charter mark award process and explanation from PSO of how the new dashboard will work.


4

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


B2 There is clear, consistent and accessible support for Schools and they make successful Athena SWAN applications.

i. Provide a coordinated service to all Schools and Functions which supports them in achieving gender equality through the continuous Athena SWAN gender charter mark process and which encourages and promotes the sharing of best practice. This will include :

a. a specified timetable of action (involving the Athena SWAN School leads, Heads of School, , Deans of Diversity and inclusion, University Diversity and Inclusion officer) covering the lifecycle of the Athena SWAN process and culminating in the School’s award application (see memo from the Dean dated 23 September 2015 setting out this timetabled commitment)

b. Athena SWAN leads have a first point of contact (Diversity and Inclusion Officer) for any Athena SWAN queries, data requirements or support needed in their Athena SWAN ambitions

c. regular termly meetings of the Athena SWAN leads (Athena SWAN Steering Group) in which best practice is shared by Silver award holders and experts are invited to speak to the group

Feedback from ASSG members and a number of unsuccessful School applications suggest a need to improve our coordination of and support for Athena SWAN activity across the University and ensure that best practice is shared. Application section 2c

i.Schools and Functions represent-atatives attend ASSG meetings and annual feedback to D&I team is predominantly positive, with all negative feedback being responded to. At least 75% of School applications are successful at the level for which they applied.

Started September 2015 and to be on-going By 2019


1 Sept 2015: a clear commitment of support with a timetable for action, communicated by the new Deans for Diversity & Inclusion to all SET Schools Sept 2015: Diversity and Inclusion Officer in post from beginning of September 2015 who takes the lead in providing support and a coordinated, planned approach to school Athena SWAN applications

Nov 2015: in house panel review of the 3 Athena SWAN school applications; application leads provided with written guidance for areas of improvement, followed up by a School specific feedback meeting for Athena SWAN leads and Heads of School with the Dean for Diversity and Inclusion

B3

We understand the reasons why people leave the institution and know whether this is different depending on gender

i. Explore the options for collecting detailed information from leavers about their main reason(s) for leaving the University’s employment.

ii. Monitor detailed data from leavers on a quarterly basis

iii. If action is needed, consider and implement options.

We currently have no mechanism by which to capture a person’s detailed reasons for leaving the University’s employment and therefore cannot know whether there are gender related issues affecting this.

i. We have identified and implemented a process which enables us to capture data on ‘an employee’s main reason for leaving the University’

ii.We use this information to monitor and

Implementation: Start January 2017 Operationas: l End December 2018

AD of HR- People and Talent (Alison Hackett)

AD of HR- Operations (Cherry Bennett)

2 Dean for Diversity and Inclusion has had initial discussions with HR operations and HR Director and is currently receiving monthly reports of academic leavers


5

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


identify whether action is required, and report to DISG

B4

We are able to understand and measure engagement levels and experiences of men and women at UoR and, within this, to understand any differences and propose mitigation solutions.

i. Undertake a regular University-wide staff engagement survey, to include diversity and gender questions which will enable analysis of the results by gender to understand men’s and women’s experiences of working at UoR AND questions targeting knowledge of and engagement with Athena SWAN gender charter mark. ii. Subsequently Undertake focus groups as start of ongoing cultural audit

UEB committed in 2014 to adopt a KPI describing employee engagement so we need to be able to measure engagement. Informal feedback and SET 2015 survey indicates some women feel that culturally it is more difficult for women than men to achieve progression and promotion. We need to be able to understand if men and women experience UoR differently and if so understand where, why and what action needs to be taken Application sections 2b, 5(i)b

i. Baseline employee engagement by gender KPI is established and future targets defined. Increasing employee engagement for all staff. If there is a gender differential, steady reduction, survey by survey in this ii. Focus group topics identified and results from groups reported to HR and DISG

Implementation: March to October 16 – working group established and procurement of supplier October to Spring 17 design of survey Spring 17 survey launches (Future survey dates tbc by working group) Focus groups held in Autumn 2017

AD of HR -People and Talent (Alison Hackett)

2 UEB approved initial survey recommendations in February 2016


6

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


B5 We have a better understanding of the pressures affecting PhD students in terms of dependents.

Progression from PhD - Data on Students with Dependants Start collecting data on whether UoR PhD students have children or other dependants. This could be collected at application stage and annually upon re-enrolment

Gender balance of researchers has not changed since 2011. Focus groups and other sources reveal structural difficulties for PhD student parents to establish academic careers – this action permits the institution to gather basic data on its student parent population as a first step. Application Sections 3 & 7

Availability of data on PhD student parent population for the institution (not previously available).

Start collection before end of 2017/18 academic year. Ongoing from that point.

Head of Doctoral Research Office in the Graduate School (Mr Jonathan Lloyd)

2

B6 We know who is applying for positions at UoR, and are able to track men and women applicants through the system

i. Upgrade the recruitment system, with an applicant tracking feature, enabling us to track applicants through the recruitment process and from which we can extract diversity monitoring data for each stage of the recruitment process. The system includes an option for anonymising the shortlisting selection process for non-academic posts (grade 1-5)

Recognition that we need to be able to track applicants across each stage of the recruitment process and monitor diversity data in order to identify gender bias and to improve the diversity in our workforce Application section 4b

i.an applicant tracking system is in place ii.collecting detailed data on all protected characteristics. iii.monitoring the data to identify if there is any gender bias and, if appropriate, designing positive actions

Start October 2015 End August 2016

HR Systems Manager (Richard Speight AD of HR-Operations (Cherry Bennett)

1 After a procurement process, “Jobtrain Solutions” was purchased as the Applicant Tracking System in January 2016. It is currently being configured and integrated with existing software and processes. A pilot will begin in May with training and roll out of the new system across the UoR during July and August.

SET C

Supporting and Advancing women’s careers – Career transition points

C1 We are aware of any structural barriers to

Progression from PhD - Student Parent Peer Support 2016 NUS Mature and Part Time (MPT)

In the first two years the

Network structure in

RUSU Mature

3


7

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


establishing and progressing academic careers at several stages of the pipeline and can develop mitigating actions

i. In conjunction with UoR Students’ Union (RUSU), establish a University-wide network for student parents which meets fortnightly and virtually. Appoint 3-5 student representatives to share leadership of the network. ii. Agree a formal channel of communication between the group and appropriate senior staff e.g. Dean for Postgraduate Research Studies.

Students conference recently reported difficulties for MPT students in balancing workload with family life and of making friends who are in similar situations 2016 focus groups at UoR with PhD students reported additional challenges for students with dependent children which can be expected to extend to transitioning from PhD student to career academic: Application sections 2, 3, 4a

network is identified by student parents as a valuable source of peer support Network contributes actions to future Athena SWAN applications

place by December 2016; closed Facebook group set up before Feb 2017; first meeting held by April 2017

Students’ Officer (annual appoint-ment) Dean for Postgraduate Research Studies (Dianne Berry)

C2 As C1 Combining family and career: Childcare & Conferences i. Policy work identifying whether specific School or University-controlled funds can be used to support funding to cover additional childcare costs specifically caused by PGR students and staff attending conferences. ii. Encourage students and staff to apply to other organisations e.g. LMS and IOP for funding to cover Similar costs

Focus groups show that actions needed to build up an academic CV, such as international conference attendance, can be more expensive for those with dependants, often women. This action

i. Decision is taken on whether UoR can offer such funding to PGR students and or staff. ii. Schemes advertised on D&I website,

i. Identify any relevant funding pots and process by October 2017. ii. Application

i. Chief Financial Officer (Ms Carol Wright) ii. L&D Advisor –leadership and research staff

3


8

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


tackles the additional expense involved. This is common practice in other organisations, and already promoted by a number of international SET societies Application section 4, 5,6,7

Research funded staff forum Cases made (successful and otherwise) to UoR or other organsiations per academic year

s to external organisations logged during 2016/17 year and regularly thereafter.

develop-ment (to be appointed to People Development Function in summer 2016) Research staff forum (Current chair Adrian Champion) Heads of School

C3 As C1

Fixed term contracts

i. Identify by gender, different types of fixed term contracts e.g. teaching fellows, sessional staff, research staff, where these are most prevalent

ii. Understand different approaches across schools to fixed term contracts and changes from fixed term to open-ended contracts

iii. Develop University wide guidelines on approach to fixed term contracts, transitioning staff from fixed term to open-ended contracts and redeployment processes

iv. Monitor whether change in academic structure has had an impact on transition to open-ended contracts.

Career uncertainty due to fixed term contracts was identified as a major contributor to staff leaving the pipeline in Feb 2016 focus groups and 2015 staff survey comments. We don’t have the right data to monitor this properly. Applications sections 4a, 5i

Baseline data for different fixed term contracts obtained Guidelines agreed and in place on HR and Diversity websites Applications for transition to open-ended contracts being received by HR

For November 2016 planning round

AD of HR-Operations (Cherry Bennett) AD of HR- Advisory (Claire Rolstone)

2


9

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


from across the University.

C4 Early career research staff understand what they to do to succeed and progress, and are inspired to do it.

Early career: Grade 6 to 7 Building on success in some SET Schools, give research staff in all Schools access to training sessions, tailored to their academic environment, at least every two years, delivered by a gender-balanced mix of early career (next step ahead) and senior role models, addressing (with case studies):

What you need to do to progress in an academic career

Routes from fixed term to permanent and how these work

How promotion from Research Grade 6 to Research Grade 7 works

Opportunities for personal fellowships, researcher CI.

That all the above are possible through full-time or part-time or some blended mix, and in parallel with growing a family

Evidence from 2013 Silver Athena SWAN submission from School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences that this works as a component in retaining staff and growing research careers. Application section 4c

Increase in Research Staff 6 to 7 promotions by 100% across the University by 2019, with female representation at least matching the baseline cohort, in both SET and non-SET parts of the University.

All Research staff will have had access to a course by the end of 2017. This training will be repeated so that all staff have access at least every 2 years.

Leadership and Talent Development Manager (Susan Thornton) Research Division Leads Research Deans

2 This has been developed as a pilot in SMPS (most recent session September 2015).

C5 As C4 Early career grade 6 to 7 Introduce, based on successful practice in one of our SET Schools, a pro forma to be used for early career Grade 6 Research Staff Performance Development Reviews (PDRs), alongside existing PDR guidance, to aid identification of concrete activities to be undertaken to support career development and transition to the next academic level. This pro forma should be adapted to each School, to reflect local School- and subject-specific opportunities.

As part of its Silver AS action plan one of our SET Schools has introduced such a pro forma. This School has subsequently seen substantially larger and gender-balanced rates of RS promotion: Application Section 4c).

Introduction of pro forma as per timeframe. Positive feedback on its use from RS and their PIs.

Introduction of this pro forma in two of our SET Schools by December 2017. Gathering of feedback on its use in Summer 2018, Use in all SET Schools by December 2018.

Research Dean for the Environment Theme (Phil Newton).

2


10

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


C6 Cases from staff across Reading are being put forward appropriately into our Rewarding Excellence Processes that govern promotion of staff other than academic staff. That there is appropriate gender balance in these cases and their success.

Merit based promotion/rewarding excellence Rewarding Excellence Processes. Review data on relative rates across Schools of Rewarding Excellence promotion proposals and their gender balance, and interview Heads of Schools to explore differences, with a view to understanding and addressing the variation in application rates and ensuring that all staff have full access to promotion opportunities.

This process governs promotions for Research staff. As described in section 4c), while there has been a large increase in numbers promoted and gender balance is good, there is evidence that promotions happen in some Schools but not in others. Application section 4c

As C5 Interviews summer 2016, report Autumn 2016. Forward actions developed in Winter 2017. Implementation from August 2017

Deans for D&I (Professor Ellie Highwood and Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde)

2

C7 Women are progressing to the highest levels, and the process by which they do so is transparent and without unseen barriers

i. Review of the Personal Titles process with the aim of making further improvements in the transparency, clarity, and fairness of processes and criteria for academic promotion, in particular achieving greater transparency, fairness and consistency at the initial stage where candidates are selected by Schools. ii. Adoption of good practice in reducing likelihood for gender bias in references and assessor reports, including sending guidance to referees and assessors on writing fair, non-gender-biased reports.

Driven by motivation to ensure greater transparency, more overt assurance about consistency at each stage of the process, and to reflect good practice elsewhere in the sector. Application sections 3, 4c, 6f

New processes implemented Staff survey responses indicating that at least 80% (both men and women) think the promotions process is fair. % of women in the professoriate reaches 40% by 2020

I. New process to be implemented for academic year 2016/17 80% target achieved by Spring 2017 Annual monitoring of data (October) ii. New process implement

Chief Strategy Officer and University Secretary (Dr Richard Messer)

2 i. A review of the Personal Titles process has been started (July 2015) and an initial report sent to UEB following a workshop in November 2015 to share best practice and discuss the way forwards with HoSs and Deans. ii. Sending out of guidance (adapted from good practice elsewhere in the University sector) has been approved by the University Secretary to start 2016/17.


11

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


ed for 2016/17

C8 We receive similar volumes of applications from men and women for positions at UoR

i. Assess the use of gendered wording in a sample of job adverts and person descriptions across UoR and provide guidance for alternative wordings; ii. Highlight women working at Reading externally via the Faces of Reading project iii. Ensure job adverts link to flexible working and parental leave websites so that potential applicants understand our commitment to staff well-being.

The volume of applications from women is considerably less than that for men, although women’s success rate is better. Application section 4b

i. Report on gendered wording in sample of adverts to DISG and AIT Guidance produced and distributed to HoS and HoF. ii and iii Faces at Reading, flexible working and parental leave easily accessible from jobs and about us pages iii. Annual monitoring of data from applicant tracking system report to AIT

January 2017 Spring 2017 July 2017 September 2016 and annually thereafter

i. Deans for D&I (Professor Ellie Highwood and Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde) ii. AD of HR operations (Cherry Bennett) iii. MCE web development team iv. AD of HR operations (Cherry Bennett)

3

C9 We have processes and monitoring in place that ensure our recruitment processes are fair and transparent.

i. Change the recruitment guidelines to make it clear that the expectation is that all shortlists demonstrate gender diversity.

ii. A manual process in place to flag up for immediate review, cases of single gender short-lists

iii. Clarify the HR guidelines that it is mandatory that all those on interview panels have attended unconscious bias and recruitment and selection training

The need to ensure that our recruitment process is fully inclusive and that single gender shortlists should be reviewed as standard practice

i. The audit process is in place and single gender shortlists are being reviewed

i. complet-ed by June 2016 iii. End December 2016

AD of HR-Operations (Cherry Bennett)

2


12

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


iv. For recruitment of ECR’s, training for selectors should include consideration of diversity of applicants including age (older applicants), dependants, part-time PhD registration and other factors

Application section 4b

iii. All staff on interview panels have completed training.

C10 Training is meeting development needs of ECRs, and there is balanced uptake across the genders

Review the central training in place for ECRs to ensure that it meets development needs and that these needs are understood, that there is uptake at an appropriate level from ECRs, and that we advertise and promote (e.g. using gender balanced quotes from former attendees) so as to avoid gender bias in the selection of courses to attend.

a. There is evidence of low attendance at some courses; b. There is evidence of gender bias in selection of which courses to attend; c. That this is timely given the newly introduced research structures (Figure 3.2). Application section 5 i) a)

i. That all courses, on average over a three year period, attract a female attendance within +/- 10% of the female % in the target audience. iii. That courses meet development needs as indicated by at least 75% positive feedback from ECRs, positive feedback from PIs and other research management, attendance figures

Review of training offered and how delivered starting summer 2016, to finish February 2017. New programme of activity launched September 2017. Ongoing monitoring.

AD HR (People and Talent) (Alison Hackett) Leadership and Talent development Manager (recruitment in progress) PVC Research (Steve Mithen) Research Deans

2

SET D

Supporting and advancing women’s careers – Career Development

D1 Fairness and consistency in how work is allocated across Schools is achieved

i. Complete workload model audit and use information collected and focus group feedback to inform updated workload model guidance to be used across the University, which is transparent, consistent in approach and promotes gender equality

There are various approaches being taken on the workload model across Schools and a better

There is clear guidance in place for Schools and best

i. Start November 2015 (collecting

i. Deans for D&I (Professor Ellie Highwood

i. 1

The initial audit process of gathering information from Schools started in November 2015, in parallel with the SET Staff Survey. A follow-up focus group with SET Heads of Schools was held in


13

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


ii. Analyse School transparency review returns and workload model output to compare both parity of workload and type of work undertaken by men and women

understanding is needed in order to identify best practice and provide guidance. A need to review this was identified in feedback from the Athena SWAN panel following our 2014 Athena SWAN Institutional renewal application and also in 2015 SET Staff survey and follow up focus groups – gender differential in view on fair workloads. Application section 5(ii)a, 6f, 7b

practice being implemented Staff survey responses indicating that at least 80% (both men and women) think that work is allocated fairly

inform-ation) End December 2017 ii. Start Summer 2016, end December 2016

and Professor Simon Chandler-Wilde) ii. D&I Officer (Frances Raimo)

ii. 3

February 2016 comparing workload models and discussing best practice

D2 We are using a diverse set of career role models and women role models are more visible both internally and externally.

i. Produce a high profile website, (visible clearly from the University of Reading home page and staff portal, and linked to/ from all job adverts and further particulars), of case studies, that are collected systematically, demonstrating the diversity of our staff “Faces of Reading”, including diversity of working patterns, career stage, success and ways of blending career and caring responsibilities ii. Make women more visible in the physical spaces on campus, e.g. by renaming our library the Edith Morley Library, and considering the names used for other rooms and buildings across campus.

In part this is inspired by a talk by Prof Dave Smith (University of York) featured as one of the 175 Faces of the Royal Society of Chemistry. But also feedback from Feb 2016 role model focus group that we do not use sufficiently visible high achieving female role models.

i. Staff survey response indicating that at least 85% of staff (both men and women) feel positively about career opportunities at UoR. Increased volume of applications for positions and

Start – Sept 2016 Ends – April 17 Monitored in annual applicant tracking system

Staff Engage-ment Manager, MCE (Santosh Sinha) AD of HR- People and Talent (Alison Hackett)

2 Spring/Summer 2015: HR started to solicit and collect profiles. March 2016: VC approved renaming of library and commissioned search for suitable female name for refurbished Urban and Regional Studies building that will house Schools of Architecture and Art and Communication


14

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


Demonstrating the career progression routes available and people who have been successful in achieving career progression will inspire others and help to normalise and encourage the recruitment and promotion of a more diverse set of staff. RUSU representatives pointed out the lack of female “names” commemorated on campus. Major capital projects in the next 3 years provide opportunities to address this. Application sections 4a,5(ii)b

promotions from women ii. The library is renamed as Edith Morley Library and women feature in the names of other buildings and rooms on campus.

data and promotion panels. ii. 2019

SET E

Supporting and advancing women’s careers – Organisation and Culture

E1 There is no gender pay gap at the University of Reading.

i) PVC-Resource and Gender Champion to be tasked to chair a working group on the gender pay gap to examine changes since AP2011:6 ii) As part of this review consider previous recommendation on grade 9 zones and criteria in the light of recent changes and best practice across the sector. Also to consider Grade 8 to grade 9 pipeline. Formulate a strategy for reducing the Grade 9 pay gap.

Significant pay gaps (greater than 5%) exist in 3 pay grades; framework grade 9 and professorial zone 2 and 4. Application section 6d

i) Pay gap is reduced to less than 5% for all grades by 2020 and there is a reduction in gender pay gaps at School level demonstrated

Working group meets and reports by end 2016. New recommendations implement

i) PVC Academic Planning and Resource (Professor Robert Van de Noort)

2 A Working Group has been set up with the following membership: PVC (AP&R) Robert Van de Noort Dean of D&I Simon Chandler-Wilde Head of School Parveen Yaqoob Head of Function Janis Pich Deputy Director of HR Alison Hackett HR Manager (Rewards & Benefits) Claire Eckett (to attend a UCEA briefing in June to prepare us for this work)


15

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


iii) Monitor systematically the effect of new professorial zone criteria and new processes for leadership pay review introduced in 2015/16 and thereafter

by School level KPIs ii ) Grade 9 recommendations reported to Staffing Committee and agreed.

ed by 2017/18 or sooner. Eradication of pay gap in senior levels by 2020.

ii) Director of Human Resources (John Brady) iii) HR Manager (Rewards and Benefits) Claire Eckett

D&I Officer Frances Raimo Representative of the UCU Representative of the Staff Forum

E2 We have achieved gender balance on committees of influence

i) As part of the review of committees being undertaken, implement an improved gender balance on senior decision making committees across the University. The University Secretary is to be tasked with bringing forward proposals such that each of the strategic and decision making Committees/Boards of the University and all those considering cases for promotion and reward should normally:

a. have a minimum of 30% of either gender by 2020 and

b. Where necessary, the membership of these committees should be considered via skills required, rather than role held, in order to achieve these target

ii). Within the above review focus on UEB:

a. investigate UEB make-up at other institutions

b. develop a proposal for the VC regarding immediate mechanisms for diversifying UEB

c. work with recruitment consultants to ensure shortlists for any new external appointments to UEB are diverse, and to ensure that experience of and success with diversity work is part of person specification for such appointments.

Recognition across the University that:

Senior committee experience is essential career experience if women are to progress to the highest positions

and

Key committees are missing out on valuable input due to lack of diversity

Application sections 6i)c)

i).30% target achieved across all committees of influence ii) UEB is, or at least has appointment processes that are likely to produce a more diverse UEB by 2020. iii) Annual presentations to Council and resulting correspondence, Council committees also meet the 30% target.

i. Start November 2015, End August 2020

ii. a&b by July 2016 -Deans for D&I report on proposals for UEB to VC & (c) before next external appointment.

iii. July 2015 and annually thereafter.

i. Chief Strategy Officer and University Secretary (Dr Richard Messer)

ii. Vice-Chancellor (Sir David Bell )

Deans for D&I (Simon Chandler-Wilde and Ellie Highwood)

iii. President of Council

1 University Executive Board has approved the stated targets as at November 2015, and VC has communicated these publicly.


16

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


iii) To support work developed in i) and ii) the Deans D&I will present annually to Council to present progress on actions to achieve 30% female representation on committees (and other targets in Figure 3.1), and will work with Council to address the composition of its own committees.

E3 We have a modern,

engaging and high

impact D&I training

programme that

ensures that managers

are better equipped to

deal with diversity in

their teams and are

trained appropriately

to support the

progression and

promotion of women

in the workplace

Create a range of development and support to address and raise the profile of diversity & inclusion matters and particularly those relating to gender. Target in particular programmes for: i) line managers: key aspects of managing a diverse team, in particular key pipeline issues in relation to careers of women. ii) Heads of School and Function: develop bespoke Unconscious Bias training sessions covering all the key aspects of these roles (e.g. recruitment, promotion, workload allocation, performance management etc)) iii) Research Division Leaders: Draw on experience and gender equality tools developed in GENOVATE project at Bradford to support Research Division Leaders in seeking the best from their research active staff. iv) New starters: review of the D&I element of the New Starter Induction to: a) ensure the gender issues are represented appropriately, b) Change the lead for the D&I section from HR to Deans for D&I to reflect that this is led academically, c) as per the concordat action plan, undertake a review of the effectiveness of induction for research staff and develop appropriate actions, ensuring that any gender issues are identified and addressed v) RUSU: Identify where better links can be made with RUSU and activity on staff and student training can be joined up, e.g. I Heart Consent campaign

i)-iii) Feedback from Feb 2016 focus groups on career progression demonstrated that in some areas of UoR, Heads of School are not enabling career progression for women and are not aware of how they can do this

iv). Behavioural change interventions at key change points such as starting a new job have been shown to be effective.

v) Students are increasingly holding University to account for D&I issues. SMPS has piloted unconscious bias training for UG, PGT and PGR students, and the Dean has piloted training for Societies, which all received good feedback.

i-iii): staff survey response indicating that at least 75% (both men and women) have confidence in their manager’s capability to support their career progression

iv. 100% of participants feedback that induction provided clear information and expectation re UoR position on gender equality

v) A jointly developed unconscious bias workshop is delivered annually in partnership with RUSU to RUSU Societies and

September 2017 – full launch of D&I programmes i-iv

v) Develop sessions and run pilots with RUSU in academic session 2017-18. Full advertisement of opportunity for 2018-19

i-iv) AD of HR -People and Talent (Alison Hackett)


Leadership & Talent Develop-ment Manager (Susan Thornton)

L&D Manager (vacant, being recruited over spring/summer 2016)

v) RUSU President (annual

1 Sept2015-March 2016: A review of the people development structure took place, including consultation with a cross representation of staff

Recruitment to new posts will take place over spring/summer 2016


17

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


Application sections 5(i)a, 7a&c

other student groups.

appoint-ment)

E4 An institutional culture which is aware of the potential for unconscious bias and is pro-actively working to mitigate against it.

i) Design a follow up questionnaire to review the impact of

‘unconscious bias in decision making’ training on individuals and

the organisation.

ii) Regularly review our provision or unconscious bias training in

the light of new research in the field

iii) Develop an appropriate action in response to the findings of

these reviews

Although we have feedback on the unconscious bias training itself, we don’t have any measure of its long term impact on behaviours of individuals. Need to stay aware of recent research on effectiveness of delivery of such training and adapt practice accordingly Application section 4b

i) and iii) .start review and design work August 2016

i) Seek feedback from those who have already attended course in October 2016

ii. adapt training by May 2017

iii. roll out training to all staff by end April 2019

L&D Manager (being recruited May 2016)

1 352 staff trained to date –mainly

managers/leaders

E5 We provide a

mentoring and

coaching service to

i) Record the mentoring and coaching relationships at school and university level via annual reports from HoS and Leadership and Talent Development manager, in order to:

Mentoring, coaching and sponsoring are all known to be

A full set of data

for both

i-ii 16/17 session

Leadership and Talent Develop-

3


18

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


staff which is

efficiently and

effectively monitored

and managed and can

assess its impact on

individuals and the

organisation.

a. enable data on uptake and resource planning in relation to the size requirements for the coaching and mentoring pool

b. Understand the gender balance of coaches/mentors and coaches/mentees

ii) Review the mentoring offer and its impact from a university wide perspective including obtaining feedback on the effectiveness of such provisions, and reviewing the career progression of coaches/mentees.

iii) Review best practice at school level and also externally at institutional level and develop UoR approach as appropriate in line with this

particularly beneficial to women. Mixed practices in relation to mentoring across the university meaning that it is offered to some but not all and potentially to varying degrees of effectiveness

Inability to report on uptake of mentoring and to obtain feedback re its impact

Application section 5(i)b

coaching and

mentoring:

-Number of

active

relationships

within schools

-Number of

active

relationships

university wide

-Gender take up

of offer

-Career

progression of

individuals

iii) Guidelines

for School and

Function based

mentoring

schemes.

iii) 17-18 session

ment Manager (Susan Thornton)

E6 We have a thriving

women@Reading

network group in

order to support the

committee and

advertise events.

i) Widen the membership of the committee in order to reduce reliance on individuals ii) Review the impact of changing the approach to advertising and type of events and plan for 2017-18 accordingly. iii) Provide additional support via small funding amounts when possible

The committee is formed of enthusiastic but time poor members.

We identified a need for wider advertisement – we need to measure the impact of this.

Committee meetings happen regularly Events programme is produced in a timely manner.

Review work 16/17 session, 3 years of analysis of attendance at events by end of 2019

Leadership and Talent Develop-ment Manager (Susan Thornton)

3


19

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High



A larger more balanced network of members Lower drop-out rates at events

E7 We understand the

practical impact of

development

programmes such as

Aurora and

Springboard in terms

of value add and

increased

performance for the

individual and the

university

Resource is used

effectively

i) Identify and implement methods for assessing impact of Springboard, StellarHE and Aurora on individual and institution, including career progress of participants (via personal titles process, professorial pay review, rewarding and recognising excellence) ii) Undertake a full review of emerging research on this issue and consider in relation to our current approach iii) Develop actions appropriate to the review above iv) Proactively support Aurora cohorts once they have completed their programme, taking into account participants feedback.

There is currently limited systematic evidence of long term impact of these programmes (other than informal feedback at the individual level)

There is no follow through as to what women do next and if this was linked to undertaking the development

Aurorans express desire to continue their development AND to share this with colleagues, but mechanisms to do this are not well developed.


i) Documented

process for

collecting

information on

long term

impact of these

programmes

and starting to

track Aurorans

from first 3

cohorts.

ii) Report on

latest research

on “fixing

inviduals” vs

“fixing the

institution”

iii) action plan to

change

provision if

needed

iv) programme

of support for

Aurorans

publicised and

i-ii) September 2016 to September 2017 iii for 2017 decisions on applicants iv 2018 and ongoing

i ,ii,iv) Leadership and Talent Develop-ment Manager (Susan Thornton) ii) Dean for D&I (Ellie Highwood)

3


20

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


well attended –

HoS aware of

ongoing

commitment

when they

support

someone to

attend.

E8 Men and women are enabled to take equal roles as parents including in taking shared parental leave.

i) Produce annual messages supporting the role of fathers and the institution’s positive attitude to men playing a full role in parenting. The messages will be from a male senior member of staff (PVC or VC) to all University staff and will stress that UoR positively welcomes requests from men for specific parent-related entitlements such as paternity leave and shared parental leave. ii) Visible and informative web page on shared parental leave including information on process and case studies (see also F4)

PGR Focus group report from Feb 2016 suggest unequal parenting means women bear more of the career penalty of parenting. This action targets reluctance to request flexibility or parental leave among male staff. Application sections 7b

Profiles/messages from fathers in the University on staff portal and in the longer term on the D&I website Over the long-term, an increase in requests for specific parent-related entitlements from male staff.

First message w/c 13 June 2016 for Father’s Day

Staff Engage-ment Manager, MCE (Santosh Sinha) D&I Officer (Frances Raimo)

2

SET F Supporting and Advancing women’s careers – Flexibility and managing career breaks

F1 Staff are enabled to take parental leave without the negative career consequences and with career development support on return

Funding for parental leave (used here to refer specifically to maternity and shared parental leave):

ii. Schools to be reimbursed the full cost of an employee taking parental leave

ii. 25% of this funding is to be ring-fenced to aid return

to work for the individual in a manner to be determined via discussion with returner

This is driven by the need to mitigate the negative resource outcome for Schools (and any consequential negative impact for an employee’s career prospects) of taking (or being perceived as

2015 Staff survey responses indicating that at least 80% (both men and women) of academic staff who have taken a form of

Implementation of policy start of 2016/17 academic year

PVC Academic Planning and Resource (Professor Robert Van de Noort)

1 Agreed by UEB to be implemented in 2016/17 – first application already agreed


21

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


likely to take) parental leave. Previously School had been reimbursed 50% and no direct support to returner Application section 7b

parental leave, feel supported by the University on return

F2 Staff are enabled to take parental leave without the negative career consequences and with career development support on return

F1 action to be fully extended to the Functions (non- academic staff) so that:

i. Functions to be reimbursed the full cost of an employee taking parental leave ii. Portion of this funding to be ring-fenced to aid return to work for the individual in a manner to be determined via discussion with returner

This is driven by the need to mitigate the negative resource outcome for the Functions (and any consequential negative impact for an employee’s career prospects) of taking (or being perceived as likely to take) parental leave. Previously no funding had been available to cover and no direct support for returner, Application section 7b

2015 Staff survey responses indicating that at least 80% (both men and women) of non-academic staff who have taken a type of parental leave, feel supported by the university on return

Implementation of policy start of 2017/18 academic year

PVC Academic Planning and Resource (Professor Robert Van de Noort)

1 UEB agreed to case put forward by Deans D&I in Autumn 2015.

F3 There is fairness and consistency in manager decisions on flexible working requests (part-time, part-year, job-share) and a culture where flexible working is not a barrier to progression

Monitor manager decisions (agreements and refusals) on formal flexible working requests). Use this information to inform policy and guidance on FW decision-making, promoting fairness and consistency in outcomes

A need to ensure that decision making across the University on FW requests is fair and consistent. Application section 7a&b

i.data being collected and analysed (6 monthly basis)

ii.review policy and guidance informed by data

i.Sept 2016 and 6 monthly thereafter

ii.March 2017 iii.by Nov 2019

AD of HR- Advisory Services (Claire Rolstone)

2

In November 2015 we implemented a change in our HR-data-system (TRENT) to enable collection of data on manager decisions to agree/refuse requests from staff for flexible working patterns. This data has started to be collected.(see AP2011: 10 update)


22

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


iii.Staff survey response indicating that at least 85% of staff (both men and women) agree that the Institution is supportive of flexible working requests

F4 We understand the informal flexible working patterns being used across the University and are using these to inform decisions about e.g. core hours, timing of institutional events

i. To supplement data already available regarding formal flexible working, request data on lecturer availability forms (which can record informal flexible working agreements)) from Schools and analyse annually ii. Move the majority of meetings at all levels to within agreed core hours, and for any that remain outside, establish a code of practice including notice period and availability of materials for those unable to attend.

It is important to identify the extent to which informal ‘flexible working agreements’ are in existence for teaching staff with child care commitments in SET Schools. Application section 7a

i. Data is being collated and providing a better understanding of the extent of informal flexible working arrangements at the UoR ii. Fewer requests for meetings outside of core hours, specifically for senior leadership meetings – measured in staff survey

First assessment in November 2016 Thereafter in May each year (following annual submission of forms) ii. UEB and senior HR weekly meetings moved to within core hours for 16-17 session


1 Initial pilot assessment with SMPS data completed by Ellie Highwood in Feb 2016

F5 Staff across the University, and prospective staff

i. We will establish, very visibly as part of the Vice Chancellor’s Office website, and linked to/ from local Diversity and Inclusion pages across the University, pages advertising both flexible

This action grows out of evidence from Athena SWAN Silver

i). Central website produced. Links

i. Central website produced

i.Deans for D&I (Simon Chandler-

2 A local website, as a pilot, has been produced in the School of Mathematical


23

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


applying to join the University, perceive the University as supportive to flexible working and parental leave, and that it is seen as a normal part of a successful career to take parental leave and/or work flexibly to combine working with caring responsibilities.

Managers are better informed about flexible working and parental leave.

working and parental leave. The distinguishing features will include: a) photo of VC plus quote from VC articulating VC support; b clear, easily navigable links to detail of how these work on HR web sites; c) case studies from across the University making clear in each case that employees, at a very wide variety of levels in the University, are engaged in parental leave and/or flexible working.

ii. To supplement this central web presence we will encourage individual Schools, particularly those aspiring to Silver Athena SWAN and above, to produce their own local flexible working and parental leave websites, making clear local HoS endorsement and with case studies closer and more relevant to the local group of staff.

iii. HR Advisors to deliver workshop ‘An overview of childcare parenting policies’ in all Schools –this was developed by HR to supplement the online guidance following the introduction of shared parental leave

resubmission in a particular SET School (SMPS) that this works at a School level to normalise and support employees undertaking and considering flexible working and/or parental leave, and to provide them with helpful practical case studies. There is also evidence from a SET School Athena SWAN submission of impact in terms of recruitment from a wider pool of academic staff. Finally, our February 2016 Focus group on part-time and flexible working identified that “we need more female, senior, part time role models”.

This action is also similar in spirit to the recent Royal Society project “Parent Carer Scientist”, which featured three Reading staff and PhD students.

to the website from local parts of the University and from job adverts.

ii) Local School websites produced.

iii).Presentation delivered to all Schools across the university by HR Advisors

i-iii Staff survey responses indicating that at least 80% (both men and women) of staff agree that both flexible working and parental leave are compatible with a successful career.

by August 2016.

ii. At least two new local School websites to be produced through the plan period.

iii.Present-ations delivered in all Schools by April 2017

Wilde and Ellie Highwood)

Staff Engage-ment Manager, MCE (Santosh Sinha)

ii. All Heads of School

iii.AD of HR- Advisory Services (Claire Rolstone)

and Physical Sciences (last updated in January 2016). Workshop delivered to HR staff in 2015/16 in order that they can support all staff more effectively on family friendly queries. This was also piloted in SCFP in 2015


24

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


Application section 7b, 8

F6 Wide use of job-share arrangements in order to recruit to the University from a larger pool, and to encourage larger gender diversity at senior levels across the University.

i. All full-time vacancies, whether advertised internally or externally, to be advertised with job share as an option, this indicated clearly in the job advert and the further particulars. (There will be exceptions where a specific case has been made to and approved by the local HR Partner that a job share is inappropriate for particular business reasons.) Support this with an HR guidance note plus pro forma.

ii. Provide training courses to managers, especially Heads of Schools and above in first instance, to talk through benefits and potential issues around job shares, with case studies.

iii. Monitor annually, through the new applicant tracking system (action B6) the % of job share applications and their relative success rate.

Evidence from a School-level 2013 Athena SWAN submission is suggestive that use of job-share in senior leadership levels (e.g. HoD) encourages a more gender-balanced recruitment. Discussions of Athena SWAN best practice with QMUL identified this as one possible mechanism for recruiting couples to academic posts. Our February 2016 focus group on part-time and flexible working articulated that “We need to be clear in job adverts that part time working is welcoming – a statement of the culture” and that “We need more female, senior, part time role models”. Application section 7a&b

i. All vacancies advertised in this way. An increase in numbers of staff at all levels in jobshares.

ii. Training delivered with positive feedback.

iii. Increases in successful applications for job shares

i) Statement in all job adverts) March 2016, with full implementation by September 2017.

i. and iii. AD of HR-Operations (Cherry Bennett)

ii. Deans for D&I (Ellie Highwood and Simon Chandler-Wilde)

2 As a first step as at March 2016 all University job adverts now include a standard statement that “The University is committed to having a diverse and inclusive workforce and we welcome applications where a flexible working pattern and/or a job share is proposed.” But this needs also to translate culturally to action and understanding on the ground. As a key step in this direction a first discussion session on flexible working and job shares was led by the Deans D&I with the University Leadership group on 20/1/16.

SET G Any other comments


25

Action





Measurable outcomes


milestones

Persons responsibl


Lead in bold

Prior-ity

1-3

1 = High


G1 To ensure equality and inclusion for transgender people

Review and refresh the University’s policy for transgender people in line with ECU best practice guidance and promote this on the Intranet to raise awareness of transgender issues in the workplace.

Our guidance has not been updated since 2010 and needs to reflect current best practice and be relaunched on the staff website. In the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index (WEI) 2016 staff survey, only 37% of LGB staff agreed that ‘The Workplace culture in my organisation is inclusive of trans people.’ We need to work to improve this response. Application section 8

i.revised guidance published and launched on the staff website ii.In the Stonewall WEI 2018 staff survey, an increase in % of LGB staff who agree with the statement ‘The Workplace culture in my organisation is inclusive of trans people.’ from 37% to at least 55%(this was the Top 100 agreement % in 2016).

i.revised guidance launched: Start August 2016, End December 2016 ii.improved staff survey response reported in February 2019 Stonewall WEI feedback

D&I Officer (Frances Raimo) University Director of Legal Services (Julie Rowe) LGBT+ Staff Network Coord-inator (Calvin Smith)

2

= Actions that are identified in the submission document should be clearly highlighted and cross-referenced so that when a panellist reads the action plan it is clear what the rationale for the action is.

= Actions should be scheduled across the four-year duration of the award.

= Actions (and action plans) should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound).

= The panel will expect to see evidence of prioritisation. Action plans may be ordered by priority level rather than chronologically or thematically.

= Responsibility for completing actions should be distributed across a range of staff. Action plans where HR and equality and diversity practitioners are responsible for everything will not be well received by panels.

= Descriptions of measures already in place should not be included in the action plan without detail on their monitoring or development.

= It is important to indicate how the success of an action will be measured. This should take the form of a column in the table.

= There is no right or wrong number of actions. However, it is important to balance conciseness with a good level of detail.


26

= Action plans should be aspirational and innovative, particularly at higher levels of award.

= Action plans should be organic documents, constantly reviewed and updated (not just prepared as part of an award submission).

University of Reading Athena SWAN Action Plan 2011

Action Description of trigger

Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

Student Recruitment

1 Gender representation in

recruitment literature and during

open days identified as important to

take account of particular needs

depending on current balance.

Prospectus

and online

material is

checked for

gender

balance and

both male and

female Open

Day

ambassadors

are visible.

We work with

a number of

girls schools

to encourage

uptake of

engineering

and physical

sciences in

Produce a new set

of images with

specific remit of

demonstrating

female visibility in

SET Schools for both

undergraduate and

post graduate

recruitment.

Further work

planned with girls’

schools.

Recruitment figures

to be monitored at

school level.

Achieved Previously:

Carey

Singleton,

Director of

Student

Recruitment

and Outreach

Office

Responsibility

now with:

Heads of

School

(following the

University’s

restructuring)

2012 2011 Increased

numbers of

female

applicants to

those SET

schools with

an imbalance

at u/g and

p/g/ level by

5%



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

particular.

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 1 sections: 3, 6h Since 2011 the UoR Marketing Communications and Engagement Team has done a lot of work to ensure that the visibility of women in Science is raised

through the images used in our student recruitment material. In our Summer School flyers and brochures for the Scholars programme, (an intensive

outreach Scheme for widening participation), which covers several subject strands of which 3 are in the Science and Life sciences, we use images of female

students (section 6h) working in Science to encourage female school-age students. We also use a diverse range of imagery in our UG and PG prospectuses

as detailed in the application.

Two Schools which have departments with the lowest levels of female representation and where progress has been made: i. in Chemistry (School of Chemistry, Food, Pharmacy) there has been a significant increase in outreach and STEMNET activities with local schools. The

Department is involved in ‘Chemistry for All’, a 5 year longitudinal research programme designed to investigate the impact of sustained outreach activities

on groups that are currently under-represented in tertiary education in chemistry. This includes females as well as ethnic minorities and pupils for whom

English is the second language. The Chemistry Department is working with 6 local secondary schools to deliver outreach activities on a regular basis. The

initiative started in 2014 and finishes in July 2019. It is funded by the Royal Society of Chemistry through a competitive process.

From 11/12 to 14/15 total percentage of female UG Chemistry students at UoR increased from 29% to 35% -an extra 29 female students.

ii. in the School of Built Environment where the number of female students on construction courses is typically low, there has been targeted activity to recruit more women undergraduates based on feedback sought from current female students. Since 2012, the School has had an Athena SWAN stand celebrating women in construction, at the UG open Day, which has raised considerable praise and interest from attendees. From 11/12 to 14/15 total percentage of female UG students increased from 14.5% to 19.5% (but to note numbers of both men and women reduced overall by 154). From 13/14 to



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

14/15 Female PGTs increased by 22 (5%). To see the full picture, it is necessary to look at all subjects at UG and PG level but for these 2 subjects with low representation of women in the University, we are making progress and through the Athena SWAN Steering Group, best practice is being shared so we see this as very positive.

Appointments and Promotions

2 Staff appointments and promotions,

and pay award success rates review

indicated lower rates of promotion

for women and women being

promoted later in their career.

Promotions

Process

Review in

2010/11 has

made changes

to promotions

process to

incorporate

mechanism

for taking

account of

special

circumstances

such as

maternity

leave and

Identify reasons

why no females

were put forward

for promotion to

grade 8 (Reader*)

this year (10/11) in

SET Schools.

Monitor changes to

promotions rates as

a result of changes

to the system.

*Since 2012, Reader

is now Associate

Professor

Achieved Previously

Professor

Dianne Berry

as Chair of

Staffing

Committee

Responsibility

now with:

Chief

Strategy

Officer and

University

Secretary (Dr

Richard

2012 -

2014

2010/11 Increase in

rate of

promotion of

women at

senior grades

(grade 8 & 9)

by at least 5%.

Particular

emphasis on

encouraging

women to

apply for

Reader (grade

8/Associate

Professor)



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

career breaks, Messer)

PVC,

Academic

Planning &

Resource

(Professor

Robert Van

de Noort)

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 2 sections: 3, 4c, 6f The academic promotion process was changed substantially in 2012 as follows:

Changing the criteria for promotion to Professor and adding a single title of Associate Professor (previously Reader) to remove the nominal

distinction between research focused and teaching focused academic careers; and

adding a Personal Circumstances form to the application

Although these changes have resulted in progress as reflected in the promotions data (reported in this application), the progression of women to

senior positions in UoR continues to be a focus for action. During Autumn 2015 Deputy Vice Chancellor Professor Steve Mithen led the following work

with the overall aim being, to achieve the highest standards of diversity and inclusion and ensure transparency in the annual review process:



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

I. The criteria for Professorial zones have been revised following a number of consultations with senior staff, including the Deans for Diversity and Inclusion, during late October and November 2015

II. The manner in which the Professorial annual review is undertaken has likewise been revised, resulting in amendments to: the contents of the VC's letter requesting submissions, the design pro-forma that Professorial staff are required to complete and the composition of the Professorial Annual review committee. This work was completed at the end of November 2015 so that all revisions were in place for the 2015/16 academic year review process.

III. The revised process has been implemented, and the committee with its amended membership met in March 2016.

The outcomes of this work feeds into revisions currently underway to the personal titles process being led by Chief Strategy Officer and University Secretary (Dr Richard Messer) to review the personal titles promotion process and implement a new structure. See AP2016: C7

We have met the target of increasing promotions to Grade 8 (AP) and 9 (Professorial) by 5%: Table 3.2 in the application shows an increase of 5.5% in

female AP and 7.4% in female Professors

3 Need for Promotion Training

Workshops identified by Promotions

Review

Promotion

Workshops

recently put in

place to

support those

wishing to put

themselves

Advertise and

encourage uptake

of Promotion

Workshops and

monitor impact on

promotion rates


Libby

Graham,

Director of

Centre for

Staff Training

&

2011 –

2014

2010 Increase in

rate of

promotion of

women to

higher grades



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

forward, Development

Responsibility

now with:

Deans for

D&I

(Professor

Ellie

Highwood

and Professor

Simon

Chandler-

Wilde)

AD of HR-

People and

Talent (Alison

Hackett)



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 3 section 4c 2014/2015: 57 attendees at 3 promotions workshops (32 women of which 8 were from SET Schools)

2015/2016: 2 further sessions for academics across Schools on 9/9/2015 and 19/10/2015 run by Professor Ellie Highwood. A total of 27 individuals

attended, of which 18 were women (9 from SET Schools).

These workshops are to continue as BAU over the next 3 years.

More women are being promoted to AP and Professor (section 4c of application)

4 Mentoring seen to be effective in

supporting women in promotions

but more request than can be

satisfied.

Mentoring

and 2 sessions

of coaching

are offered by

CSTD.

Peer

mentoring

Circle has

emerged from

Women’s

Increase availability

of mentoring by

recruiting more

mentors


Justin

Hutchence,

CSTD

Responsibility

now with:

Leadership

and Talent

Development

2012 – 14 2012 Increase

number of

mentoring

pairs by 20%



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

network Manager

(Susan

Thornton)

AD of HR-

People and

Talent (Alison

Hackett)

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 4 section 4c, 5(i)b

Mentors to ECRs: 41% of ECRs (144 individuals) are in SMPS and SAGES and for the last 18 months, both Schools have had formal mentoring

provision where every ECR is offered a mentor. While this does not confirm the 20% target this is a positive move in these Schools and means that

100% of those staff can take up this offer if they choose to do so and we are confident that the 20% target is exceeded.

In addition to the Schools’ internal mentoring schemes, we have a University-wide mentoring scheme for new staff joining the University,

whether academic or professional/managerial staff.

Aurora: we sent 10 delegates to the pilot of this Leadership Foundation programme and have since sent 10+ to each cohort (37 so far).

Participants in the Aurora programme have a mentor to support them throughout the programme.

We have sent 2 women on development programmes for BAME staff: StellarHE (leadership programme), and the Leadership Foundation

Diversifying Academia programme pilot. Both individuals were identified via competitive process at the UoR and in 2015 happened to both be

women.



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

We have established an internal coaching scheme to offer coaching support to all staff. This is a recent project and we are still

establishing a sufficient number of coaches to be able to offer the facility University-wide, having started with a ‘soft launch’ while

building up the offer (AP2016:E5)

5 Athena SWAN Steering group has

identified that each SET School has

different process by which people

are recommended to faculty Board

for promotion.

Review

recommended

of the various

mechanisms

used by SET

schools to

identify and

recommend

people for

promotion in

case this

introduces

gender bias

Review of the

various processes

used by SET schools

to identify good

practice for

recommendation to

others


Professor

Dianne Berry

as Chair of

Staffing

Committee

Responsibility

now with:

Chief

Strategy

Officer and

University

Secretary (Dr

Richard

Messer)

Oct 2012 Oct

2011

Clear

guidelines

produced on

good practice

in identifying

and

recommending

people for

promotion.

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 5



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

section 3, 4c, The academic promotion process was changed substantially in 2012 as follows:

Changing the criteria for promotion to Professor and adding a single title of Associate Professor (previously Reader) to remove the nominal

distinction between research focused and teaching focused academic careers; and

adding a Personal Circumstances form to the application

However, we are continually looking for ways to improve and a complete review of the Personal Titles promotion process started in July 2015 led by Chief

Strategy Officer and University Secretary (Dr Richard Messer). The review is due for completion in July 2016 with implementation at the start of the

2016/2017 academic year. This is driven by the motivation to ensure greater transparency, more overt assurance about consistency at each stage of the

process and to reflect good practice elsewhere in the sector. See AP2016: C7. The completed revision of the professorial annual review process (see action

2 update above) by Deputy Vice Chancellor, feeds into this work.

6 Data recently gathered indicated

larger pay gap for women on

professorial zones than lower grades

Review

recommended

of proportions

of women on

the four

professorial

grades.

Review proportion

of women at each

of the 4 professorial

levels to determine

whether there is an

issue

Partly

Achieved

Previously:

Ruth Busby,

Deputy

Director

Human

Resources

Responsibility

2014 2012 More women

on higher

professorial

zones



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

now with:

PVC

Academic

Planning &

Resource

(Professor

Robert Van

de Noort)

Deans for D&I

(Professor

Ellie

Highwood

and Professor

Simon

Chandler-

Wilde)

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 6 section 6d



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

During Autumn 2015 Deputy Vice Chancellor Professor Steve Mithen led the following work with the overall aim being, to achieve the highest standards of

diversity and inclusion and ensure transparency in the annual review process:

I. The criteria for Professorial zones have been revised following a number of consultations with senior staff, including the Deans for Diversity and Inclusion, during late October and November 2015

II. The manner in which the Professorial annual review is undertaken has likewise been revised, resulting in: amendments to the contents of the VC's letter requesting submissions, the design pro forma that Professorial staff are required to complete and the composition of the Professorial Annual review committee. This work was completed on 25 November 2015 so that all revisions were in place for the 2015/16 academic year review process.

III. The revised process has been implemented, and the committee with its amended membership met in March 2016.

See section 6d of the application for pay gap data and analysis:

Significant pay gaps (greater than 5%) exist in 3 pay grades; framework grade 9 and professorial zone 2 and 4. The University has set targets to reduce

the senior pay gap and formed a new gender pay gap working group, chaired by the PVC, Planning & Resource and including one of the Deans for

Diversity and Inclusion. This will report to UEB in summer 2016. See AP2016:E1

7 Athena SWAN Steering Group

recommended current Staff

Development Review (appraisal)

process be reviewed to ensure it

recognises a range of contributions

Review of SDR

begun as the

Promoting

excellence

project

Review to report

and new

arrangements to be

determined.


Ruth Busby

Deputy

Director

Human

2012 2011 New

arrangements

to be put in

place

beginning Oct



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

Resources

Responsibility

now with:

AD of HR-

People and

Talent (Alison

Hackett)

2012

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 7 section 3, 5(i)a, 6f

Since 2011, there has been considerable change in the appraisal system. A new Performance Development Review (PDR) process was introduced in January

2014 to provide clarity on the expectations of managers and their staff and to provide an opportunity to measure each person’s contribution, and to

recognise and reward excellence through the University's Reward mechanisms on an annual basis. In 2016 the process is being reviewed to assess

effectiveness.

Work-Life balance

8 Need for increased child care

availability identified as part of

Bronze award.

New, larger

Child Care

facility

provided by

University

Continue to monitor

availability of

Childcare to

determine whether


Professor

Richard Ellis,

Chair, Athena

SWAN

2010 -

2014

2008 Number of

child care

places remains

sufficient for

and



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

with more

spaces and

longer hours.

it is sufficient. Steering

Group

Responsibility

now with:

D&I Officer

(Frances

Raimo)

anticipates

demand

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 8 section 7c

The Little Learners Nursery, run by RUSU was purpose built in 2009 and only accepts the children of students and staff members of the University

of Reading. In its most recent Ofsted inspection (March 2014) it was graded as ‘good’ in all areas. The nursey can take 106 children at any time and

overall occupancy is (March 2016) at 70%. This rises throughout the University year (each term). The Pre-School part of the nursery (for ages 3-5)

has high demand and is currently full –there is a waiting list for this age group but available space prevents further expansion and the Pre-School is

registered to take no more than 32 children by Ofsted . The nursery offers 15 hours Government funding per week for all 3-4 year olds and to

eligible 2 year olds. Child care vouchers are accepted.

In addition, The Little Owl Pre-School which is on the Earley Gate corner of campus is one of the longest running pre-schools in the area and caters

for children of University Staff and Students aged 2-5, as well as children who live in the surrounding community. It has 24 places and is open for

morning sessions. It was graded as outstanding in its most recent Ofsted inspection (November 2014).

The Childcare Voucher scheme (publicised on our HR webpages) has 274 parents in the scheme at January 2016 (up from 80 participants in 2014).



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

9 Workload Model principles

established 2006

Athena SWAN

Steering

group has

identified this

as an area

where a

further review

is now timely

A review of the

various workload

models across SET

Schools is to be

carried out to share

good practice

Not

Achieved

Previously:

Dean of Life

Sciences and

Faculty

Management

Boards

Responsibility

now with:

Deans for

D&I

(Professor

Ellie

Highwood

and Professor

Simon

Chandler-

Wilde)

Oct 2013 Jan

2012

Establish

guidelines for

good practice,

which Schools

will adopt.

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 9 section 6f



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

During October 2015/January 2016, the Deans for Diversity and Inclusion, commissioned an audit of approaches taken by SET Schools on the workload

model. This has revealed that inconsistency in approach continues. This was identified as a gender issue in the 2015 STEM Staff culture survey, which was

investigated further through a focus group in early 2016 with the Heads of School and reported in the main body of the application. See AP2016: D1

10 Flexible working policy developed by

HR

Flexible

working

availability is

advertised on

HR website

but Athena

SWAN

Steering

Group

identified that

there is little

monitoring of

how this

policy is

enacted by

managers.

Training on

managing diverse

teams will be

offered to all

managers/PIs based

upon Vitae ‘Every

Researcher Counts’

materials on

‘Managing Diverse

Teams’ to ensure

that managers are

enabled to manage

flexible working

effectively.

Achieved Professor

Dianne Berry

as Chair

Staffing

Committee

Libby Graham

Director of

CSTD.

Responsibility

now with:

AD of HR-

People and

Talent (Alison

Hackett)

2012 2010 Training in

place and is

taken up by

managers.

Staff Survey

results will

indicate

whether

flexible

working is

readily taken

up and will

inform target

as to level of

flexible

working to be



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

Vitae training

materials on

managing

diverse teams

has been

obtained and

training will

be offered to

managers/PIs.

achieved.

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 10 section 7a To date, there have been a range of measures/ activities taken to improve and embed our flexible working policies/processes in conjunction the

development of management capability (full details section 7):

ability to manage diverse teams(including managing part time staff and considering FW requests) - the following training is currently being rolled out:

o Diversity in the Workplace online training, mandatory for all staff, which addresses each protected characteristic individually and poses case studies including a manager’s handling of a maternity situation. This training has now been completed by 41% of staff (1,905) up from 11% completion rate in November 2015

o Unconscious Bias in Decision Making (F2F training workshops developed by our Psychology Department); delivery of this training started at the very top of the UoR management chain with all of UEB undertaking Unconscious Bias training in autumn 2014. This continues to be



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

evaluated and rolled out across the University (AP 2016: E12) particularly targeting staff with management/supervisory roles; 356 staff have undertaken this to date with further staff on courses in June 2016.

o The management development needs of Principal Investigators who manage Research Staff are being addressed through the following

training courses: “Performance and Development Review Training for Reviewers”; “Essential guide to being a Principal Investigator”, and

“Unconscious Bias in Decision Making”. This material goes beyond the diversity content of ‘’Every Researcher Counts’’ referred to in the

original action. Management capability in managing diverse teams is being progressed through AP 2016:E3i-iii

since December 2015, all job applications are to include as standard, wording demonstrating that the University will consider as normal practice, applications from people wanting to work flexibly including a job share arrangement. The new wording says: ‘’ The University is committed to having a diverse and inclusive workforce and we welcome applications for job-share, part-time and flexible working arrangements which will be considered in line with business needs''. Future action see AP2016:F5,F6

through the implementation of a new online annual leave system (completed February 2016), we can now identify that we have staff working 477 different working patterns. While these include part-time/part-year and job-share arrangements, they also cover full-time roles where employees have a contractual agreement to work in a specific pattern to meet their work-life balance needs

a change was made to our HR data System(TRENT) in November 2015 to enable the collection of data on FW request outcomes. New forms were made available online to staff to support this process and to raise awareness with managers, a reminder was issued via the University’s communication ‘In Brief’ to all staff on 4th December 2015 so that managers are aware of the requirement to inform HR of all decisions on FW requests. This data has just started to be collected and will be monitored as business as usual, enabling HR Partners to assess consistency and intervene where required. See AP 2016:F3

11 Women’s Network reviewed

Maternity leave and support on

return which indicated limited

knowledge of availability of support

amongst women, particularly those

HR policies

are currently

highlighted on

website but

with limited

HR to establish a

steering group to

review the

maternity/paternity

process,

Achieved Ms Ruth

Busby,

Deputy

Director

Human

May 2010

– May

2011

June

2012

Clarity on

website of

maternity

leave rights

and clarity



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

on lower grades, and their

managers. Problem highlighted of

differences between funders in

extending contracts.

detail,

particularly of

the impact of

different

funders’

approaches.

communications

and support

arrangements, and

consider

establishing a job

sharers database.

The review will look

at the possibility of

enabling an

extension of the

contract beyond the

maternity leave if

this is not allowed

by the funder.

Booklet to be

produced to ensure

full information

available to parents

and managers.

Resources,

Responsibility

now with:

Deans for

D&I

(Professor

Ellie

Highwood

and Professor

Simon

Chandler-

Wilde)

PVC

Academic

Planning &

Resource

(Professor

Robert Van

de Noort)

about

differences

between

funders and of

the particular

support

offered by

Reading.

Greater

uptake of

funding for

buying out

teaching.




Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

section 4a & 7b The current SAT has considered the separate elements of this multifaceted action and has identified those elements which have not been progressed (with

no plans to take forward and why) and other areas which we have achieved or been able to go beyond the original expectations of the original action:

i.Maternity/paternity communications and support. In October 2015, a workshop was developed by the HR Advisors ‘an overview of childcare parenting

policies’ to cover the full range of parental/family friendly leave, KIT/SPLIT days and (briefly) flexible working provisions. This has been delivered to HR staff

in order that they can support staff more effectively on family friendly queries. In addition it has been piloted at a lunchtime session to the School of

Chemistry Food and Pharmacy (14 October 2015) and is to be rolled out to all Schools AP 2016: F5iii

ii. establishing a job sharers database. There is no further plan to progress this as the current SAT considers its success to be limited for most academics in

SET. However to note that the current Dean for Diversity and Inclusion position is a job share arrangement, demonstrating the UoR’s willingness to support

a job sharing role and that this being at a senior level, will not be a barrier. Also see future action planned AP2016:F6 which focuses on job-sharing

iii.extension of research contracts. This is dependent on the funder and the nature of the research project so not within the UoR’s remit to determine.

However we have had a specific example recently demonstrating good practice in which the School of Maths and Physical Sciences obtained approval from

the Research Council for a contract to be extended following researcher’s maternity leave (with RC funding the maternity cost separately).

iv. funding for buying out teaching is being taken forward in AP 2016: F1 and F2. (The University Executive Board has agreed for the full cost of maternity/ shared parental leave to be reimbursed to Schools from a central fund with 25% of this funding is to be ring-fenced to aid return to work for the individual).

12 Keeping in Touch days noted as not

always taken up

Identify that

not all Schools

and

Ensure better

information for

parents and


Ruth Busby,

Deputy

2012 – 13 2012 Greater

uptake of

Keeping in



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

individuals are

aware of the

payments

made for

those using

KIT days

managers about KIT

day provision and

provision of

‘coaching/induction’

to support those

returning

Director, HR

Responsibility

now with:

AD of HR-

Advisory

Services

(Claire

Rolstone)

Touch days.

Development

and delivery of

returners’

‘induction’

training to

support those

returning

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 12 section 7b The lack of progress on keeping in touch (KIT) days was highlighted in AS Panel feedback following the 2014 application. The new SAT asked HR to look at

the guidance immediately and as a result of this we now have improved online guidance for staff and managers. This makes it clear to all staff across the

University that we take the same approach for remunerating Shared Parental Leave (keeping) in touch (SPLIT) days and maternity leave Keeping in Touch

(KIT) days. Anyone attending work for a KIT or SPLIT day will be paid at their full contractual rate of pay or offered a day off in lieu at their preference. Paid

KIT days are captured by HR data system TRENT.

In October 2015, a workshop was developed by the HR Advisors ‘an overview of childcare parenting policies’ to cover the full range of parental/family

friendly leave, KIT/SPLIT days and (briefly) flexible working provisions. This has been delivered to HR staff in order that they can support staff more

effectively on family friendly queries. In addition it has been piloted at a lunchtime session to the School of Chemistry Food and Pharmacy (academic staff



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

and managers) and is to be presented in all Schools AP2016:F5iii

13 Women’s Network established,

facilitated by UKRC personnel.

A series of

women’s

network

events have

taken place

with

presentations

from invited

speakers and

more informal

sessions

Further meetings

planned with

invitations to all

women across the

University – SET and

non-SET.

Achieved Previously

Dianne Berry

(as Chair of

D&I Strategy

Group and

Chair of

Women at

Reading

Network

committee

Responsibility

now with:

Leadership &

Talent

Development

Manager

(Susan

Thornton)

Chair of

2012 - 15 2010 Increased

attendance at

regular

programme of

events with

good feedback

from

attendees



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

Women at

Reading

Network

Committee

(Dr Claire

Collins)

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 13 section 5(i)b Since the creation of the original Women’s Network, there has been considerable success in the development of networks for women at UoR, described in

detail in the application.

In summary there are 2 networks:

i.‘Women at Reading’ is open to all women across the University to participate in events

ii.Women in Leadership at Reading is for women in (or aspiring to) senior leadership roles.

A programme of events is planned throughout the year for both networks by a steering group which is now chaired by Dr Claire Collins, an Associate

Professor in the Henley Business School.



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

14 Part timers’ pension right

established in 2000 by EU Court

A range or

tribunals have

reported

Reading is looking

at each case to

determine the

individuals rights to

backdated

membership of the

pension scheme

Achieved Director of

Human

Resources

(John Brady)

2012 2007 All eligible part

time members

of staff have

pension rights

backdated


There is no further action required in the context of Athena SWAN as UoR proceeds in line with the legislation

Gender Balance on Committees

15 Monitor committee membership Committee

membership

reviewed with

little change

from 2008 at

around 38%

average

Review to be

undertaken of how

membership of

committees is

determined to see

whether post might

be advertised.

Partly

Achieved

Previously:

Prof Dianne

Berry as Chair

Staffing

Committee

Responsibility

now with:

Vice-

2014 2012 Improve

gender

balance to

between 40 –

50% on ALL

committees



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

Chancellor

(Sir David

Bell)

PVC,

Academic

Planning &

Resource(Prof

Robert Van

de Noort)

Chief Strategy

Officer and

University

Secretary (Dr

Richard

Messer)

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 15 section 6c At April 2016 it is acknowledged that there is more to do at the most senior level and there are currently no women on UEB AP 2016:E3(iii).

The UoR recognises that we need a better gender balance on senior committees and for this reason, for the first time, an official target (success measure)



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

has been approved by the Vice-Chancellor(in November 2015) as follows: each of the strategic and decision making Committees/Boards of the University

(and all those considering cases for promotion and reward) should normally have a minimum of 30% of either gender by 2020

A review of committees is currently on-going as part of the academic restructuring, explained in the main body of the application. The implementation

group will be tasked to achieve the target stated and where necessary to consider committee membership via skills rather than role held to achieve this –

see AP 2016:E2

Progress has been achieved on the wider UoR leadership group, which is a key strategic, decision-making body. At April 2016, 38% of the leadership group

are women (21 out of a total of 55 individuals). These positions include: Deans (Research T&L, Diversity & Inclusion), Henley Business School, Heads of

School and Heads of Function.

In March 2015, 3 women members were appointed to Council to positions previously held by men. We believe that Council recruitment diversity messages

contributed to this success. Less successful is the change in gender representation on Senate reported in the application and we are investigating this with

action in place-see AP 2016:E2(i)

Embedding learning from Athena SWAN

16 Decision that all SET schools should

be engaged in the Athena Process

All SET schools

with awards

and preparing

submission

have a

representative

on the

All SET schools

whether currently

part of Athena

SWAN or not at to

have a

representative on

the Athena SWAN


Athena Leads

and Heads of

SET Schools

Responsibility

now with:

2011-14 2011 All SET schools

engaged in the

Athena

process, with

awards by

2012 and

participating



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

University

level Athena

Steering

group which

meets termly

in order to

find out about

new activities

and feed back

to their School

Steering group as

part of integrating

them with the

scheme

D&I Officer

(Frances

Raimo)

Deans for D&I

(Professor

Ellie

Highwood

and Professor

Simon

Chandler-

Wilde)

actively in

steering group

meetings and

feeding back

to colleagues

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Action 16 section 2b ALL SET Schools are engaged in Athena SWAN activity and the 2 that do not currently hold an award are working on applications. Each School has an AS

Lead who attends the Athena SWAN Steering Group (ASSG) meetings chaired by the Dean for Diversity & Inclusion on a termly basis. ASSG meetings are a

forum for sharing of best practice.

For example: i. In June 2015, Rachel Thorns (HR Partner) shared best practice with Athena SWAN School Leads on writing AS applications (following her

attendance as an AS panel observer at ECU HQ in 2014). All AS Leads have a copy of the best practice material provided by Rachel and this was used to



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

inform those Schools that submitted applications in November 2015. The Diversity and Inclusion Officer is building on the best practice folder and sharing

this with AS leads.

ii. ASSG meetings are an opportunity for expert guest speakers to be invited to present. In February 2016, Dr Cassie Nolan from the Planning and Strategy

Office gave a presentation on data interpretation to Athena SWAN School Leads at the Athena SWAN Steering Group meeting; similar sessions based on

ASSG member requests will be provided at future meetings.

We have significantly developed the original action; with the appointment of 2 roles: Dean for Diversity & Inclusion and Diversity & Inclusion Officer, the

UoR has put measures in place to take engagement with Schools on Athena SWAN to a higher level. On 23rd September 2015, a clear commitment of

support with a timetable for action was sent to all SET Schools by the new Deans for Diversity and Inclusion (see memo shown in section2 of application). All

Athena SWAN Leads now have a first point of contact (D&I officer) to assist with data requests and to provide support and advice. This is a joined up Athena

SWAN process across the University. All School applications are now reviewed by an internal Panel followed by F2F feedback delivered by the Dean for D&I

to the School AS lead and Head of School (this process was trialled and worked well for November 2015 and April 2016 applications). See AP 2016:A2 & A3

17a Invitation from ECU to be part of

Systemic Change Pilot

Proposal for

involvement

accepted.

Reading

hosted first

meeting

October 2011.

Projects underway

as per entries below


Professor

Dianne Berry,

Professor

Averil

Macdonald

and Mrs Ruth

Busby

2012 2011 See below



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

17b

ECU project: request from non-SET

Schools for Athena style programme

Proposal

accepted for

developing

non-SET

programme

nationally

Planning phase

begun, Call to be

put on ECU website

for participating

non- SET

departments

Achieved As above 2012 2011 Pilot non SET

scheme

trialled and

reported

17c ECU project: Need to share good

practice learned from Athena SWAN

to Professional, Managerial and

Administrative staff

Plans put in

place and

initial focus

group met

November

2011

A series of focus

groups from each

sector across all

staff to be

convened to

determine needs

and further actions

then defined

Not

Achieved

As above 2012 2011 Good practice

learned from

Athena SWAN

embedded in

processes and

practices for

non-academic

staff

17d

ECU project: indication that job

sharing was not wide spread and

that those on part time contracts

were limited to lower grade

occupations

Plans put in

place to

acquire data

on job shares

and on grade

levels for staff

working part

A job--share bank to

be set up and merit

based promotion

reviewed to identify

barriers to those

working part time.

Not

achieved

As above 2012 2011 Job share

bank, greater

uptake of job

sharing and

evidence of

part time

workers being



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

time able to access

higher grade

posts.

17e 21.ECU project:

Indication that managers were not

always willing to enable flexible

working

Consideration

of

incorporating

measures of

managers

effectiveness

in managing

diverse teams

incorporated

into appraisal

Vitae training for

managers to be

followed up by

inclusion within

appraisal of

recognition of

enabling flexible

working within a

team

Partly

Achieved

As above 2012 2011 Greater

uptake of

flexible

working

17f

ECU Project: Indication that some

managers were less supportive of

people on part time contracts being

put forward for promotion

Data

requested to

identify

whether being

on part time

contract

reduced

likelihood of

Review data and

consider how

guidance on

promotions process

should incorporate

information on

promoting those on

Achieved As above 2012 2011 Guidelines on

enabling those

on part time

contracts to

apply for

promotion



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

being on

higher grades

part time contracts

April 2016 Update by new SAT on Actions 17a-f (17a)This was an ambitious project, which unfortunately lost momentum due to the departure of 2 of its key drivers. There is a strong lesson learnt which

has been acted on, that we need to ensure that projects are not dependent on a small number of people and responsibility should be shared more widely.

For this reason, every future action is now the responsibility of a specific named role and projects such as this will in future be shared across the SAT and

wider university stakeholders. Although the aims were not all achieved, there was some progress which can be reported as a result of this project:

(17b) The involvement of non-SET Schools in a pilot was a valuable experience making the University aware that there are different issues for AHSSLB

Schools, which will be highly informative when we extend Athena SWAN out–see AP 2016: A2&A3 One of the departments which participated in the

project (department of English Literature) reported that as a result of taking part: i.they would be putting in place an Equalities Committee with direct links

to their existing Staff-Student committee; ii.there had been awareness raising of the need to focus on a fairer system for the appointment of staff to

administrative positions and the need to open up roles to a wider group; iii. greater consideration of the needs of staff returning from maternity leave and

the need to set appropriate workloads, reducing these initially for those returning.

(17c)In terms of extending Athena SWAN to the Functions,(Professional, Managerial and Administrative staff), this is progressing; as explained at action 11

(iii) above (roll out of funding to cover Professional, Managerial and Administrative staff who take maternity/ shared parental leave) –AP 2016:F2

(17d) job share database not being progressed –reasons explained at action 11(i) but action ongoing on promoting job-sharing AP2016: F6

(17e)-already partially achieved through changes in the appraisal process see actions 7 and 10 above . Also see AP 2016:E3i-iii,F3

(17f) –already achieved through the change in personal titles process implemented in 2012-see action 5 above and continuing in AP 2016:C7



Action taken

already and

outcome at

November

2011

Further action

planned at

November 2011

Level of

progress

category

at April

2016

Responsibility

(lead role in

bold)

Timescale Start

date

Success

Measure

athena swan bronze university award renewal application · 1. letter of endorsement from a...

Documents