department application bronze and silver award… · are women. gender equality is a central...
TRANSCRIPT
Department Application Bronze and Silver Award
2
Name of institution Queen’s University Belfast
Department Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work
Focus of department AHSSBL
Date of application 7th December
Award Level Silver
Institution Athena SWAN award
Date: May 2015 Level: Silver
Contact for application Must be based in the department
Dr Tanya Serisier
Email [email protected]
Telephone (028) 9097 3630
Departmental website http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/
SchoolofSociologySocialPolicySocialWork/
3
List of Acronyms ARK – Access Research Knowledge (Northern Ireland) AHRC - Arts and Humanities Research Council AS - Athena SWAN BA – Bachelor of Arts BSW – Bachelor of Social Work DE – Director of Education DR – Director of Research ERC – European Research Council ESRC – Economic and Social Research Council FEB – Faculty Executive Board HESA – Higher Education Statistics Agency HoS – Head of School ICCR – Institute of Childcare Research IWD – International Women’s Day KIT – Keeping in Touch PGT – Postgraduate Taught PGR – Postgraduate Research NI – Northern Ireland NISSC – Northern Ireland Social Care Council QGI – Queen’s Gender Initiative Q-Step – Bachelor of Science in Quantitative Methods QUB – Queen’s University Belfast REU – Research and Enterprise Office SAT – Self Assessment Team (for SWAN) SB – School Board SMB – School Management Board SSG – SWAN Steering Group SSPSW – School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work STDU – Staff Training and Development Unit WAM – Workload Allocation Model
4
5
1. LETTER OF ENDORSEMENT FROM THE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT
School of Sociology, Social Policy & Social Work
Queen’s University Belfast
Belfast BT7 1NN
Northern Ireland
Tel +028 9033 5117 http://www.qub.ac.uk/schools/SchoolofSociologySocialPolicySocialWork/ December 1st, 2015 Dear Panel, As Head of School, I am delighted to write a letter in support of our Silver SWAN application. As a senior female academic, I am very committed to the SWAN charter principles, not least because for sixteen years of my career I have been a working single parent. The actions of the SAT, beginning with our Culture Survey, have had a profound impact on our School Culture, and enabled us interrogate and improve our practices in areas such as the promotion of work-life balance and female leadership. Staff can now more clearly see the importance of developing and supporting our talented female academics. I am particularly pleased at the collective buy-in regarding the implementation of our SWAN action plan, and the lead taken by female and male colleagues. I can also confirm that the information presented in the application (including quantitative and qualitative data) is an honest, accurate and true representation of the School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work. The last three years has been a time of great change for the School and the University. I took over as Head of School in July, making me the first ever female sociology Head of School. Our previous Head of School had been in post for thirteen years. Since my appointment, I have created additional senior management roles in the School, and I have prioritised the appointment of women to ensure correct female representation in senior roles. This was done openly and with the full support of male and female colleagues involved. We have made very strong Early Career appointments, and the School is predominantly Early Career in make-up. I am very well aware that this young cohort of staff need to be carefully mentored at this critical stage in their careers. Our engagement with SWAN has allowed me to see gender inequalities in teaching duties that otherwise would have remained hidden. For example, undergraduate and postgraduate teaching loads are amalgamated in our work allocation model. However, the majority of our undergraduate teaching is done by women, and the majority of our postgraduate taught is done by men. This gives men an advantage in developing relationships with potential PhD students, advantaging men for promotion. As part of the strategic
6
direction of the School going forward, I will prioritise our actions to correct this imbalance, also enhancing our student experience by exposure to a wider range of staff. I will work not only to ensure our Action Plan is effectively carried out but that the underlying issues of gender equality remain central to our direction as a School. Although we have made great progress, there is more to be done. For example, our engagement with ATHENA SWAN has allowed us to identify that women take on a disproportionate percentage of the School workload that does not assist with career progression. We have put forward new initiatives in our action plan to address this. I am aware that while we are a predominantly female School, we have fewer women in senior positions. It is vital that the careers of early career women are supported and they advance through promotion. I am confident that our action plan will ensure that we achieve these aims. Yours sincerely,
Professor Sally Shortall Head of School
(ii) Statement of Support from Former Head of School
As the former Head of School (2005-2015), I am writing in support of the Silver Award application made by the School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work at Queen’s University Belfast. I encouraged the School’s formal engagement with the Athena SWAN process from early 2014 in recognition of its strong commitment to equality, including gender equality, in all aspects of our work. The SWAN process has offered a progressive platform for us to build on our record in recruiting and supporting talented early career academics, the majority of whom are women, as well as recognising our commitment to work-life balance, and our efforts to address the under-representation of male students.
As Head of School until August 2015, I participated in meetings of the SAT, preparing background statistical data and contributing to the discussions on the basis of my historical experience of equality issues within the University. Working with staff and postgraduate students from across the School, as well as with members of the SMB, including our SWAN champion, I have been keen to ensure that the concern with gender equality occupies a central place in School business and working culture. I am proud of the colleagues that have displayed such energy and commitment in leading the application and more generally of the extent to which the School as a whole has embraced the opportunities and challenges offered by Athena SWAN. My successor as Head of School, Professor Sally Shortall, is equally committed to the goals of Athena SWAN, and I look forward to working with her and the rest of the School to continue to improve gender equality.
Yours faithfully,
Professor Mike Tomlinson
(Word Count – 768)
7
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE DEPARTMENT
The School of Sociology, Social Policy and Social Work (SSPSW) is a diverse school comprising the disciplines of Sociology, Social Policy, Criminology and Social Work. It was formed in 2005 when the Schools of Sociology and Social Work merged, incorporating the Institute of Childcare Research (ICCR). These disciplines share an orientation to social welfare and social justice, combining internationally-recognised research excellence with a strong engagement with Northern Ireland. SSPSW is responsible for a number of important social initiatives, including the ESRC-funded ARK (Access Research Knowledge) project which provides dedicated sociological knowledge of Northern Ireland (NI), including a series of attitudinal ‘Life and Times’ surveys which measure changing attitudes in the region.
We are a predominantly female school (Figure 1). Currently, SSPSW employs a total of 89 staff (71 academic staff, and 18 professional and support staff) of whom 71 (80%) are women. Gender equality is a central element of research and pedagogy in SSPSW. SSPSW is recognised for its innovative research and teaching in children’s rights, offering a unique taught doctorate in Childhood studies (D Child). The School also hosts a Domestic Violence research grouping that includes both academics and practitioners and, currently, staff members are supervising a student-led research project into sexual violence and non-consensual sex among students at QUB, which will be the first such research initiative run in NI.
While most aspects of school governance operate across the whole of the school, UG and PGT teaching are administered separately, with 2 Directors of Education (DE). Staff submitted to two REF (2014) panels – UOA 22 (Social Work and Social Policy) and UOA 23 (Sociology), necessitating two Directors of Research (DR). The school runs three undergraduate degree programmes – a Bachelor of Arts (BA) where students study in Sociology, Criminology, and Social Policy (363 students in 2014/15), and a Bachelor of Social Work (BSW), the only degree programme accredited by the Northern Ireland Social Care Council (NISCC) (303 students in 2014/15). As of 2015/16 SSPSW is one of fifteen departments UK-wide offering a Nuffield Foundation-funded Bachelor of Science in Quantitative Methods (Q-Step). The school also offers a range of PGT programmes, including Masters courses, and a variety of diplomas and certificates for Social Work practitioners, with 287 students in total, of whom 231 (80.5%) women. The school currently includes 34 PGR students, 29 (85.3%) of whom are women. We have recently appointed (July 2015) our first female Head of School (HoS),Professor Sally Shortall. This shift reflects SSPSW’s commitment to promoting female leadership.
The School Management Board (SMB) is comprised of the HoS, School Manager (SM), 2x DRs (Sociology and Social Work), 2x DEs (Sociology and Social Work), Postgraduate Director (PD), Internationalisation Champion, SWAN Champion (as of August 2014) and a staff representative. This group is majority female (6 of 10 members). As of August 2014 SWAN has been a standing item on the SMB agenda.
8
Figure 1: Students and Staff by Gender: 2014/15
(Wordcount – 475)
3. THE SELF-ASSESSMENT PROCESS
(i) Description of the self-assessment team
In August 2014, the HoS, Professor Mike Tomlinson, asked Dr Tanya Serisier and Dr Sirin Sung to take on the role of SWAN champions in recognition of their expertise in gender equality. The SAT was formed through a combination of volunteers and nominations to ensure inclusion of men and women, permanent/fixed-term and full-time/part-time staff, a range of grades, and varying family and personal experiences. The aim of the group is to analyse School practices and culture, challenge gender bias and develop an Action Plan in conjunction with SMB. In Summer 2015, Professor Sally Shortall took over as HoS. The SAT has external advisors - QUB SWAN champions of School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Dr Beatrice Smyth and Dr Joe Butterfield. SMAE holds a Silver award and is the QUB-organised ‘buddy school’ for SSPSW. They have advised on process and commented on drafts of the application and action plan. Figure 2: SAT membership 2014-2015
Name Position in School Roles/Working Group Membership on SAT
Tanya Serisier (f)
Lecturer (Criminology). Tanya moved from Australia to Belfast in 2014 and her partner pursues a career in the arts.
SWAN Co-Champion
Chair SAT
Rossella Ciccia (f)
Lecturer (Social Policy). Rosella commenced in SSPSW in 2014. She is married and her husband is pursuing his career in Italy
Work/life balance.
David Hayes (m)
Senior Lecturer (Social Work), Examinations Officer. Davy’s research
Students
Workload
556 231 29
16
24
5
3
18
110 36 5
1
8
5
9
1
0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%
100.0%
Female
Male
9
focuses on young people in care.
Stan Houston (m)
Professor (Social Work), Postgraduate Director. Stan will be retiring at the end of 2015 after progressing from lecturer to Professor at QUB.
PGR/PGT students
Madeleine Leonard (f)
Professor (Sociology), Director of Research 203/14, Internationalisation Champion (2015). Madeleine progressed from lecturer to Professor at QUB whilst raising 2(?) children.
Career Progression
Elizabeth Martin (f) (Replaced Lisa Wilson)
PhD Student and tutor (Social Work) Elizabeth has a young child.
Students
Culture Survey
Mandi MacDonald (f)
Lecturer, Programme Director (Social Work). Mandi has 2 young children and is in a dual-career relationship.
Work/Life Balance
Workload
Sharon Millen (f)
Research Fellow (ICCR) – Fixed-Term. Sharon has worked in ICCR from 2008.
Fixed-term staff.
Research-Only staff
Culture Survey
Robert Miller (m)
Professor (Sociology) – Part-Time. Bob was founding Deputy Director of ARK.
Culture Survey.
Patricia Reilly (f)
Patricia has progressed from administrator to school manager. She has two school-aged children.
Professional and Support Staff
Workload
Sirin Sung (f) Lecturer (Social Policy), Internationalisation Champion. Originally from South Korea, Sirin is in a dual career relationship in Belfast.
Work-Life Balance
SWAN Co-Champion
International Students/Staff
Michael Tomlinson (m) (Replaced by Sally Shortall)
Professor (Social Policy) and HoS (until July 2015). Mike was head of SSPSW from its formation in 2005.
Incorporation of SWAN into strategic direction of school.
Fixed-term contract staff
Sally Shortall (f) (Replaced Mike Tomlinson)
Professor (Sociology) and HoS (from July 2015), DR 2013-2015. (Member of SAT as of June 2015). Sally progressed from lecturer to Professor at QUB whilst raising twins as a single mother.
Incorporation of SWAN into strategic direction of School
Gender and Research
Eoin Flaherty (m)
Lecturer in Sociology. Eoin was employed as part of the Q-Step quantitative methods initiative in 2014. He has recently married and his wife is a nurse who continues to work in the Republic of Ireland.
Early-career staff
Departmental data analysis.
10
Lisa Wilson (f) (Replaced by Elizabeth Martin)
PhD student (Social Policy) (now-completed). SAT member until December 2014
Culture Survey
School culture
Student
(ii) An account of the self-assessment process The SAT meets 3-4 times per semester, with regular working group meetings and email exchanges. Meetings have focused on a number of topics including the SWAN application (including data analysis, application and Action Plan drafting) and the promotion of gender equality in the school (embedding SWAN principles, events and key areas for development). SWAN has been a standing item at the SMB and School Board (SB) since mid-2014, with SAT representation on all other committees. As of 2014, SWAN is a standing item at the Faculty Executive Board (FEB) where the HoS reports on our progress, which is included in the HoS performance review. Tanya and Sirin meet regularly with SWAN champions across the university to discuss best practice, share ideas and report on progress. Feedback from these meetings is fed through the SWAN Steering Group (SSG) to University Management. Promotion of Athena SWAN within SSPSW began through a Culture Survey administered in October 2014 to all staff and PGR students. The survey explored issues of gender equality and sexual diversity. The overall response rate was 61% (75), with a high of 80% (24) among Lecturers. The only staff groups with a take-up of less than 50% were Professors and Professional and Support Staff. The views of Professional and Support staff were sought through a focus group which 9 (50%) attended. We are promoting Professorial engagement through dedicated mentoring tasks (Actions A1, A2). To maintain engagement in SWAN amongst all staff, we are adding engagement with gender equality as an objective to appraisals and professorial reviews (Action D8). In December 2014, the survey findings were presented at the SB (attended by academic and academic-related staff). It showed that while PGR students were generally very positive, the majority of staff expressed dissatisfaction in areas such as career development and work-life balance. Additionally, women were less likely than men to have positive views on these issues. While these results were concerning, they were also extremely galvanising in terms of staff engagement with SWAN. The discussion at this SB spawned a number of immediate actions, including development of information sheets around family-friendly policies, an International Women’s Day (IWD) event organised by staff and PGRs, and an ‘equal pay survey’ to initiate discussions around the gender pay gap – while not designed to produce robust data, the survey received a response rate of 43%. The SB also resolved to undertake a series of focus groups with targeted staff groups.
11
Figure 3: Focus Groups
Group Rationale Leader Immediate Outcomes
Male only To explore divergences in results between male and female staff and to discuss relevance of SWAN for male staff members.
Male – non SAT member.
Declaration SWAN relevant to male and female staff.
Commitment to prioritising male SWAN champion (Action D8)
Female only To explore divergences in results between male and female staff.
Female - SAT member
Career development and workload allocation considered primary issues (Action A5, A7)
Enhanced school support for individual career progression. (Action A1)
Workload allocation review (Action A7)
Early-Career/Probationary Staff
To explore particular issues and concerns of early career and new staff.
Male - non-SAT member
Need for greater research ‘culture’ in school. (Action D3)
More supports for long-term career development (Action A2)
Early career representation in School governance and on SMB (Action D4)
Staff with caring responsibilities
To explore needs and views of staff with caring responsibilities – highlighted in survey.
Female – SAT member
Need for greater and more readily accessible information (Action B3)
Reaffirmation of School commitment to flexible work and work/life balance (Action B3)
Fixed-Term Academic Staff
Needs of this group highlighted in survey – to explore their needs and perceptions.
Female – SAT member
Career progression highlighted. (Action A3)
Need for greater integration into School (Action D5)
12
Fixed-term academic representation on SMB (Action D4)
LGBT+ staff Responded more negatively to questions around school culture.
Female – non-SAT member
Need for increased visibility and awareness of LGBT+ staff and students (Action D9)
Professional and support Staff
Low levels of engagement with survey.
Female – non-SAT member.
Need for more information around career development opportunities (Action A4)
Need for professional and support staff representation on SAT (Action D10)
All staff have access to a SWAN Sharepoint folder which contains drafts of applications and action plans, SAT minutes, SB presentations and data analysis. SSPSW also has an anonymous online ‘comments box’ where staff post suggestions, queries and comments. Staff have repeatedly expressed their sense that SSPSW’s engagement has been systematic and wide-reaching. As one staff member wrote in an anonymous comment: ‘I would like to express my gratitude and support for the way this initiative appears to be being used to do more than just tick boxes. This is because I think the lived experience of being part of our School may vary quite widely but not just along lines of gender; also age, seniority, security of employment, subject discipline, career ambitions, life outside of work and I think there is a need for the implications of that, whether good, bad or indifferent, to be better understood and worked into a culture of wellbeing.’ Students have been informed about and consulted on SWAN through the Student Staff Consultative Committee (SSCC) which includes representatives from all student levels and programmes.
(iii) Plans for the future of the self-assessment team The SAT will continue to meet at least 3 times per a semester with a half-day SAT annual review at the end of the academic year to monitor Action Plan progress, and update and reflect on departmental data, supplemented by smaller working-group meetings and email exchanges. Progress will be communicated more widely through a gender equality section of the school website, the School Newsletter which will commence circulation in 2016 (Action Point D3), and regular email updates (at least 1 per semester from SWAN champions). SWAN has also become a standing item on all other committees. Following the annual review, the SAT will provide a report to the SMB and School Board. SWAN champion is a Leadership role, considered equivalent in workload to a Programme Director. Membership on the SAT is given equivalent recognition to other core committees in terms of workload allocation and recognition in appraisal. In
13
keeping with SSPSW practice, SWAN champions and SAT members who are permanent staff members will serve on a three-year rotation. Fixed-term staff and student representatives will rotate on an annual basis. The SAT will be monitored for representation by gender, different staff grades, contract types and personal/family circumstances. As of 2016, we will specify that at least 1 SWAN champion should be Senior Lecturer or above, and that there will be one female and one male champion, to promote engagement with SWAN across the School. UG and PGT students are not currently represented on the SAT but from 2016, the SAT will work closely with the SSCC to involve them in the process. As the SSCC includes all levels of students, the inclusion of SWAN as a standing item as well as liaison member representation on the SSCC will effectively promote a wide range of student engagement than a single representative on the SAT. The SSCC has agreed to create and deliver a modified culture survey to be undertaken with PGT and UG students in 2016 (Action C7). (Word count = 1068)
4. A PICTURE OF THE DEPARTMENT
4.1. Student data
(i) Numbers of men and women on access or foundation courses
N/A
(ii) Numbers of undergraduate students by gender
Figure 4: UG Students by Gender and Programme
As shown in Figure 4, the proportion of female UG students is stable at approximately 80% over the past three years, with female UG students in the BA (Sociology/Criminology/Social Policy) programmes averaging slightly above the national average for Sociology (72.9%) and female BSW students similar to the national average
512 255 247
532 268 235 556 299
239
117 69 43
117 68 41 110 64
40
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Total BA BSW Total BA BSW Total BA BSW
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
14
(85.4%) SSPSW does not offer part-time UG study and the small numbers of part-time students (Table 5) are students finishing elements of their previously full-time study (further analysis not undertaken owing to low numbers). Figure 5: Undergraduate Students: Full-Time and Part-time
Full-Time Part-Time
Female Male Female Male
No. % No. % No. % No. %
2012/13 502 79.8 112 18.4 10 1.6 5 0.8
2013/14 503 77.5 109 16.8 29 4.5 8 1.2
2014/15 538 80.8 104 15.6 18 2.7 6 0.9
Staff consultation has suggested that the higher gender segregation of the school system in NI may account for some of the disparity in gender ratios between our programmes and those across the UK, as many boys-only schools do not offer Sociology at A-level (The vast majority of our student cohort are drawn from NI). This will be investigated further. (Action C1) Figure 6: UG Applications, Offers and Acceptances
While the proportion of male applicants is significantly less than females, males are slightly overrepresented in terms of offers made and underrepresented in terms of acceptances. This pattern holds across the three years of data, although there has been a slight decline in the overall proportion of male acceptances (from 18% to 15% - 40 to 34 students).
1532 684 183 1506 747 192 1509 817
195
369 208 40 394 217 37 384 226
34
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female Male
15
Figure 7: Male Admissions and Acceptance Rates by Degree
However, breaking down the figures by degree indicates that the total number and proportion of male applicants and acceptances to the BSW has been steadily rising over the past 3 years (Figure 7). This proportion is even higher among school-leavers (12% to 19%) compared to mature and graduate-entry students. This increase demonstrates the impact of a targeted recruitment and outreach campaign programme commenced in 2010 by Social Work staff to attract more male students. These efforts mean that the BSW is on-track to increase its proportion of male students to above the national average in the coming years. The BA Criminology programme, partly set up to address this gender imbalance, has been successful in attracting more male applicants, offers and acceptances (over a third). Market research we have undertaken suggests that the new ‘Q-Step’ BSc Sociology with Quantitative Methods is attractive to potential male students and offers a chance to increase our male UG intake (Action C1). Figure 8: UG Degree Attainment Rates by Gender
28
12
22
15 18 16
11.4% 9.8% 8.6%
10.9%
6.9%
12.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
BA BSW BA BSW BA BSW
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Admissions
Acceptance Rates
173 79 94 153 70 83 183 79
104
29 14 15 35 20 15 40 23
17
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
All BA BSW All BA BSW All BA BSW
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Male
Female
16
Degree attainment rates reflect the gender ratios in both degree programmes. Figure 9: Degree Classification by Gender
Figure 10: Proportion of Students Receiving ‘Good’ (1st/2.1) Degree by Gender
In 2012/13, there were minimal gender differences in achieving a good classification across the two degrees. However, in recent years, gender differences have opened up particularly in the BSW degree, with males slightly less likely to achieve a good degree. At the same time, most recent data indicates that BA males were slightly more likely to achieve a good degree than females. SSPSW will monitor this phenomenon, investigate
20 128 24
1
17 107 28
1
23 124 36
5 20 3
1
4 22 8
1
4 27 8
1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1st 2.1 2.2 3rd 1st 2.1 2.2 3rd 1st 2.1 2.2 3rd
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Male
Female
148
61
87
124 53
71 147
56
91
25 11
14
26 15 11 31 18 13
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
All BA BSW All BA BSW All BA BSW
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
17
its causes and take actions to increase the proportion of males obtaining ‘good degrees’ (Action C2).
(iii) Numbers of men and women on postgraduate taught degrees
SSPSW offers PGT courses at a range of levels, including certificates, diplomas, masters and a taught doctorate in childhood studies (Figure 11). Social Work PGT courses are primarily targeted at Social Work professionals. The MRes provides training in research methods and also includes employees wishing to upskill/refresh their skills base. Figure 11: PGT Provision in SSPSW
Arts/Sociology Social Work
Certificate Cert (PC) Applied Social Studies:
Child Care
Dual Diagnosis
Foundation-Systemic Practice
Strategy and Leadership
Systemic Practice and Family Cert (PC) Cognitive Behavioural Practice Cert (PC) PPI Health & Social Care
Diploma Dip (PD) Social Research Methods Dip (PD) Sociology Dip (PD) Youth Justice
Dip (PD) Applied Social Studies:
Child Care
Intermediate Systemic Practice
Mental Health
Strategy and Leadership
Systemic Practice and Family Dip (PD) Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Dip (PD) Mental Health
Masters MA (T) Sociology MRes (T) Social Research Methods MSc (T) Youth Justice
MSc (T) Applied Social Studies:
Child Care
Family and Systemic Practice
Qualitative Systemic Practice
Mental Health
Strategy and Leadership
Systemic Practice
Taught Doctorate
Doctorate in Childhood Studies (DChild)
18
Figure 12: PGT Students by Gender and Full-Time/Part-Time Status
The majority of PGT students are part-time (Figure 12), and we are aware from regular student consultations that these students, many of whom have caring responsibilities, feel less integration within SSPSW than other groups. Part-time student experience and integration is a priority area for SSPSW. We will be working with the Queen’s Graduate School and Dean of Graduate students, Prof Margaret Topping, who have also identified this as an area of concern, to enhance the integration of PGT students within SSPSW and QUB more generally (Action C4). Figure 13: Students by Gender and Discipline
13
129
19
168
16
215
3
38
9
47
2
54
0
50
100
150
200
250
Full-time Part-time Full-time Part-time Full-time Part-time
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Nu
mb
ers
of
Stu
de
nts
Female Male
91 51 139
48
175 56
29 12 37
19
40 16
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Social Work Sociology,Social Policy,Criminology
Social Work Sociology,Social Policy,Criminology
Social Work Sociology,Social Policy,Criminology
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
19
As Figure 13 indicates, male students are under-represented across all PGT programmes. Over time, the numbers of female Social Work PGT students has increased dramatically from 91 to 175, partly reflecting the occupational segregation and changing further accreditation needs within this profession. We have, however, seen a slight increase in male PGT acceptances over the past three years (Figure 14) and will be seeking to build on this by extending our UG efforts at male student recruitment PGT courses (Action C8). Figure 14: SSPSW PGT Applications, Offers and Acceptances by Gender
Figure 15: SSPSW PGT Degree Attainment by Gender
The proportions of female and male students attaining PGT degrees in this period reflects the gender composition of the student cohort (Figure 15) pointing to equivalent attainment rates for both genders.
196 139 93
238 149 103 278 223 123
69 51 22
75 53 35 81 60 43
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
42 68 107
16 18 28
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
20
(iv) Numbers of men and women on postgraduate research degrees
Figure 16: PGR Students by Full-time/Part-Time and Gender
PGR students in SSPSW are a mixture of MPhil and PhD students with female students far more likely than male students to study part-time (Figure 16). This is primarily due to greater numbers of these students having caring responsibilities for young children. The School has seen a gradual increase in the proportion of female PGR students from 66%-85% due to an overall reduction in the numbers of male students from 15-5. Figure 17: PGR Applications, Offers and Acceptances by Gender
In 2012/13, there were minimal gender differences in terms of applications, offers and acceptances. Over time, the number of male applicants has decreased, with associated
13
16
12 12 16 13
12
3
6 3 3 2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Full-Time Part-Time Full-Time Part-Time Full-Time Part-Time
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
18 6 4
36 15
10
18
7 6
19 5 3 15
4 2
11 2 2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
Ap
plic
atio
ns
Off
ers
Acc
epta
nce
s
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
21
declines in offers and acceptances. Increasing the numbers and proportions of male students accepted into SSPSW is thus also a priority for us at this level (Action C3). Figure 18: PGR Degree Attainment by Gender
The proportion of male completions increased over this period (Figure 18), although this was largely due to the higher numbers of female students undertaking part-time study (Graph 4.11) and thus taking longer to complete their degrees (Figure 19). This reflects valuable flexibility on the part of SSPSW in response to PGR student needs. As mentioned in relation to PGT students, there is a need to ensure that adequate mentoring and support is provided to this cohort of part-time female students (Action C4). Figure 19: Length of Time for PhD completion by Gender
17 8
7
4 3
5
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female Male
6 6 5 1
5
2 3 3
1
4
1 1 1
3
2
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
4 years orless
5-6 years 7 or more 4 years orless
5-6 years 7 or more 4 years orless
5-6 years 7 or more
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
female male
22
(v) Progression pipeline between undergraduate and postgraduate student levels
Figure 20: Percentage of Women in Key Progression Points SSPSW
Figure 20 shows the percentage of women at key progression points from UG admission to PhD completion. The graph illustrates that there are distinct progression issues between male and female students with male students far lower in number at the point of UG admissions, and female students taking longer to complete PhDs, due to high proportions of part-time students. We do not currently collect data on the extent to which UG and PGT students progress between degree levels in SSPSW, although we know this is not a simple process. The majority of PGT students in SSPSW are not recent graduates but social work professionals, and students in different disciplines have differing progression routes. While, for instance, it is possible for a BA student in Sociology to progress from UG to PGT to PGR within SSPSW, Criminology students are more likely to take the Masters in Criminology offered by the Law School before returning to SSPSW to undertake PGR study, a route that we know many of our Criminology students who go on to further study take. Such a route would seem to represent a temporary ‘pipeline’ loss in students but is ultimately beneficial for both the student and SSPSW. There is a need both for dedicated research in this area and for increased measures to encourage our ‘good’ UG students particularly to move onto further study (Action C5).
(Word Count – 1178)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
UG
UG Good Degree
PGT
PGT Completion
PGR
PGR Completion
PGR in 4 years
23
4.2. Academic and research staff data
(i) Academic staff by grade, contract function and gender: research-only, teaching
and research or teaching-only
Figure 21: Staff Numbers by Gender 2014/15
SSPSW employed 71 academic staff in 2014/15. The majority (52) are Academic staff employed both for research and teaching, with a smaller group of 17 Research staff and 2 Lecturers (Education).1 Due to the small numbers and gender parity (50%) of Lecturer (Education) they are incorporated within the Academic staff group for analysis. Owing to the differing gender composition and career pathways of Academic staff and Research staff, the data will be presented separately throughout.
1 For convenience, the document will refer to staff involved in Research and Education
(Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, Readers, Professors) as Academic staff, and Research-Only staff as Research staff.
59%
94%
50%
41%
6% 50%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Academic (Lecturing) Academic (Research) Academic (Lecturer -Education)
Nu
mb
er
of
Staf
f
Female
Male
24
Figure 22: Staff by Gender, Grade and Function (a) Research Staff
(b) Academic Staff
The percentage of female staff has remained between 64% (49 of 76) to 67% (48 of 71) over three years, but with an increase of female Research staff from 84% (21 of 25) to 94% (16 of 17). We now have only female staff employed as Research Assistants and Fellows and one male and one female Senior Research Fellow (Figure 22a). Actions to improve the gender balance in this cohort are needed (Action A8). Female Academic staff increased from 55% (28) to 59% (32) (Figure 22(b)). This is a mid-point between the HESA (Higher Education Statistics Agency) 2013/14 averages of 50.5% for Sociology and 64% for Social Work. During these three years the percentage of female Lecturers increased from 65%-77%, leading to an under-representation of men (Action A8). The percentage of SL/Readers decreased from 67%-50%, achieving full gender parity. The percentage of Female Professors remains low, with the gender
8 11
2 7 14
1
2 13
1
2 1
1 1 2
1 1
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Re
sear
ch A
ssis
tan
t
Re
sear
ch F
ello
w
Sen
ior
Res
earc
h F
ello
w
Re
sear
ch A
ssis
tan
t
Re
sear
ch F
ello
w
Sen
ior
Res
earc
h F
ello
w
Re
sear
ch A
ssis
tan
t
Re
sear
ch F
ello
w
Sen
ior
Res
earc
h F
ello
w
2012-13 2013-14 2013-14
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Male
Female
17 8
3
21 5
3 1
23 5
3
2
9 4
8 1
6 5
9 1
7 5
9
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Lect
ure
r (E
du
cati
on
)
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r/R
ead
er
Pro
fess
or
Lect
ure
r (E
du
cati
on
)
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r/R
ead
er
Pro
fess
or
Lect
ure
r (E
du
cati
on
)
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r/R
ead
er
Pro
fess
or
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Male
Female
25
imbalance clearly represented in Figure 23. This indicates a need to urgently increase senior female staff (Action A6). Figure 23: Permanent Academic Staff by Gender and Grade 2014/15
Figure 24: Staff by Gender and Full-Time/Part-Time Status (a) Academic Staff
As Figure 24(a) shows, the number of part-time Academic staff in SSPSW is consistently low, with 8 individuals in total. This includes 1 male and 1 female Lecturer (Education) on part-time, fixed-term contracts (both recent PhD graduates substituting permanent staff on sabbatical.) There was one part-time female Lecturer who left in 2013-14 and one continuing part-time female Senior-Lecturer/Reader. The increase of part-time male Professors has increased from 2-4 through two strategic part-time REF appointments and two Professors transitioning to retirement.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Lecturer Senior Lecturer Professor
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
16 7
3
20
4 3
23
4 3
1
9 4
6 1
6
5 6
1
7
5
5
1 1 1 1
1
1
1
2 3 4
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Lect
ure
r (E
du
cati
on
)
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r/R
ead
er
Pro
fess
or
Lect
ure
r (E
du
cati
on
)
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r/R
ead
er
Pro
fess
or
Lect
ure
r (E
du
cati
on
)
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r/R
ead
er
Pro
fess
or
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Male Part-Time
Female Part-Time
Male Full-Time
Female Full-Time
26
Figure 24(b) Research Staff
There are similarly low levels (maximum of 4 in any year) of part-time Research staff (Figure 24(b)) although the small numbers of male staff members were more likely to be part-time, with 33% (1/3) of males part-time in 2012/13 and 50% (2/4) part-time in 2013-14. Figure 25: Permanent Academic Staff by Grade, Discipline and Gender
There are slightly more permanent Academic staff (28) employed in Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology (SSPC) than in Social Work (SW) (25 staff). The overall profile is similar with 64% of both groups employed at Lecturer level and 61% overall female staff . SSPC has more Professors (7 versus 3) while SW has more Senior Lecturers (7 versus
6
11 1
6 13
1 1
11
1
1
1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1
2 1 1 1
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Re
sear
ch A
ssis
tan
t
Re
sear
ch F
ello
w
Sen
ior
Res
earc
h F
ello
w
Re
sear
ch A
ssis
tan
t
Re
sear
ch F
ello
w
Sen
ior
Res
earc
h F
ello
w
Re
sear
ch A
ssis
tan
t
Re
sear
ch F
ello
w
Sen
ior
Res
earc
h F
ello
w
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Male Part-Time
Female Part-Time
Male Full-Time
Female Full-Time
13 2
2
10
3 1
5 1
5
1
2
4 2
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r
Pro
fess
or
Lect
ure
r (E
du
cati
on
)
Lect
ure
r
Sen
ior
Lect
ure
r
Pro
fess
or
Sociology/SocialPolicy/Criminology
Social Work
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Male
Female
27
3). Lecturers are 72% female (13/18) in SSPC and 77% (10/12) in SW. Senior Lecturers are 66% (2/3) female in SSPC and 43% (3/4) in SW, although the numbers are comparable. Professorial staff are 29% women (2/7) in SSP and 33% (1/3) in SW. Given these high levels of similarity, the data for Academic staff are discussed across SSPSW as a whole.
(ii) Academic and research staff by grade on fixed-term, open-ended/permanent
and zero-hour contracts by gender
Figure 26: Gender and fixed-term vs permanent contracts
The vast majority of Academic staff in the school are employed on permanent contracts (Figure 26), with only 2-3 on fixed-term contracts each year (4 individuals in total). These were either strategic REF appointments (2 male Professors) or ‘teaching cover’ posts for recently graduated PhD students, (1 male, 1 female) which function as important ‘CV builders’. This pattern is almost reversed for Research staff, with 3 staff (12-18%) - including the only male -employed on a permanent basis. This leaves a significant proportion of female Research staff employed on fixed-term contracts, primarily through the ICCR. QUB operates a central redeployment scheme for fixed-term research staff, made available 6 months before the conclusion of a contract, allowing staff to avoid periods of unemployment. Research staff in SSPSW have taken advantage of this scheme, although many have also received multiple consecutive contracts that have enabled them to stay in SSPSW for significant periods of time. For instance, Sharon Millen, the
28
19
2
29
20
2 1
31
14
2 3
20
3
1 2
19
3
1 2
19
1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Fixe
d T
erm
Aca
de
mic
Pe
rman
ent
Aca
dem
ic
Fixe
d-T
erm
Re
sear
ch
Pe
rman
ent
Re
sear
ch
Fixe
d T
erm
Aca
de
mic
Pe
rman
ent
Aca
dem
ic
Fixe
d-T
erm
Re
sear
ch
Pe
rman
ent
Re
sear
ch
Fixe
d T
erm
Aca
de
mic
Pe
rman
ent
Aca
dem
ic
Fixe
d-T
erm
Re
sear
ch
Pe
rman
ent
Re
sear
ch
2012-13 2012-13 2012-13
Male
Female
28
fixed term staff representative on the SAT, has been employed within the ICCR in SSPSW continuously since 2008. It is also important to note that there is a minority of staff in this group seeking employment as Lecturers, with the majority pursuing a research career. Both groups share concerns around career progression which will be addressed through targeted career development measures including mentoring and increased opportunities for experience in teaching (Action A3).
(iii) Academic leavers by grade and gender and full/part-time status
Figure 27: Academic leavers by grade and gender 2012/13 – 2014/15
Leavers Total staff Labour turnover %
Grade Male Female Male Female Male Female
2012/ 13
Research Assistant 0 0 2 8 0% 0%
Lecturer 0 0 11 17 0% 0%
Research Fellow 0 1 1 12 0% 8.3%
SL, Reader 0 1 4 9 0% 11% Senior Research Fellow 0 0 1 2 0% 0%
Professor 0 1 8 4 0% 25%
Total 0 3 37 52 0% 5.7%
2013/ 14
Research Assistant 0 1 1 8 0% 12.5%
Lecturer 2 1 9 22 22.2% 4.5%
Research Fellow 0 0 2 14 0% 0%
SL, Reader 1 3 6 8 16.7% 37.5% Senior Research Fellow 0 0 1 1 0% 0%
Professor 1 0 10 3 10% 0%
Total 4 5 29 57 13.8% 8.8%
2014/ 15
Research Assistant 1 0 1 2 100% 0%
Lecturer 1 2 10 26 10% 7.7%
Research Fellow 2 2 2 15 100% 13.3%
SL, Reader 0 0 6 5 0% 0% Senior Research Fellow 0 0 1 1 0% 0%
Professor 0 0 9 3 0% 0%
Total 4 4 29 52 13.7% 7.7% Between 2012/13 and 2014/15, 12 female Academic staff (6-8% on average per year) have left the School, compared with 8 male staff members (14% on average in 2013/14 and 2014/15) (Figure 27b). Turnover rates for both genders are significantly lower than HESA Statistics 2013/14 averages across all subjects - 19% for females and 17% for males.
29
Figure 28: Academic Leavers by Reason
Resignation End of Contract Retirement
Research Assistant Female 1
Male 1
Research Fellow Female 2 1
Male 1 1
Lecturer Female 3
Male 1 1 1
Senior Lecturer/Reader Female 4
Male 1
Professor Female 1
Male 1
Four female Research staff and three male staff members left during this period, a turn-over rate of 75% for male Research staff and 9% for females. In both cases the majority of leavers (3 of 4 females and 2 of 3 males) were resignations due to successfully obtaining higher-grade or permanent posts (Figure 28). The gender disparity in these proportions highlights the importance of career development measures for female fixed-term research staff (Action A3). All female leavers in this period were resignations, (Figure 28), in contrast to male staff where 40% (2) retired and one Lecturer (Education) left due to completion of a one-year contract, leaving 40% (2) resignations. As evidenced through informal exit interviews, all resignations were to take up higher-grade posts elsewhere, with the exception of the Professorial leaver who left for a different Professorial positon. This represents individual career progression for leavers, signalling that employment in SSPSW may have prepared them for higher-level positions. However, the resignations of significant proportions of female staff at Senior Lecturer and Professor grades is particularly concerning, constituting a ‘leaky pipeline’. We are seeking to address this with a focus on female career progression (Actions A1, A3, A5 - See also Section 5.1(iii)). (Word Count – 1001)
5. SUPPORTING AND ADVANCING WOMEN’S CAREERS
All key staff processes at QUB (including Recruitment, Induction, Promotion and REF administration) operate in accordance with Equality and Diversity Policy. QUB complies in all areas with NI equality legislation. All key decision makers, from recruitment and promotion panel members to REF champions, undertake equality and diversity training, which includes elements of unconscious bias. This is monitored both internally and by QUB-HR.
5.1. Key career transition points: academic staff
(i) Recruitment
SSPSW vacancies are publicised through the QUB website, media advertisements and recruitment websites. All advertisements include a reference to QUB’s Equal Opportunities Policy and provide direction to the QUB-HR website which includes information on work-life/family balance policies. A point of contact within SSPSW is also
30
provided (in future, 1 male and 1 female will be included) (Action A8). SSPSW has not previously encouraged applicants by gender but will begin to do so (details below). In line with QUB policy SSPSW does not longlist. Shortlisting is carried out by reviewing applications against the essential and desirable criteria contained in the position description. Selection is decided on the basis of a panel interview, and, for permanent academic posts, a research presentation to the School. These generally occur on consecutive days, but candidates unable to attend the university for two days in a row due to family or other commitments are able to request alternative arrangements. This is subject to monitoring for inequity and a number of successful candidates have made these arrangements. Figure 29: Recuitment Exercises – Numbers By Gender
Year Grade
Applicants Shortlist Offer Appointed Success Rates
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
2012-13
General Campaig
n2
9 7 5 0 3 - 23 - 22% -
Research Assistant
132 48 25 3 8 1 5 1 3.8% 2.1%
Research Fellow
40 21 14 2 5 - 5 - 12.5% -
Lecturer (Educatio
n) 3 2 2 2 0 1 - 1 - 50%
Lecturer 31 26 16 8 5 2 5 1 16.1% 3.8%
Senior Lecturer
3 3 1 0 0 - - - - -
Professor 5 18 1 5 0 2 - 2 - 11.1
%
2013-14
Research Fellow
32 12 15 2 5 0 5 - 15.6% -
Lecturer 66 49 18 12 5 1 4 1 6.1% 2.0%
2014-15
Research Fellow
25 12 9 1 3 0 2 - 8.0% -
Lecturer (Educatio
n) 2 0 1 - 1 - 1 - 50% -
Lecturer 134 96 31 25 6 4 4 2 3.0% 2.1%
Total Numbers 482 294 138 60 41 11 33 8 6.8% 2.7%
Figure 29 shows the numbers of applicants, shortlisted, offers and appointments by gender. Women consituted a increasing majority at every stage in the recruitment process for Research Assistant, Research Fellow and Lecturer. This pattern was followed to shortlisting for Senior Lecturer but no offers were made in the only recruitment at this level. The single round of Professorial recruitment, however, saw women decrease from 22% of applicants to 17% of shortlistings, with offers made to 2 male candidates.
2 A general recruitment campaign inviting candidates at multiple grades to apply.
3 Both appointed at lecturer level.
31
Figure 30 shows the total appointments made over this period: 5 female and 1 male Research Assistants, 12 female Research Fellows, 1 female and 1 male Lecturer (Education), 15 female and 4 male Lecturers and 2 male Professors. Figure 30: Total Appointments
SSPSW has employed large numbers of early-career women, but only men at senior grades. In general, recruitment patterns reflect and enhance existing gender disparities (see 4.2(i)). This is particularly concerning for Professorial posts which are extremely significant for mentoring and leadership. SSPSW will therefore be acting to identify and encourage female candidates at this level (Action A6).
The under-representation of men in early-career positions is also an area of concern. Figure 31 shows the trends in success rates for Research Fellow and Lecturer posts, the positions with the highest level of recruitment. While the success rates for female Research Fellow candidates fluctuated (12.5%-15.6%-8.0%), men only constituted between 25%-33% of applicants and no males were recruited to these positions. Success rates for Lecturer posts fell overall, but more sharply for female applicants (16.1%-3.0%) than males (3.8%-2.1%). This saw an increasing gender equity in success rates for these posts, but not one sufficient to correct male under-representation.
5
12
1
15
1
1
4
2
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
ResearchAssistant
Research Fellow Lecturer(Education)
Lecturer Professor
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female Male
32
Figure 31: Success Rates by Gender Research Fellow and Lecturer Posts
(ii) Induction
All new staff attend an induction workshop where information is provided on employment practices, staff resources, and the University’s commitment to AS (with particular reference to flexible work, family friendly policies, and equality and diversity). These policies are available to staff through Queen’s Online (QOL). All employees receive an induction pack with general university and School specific information. In SSPSW, this includes information on roles and responsibilities and, from November 2015 onwards, information on work-life/family balance and AS (Action D11). Induction for Academic staff in SSPSW also includes meetings during their first week with the HoS and other key staff (DR, DE and Programme Director) to discuss research and teaching expectations and support. They are assigned a mentor (Senior Lecturer/Reader or Professor) whose role is to advise them on career development and the 3 year probation process. A welcome coffee is arranged and they are also assigned a ‘buddy’ who provides informal peer support and guidance, and facilitates their social integration within the School. Research Staff meet with their supervisor who acts as a mentor, introducing them to relevant staff members, and discussing their roles and responsibilities. The role of ‘buddies’ is taken by staff who share an office (generally Research staff work in offices of 3-4). While Research staff consider ICCR very welcoming, more could be done to welcome them to the School as a whole through, for instance, extending the practice of welcome coffees and emails to all staff (Action D5).
(iii) Promotion
No formal promotions process exists at QUB for Research staff. Career progression and continuity for this group of staff is based on a system of redeployment. We have not to date collected data on this but know that this process is well-used by Research staff in SSPSW (Action A3). Promotions for Academic staff are organised through the annual Academic Promotions exercise. Information about promotion processes and criteria is displayed permanently on the QUB-HR website and communicated via email and QOL to all eligible staff.
12.5%
15.6%
8.0%
16.1%
6.1%
3.0% 3.8%
2.0% 2.1%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Research Fellow Lecturer
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Success Rate Female Success Rate Male
33
Applicants must state how they meet the Grade Criteria and the appropriate Academic Standards for their proposed Grade. Staff are also able to note any career interruptions (e.g., maternity/adoption leave) or personal circumstances (e.g., illness) that may have impacted their academic progress. Grade Criteria include the full range of academic work-related activities: Research, Education, Academic Leadership (which includes involvement in SWAN), and Societal and Economic Impact. A range of supports are provided within the School and University to build staff profiles and support promotion applications. Annual appraisals (see 5.3(ii)) assist staff in career development including identifying areas which require improvement for promotion-readiness. Appraisers also encourage ‘promotion-ready staff’ to apply and provide feedback on draft applications. Information sessions around promotion are organised at the start of the Promotion round by QUB-HR. QGI provides an additional annual Promotions seminar led by a female senior academic for female members of staff. Promotion is a three-stage process, with all applications assessed by a School panel, a University Promotions Committee, and the Central Promotions Committee. The School panel consists of the HoS, DR, DEs, Postgraduate Director, and 3 Professors (1 internal, and 2 external), with a representative from Equal Opportunities Unit in attendance (EOU). The Panel considers the merits of the application, accounting for the impact of any career breaks or personal circumstances. The HoS must then complete a report, including the Panel’s recommendation and rationale. To ensure equity, all applications proceed to the following stages where they are fully considered and assessed. If the application is unsuccessful, feedback is provided by all panels and the candidate has the opportunity to appeal the decision. QUB also allows staff who receive external employment offers to apply for promotion outside of the normal promotions round. The HoS makes a recommendation to an ad hoc University Promotions Committee, based on the profile of the staff member and their strategic importance. The Committee makes a determination, applying the same criteria as for all other academic promotions. Figure 33 shows the numbers of eligible staff, promotion applications made and promotions awarded by gender. In 2012/13, there were 5 promotions in total: 2 women and 1 man promoted from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer, and 1 woman and 1 man promoted from Reader to Professor. In 2013/14, 2 males were promoted, with no staff promoted in 2014/15.
34
Figure 32: Eligible Staff, Applications (Application Rates) and Promotions (Success Rates) by Gender SSPSW
Eligible Staff Applications Received
(Application Rates) Promotions
(Success Rates)
Grade at Applicatio
n
Male
Female
Total
Male Femal
e Total Male Female Total
2012/13
Lecturer 8 9 17
3 (38%)
2 (22%)
5(18%)
14 (33%)
25 (100%
)
3 (60%
) Reader
1 4 5 1
(100%)
2 (50%)
3 (60%)
16 (100%
) 1
(50%)
2 (67%
) All Grades
14 16 30 4
(29%) 4
(25%) 8
(27%) 2
(50%) 3
(75%)
5 (63%
)
2013/14
Lecturer 8 7 15 4
(50%) 1
(14%) 5
(33%) 2
(50%) 0
2 (40%
) All Grades 12 14 26 4
(33%) 1 (7%)
5 (19%)
2 (50%)
0 2
(40%)
2014/15
Lecturer 7 11 18 1
(14%) 0 1 (6%) 0 - 0
All Grades 12 16 28 1 (8%) 0 1 (4%) 0 - 0
In 2012/13, SSPSW had higher proportion of applications for both males and females (29% and 25%), compared to the QUB averages (19% and 17%). Females had a higher success rate that the QUB average (75% compared to 45%) while male success rates were close to the average. In 2013/4, males were much more likely to apply than females; there was only one female applicant who was unsuccessful. Promotions criteria were changed in 2014/5, which may explain the low number of applicants (only 1 male who was unsuccessful). Significantly, the Culture survey found that 67% of men claimed to understand QUB promotion practices, compared to 22% of women, indicating that lack of knowledge may be a factor preventing women from applying for promotion. We plan to address this through increasing collective mentoring in SSPSW around career development and promotion (Actions A1, A2) as well as encouraging more female staff to attend QGI workshops and engage in QGI mentoring schemes (Action A1). To increase success rates we also intend to increase support offered to individuals around the application process (Action A5).
4 Promotion by retention
5 Includes 1 promotion by retention
6 Promotion by retention
35
In making sense of this data it is important to note that our School has a high proportion of early career staff. In 2014/15, of the 18 Lecturer level staff considered eligible for promotion, at least 5 were within 2 years of completing probation and so, whilst eligible would not be expected to be promotion-ready. Given that we have 11 additional Lecturer-level staff currently on probation, this will continue to affect our levels of promotion over the Action Plan period. For this reason a main focus of the plan is on increasing information and support for career development and promotion-readiness (Action A5).
(iv) Department submissions to the Research Excellence Framework (REF)
Figure 33: SSPSW RAE (2008) and REF (2014) Return Rates by Gender
RAE (2008) REF (2014)
Female Male Total Female Male Total
Eligible 20 27 47 29 25 54
Returned 20 (100%) 26 (96%) 46 (98%) 28 (97%) 23 (92%) 51 (94%)
Not returned 0 1 (4%) 1 (2%) 1 (3%) 2 (8%) 3 (6%)
Figure 34 shows the RAE (2008) and REF (2014) eligibility and return rates for female and male staff in SSPSW. Return rates were 98% for the RAE and 94% for the REF. While return rates were slightly higher for women in both exercises, in the RAE only 1 male staff member was not returned and 1 female and 2 males were not returned in the REF. (Word Count – 1564)
5.2. KEY CAREER TRANSITION POINTS: PROFESSIONAL AND SUPPORT STAFF Figure 34: SSPSW Profession and Support Staff by Function and Gender and Full-Time/Part-Time
Female Male
Clerical Staff Full-Time 9 1
Part-Time 3
Academic-Related Staff Full-Time 4
Part-Time 1
Total Full-Time 13 1
Part-Time 4
(i) Induction
Professional and Support staff receive general QUB induction (5.1(ii)). Clerical staff also receive a specialised induction from the Staff Training and Development Unit (STDU) with information about support, training and career development opportunities. All inductions are evaluated by STDU in order to inform future developments. SSPSW Professional and Support staff receive a school-specific induction from the School Manager, which includes an explanation of roles and responsibilities and introduction to other staff members. Staff have suggested that more detailed role-specific information could also be provided (Action A4). Most Professional and Support staff work in shared work-spaces and their colleagues in these spaces undertake the more informal aspects of induction, introducing new staff
36
to other staff members and providing day-to-day support and advice. In future, all new staff will be given a welcome coffee (Action D5).
(ii) Promotion
There is no internal promotions process for Professional and Support staff, although staff may have opportunities to ‘act up’ in higher grade positions and are welcome to apply for positions throughout the university. Where staff increase their responsibilities in an existing position, the school may request that the position be regraded. We have a successful record of this in our School with the School Manager and Education Administrator both having progressed from Clerical grades to their current roles within SSPSW. We are currently applying for the Head of School Secretary position to be upgraded in recognition of the level of responsibility taken on by that member of staff. (Word Count – 242)
5.3. Career development: academic staff
(i) Training
QUB offers a range of voluntary and mandatory training. All staff must undertake training in health and safety, data protection and ‘DiversityNow’ equality and diversity training (SSPSW uptake for this is 95%). QUB is currently planning a roll-out of dedicated unconscious bias training, and SSPSW plans to ensure all staff undertake this training, beginning with staff involved in promotion, recruitment and appraisal (Action D6). Academic staff must also complete a PG Certificate in Higher Education and Training (PGCHET) and training in PGR supervision in order to successfully complete probation. A range of voluntary courses are also open to academic staff. STDU runs the majority of these, with courses on leadership (some specifically for women), management, equality and diversity, and personal and skills development, with additional courses run by Information Technology, Research and Enterprise (REU) and the Centre for Educational Development. Training effectiveness is monitored by delivering units with all participants asked to provide feedback. Within SSPSW training needs are discussed in Appraisal, and Academic staff have made use of STDU training on 193 occasions over the last three years (Figure 35). Females are more active in training than males, undertaking 77% of all courses. Research staff also undertake higher rates of training, taking 30% of all training while constituting 22% of staff. As of 2015/16 SSPSW will fund Research staff to voluntarily undertake the PGCHET (Action A3).
37
Figure 35: Training Uptake by Gender and Contract Type SSPSW
Women undertake the majority of training in all categories, with particular predominance in research (86%, 43 training sessions) and career development (88%, 9 training sessions) (Figure 36). Figure 36: Type of Training by Gender 2013/14-2014/15
Female Male
Number Percentage Number Percentage Total
Equality and Diversity7 2 66% 1 33% 3
Management 8 57% 6 43% 14
Leadership 10 71% 4 29% 14
Research Skills 43 86% 7 14% 50
Teaching 57 77% 23 23% 80
Personal Development 9 88% 2 12% 11
Total 148 77% 45 23% 193
(ii) Appraisal/development review
Appraisal is undertaken annually for all staff. Academic staff are appraised by a nominated Professor while Research staff are appraised by their Line Manager. All staff conducting appraisals complete equality and diversity training. Appraisals consider career development needs and goals around research, teaching, and administration, as well as allowing staff to note any career interruptions or adverse personal circumstances. Meetings conclude by setting objectives for the coming year. From November 2015, all appraisals in SSPSW will include discussion of work-life balance, reviews of individual workloads, and discussions of long-term career planning (Action B1, A7). Probationary Academic staff undertake a specialised form of annual appraisal known as an Annual Probation Meeting overseen by a Probationary Committee (HoS, DE, and
7 Additional to mandatory DiversityNow training.
25
15
31
21
38
19
13
1 9
1
19
1 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Academic Research Academic Research Academic Research
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Nu
mb
er
of
Trai
nin
g Se
ssio
ns
Female
Male
38
DR/Professor). All Probationary staff have a Mentor who advises on successful completion of Probation. From 2015/16, advice on long-term career planning will be a formal element of the Mentoring role (Action A2).
(iii) Support given to academic staff for career progression
SSPSW has a range of career support measures, including individual publication planning exercises. SSPSW organises regular information sessions, as well as dedicated Research and Teaching ‘away days’. SSPSW operates a research fund for conference attendance, events, research networks and other staff activities. We also run monthly ‘writing’ feedback groups attended by staff from across the school (including several Professors and the HoS). Over the past three years the writing group has commented on 30 pieces of writing, resulting in at least 10 published articles, 3 book contracts, and a European Research Council ‘starting grant’ (€1.3m) by an early-career female academic which was shortlisted for funding.
With the exception of Probationary Academic staff, mentoring is provided in on an informal basis. The need to strengthen mentoring practices has been raised in staff consultations, particularly by female staff (only 32% believe sufficient mentoring exists compared to 75% of men). A priority over the coming years will be to increase both individual and collective mentoring (Actions A1, A4). In addition, we will increase our efforts to promote the QGI mentoring scheme, which pairs senior and early-career women across the university (Action A1).
We have been developing a number of additional support mechanisms for research staff. We are working with the School of Education to develop a faculty-wide mentoring scheme, including individual mentoring, and group workshops. We are also increasing career opportunities for research staff through funded PGCHET places, and facilitating their access to teaching opportunities, and to peer review and feedback in this area (Action A3). In addition to strengthening the career development component in mentoring for Probationary Academic staff, we are working to increase information and opportunities around PhD supervision. (Supervision is essential to promotion but difficult to access for new staff) (Action A2).
(iv) Support given to students (at any level) for academic career progression
All UG students are assigned an Academic staff-member as a personal tutor. We organise a Peer Mentoring scheme, which pairs first year and senior students. We provide information on postgraduate opportunities to all students, but have recognised that this could be more actively promoted through information workshops and active encouragement for individual students with good academic standing to pursue further study (Action C5). We have a diverse, primarily part-time, cohort of PGT students. These students are supported to pursue individual research. The new QUB Graduate School (2015) runs a range of networking, social, career and personal development activities and SSPSW is currently working with the Dean of the Graduate School on measures to enhance the experience of part-time PGT students particularly (Action C4).
39
The QUB Postgraduate Researcher Development Framework supports training and career development for PGRs throughout the university. The new Graduate School gives PGR students increased access to training, skills, social and networking opportunities, emphasising interdisciplinarity through activities such as ‘Research Sandpits’. All students complete an Annual Progress Review, carried out with two academic staff independent of their supervisory team: the primary focus of this is PhD completion but it also considers longer-term career goals and development (Action C6). SSPSW has a Postgraduate Tutor who organises networking and career development opportunities including a PGR conference and seminar series, organised in conjunction with the active PGR society. PGR students are encouraged to apply for teaching opportunities from tutorials to Academic, and they receive student evaluations and peer reviews of their teaching to facilitate CV-building. Every PGR student is given space in a communal office, facilitating collegiality, networking and peer support. A peer mentoring system was discontinued in 2013 as PGR students felt that the strength of existing networking opportunities made such as scheme redundant. From 2015/16 we will be introducing an annual career development workshop for PGR students, discussing both academic and non-academic careers (Action C6).
(v) Support offered to those applying for research grant applications
SSPSW has an excellent record of attracting research funding. School and University supports enable success at all levels, with noteworthy successes amongst early career female researchers in 2015, including a £250,000 AHRC early career grant awarded to Cheryl Lawther, a lecturer who had recently completed probation, and Gemma Carney, a Probationary lecturer with 2 young children being shortlisted for a €1.3 million ERC ‘starting grant’. We have a strong record of grant applications and funding (Figures 37 and 38) with 66% of grant applications involving female staff, and female staff having 60% of successful applications. REU alerts staff to grant opportunities through email, and provides staff with feedback and examples of successful applications. The Arts Faculty operates a peer review system and database of applications. SSPSW facilitates advice and feedback by senior staff, both through formal mentoring/appraisal and informal research networks. Where applications are unsuccessful, support and feedback are available both from REU from senior staff in SSPSW. Researchers involved in the ICCR have a particularly good record in naming early career researchers on grants in order to assist in career development and ongoing employment amongst Institute staff. This is evident in the large numbers of women named as CI on medium and large grants in this period, the majority of whom are Research staff in the ICCR. In 2015/16 Senior staff in the Institute have agreed to develop a ‘best practice’ model for dissemination throughout SSPSW (Action A9).
40
Figure 37: Grant applications by amount and gender
Figure 38: Grant awards by amount and gender
(Word Count – 1277)
5.4. Career development: professional and support staff
(i) Training
Professional and support staff have access to STDU training, including courses on leadership, equality and diversity, and general and professional development. Extensive dedicated clerical and administrative training is also provided. Information is provided via email and QOL, with staff feedback used in a continual process of review and improvement. Training needs are discussed in appraisal and in the past three years Professional and Support Staff have undertaken 131 training opportunities, or an average of about 7
20 9
12 10
20 19
15
8 15
4 7
19 1 22
38
7
14 27
7
2
8
7
8 12
7
4
10
7 2
10 6 13 15 11
9
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
App. <£10k
App. £10-50k
App. >£50k App. <£10k
App. £10-50k
App. >£50k App. <£10k
App. £10-50k
App. >£50k
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female PI Female CI Male PI Male CI
16 6
6
6 12 6
13
6 4
3
5
8
2
10
5
6
5
6
9
4 4
3
3
6
6
2 6 3
9 3 5
6 12
1
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
App. <£10k
App.£10-50k
App.>£50k
App. <£10k
App.£10-50k
App.>£50k
App. <£10k
App.£10-50k
App.>£50k
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Male CI
Male PI
Female CI
Female PI
41
training courses per staff member. 100% of this group have completed DiversityNow training.
(vi) Appraisal/development review
Appraisal is a chance to discuss achievements and progress over the past year, additional needs for training, and personal issues (e.g. maternity/adoption leave or illness) that have affected their progression in the past year, as well as discuss career goals and opportunities for career development.
(ii) Support given to professional and support staff for career progression
In addition to extensive training opportunities, Professional and Support staff have opportunities to ‘act up’ or shadow higher grade positions, and to become involved in specific projects or committee management. These opportunities have been used effectively in SSPSW to aid progression (See 5.2(ii)). On the basis of staff feedback, we are currently pursuing development of annual faculty-wide workshops on career development (Action A4). (Word Count – 197)
5.5. Flexible working and managing career breaks
(i-ii) Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: before and during leave
QUB was named 2015 Family Friendly Employer of the Year (Public Sector) by the NI Employers for Childcare Awards, and entitlements to all forms of parental leave exceed statutory requirements. QUB provides up to 52 weeks leave maternity/adoption leave (weeks 1-18 full pay, 19-39 partial pay, 40-52 unpaid). SSPSW prioritises making maternity/adoption leave and return as stress-free as possible. A Central Maternity Fund provides money to cover staff duties for the first 18 weeks, with SSPSW funding cover for the remainder of the period. Prior to a staff member taking leave, the HoS meets with them, explaining supports such as paid ‘Keeping in Touch’ days which allow staff to attend meetings and conferences or avail of career development opportunities. Staff expressed a need for more information on family-friendly and work-life balance policies, leading the SAT to produce an information sheet in early 2015, which was also used to reinforce SSPSW’s commitment to work-life balance and family-friendly policies. This sheet is to be included in induction, added to the staff handbook, and made available to all staff on share-point and the school website (Action B3). In addition, following suggestions by the ‘Carer’ focus group, SSPSW is implementing a ‘buddy’ system for staff who are planning to take maternity/adoption leave. A recent returner will act as a peer support and mentor, checking in regularly with the staff member before and during leave. (Action B4).
(iii) Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: returning to work
All returning staff have a back-to-work meeting with their line manager to discuss needs and supports, and reassure staff of School commitments to both formal and informal flexible working arrangements. All staff are given reduced workloads in the six months following maternity/adoption leave to minimise career disruption. From November 2015, all Academic staff will be guaranteed a semester free of teaching, with cover funded jointly through QUB and SSPSW (Action B4).
42
(iv) Maternity return rate
As shown in Figure 39, SSPSW has a 100% maternity return rate with all maternity returners from the past three years in post. Seven of the nine have been back for 18 months, while the 2 maternity leavers from 2014-15 have no plans to leave. Figure 39: Maternity Leavers Still in Post
Academic Research (Fixed Term) Professional and Support
2012-13 1 3 0
2013-14 0 3 0
2014-15 0 2 0
(v) Paternity, shared parental, adoption, and parental leave uptake
From 2012-20148 no members of staff had partners who had children (QUB policy includes same-sex couples). One male staff member will be taking paternity leave in early 2015. In the period 2012-14 two members of Professional and Support Staff took parental leave but no members of Academic staff did so. Discussions with the ‘Carer’ group revealed that Academic/Research staff were able to manage the types of situations covered by parental leave through their greater flexibility and did not require formal leave. Academic staff do, however, require leave to cover emergencies which cause them to miss scheduled teaching or other inflexible commitments. Academic/Research staff made use of this leave 3 times in 2013 and 10 times in 2014 while Professional and Support staff made use this leave 5, 6 and 7 times in 2012,2013, and 2014 respectively. Reinforcing our commitment to these policies (See 5.5(i)) had a positive impact on Academic/Research staff take up especially, with 9 uses of this leave in the first half of 2015 and a further 9 from August to the time of writing.
(vi) Flexible working
SSPSW follows QUB policy in offering all staff the opportunity to apply for flexible working. SSPSW has a practice of supporting staff in their requests and all requests (2 each for Academic and Professional and Support staff) for flexible work in this period were granted. SSPSW supports flexible work for all groups of staff and recognises that staff have differing needs at different life stages, as evidenced by our practices. Our Education Administrator, for instance, has had two periods of flexible work, in 2009 and ongoing from 2012, due to having two small children. She finishes work at 2:30pm each day to enable her to spend time with her family. In 2011, a female Professor’s husband became ill, resulting in a three-month hospital stay in England. The HoS organised for the Professor, who had significant leadership roles within SSPSW, to work remotely and flexibly during this period and for some time after.
8 This data is provided by calendar year rather than academic year.
43
Our staff survey revealed a lack of knowledge around School commitments to flexible work. It also found that staff felt pressure from students and colleagues to work and engage in email correspondence at evenings and weekends, as well as some frustration with the abundance of administrative meetings. We recognise that informal flexible work is very important for Academic/Research staff and are introducing a series of measures aimed at assisting staff in managing their own time and promoting work-life balance. This includes an email policy, included in staff and student handbooks and module outlines, emphasising that staff are not required to engage in email correspondence on evenings and weekends, and initiating a ‘Research-only’ day for staff (with no teaching or administrative responsibilities) to ensure that research time is not pushed to the weekends and evenings (Action B1).
(vii) Transition from part-time back to full-time work after career breaks
SSPSW is supportive of flexibility in staff working arrangements, including the transition back to full-time work. For instance, our Education Administrator, mentioned in 5.3(vi) has transitioned from full-time to part-time (2009), back to full-time in 2010, when she was promoted to her current position, before again taking part-time work in 2012. We have not yet had any academic staff in a similar position but prioritise flexibility for all staff. (Word Count – 892)
5.6. Organisation and culture
(i) Culture
While SSPSW’s formal engagement with SWAN began in August 2014, a commitment to gender equality has been a core part of SSPSW since the School’s founding in 2005. Many staff undertake research which explicitly promotes gender equality, through a focus on family, childcare and reproductive choice (eg ICCR), gendered violence (eg Domestic Violence Research group) and other research including gender and ageing (the topic of Gemma Carney’s shortlisted ERC research bid). Gender is also a prominent component in our teaching, and is considered a core element of all aspects of the disciplines we cover. SSPSW decided to mainstream gender content in 2010 to reflect this centrality. Ongoing monitoring of the inclusion of gender in all parts of the curriculum is undertaken by the Education Committee, and consideration of gender forms part of Module and Programme reviews, and is considered when approving new modules. We believe this underlying commitment to the ten core principles of AS is evident in our levels of staff involvement in the SWAN process (see 3(ii)). This engagement, in recognition that academia cannot reach its full potential unless it can benefit from the talents of all, (AS Principle 1) has seen actions associated with SWAN being organised and undertaken across all parts of the school, by staff and students at all levels. Central to our process has been an acknowledgement that advancing gender equality demands commitment and action from those in senior roles (AS Principle 8) and so senior Academic (HoS, Professors) and Professional and Support (School Manager) staff are represented on the SAT and work with others from across the School. The majority of survey analysis, for instance, was carried out by a male Professor working with a female contract-research staff member and female PhD student. We are committed to making
44
structural changes (AS Principle 9) in order to support gender equality and have sought to do this at all stages of the analysis and discussion. Actions to address the loss of women through the career pipeline, and the lack of women in senior roles (AS Principles 2 and 3) are at the core of our action plan. This will also work towards correcting gender pay differentials (AS Principle 4). Addressing the barriers faced by fixed term research staff is a core part of our actions going forward, and we have had high levels of engagement with the process from this group of staff (AS Principles 5 and 6). In SSPSW we recognise that gender inequality is not a ‘single-issue’ problem, but must be dealt with through an understanding of intersectionality (AS Principle 10). This understanding has seen us engage LGBT+ issues in our SWAN process (AS Principle Principle 7), as well as highlight issues of social class and work, and international solidarity in our public events associated with SWAN, through events focusing on the issue of girls’ education in Pakistan and a fund-raiser for Yazidi women suffering sexual violence under ISIS. These events build into ongoing concerns with intersectionality in research and pedagogy. SSPSW hosts the QUB Disability Research Network, with Bronagh Byrne, a founding co-director, recently celebrated for this work in the QUB publication, ‘New Voices, New Impact’, (Figure 40). SSPSW also runs an annual prize, named after Professor Eithne McLaughlin, for the best student essay on the theme of disability. SSPSW houses the Northern Ireland branch of the British Society of Gerontology, and a staff member serves on the advisory committee of the Northern Ireland Council for Ethnic Minority (NICEM). Figure 40: Images of Dr Bronagh Byrne from QUB ‘New Voices, New Impact’
The commitment of the school to equality and diversity feeds into the informal culture of the school. Both women and men speak up in meetings/seminars and staff did not report unacceptable or stereotyping language, imagery or behaviour within SSPSW. This is summed up in the comment from a female staff member: ‘Though I know there are still not enough women in Professorial roles I feel more comfortable working at QUB than I have at any of the three universities I have worked. The men that I work with are
45
supportive of women's advancement and there is no blokeish culture in our school. This may be as much to do with there being a good collegiate culture.’ An issue that was highlighted, however, was around increasing the integration of different staff groups (particularly Research and Professional and Support staff) and we will putting in place a series of actions to do this, including all-staff welcome coffees and a weekly brown-bag lunch (Action D5). We are also committed to recognising success. Currently, staff and student achievements are highlighted on the school website and circulated by email within the school, with a selection also acknowledged in annual Graduation ceremonies. Going forward we will be formalising this through the introduction of a School newsletter going to all staff and students twice a semester and uploaded onto the website, to highlight key achievements (Action D3). For IWD 2016 we will also be launching an annual prize for the best student paper on an issue related to gender equality. In the month leading up to this we will seek suggestions for the name of the prize from Staff and Students and conduct a School poll to determine the final choice (Action C7).
(ii) HR policies
Equality and Diversity are core aspects of all School business. Staff engaged in management, recruitment or appraisal must complete training in equality and diversity. This is monitored both by SSPSW and QUB-HR. SSPSW monitors consistency in applying these policies through oversight of all processes – all appraisal documents for instance go to the HoS, who monitors these for signs of bias or inconsistency. SSPSW takes all grievances and any alleged instances of bullying or harassment very seriously. Staff involved in these procedures must undertake training in equality and diversity. All formal disciplinary proceedings, grievances or allegations of harassment and bullying are reported to QUB-HR and the EOU who oversee SSPSW’s response. The HoS must complete a full report on any incidents, as well as ensure that all parties involved fully understand any actions taken and feel satisfied with the outcome. There is a high level of confidence in responses to these issues within SSPSW, with 70% of staff in the culture survey reporting feeling confident that any complaints would be dealt with effectively, and we have a record of investigating and responding pro-actively to issues such as online sexism, with students disciplined in 2014 for sexist comments made about a female guest lecturer.
46
(iii) Representation of men and women on committees
Figure 41: Committee Membership by Gender
2012/13 2013/14 2014/15
Female Male Female Male Female Male
SMB 4 (50%) 4 (50%) 2 (25%)
6 (75%) 7 (70%) 3 (30%)
Education Committee 7 (44%) 9 (56%) 7 (47%)
8 (53%) 12 (75%)
4 (25%)
Research Committee 4 (44%) 5 (55%) 4 (50%)
4 (50%) 5 (50%) 5 (50%)
Postgraduate Committee
5 (83%)
1 (17%) 5 (83%)
1 (17%) 8 (89%) 1 (11%)
Ethics Committee 9 (75%) 3 (25%) 7 (70%)
3 (30%) 8 (73%) 3 (27%)
Social Work Committee 9 (45%) 11 (55%)
9 (45%)
11 (55%)
13 (57%)
10 (43%)
Within SSPSW the main committees of the School primarily involve Academic staff, although 2 female Research staff members sat on the Research Committee in 2012/13 and 2013/14 (dropping to one in 2014/15), and a female member of Research staff sits on the Ethics Committee in 2013/14-2014/15. By the end of this year, additional Research staff will sit on the Research and Ethics Committee and a member will be invited onto the SMB and Postgraduate Committee. PGR members will also be joining the Ethics Committee (Action D5). Some committees (SMB, Research, Education, Social Work) are made up of members designated by their specific roles. However, the Postgraduate and Ethics Committees also include general committee members. Members of these committees self-nominate, or if there is a need for additional members, staff members may be requested to join. There are no clear patterns in the gender composition of committees within SSPSW. The Research committee had gender parity for most of this period, the Social Work Committee close to gender parity (with gender proportions not exceeding 57%) and the Ethics Committee and Postgraduate committee were predominantly female. Although the Education committee was relatively equal for the first two years in 2014/15 it was 75% female. Most significantly, the SMB fluctuated significantly over this period, beginning with gender parity, then moving to majority men and then reversing these proportions. In future, we will monitor committee membership to ensure neither gender exceeds 60% of members, and monitor gender equity in Leadership positions across SSPSW (Action D1).
(iv) Participation on influential external committees
Academic Staff in SSPSW sit on a variety of university committees. These include university governance committees (Academic Council, University Senate, Academic Board Honorary Degrees Committee), student-related committees (Central Student Appeals Committee, Postgraduate Forum, Academic Offences Panel, Courses and Regulations Group, Student Discipline Appeals, Postgraduate Finance Committee), research committees (Faculty Research Advisory Group, Research Impact Group,
47
University Ethics Committee, Improving Children’s Lives Management Committee) and the Collaborative Partnership at Queens (CPAQ), a joint oversight body of the BSW made up of Social Work staff and local service providers. SSPSW encourages staff to sit on External Committees through the HoS making staff aware of relevant opportunities via email and at SBs. Staff are invited to nominate and informed of the importance of Leadership for promotion purposes. In future, we will monitor appointments to these committees for gender equality (Action D1). 4 female Senior Lecturers (of a total 5) sit on 1-3 committees each, 4 (of 5) male Senior Lecturers sit on one or two committees each, and one male Senior Research Fellow sits on 5 committees. In addition, 4 female Lecturers and 1 male Lecturer sit on one Committee each. Several Committee memberships are tied to Leadership roles within the School, particularly committees to do with teaching, and staff sit in their capacity as Postgraduate Tutor, Director of Education or Exams Officer. CPAQ membership is rotated between Social Work staff and includes a mix of Lecturers and other Senior Lecturers, while a small number of other Committees are allocated on a volunteer basis. In addition, a variety of staff in SSPSW sit on influential external bodies. 1 female professor sits on a REF panel, and several staff of both genders: act as advisors to government bodies and NGOs, sit on ESRC panels, act as external examiners, occupy positions in research associations and networks. Staff in Social Work sit on a number of safeguarding and accreditation bodies with equal numbers of women and men undertaking these tasks.
(v) Workload model
Our Workload Allocation Model (WAM) assigns 1620 hours per annum to each member of Academic staff. (Workloads for Research and Professional and Support staff are determined by line managers.) This is divided into sections: ‘Admin’; ‘Classroom’; ‘Research’; ‘Training’; and an ‘unallocated’ section in which any excess hours are listed. Staff have access to an ‘average’ WAM for their grade, and in future we will monitor this for gender disparities (Action A7). Workloads are administered by the SMB who review allocations annually. Appraisals also involve an assessment of how candidates fulfil their workload allocations and mentors/appraisers frequently advocate on behalf of appraisees if they feel that their workload balance is not beneficial to promotion or completing probation. Rotation of Leadership roles and committee membership occurs on a three-year basis. Consultation with staff revealed a level of dissatisfaction with the WAM, as well as problems with its current functioning:
Overly complex.
Retrospective rather than forward calculation workloads
New roles not immediately incorporated
Inadequate differentiation of tasks related to career development An example of the inadequacy of this model was provided by Social Work staff who found that while the WAM ‘Classroom’ category indicated female staff members were doing less teaching it failed to differentiate between postgraduate and undergraduate teaching (with postgraduate teaching involving smaller classes, less marking, more opportunity to attract PhD students, and more opportunities for research-led teaching).
48
Upon investigation, it was seen that while 80% of male staff were involved in PGT teaching, only 31% of women were. Of Lecturer level staff, 75% of men were involved in PGT teaching and 27% of women. For these reasons we have decided to undertake a review and revision of the WAM to more fully reflect workload and access to activities related to career progression (Action A7). An analysis was also conducted of leadership roles in the school by gender. These were categorised as UG-related (eg UG Programme Director), PG-related (eg Postgraduate Director), and Research (eg Ethics Committee Chair) (Figure 42). The 41 designated leadership roles within SSPSW were divided fairly equally overall (54% (22) women and 46% (19) men). However, women undertake a 97% (13/14) of the UG-related roles but only 42% (5/12) of the PG-related roles and 29% (2/7) of the Research-related roles. We are taking action to redress this gendered division of labour (Action D1). Figure 42: Leadership Roles by Type and Gender SSPSW 2014/15
(vi) Timing of departmental meetings and social gatherings
SSPSW has a core hours policy, and all regular committee meetings start between 9:30-2:30 and are timetabled at the beginning of the academic year. Teaching and Research Away days also occur within core hours and are announced with several months’ notice. However, irregular ad hoc meetings are occasionally required, and these are scheduled by polling all participants 1-2 weeks before the meeting occurs. Ad hoc meetings may be held outside core hours if no other times are available. From 2016 onwards, any meetings held outside these hours will need to conform to a set of guidelines to facilitate participation by those unable to attend (Action B2). Social events in SSPSW are generally attached to all-school functions, such as lunches following research or teaching away days and a wine reception at the conclusion of the postgraduate conference. The majority of these are held on-site and during the working day in recognition that staff with family responsibilities should not miss these valuable networking functions. There are two notable exceptions to this: the reception held in the evening following the Postgraduate conference and the annual Christmas party, generally a dinner, held off-campus, which approximately 30-40 staff attend. The
22
13
5
2
19
1
7
5
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Total UG-Related PG-Related Research-Related
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
49
Postgraduate reception is held in the evening at the request of postgraduate students, but the conference also involves a catered lunch that allows staff and students to network. In future, we will alter the Christmas party to a lunch with the School office closed from 12 to enable all Professional and Support staff to attend (Action B1).
(vii) Visibility of role models
Diversity is actively considered in all publicity materials, including student materials and websites, and 74% of staff and postgraduate students agreed that both women and men in senior roles function as visible role models. Going forward, the use of male students and staff will be particularly prioritised around student recruitment (Actions C1, C3). Figure 43: Seminar Speakers by Gender
Figure 43 shows increasing levels of gender equity in Seminar speakers, although 2014-15 saw a hiatus of the seminar series due to poor attendance. In response to staff requests for greater promotion of research culture, Seminars will return in 2016, and we will monitor speakers to ensure that in any semester neither gender exceeds 60% of scheduled speakers (Action D3).
(viii) Outreach activities
In SSPSW Outreach is considered to be part of normal academic service, and is included in the School participation allowance. To date, participation in outreach activities has been organised by asking for volunteers (with the exception of Social Work’s school outreach which has prioritised participation by male staff members), although 82% staff felt that gender was balanced in these activities. To date we have not actively collected data on this but the (incomplete) data we have suggests that gender balance is relatively even but there are problems with certain staff (particularly new staff) taking on a disproportionate burden. As of 2016 we will operate rota where each member of Academic staff undertakes an equal number of outreach events while ensuring that all stands contain at least one male and one female member of staff (Action D10). (Word Count – 2525)
9
12 2
14
13 2
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Pe
rce
nt
of
Tota
l
Female
Male
50
6. CASE STUDIES: IMPACT ON INDIVIDUALS
Redacted for privacy reasons.
7. FURTHER INFORMATION A distinctive feature of SSPSW is its level of community and public engagement, including around issues of gender equaity. The ARK project, for instance is a distinctive endeavour, is dedicated to making political and social information about Northern Ireland widely available. Led by a male Professor and female Senior Research fellow in SSPSW, it has highlighted changing attitudes to gender, LGBT+ issues and race in the province. As a socially engaged School in a small province we have the opportunity to work closely with both government departments and NGOs and engage in direct community relations, and we have taken advantage of that to highlight issues of gender equality in conjunction with a range of other organisations through a series of public events (Figure 44) including a film and discussion on gender work and austerity for IWD 2015 organised in conjunction with several trade unions and the People Before Profit NGO (Figure 45). We have also organised forums on Reproductive rights, family policy at work, and worked with the Scholars at Risk programme to highlight the issue of girls’ education in Pakistan. Figure 44: Gender-Related Public Events hosted by SSPSW (2012-2015)
Event External Organisations Involved/Supporting
2012/13 Seminar – Reproductive Rights and Abortion in Northern Ireland
Marie Stopes
2013/14 Seminar – Family Policy in the Workplace
SSPSW only
2014/15 IWD Film Screening – Inez: A Remarkable Woman with panel discussion
National University Ireland Maynooth, People Before Profit (NGO), Universities and Colleges Union, Unison (Trade Union)
2015/16 Professor Shirin Zubair talk on gender and girls in Pakistan
Scholars at Risk
2015/16 Fundraiser (cake stall) for Yazidi victims of sexual violence under ISIS
Yazda (International Yazidi NGO)
2015/16 Campus Visit – Founders of End Rape on Campus (USA)
Nexus NI (support organisation for survivors of Sexual violence), End Rape on Campus (US NGO)
2015/16 The Hunting Ground screening with panel discussion
Nexus NI, Police Service Northern Ireland, Department of Health, Northern Ireland
51
Figure 45: Leaflet for IWD Event 2014
Figure 46: Leaflet for Screening of the Hunting Ground
We are currently working with Nexus NI to promote awareness around the problem of sexual violence on university campuses, and organised a screening of the award-winning US documentary The Hunting Ground, on December 2 with over 170 registered attendees (Figure 46). We were also one of 3 UK universities to host a visit from the ‘End Rape on Campus’ activists profiled in the film. SWAN Champion Tanya Serisier is the Principle Investigator of a student-led SCORE (Student COnsent REsearch) project which will undertake a survey in early 2015 to explore incidences of non-consensual sex at QUB leading into a campaign around the issue. 3 other SSPSW staff on the advisory board. Staff are also involved in establishing an Irish research and advocacy network on
52
this issue with colleagues from Ulster University, National University of Ireland Galway and University College Dublin.
(Word Count - 321)
53
8. ACTION PLAN Theme A – To improve opportunities for career development and progression within the school, and especially for female staff
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
A1 Increase support provided to individual academic staff members around career development.
Focus groups and research away day identified need for more effective mentoring and academic career development. Only 32% female Academic staff felt there was sufficient mentoring in SSPSW (compared to 75% men).
A. Annual workshops run by Professorial members of staff on (i) career development/promotion (Spring semester prior to promotion round) (ii) research grant income strategies (Autumn semester) B. Promote QGI mentoring scheme to female staff members by having SWAN champion send email encouraging staff members to take part. Encourage attendance at workshops through organising school coffee before hand.
A. Professorial Workshop Convenor (new role nominated by HoS) HoS B. SWAN champion
In place by 2017.
A. > 10 staff members to attend each annual workshop. (Reviewed annually) >80% staff report that school provides adequate mentoring. (Staff Survey 2018) B. >20% female staff to be involved in QGI mentoring scheme by 2018. (Progress reviewed annually).
A2 Increase support provided to individual Probationary staff around career
Staff who have recently completed promotion have suggested more emphasis on long-term career development would be helpful.
A. Make long-term career development core part of probationary mentoring relationship and annual probationary meeting for probationary staff.
A. Mentors, HoS B. HoS, Postgraduate Director
In place for 2016/17.
A. >70% staff to have future career development plan in place by time of successful completion of probation. (Review end 2017)
54
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
development. Majority of this group are women.
B. Information on supervision opportunities as part of mentoring for probationary academic staff. Information sheet to be developed. C. Where new PhD students have not proposed a second supervisor priority to be given to staff without existing PhD students where their research expertise is relevant.
C. Postgraduate Director. (List of eligible staff updated by PG Support staff.)
B/C. >70% lecturing staff to be second supervisor by end of probation. (Review 2018)
A3 Increase support provided to fixed-term research staff for career progression.
Research staff focus group articulated need for more information and enhanced supports around career development. This group of staff is almost entirely female.
A. Establish faculty-based mentoring scheme for fixed-term research staff (jointly with School of Education). This will include individual peer-mentoring and collective mentoring (regular workshops on pathways to permanent employment). B. Research staff to be emailed prior to academic year with call for expression of interest in teaching/guest lecturing and areas of expertise. Education committee to circulate to module convenors. Any
A. Directors of Research, HoS (Counterparts in School of Education) B. Directors of Education, Education Committee C. HoS, Supervisors. D. HoS, SMB,
A. Summer 2017 B 2016 and annually. C. 2016 (ongoing) D. 2016. E. 2016 (ongoing)
A. >33% fixed-term research staff take-up new mentoring opportunities. (Review 2018) B/C. 100% Research staff to report access to career development around teaching. (Review 2018) All staff who request for teaching opportunities/PGCHET training in appraisal to have this met within 12
55
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
teaching to be provided with peer review. C. SSPSW to fund research staff who wish to complete PGCHET. Staff to be asked about this as part of annual appraisal. D. SSPSW to develop system of work-recognition for Research staff who sit on School committees. E. SSPSW to collect data on staff use of redeployment scheme.
Supervisors. E. SM, Supervisors.
months. D. Research staff who sit on committees to report this work recognised/given time allocations (Review 2018). E. Data recorded and monitored annually.
A4 Increase support for career development for professional and support staff.
Professional and support focus group expressed desire for greater career development information and opportunities. Career development needs of this group distinct to other staff.
A. SSPSW to initiate faculty-wide mentoring and career development workshops for professional and support staff. B. Development of targeted role-specific induction materials for professional and support staff. C. Development of guidelines clarifying Academic and
A. SM, HoS (To work with FEB) B. SM C. Directors of Education, SM, Education Administrator,
A. 2018. B. Summer 2016. C. 2016
A. >50% professional and support staff make use of mentoring/workshop opportunities. (Review 2020.) B. >75% Professional and support staff reporting satisfaction with induction processes. (Review
56
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
This group of staff almost entirely female.
Administrative responsibilities in teaching administration. To be distributed to all relevant staff members.
Education Committee.
2018) C. Professional and support staff to report increased clarity in this area. (Review 2018)
A5 Increase School support for academic staff around promotion.
Low promotion application rates (especially amongst female staff. Low success rates for all staff 2013/14-2014/15. Low understanding of promotion processes reported by female staff.
A. Annual review of promotion application and success rates by gender. HoS to present to School Board as part of SWAN end-of-year review. If no improvements after 3 years SMB and SB to review current procedures and canvas new potential measures to be added to action plan. B. HoS send email inviting staff to see them to discuss promotion at beginning of round. C. All staff to be offered individual promotion readiness planning meeting 2 years after confirmation or promotion to SL/Reader. Meeting to involve HoS, Appraiser, another Professor. The meeting will provide an assessment of
A. SMB, SAT, HoS B. HoS C. HoS, Appraisers, SMB, Professors D. HoS, Appraisers
A. End 2015/16 (ongoing) B. 2016 promotion round (annually thereafter) C. Spring semester 2017. D. From promotion round 2015/16.
Increase in rates of eligible female staff applying for promotion to 13% (University average) over four year period. (Review 2019). Increase in success rates for all staff to >35% (University average 40-45%) over four year period. (Review 2019). >75% female staff to report understanding of promotion practices. (Staff Survey 2018) >70% staff to report satisfaction with School support around promotion (Staff Survey 2018)
57
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
promotion-readiness, identify areas requiring development, and generate action plan, to be communicated to SMB and considered in workload allocation. D. Staff applying for promotion given opportunity for feedback on application from Appraiser before submission and review session with HoS if unsuccessful.
A6 Increase representation of women at professorial level.
Under-representation women at professorial level (25%) Low application rates from women (22%) in last professorial recruitment round.
A. Ensure that all senior recruitment exercises make note of SSPSW commitment to gender equality and encourage female candidates to apply by including welcoming statements. B. When recruiting at Professorial level a search committee will be instigated to identify potential female candidates and approach them to apply.
A. Recruitment panel, HoS, SM B. SMB, (Liaise with HR)
A. 2016 (ongoing) B. 2016 (ongoing)
Increase proportion of applications from women for senior posts to 50%, and increase shortlisted women to >25%. (Review 2018)
A7 Increase transparency, accuracy and
Staff consultation demonstrated significant
A. Undertake school-wide review of WAM with view to redesigning to improve key
A/B. SAT, SMB, SM
A. 2016-17 B. 2017/18
A. New WAM developed which more accurately distinguishes between
58
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
relevance of WAM.
shortcomings with the accuracy and transparency of the WAM, particularly in accounting for different types of work. Investigation found women undertaking higher amounts of UG (as opposed to PGT) teaching.
aspects, including transparency and accuracy. B. Following initial review, workload to be reviewed annually by gender, with an emphasis on access to PG teaching and supervision. C. Individual workload review (and comparison to grade average) to be included as part of appraisal discussion. Where staff teaching/administrative loads are significantly (>10%) higher than average, an individual plan to be set in place for the following year.
C. Appraisers, SMB
(annually thereafter). C. 2016/17 (ongoing)
different types of work. >80% staff to report satisfaction with WAM (Staff Survey 2018) B. Average WAM at every grade to be the same by gender (Review 2019). C. Individual staff WAM to remain within 5% of average allocation for research/unallocated over a 3-year period. (Review 2018).
A8 Increase male recruitment rates for Research Fellow and Lecturer posts.
Men are under-represented in these positions, and women continue to recruited at higher rates. (No men have been recruited as Research Fellows in the past three years).
A. All posts to have male and female contact points on recruitment materials. B. SSPSW publicity materials and website to profile male staff members during recruitment periods. C. Welcoming statement in job advertisements to male
A. SMB, SM, HoS B. Media and Communication Officer C. SMB, SM
A/B/C. 2016 (ongoing)
A/B/C. Increase male application rates to 40% for both posts. (Review 2018). Success rates for male candidates to equal females (Lecturer posts). (Review 2019) >20% appointments to
59
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
candidates for these posts. Research Fellow to be male. (Review 2019).
A9 Increase opportunities for early-career staff to be named as CI on big (>£50k) research grants.
Good practice around this exists in ICCR (resulting in high numbers of early-career Research Fellows being named on big grants), but there is no systematic approach to this elsewhere in SSPSW. This practice would particularly benefit the majority-female cohort of early-career Academic/Research staff.
A. Senior ICCR to host workshop on including early-career researchers on grants, and developing early-career grant success, at Research Away day. B. Following this, Research Committee to investigate methods for increasing this practice through-out the School and report to SMB and School Board.
A. DRs Research Committee. Senior Research Fellows (ICCR) B. DRs Research Committee
A. 2016/17 Research Away Day. B. End 2016/17 academic year.
Increase to 40% lecturing staff being CI on grants of over £50k. (Review 2019).
60
Theme B – To improve and promote work-life balance for all staff and to improve the school’s status as a family friendly workplace.
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Action Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
B1 Increase work-life balance for staff, and reduce pressure to engage in work on evenings and weekends.
Staff reporting pressure to work evenings and weekends, particularly around email correspondence. Some social events occur on evenings. Staff with caring responsibilities report not being able to attend. Academic staff report that teaching and administrative duties (particularly meetings) can cause research to be moved to evenings/weekends.
A. Statement supporting work-life balance and flexible work (both formal and informal) to be included in staff handbook and induction pack. B. Discussion of work-life balance to be added to appraisals for all staff. C. Statement that staff are not expected to respond to emails during evenings or weekends (and may take up to three working days to respond) to be included in student and staff handbooks, and in module guides. D. All Academic staff to be entitled to ‘research only’ day during which they are not expected to undertake teaching/administrative duties or respond to emails. This to be made into policy and communicated in induction and staff handbook.
A. SMB, SAT, SM B. Appraisers, HoS C. SMB, Education Committee, DEs, SAT D. SMB, HoS, SM E. SM, SAT
A/B/D. 2016 (ongoing) C. Spring Semester 2016/17. D. 2017 (ongoing)
A/B. >80% staff report school support for and work-life balance. (Staff survey 2018) C/D. Staff to report increased ability to manage own workload, and work-time (Review 2017). E. Carers to report full participation in School social life. (Staff survey 2018)
61
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Action Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
E. Social events such as Christmas function to be moved to core hours, and School office closed so that all Professional and Support staff can attend.
B2 Family-friendly meeting times.
Ensure full participation in school meetings by staff with family and personal commitments.
A. SMB to publicise core meeting policy, and remind staff at the commencement of each semester over email. B. Where exceptional meetings must be held out of core hours advance notice of at least a fortnight given, memos sent beforehand for comments and minutes circulated.
A. SM, SMB B. SMB, SAT, SM.
A. Spring Semester 2015/16 (ongoing) B. 2016 (ongoing).
>70% meetings held during core hours. (Review 2018) >70% meetings at least fortnight notice. (Review 2018) >80% staff to report meetings held in core hours. (Staff survey 2018)
B3 Improve access to information and support around family-friendly and work-life balance policies.
Lack of knowledge among staff reported in staff survey.
A. Information on work-life balance and family-friendly policies to be included in SSPSW induction pack. B. Gender equality and work-life balance sections added to school website.
A. SM, SAT B. Media and Communications Officer, SAT.
A. 2016 (ongoing). B. December 2015.
A/B. >70% staff report knowledge of work-life balance and family-friendly policies in school survey.
62
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Action Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
B4 Increased school support for staff undertaking maternity/adoption leave.
While we have an excellent record of maternity leavers returning, staff highlighted the need for more support to enable the process to be as stress-free as possible. In particular, staff stated that more certainty about the period immediately following leave would reduce their stress and aid their reintegration into work.
A. Buddy/peer support system to be set up for staff members planning maternity/adoption leave where they will be paired with a recent returner who will provide them with guidance and support before, during and after their period of leave. B. Staff to develop work plan (with reduced responsibilities in all areas) in consultation with line manager for 6 months after returning from maternity/adoption before leave commences. C. Academic staff to have semester free from teaching following return from maternity leave. (Funded so as not to increase workload of other staff).
A. SAT, HoS, SM B. HoS, SM, Research Supervisors C. SMB, HoS, DEs
A. Summer 2016 (ongoing) B. Summer 2016 (ongoing) C. November 2015 (ongoing)
Retain 100% maternity return rate. >80% maternity returners to indicated high satisfaction with school support. (Review 2018)
63
Theme C – To improve gender equality at the student level and improve the academic progression pipeline, especially for female students.
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
C1 Increase numbers of male students, particularly in BA programme.
Male students are under-represented in all our programmes. The BSW has made progress to increasing male students intake, and the BA could do the same by adopting some of these methods. Staff believe an obstacle to recruitment is the lack of sociology provision in male-only schools. Market research suggests that the new ‘Q-Step’ degree is attractive to male students. Our history shows with Criminology shows that specific programmes can increase male student intake.
A. Continue efforts to recruit male students to BSW and monitor ongoing trends. B. Conduct survey of schools in Northern Ireland offering Sociology at A-Levels. If there is a lack of provision here, Education Committee to suggest actions in response. C. Develop BA recruitment campaign for male students based on Social Work efforts and with an emphasis on the Q-Step programme as a recruitment tool. This will include measures such as the following: * Dedicated outreach by male staff and students. * Highlight male students on website and in recruitment materials. * Conduct research (focus groups) with existing male students about their decision to study Sociology.
A. DE (BSW), Media and Communications Officer, Social Work Committee (working with Student Recruitment) B. DE (BA), Education Committee C. DE (BA), Programme Directors (BA), Education Committee, Media and Communications Officer, (working with Student Recruitment) Director of Education (BA)
A. Ongoing B. 2016 C. 2016 (recruitment period for 2017/18 intake).
A. >15% increase in male applicants and acceptances to BA programme over 5 year period. (Review 2020). B. Report detailing Sociology provision across NI schools. Action plan developed in response. (Review 2017) C. >15% increase in male applicants and acceptances to BA programme over 5 year period. (Review 2020)
64
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
C2 Increase gender equality in Degree classification for BSW.
Our data shows a trend over the past two years for a significantly lower (>10%) proportion of male students to obtain 1sts and 2.1s than females.
A. Education committee to monitor degree classification by gender on an annual basis. In social work, if the coming year sees the third consecutive gap between female and male students in outcomes develop action plan measures to investigate and address this gap. B. Conduct focus group with male Social Work students to investigate possible reasons for the gap.
A. Director of Education (BSW), Education Committee, SAT, Social Work Committee B. Director of Education (BSW), Social Work Committee, SAT
A. September 2016 (annually thereafter) B. 2017
Gender parity (by proportion of total students of that gender) in attainment of 1sts and 2.1s in 5 years. (Review 2020)
C3 Increase numbers of male PGR students.
Low intake of male students – due both to low numbers of applications and low acceptance rates.
A. Postgraduate committee to review applications by gender and develop strategy for attracting high-quality male PhD students. B. Male students who do not accept an offered place to be telephoned to ask about reasons. C. Development of recruitment campaign profiling male students and staff members. (Extension of UG campaign)
A/B/C. Postgraduate director, Postgraduate committee, Media and Communications Officer (in conjunction with Student Recruitment and the Graduate School)
A. 2016/17 B. February 2016 C. 2016/17
Increase male PhD applicants and places by >15% over 5 year period. (Review 2020)
65
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
C4 Improve part-time PGT and PGR experience and integration into SSPSW and QUB.
We have large numbers of female part-time students in both PGT and PGR degrees. Internal review with these students has shown lower rates of satisfaction with support and the post-graduate experience than full-time students. Many of these students also have parenting/caring responsibilities and may require different strategies for engagement.
A. Part-time PGT/PGR students to be consulted through focus group about their needs and expectations for support. B. PGT-subgroup/committee of SSCC to be developed to more effectively obtain and address PGT needs. (To include dedicated part-time representative for PGT and PGR students) C. Work with Graduate School to develop programmes targeted to the needs of part-time PG students.
A. Postgraduate Director, DEs, Education Committee, Postgraduate Committee B. SSCC convenor, DEs, Postgraduate Director C. Postgraduate Director, DEs, Postgraduate Committee, (in consultation with Graduate School)
A. 2016 B. 2016/17 C. 2016
C. Action plan developed in conjunction with Graduate School (review 2017). B. SSCC subgroup to include representatives from all PGT programmes. (Review 2017) A/B/C. Part-time PGT students to report increased satisfaction rates (Review 2019)
C5 Improve academic progression pipeline for UG students to take up PG study.
As a school with a predominantly female UG cohort we are in an excellent position to facilitate women’s progress through the academic pipeline, however we currently do not do this in a
A. Hold annual information workshop within SSPSW for UG students to discuss PG options. Invite 2nd and 3rd year students. B. At completion academic year Programme Directors to contact 2nd year students with
A. DEs, Education Committee, Programme Directors B. Programme Directors, DEs,
A. 2016 Autumn Semester (annually thereafter) B. End 2015/16 (annually
A. Attendance of 20-30 students at workshops. B. All students with GPA 65 or above to be contacted. Programme directors to meet
66
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
systematic way. a GPA of a 1st or high 2.1 encouraging them to consider PG study and inviting them to contact a member of staff to discuss options.
Education Committee
thereafter) with >25% of these students.
C6 Improve career development opportunities for PGR students to facilitate progression to academic career.
PGR students have reported need for greater information around career development and desire for more career progression opportunities. PGR students are both students and early-career researchers who could be more effectively incorporated into the overall operations of the School. We have large numbers of female PhD students and academics, but need to ensure students have access to these academics as role models.
A. Annual career workshop for PGR students including information on academic and non-academic career pathways. Workshop to be run by at least one Professor and at least one female member of staff. B. Develop recognition/incentives for PGR members SAT and other committees. C. Annual Progress Review to include discussion of long-term career goals and development needs. D. PhD students to be given peer review of teaching when they undertake guest lectures.
A. Postgraduate Director, Postgraduate Committee B. SMB, HoS C. Postgraduate Director, Postgraduate Committee, Supervisors D. Education Committee, Postgraduate Committee, Supervisors, Module Convenors.
A. 2016 Autumn semester. B. 2016 C. 2016 (ongoing) D. 2016 (ongoing)
A. >70% PGR students to attend workshop during candidature (Review 2019) B. Incentive scheme in place and PGR students reporting satisfaction with it (Review 2018) A/C. >80% PGR report satisfaction with School supports around career development (2017 PGR survey) D. 100% PGR students report receive opportunities peer
67
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
We need to ensure that where PhD students do have access to career development opportunities we maximise the benefits of this.
review of teaching (Review 2018)
C7 Increase Involvement UG and PGT students in SWAN process.
We have begun to involve students through the SSCC, but would like to progress further with this, and consult with students around what issues of gender equality are most pressing for them. We already have an well-functioning SSCC, and feel this is the most effective way to involve students. Gender equality is a core component of our teaching and is a resource for promoting a culture of gender equality in the School
A. SSCC to act as liaison point between SAT and student body: * SWAN champion to attend SSCC and provide report. * SWAN to become standing item on SSCC. * Minutes of SSCC to be discussed at SAT. * Where specific issues arise, SSCC to delegate member to attend SAT. B. Produce and distribute modified Culture Survey for UG and PGT students. C. Annual prize for best essay by a student on topic related to gender equality. (Prize to be developed for IWD 2016).
A. SWAN Champion, SSCC convenor, SSCC, SAT. B. SSCC Convenor, SSCC, SWAN champion, SAT C. SWAN Champion, SAT, Module Convenors
A. Spring Semester 2016 (ongoing) B. 2016/17 C. March 2016
A. Recorded discussion of SWAN at every SSCC. B. >60% UG and PGT students to complete survey. C. >10 entries to prize each year.
68
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
while also recognising student success.
C8 Increase male applicants and students in PGT programmes.
Male students are under-represented in our PGT cohort. Our largest cohort attend professionally-focused certificates and diplomas run by the Social Work staff.
A. Development of recruitment campaign profiling male students and staff members. (Extension of UG campaign) B. Conduct focus group with male PGT students (in Social Work programmes) to identify background/reasons for undertaking course. From this develop recruitment action plan for male students.
A. DEs, Education Committee, Media and Communications Officer (in conjunction with Student Recruitment and the Graduate School)
A. 2017/18 B. 2017
Increase of male applicant and enrolments by 15% over 5 years (Review 2020)
69
Theme D – To create a more inclusive SSPSW culture, with principles of gender equality made central.
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
D1 Increase female leadership in all areas of School governance, especially research.
An investigation of our current leadership roles found a gendered pattern with women concentrated primarily in UG-related roles and men over-represented in PG-related and research-related roles. A secondary problem with this is that leadership roles tied to research and PG administration tend to lead to more opportunities for promotion. We’ve also found that some of our committees have, in certain years, had over-representations of men or women.
A. Re-classify leadership roles within the School as primarily UG/PG/Research, and indicate their value for promotion. B. Monitor to ensure at least 50% women in roles in each area. Actively recruit posts from existing committee membership. C. Monitor committee membership to ensure no more than 60% men or women at any point.
A. SAT, SMB B. SMB, SAT, C. SMB, DRs, DEs, Postgraduate Director, SAT
A. Beginning 2016. B. From 2016. C. From 2016
A. Document available on Sharepoint. B. Women to occupy 50% of leadership roles in all areas of School. (Review 2018) C. Both men and women to be at least 40% each committee.
D2 Maintain staff engagement with SWAN
We have had good engagement from staff but wish to ensure that this continues and that involvement in SWAN principles is not isolated to particular staff groups or those involved directly in SAT.
A. Engagement with gender equality to be an objective included in appraisal discussions for all staff.
A. SMB, HoS, Appraisers, SAT
2016 onwards
A. 100% appraisal reports to include reference to gender equality objective.
70
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
D3 Gender equality to be part of promotion of research culture within school.
Discussions at research away day (themed around research and gender) expressed staff desire for enhanced research culture, and more avenues to communicate success. We wish to ensure that this includes both genders equally.
A. Introduce School newsletter to share research ‘success stories’ including publications, successful research funding bids etc. Coverage by gender to be monitored and reported annually. B. Schedule seminar series so that no more than 60% women or men annually.
A. Media and Communications Officer, Research Committee, SAT B. DRs, Research Committee, SAT
A/B. 2016 (ongoing)
>40% Seminar speakers and newsletter representation for both genders. (Review 2017)
D4 Increase representation of early-career and fixed-term staff in School governance.
These predominantly female cohorts are generally early-career and have specific needs around School governance. They are also a large part of the staff group but tend to be under-represented in management structures.
A. Include ECR and fixed-term staff representatives on SMB. B. Ensure all committees include early-career staff member and relevant committees include fixed-term research staff.
A. SMB, SAT, HoS B. SAT, SMB, DRs, DE, Postgraduate Director
2016 (ongoing)
Representation of ECR and fixed-term research staff on all (relevant) committees.
D5 Greater integration of different staff groups in School culture –
Lack of integration between different groups of staff recognised by all staff in focus groups, but noted particularly
A. Welcome coffees to be extended from permanent academic staff to all staff
SAT, HoS SM
2016 A. Welcome coffees to be attended by over 20% staff within
71
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
particularly fixed-term research and professional and support staff.
by Research and Professional and Support staff.
members. B. Weekly brown bag lunches held for all staff.
school. B. Lunches to be regularly attended by 10 or more staff members.
D6 Ensure training in unconscious bias completed by all staff in SSPSW.
While we have good uptake of our DiversityNow training, this is not the same as dedicated unconscious bias training. We have been part of discussions across QUB to roll out the training and would like to take advantage of it. This is a particularly pressing need for staff involved in recruitment, training, promotion and appraisal.
A. Within 6 months of QUB adoption of training package arrange workshop for all senior staff. B. Follow this with workshops for other groups. C. Training allowance to be increased for all staff to complete. D. Completion of training to form component of Appraisal.
SAT, SMB, HoS, SM
Within 2 years of QUB roll-out of training.
All staff to have completed unconscious bias training within 2 years of QUB roll-out.
D7 Ensure SWAN remains central to all School business.
We have initiated a process of mainstreaming SWAN throughout the school, (eg as a standing item for all committees) and wish to ensure that engagement
A. HoS to provide report to SMB on SWAN progress and engagement at end of each academic year.
A. HoS, SWAN champion B. Committee Chairs
2016 (ongoing)
SWAN recognised as core part of School business. (>80% of staff agree with this question in staff
72
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
remains high, and that it remains central to the School’s strategic planning and future directions.
B. Committee chairs to report to SMB on SWAN progress and engagement at end of each academic year. C. SWAN update included in School newsletter. D. SAT to hold away day to at conclusion of each academic year to reflect on action plan progress and review data trends. To be followed by report to School Board.
C. SAT, Media and Communications Officer D. SAT
survey). (2018 Staff survey) >80% staff to agree that they are aware of progress with Athena SWAN (2018 Staff survey).
D8 Increase involvement in SWAN for all groups of staff.
While we have a wide group of staff in the SAT, both of our SWAN champions are Lecturer grade female staff. We wish to ensure that this role is spread among genders and grades.
A. Ensure at least one new SWAN champion senior lecturer or above. B. Ensure at least one new SWAN champion male.
SAT, SMB
2017/18 (end of current term)
A. At least one SWAN champion senior lecturer or above. B. At least one SWAN champion male member of staff.
D9 Increase visibility of LGBT+ staff and students in school.
Informally we know there is a large cohort of LGBT+ students and staff, but staff and PGR students commented on lack
A. Audit of module content across school to gauge provision of teaching on LGBT+
A. SAT, Education Committee
A. Summer 2016 B. Autumn
A. Plan for incorporation of LGBT+ issues in curriculum.
73
Identified Issue and Area for Action
Rationale Proposed Actions Responsibility Timeline Success Measure
of visibility in Culture survey. issues. B. Hold LGBT+ focused school event.
B. SAT semester 2017
B. >20 students and 10 staff to attend event.
D10 Increase equity in Outreach activities
Outreach tends to fall disproportionately on new staff. We also have a need for greater male visibility.
A. Establish rota system for outreach activities. B. Ensure at least one male/female at every event.
Media and Communications officer, SMB, SM
Spring semester 2016.
A. All staff to attend at least 2 outreach events per semester. No staff to attend more than 4. B. Each event to have recorded presence one male and one female staff member.
D11 Increase profile of SWAN in School materials (internal and external).
While we have strong levels of engagement, Athena SWAN is not yet part of the recognisable ‘school identity’.
A. Include SWAN update in induction pack. B. Include commitment to Athena SWAN in job advertisements, webpage, student and staff handbooks.
A. SM, HoS, SWAN Champions B. SMB, Media and Communications officer, SAT
Summer 2016.
All SSPSW promotional and information materials to include reference to Athena SWAN.