Women, research and universities: a story of slow progress

1. Monitoring as a basis for policy decisions in universities and research institutionsProf. Dr. Jadranka Gvozdanović, Heidelberg University/LERU Gender Steering Group

2. Women, research and universities: a story of slow progress • 1. The proportionoffemaleresearchers in the EU hasbeengrowingsignificantlyfasterthanthatofmen (5.1% annuallyover 2002-2009 comparedto 3.3% formen in the EU-27, Shefigures 2012, p.5). • 2. However, „women‘sacademiccareerremainsmarkedlycharacterizedby strong verticalsegregation“ (Shefigures 2012, p.6). In 2010: • 59% ofgraduateswerefemale, • 46% ofPhDgraduateswerefemale • 44% of grade C academicstaff was female • 37% of grade B academicstaff, • 20% of grade A academicstaff (humanities 28.4%, socialsciences 19.4%, vs. e.g. engineering 7.9%). • 3. The glassceilingindexstood at 1.9 in 2004, at 1.8 in 2010 (SF2012) • -> structuralobstaclesforwhichtargetedactionisrequired. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

3. European goodwill vs. the problem of implementation • ERA on gender equality ->Member States are invited to: • Create a legal and policy environment and provide incentives to: • remove legal and other barriers to the recruitment, retention and career progression of female researchers while fully complying with EU law on gender equality • address gender imbalances in decision making processes • strengthen the gender dimension in research programmes • Engage in partnerships with funding agencies, research organisations and universities to foster cultural and institutional change on gender - charters, performance agreements, awards • Ensure that at least 40% of the under-represented sex participate in committees involved in recruitment/career progression and in establishing and evaluating research programmes • Research stakeholder organisations are invited to: • Implement institutional change relating to HR management, funding, decision making and research programmes through Gender Equality Plans which aim to: • Conduct impact assessment / audits of procedures and practices to identify gender bias • Implement innovative strategies to correct any bias • Set targets and monitor progress via indicators. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

4. Monitoring – and then? • The LERU experience: compare data and gender-equality plans of member universities -> benchmarking and mutual advice. • The Equal Opportunity Offensive of the German Research Council (since 2008): evaluate Equal-Opportunity Plans and refuse funding to universities with insufficient EOP. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

5. Tackling the sources of slow progress: an example of a German university ranked among the best by the Ger. Res. Council • Heidelberg University: indicativebecauseitis a comprehensiveuniversity (all specializations). • Steadyyetslowprogress 2002-2011: • Grade A femaleacademics in 2002 8.6% vs. • in 2011 16% (German average 15.5%); • 3. Leakypipeline: • 51% femalePhDs (Ga 44.8%) • 27.9% (Ga 25.5%) Habilitation, RG leader • 18.6% Professors (grade A) withoutMedicine. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

6. The leaky pipeline of the University of Heidelberg 2008-2010 Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

7. Gender-equality measures • -> Measurestowardskeepingfemalescholars at universities: • a) Gender-specificmeasures, in placeaslongas a biasexists: • Special mentoringprogrammesandtrainingprogrammestowardsprofessorships • Protected time forresearchgiventopostdocsfor a limited periodof time; • Gender-blind measuresfromwhichwomenindeedbenefitasmuchasme: • Start-upprofessorshipstobridgethegapbetweenthefirst 6 yearpostdocperiodand a fullprofessorship; • Assessment guidelinesforbias-freeevaluationofscholarlyachievements • Work-lifebalancemeasures(childcare, additional fundingpossibilitiesforreplacementduring parental leave, etc.). • c) Structuralmeasures: genderresponsibilityofthe University Leadership, femalequotaforcommittees, gendertrainingfor all thegoverningandadministrationlevels; • -> yetthepipeline still leakes -> whereandwhoisaccountablefortheleak? Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

8. Where does the career pipeline leak?Diagnosing the problem • 1. The leakypipelineoftheentireuniversityis • slowlyclosing due totargetedmeasures; • 2. The careerleakforfemalescientistsoccurs after • thePhD; • 3. The careerpoint at whichthepipelineleaksisshiftingfromthePhDtowards Habilitation. • 4. Who isresponsibleforacquisitionofpersonel? • 5. Who canformulatetargetsandbeheldresponsiblefortheirattainment? Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

9. Assessment of responsibility -> assignment of responsibility -> monitoring -> evaluation • 1. The basic organisational units in charge of acquisition and choice of personel are the Faculties; • 2. The Senate, the President‘s Office and the Ministery have de facto controlling functions (although the President‘s Office de iure bears the responsibility). • 3. Monitoring of the Faculties reveals huge differences and a need for diversified measures. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

10. Monitoring faculties (comparison of three-year averages) shows: the leaky pipeline is multifacetted • Type 1: the leaky pipeline begins at the pre-university stage (Faculty of Physics and Astronomy; Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science) • -> measure: special info days for school girls introducing them to research in these fields (so-called MINT days). • (The following chart shows by dotted lines the Faculty‘s target values for 2011 and 2013.) Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

11. Leaky Pipeline Physics and Astronomy

12. The pipeline leaks from the graduation • Type 2: thepipelineleaks after thegraduation (Facultiesof Law, Theology, Economics andSocial Science, Chemistry and Earth Sciences); • Different reasons: • tenuredpositionoflawyeror priest vs. doctoraland post-doctoraltemporarypositions; • Significantlyhighersalaries in businessandchemicalindustry. • Measures: trainingbyfemalescientistsasrolemodels etc. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

13. Leaky Pipeline Economics and Social Sciences

14. The pipeline leaking after PhD • Type 3: the pipeline leaks after the PhD (Faculties of Philosophy and Medicine) • Measures: scholarships for protected research time for postdocs on university and faculty levels (acquired on a competitive basis). • The effect of these scholarships can be demonstrated by a comparison of the Medical Faculty Heidelberg, which has additional faculty scholarships , and the Medical Faculty Mannheim, wirthout them. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

15. Leaky Pipeline Philosophy

16. Leaky Pipeline Medical Faculty Heidelberg

17. Leaky Pipeline Medical Faculty Mannheim

18. The pipeline leaks after the Habilitation at the latest • Type 4: the pipeline leaks after the Habilitation (Faculties of Modern languages and of Behavioral and Cultural Studies). • Measures: mentoring and training towards a professorship, possibility to apply for non-tenured (five year) start-up professorships through financial upgrading of existing positions (this is a general possibility, but more frequently applied here), co-financing of a research project on career decisions. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

19. Leaky Pipeline Modern Languages

20. Conclusions • Thereis not onesolutionthatwould fit all. • Monitoring revealsthecriticalpoints at whichmeasuresareneeded. • Structuralchangecanbeeffectiveonlyiftheresponsibilitiesareclearlydefinedandthemeasuresapplytothecrucialpointsof • overtand covert discrepancies. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

21. Recommendations • In order to provide a basis for structural change, European research organizations (including universities) and government bodies should commit themselves to developing a methodology for monitoring and evaluating efficiency of actions. • Monitoring is done with respect to the levels and units capable of defining their own targets and responsible for the developments . • Monitoring should be coupled with incentives vs. denial of additional funding. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

22. Gender-equality monitoring and indicators • Gender-equalityindicatorsshouldtakeintoaccountthecountry-specific legal regulations(e.g. istheuniversity -internalpromotionto A-positionspossibleor not); • Gender-equalityindicatorsshouldbeevaluated relative tothecountry-specificaveragevaluesfor a position (e.g. A-position, i.e. fullprofessor) for a specificdiscipline; • Recommendation: monitorprogress in achievinggenderequalityalongtheuniversity-careerladdermeasuredbythediscipline-specificaveragesofsuccessive (e.g. threeorfive) sequencesofyears. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position

23. References • Gleichstellungskonzept Universität Heidelberg 2013-2017, http://www.uni- • heidelberg.de/md/gsb/aktuelles/gleichstellungskonzept_univheidelberg_2013-2017.pdf • She figures 2012 • http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/she-figures-2012_en.pdf • Women, research and universities: excellence without gender bias (LERU position paper) • http://www.leru.org/files/general/LERU%20Paper_Women%20universities%20and%20research.pdf Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position