the advanced centre for biochemical engineering … silver... · 2016-07-27 · department of...

Department of Biochemical Engineering Gary J Lye, BSc, PhD, CEng, CSci, FIChemE UCL, Gordon Street, London WC1H 0AH, UK Professor of Biochemical Engineering Tel: +44 (0)20 7679 9585 Fax: +44 (0)20 7209 0703 Head of Department Email: [email protected], Website: www.ucl.ac.uk/biochemeng Director, EPSRC CDT in Bioprocess Engineering

THE ADVANCED CENTRE FOR BIOCHEMICAL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON

5th February 2016

Ms Sarah Dickinson Athena SWAN Manager Athena SWAN Charter Equality Challenge Unit 7th Floor Queens House 5/56 Lincoln’s Inn Fields London WC2A 3LJ Dear Ms Dickinson,

UCL Biochemical Engineering Athena SWAN Award We are all very proud and delighted to have achieved our second consecutive Athena SWAN Silver Award in 2015. I regard this award as an acknowledgement of both the hard work and the values that define the UCL Department of Biochemical Engineering. I particularly would like to thank my predecessor, Prof Nigel Titchener-Hooker, for providing a clear commitment to Athena SWAN principles throughout his tenure as Head of Department. Moving forward as a department, we look forward to expanding the remit of the Athena SWAN agenda, providing a beacon of Athena SWAN practices for both UCL and beyond and pursuing an Athena SWAN Gold Award in 2018. Yours sincerely

Professor Gary J Lye, FIChemE Head, UCL Biochemical Engineering

1

Athena SWAN Gold department award application

Name of university: University College London

Department: Biochemical Engineering

Date of application: 30 April 2015

Date of Silver Athena SWAN award: 28 July 2011

Date of university Bronze and/or Silver Athena SWAN award: Bronze 2006, Renewed 2009, November 2012, Silver submitted April 2015

Contact for application: Darren N. Nesbeth

Email: [email protected]

Telephone: +44 (0) 20 7679 9582

Departmental website address: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/biochemeng

2

Table of Contents

Section 1. Letter of endorsement from Head of Department!!!!!!!...4

Section 2. The self-assessment process!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!...7

Section 3. A picture of the department!...!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!...11

Section 4. Supporting and advancing women’s careers!...!!!!!!!...32

Section 5. Any other comments!...!!!!!!!...!...!!!!!!!!..56

Section 6. Action plan!...!!!!!!!...!...!!!!!!!...!...!!!58

3

Abbreviations

APOFAC Applications Offers Acceptances

AS Athena SWAN

BEng Bachelor of Engineering

DTC Doctoral Training Centre; also CDT – Centre for Doctoral Training

EngD Engineering Doctorate

EPSRC Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council

HESA Higher Education Statistics Agency

IChemE Institution of Chemical Engineers

iGEM International Genetically Engineered Machines

MBI Modular Training for the Bioprocess Industries

MEng Master of Engineering

PDRA Post-doctoral Research Associate

PGSSCC Postgraduate Student / Staff Consultative Committee

PGT / PGR Postgraduate Taught / Postgraduate Research

PST Professional Services Team

RAFT Research and Facilities Team

SMT Senior Management Team

SAT Self Assessment Team

STEMM Science, Technology, Engineering, Medicine and Mathematics

TCM Teaching Committee Meeting

UCAS Universities and Colleges Admissions Service

UGSSCC Undergraduate Student / Staff Consultative Committee

UG Undergraduate

4

1. Letter of endorsement from the head of department: maximum 500 words.

An accompanying letter of endorsement from the head of department should confirm how the SWAN action plan and activities in the department contribute to the overall department strategy and academic mission, and spell out what is next for the department, what difficulties might be experienced, and what the department most looks forward to.

The letter is an opportunity for the head of department to confirm their support for the application and to endorse and commend any women and STEM initiatives that have made a significant contribution to the achievement of the departmental mission.

5

Dept Biochemical Engineering, University College London

Gordon Street London WC1H 0AH Prof. Nigel Titchener-Hooker 3.2 Bernard Katz Building Tel: 0207 679 3796 Ex: 09586 Fax: 0207 916 3943 [email protected] http://www.ucl.ac.uk/biochemeng Sarah Dickinson 24th April 2015 Athena SWAN Manager Athena SWAN Charter Equality Challenge Unit 7th Floor, Queens House 5/56 Lincoln’s Inn Fields London WC2A 3LJ

Dear Ms Dickinson, It gives me great pleasure to endorse our Athena SWAN (AS) Gold application which builds on the success of our Silver award. All our staff are encouraged and enabled to participate in all our activities irrespective of gender, race, religion, or sexuality. This has paid dividends in promoting and nurturing the human capital that delivers our continued success in research and teaching, with 85% of our research publications rated as ‘world leading’ or ‘internationally excellent’. AS principles pervade our departmental ethos, and improve the lives and careers of students and staff. Our student cohorts enjoy regular contact with female leaders from academia and industry throughout their time with us, exemplified by the talk given by the President of the IChemE, Judith Hackitt CBE, at our Career Networking and gender equality event in 2014. 2014 saw the rollout of the Integrated Engineering Programme (IEP) which emphasises how engineers can change the world we live in, through the use of real-life scenarios, such as vaccination in the developing world. Anecdotal evidence suggests it will help us increase further the proportion of female students. As a direct result of our policies, driven by our AS action plan and our open culture, our intake of women UG students is consistently >10% above average for engineering. Our pipeline is maintained with well above national averages at all points. Awareness of

6

gender equality has been bolstered via our active promotion of campaigns including WISE. I have committed significant time and effort to these activities, hosting events to disseminate good practice and providing access to training, such as the Aurora programme. We launched AS workshops with the universities of Cambridge, London Southbank and Westminster. These have proven valuable for sharing knowledge of AS, culture and practices through candid and forthright discussion. With a significant proportion of academic staff below the age of 40 it is essential to have systems in place to encourage and enable a family-friendly, supportive culture. We operate a diversity of working arrangements, and the benefits are clear for all. I am exceptionally proud of our efforts as a SAT in capturing and embedding our AS achievements. I hope we have been able to convey the energy and enthusiasm behind greater levels of female representation through the recognition of gender equality in our processes and mind-set. The next period will be exciting for us. We expect to realise further the benefits of relocation to a single-site and of the UCL2034 strategy to enhance the working lives of students and staff. These will enable us to deepen our AS practices and help promote them across other UCL and other HEIs. Women are now represented at all levels of seniority, creating a series of strong role models. My mission is to ensure that these individuals are seen as beacons of success not just in a parochial way but as fully integrated, international leads as befits their intellects and strategic acumen. We are well along this path – it’s proving an exhilarating and rewarding journey! Yours faithfully, Nigel Titchener-Hooker Head of Department

SECTION 1 WORD COUNT: 497

7

2. Describe the self-assessment process. Max. 1000 words. This should include:

a) A description of the self assessment team: members’ roles (both within the department and as part of the team) and their experiences of work-life balance.

The SAT has 9 members (3 male, 6 female) at various stages in their career from across the department

Our SAT makeup reflects the diversity of experience and outlook that our staff and students offer; it is made up of members of senior management, such as founding members of the department, Professors Eli Keshavarz-Moore and Nigel Titchener-Hooker (our HoD), as well as junior academics, a PDRA, doctoral students and PST members.

Ms Asma Ahmad (EngD student): Asma joined UCL in 2008 as an undergraduate and is now a doctoral student. Asma supports statistical data analysis and collation of public outreach activities, organises and runs focus group discussions with postgraduates. Outside of work Asma enjoys dancing, cooking and travelling .

Prof Eli Keshavarz-Moore: Eli became our first female Chair in 2010. Eli’s teaching initiatives have resulted in sustained academic and career achievement for our female students. Eli was in our 2011 Silver team and analyses UG student data. Eli is married with two grown-up children and has caring responsibilities for her parents.

Dr Martina Micheletti (Senior Lecturer): Martina joined the department in 2004 as a PDRA and was appointed Lecturer in 2007. She is responsible for data analysis and staff and students graphs preparation and she has led the organisation of two beaconing events, AS Surgery, aimed at UCL SAT members applying in the near future, and the ‘AS for HoDs’ event with the UCL President and Provost.

Dr Darren Nesbeth (Lecturer): Our SAT lead joined UCL in 2007 as a PDRA before his 2010 appointment as Lecturer. He leads UCL participation in the undergraduate International Genetically Engineered Machines (iGEM) competition, allowing the department to promote AS practices internationally. Darren is married and has two school-age children. Flexible work arrangements allow Darren to fulfil family commitments including school pick-ups.

Dr Ruth O'Donnell (Outreach Communications and Administration Coordinator): Ruth joined UCL in 2014 after coordinating a successful AS Silver Renewal at Imperial College. Ruth directs student recruitment and ensures representation of gender diversity in the department’s online platforms and recruitment materials. Ruth enjoys travel, aikido and writing about film.

Mr Desmond Schofield (EngD student): Des joined UCL in 2011 as a doctoral student. Des provides feedback on the issues examined at SAT meetings. He works with Asma to deliver focus groups and to help improve and refine our AS systems. Des enjoys live music, sport, and ‘open mic’ nights.

Dr Maria Villegas-Torres (PDRA): Maria started as a UCL PhD student in 2009 and is now a PDRA. Maria coordinates our PDRA Forum and has been appointed Associate

8

Professor at Universidad Icesi Cali Columbia. We have applied for Santander Catalyst funds for Maria to supervise joint projects with UCL. Maria enjoys traveling, photography and sports with her husband.

Prof Nigel Titchener-Hooker (Head of Department): Nigel has been HoD since 2008 and has a strong interest in facilitating appropriate work-life balances for his staff, which he observes as crucial for personal success. He is committed to creating the right environment to support academic promotion for female staff. Nigel is the father of twin boys with whom he enjoys outdoor activities including rambling and swimming.

Ms Anne C. Wilson (PST Manager): Anne joined us in 2012 and coordinates the collection and analysis of the data in this assessment. Anne also provides continual review and improvement of our policies and procedures and has overseen a major revision of our website, including its AS content. Anne balances professional demands with caring responsibilities for a parent. 578

9

b) An account of the self assessment process: details of the self assessment team meetings, including any consultation processes that were undertaken with staff or individuals outside of the university, and how these have fed into the submission. Process Our SAT meet quarterly, to review the Department’s AS direction of travel, and weekly when delivering specific events or tasks. Minutes are reported to SMT Staff, Recruitment and Staff-Student (UG and PG) Consultative Committee meetings for discussion. SAT leadership rotates every 3 years. Core roles are: the previous SAT lead, current SAT lead, HoD and PST manager. PDRA and PGR student members coordinate input from PGT and UG students. Three members of our 2011 Silver team have brought their AS expertise to bear on other departmental activities (Action 7.2), such as PGSSCC and the Departmental Equal Opportunity Liaison Officer role helping our HoD implement UCL Equal Opportunities Policies and practices. Consultation We used the York Biology department AS Application as a guide and liaised with Dr Patricia Hunt regarding the Imperial Chemistry experience of submitting AS Gold applications. We shared experiences with the Cambridge Department of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology HoD, about feedback from their last AS submission, and staff at Westminster and London Southbank University, who are assembling SATs. We have paired with UCL MRC Laboratory for Molecular Cell Biology (LMCB) to establish a peer-to-peer feedback mechanism. We have run a number of ‘beacon’ activities that are discussed below (Section 5). Feedback Input from external documents, data and peers have informed our planning of AS events. Our most recent staff survey had 81% of academic staff response (83% of females) and 59% PDRA response (77% of females). We also organsied a Student Focus Group event, attended by 2 male and 4 female UG students and 4 male and 6 female PG students. Within UCL we participated in the 2015 ‘Going for Gold’ workshop hosted by UCL and have peer reviewed submissions with UCL MRC LMCB (Sarah Mole), Computer Science (Caroline Wardle), Chemical Engineering (Eva Sorensen) and Cancer Institute (Kerry Chester).

302

10

c) Plans for the future of the self assessment team, such as how often the team will continue to meet and how the department will deal with the turnover of team members, any reporting mechanisms and in particular how the self assessment team intends to monitor implementation of the action plan. Team Evolution To ensure freshness of ideas we will extend SAT membership to include representatives from our UG and PGT cohorts, in addition to existing PGR representation. SAT turnover will be actively managed to ~50% every 3 years to ensure AS experience is shared and embedded within the department (Action 7.2). The SAT will continue to report to all key committees. Action Plan Implementation Individual leads are expected to report on progress, or to request personnel or resource requirements, at regular SAT meetings. Post-submission our SAT meeting will use our 8 2015-2018 Objectives (p71) as standing agenda items to ensure their delivery and that development remains focused. 107


11

3. A picture of the department: maximum 2000 words a) Provide a pen-picture of the department to set the context for the application, outlining in particular any significant and relevant features.

‘The department makes great efforts in getting women to feel accepted’ 2015 Student Focus Group

Biochemical Engineering is a niche discipline. We are the only UK department to offer UG degrees and have built these programmes from a first intake of 5 to over 50 in 2014. We must work hard to secure a national profile despite the very significant outcomes of our sector in terms of new medicines and global vaccines. The importance of the field was underlined by our winning a Queen’s Anniversary Trust prize in 2013 in recognition of our contributions to global healthcare over a sustained period.

We offer five UG programmes (120 students), two PGT programmes (40 students) and one part time PGT programme (2-4 students). We have 90 doctoral students (PhD, EngD) and two Doctoral Training Centres (DTCs), which together support 10-15 new students annually.

Our department has 21 academics (one part time). We have 40 PDRAs, a 5-strong research and facilities team (RAFT) and a 7-strong Professional Services Team (PST). Monthly 'Tea@Three' events provide academic staff, RAFT and PST teams an opportunity for informal conversation and networking. 183

Bernard Katz Building, UCL Biochemical Engineering

12

b) Provide data for the past five years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance, how they have affected action planning, and any improvements since the department’s Silver award.

Student data

i) Numbers of males and females on access or foundation courses – comment on the data and describe any initiatives taken to attract non-traditional groups of women to the courses.

Our department does not offer foundation courses. 7

13

ii) Undergraduate male and female numbers – full and part-time – comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture in the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance or negative trends and the impact to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.

10% outperformance gap maintained over 5 years

Figure 1 shows six years outperforming the 27% national average for percentage female students on UG engineering degrees (Source: HESA). However, an upward trend in male student numbers means our percentage female students slipped to <40% in 2014/15. Analysis In 2011 (Action 2.1), we started gathering geographical UG students data (Figure 2) which now shows a downward trend in ratio of UK females and a variable ratio of EU and Overseas female students. Actions to date Since 2011 our UCAS days have had PGR female leads (Action 2.2) and we have displayed positive images in our building and on our website of female student successes. We have also increased engagement with UK secondary schools through our schools communication programme (Action 1.1). A steady stream of school pupils now visits us and experiences a supportive visual culture (Action 1.2). These actions have helped solidify our numbers of female students at >60 and >39% of total student numbers. Actions going forward Knowing the destination of UK female students who decline our offers (Action 2.1) could inform how we structure our course and communication efforts to specifically target female A level pupils’ interests. We have also appointed Outreach Coordinator Ruth O’Donnell (Action 9.1) to lead on UK school engagement (Action A1.4) and communication.

217

14

Figure 1. UG male and female numbers. Grey bar chart represents the number of undergraduate (UG) students, female and male, registered for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the % female UG students in comparison to the UK average value (dashed line), reported for Chemical, Process and Energy Engineering, 2012/13, HESA.

Figure 2. Geographical breakdown of UG male and female numbers. Stacked bar chart represents the % female over the total female students registered from Europe, overseas and UK, respectively, registered for every year from 2010/11 to 2014/15.

!"#"$##% !"##$#!% !"#!$#&% !"#&$#'% !"#'$#(%

)*% #'+% "+% ,+% !(+% #-+%

./012032% !'+% -+% &-+% !(+% &(+%

*4% ,!+% 5!+% (,+% ("+% '6+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

!"#$"%&'()"*'&%+",+"&"*'-'./*%01%

+"2./*%%%

15

iii) Postgraduate male and female numbers completing taught courses – full and part-time – comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture in the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.

Ratio of female PGT students consistently exceeds national average

Figure 3 shows the proportion of female students on our Masters programmes has continued to exceed the 27% 2012/13 national average for engineering since our Silver Award. However the ratio did fall from parity from 2009/10 to 2013/14. Action 3.1 from our Silver Assessment was to establish a database of PGT student destinations to inform our recruitment materials and return our ratio female PGT students to parity. Toward this aim we also conducted annual surveys of PGT students on Exam Board day and invited students to join our Departmental LinkedIn group (Action 3.2), a link to which is also displayed on our website front page.

Since 2011 we have overhauled our public areas that now portray contemporary images of the engineering profession for prospective students. These activities have seen female:male split of Masters students return to parity in 2014/15. 148

16

Figure 3. PGT male and female numbers. Grey bar chart represents the number of postgraduate (PG) students, female and male, registered on taught courses for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the % female PG students registered on taught courses in comparison to the UK average value (reported for Chemical, Process and Energy Engineering, 2012/13, HESA).

!""#$%"& !"%"$%%& !"%%$%!& !"%!$%'& !"%'$%(& !"%($%)&*+,-.+& %/& %0& %%& %"& %!& !%&

1-.+& %0& %#& !!& %)& %/& !"&

2&*+,-.+& )%2& (02& ''2& ("2& ("2& )%2&

"2&

!"2&

("2&

3"2&

/"2&

%""2&

"&

)&

%"&

%)&

!"&

!)&

!"#$"%&'()&"*+,-

&.+*"/.""+(

,01+"2/,

3*&*"

4,'

5&3"/

6"#$"*+,-

&.+*"/."+(,01+"-&03&&*"

!02&

17

iv) Postgraduate male and female numbers on research degrees – full and part-time – comment on the female:male ratio compared with the national picture in the discipline. Describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.

Ratio of female PGR students consistently exceeds national average

Figure 4 shows our ratio of female PGR students to be high, and the absolute number to be consistent at 10 or above for 5 years out of 6. Our recruitment approach has been to target promising final year female UG and PGT students and to encourage them to apply for doctorates. We have many female students with outstanding academic records and the challenge is to persuade them to persist with research against industry/City positions. We have made a particular effort to engage with potential female researchers in year 2, when they still have plenty of time to reflect on future career decisions.

We suspect students may perceive PGR degrees as a less attractive career compared to the numerous other opportunities our degrees open up for them. In some senses we are a victim of our own success. With high salaries on offer it is particularly hard to persuade the best to stay on. To address this (Action A11.4) we led a 2015 London & South East IChemE event featuring presentations from young, female, engineering graduates, professionals working in academe, industry and consultancy. UG students, PGT students and several London schools attended, with over 20 female pupils. We have two different PGR programmes: PhD and Engineering Doctorate (EngD), which have been analysed separately below. 225

Figure 4. Postgraduate male and female numbers on research degrees. Grey bar chart represents the number of postgraduate (PG) students, female and male, registered on research degrees for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the % female PG students registered on research degrees (PhD and EngD) in comparison to the UK average value (reported for Chemical, Process and Energy Engineering, 2012/13, HESA).

18

Female EngD recruitment responds to our 2011 Silver actions

Our AS Silver assessment highlighted recruitment to our EngD programme as a concern. In addition to our efforts with PGT and UG female student numbers, we have also featured images and articles promoting the successes our six 2009/11 female EngD students frequently in our department publications (Action 3.4).

Figure 5 shows our ratio of female EngDs have responded to our efforts. Our 2010/11 17% female intake is the only year we fall below the 23.4% national level of female students for engineering and technology PGR degrees (source ECU 2012/13). We have built from this level to an average >40% over 2013/14-2014/15. We now operate two CDTs and are determined to target a 50% female intake over the life of each centre.

130

Figure 5. Male and female numbers on EngD degrees. Grey bar chart represents the number of postgraduate (PG) students, female and male, registered on Engineering Doctorate (EngD) degrees for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the % female PG students registered on EngD degrees.

!""5$#"%

!"#"$##%

!"##$#!%

!"#!$#&%

!"#&$#'%

!"#'$#(%

708390% '% !% !% '% (% &%

:390% 5% #"% ,% -% ,% (%

+%708390% &#+% #6+% !(+% &&+% '(+% &-+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

"%

!%

'%

,%

-%

#"%

#!%

3%45%!"#-$"%&'()"*'&%/*%6*27%)"2+""%

8(#0"+%/9%

&'()"*'&%/*%6*27%

)"2+""%

19

Four consecutive years of gender parity in PhD recruitment

Figure 6 shows gender parity was achieved for PhD student numbers for 4 out of 6 years since 2009/2010 (Objective 3).

Our SAT continues to drive the agenda of boosting our proportion of female PhD students. We have increased the visibility of mentorship opportunities available to our PhD student cohort. An example is the opportunity to supervise teams of 16-18 year olds at the UCL Academy School participating in the ‘iGEM High School’ synthetic biology competition. We also encourage our female PDRAs to act as mentors for female (and male) PhD students, providing support for their research and wellbeing.

Going forward, Ruth O’Donnell will lead on the development of female case studies for our webpages (Action 3.4), to ensure positive role models are available to potential female applicants. 137

Figure 6. Male and female numbers on PhD degrees. Grey bar chart represents the number of postgraduate (PG) students, female and male, registered on Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degrees for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the % female PG students registered on PhD degrees.

!""5$#"%

!"#"$##%

!"##$#!%

!"#!$#&%

!"#&$#'%

!"#'$#(%

708390% 5% -% 5% !% (% ##%

:390% -% 6% #"% !% 5% #(%

+%708390% (&+% (&+% '6+% ("+% &,+% '!+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

"%

!%

'%

,%

-%

#"%

#!%

#'%

#,%

3%45%!"#-$"%&'()"*'&%/*%4:7%)"2+""%

8(#0"+%/9%

&'()"*'&%/*%4:7%

)"2+""%

20

v) Ratio of course applications to offers and acceptances by gender for (ii), (iii) and (iv) above – comment on the differences between male and female application and success rates and describe any initiatives taken to address any imbalance and the effect to date. Comment upon any plans for the future.

45% of UG applicants are female

Figure 7 shows UG female applications were steady at ~40% pa, and intake has outperformed the 14.2% female students on UG engineering and technology degrees (2012/13 ECU). However we have seen a fall in the proportion of accepted offers by females, consistent with a 2004-2013 UK trend across all degrees (Source: ECU). This is disappointing given our actions since 2011 to raise awareness including: WISE events, women-only schools visits, boosting female Nuffield scheme internships (Action 1.3) and recruiting strong female role models for UCAS day tours (Action 2.2).

Finding an answer to this dip is a key action for 2015/16 (Action G2.1). A clue comes from the fact 1.8% of 2012/13 UK female students took engineering and technology degrees, compared to 12.5% of males (ECU). In 2014 we appointed Dr Iris Luke as Careers and Industrial Outreach Co-ordinator (Action 3.3) to re-boot the internships we run for school pupils. She will also develop material on our website differentiating Biochemical Engineering from chemical engineering and biochemistry, and highlighting the range of career options it opens up.

As a department we also lead a Faculty-wide annual “Women in Engineering” event for eighty female A-level students that we will leverage in the ‘Inspiring Women in Science’ outreach programme to increase visits from female-only schools.

217

21

Figure 7. Application, Offer and Acceptances (APOFAC) as Percentage of Total for UG taught courses. Grey bar chart represents the % female in applications, offers, acceptances and intake (from left to right, respectively) for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the total (female+male) Year 1 UG students intake.

Our female students are fully part of a vibrant and diverse community

!""5$#"%

!"#"$##%

!"##$#!%

!"#!$#&%

!"#&$#'%

!"#'$#(%

+%708390%;<<9=>3?=@A2% '-+% ',+% &-+% '&+% '(+% &5+%

+%708390%.BB012% ("+% '5+% &-+% '(+% '(+% &,+%

+%708390%;>>0<?3A>02% '-+% '5+% &-+% ''+% &-+% &-+%

+%708390%CA?3D0% ',+% ',+% '&+% '&+% &(+% &#+%

E@?39%*F%CA?3D0% '#% ('% (#% ('% (#% (#%

"%

#"%

!"%

&"%

'"%

("%

,"%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

;/'-$%*(#0"+%/9%<"-+%=%>5%&'()"*'&%

3%!"#-$"%.*%

?,,$.@-'./*&A%

B99"+&A%

?@@",'-*@"&%-*)%

C*'-D"%

22

Parity in PGT applications

Figure 8 shows a healthy proportion of female PGT applicants with applications exceeding gender parity in 4 of the past 6 years. We were disappointed by the 33% female 2011/12 intake even though this significantly outperforms the 21.2% national ratio of female students taking engineering and technology PGT degrees (source: ECU 2012/13). Our activities (Action 3.2) have helped to bring this back to 40% but we need to do more to convert acceptance into intake.

One approach is to engage with universities in countries from which historically we receive a lot of applicants, including China, Nigeria and Chile. We have bid for Santander Catalyst funding, focusing initially on Chile, to help us to understand better the cultural and financial factors that influence levels of female application and acceptances (Action A3.5). 134

Figure 8. Application, Offer and Acceptances (APOFAC) as Percentage of Total for PG taught courses. Grey bar chart represents the % PGT female in applications, offers, acceptances and intake (from left to right, respectively) for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the total (female+male) PGT student intake.

!""5$#"%

!"#"$##%

!"##$#!%

!"#!$#&%

!"#&$#'%

!"#'$#(%

+%708390%;<<9=>3?=@A2% (,+% '6+% (#+% &'+% (!+% ('+%

+%708390%.BB012% '5+% (#+% '6+% !5+% (&+% ('+%

+%708390%;>>0<?3A>02% '-+% ("+% '&+% &'+% ('+% ((+%

+%708390%CA?3D0% (#+% '6+% &&+% '"+% '"+% (#+%

E@?39%GFE%2?HI0A?2% &(% &,% &&% !(% &"% '#%

"%(%#"%#(%!"%!(%&"%&(%'"%'(%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

;/'-$%*(#0"+%/9%45;%&'()"*'&%

3%!"#-$"%.*%

?,,$.@-'./*&A%

B99"+&A%

?@@",'-*@"&%-*)%

C*'-D"%

23

2014/15 female PGR student numbers highest in 6 years Figure 9 shows female PGR applications achieved near-parity over 2011/12-2012/13 with a 5-year average of ~40% featuring a 32% dip in 2014/15. Since 2011 we consciously increased images of female staff and students in our popular departmental magazine, Bioprocessing Matters (Action 3.4). Our April 2013 edition featured 44 images of female UCL staff and students (51% of total), compared with only 23 such images across all 7 editions in 2009-2011 (31% of total). Applying this approach across all our media will help us increase the female ratio of applicants. 99

Figure 9. Application, Offer and Acceptances (APOFAC) as Percentage of Total for PG research courses. Grey bar chart represents the % PGr female in applications, offers, acceptances and intake (from left to right, respectively) for every year from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the total (female+male) PGR students intake.

!""5$#"%

!"#"$##%

!"##$#!%

!"#!$#&%

!"#&$#'%

!"#'$#(%

+%708390%;<<9=>3?=@A2% '"+% '"+% (,+% ',+% &5+% &!+%

+%708390%.BB012% '#+% '(+% (&+% ("+% &(+% &'+%

+%708390%;>>0<?3A>02% '#+% '!+% ("+% '!+% &-+% &6+%

+%708390%CA?3D0% '&+% &6+% '#+% &-+% '"+% '#+%

E@?39%GFJ%2?HI0A?2% &"% !6% !6% #,% !(% &'%

"%(%#"%#(%!"%!(%&"%&(%'"%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

;/'-$%*(#0"+%/9%45E%&'()"*'&%%

3%!"#-$"%.*%

?,,$.@-'./*&A%

B99"+&A%

?@@",'-*@"&%-*)%

C*'-D"%

24

vi) Degree classification by gender – comment on any differences in degree attainment between males and females and say what action is being taken to address any imbalance.

Majority of female students achieve 2:1 or 1:1 degrees Figures 10 shows the majority of students achieving 2:1 or above degree classification are female. This may be due to a more focused and mature approach of our female students. The IEP will provide our 2014/15 starters the opportunity to select 3 courses from departments spanning our entire faculty and we expect this may offer a route to increased male attainment. Up to 40% of our 2012/13 female students achieved 1:1 degrees (Figure 11), compared with 27.9% nationally for Engineering and Technology degrees (source: ECU 2012/13), a level also exceeded by our 2009-2014 average of 32% (Figure 12). We are now targeting (Action A10.1) an increase from ~40% to 50% female students achieving 1:1. 123

Figure 10. First and Upper Second Class degrees year on year. Percentage female (dark grey) and male (light grey) of total students.

!""5$#"% !"#"$##% !"##$#!% !"#!$#&% !"#&$#'%

+%B08390%K13IH3?=AK%L=?M%!N#%3AI%3O@/0% ("+% &5+% &5+% &-+% ('+%

+%8390%K13IH3?=AK%L=?M%!N#%3AI%3O@/0% !5+% &(+% &(+% !#+% &'+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

3%F'()"*'&%

2+-)(-'.*2%G.':%

HI=%-*)%J.+&'%@$-&&%

'/%'/'-$%&'()"*'&%

2+-)(-'.*2%.*%"-@:%

1"-+%

25

Figure 11. UG Degree class year on year. Percentage of female students graduating with the indicated degree classification in each year.

Figure 12. UG Degree class: 5 year average. 2009-2014 average percentage female and percentage male of students graduating with the indicated degree classification.

!N!% !N#% 7=12?%>9322%

!""5$#"% #(+% ((+% &"+%

!"#"$##% !"+% ,6+% #&+%

!"##$#!% !5+% &(+% &,+%

!"#!$#&% '"+% !"+% '"+%

!"#&$#'% #6+% ''+% &5+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

3%!"#-$"%

2+-)(-'.*2%'/%

'/'-$%9"#-$"%

2+-)(-'.*2%.*%

"-@:%1"-+%

!N!% !N#% 7=12?%>9322%

;/013K0%@B%+%708390%K13IH3?=AK%O0?L00A%!""5%

3AI%!"#'%!'+% ''+% &!+%

;/013K0%@B%+%:390%K13IH3?=AK%O0?L00A%!""5%

3AI%!"#'%!(+% '#+% &'+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

5+-)(-'.*2%

9"#-$"%-*)%#-$"%

+"&($'&%K-L"+-2")%

/L"+%':"%

HMMNOHM=P%1"-+&%

,"+./)Q%

26

Proportion of female PGT students gaining Distinction doubles Figure 13 shows >40% 2013/14 female PGT students achieved a Distinction, doubling the 2009/10 level. Our target is parity by 2018 (Action A10.2) and to shift the proportion of Pass grades upward toward Merits. To drive this we will harmonise teaching across our MSc and Final Year MEng cohorts. Historically these groups collaborate and interact extensively, to their mutual benefit in terms of grade performance. We will recognise and encourage this in the structure of the syllabus for each programme. 88

Figure 13. PGR Degree class year on year. % Ratio of female students graduating with a degree classification to total female students graduating in each year.

Figure 14. PGR Degree class: 5 year averages. % Ratio of female students graduating with a degree classification to total female students graduating in each year.

P=2?=A>?=@A% :01=?% G322%

!""5$#"% !&+% "+% 66+%

!"#"$##% !-+% !!+% ("+%

!"##$#!% !&+% &-+% &-+%

!"#!$#&% &,+% !#+% '&+%

!"#&$#'% ''+% ''+% #&+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

3%!"#-$"%

2+-)(-'.*2%'/%

'/'-$%9"#-$"%

2+-)(-'.*2%.*%

"-@:%1"-+%

P=2?=A>?=@A% :01=?% G322%

;/013K0%@B%+%708390%K13IH3?=AK%O0?L00A%!""5%

3AI%!"#'%&#+% !(+% ''+%

;/013K0%@B%+%:390%K13IH3?=AK%O0?L00A%!""5%

3AI%!"#'%&&+% !,+% '"+%

"+%

!"+%

'"+%

,"+%

-"+%

#""+%

5+-)(-'.*2%

9"#-$"%-*)%#-$"%

+"&($'&%K-L"+-2")%

/L"+%':"%

HMMNOHM=P%1"-+&%

,"+./)Q%

27

Gender parity in time to doctoral thesis submission

Figure 15 shows gender parity for our PGR students in terms of the research skills they develop in our department. Although ‘Time to submission’ may seem like a crude measure, we see it as an accurate aggregator of a number of different skills a PGR student must gain over the course of doctoral research. 62

Figure 15. Average time to thesis submission for female and male postgraduate students on research degrees. Years in X-axis indicate year of entry.

!""($",% !"",$"6% !""6$"-% !""-$"5% !""5$#"%

708390% 'Q#&% 'Q'-% 'Q"&% 'Q'5% &Q,5%

:390% 'Q(!% 'Q((% 'Q",% 'Q&'% 'Q#!%

"%

#%

!%

&%

'%

(%

,%

?L"+-2"%'.#"%'/%

&(0#.&&./*%9/+%

,/&'2+-)(-'"%

&'()"*'&%/*%

+"&"-+@:%)"2+""&%

R1"-+&S%

28

Staff data i) Female:male ratio of academic staff and research staff – researcher, lecturer, senior lecturer, reader, professor (or equivalent). Comment on any differences in numbers between males and females and say what action is being taken to address any underrepresentation at particular grades/levels.

Tenfold greater percentage female chairs than engineering average

Figure 16 shows a consistently 40-45% female PDRA workforce during a doubling of PDRA numbers since 2009/10. 20% female Chairs is considerably higher than the national averages for General (2%) and Chemical (4%) Engineering (source: HESA 2012/13 data).

Progress has been made in the last few years, with Martina Micheletti promoted from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer and Suzy Farid from Reader to Professor. We see this as evidence of the collaborative and supportive culture of our department. Figure 16 shows Lecturer-to-Senior Lecturer as a Key Transition Point and our SMT will now focus appraisal and mentorship efforts on Lecturers who have been in post for over 5 years to assist them in making the transition (Action 5.1).

Figure 17 provides a snap-shot (2012/13) of the strong female (UG to Chair) pipeline we have achieved.

142

29

Figure 16. Female:m

ale ratio of staff from P

DR

A to chair. G

rey bar chart represents the Staff headcount, fem

ale and male,

for every year from 2009/10 to 2013/14. The black triangle line graph represents the %

female staff.

30

Figure 17. Female:m

ale ratio of mem

bers of department from

UG

student to chair. Grey bar chart represents the student

and staff headcount, female and m

ale, for every category in the year 2012/13. The black triangle line graph represents the %

female staff in com

parison to the UK

average value (reported for Staff and P

rofessor category only in Chem

ical, Process and

Energy E

ngineering, 2012/13, HE

SA

).

31

ii) Turnover by grade and gender – comment on any differences between men and women in turnover and say how the department plans to address this. Where the number of staff leaving is small, comment on the reasons why particular individuals left. Academic Four male academic staff members have left the department since 1998 and no females. PDRAs For the majority of PDRAs, gaining experience of multiple research groups is the best career option and our department reflects this. Since 2007, three of our PDRAs have become academics, two at our department (1 male, 1 female) and two outside UCL (1 male, 1 female). Four PDRAs have had two or more PDRA contracts. All other PDRAs (see Figure 16 for total numbers) have completed one contract.

84


32

4) Supporting and advancing women’s careers: maximum 5000 words Key career transition points a) Provide data for the past five years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance, how they have affected action planning, and any improvements since the department’s Silver award. i) Job application and success rates by gender and grade – comment on any differences in recruitment between men and women at any level and say what action is being taken to address this.

! 50% female appointments since 2010/11

Though the absolute number fluctuates, the average proportion of females shortlisted for interview is higher than for men (Figure 18). It is worth noting that since 2011/12 more females have been appointed than males. The SAT will review the composition of interview panels and the content of candidates’ personal statements and CVs during this period to see if any biases can be identified (Action A5.4).

Our Staff Survey results, quoted throughout Section 7, support the fact that we have an excellent reputation for supporting female staff and for having above-average percentage of female academic staff. For applicants from within the UK bioprocess and biotechnology communities (academic and industrial), this reputation precedes us and there is a high level of awareness of the work we do on gender equality (see Section 5). 137

Collecting the Queen’s Anniversary Prize at Buckingham Palace in 2013

33

Figure 18. Bar chart represents the %

female and m

ale in applications for fixed term P

DR

A positions and perm

anent academic

positions, interview offers and appointm

ents on PD

RA

positions opened every year from 2009/10 to 2013/14.

!""#$%&'()*

+'(,-.$,/*

!""0$'(,1*

!""#$%&'()*

+'(,-.$,/*

!""0$'(,1*

!""#$%&'()*

+'(,-.$,/*

!""0$'(,1*

!""#$%&'()*

+'(,-.$,/*

!""0$'(,1*

!""#$%&'()*

+'(,-.$,/*

!""0$'(,1*

2334563*2363566*

2366562*2362567*

2367568*9*:&#,*

;29*

<79*6339

*249

*779

*=39

*249

*249

*839

*6;9

*689

*39

*>49

*=29

*8=9

*9*?,@&#,*

2<9*

6;9*

39*

;69*

>;9*

=39*

;69*

;69*

>39*

<79*

<>9*6339

*769

*8<9

*==9

*

39*

239*

839*

>39*

<39*

6339*

!"#$%&'$"&()"!"*&'$"+(",--'+.&(/+0(12"3(/$45+$61"&()",--0+(/%$(/1"

34

a) ii) Applications for promotion and success rates by gender and grade – comment on where these differ, whether these have improved and say what further action may be taken. Where the number of women is small applicants may comment on specific examples of where women have been through the promotion process. Explain how potential candidates are identified.

100% male and female promotion success rate maintained

We are extremely proud to have maintained our 100% promotions success rate since our Silver award, for both female and male academic staff members (Action A9.3). Our case studies (Section 7) exemplify our deep commitment to the meritocratic promotion of academic staff. A second female staff member achieved a Chair in 2014 and her rate of promotion (Lecturer to Chair within 14 years) exceeds that of all her male counterparts.

Our SMT remain committed to assessing the multiple factors affecting women in their pursuit of academic promotion, including caring responsibilities and the impact these may have on the capacity for international travel and networking activities. Such factors are taken into consideration when the progress of staff members towards promotion targets is reviewed during annual appraisal. We maintain that this good practice benefits all. The HoD actively keeps track of the career progression of all staff and works with them to set clear goals for promotion. All permanent female academic staff members have either been promoted over the past 5 years or are currently in the promotion cycle (outcome to be known April 2015). All have significant caring responsibilities.

196

35

b) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed.

i) Recruitment of staff – comment on how the department’s recruitment processes ensure that female candidates are attracted to apply, and how the department ensures its short listing, selection processes and criteria comply with the university’s equal opportunities policies.

Minimum 33% female representation on interview panels as standard

Our SMT continually review recruitment procedures with our PST head, and review SAT recommendations. Our procedures are aligned with UCL regulations and at least one third of all interview panels is female, which exceeds UCL policy (Action 5.2).

Academic staff mentor suitable internal candidates and scout for academic talent (Action 4.2). Our 2014 appointment of alumnus Dr Brenda Parker as Lecturer attests to the credibility of this approach. Often we will contact female early career researchers at networking events or conferences, encouraging them to apply when jobs are available or simply to send a CV for us to circulate internally and add to our database. 10 of our current 11 female, non-alumni PDRA cohort were first contacted in this way.

In addition to conventional academic routes, we ensure all our jobs are advertised on the sites of major organisations that promote women in science and engineering, such as WISE, UK research councils and Innovate UK. We are also targeting more focused websites such as mumsinscience.net.

At conferences and events we promote our AS success as an objective endorsement that our department is a supportive, family-friendly place to work. We hope this will encourage women to consider the department as an arena in which their career ambitions can be supported.

Applicants are made aware at first interview of our AS achievements and commitment to AS improvement. We also highlight our family-friendly policies, how these impact our working hours and meeting times and our expectation that this culture is supported, respected, and positively contributed to by all staff.

We review advertisements (Action 5.3) to ensure they use clear and gender-neutral language and state our policy to consider non-conventional career paths equitably and with open minds. We also incorporate a positive action statement encouraging female, black and minority ethnic (BME) applicants, along with a AS Silver award statement and logo.

100% of our permanent academic staff members have taken the required formal training in order to be eligible to sit on interview panels. This training includes information on the Equality Act 2010 and a discussion of unconscious bias. 354

36

b) ii) Support for staff at key career transition points – having identified key areas of attrition of female staff in the department, comment on any interventions, programmes and activities that support women at the crucial stages, such as personal development training, opportunities for networking, mentoring programmes and leadership training. Identify which have been found to work best at the different career stages.

PDRA duties that fully qualify people for Principal Investigator positions

Figure 16 (p29) shows Lecturer-to-Senior Lecturer as our principle Key Transition Point. Academic performance is discussed at Annual Appraisal where due attention is paid to the UCL Promotion Policy in terms of how activities and achievements could fit with stated promotion criteria. All our PDRAs and Lecturers are provided with a Handbook and a career mentor on appointment. Staff can rely on their mentor for support and advice and our Handbook defines key expectations and procedures. This handbook is currently being transitioned to an online Moodle hub.

The HoD uses the regular all-staff meetings to remind everybody of promotion opportunities and to encourage dialogue. This transparency has been important for all to see how women and men can each achieve recognition, based on building a profile at international conferences (Action 6.1). Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is an integral part of each individual’s annual targets and the HoD is especially keen to urge women to hone the leadership skills necessary for promotion.

Our HoD takes a key role in providing responsibilities to Lecturers based on development needs. For example, Martina Micheletti was given the chance to head our 2011 SAT as a leadership opportunity to help her case for promotion to Senior Lecturer, which was successful. Darren Nesbeth’s leadership of our 2015 application is a parallel case.

Figure 16 shows the proportion of female staff increases between PDRA and Lecturer. Historically in STEMM the Key Transition Point is between PDRA and Lecturer stage. Figure 16 shows we have bridged this gap and we attribute this to the support we provide for PDRAs and our good recruitment practices.

We also provide PDRAs with opportunities to build their visibility, via web profiles (Action A4.8), and the teaching skills, managerial responsibility and publications that will qualify them for a Lectureship position

A key outcome from the PDRA Forum we launched in 2012 (Action A4.4) was the request to provide formalised opportunities for gaining teaching experience. All PDRAs have been invited to attend Arena training courses and to be assigned formal training roles within the department (Action A4.6). To date 10 male and 5 female PDRAs are now designated as Honorary Lecturers.

367

37

Career development a) For each of the areas below, explain what the key issues are in the department, what steps have been taken to address any imbalances, what success/impact has been achieved so far and what additional steps may be needed. i) Promotion and career development – comment on the appraisal and career development process, and promotion criteria and whether these take into consideration responsibilities for teaching, research, administration, pastoral work and outreach work; is quality of work emphasised over quantity of work?

Our female professors have doubled in number Appraisal: We go beyond UCL policy and carry out Annual Appraisals of all fixed term and permanent contract staff, ensuring everyone knows his or her role is important and evolving. We continually review and reflect on our appraisal procedures to ensure they remain transparent and without bias. The SMT uses appraisal as one approach to identifying opportunities for staff development. Promotion: Our SMT work with staff members during appraisals to discuss and develop a promotion strategy. Since 2011 we have formally incorporated a ‘Promotion: Self-evaluation’ appraisal element (Action A9.3) to anchor a promotion-centred mind-set in all staff. For instance, all academic staff are encouraged to pursue professional certification via bodies such as IChemE to bolster promotion within the Engineering Faculty. Pastoral, outreach and administrative work (‘enabling’), alongside teaching and research, formally contribute to promotion cases (discussed further on p46).

As a result of the above practices we have continued to make progress since our 2011 Silver Award, doubling the number of female Chairs to 2 out of a total of 8. Figure 15 shows our female Chair ratio now outperforms the national level in General Engineering tenfold: 20% versus 2% (source: HESA 2012/13 data.

In 2011/12 we had four successful promotion applications (zero female), in 2012/13 three (one female) and in 2013/14 four (one female). Succession plans: We operate a pro-active succession plan for key roles in the department, renewed annually in consultation with senior academic, technical and professional services staff. The annual UCL timetable and policies for promotion are standing agenda items at all-Staff Meetings.

263

38

a) ii) – describe the support provided to new staff at all levels, as well as details of any gender equality training. To what extent are good employment practices in the institution, such as opportunities for networking, the flexible working policy, and professional and personal development opportunities promoted to staff from the outset?

Structured training, support and mentoring is provided for all new starters

All new academic staff are assigned an experienced mentor on appointment and complete formal teaching qualifications as a condition of their 24 month probation period. Mentors provide support ranging from active listening and personal reflections to formal assistance in delivery of tasks.

We take pride in the success of our mentoring support, as evidenced by 85% approval rate in the 2013 UCL-wide staff survey. This success is a product of the focussed and personal nature of our mentoring and development scheme. Female staff are given a choice of a female or male mentor and we feel this is a critical factor in helping women academics develop a sense that they have their ‘feet under the table’ as soon as possible.

We strongly encourage all staff to take advantage of UCL training and development opportunities, especially when this assists in settling in and confidence building. This training is also key to senior promotions. Finance for external CPD is provided and the HoD plays an active role in identifying relevant career-building opportunities for all staff. In addition, all staff members completed an online Equality and Diversity training within their first 6 weeks at UCL. 203

39

a) iii) Support for female students – describe the support (formal and informal) provided for female students to enable them to make the transition to a sustainable academic career, particularly from postgraduate to researcher, such as mentoring, seminars and pastoral support and the right to request a female personal tutor. Comment on whether these activities are run by female staff and how this work is formally recognised by the department.

Supporting student attainment lies at the heart of our culture Female personal tutor guaranteed if requested: All students are allocated a personal tutor and informed they can also choose to have a female tutor if they prefer. In our 2015 Student Focus Group a student commented that ‘The department makes great efforts in getting women to feel accepted’ and to date we have had no student requests for a female personal tutor.

Opportunities to develop Leadership Skills: We provide doctoral student groups the opportunity to devise and deliver a one week research project for completion by UG students (Action A4.5). This activity has enabled us to assemble all-female teams to work together, teach and lead. This is a valuable opportunity to build confidence in our female students, proving gender is no barrier to achievement and leadership. This also benefits male students by harnessing different ways of thinking and developing familiarity with mixed-gender teams and female leadership.

Future female leaders: the iGEM international student competition: The International Genetically Engineered Machines (iGEM) is a summer competition with finals at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). iGEM gives UG students the opportunity to work on projects in which they are challenged to develop their bench research, website design, mathematical modelling, public engagement and presentation skills. Over 200 universities participate worldwide.

UCL iGEM participation started in 2009, supported by Eli Keshavarz-Moore as part of her SAT activities. Eli recognised iGEM as a valuable route for female students to develop academic leadership skills through presenting at international events, leading teams of fellow students and delivering public outreach activities. Such staff activities are formally recognised by our department appraisals (p46).

Figure 19 shows we have achieved an average of 40% female iGEM team membership and have >30% female instructors. We are currently developing a 5-year funding plan for a maximum team size and minimum 50% female participation. Our 2015 team is 50% female (data not shown). Overall 2009-2012 iGEM data shows a positive correlation between female participation and iGEM success level (data not shown, source Paris Bettencourt University iGEM team). Our experience bears out this, as our 2012 team, which had the highest proportion of women, was also our most successful in terms of awards. 420

40

Figure 19. Percentage Female UCL Students (A) and Staff Instructors (B) in UCL iGEM Teams. Grey bars indicate UCL team data and horizontal line indicates 2013 total competition mean data: 40% for students and 22.5% for instructors, gathered by the 2013 Paris Bettencourt University iGEM team. X axis labels indicate UG teams (year only), PG teams (Year-PG) and Entrepreneurship teams (Year-E). Total numbers, male plus female, provided in white inside bars.

!""#$ !"%"$ !"%%$ !"%!$ !"%!&'$ !"%($ !"%(&)*$ !"%(&'$ !"%+&)*$,-./01-2$ 345$ 6"5$ 6"5$ 3#5$ ((5$ +35$ 6"5$ %+5$ (75$

"5$

%"5$

!"5$

("5$

+"5$

6"5$

3"5$

4"5$

7"5$

!"#$%

&'$"()"(*

+,"-$

&%."

!""#$ !"%"$ !"%%$ !"%!$ !"%!&'$ !"%($ !"%(&)*$ !"%(&'$ !"%+&)*$812-9.:-;92$ ((5$ 6"5$ 6"5$ 6"5$ 6"5$ 6"5$ 6"5$ ((5$ 6"5$

"5$

%"5$

!"5$

("5$

+"5$

6"5$

3"5$

!"#$%

&'$"()"(*

+,"-$

&%."

3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2

3 10 10 13 12 11 6 7 21

A

B

41

Our female students achieve international success

Support for next steps All academic staff bring their collective breadth of experience to bear on identifying doctoral students from within our department who show the potential to progress from PDRA into academic positions. Such students are given every encouragement and the policy of our department is clearly set by the HoD: the brightest students must always be supported in their efforts to achieve and progress. Annual budgets are set to reflect this on-going commitment. Our HoD insists that all academics “go the extra mile” for our students and sees it as his responsibility to take into account fully the student experience when planning research and teaching provision. Notable measures of our success with female students include a Best Poster award for Nathalie Moens (PGR) at the Euroscicon 5th Annual Cell Culture Technology Conference (2012) and guest blog invitations extended by Total Biopharma to Giulia Detela (PGR) to report on the 2013 and 2014 World Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Congress events. Rose Kinsella (UG) won the Cadzow Smith UK Engineering Student award in 2014. This was the first ever time the award was won by a female student and also the first time by a UCL student. Our male students are also high-achievers, with Udit Varma leading the student team that won the $10,000 prize as top Abbott Innovation University Challenge team 2011.

231

PGR team collect award at the House of Lords

42

Organisation and culture

a) Provide data for the past five years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance, how they have affected action planning, and any improvements since the department’s Silver award.

i) Male and female representation on committees – provide a breakdown by committee and explain any differences between male and female representation. Explain how potential members are identified.

Improved gender balance on departmental committees

Table 1 (p45) lists the main committees at departmental, faculty and university level and the female/male representation. A third of our female members of staff have been selected to sit on faculty or university-level committees. We have also increased female representation on internal high-level committees. Since our Silver award (Action 7.2) we have markedly increased the level of female PDRA representation on key Safety and Teaching Committees. 5 female and 3 male PDRAs nominated by the PDRA Forum have gained valuable experience of committee meeting and management procedures.

94

43

a) ii) Female:male ratio of academic and research staff on fixed-term contracts and open-ended (permanent) contracts – comment on any differences between male and female staff representation on fixed-term contracts and say what is being done to address them.

Outperforming national comparators for female PDRA and permanent staff

Figure 20 shows percentage female staff members of 42% for PDRAs (defined-term research positions) and 27% for permanent academic positions, both of which outperform the 2012/13 level of 26.6% female academic staff in Chemical Engineering, the highest percentage in any engineering subject area that year (source: ECU). Our long-term target is to achieve gender parity across both of these categories.

We are beginning to make this happen by providing PDRAs with an expanded portfolio of Teaching and Supervisory opportunities. Evidence of the success of this approach is Maria Villegas-Torres who has recently been appointed Associate Professor at Universidad Icesi Cali Columbia. 110

44

Figure 20. Gender ratio of staff on fixed and perm

anent contracts. Bars indicate the headcount of fem

ale (dark grey) and m

ale (light grey) staff from 2009/10 to 2014/15. The black triangle line graph represents the percentage fem

ale. The dashed green line indicates the 5 year average ratio of fem

ale staff on fixed term contracts (42%

) and the red dashed line indicates the 5 year average ratio of fem

ale staff on permanent term

contracts (27%).

45


i) Representation on decision-making committees – comment on evidence of gender balance in the mechanism for selecting representatives. What evidence is there that women are encouraged to sit on a range of influential committees inside and outside the department? How is the issue of ‘committee overload’ addressed where there are small numbers of female staff?

Female academics represented on all key decision-making committees

Our female chairs sit on two key decision-making committees: Finance and Senior Management (Table 1), both of which sit within core hours of 10am-4pm. This is a significant development since our Silver award (Action 7.1). Females chair an equal number of departmental committees to males (leaving aside those chaired by HoD). As a small department with six female staff we must strike a balance between the benefits to our committees of having gender diversity and the need for our female staff to have a balanced workload. As such we equalise the level of committee responsibility given to individual male and female staff members. The HoD assesses these loads every 6 months to ensure appropriate loads are achieved, and opportunities for career development shared. 131 Departmental Males Females Finance Committee 3** 1 Senior Management Team 4** 2 Teaching Committee 16 6* Recruitment Committee 4* 2 Staff / PG Student Consultative Committee 3 1* Staff / UG Student Consultative Committee 5* 1 Faculty Faculty Space Committee 1 0 Research Directors Forum 1 0 Faculty CDT Directors Forum 1* 0 Faculty Teaching & Learning Strategy 0 1 UCL Academic Board 2 0 GM Safety Committee 1 0 BBSRC Doctoral Training Programme 1 0 Engineering Impact 0 1 Table 1. Sitting Male and Female Committee members from UCL Biochemical Engineering Department. Asterisk indicates committee Chairperson. *Chair **HoD Chair

46

b) ii) Workload model – describe the systems in place to ensure that workload allocations, including pastoral and administrative responsibilities (including the responsibility for work on women and science) are taken into account at appraisal and in promotion criteria. Comment on the rotation of responsibilities e.g. responsibilities with a heavy workload and those that are seen as good for an individual’s career.

Four core activities underpin our 100% promotion success rate SMT Oversight Our SMT review the workloads of all academic staff across the four categories below. Staff members are encouraged to comment on their workload during appraisals and more frequently if necessary. Staff are also invited to review and revise their responsibilities with their mentor for guidance on how to achieve a well-balanced distribution of activities whilst advancing toward promotion targets. We believe this scrutiny and the HoD personal involvement are key to our 100% promotions success rate. We operate on the basis that there are no male-only or female-only roles. 1) Engagement with Biochemical Engineering Stakeholder and General Public All staff members contribute to dissemination of research outputs within the academic and industrial communities as well as to the wider public. 2) Teaching We provide teaching from undergraduate through to post experience, industry level and all permanent contract academic staff are required to contribute to and develop teaching initiatives at all levels. Teaching is a highly regarded part of our activities and formally acknowledged as such in the promotion criteria set out by the department. 3) Department and Colleges Systems All staff rotate through a range of ‘Enabling’ responsibilities, ranging from submitting proposals for the new UCL East site to chairing the SAT. This rotation allows a wider appreciation of overall departmental activities and prevents individual from being restricted to a particular role. Our approach is highly rated by Faculty managers for its transparency and fairness. 4) Research Funding and Outputs Funding and publishing research is core to the culture of the department. Staff can only succeed in these areas in concert with the three core activities above. All staff, irrespective of grade, are expected to deliver across all functions. This is crucial for promotion. A formal record of responsibilities in teaching, research, administrative and management activities is used to monitor work individual loads and to plan for changes as staff assume more demanding roles and as less experienced staff join.

331

47

b) iii) Timing of departmental meetings and social gatherings – provide evidence of consideration for those with family responsibilities, for example what the department considers to be core hours and whether there is a more flexible system in place. We understand that timing and providing sufficient notice is key to making our meetings and social gatherings successful. The latter have to be as open and welcome to as many staff as possible. We are particularly mindful of the fact that making caring arrangements can often be the crucial factor in deciding whether to attend an event and thus we aim to give people as much notice as possible. We run meetings between 10am-4pm and also start all social events no later than 4pm to give people the opportunity to attend but to still head home by early evening. This policy helps ensure very high levels of staff attendance. All departmental meetings necessary for the effective running of our research and teaching are entered into an online departmental calendar to inform staff well in advance. Staff can make arrangements to attend or ask for a change in time/date depending on the availability of colleagues. Where possible, remote access via teleconference or web-based video call can be arranged so that if someone is unable to attend a meeting they may still contribute. 181

Socialising at the departmental festive bake-off

48

b) iv) Culture –demonstrate how the department is female-friendly and inclusive. ‘Culture’ refers to the language, behaviours and other informal interactions that characterise the atmosphere of the department, and includes all staff and students.

A culture of equality and excellence by inclusion

Progress on gender equality requires buy-in from the entire department, from HoD to first year undergraduate. Unfortunately, patriarchal views, mind-sets and behaviours remain present to varying degrees in many academic communities and cultures in both the UK and globally. Our culture, of recognising and rewarding the individual, permeates all that we do. It is communicated effectively to students and colleagues both directly, in our visual and written culture, and also tacitly, in the way we relate to each other productively to ensure we all achieve our aims.

We maintain a team-based approach as our core value, with each staff member secure in the knowledge that they can carry out their research with any equipment and facility held by the Department. This mutual and complementary support pays dividends in terms of grant success and reinforces AS principles. 100% of permanent contract academic staff members are both teaching and research-active. This compares well with the 2012/13 national picture, where only 46.2% of UK female academic staff are in a ‘teaching and research’ role (source: ECU). Our research ranked as being of international standard in REF2014.

We support working from home when it is required, providing laptops and the necessary backup for internet video calls.

Our team-based structure feeds directly into our ability to maintain an esprit de corps that fosters acceptance of a diverse range of cultures, working styles, backgrounds and ideas. Women feature on an equal footing as a natural result of our culture. This is evidenced by our department response to the 2013 UCL Staff Survey in which 87% of our staff agreed that we respect diversity. In our biannual Team Briefing events our HoD, staff and students celebrate the latest achievements of the department and a wide range of people who have a stake in our department’s success. This ranges from news of positions people have taken outside the department to the performance of our students academically and socially.

Our HoD maintains a strong financial commitment to student-run UG and PG Societies who in turn are trusted with organising a broad range of social events including an annual Summer Barbecue and Christmas Ball and a series of satellite events such as a Mexican, Día de Muertos-themed Halloween 2014 event, a hypnotist event in 2013, cocktails night, bowling events and a steady flow of Pub Quizzes. All staff members, from eminent to emergent, participate in these events and activities with genuine enthusiasm. Our approach is to be responsive to new opportunities that broaden our students’ perspectives. 424

49

b) v) Outreach activities – comment on the level of participation by female and male staff in outreach activities with schools and colleges and other centres. Describe who the programmes are aimed at, and how this activity is formally recognised as part of the workload model and in appraisal and promotion processes.

Fostering the engagement habit

Valuing outreach: All outreach activities fall within UCL expectation of academic staff to demonstrate ‘Knowledge Transfer’ activity as part of a case for promotion. Our HoD has a strong track record in working with staff to put forward engagement activities as a significant part of promotion cases. We have built on our AS Silver work to play an expanded role in the Engineering Faculty “Women in Engineering Day” where approximately 200 prospective female students come to UCL for a day-long series of presentations and laboratory tours.

When planning outreach activities we take particular note of feedback from our students via Focus Group events. The following comment was particularly striking:

‘There needs to be a consideration of society outside UCL ! we should be going to industry and speaking to them, saying that more women are coming into the field, we are doing this to encourage them/be more welcoming, what is industry doing? That should be a conversation between academia, where there is change happening, and industry where it might not.’

Outreach excellence: One of our principal outreach activities is the Nuffield Scheme that has, since 2009, provided 40 Science Bursaries for students from schools and colleges to take 3-month research projects. Over half of the students are female and were targeted through liaison with schools to promote the benefits of female students participating in this prestigious scheme.

We operate several other outreach activities to schools aimed at building awareness of our discipline and encouraging enthusiastic students. Currently a female academic, Dr Yuhong Zhou, leads Headstart, a week-long programme of laboratories, workshops and lectures for 30-strong groups of 16-18 year old school pupils. On average 60% of the delegates are female. Teams of at least 6 PGR student supervisors are essential for delivering Headstart. Yuhong ensures 50% of this supervisory team is female (Action 1.3).

Future female leaders: Since 2013 we have worked closely with 16-18 year old pupils from the UCL Academy School (Action 1.1) participating in the international synthetic biology competition, iGEM. The iGEM competition requires pupils to go beyond laboratory research and engage with stakeholders in wider society. We provide laboratory facilities and recruit UCL student volunteers to supervise the pupils. From the outset we resolved to strongly encourage female pupils to participate in the competition with a view to at least achieving gender parity. 2013 and 2014 UCL Academy School iGEM teams have been 60% female (Figure 21). Instruction of both teams was led by a female UCL doctoral student, as is also the case for the 2015 team.

Athena SWAN is a key part of the narrative our department provides for school pupils. Our achievements with UCL Academy School are disseminated throughout the wider

50

UCL community and have set the pace for several follow-up collaborations with other UCL departments. 468

Figure 21. Percentage Female Pupils making up UCL Academy iGEM Teams. UCL Academy School data gathered by UCL Biochemical Engineering. Total competition data plotted by the 2013 Paris Bettencourt University iGEM team.

2013 UCL Academy School iGEM High School team

!"##$ !"#!$ !"#%$ !"#&$'(($)*'+,$'-*.$ %/$ &0$ &%$123$'4'5*+6$ 7"$ 7%$

#8$

%"$

&8$

7"$!"#$%

&'$"()"(*+,

"-$&%

."

51

Flexibility and managing career breaks

a) Provide data for the past five years (where possible with clearly labelled graphical illustrations) on the following with commentary on their significance, how they have affected action planning, and any improvements since the department’s Silver award.

i) Maternity return rate – comment on whether maternity return rate has improved or deteriorated and any plans for further improvement. If the department is unable to provide a maternity return rate, please explain why.

100% maternity return rate

The Department’s 100% maternity return rate has been maintained since the department was founded in 1998, with seven female staff members returning from maternity leave. As a department we celebrate new arrivals and congratulate parents and parenting milestones.

From speaking to colleagues in other departments and universities who have attended our AS knowledge-sharing events (Objective 11), we realise we have particularly benefited from an SMT for whom active caring roles are the norm and who are collectively determined to sustain a supportive culture for those experiencing these challenges at whatever stage in their career. 98

Female doctoral students lead many lab-based classes

52

a) ii) Paternity, adoption and parental leave uptake – comment on the uptake of paternity leave by grade and parental and adoption leave by gender and grade. Has this improved or deteriorated and what plans are there to improve further.

All our new fathers take paternity leave

All new fathers within the department have taken paternity leave. We do not take this for granted and continue to review our Staff Handbooks and induction procedures to ensure that our practices regarding paternity leave uptake are clear and simple. Since 2011 three academic staff members and one non-academic staff member have taken paternity leave. Since 2013 UCL has doubled its paternity provision to 4 weeks paid leave, which is highlighted in our staff handbook.

We have no recorded instances of adoption leave within the department. However, UCL procedures are in place to support any future requests of this nature.

UCL will introduce Shared Parental Leave (SPL) in April 2015 in which parents can share 52 weeks leave between them – either concurrently or alternatively. Staff at UCL can take this leave in up to 3 blocks (e.g. take 3 months, come back to work while their partner takes 3 months, then both take 2 months off together), and UCL has matched shared parental leave pay to maternity provision: 18 weeks full pay.

We are already making implementation plans in our SMT (Action 9.2) and Finance teams for SPL and our SAT has promoted SPL across all department committees and in our in weekly Now@BiochemEng departmental news email.

214

53

a) iii) Numbers of applications and success rates for flexible working by gender and grade – comment on any disparities. Where the number of women in the department is small applicants may wish to comment on specific examples.

UCL has a clear flexible working policy, defined in the ‘UCL Work Life Balance Policy’ document and all our staff, including our HoD, work flexibly when necessary. Requests for flexible working are agreed with HoD on an informal basis, to provide alternative staff working patterns. PDRAs also agree flexible working informally with their Principle Investigators (PIs) who ensure alternative routes to meeting research goals. In our 2015 departmental staff survey 88% of permanent and 95% of PDRA staff agreed or strongly agreed with the statement ‘The Department supports flexible working hours for academic staff and PDRAs.’

96

54


i) Flexible working – comment on the numbers of staff working flexibly and their grades and gender, whether there is a formal or informal system, the support and training provided for managers in promoting and managing flexible working arrangements, and how the department raises awareness of the options available.

The department’s policy is to support, wherever possible, work patterns and practices that meet the individual’s needs for maintaining a work-life balance. The HoD continues to use regular informal and formal one-to-one and whole staff meetings to promote this approach. Additional support is provided by UCL’s HR Consultancy Team, which can offer advice to managers on evaluating flexible working requests and provision of alternative working arrangements.

Academic staff members are aware that flexible working is available to all and that the department abides by UCL’s family-friendly policies. This includes the HoD and Deputy HoD, both of whom have had to leave highly visible and important work activities at very short notice to collect a child from school unexpectedly – sending a clear message that flexible working is valued and encouraged at all levels in the department by both men and women. 76% of our staff responded to the 2013 UCL staff survey, 75% agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement ‘My working time can be flexible’.

All 13 staff with caring responsibilities benefit from flexible working hours as a formal departmental policy. Extra flexibility is accepted as necessary at times and all staff members continue to benefit from this policy. Core hours are between 10am and 4pm with all staff meetings scheduled during these times.

214

55

b) ii) Cover for maternity and adoption leave and support on return – explain what the department does, beyond the university maternity policy package, to support female staff before they go on maternity leave, arrangements for covering work during absence, and to help them achieve a suitable work-life balance on their return.

Before and During Maternity Leave (ML): In preparation for ML the HoD and staff member will agree a plan for colleagues to support the leave period by modifying teaching provision and sharing responsibility for research supervision and bidding activities (Action 4.3). Historically, no member of the department has applied for adoption or SPL, however, the procedure would follow guidelines in place for maternity leave cover.

As part of our regular AS internal review process we detected issues affecting PDRAs on fixed-term contracts wishing to take maternity leave. Particular challenges arise in cases where the PDRA’s stipend is paid by an external institution (research council or industrial sponsor) or where the researcher is the citizen of a nation outside the EU. Such issues have also affected PGR students (Action A4.7) who have taken maternity leave and as a result needed to extend their student Visa and their funding period. To address this we use tutorial meetings and our Student Handbook to connect students with our partners in the UCLU Rights and Advice Centre (URAC). We also liaise directly with URAC to ensure our process and messages are as useful and as accurate as possible. PDRAs are directed to central UCL HR services by the information in the Staff Handbook and through PI discussions. To date all instances of PDRA and PGR student maternity leave have been successfully managed with respect to work responsibilities and academic progress.

Returning from ML: Encouraging and enabling staff returning from maternity leave is a central tenet of Departmental policy. Provision of departmentally supported home IT facilities, to support flexible working, has remained a highly effective working policy since our AS Silver award. This is extended to pre-maternity leave in discussion with the HoD.

Since 2009 our departmental policy has been to provide academic staff one term of teaching-free sabbatical leave when returning from maternity leave in order to focus on research activity, which all female staff have used to date. This approach became UCL policy in 2013. Our HoD fully supports this provision and encourages days in which staff can opt to come into work to assess progress and developments if they so wish.

Adaptability and flexibility is key in responding to an individual’s maternity leave needs. Everyone is different; some feel more anxious if they do not have a first hand feel for developments at work, others want a complete focus on home life when a new-born arrives. Since AS Silver we have provided information on the range of Maternity Leave options (Action 8.1) as part of our emailed invites to events such as ‘Tea at Three’ and the ‘Now@Biochem Eng’ newsletter. 440


56

5. Any other comments: maximum 500 words. Please comment here on any other elements relevant to the application, e.g. other STEMM-specific initiatives of special interest that have not been covered in the previous sections. Include any other relevant data (e.g. results from staff surveys), provide a commentary on it and indicate how the department plans to address any gender disparities identified.

Leading by example

Although responses to our staff surveys have been overwhelmingly positive, some respondents highlighted the need for on-going discussion of home working, female representation and clarity regarding promotion. We are full-committed to keep this dialogue open and meaningful in terms of feedback and actions. Bio/Chemical Engineering Academia: We arranged 2014 and 2015 workshops (Action A11.1) for HoDs and senior staff in aligned disciplines at University of Cambridge, Westminster and London Southbank, who have submitted AS assessments, either at department or University level to share experiences and best practice. BioIndustry: Industrial and academic sectors work extremely closely together in this field. It is therefore key that aspirant female academics feel confident both spheres will treat them fairly. Feedback from our 2015 UG and PG student focus group revealed the need (Action A11.4) for us to take steps: “Industry ! has the potential to be a lot more sexist ! it can be quite intimidating with lots of men in suits ! I have been quite annoyed by not having my voice heard in these groups, part of which may have been because I am a young woman.” We are committed to promoting gender equality to industry. When opening Bioprocess UK 2014, attended by 20 universities and 25 companies, our HoD highlighted AS and the commercial benefits of promoting women’s careers. Prof. Eli Keshavarz-Moore introduces AS principles when presenting to industrialists at Bioprocessing Research Industry Club meetings that bring together commercial and academic bioprocessing communities, and also the Vision programme of workshops and seminars for senior executives. Our SAT liaises with the steering committee of our Modular Training for the Bioprocess Industries (MBI®) programme to define actions for addressing industry attitudes, realities and student perceptions. We use social media (Action A11.3) to promote our activities, linking to 8 AS Departments via Twitter. UCL and AS: We seek to inspire departments in UCL and beyond to engage with the AS agenda. In March 2015 we led a 'UCL HoDs Athena SWAN' event (Action A11.2) with Michael Arthur, UCL President and Provost, and HoDs from STEMM Departments and, critically, their SAT leads. Senior staff from arts and humanities faculties also attended. Professor Arthur opened the event, setting out his views on gender equality, with HoDs discussing the benefits of AS and challenges to progressing gender equality within the academy.

57

Supporting achievement for Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) Researchers: Our AS journey since 2009 has formalised the principles on which our department was founded in 1998. A similar process now begins for us with UCL’s participation in the ECU Race Charter Mark Trial 2015. Historically a diverse department, we are committed to supporting this process (Action G8.1), starting with our membership of UCL Race Equality Network, that will facilitate the exchange of ideas and awareness-raising of race equality issues. We also encourage our BME researchers to join the B-MEntor programme. Our alumnus, Hajera Begum, was elected 2014 BME Students' Officer and will be consulted on student perspectives.


58

6. Action plan. Provide an action plan as an appendix. An action plan template is available on the Athena SWAN website. This should be a table or a spread sheet comprising plans to address the priorities identified by the analysis of relevant data presented in this application, success/outcome measures, the post holder responsible for each action and a timeline for completion. The Plan should cover current initiatives and your aspirations for the next three years.

2011-2015 Action Plan Original Actions This first Action Plan details the Original Actions specifically stated in our Athena SWAN Silver Award self-assessment document and their impacts. These Actions can be conveniently identified by the presence of the word Silver in bold in the column entitled ‘Identified need for action’. All the Original Actions in this Action Plan are numbered 1.1, 1.2 etc. and are indicated in bold in the body text of Sections 1-6 as in this example: (Action 1.2).

Additional Actions Throughout the July 2011- April 2015 period Additional Actions have been agreed by our SAT. These were initiated and positively impacted our Objectives. These are also detailed in this first Action Plan and can be identified by the presence of the word Additionally in the column entitled ‘Identified need for action’. All the Additional Actions in this Action Plan are numbered A1.3, A1.4 etc. and are indicated in bold in the body text of Sections 1-6 as in this example: (Action A1.4).

2015-2018 Gold Action Plan Future Actions This second Action Plan details Actions discussed and agreed by our SAT to be initiated over the coming three years. These Future Actions are numbered G1.1, G1.2 etc. and are indicated in bold in the body text of Sections 1-6 as in this example: (Action G1.2).

59

Action Plan: July 2011- A

pril 2015

Original O

bjectives Defined in our 2011 Silver A

ward Self A

ssessment D

ocument

&

Additional O

bjectives Set Out D

uring the July 2011- April 2015 Period

Objective 1 Increase fem

ale applicants to UG

degrees (Target: Achieve parity)

Objective 2 M

aintain current number of U

G fem

ale students acceptances O

bjective 3 Prom

ote PG

T and PG

R opportunities to fem

ale UG

students O

bjective 4 Increase our retention of PG

R and P

DR

A fem

ales into Lecturer positions O

bjective 5 Increase number of fem

ale applicants to staff positions O

bjective 6 Support fem

ale staff mem

bers to develop well-suited international presence

Objective 7 Increase w

omen representation at high level com

mittees

Objective 8 E

nsure maternity/paternity leave and support at career breaks

Objective 9 E

nsure transparency and fairness of operation in academic progression

Objective 10 D

rive higher levels of female achievem

ent throughout department

Objective 11 A

ct as a beacon of good practice to other groups in the HE

sector

60

Objective 1 Increase fem

ale applicants to UG

degrees (Target: Achieve parity)

Identified need for action A

ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

identified that less than 50%

of students applying to our U

G program

mes w

ere fem

ale.

1.1 Add girls-only secondary

schools to recruitment system

(invitation to visit, send m

ail shots).

Action com

pleted: target schools contacted and on-going relationship established.

Recruit-

ment

Team

SA

T N

uffield Lead

The average proportion of fem

ale applicants is 44%

over the 2009-2014 period. Tw

o all-girls schools booked 25 places each for our 2015 event w

ith the IChem

E

entitled ‘Personal Journeys

through Engineering as told

by Wom

en in Industry’.

P13

P49

1.2 Advertise degrees to

female applicants by

including quotes from fem

ale alum

ni and positive images of

a diversity of engineers in UG

B

iochemical E

ngineering leaflet.

Action com

pleted: m

aterial distributed to target schools.

Qualitative indication of

positive perception from

student Focus Group

comm

ent: “The department

makes great efforts in getting

wom

en to feel accepted.”

P13

1.3 Monitor gender balance in

Nuffield S

cience Schem

e. A

ction completed: O

n-going m

onitoring procedure fully im

plemented.

55% fem

ale student intake on N

uffield studentships across period 2009-2014.

P20

P49

Additionally, in 2013 w

e observed that, although w

e had succeeded in attracting m

ore male students to our

UG

programm

es, we had

not achieved a matching or

higher increase in female

acceptances.

A1.4 Increase the visibility to

UK

and overseas students of our fem

ale UG

achievements

and successes.

Action ongoing: Tw

o full tim

e staff mem

bers appointed in 2014 w

ith rem

it covering student engagem

ent and com

munications. 3 large

flat-screen monitors in

reception spaces within

our building updated by all staff w

ith news of

student achievement.

PS

T S

AT



student 2015 Student Focus

Group com

ment: “It feels that

other engineering departm

ents definitely have m

ore men than w

omen but

our department is

refreshingly well balanced.”

P13

61

Objective 2 M

aintain current number of U

G fem

ale students acceptances


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

considered that SA

T decision-m

aking could benefit from

access to data on gender, entry level and geographical location of student applicants accepting places on our U

G

programm

es.

2.1 Create, update and

monitor a departm

ental database of U

G data

including information on

applications, offers, acceptances by location (overseas, U

K, E

U) and A

-levels or equivalent classification on entry.

Action com

pleted: database in place.

Recruit-

ment

PS

T

Task force put in place headed by D

r Tarit M

ukhopadhyay to define actions as a result of analyses of data from

this database resource.

P13

2.2 Ensure fem

ale representation at U

G, P

G and

staff level to act as am

bassadors at UC

AS

interview

s, during Q&

A

sessions, tours and departm

ent open days.

Action com

pleted: H

igh level of female

involvement in these

recruitment activities

achieved and m

aintained by m

onitoring.

Recruit-

ment

PS

T

Gender parity achieved for all

parent-facing and student-facing team

s delivering U

CA

S open days, interview

s and activities.

P13

P20

Objective 3 P

romote P

GT and P

GR

opportunities to female U

G students


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

reflected that SA

T decision-m


information on retention

numbers and destination of

PG

T and PG

R students.

3.1 Create a departm

ental database of destination statistics of our U

G, P

GT and

PG

R students.

Action com

pleted: database designed and populated.

PS

T R

etention of a 40% ratio of

female to m

ale students from

PG

T and PG

R through to

Researcher in 2012/13.

P15

P30

Fig 17

62

Objective 3 contd P

romote P

GT and P

GR

opportunities to female U

G students


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

noted a low num

ber of fem

ale applications to EngD

program

me in com

parison to P

hD.

3.2 Develop a survey for final

year UG

and PG

T students to identify their interests, aspiration, and perception of a future academ

ic career and the characteristics of their ideal P

G degree.

Action com

pleted: survey designed and populated on E

xam

Board day w

hen results and prizes announced.

UG

Tutor P

ST

Survey com

pletion is linked to joining our LinkedIn D

epartment N

etwork that has

grown to approaching 1000

mem

bers since its 2009 launch.

P15

3.3 Ensure equal split (F/M

) in internal departm

ental selection of U

G candidates

for research bursaries applications such as the E

PS

RC

Vacation B

ursary S

cheme.

Action com

pleted: an equal gender split of V

acation Bursary

students has been met.

Ratio of fem

ale:male

students offered Vacation

Bursaries has achieved

parity over the 2011-2015 period. D

r Iris Luke, our new

Industrial Outreach

appointment, w

ill conduct on-going m

onitoring.

P20

3.4 Produce interview

s of current E

ngD fem

ale students for inclusion in Industrial D

octoral Training Centre

recruitment m

aterial (at C

ollege-wide level), including

our quarterly magazine,

BioP

rocess Matters.

Action com

pleted: interview

s collated and included in recruitm

ent m

aterial.

IDTC

D

irector P

ST

PG

-S

SC

C

Raito of fem

ale:male E

ngD

students has risen steadily since 2011 to achieve parity average of >40%

from

2013/14 to 2014/15.

P19

P23

P18

Fig 5

Additionally, in 2013 our

percentage female

applicants for PG

T degrees fell below

40% for only the

second time in 11 years.

A3.5 B

id for Santander

Catalyst to understand better

the cultural and financial factors that influence levels of fem

ale application and acceptance of offers.

Action ongoing: B

id subm

itted. Aw

ard decision due sum

mer

2015.

Recruit-

ment

SA

T

Female P

GT applications

boosted to >50% since

2013/14 intake. S

ee also new actions:

G2.2-G

2.4

P22

Fig 8

63

Objective 4 Increase our retention of P

GR

and PD

RA

females into Lecturer positions


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

reflected that our PG

R

handbook and departmental

website content w

as not tailored to specifically encourage fem

ale students or job applicants.

4.1 Raise aw

areness of opportunities such as w

orkshops organized by U

CL’s G

ender Equality

Schem

e and Research

Council gender-focused

Initiatives. Use routes

including PG

R student

Induction talks, departmental

team briefing and research

seminars.

Action com

pleted: Tailored inform

ation now

provided.

HoD

P

ST

SA

T

Retention of a 40%

ratio of fem

ale to male students from

P

DR

A through to Lecturer.

See also new

action: G3.1

P29

Fig 16

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

realised that, outside of tutorials, no form

al routes w

ere in place for providing career advice to P

GT and

PG

R students.

4.2 Develop an academ

ic-career focused m

entoring schem

e for motivated and

skilled female P

GT and P

GR

students.

Action com

pleted: m

entoring scheme rolled

out and publicised to all P

GT and P

GR

students, 100%

of whom

will m

eet their m

entors during Term

3 IEP

activities.

PG

Tutor M

Sc

Tutors

Retention of a 40%

ratio of fem

ale to male students from

P

GT and P

GR

through to R

esearcher.

P35

P29

Fig 16

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

noted that we need a w

ell-defined policy on m

aternity cover posts.

4.3 Ensure academ

ic staff m

aternity cover posts are offered to current fem

ale P

DR

As.

Action com

pleted: procedure in place.

HoD

P

ST

Our policy of m

aking academ

ic maternity cover

posts available to female

PD

RA

s is now fully in place

in readiness for the next staff m

ember seeking m

aternity leave.

P55

Additionally, in 2012 it

emerged from

dialogue that our P

DR

A cadre w

ould benefit from

a forum w

hich encouraged full and frank discussion of the challenges and opportunities of P

DR

A

work.

A4.4 E

stablish PD

RA

Forum

to represent PD

RA

s and respond to P

DR

A career

development needs.

Action com

pleted: Forum

in place. P

DR

A

Forum

SA

T


PD

RA

perceptions from our

2015 PD

RA

Survey. 90%

of fem

ale respondents Agreed

or Strongly A

greed with the

statement ‘M

y colleagues are supportive of m

e and I feel like one of the team

.’

P36

64

Objective 4 contd Increase our retention of P

GR

and PD

RA

females into Lecturer positions


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig


e concluded that our P

GR

students could benefit hugely by being given the opportunity to not only supervise U

G student

projects but to devise the projects them

selves.

A4.5 P

rovide all Year 2 P

GR

students w

ith the opportunity to devise and supervise a one-w

eek research project for com

pletion by UG

students.

Action com

pleted: S

upervision of our UG

P

ilot Plant W

eek research activity is now

delivered by P

GR

students supported by R

AFT.

Grad.

Tutor Q

ualitative indication of positive perception from

student 2015 S

tudent Focus G

roup comm

ent: “Everyone

is just treated as a colleague.”

P39


e recognised that P

DR

As

must often acquire a track

record in teaching to secure a perm

anent post, despite w

orking in a role in which

research is the top priority.

A4.6 P

rovide all PD

RA

s with

opportunity to devise and deliver lectures or related teaching m

aterials

Action com

pleted: All

PD

RA

s have been offered teaching responsibilities since m

id-2014.

Grant

Holders

SM

T

Qualitative indication from

2015 P

DR

A S

urvey. 90% of

female respondents A

greed or S

trongly Agreed w

ith statem

ent ‘My m

anager actively encourages staff to take up career developm

ent opportunities, irrespective of gender.’

P36


e concluded that m

aternity leave policies for non-E

U

PG

R students funded by

non-UC

L sources should be clarified.

A4.7 E

nsure students are aw

are of UC

L Student U

nion R

ights and Advice C

entre.

Action com

pleted: Inform

ation provided w

ith student induction m

aterials.

Super-

visors P

DR

As


perception from student 2015

Student Focus G

roup com

ment: “The departm

ent has a very w

elcoming

atmosphere full stop, it

doesn’t matter w

hether you’re a m

an or a wom

an.”

P55


e considered, in consultation w

ith our RA

FT, that PD

RA

s have no ‘shop w

indow’ on

our website to present their

skills and experience to the external jobs m

arket.

A4.8 R

aise profile of PD

RA

s w

ithin the department by

offering a research page on the w

ebsite to all post-docs.

Action com

pleted: by D

r Ruth O

’Donnell, our

Outreach,

Com

munications and

Adm

inistration lead, has coordinated these w

eb pages.

PS

T 65%

of male and 100%

of fem

ale PD

RA

s have researcher profiles on the departm

ent website. A

ll will

continue to be strongly encouraged to upload and update their online profiles.

P36

65

Objective 5 Increase num

ber of female applicants to staff positions


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

judged that SA

T decision-m


information on applications,

offers and acceptances during P

DR

A and

Perm

anent Academ

ic staff position recruitm

ent.

5.1 Developm

ent of departm

ental database with

information on job

advertisement, applications,

offers and acceptances including gender split, interview

panel composition.

Action com

pleted: database created.

PS

T S

AT

40% of our P

DR

As are

female, despite the total

cohort almost doubling in

size since 2011. For 4 years out of 5 since 2011, 50%

of both our Lecturers and R

eaders have been female.

Appointm

ent of UC

L PhD

alum

nus Brenda P

arker as Lecturer at U

CL.

Appointm

ent of UC

L PhD

alum

nus Maria V

illegas-Torres as A

ssociate P

rofessor at Universidad

Icesi Cali, C

olumbia.

P28

P29

Fig 16 P

30 Fig 17

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) our review

process highlighted that the gender balance of interview

panels is not m

onitored.

5.2 Develop a transparent

formal m

echanism to

establish gender balance of each interview

panel.

Action com

pleted: Interview

dates and panels now

organised by P

ST w

ho ensure aw

areness of and com

pliance with policy.

PS

T G

rant H

olders S

MT

33% fem

ale representation U

CL target m

et.

P35

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

considered that the content of our adverts w

as not coordinated as part of overall departm

ental strategy w

ith respect to advancing w

omen’s careers

in academe.

5.3 Establish focus group on

advert writing.

Action com

pleted: focus group in place, headed first by P

ST

and, since mid-2014, by

Dr R

uth O’D

onnell, our O

utreach, C

omm

unications and A

dministration lead.

PS

T 100%

of job advertisements

now review

ed in light of wider

departmental strategy.

P35

66


e review

ed our level of female

appointments and fem

ale applications, w

hich, although high, m

ust be maxim

ised as part of im

pacting the number

of females in senior

academic roles.

A5.4 S

AT to independently

scrutinise 2011 and 2012 C

Vs and covering letters

submitted for P

DR

A and

Perm

anent Academ

ic roles.

Action ongoing: 2015

report in preparation w

ith comm

ents, notable observations em

erging from

a complex picture.

SA

T Q

ualitative indication of P

DR

A perceptions from

our 2015 P

DR

A S

urvey; 90% of

respondents Agreed or

Strongly A

greed with the

statement ‘Individuals in the

department are treated on

their merits irrespective of

their gender.’

P32

Objective 6 S

upport female staff m

embers to develop w

ell-suited international presence Identified need for action

Action

Outcom

e Lead

Impact

Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we cam

e to the conclusion that no form

al system/support w

as in place to prom

ote female

staff participation at international conferences

6.1 Raise aw

areness of the im

portance of international participation as form

al prom

otion criterion. Work to

identify suitable cover and any other support for w

omen

wishing to m

ake international trips.

Action com

pleted: International conference attendance is a standing item

for all annual appraisals and prom

otion mentoring.

SM

T S

AT

PS

T

Prof S

uzy Farid Co-C

hairing International conference in U

SA

, Prof E

li Keshavarz-

Moore C

o-Chairing

International conference in P

ortugal.

P36


omen representation at high level com

mittees


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

judged that high level D

epartmental, Faculty and

College com

mittees could

benefit from greater

involvement of fem

ale staff m

embers in term

s of broadening the diversity of perspectives available.

7.1 Ensure participation in

UC

L Wom

en in Leadership and M

anagement project, led

by Prof A

tkinson, aiming at

increasing the number of

wom

en with the skills and

experience necessary to apply for a m

anagement post

or involvement in U

CL senior

comm

ittees.

Action com

pleted: U

CL P

roject concluded in 2012.

SM

T M

artina Micheletti

participated in the UC

L W

omen in Leadership and

Managem

ent project in 2011 and in 2012 w

as appointed as S

enior Lecturer.

P45

67

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

established that there was

no formal m

echanism to

ensure staff turnover and opportunities w

ithin intra-departm

ental comm

ittees.

7.2 Establish and form

alise a new

mechanism

for selecting representatives that invites perm

anent and PD

RA

staff to propose a com

mittee he/she

would like to be involved in.

Such proposal can be

individually discussed during the yearly appraisal.

Action com

pleted: incorporated into annual appraisal.

SM

T G

rant H

olders

All staff m

embers sit on

internal comm

ittee within 12

months of appointm

ent.

P42

Objective 8 E

nsure maternity/paternity leave and support at career breaks


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

examined the inform

ation we

provide regarding Research

Councils P

DR

A m

aternity leave policies and concluded they should be clarified.

8.1 Review

maternity leave

policy with P

DR

A funders

through meetings w

ith UC

L H

uman R

esources and external bodies if necessary.

Action com

pleted: policies now

clearly defined before appointm

ent.

HoD

Q

ualitative indication of P

DR

A perceptions from

our 2015 P

DR

A S

urvey. 60% of

female respondents A

greed w

ith the statement ‘The

Departm

ent has clear and transparent policies and practices to support their academ

ic staff and PD

RA

s upon return from

long leave.’

P55

Objective 9 E

nsure transparency and fairness of operation in academic progression


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig

During our Silver A

ward

period (2009-2011) we

reflected that transparency and fairness of how

we

manage academ

ic progression should be com

municated as clearly as

possible.

9.1 Develop departm

ent w

ebsite content detailing internal, Institutional and external gender equality initiatives. P

rovide our AS

subm

ission document online.

Highlight our A

S activities in

our staff and student H

andbooks.

Action com

pleted: R

uth O’D

onnell, our O

utreach, C

omm

unications and A

dministration lead, has

coordinated these web

pages.

SA

T P

ST

Qualitative indication of S

taff perceptions from

our 2015 S

taff Survey. 100%

of female

respondents Strongly A

greed w

ith the statement ‘If I apply

for promotion I am

confident I have an equal chance of success, irrespective of m

y gender.’

13

68

[as above] D

uring our Silver Aw

ard period (2009-2011) w

e reflected that transparency and fairness of how

we

manage academ

ic progression should be com

municated as clearly as

possible.

9.2 Write up policies and

procedures stemm

ing from

the AS

process into a B

iochemical E

ngineering G

ender Equalities H

andbook (for departm

ental distribution to staff and students).

Action com

pleted: by D

r Ruth O

’Donnell, our

Com

munications lead,

has coordinated these actions.

SA

T P

ST

Qualitative indication of S

taff perceptions from

our 2015 S

taff Survey. 100%

of female

respondents Agreed or

Strongly A

greed with the

statement ‘I understand the

promotions process and am

clear about the required criteria.’

P52

Additionally, in late 2012

we review

ed progress since 2009 and also took note of anecdotal evidence that som

e staff felt that the publication m

etrics for prom

otion could be more

clearly set out.

A9.3 Incorporated a

‘Prom

otion: Self-evaluation’

element of appraisal

documents that staff m

ust com

plete prior to appraisal m

eetings.

Action com

pleted: S

tep implem

ented by H

oD and D

eputy HoD

, P

rof. Gary Lye

SM

T 100%

success rate of prom

otion applications throughout the history of the D

epartment.

P37

Objective 10 D

rive higher levels of female achievem

ent throughout department


ction O

utcome

Lead Im

pact Page / Fig


e concluded that, since 2009, w

e have never reached or exceeded 50%

of female U

G

students achieving a 1:1, although w

e have exceeded 50%

of female U

G students

achieving a 2:1.

A10.1 Leverage our all-tim

e high num

bers of female

PD

RA

s as role models by

providing them w

ith opportunities to teach, supervise and m

entor female

UG

s.

Action ongoing: 100%

of fem

ale PD

RA

S

starting in 2014 have been active in teaching and supervision activities.

SA

T P

DR

A

Forum



student 2015 Student Focus

Group com

ment: “The

department has a very

friendly atmosphere, and

encourages every student, no m

atter their background, to achieve their full potential.” S

ee also new action: G

3.2

P24

Fig 10 P

25 Fig 11 Fig 12

69


e noted that the upw

ard trend in the num

ber of Distinctions

being achieved by females

on our PG

T programm

es w

as very gradual.

A10.2 A

ccelerate female

achievement through greater

harmonisation of M

Sc and

Fourth Year M

Eng

programm

es.

Action com

pleted: M

aster Degree Tutors

and Teaching C

omm

ittee discussed and agreed details of how

to harmonise better

these Masters

programm

es.

SA

T M

asters Tutors

Program

me am

endment

proposal documents

approved by external exam

iner and departmental,

faculty and university teaching com

mittees for

2015/16 start. S


2.4

P26

Fig 13 Fig 14

Objective 11 A


sector Identified need for action

Action

Outcom

e Lead

Impact

Page / Fig


e noted that our equivalent D

epartments at other U

K

Universities are beginning

their AS

journey, as we did

in 2009, and, as we already

have a close working

relationship with these

Departm

ents, we are w

ell positioned to share our experiences of A

S.

A11.1 O

rganise UK

B

io/Chem

ical Engineering

Departm

ents and Athena

SW

AN

workshops.

Action com

pleted: V

ery valuable insights have been shared w

ith 3 com

parator Biochem

ical E

ngineering-type D

epartments.

SE

T O

ngoing comm

itment to

apply for AS

Aw

ard status by of C

ambs C

EB

Dept., U

. W

estminster D

ept. Life S

ciences and London S

outhbank University D

ept. C

hemical and P

rocess E

ngineering

P56


e considered the absolutely critical im

portance of HoD

buy-in for A

S success. W

e also considered the challenges to H

oD buy-in for

Departm

ents very different from

our own, in term

s of size, subject area or other m

etrics.

A11.2 E

stablish UC

L-wide A

S

event that demands the

attention of HoD

s that may

not currently be AS

-engaged by being led by M

ichael A

rthur, the UC

L President

and Provost.

Action com

pleted: E

vent delivered in M

arch 2015.

SA

T In addition to the attendance of S

TEM

M D

epartments,

Faculty Managers of tw

o Arts

and Hum

anities Faculties attended this A

S event.

P56

70

Objective 11 contd A


sector Identified need for action

Action

Outcom

e Lead

Impact

Page / Fig


e review

ed the growing role of

social media in the

dissemination and exchange

of new A

S practices,

activities and AS

-relevant new

s.

A11.3 Launch Tw

itter account for U

CL B

iochemical

Engineering A

S activities and

Twitter List of A

S

Departm

ental Twitter

accounts.

Action com

pleted: A

ccount and List set up sum

mer 2014.

SA

T 66 Tw

itter followers including

Loughborough U. S

chool of E

ngineering Adm

issions Tutor and E

xeter University

Centre for G

eography, E

nvironment and S

ociety

P56

Additionally, our 2015

focus group revealed student concerns regarding fem

ale students’ opportunities for success in bio-industry. A

s this is the principle sector on w

hich our training is focused, this is of particular concern to us.

A11.4 P

romote the benefits of

female engagem

ent and success through our industrial sem

inar organisers and com

munication w

ith attendees of our industry-facing activities such as M

BI

and Vision.

Action com

pleted: All

our staff devote effort to affirm

ing our AS

-com

mitm

ent in all industry-facing situations.

All staff

The average number of

images of fem

ale industrialists per edition of our ‘B

ioProccessing M

atters’, m

agazine has trebled from 2

per edition in 2007-2011 to 6 per edition in 2012-2014. S


8.5

P56

71

2015-2018 Gold A

ction Plan

Future Actions to be Launched during 2015-2018

Objective 1 A

chieve gender parity of applicants to UG

degrees O

bjective 2 Achieve gender parity of students across all departm

ent degree programm

es O

bjective 3 Achieve gender parity of P

DR

A researchers

Objective 4 A

chieve gender parity across Lecturer, Senior Lecturer and R

eader levels O

bjective 5 Increase wom

en representation on all comm

ittees O

bjective 6 Launch shared parental leave O

bjective 7 Clarify how

we ensure fairness in academ

ic progression O

bjective 8 Deepen and beacon our com

mitm

ent to equality

72

Objective 1 A

chieve gender parity of applicants to UG

degrees

Previous Actions

New

Action

Responsibility

Timescale

Success Measures

G1.1

Action 1.1

Expand fem

ale-targeted invitations to include m

ixed-gender schools, including supporting U

CL

Academ

y iGE

M.

Recruitm

ent Team

Ruth O

’Donnell

Em

ail school invites through S

eptember and O

ctober annually from

2015.

Increasing total num

ber of female

school pupils visiting departm

ent.

G1.2

Action 1.1

Annual review

of text and im

ages in promotional

materials as S

AT agenda

item.

Recruitm

ent Team

Ruth O

’Donnell

Annual review

of materials

every January. Increasing ratio of m

ixed-gender schools visiting departm

ent.

G1.3

Action 1.2

Action 1.3

Action A

1.4 A

ction 2.1

2-3 staff fact-finding m

issions to visit overseas schools. M

onitor perceptions of U

K, E

U and overseas

students viewing our

website w

ith a popup survey.

Recruitm

ent Team

Ruth O

’Donnell

SA

T

Septem

ber 2015 with strategic

review in 2016

Insights gained from

overseas staff visits fed back to S

AT.

Data on prospective

students’ perceptions of the subject and the departm

ent captured by online surveys.

Objective 2 A

chieve gender parity of students across all department degree program

mes

Previous Actions

New

Actions

Responsibility

Timescale

Success Measure

G2.1

In 2014 our SA

T observed (P

20, P21,

Fig 7) a fall in the proportion of accepted offers by fem

ale students for our U

G degrees.

System

atise data capture during U

CA

S

process and explore new

routes to capture further data that can also provide useful insight. S

hare data at Staff and

Recruitm

ent meetings to

agree actions.

Task force from:

Recruitm

ent Team

SA

T

Analyse 2015/16 in July 2016

Analyse 2016/17 in July 2017

UC

AS

cycles

Generation of a

quantitative data set that captures inform

ation on initial and final choices m

ade by pupils and the factors influencing these decisions.

73

G2.2

Action 3.4

Continue m

onitoring of P

GT and P

GR

adverts, applications and review

ing strategy to m

aintain gender parity. D

evelop female case

studies for the websites

for each of our two

DTC

s.

DTC

Mgm

t Cttees

Ruth O

’Donnell

Update w

ebsite from July 2016

detailing achievements of

female M

asters, PhD

and E

ngD students from

2014/15 intake.

Ratio of fem

ale students taking E

ngD

degrees, ideally achieving parity.

G2.3

Action A

4.5 M

onitor progress of P

GR

-student supervision of U

G and P

GT project

teams, ensuring M

ale / Fem

ale pairs of PG

R

students provide supervision.

SA

T D

octoral Cttee

DTC

Mgm

t Cttees

Module O

rganiser

Review

UG

and PG

R student

feedback annually. Review

this activity in 2016.

Student feedback

indicates satisfaction w

ith the gender balance of project supervision team

s via survey responses and feedback on relevant courses.

G2.4

Action A

10.2 M

onitor levels of female

achievement on P

GT

programm

es and student satisfaction w

ith new

harmonised

programm

es.

Masters Tutors

SA

T

Review

PG

T student feedback annually. R

eview this activity in

2016.

2-3 Case S

tudies in place signalling success of m

ale and fem

ale PG

R students.

Objective 3 A

chieve gender parity of PD

RA

researchers

A

ctions to date N

ew A

ctions R

esponsibility Tim

escale Success M

easure G

3.1 A

ction 4.1 E

nsure information

regarding Gender and

Race E

quality initiatives rem

ains an embedded

element of P

DR

A

induction procedures and briefings.

PS

T S

AT

Annual review

every January. C

ompose 2015/16 staff/student

survey to measure aw

areness.

>80% of P

DR

As

demonstrated their

awareness of G

ender and R

ace Equality

initiatives in their responses to 2015/16 staff survey.

G3.2

Action 4.2

Increase take-up of schem

e whereby P

DR

As

formally m

entor UG

, P

GT and P

GR

students.

SA

T January 2016

75% P

DR

As report

having a mentee in

PD

RA

Survey.

74

Objective 3 contd A

chieve gender parity of PD

RA

researchers

A

ctions to date N

ew A

ctions R

esponsibility Tim

escale Success M

easure G

3.3 A

ction A4.4

Feedback from

PD

RA

Forum

Clarify, and / or develop

with central U

CL, options

for formally recognising

the teaching responsibilities undertaken by P

DR

As.

HoD

January 2016

75% P

DR

As achieve

formal recognition of

teaching responsibilities.

G3.4

Action A

4.4

Canvas P

DR

As through

the PD

RA

Forum to

establish training needs. Inform

Forum of

available UC

L training on grant-w

riting/ fellowship

applications.

SA

T June 2016

>80% of P

DR

As

indicate satisfaction w

ith availability of training opportunities in 2015/16 staff/student survey.

G3.5

Action A

4.6 M

onitor progress of P

DR

A supervision of

PG

R project team

s, ensuring M

ale / Female

pairs of PD

RA

s provide supervision.

SA

T D

octoral Cttee

Module O

rganiser

Review

PD

RA

and student feedback annually. R

eview this

activity in 2016.

PD

RA

and student feedback indicates satisfaction w

ith gender balance of project supervision team

s via survey responses and course feedback.

G3.6

Action A

4.7 E

nsure all supervisor and P

DR

As aw

are of support available at U

CL

Student U

nion Rights

and Advice C

entre for non-E

U P

GR

students.

SA

T D

octoral Cttee

DTC

Mgm

t Cttees

Module O

rganiser

Decem

ber 2015 >80%

of PD

RA

s dem

onstrated aw

areness of UC

L S

tudent Union R

ights and A

dvice Centre for

non-EU

PG

R students

in their responses to 2015/16 P

DR

A

survey. G

3.7 A

ction A4.8

Ensure P

DR

As provide

web profile content as

integral part of New

S

tarter induction.

SA

T P

ST

Decem

ber 2015 100%

of PD

RA

s’ research profiles are displayed on departm

ent website.

75

Objective 4 A

chieve gender parity across Lecturer, Senior Lecturer and R

eader levels

Actions to date

New

Actions

Responsibility

Timescale

Success Measure

G4.1

Action 5.2

Boost fem

ale representation on academ

ic panels above 33%

.

SA

T G

rant holders

January 2017 W

ill require collaboration beyond our departm

ent to protect fem

ale staff workloads

and schedules.

Gender parity

achieved for average interview

panel m

akeup.

G4.2

Action 5.3

In 2014 our SA

T reflected on a lack of strategic oversight of adverts w

ith respect to equality agenda

PS

T Manager to attend

UC

L course: RO

ME

S

ystem Training P

art 1: A

dvert Creation and

Placem

ent and feed back insights to S

AT.

PS

T S

AT

January 2016 100%

of job advertisem

ents in 2016 have been scrutinised by S

AT

and modified if

necessary.

G4.3

Action A

5.4 P

roduce biannual report and analysis of internal and external applicants’ putting them

selves forw

ard for PD

RA

and perm

anent academic

roles.

SA

T July 2016

Report provides

detailed overview of

internal and external applicants and any tendencies, or lack of, are m

ade apparent.

G4.4

Action 6.1

Expand support for

International Conference

attendance to all PG

R

students and PD

RA

s by providing guidance for applying for travel grants.

SA

T D

octoral Cttee

DTC

Mgm

t Cttees

Septem

ber 2015 then PD

RA

conference attendance m

onitored biannually

>70% of total P

DR

As

attend international conferences (at gender parity).

G4.5

Action 10.3

Invite all Lecturers and S

enior Lecturers to present R

esearch and Teaching V

ision to SM

T.

HoD

S

MT

April 2018

One or m

ore female

appointment or

promotion to S

enior Lecturer and R

eader.

76


omen representation on all com

mittees

A

ctions to date N

ew A

ctions R

esponsibility Tim

escale Success M

easure G

5.1 A

ction 7.1 A

rrange work-shadow

ing schem

e whereby C

hairs not already sitting on high-level com

mittees

are invited to ‘sit in’ on m

eetings over two

Terms.

HoD

S

eptember 2016

All C

hairs have sufficient track record to be considered for H

igh Level Com

mittee

vacancies when they

arise.

G5.2

Action 7.2

Arrange w

ork-shadowing

scheme w

hereby PD

RA

s not already sitting on departm

ental comm

ittees are invited to ‘sit in’ on m

eetings over two

Terms.

HoD

A

pril 2018 100%

of PD

RA

s have sat on a departm

ental com

mittee.

Objective 6 Launch shared parental leave

Actions to date

New

Actions

Responsibility

Timescale

Success Measure

G6.1

Action 8.1

Develop internal

information resources

regarding parental leave policies for all m

embers

of department from

UG

to C

hair. Ensure these

resources are highly visible and accessed.

SA

T S

eptember 2016

>80% of staff and

students express aw

areness of parental leave policies in 2015/16 staff/student survey.

77

Objective 7 C

larify how w

e ensure fairness in academic progression

A

ctions to date N

ew A

ctions R

esponsibility Tim

escale Success M

easure G

7.1 A

ction 9.1 D

evelop a short inform

ational film to

convey the facts of our A

S activities and also our

culture and ethos. Make

available on ‘youtube’.

Ruth O

’Donnell

January 2016 1000 unique youtube view

s by 2018, data to be purchased from

G

oogle so as to be objectively gathered.

G7.2

Action 9.2

Integrate our B

iochemical E

ngineering G

ender Equalities

Handbook content into

an ‘Our V

alues’ internal M

oodle portal with

weblinks and electronic

content.

SA

T R

uth O’D

onnell

August 2015

Equality

considerations are integrated w

ithin inform

ation for staff and students – and no longer presented as separate or special considerations but as professional orthodoxy.

Objective 8 D

eepen and beacon our comm

itment to equality

A

ctions to date N

ew A

ctions R

esponsibility Tim

escale Success M

easure G

8.1 S

taff aware of B

-M

Entor, U

CL

mentoring schem

e for B

lack and M

inority Ethnic

(BM

E) academ

ics and researchers

Liaise with the U

CL E

CU

R

ace Charter M

ark Trial S

AT to share best

practice and contribute to 2015 A

ssessment

document.

SA

T A

ugust 2015 C

ontribute to the UC

L E

CU

Race C

harter M

ark award.

G8.2

Action A

11.1 O

rganise a Joint PD

RA

Forum

event with

Cam

bridge Departm

ent of C

hemical E

ngineering and B

iotechnology (C

EB

).

SA

T P

DR

A Forum

October 2016 (after C

EB

com

plete 2015 building relocation process)

Attendance by 10

PD

RA

s from each

department and

circulation of insights or reflections that arise.

78

Objective 8 contd D

eepen and beacon our comm

itment to equality

Actions to date

New

Actions

Responsibility

Timescale

Success Measure

G8.3

Action A

11.2 E

stablish AS

-focused events tailored to garner attention and attendance of H

oDs. Take lead in

rollout of AS

agenda to A

rts and Hum

anities departm

ents.

SA

T

October 2018

UC

L Arts and

Hum

anities departm

ents provided w

ith support to achieve H

oD buy-in

for their first AS

applications.

G8.4

Action A

11.3 C

ontinue to update Tw

itter account and m

onitor for emergence of

new im

pactful Social

Media offerings as routes

to students and researchers.

SA

T A

pril 2018 300 Tw

itter followers

for @

SW

AN

Biochem

Eng

G8.5

Action A

11.4 Leverage further our pre-em

inent level of industrial visibility to clearly link the A

S-

agenda with the bottom

line of business success.

SA

T A

pril 2018 W

ork with collaborator

companies and

organisations such as B

ioIndustry A

ssociation and IC

hemE

to organise A

S-focused industrial

events. G

8.6 A

ction 8.1 E

ncourage new parents

to join UC

L Parents and

Carers Together (P

AC

T) netw

ork and to access U

CL services provided to

help staff prepare for m

aternity leave.

SA

T A

pril 2018 A

ll staff seeking m

aternity leave provided w

ith inform

ation pack regarding available sources of support such as P

AC

T.

the advanced centre for biochemical engineering … silver... · 2016-07-27 · department of...

Documents