Key results from the ASSET 2016 report: experiences of gender equality in STEMM academia and their intersections with ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability and age Amanda Aldercotte, PhD Acting Research Manager Equality Challenge Unit, London

ASSET 2016 Background First Athena Survey of Science, Engineering and Technology (ASSET) in 2003 Multiple iterations 2003, 2004, 2006, and 2010 Talented women working in STEMM can become invisible Survey designed to cover six aspects of academic working life National survey Previous iterations 2003/04, 2006 and 2010 Focused on female STEMM academics’ perceptions and experiences in a number of key areas, primarily those related to visibility: underrepresented in senior positions more likely to be on fixed-term contracts Vs male colleagues were more visible at key career stages, encouraged to progress their careers, and relatively unaware of the barriers experienced by their female colleagues. More than a decade later, the picture painted by the ASSET 2016 survey illustrates that little has changed. ECU commissioned by: The Royal Society The Royal Society of Biology The Royal Academy of Engineering The Academy of Medical Sciences Overhaul of previous iterations, now covers six areas of working life: Recruitment Job and career Perceived gender equality in their department Caring responsibilities Training and leadership Promotion and development

ASSET 2016 Method 43 institutions across the UK N = 4869 respondents (2374 women) Weighted sample by gender, ethnicity and academic field to ensure representativeness Variety of statistical approaches eg ANOVAs, logistic regression From 43 institutions across the UK Analytic strategy Sample weighted by gender, ethnicity and academic field (using national data) to ensure representativeness Large number of items on survey – used factor analysis to combine individual questions targeting the same underlying concept (eg time spent on different teaching and administrative duties). Used ANOVAs and logistic regression to explore gender differences and interactions with other protected characteristics while controlling for respondent age and current post

ASSET 2016 Results Similar results as those from 2003: From recruitment to promotion, female STEMM academics were more likely to perceive, experience or be exposed to some form of disadvantage compared with their male colleagues Clustered around three themes: Teaching and administrative duties Feeling supported and valued Caring responsibilities PICTURE SIMILAR TO 2003: From recruitment to promotion, female STEMM academics were more likely to perceive, experience or be exposed to some form of disadvantage compared with their male colleagues CAVEAT: SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT Impact of small differences = accumulation and consistency - rather than the magnitude of the difference between men and women’s ratings. Summarise these across three key areas

Teaching and administrative duties Factors impacting average academic career: POSITIVE: Well-regarded research projects Successful grant applications Substantial research output NEGATIVE: Having a heavy administrative load Having a heavy teaching load Taking a career break Both genders saw teaching responsibilities in a negative light, e.g., impact on average academic’s career progression 42.2% of women were on teaching-only contracts, compared with 27.9% of men Women reported spending more of their time on teaching and admin than men Men reported spending more of their time on research

Teaching and administrative duties Women spend more time on teaching, but this is not as valued by their department as research ‘Allocation of teaching activities is disproportionately towards women carrying the burden, but this is [an] advantage for men.’ Female, planetary and space science Women felt that they are allocated more teaching duties but do not feel that these are important for their career development or progression Lower ratings of how teaching is valued by their department than men  Commentary = efforts outside of research output are not appreciated in the promotion process Corroborating evidence: Out of the 10 training areas listed, the only one for which the proportions of men and women who had received training were similar was teaching.

Teaching and administrative duties Disjoint between perceived advantage in the allocation of teaching and administrative duties Perceived advantage for men in the allocation of teaching and administrative duties.

Feeling supported and valued * * * * * * * * Women were less likely to: have a formally assigned mentor that they see regularly report having a supportive line manager have access to senior departmental staff serve on important departmental committees feel that their research and external professional activities are valued by their department

Feeling supported and valued 59.7% of men were encouraged or invited to apply for promotion, compared with 48.8% of women 7.4% of women said that they wanted to stay in STEMM but outside higher education, compared with 5.4% of men Men more likely to agree with statements like: My work environment is friendly My peers are supportive I have colleagues that I consider role models I can count on my department for a good reference

Caring responsibilities Negative impact of having a family remarked upon by both genders ‘I think once women have children, they have far less flexibility with their time (compared to men). For instance, meetings, events and conferences outside of the workplace have to be arranged with childcare in mind.’ Female, social engineering Disadvantages specific to women who had taken parental leave Men and women brought up how important the impact of caring responsibilities are for their careers across the whole survey. Both genders felt that caring responsibilities had a negative impact on own and the average academic career: Women more negative about it than men  experience greater conflict between the demands around having a family and the demands associated with their career. Commentary  Pressure to work long hours not an explicit disadvantage for women but can have a gendered effect because of caring responsibilities FOR EXAMPLE: Caring responsibilities and time constraints blocked more female than male respondents’ access to training in the last 12 months. Compared with women who had not taken parental leave, women who had caring responsibilities were less likely to: be able to relocate for a new post if needed* feel involved in the social life of their department have their work successes celebrated in their department feel supported by their partner or family* *important for career progression

ASSET 2016 Intersections Final (weighted) sample of 4869 STEMM academics (2374 women) BME = black (black African, black Caribbean, black British and black other); Asian (Indian, Pakisitani, Bangladeshi, Asian British and Asian other); Chinese; mixed; other ethnic background Protected characteristics in ASSET 2016 sample: BME = 13.1% LGB = 6.2% Disability = 17.6% Age = 8.2% under 30, 19.0% over 61 National proportion of STEMM academics: BME = UK 10%, non-UK 30% Disability = 3.4% (but impacted by disclosure) Sexual orientation = 1.5% (but impacted by disclosure) Age = 16.6% under 20, 6.9% over 61

BME women are exposed to compounded disadvantage Compared with white women, BME men, and white men, BME women were the reported: department less committed to equality issues greater advantage for men in the allocation of resources least likely to be in a senior post rated the impact of protected characteristics on the average academic career more negatively than other subgroups less likely to have access to KIT days and flexible working options than white women least likely to have been invited for promotion or encouraged to undertake activities that would promote career development least likely to have a supportive line manager, access to senior staff, or feel that their appraisal had been valuable

Advantages of being a man are not unconditional Compared to men self-identifying as heterosexual, men self-identifying as LGB were: less likely to be in senior posts less able to relocate and less involved in their department’s social life after parental leave more likely to report not being able to access training opportunities that they needed or wanted because of their sexual orientation less likely to be encouraged or invited to apply for promotion less likely to have a formally assigned mentor or a supportive line manager

Disability is uniformly associated with disadvantage Although there were instances where female respondents who disclosed as disabled experienced greater disadvantage compared with male respondents who disclosed as disabled, the overarching pattern across the six aspects of working life was that disability was the strongest predictor. felt that their department was less committed to equality were less likely to have been nominated or invited to their post earned a lower salary on average spent more time on teaching rated their department as less transparent and fair were less likely to have leadership and grant application skills training reported more barriers to training in the last 12 months were less likely to be encouraged or invited to apply for promotion and less likely to receive support for career development from their department

Gender gaps are age-dependent Majority of gender differences absent among respondents 30 and under. Suggests that gender differences accrue across the academic career. For instance, men and women under the age of 30 did not differ in: the type of contract they held (e.g., fixed-term versus permanent, part- versus full-time) how much they felt their department was committed to equality their ratings of their department’s fairness and transparency how much they wanted to obtain a post in senior management in their institution whether they would like to continue their career in STEMM and higher education Although women rated the allocation of tasks related to professional development as biased towards men in all three age groups, female participants who were older than the average academic reported the strongest bias towards men of all participants. Could be an indication of cultural change or related to a third factor such as caring responsibilities.

Recommendations Ensure academic contracts accommodate flexible working policies Establish workload allocation models that balance teaching and administrative duties Have options like keeping-in-touch days and flexible hours to help staff return from parental leave Reduce variability in amount and type of support provided by line managers Expand promotion criteria to include performance in other academic areas Although these recommendations are phrased in terms of alleviating the discrepancies in male and female STEMM academics’ experiences, many could be adapted or used as a starting point for addressing other imbalances, such as those related to the intersections between gender and ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability and age.

Thank you! Useful Publications & References Contact details: Equality Challenge Unit (2017). ASSET 2016: biosciences and medicine, engineering and physical sciences. Equality Challenge Unit (2017). Equality in higher education: staff statistical report 2017. Equality Challenge Unit (2017). ASSET 2016: experiences surrounding gender equality in STEMM academia and the intersections with ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability and age. Higher Education Funding Council for England (2017). Call for evidence for identifying sector-leading innovative practice in advancing equality and diversity. Contact details: Amanda Aldercotte Acting Research Manager, Equality Challenge Unit amanda.aldercotte@ecu.ac.uk @ECUAmanda https://www.ecu.ac.uk/publications/asset-2016-by-discipline/