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

Women, research and universities: a story of slow progress

1. The proportion of female researchers in the EU has been growing significantly faster than that of men (5.1% annually over 2002-2009 compared to 3.3% for men in the EU-27, She figures 2012, p.5).2. However, „women‘s academic career remains markedly characterized by strong vertical segregation“ (She figures 2012, p.6). In 2010: •59% of graduates were female, •46% of PhD graduates were female•44% of grade C academic staff was female•37% of grade B academic staff,•20% of grade A academic staff (humanities 28.4%, social sciences 19.4%, vs. e.g. engineering 7.9%).3. The glass ceiling index stood at 1.9 in 2004, at 1.8 in 2010 (SF2012)-> structural obstacles for which targeted action is required.

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 2

European goodwill vs. the problem of implementation

ERA on gender equality -> Member States are invited to:•Create a legal and policy environment and provide incentives to:

• remove legal and other barriers to the recruitment, retention and career progression of

female researchers while fully complying with EU law on gender equality• address gender imbalances in decision making processes• strengthen the gender dimension in research programmes

•Engage in partnerships with funding agencies, research organisations and universities to foster

cultural and institutional change on gender - charters, performance agreements, awards•Ensure that at least 40% of the under-represented sex participate in committees involved in

recruitment/career progression and in establishing and evaluating research programmes

Research stakeholder organisations are invited to:•Implement institutional change relating to HR management, funding, decision making and

research programmes through Gender Equality Plans which aim to:• Conduct impact assessment / audits of procedures and practices to identify gender bias• Implement innovative strategies to correct any bias• Set targets and monitor progress via indicators.

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 3

Monitoring – and then?

The LERU experience: compare data and gender-equality plans of member universities -> benchmarking and mutual advice.The Equal Opportunity Offensive of the German Research Council (since 2008): evaluate Equal-Opportunity Plans and refuse funding to universities with insufficient EOP.

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 4

Tackling the sources of slow progress: an example of a German university ranked among the best by the Ger. Res. Council

1.Heidelberg University: indicative because it is a comprehensive university (all specializations).2.Steady yet slow progress 2002-2011:•Grade A female academics in 2002 8.6% vs.•in 2011 16% (German average 15.5%);3. Leaky pipeline: •51% female PhDs (Ga 44.8%)•27.9% (Ga 25.5%) Habilitation, RG leader •18.6% Professors (grade A) without Medicine. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 5

The leaky pipeline of the University of Heidelberg 2008-2010

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 6

Gender-equality measures

-> Measures towards keeping female scholars at universities:a) Gender-specific measures, in place as long as a bias exists:•Special mentoring programmes and training programmes towards professorships•Protected time for research given to postdocs for a limited period of time;b)Gender-blind measures from which womenindeed benefit as much as me:•Start-up professorships to bridge the gap between the first 6 year postdoc period and a full professorship;•Assessment guidelines for bias-free evaluation of scholarly achievements•Work-life balance measures (child care, additional funding possibilities for replacement during parental leave, etc.).c) Structural measures: gender responsibility of the University Leadership, female quota for committees, gender training for all the governing and administration levels;-> yet the pipeline still leakes -> where and who is accountable for the leak?

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 7

Where does the career pipeline leak?Diagnosing the problem

1. The leaky pipeline of the entire university is slowly closing due to targeted measures;2. The career leak for female scientists occurs after the PhD;3. The career point at which the pipeline leaks is shifting from the PhD towards Habilitation.4. Who is responsible for acquisition of personel?5. Who can formulate targets and be held responsible for their attainment?Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 8

Assessment of responsibility -> assignment of responsibility -> monitoring -> evaluation

1. The basic organisational units in charge of acquisition and choice of personel are the Faculties;2. The Senate, the President‘s Office and the Ministery have de facto controlling functions (although the President‘s Office de iure bears the responsibility).3. Monitoring of the Faculties reveals huge differences and a need for diversified measures.

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 9

Monitoring faculties (comparison of three-year averages) shows: the leaky pipeline is multifacetted

Type 1: the leaky pipeline begins at the pre-university stage (Faculty of Physics and Astronomy; Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science)-> measure: special info days for school girls introducing them to research in these fields (so-called MINT days).(The following chart shows by dotted lines the Faculty‘s target values for 2011 and 2013.)

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 10

Leaky Pipeline Physics and Astronomy

The pipeline leaks from the graduation

Type 2: the pipeline leaks after the graduation (Faculties of Law, Theology, Economics and Social Science, Chemistry and Earth Sciences);Different reasons: •tenured position of lawyer or priest vs. doctoral and post-doctoral temporary positions;•Significantly higher salaries in business and chemical industry.Measures: training by female scientists as role models etc.

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 12

Leaky Pipeline Economics and Social Sciences

The pipeline leaking after PhD

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

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 14

Leaky Pipeline Philosophy

Leaky Pipeline Medical Faculty Heidelberg

Leaky Pipeline Medical Faculty Mannheim

The pipeline leaks after the Habilitation at the latest

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

Leaky Pipeline Modern Languages

Conclusions

• There is not one solution that would fit all.

• Monitoring reveals the critical points at which measures are needed.

• Structural change can be effective only if the responsibilities are clearly defined and the measures apply to the crucial points of

overt and covert discrepancies.

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 20

Recommendations

• In order to provide a basis for structural change, European research organizations (including universities) and government bodies should commit themselves to developing a methodology for monitoring and evaluating efficiency of actions.

• Monitoring is done with respect to the levels and units capable of defining their own targets and responsible for the developments .

• Monitoring should be coupled with incentives vs. denial of additional funding.

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 21

Gender-equality monitoring and indicators

1.Gender-equality indicators should take into account the country-specific legal regulations (e.g. is the university -internal promotion to A-positions possible or not);

2.Gender-equality indicators should be evaluated relative to the country-specific average values for a position (e.g. A-position, i.e. full professor) for a specific discipline;

3. Recommendation: monitor progress in achieving gender equality along the university-career ladder measured by the discipline-specific averages of successive (e.g. three or five) sequences of years. Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 22

References

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

Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position 23