Ruby Mathew from York Business School writes
Studies on gender in Higher Education Institutions (HEI) generally agree on the career challenges women face in the UK HEI, especially in the SET (Science, Engineering and Technology) subject areas (Cotton et.al, 2021). The literature further suggests the structural and cultural challenges women face in academic institutions can result in them leaving academia altogether considered to be a waste of talent and resources in the academic workforce (Bryant et al., 2017; O’Connor, 2019). An examination of gender equality initiatives in the academic workforce shows some early initiatives to challenge these issues from the 1980s. Phipps (2008) in his evaluation of such initiatives comment that the early interventions started with women students and faculties being encouraged to form groups which were supposed to provide mutual support through mentoring and networking activities for them. Other examples of gender equality initiatives for women in UK Science disciplines included Women in Science and Engineering (WISE); Women in Science and Technology (WIST); Women in Science, Engineering and Technology (WISET) and these initiatives were undertaken mostly at the university level.
Notable among gender equality initiatives is the Athena Project named after the Greek goddess Athena, who represents wisdom, strength and skill, began in 1999 as a response to improve the academic culture which acts as a barrier to women’s career advancement in the UK academia (Rosser et al., 2019; Wieners and Webers, 2020). With the agenda of improving women’s representation in senior positions in Science subject areas Athena Project (1999-2007) was set up by women in the academic community. Tsouroufi (2019) in their critical reflection on gender equality initiatives mentions that the Athena Scientific Women’s Academic Network (Athena Swan) was initiated following ideas derived from an academic conference funded by the AS project.
Athena Swan Equality Charter by Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) was formally launched in the year 2005 to recognise gender equality initiatives in the UK HEIs. The UK HEIs are encouraged to join the charter to show their commitment towards gender equality and diversity. While the initial focus of the charter was on women in Science, this was extended in May 2015 to the Social Sciences, Humanities, Business and Law disciplines (ECU, 2022). However, participation in the Athena Swan charter is voluntary and there are no set targets or mandatory policies which need to be met for accreditation (Gregory-Smith, 2017). Instead, institutions are guided by the Athena Swan principles to identify gender equality challenges within their institutions and to develop and implement action plans to overcome them. Furthermore, the Athena Swan as an external benchmark charter recognises the participating HEIs’ commitment to gender equality by giving them a series of awards based on the Athena Swan application document. Member institutions are encouraged to apply for bronze, silver and gold awards based on the implementation of the Athena Swan principles in the participating academic institutions and departments (ECU, 2022).
Several studies were undertaken to examine the impact of AS in improving inclusive and supportive culture in participating institutions and the majority if it shows a positive outcome. For instance, Athena Swan impact studies by Barnard (2017), Caffrey et al. (2016), Ovseiko et al. (2017) and Tsouroufli (2019) argue that the departments or the institutions accredited with the Athena Swan charter, with its attempt to implement policies and practices in relation to the AS principles towards equality and diversity, have resulted in addressing the structural and cultural issues for women. For instance, Ovseiko et al. (2017) used mixed methods to examine the impact of the AS initiatives in medical Science departments at Oxford University and recognised greater recognition towards women’s caring responsibilities in the domestic sphere, improved visibility towards women’s challenges in the organisational setting and better mentoring facilities. Moreover, it is claimed that in the effort to implement the AS principles in institutional practices, there were increased efforts to challenge the gendered culture.
However, recent studies raise growing concerns about how the self-reported positive impact in AS award documents converts to lived experiences of women academics working in Science departments (McKie, 2020). For instance, O’Connor (2019)’s evaluation of gender equality initiatives using global scholarship criticises AS interventions mostly focusing on individual levels and if this has successfully challenged gender issues in the higher education sector given that under-representation of women in senior roles persists. Other criticisms include the implementation of the Athena Swan in departments itself implicates an unequal workload for women who participate in the Self Assessment Team (SAT) especially for women in STEM who are a minority, non-acknowledgement of SAT committees work to implement AS initiatives in organisations and SAT committee members being penalised if the AS award is not granted (Tzanakou and Pearce, 2019).
Other studies also argue that the institutions might approach Athena Swan as a box-ticking exercise to secure an award incentive rather than making genuine efforts towards gender equality (O’Connor, 2019). Further evidence from Christine Mathew (2021)’s thesis on Athena Swan’s impact suggests the supportive and inclusive culture recorded does not necessarily reflect the lived experiences of women in these institutions. The impact of Athena Swan accreditation in promoting an inclusive and supportive culture portrays a complex picture and further empirical investigation at an institutional level is required to provide a clearer picture of the situation.
Bibliography
Bryant, L.D., Burkinshaw, P., House, A.O., West, R.M. and Ward, V., 2017. Good practice or positive action? Using Q methodology to identify competing views on improving gender equality in academic medicine. BMJ open, 7(8), p.e015973.
Cotton, E., Beauregard, T.A. and Keles, J.Y., 2021. Gender equalities: What lies ahead. Work, Employment and Society, 35(4), pp.615-620.
Christine Mathew, R., 2021. The impact of Athena Swan accreditation on the lived experiences of early-and mid-career researchers: A qualitative study of an Athena Swan gold award-holding department (Doctoral dissertation, University of York).
ECU, 2022. Athena Swan Charter | Advance-HE. [online] Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/equality-charters/athena-swan-charter
Gregory‐Smith, I., 2017. Positive action towards gender equality: Evidence from the AS charter in UK medical schools. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 56(3), pp.463–483.
McKie, A., 2020. AS Revamp Urged as Academics Lose Faith in Awards. [Online] THEunijobs. Available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/unijobs/article/athena-swan-revamp-urged-academics-lose-faith-awards/
O’Connor, P., 2019. Gender imbalance in senior positions in higher education: What is the problem? What can be done? Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 3(1), pp.28–50
Ovseiko, P.V., Pololi, L.H., Edmunds, L.D., Civian, J.T., Daly, M. and Buchan, A.M., 2019. Creating a more supportive and inclusive university culture: A mixed-methods interdisciplinary comparative analysis of medical and social sciences at the University of Oxford. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 44(2), pp.166–191.
Phipps, A. (2008). Women in science, engineering and technology: three decades of UK initiatives. Stoke on Trent, UK: Trentham Books.
Rosser, S.V., Barnard, S., Carnes, M. and Munir, F., 2019. AS and ADVANCE: effectiveness and lessons learned. The Lancet, 393(10171), pp.604–608.
Tsouroufli, M., 2019. An examination of the AS initiatives in the UK: Critical reflections. In Strategies for Resisting Sexism in the Academy (pp. 35–54). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Tzanakou, C. and Pearce, R., 2019. Moderate feminism within or against the neoliberal university? The example of AS. Gender, Work & Organization, 26(8), pp.1191–1211.
Wieners, S. and Weber, S.M., 2020. Athena’s claim in an academic regime of performativity: Discursive organizing of excellence and gender at the intersection of heterotopia and heteronomia. Management Learning, p.1350507620915198.