Department Application Bronze Award - newcastle.ac.uk Name of institution Newcastle University...

Department Application Bronze Award

2

Name of institution Newcastle University

Department School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics

Focus of department AHSSBL

Date of application April 2016

Award Level Bronze

Institution Athena SWAN award Date: April 2016 Level: Silver

Contact for application Must be based in the department

Dr James Annesley

Email [email protected]

Telephone 0191 2086617

Departmental website http://www.ncl.ac.uk/elll/

1. LETTER OF ENDORSEMENT FROM THE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT Recommended word count: Bronze: 500 words

An accompanying letter of endorsement from the head of department should be included. If

the head of department is soon to be succeeded, or has recently taken up the post, applicants should include an additional short statement from the incoming head.

Note: Please insert the endorsement letter immediately after this cover page.

3

23rd April 2016 Dear Ms Gilligan,

As the first male Head of the School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics for more than 15 years, I’m delighted to support this application and am committed to implementing the action plan.

My personal commitment to the process has been evident since I attended a GEM workshop in 2013 and began the process of setting up the SAT just after my appointment as Head of School in January 2015. Although I hadn’t initially intended to act as chair, I was glad to take on this role when workload pressures and related circumstances affected the composition of the original team. Beyond the engagement demonstrated in helping to bring our application together, my commitment is deepened by the responsibility I feel to sustain the legacy of equality and opportunity hard won by the succession of female leaders that have held this office before me.

In broad terms, much of the School’s data is reassuring. The ratio of female to male academics sits at 38/23, maternity leave return rates are at 100% and grant income shows women out-performing men. These are basic yardsticks, but still the headlines make for encouraging reading. Equally positive was the staff survey. 81% of 42 respondents felt they had “never” been treated unfavourably because of gender, 77% described the School as “supportive”.

At the same time, however, the survey identified areas of legitimate concern around, for example, workload planning and promotion, concerns that the action plan sets out to address. The analysis of the data also revealed attrition points in some of the detail on salaries, periods in mid-career where progression rates for women were slow. Equally challenging is the imbalance evidenced among undergraduate students, where women form 70% of the population. In our SAT meetings, members looked hard at these realities, leaning in to design targeted measures aimed at addressing them. True, some of these issues may be characteristic of our discipline, but that context gives no cause for complacency.

School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics Newcastle University Percy Building Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU United Kingdom

4

It is the staff survey and the work of the SAT that has generated our priorities. The commitment to changing the fabric of our working practices guides Transforming School Culture. The need to clarify processes on career advancement, ensure equal pay and underwrite opportunity informs the work on Recruitment and Promotion and Career Development and Progression. The focus on student achievement, the undergraduate gender imbalance and the need to improve the broader dialogue around diversity drives the plans for the Student Experience. Informed by the Athena SWAN Charter, these priorities provide a clear statement of the School’s willingness to learn from the SAT, address fair criticisms made through the survey and commit to change.

What follows is an application grounded on data gathering, scrutiny and collaboration, the result of hard work that evidences the School’s commitment to meeting the Bronze criteria and implementing an action plan aimed at embedding equality and opportunity into our cultures, structures and processes for the years ahead.

Yours sincerely

Dr James Annesley Head of School

[Word Count 486]

5

Abbreviations used within this document

ACE Arts Council England

AHRC Arts and Humanities Research Council

AP Action Plan

AS Athena SWAN

BAFTA British Academy of Film and Television Arts

CASAP Certificate in Academic Standards and Practice

CDP Career Development and Progression

CRiLLS Centre for Research in Linguistics and Language Sciences

DoR Director of Research

DTP Doctoral Training Partnership

EC Early Career

E&D Equality and Diversity

ESRC Economic and Social Research Council

F/T Full Time

FT Fixed Term

FTE Full-Time Equivalent

GEM Gender Equality Charter Mark

G&C Grants and Contracts

HASS Humanities and Social Sciences

HESA Higher Education Statistics Agency

HoS Head of School

HR Human Resources

IT Information Technology

KIT Keeping in Touch

m/f Male/Female

MA Master of Arts

MLitt Research Masters

Mphil Masters of Philosophy

IphD Integrated Philosophy Doctorate

NCLA Newcastle Centre for the Literary Arts

NHS National Health Service

NU Newcastle University

NUHRI Newcastle University Humanities Research Institute

pa Per annum

PAODs Post Application Open Days

PDR Performance and Development Review

PG Postgraduate

PGT Postgraduate Taught

PGR Postgraduate Research

PhD Doctor of Philosophy

PI Principal Investigator

PRP Personal Research Plan

PSS Professional and Support Staff

PVC Pro-Vice Chancellor

6

PT Part Time

RA Research Associate

RAE Research Assessment Exercise

RCUK Research Councils UK

REA Research Excellence Academy

REF Research Excellence Framework

RIF Research Innovation Fund

RP Recruitment and Promotion

RSF Research Support Fund

SAT Self-Assessment Team

SDU Staff Development Unit

SE Student Experience

SEC School Executive Committee

SELLL School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics

SL Senior Lecturer

SM School Manager

SML School of Modern Languages

SS Staff Survey

SSSDP Senior Support Staff Development Programme

SSC Student-Staff Committee

T&R Teaching and Research

TF Teaching Fellow

TSC Transforming School Culture

UCAS Universities and Colleges Admissions Service

UG Undergraduate

VC Vice Chancellor

WAM Workload Allocation Model

WEF With Effect From

WL Workload

WP Widening Participation

7

List of figures

Figure 1: The student-led café in our Percy Building

Figure 2: Aggregated “Overall Satisfaction” Scores at NSSS, PTES and PRES

Figure 3: Results at REF 2014 for Unit of Assessment 29 (English Language Literature), and

Unit of Assessment 28 (Modern Languages and Linguistics)

Figure 4: Overall course applications, offers and acceptance rates for UG programmes

Figure 5: Overall degree classification

Figure 6: Postgraduate taught degrees (F/T)

Figure 7: Postgraduate taught degrees (P/T)

Figure 8: Postgraduate taught classifications (F/T)

Figure 9: Postgraduate taught classifications (P/T)

Figure 10: Postgraduate research degrees (F/T)

Figure 11: Postgraduate research degrees (P/T)

Figure 12: Completion of postgraduate Research studies

Figure 13: SELLL Undergraduate progression to postgraduate study (at Newcastle)

Figure 14: Academic Staff by Grade, Function and Gender

Figure 15: Academic Progression 2013-2016

Figure 16: Grade F staff by contract type

Figure 17: Training Uptake

Figure 18: Maternity leave

List of tables

Table 1: Academic leavers by grade and gender and full/part-time status

Table 2: Appointments in SELLL 2012 – 2015

Table 3: Applications for promotion and success by gender

Table 4: REF 2014

Table 5: RAE 2008

Table 6: Committee membership

8

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE DEPARTMENT

Recommended word count: Bronze: 500 words

Please provide a brief description of the department including any relevant contextual information. Present data on the total number of academic staff, professional and support staff and students by gender.

The School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics (SELLL) is one of nine Schools in the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences (HASS) at Newcastle University (NU) and will be the first from the Faculty to apply to Athena SWAN (AS). The School is based in and has sole use of the Percy Building on the Newcastle campus and is organized around three subjects, English Literature, Creative Writing and English Language and Linguistics. The School employs 61 academics (38/23 f/m) and 8 professional support staff (all female). There are 697 undergraduates (UG) (154/543 m/f), 71 taught postgraduates (PG) (22/49 m/f)) and 114 PG research students (31/83 m/f). The School’s teaching and research focuses on a variety of inter-related disciplines, from literary criticism to theoretical linguistics. The study of history, politics and social change as manifested in and effected through language informs our work, with many staff dedicated to work that incorporates understandings of class, ethnicity and gender. SELLL runs five single honours UG programmes and six joint degrees, two with History and four with Modern Languages (SML). To support students’ work and enhance their prospects, this year we launched the ‘Enterprise, Employability and English Challenge’, an event that gives all Stage 2 students the opportunity to address a real-life scenario, namely, improving NHS access for minorities. Students are also encouraged to become leaders by joining the Student-Staff Committee (SSC) and the student ambassador scheme and have the opportunity to build their experience by engaging in extra-curricular activities through the Union’s societies, with The Courier student newspaper and the Newcastle University Theatre Society the two most commonly favoured by our students. Student representatives sit on the SSC and attend Boards of Studies, engaging fully in formal processes relating to their experience. We also run informal events for different degree stages. Complimenting our thriving UG community, are the School’s PGs. Seventy-one students take five MA degrees with staff also contributing to the delivery of jointly owned degrees, The MA in Film: Theory and Practice, shared with the School of Modern Languages (SML), and the MA in Writing Poetry run collaboratively with the Poetry School, London. At PGR level we offer Mlitt, Mphil, IphD and PhD degrees to 114 students. PG students are represented collectively on the PG SSC. Reading groups, seminar series and social events support them, all are elements of PG life in SELLL that work to build community and collaboration. Staff meet formally at School meetings (3 per annum), Boards of Studies (2pa), Examiners (annually) and annual teaching and research away days. Housing all staff, significant teaching spaces, communal areas and a dedicated suite for PG students, the Percy Building, brings immediate benefits in terms of community and collegiality. To sustain this culture, in 2015

9

we opened the student-run Percy Café (Figure 1) and are moving ahead with work to add to our nomadic learning spaces. Visibly successful, these initiatives have been widely praised by students – “Great refurbishment – we love the student-led café”.

Figure 1: The student-led café in our Percy Building

10

Schematic diagram of the School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics within Newcastle University

Newcastle University

Faculty of Medical Sciences

Faculty of Humanities, Arts and

Social Sciences

Faculty of Science, Agriculture and

Engineering

Schools of:

Architecture, Planning and Landscape

Arts and Cultures

Newcastle University Business School

Education, Communication and Language Sciences

Geography, Politics and Sociology

History, Classics and Archaeology

Modern Languages

Newcastle Law School

School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics

Teaching Research

Undergraduate

BA (Hons) English Literature

BA (Hons) English Literature with Creative Writing

BA (Hons) English Language

BA (Hons) English Language and Literature

BA (Hons) Linguistics

BA (Hons) English Literature and History

BA (Hons) Linguistics with Chinese or Japanese

BA (Hons) Linguistics with French

BA (Hons) Linguistics with Spanish

BA (Hons) Linguistics with German

Postgraduate

PhD, Literature

PhD, Linguistics & English Language

iPhD, Linguistics & English Language

MA in English Literature

Writing Poetry MA

MA in Linguistics

MA in Sociolinguistics (Research)

MA in Film: Theory and Practice

MA in Creative Writing

Masters by Research: Mlitt – Literature

Masters by Research: Mlitt – Linguistics and/or English Language

Mphil, Literature

Mphil, Linguistics & English Language

Mphil, Creative Writing

Creative Writing PGCert

Unit of Assessment 29

English Language and Literature

(includes Creative Writing)

Unit of Assessment 28

(Modern Languages and Linguistics),

with staff from Modern Languages and

Education, Communication and

Language Sciences

[word count: 493]

11

3. THE SELF-ASSESSMENT PROCESS


Describe the self-assessment process.

This should include:

(i) a description of the self-assessment team The 12 strong SELLL Self-Assessment Team (SAT) consists of eight women and four men as follows: Name M/F Role in the

School Relevant School or University Roles

Context/Experience of Work-life Balance

Dr James Annesley

M Head of School

Chair of the School SAT; Representative on the University SAT; Head of School.

Working parent of school-aged child; took extended paternity leave in 2002. Joined NU in 2007.

Dr Tara Bergin

F P/T Lecturer in Creative Writing (poetry)

Represents part-time academic staff.

Completed PhD in 2013 and appointed to permanent lecturership at NU in 2015. P/T to accommodate writing and parental responsibilities.

Mr Jake Campbell

M PGR Student Represents PG students.

First year PGR Student

Professor Karen Corrigan

F Deputy Head of School

Represents Female Profs. Has undertaken management roles at School/Faculty; Led on several major RCUK awards.

Joined NU in 1993. Has experience of work-life issues, specifically caring for elderly parents/living in a dual career partnership.

12

Dr Tina Gharavi

F Senior Lecturer in English (Digital Film/Media)

Represents Female Senior Lecturers.

Joined NU in 2005. Filmmaker with a BAFTA-nomination. Her diversity commitment led to trusteeships at ACE and Baltic Contemporary Art.

Dr Ros Haslett

F Lecturer in Dramatic Literature

Represents full-time academics.

Joined NU in 2011. Maternity leave 2014/15; preparing for the same in 2016/17.

Dr Helen Limon

F Research Associate NCLA

Represents Post-doctoral Research Associates.

Joined NU in 2013. Completed PhD as mature student. Joined academic research from industry.

Mrs Lesley Lant

F School Manager

Represents Professional Support Staff; works full-time but has also worked part-time following maternity leave.

Joined NU in 1997. Working parent of school-aged child. Invaluable knowledge of University policies and procedures.

Mr Connor McDonnell

M UG Student Represents UG male students.

Third year UG student and SELLLs Student Leader.

Dr Geoff Poole

M Senior Lecturer in Linguistics

Represents F/T male Senior Lecturers.

Joined NU in September 1996. Had paternity leave (2010) and took annual leave after the birth of his first child (2006).

Ms Holly Suttle

F UG Student Represents UG female students.

Third year UG student and SELLLs Student Leader.

Dr Danielle Turton

F Lecturer in Linguistics

Represents Early Career Academics.

Completed her PhD in November 2014. Joined NU in September 2014.

13

(ii) an account of the self-assessment process SELLL began engaging with AS in August 2013 when it joined the Gender Equality Mark (GEM) trial for Humanities. The Head of School (HoS) [Annesley] attended a briefing workshop in Edinburgh then took on the role of SAT Chair, leading initial planning meetings and then setting up the SAT. Membership was by open invitation to all staff (calls at School meetings and e-mail). Individuals with particular experiences (e.g. parenting, P/T work, maternity leave) were also invited to join. The resulting team is a mix typical of SELLL, a diverse group, representing a variety of ages/grades, a PhD student and two UG students. Involving four of the School’s key managers, there is clear evidence of commitment at senior level. Annesley represents the School at Faculty and oversees recruitment and planning. He also sits on the University SAT, has clear opportunities to effect change within the School and to influence upwards.

Discussions at School Executive Committee (SEC) since 2014 have sustained the process, allowing for reflection on the process and the design of the action plan. Beyond that, AS has been a standing item on School meetings since May 2015, with the aim being to keep all staff updated and to foster opportunities for further comment. The SAT started meeting in the spring of 2015, with regular monthly meetings commencing from the autumn of 2015, supported by further processes (e.g. Staff Survey) and consultations around the formal sessions. Documents and data were regularly passed among the Team for scrutiny, with the work on drafting and revision achieved collaboratively. Drafts have been circulated widely and comment invited (and received) from many staff, both in SELLL and institutionally (including the HASS PVC). SAT meetings have been focussed on scrutinising the School’s performance data, addressing perceptions of culture and generating suggestions and actions for the Action Plan (AP). The SAT also focussed on reviewing data and free comments from the anonymous staff survey (SS) conducted in November 2015. Achieving a response rate of 70%, it generated data on culture and perceptions in the School and provided the substance of many of the SAT’s discussions. Members also contributed their own informal insights garnered through interactions across the School with the aim being to draw out observations and make the process as inclusive and responsive as possible. To further the SAT’s work, three of its members (along with six members of SEC) participated in Unconscious Bias Training (2/3/16) focused on the recruitment of staff and students and career progression (and more staff will take this course in future). The SAT also consulted with individuals engaged in AS outwith SELLL. One of our SAT meetings was attended by Mrs Chris Stafford, Director of HASS Faculty Operations, another by Professor Judith Rankin, University Dean of Diversity with both able to provide senior University perspectives. SAT members have also actively sought out and participated in equality and diversity (E&D) events outside SELLL (e.g. those organised by the NU Women Professors Network).

14

Not only did the results of the consultations, training and SS contribute to the narrative and information offered here, but they also helped generate the School’s priorities for the AP, grouped under 4 key headlines as follows:

Transforming School Culture (TSC)

Recruitment and Promotion (RP)

Career Development and Progression (CDP)

Student Experience (SE)

Capturing the ambitions for and commitment to cultural change, the need to remove obstacles (both real and perceived) and further embed equality of opportunity through structural work on committees and representation, and with a focus on monitoring of specific performance data (e.g. gender and pay, recruitment and promotion etc.) and connecting staff work on E&D with the student experience by establishing UG and PG E&D representatives, the SAT has already made a vital contribution to the School and will continue to do so in the years ahead.

(iii) plans for the future of the self-assessment team The SAT will continue to meet using the following terms of reference (eight meetings pa). To support this work, a school E&D officer has been appointed, alongside UG and PG E&D representatives. The membership, terms and processes used (around consultation, document drafting and communication of findings etc.) will be reviewed post application (AP: TSC1.1; 1.4; 1.5; RP2.2):

Develop School applications for AS awards.

Ensure the School provides an inclusive environment for all staff and students.

Provide a forum for staff and students to raise any general E&D issues in a transparent

manner.

Consider and implement new School policies and procedures relating to E&D in all

aspects of School activities.

Ensure that actions and policies initiated through the Committee are communicated

effectively to key School Committees for further discussion and implementation.

Oversee the implementation of relevant Faculty and University policies and procedures

with regard to the AS charter and E&D issues more broadly within the School.

Reflect on membership to ensure inclusivity and to reflect changes as they evolve.

Review staff survey process and data and run further surveys every 2 years.

Contribute to the new E&D pages on the school webpage and oversee content.

Support and engage with the UPG and PG E&D representatives.

Now an established School committee and firmly embedded into our culture, the SAT will report directly to SEC under a standing item on diversity and form the nucleus of the School’s new E&D Committee. Members of the E&D Committee will undertake Unconscious Bias Training. (AP: RP2.12)

15

In the course of its work, and as it implements the AP and engages further with the Athena SWAN Charter, the School, as the first unit in HASS to apply for AS accreditation, will also contribute to wider cultural change in the institution by modelling and disseminating good practice and sharing experience with other schools.

[word count: 945] 4. A PICTURE OF THE DEPARTMENT Recommended word count: Bronze: 2000 words

Strong in teaching and the student experience and excellent in research, SELLL is a very successful School, one of the leading units in NU, with Creative Writing, Linguistics, and Children’s Literature among its many outstanding areas. It is the School’s work with partners (e.g. Seven Stories and the Wordsworth Trust) that adds to its distinctiveness. Generating embedded collaborations and delivering socially transformative research, this work speaks to the public facing character of the School’s teaching and research. The study of language and literature in real situations, affecting real people is core to our mission. This is equally true of the School’s work with students, work that connects them with our values and culture. Many Postgraduate (PG) students work on projects with partners (three hold Collaborative Doctoral Awards), while Undergraduates (UGs) can study modules that take them onto placements. In addition, all UGs are involved in the School’s innovative employability work. The creativity and dynamism of students thus compliments the ambitions of staff and sustains our thriving intellectual community, one built on a shared passion for the critical study of languages and texts. For the SAT, work on AS contributes to this broader mission, serving to reinforce the energy and vitality of our dynamic and creative intellectual community.

Figure 2: Aggregated “Overall Satisfaction” Scores at NSSS, PTES and PRES 2014 2015

National Student Survey

89%

93%

PG Taught Experience Survey

92%

91%

PG Research Experience Survey

NA

84%

16

Figure 3: Results at REF 2014 for Unit of Assessment 29 (English Language Literature), and Unit of Assessment 28 (Modern Languages and Linguistics) UoA29 UoA28

% of work graded at 4*

57% 35%

% of work graded at 3*

22% 32%

GPA 3.46 3.04

Impact 100% at 4* 60% at 4*

4.1. Student data If courses in the categories below do not exist, please enter n/a.

(i) Numbers of men and women on access or foundation courses SELLL does not offer foundation or access courses. (ii) Numbers of undergraduate students by gender Full and part-time by programme. Provide data on course applications, offers and acceptance rates, and degree attainment by gender.

Figure 4 shows female UG students outnumbering male UG students by approximately 70%/30% in any typical year, a distribution that applies consistently across the degrees

representing the School’s 3 subject areas and sits in line with national figures. As HESA data for comparable Russell Group departments shows, female UGs tend to represent around 75% of the UG population. In this respect the School’s figures shows slightly less imbalance than the national picture, but still there’s no cause for complacency in such a marginal difference. There are currently no P/T UG students studying in SELLL.

Though clearly part of a national trend and linked to a range of sociological and educational factors, the AP shows real commitment to working towards redressing this imbalance and to making sure that the School attracts a more diverse student body. To increase the proportion of male UGs, the Director of Excellence in Learning and Teaching (DELT) will set up a focus group of male UGs to identify those aspects of the degrees that are particularly

attractive and to understand why take up of SELLL degrees is lower among men (AP:SE4.2). The SAT will also review the gender profile of students represented in marketing materials, web and print, (AP:SE4.3) and work done to ensure the visibility of male students and staff at Open Days (AP:SE4.4).

17

Figure 4: Overall course applications, offers and acceptance rates for UG programmes

Figure 4 shows that men are less likely to take up an offer from the School through UCAS; 30 – 40% of males accept as opposed to 50 – 60% of females. Considering this data, the SAT agreed that SELLLs should start monitoring conversion rates by gender and setting up a system for current UG male students to contact male applicants to talk through the applicants’ plans and offer insights into their experience in the School (AP:SE4.5). Their experience of the application process and as members of the School will help inform actions

going forward. Although the degree attainment varies slightly between the different degrees within the School, the data appears to show no significant gender imbalance on this measure, nor any meaningful variance within individual degrees. This can be seen in the overall trend in Figure 5. Looking behind the figures, the SAT did find that there was some imbalance in 2013/2014 when females taking Literature performed slightly better than males (the tables don’t capture the detail, but among 1st class degrees the split was 20/4, f/m). Bearing in mind the low numbers of men on the degrees overall, the SAT weren’t overly concerned and saw no significant trend. There is, however, commitment in the AP to monitor these figures in future (AP:SE4.1).

Apps Offers Entry Apps Offers Entry Apps Offers Entry

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Female 440 302 181 488 355 185 464 363 207

Male 185 133 53 232 171 63 205 158 49

Total 625 435 234 720 526 248 669 521 256

% Female 70% 69% 77% 68% 67% 75% 69% 70% 81%

% Male 30% 31% 23% 32% 33% 25% 31% 30% 19%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

050

100150200250300350400450500

Female Male Total % Female % Male

18

Figure 5: Overall degree classification

In broad terms, while the School’s UG demographic aligns with national trends, the SAT process has promoted closer scrutiny of these patterns and brought real momentum to measures that will offer reflection upon these realities, address potential inequalities, underwrite fairness and opportunity and contribute to change.

(iii) Numbers of men and women on postgraduate taught degrees Full- and part-time. Provide data on course application, offers and acceptance rates and degree completion rates by gender. The proportion of female students on F/T PGT degrees approximately mirrors the proportion at UG level and sits in line with the national HESA data for the subject area at PGT (1/0.37, f/m). Although the percentage of women who apply and are offered a place has remained relatively consistent over the past 3 years (around 70%), the percentage of women who enter has increased from 64% in 2013-14 to 77% in 2015-16. The numbers are small (43 students entered in 15/16) and it’s therefore hard to read too much into the data.

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

1st 2:1 2:2

Female 28 31 28 114 115 103 17 14 17

Male 5 6 8 30 22 26 7 8 3

Total 33 37 36 144 137 129 24 22 20

Female % 17% 19% 19% 71% 71% 69% 11% 9% 11%

Male % 12% 16% 22% 71% 59% 70% 17% 22% 8%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

020406080

100120140160

Female Male Total Female % Male %

19

Figure 6: Postgraduate taught degrees (F/T)

A similar trend is seen for P/T PGT degrees. The gender balance at the application and offer stages remains relatively stable. There was a dip in female entrants during 14/15, but bearing in mind the size of the sample (seven students in total) the SAT didn’t regard the pattern as significant. In similar terms, with small numbers across the general sample, the SAT found little of significance in the patterns.

Figure 7: Postgraduate taught degrees (P/T)


2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Female 158 97 25 179 117 42 186 99 33

Male 69 44 14 69 42 16 73 40 10

Total 227 141 39 248 159 58 259 139 43

% Female 70% 69% 64% 72% 74% 72% 72% 71% 77%

% Male 30% 31% 36% 28% 26% 28% 28% 29% 23%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

020406080

100120140160180200



2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Female 27 21 12 25 17 3 39 24 16

Male 16 11 8 16 12 4 20 12 8

Total 43 32 20 41 29 7 59 36 24

% Female 63% 66% 60% 61% 59% 43% 66% 67% 67%

% Male 37% 34% 40% 39% 41% 57% 34% 33% 33%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

05

1015202530354045


20

In terms of attainment at PGT, FT male and female students generally perform equally well (Figures 8&9). There are, however, exceptions. The 2012/2013 FT graduating class (Figure 8) shows many more males achieving a distinction (43% of men achieved a distinction, as opposed to 24% of women). This was not, however, the case in subsequent years and the SAT saw no cause for specific action, beyond the on-going data monitoring that will be part of the team’s remit going forward.

Figure 8: Postgraduate taught classifications (F/T)

Looking at PT students, even with small numbers, the data showed stable patterns of achievement. As before the small numbers make it hard to draw concrete inferences. Relating to gender. Worth noting is that it looks like students on the PT route in general perform less well than those on FT, with fewer (in terms of %) achieving the highest grades. The SAT did pause over these statistics, but felt this to be more an issue for School PG committees.

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Distinction Merit Pass

Female 9 5 19 15 16 17 13 1 6

Male 9 4 7 6 9 5 5 2 3

Total 18 9 26 21 25 22 18 3 9

% Female* 24% 21% 43% 39% 67% 39% 34% 4% 14%

% Male* 43% 27% 41% 29% 60% 29% 24% 13% 18%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

02468

101214161820

*Percentages calculated based on the overall cohort

Female Male Total % Female* % Male*

21

Figure 9: Postgraduate taught classifications (P/T)

(iv) Numbers of men and women on postgraduate research degrees Full- and part-time. Provide data on course application, offers, acceptance and degree

completion rates by gender. Figure 10 shows a rising proportion of FT female applicants and entrants to PGR degrees over the last three years. 63% of entrants were women in 13/14, 77% in 15/16. Again, the data set is small (22 total entrants in 2015/16) so the change is hard to read. When compared to national trends, the SAT found Russell Group statistics shadowed SELLL patterns with a 64%/36% f/m ratio apparent in English Language and Literature in 2013/14 and 65%/35% in 2014/15. PT applicants and entrants were rare. Figure 11 shows that twelve PT students have started in total in the last three years.

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Distinction Merit Pass

Female 5 3 4 6 5 8 6 5 0

Male 2 2 1 4 2 4 2 0 2

Total 7 5 5 10 7 12 8 5 2

% Female* 17% 11% 27% 21% 18% 53% 21% 18% 0%

% Male* 14% 17% 8% 29% 17% 33% 14% 0% 17%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

0123456789

10

*Percentages calculated based on the overall cohort

Female Male Total % Female* % Male*

22

Figure 10: Postgraduate research degrees (F/T)

Figure 11: Postgraduate research degrees (P/T)

Looking at student achievement, as Figure 12 below shows, it’s hard to detect patterns linked to gender. Seven students completed their PGR studies in 13/14, 12 in 14/15 and nine so far in the current 15/16 cycle. With a sample size this small, inferences are hard to draw.


2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Female 137 43 18 152 31 10 152 34 17

Male 123 34 11 101 17 6 74 15 5

Total 260 77 29 253 48 16 226 49 22

% Female 53% 56% 62% 60% 65% 63% 67% 69% 77%

% Male 47% 44% 38% 40% 35% 38% 33% 31% 23%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160



2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Female 11 6 2 13 6 6 15 4 2

Male 3 1 1 5 1 0 2 1 1

Total 14 7 3 18 7 6 17 5 3

% Female 79% 86% 67% 72% 86% 100% 88% 80% 67%

% Male 21% 14% 33% 28% 14% 0% 12% 20% 33%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16


23

Figure 12: Completion of postgraduate Research studies

(v) Progression pipeline between undergraduate and postgraduate student levels Identify and comment on any issues in the pipeline between undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. Figure 13 below shows progression from SELLL UG to SELLL PG. Wider data on progression from UG to PG was harder to access so comments on the progression data and pipeline are

inevitably narrow. In terms of SELLL, at first glance, an uneven retention of female students is shown. However, considering our UG demographic, this trend actually shows a slight preference toward males continuing with us. Reviewing their decision-making at this point and including discussion of this trend at the focus group on male student recruitment forms part of the AP (AP:SE4.2).

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Pending submission Completed

Female 15 18 17 5 6 4

Male 15 19 12 2 6 5

Total 30 37 29 7 12 9

% Female 50% 49% 59% 71% 50% 44%

% Male 50% 51% 41% 29% 50% 56%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

02468

101214161820


24

Figure 13: SELLL Undergraduate progression to postgraduate study (at Newcastle)

In general terms and as a concluding observation on this part of the submission make clear, the SAT found it hard to draw clear conclusions from some of the PG data because of the small sample sizes involved. Even so, as the (AP: SE4.1) shows, the SAT are keen to monitor and reflect on PG experiences in broad terms and don’t regard the absence of significant evidence of imbalance in achievement as cause for complacency about the School’s performance at PG level. 4.2. Academic and research staff data (vi) Academic staff by grade, contract function and gender: research-only, teaching and

research or teaching-only Look at the career pipeline and comment on and explain any differences between men and women. Identify any gender issues in the pipeline at particular grades/job type/academic contract type. In SELLL almost all permanent academic staff are on teaching and research contracts so the pattern here reflects the overall demographic of the School. The data shows there is no significant gender distinction between contract types (Figure 14), with equal numbers of men and women employed on research contracts, with the gender balance even on teaching and research contracts too. The small number of staff on teaching-only contracts does show an imbalance female to male. The data points are however very small (only 2-3 staff members a year are employed on this basis).

2012 2013 2014 2015

Female 5 9 11 11

Male 3 3 4 5

Total 8 12 15 16

% Female 63% 75% 73% 69%

% Male 38% 25% 27% 31%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0

2

4

6

8

10

12


25

Figure 14: Academic Staff by Grade, Function and Gender

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Grade Role Female Male Female Male Female Male

F

Lecturer 7 2 6 4 9 4

Research Associate 2 2 3 3 3 3

Teacher 2 0 2 2 3 1

G Lecturer 8 2 8 1 6 1

H Senior Lecturer 4 6 5 6 6 4

Reader 0 1 2 2 2 3

I Professor 9 7 9 6 8 7

Considering academic staff by grade (Figure 14), we can see that the m/f distribution of grades is fairly even. Males account for a larger proportion of grades H and I, grades that equate to senior lecturer/reader at NU (F and G are the lecturer grades). The distribution may reflect a considerable period of expansion in the School that has seen the number of

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Lecturer

Research Associate

Teacher

Lecturer

Senior Lecturer

Reader

Professor

Lecturer

Research Associate

Teacher

Lecturer

Senior Lecturer

Reader

Professor

Lecturer

Research Associate

Teacher

Lecturer

Senior Lecturer

Reader

Professor

FG

HI

FG

HI

FG

HI

20

13

/14

20

14

/15

20

15

/16

Female Male

26

permanent academic staff grow by more than 20% in six years. With, the bulk of these appointments made at grade F and G, and many of them women, some bunching of female staff is inevitable. However, the SAT still found evidence (Figure 15) that women do progress to higher grades more slowly with wider social factors seen as a contributory cause. As one respondent to the SS put it “I think women are generally disadvantaged across academia, it’s not SELLL’s fault”. Still, the SAT did reflect at length and the AP outlines specific measures to monitor and support women’s progress (AP:RP2.3). Since this table was drawn up, each of the four female staff at grade F who applied for promotion to G in January 2016 have had their applications approved. Beyond senior lecturers and readers, the visible success of female professors is a very positive feature of the school and an important part of the School’s culture and heritage. Even so, bearing in mind the number of female academics working in SELLL, we would actually expect more female professors. AP measures to help build careers and support promotion for women are aimed at helping address these realities and see women progress to higher grades with greater rapidity and frequency (AP: RP2.3).

Figure 15: Academic progression 2013-2016

F G H I

Male 21% 20% 64% 44%

Female 79% 80% 36% 56%

0%

50%

100%

Academic Progression 2013/14

F G H I

Male 37% 11% 53% 40%

Female 63% 89% 47% 60%

0%

50%

100%


F G H I

Male 33% 14% 47% 47%

Female 67% 86% 53% 53%

0%

50%

100%


27

Currently, all staff in the School who are not on teaching and research contracts (i.e. teaching-only/research-only staff) are at grade F. This makes it unnecessary to show charts for teaching-only and research-only staff by grade. (vii) Academic and research staff by grade on fixed-term, open-ended/permanent and zero-

hour contracts by gender Comment on the proportions of men and women on these contracts. Comment on what is being done to ensure continuity of employment and to address any other issues, including redeployment schemes. All staff on fixed term (FT) contracts are currently at grade F and Figure 16 restricts the data accordingly. The data shows a higher proportion of women on FT contracts over the past three years. The numbers of FT staff is small and hard to draw conclusions from. However,

there is evidence that the rate of employment on FT contracts is higher among women. In response, the SAT will monitor FT appointments’ data and ensure that staff working on these contracts are linked to broader initiatives to build women’s careers (AP:RP2.5). The School has no staff contracted on a zero-hours basis. Figure 16: Grade F staff by contract type

(viii) Academic leavers by grade and gender and full/part-time status

Comment on the reasons academic staff leave the department, any differences by gender and the mechanisms for collecting this data. Academic staff turnover is small and relatively stable, under 10% for the last three years. As Table 1 demonstrates, in the last three years there were only sixteen leavers (thirteen female). Most had reached the end of FT contracts (eight) or retired (four). Three members of permanent academic staff (all female) left to take up new posts, with one being promoted. The SAT review noted that the majority of leavers were women. More than that, all of the staff who left (except retirements) were at lecturer grade H and below. Clearly in a

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Fixed Term Open-Ended

Female 4 7 9 7 5 7

Male 1 5 4 2 2 4

Total 5 12 13 9 7 11

% Female 80% 58% 69% 78% 71% 64%

% Male 20% 42% 31% 22% 29% 36%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0123456789

10


28

department where women are the majority, it’s likely that the leavers’ data will show a

similar profile. It is however significant that all leavers at this grade were women. Reviewing subsequent data will form part of the AP and the School will introduce formal exit interviews and ensure the SEC reviews leavers’ data on a biannual basis (AP:RP2.6). Table 1: Academic leavers by grade and gender and full/part-time status 2012-13

Grade

Staff Employed Leavers Turnover

Male Female Male Female Male Female

RA F 1 5 0 1(F/T)

2(P/T)

0% 60%

Teaching

Fellow F

0 2 0 2 0% 100%

Lecturer F 2 7 0 0 0% 0%

Lecturer G 2 8 0 0 0% 0%

Senior

Lecturer H

6 4 1 0 17% 0%

Reader H 1 0 0 0 0% 0%

Professor I 7 9 0 0 0% 0%

Total (m/f) 19 35 1 (5%) 5 (14%) 5% 14%

Total 54 staff overall 6 leavers overall 11% turnover overall

2013-14

Grade



RA F 2 3 0 0 0% 0%

Teaching

Fellow F

1 2 0 1(F/T)

1(P/T)

0% 100%

Lecturer F 3 8 0 2 0% 25%

Lecturer G 1 8 0 0 0% 0%

Senior

Lecturer H

6 5 0 0 0% 0%

Reader H 2 2 0 0 0% 0%

Professor I 7 9 1 0 14% 0%

Total (m/f) 22 37 1 4 5% 11%

Total 59 Staff overall 5 leavers overall 8.5% turnover overall

2014-15

Grade



RA F 3 4 0 1(P/T) 0% 25%

Teaching

Fellow F

1 2 0 0 0% 0%

Lecturer F 4 11 0 1(P/T) 0% 9%

Lecturer G 1 7 0 1(P/T) 0% 14%

Senior

Lecturer H

4 6 0 0 0% 0%

Reader H 4 2 1(F/T) 0 25% 0%

Professor I 7 8 0 1(F/T) 0% 13%

Total (m/f) 24 40 1 4 4% 10%

Total 64 Staff overall 5 leavers overall 8% turnover overall

[Word Count: 1976]

29

5. SUPPORTING AND ADVANCING WOMEN’S CAREERS


5.1. Key career transition points: academic staff (i) Recruitment Break down data by gender and grade for applications to academic posts including shortlisted candidates, offer and acceptance rates. Comment on how the department’s recruitment processes ensure that women (and men where there is an underrepresentation in numbers) are encouraged to apply. The process of setting up a selection panel for academic appointments is determined by role

and subject expertise. The HoS sits on all panels for academic staff. For lecturing positions, the Subject Head also serves along with an individual whose subject expertise most closely matches that of the advertised job. On occasion, a second specialist will serve, bringing additional research expertise. School staff are supported by a layperson from outside the subject area, and a panel chair appointed by Faculty (usually a member of the Faculty Executive Board). Over the past three years, selection panels built on these principles have shown a good mix in terms of age, grade, experience and gender. There have been no all-male or all female panels and all but two interview panels for permanent positions have had at least two men and two women on them. However, data on recording the precise composition of panels has not been kept and doing so from here on in, and reviewing the composition, represents an

important part of the AP (AP:RP2.7). Similar scrutiny will also be applied to the advertising process. While application rates shows a balanced spread of applicants in terms of the male to female ratio, the measures in place to ensure the School is actively promoting new positions in terms that consciously address E&D need to be improved. Work on our advertising, the design of job specifications and the narrative around positions are thus part of the AP (AP:RP2.8). In terms of the appointments made, there have been nine staff appointed on open-ended contracts over the past three years, five women and four men. Nine women and five men have been appointed to FT positions.

30

Table 2: Appointments in SELLL 2012 – 2015

Academic Year

Job Role Applications Appointed

F M U F M

2012-13 p/t Research Associate 16 14 0 1 1

Research Assistant 27 11 0 1 0

TF in Language/Linguistics 9 6 0 1 0

Lecturer in Child Language Development

8 2 0 1 0

Reader/SL in American Literature 12 11 1 1 0

2013-14 Research Associates (x4) 42 46 0 2 2

Lecturer in Sociolinguistics 4 13 0 1 0

p/t Lecturer in the History of the

English language

1 3 0 0 1

TF in Film Studies 17 18 0 1 0

Lecturer in Phonology 7 13 1 1 0

Lecturer in the History of the English Language

7 11 1 0 1

Teaching Fellow in Syntax 3 2 0 0 1

2014-15 p/t Research Associate 11 8 1 1 0

Lecturer in the History of the English Language

2 1 0 1 0

Lecturer/SL in Creative Writing 9 14 1 0 2

Lecturer in Creative Writing (Poetry) 7 11 0 1 0

Lecturer in English Literature (1890-1930)

36 44 0 0 2

Head of School 4 9 1 0 1

The SAT also noted that data on shortlists was incomplete, with no accurate recording of

candidates or m/f split on shortlists. Addressing this again forms an important element in the AP (AP:RP2.7). (ii) Induction Describe the induction and support provided to all new academic staff at all levels. Comment on the uptake of this and how its effectiveness is reviewed.

The Staff Development Unit (SDU) offers a range of support services for new staff. There are ‘Welcome’ events periodically across the year offering an overview of the University’s strategic objectives and functions. Alongside these, SDU also provide a range of online resources on PDR, Health and Safety and induction. To these NU services, the School offers bespoke support that starts with an induction meeting with the HoS and/or SM. Beyond serving as a welcome, this meeting offers a chance to talk through responsibilities, a meeting that compliments the work of the induction mentor/buddy who is assigned to each new member of staff for their first year. The mentor,

31

who has a WL allowance, arranges formal meetings (2 pa) and offers informal support. The

aim is to support the induction of new staff, be a friendly face, encourage information sharing, answer day to day questions, serve as a link with other staff members and help with orientation. There’s also a School specific briefing session on IT services for new staff at the start of each academic year. Staff who need further support are advised to take specific courses with SDU. In the SAT’s review of induction (and free comments on the SS), while there was general satisfaction, questions were raised about parental leave, promotion and support. As one staff member noted: “It would have been very helpful to know that your caring responsibilities can be taken into account when timetabling … This information isn’t included in the staff handbook and was not mentioned at any stage in the induction process.” As a result of this

feeback, actions aimed at improving the staff handbook, the induction process and monitoring its effectiveness form part of the AP (AP:RP2.9).

(iii) Promotion Provide data on staff applying for promotion and comment on applications and success rates by gender, grade and full- and part-time status. Comment on how staff are encouraged and supported through the process. Table 3 records applications for promotion since 2013, showing 6 of 7 female applicants have been successful (86%), 3 of 6 male (50%). Although the sample size is small, there is no evidence from the data that women are less likely to be successful when making applications.

Table 3: Applications for promotion and success by gender

Year

Promotion

to

No of

Applications

Male Female

Successful Unsuccessful Successful Unsuccessful

2012-13

Chair 1 - 1 - -

Reader 1 1

Senior Lect. 2 1 - 1 -

Lecturer G 2 - - 2 -

2013-14

Chair 2 1 1 - -

Reader 2 1 - - 1

Senior Lect. 1 - - 1 -

2014-15

Chair 1 - 1 - -

Lecturer G 1 - - 1 -

*Note: all staff who applied for promotion had full-time contracts.

There have been three applications for promotion to professor in this period with two successful. All were made by men. The SAT found cause for concern in this information and the AP proposes specific measures (AP:RP2.4). Also noteworthy is the absence of applications from staff on fractional contracts. There are only three SELLL staff on fractional contracts who could apply (the others are professors), so the absence is not immediately significant. Again, the AP includes actions aimed specifically

32

at making sure that the School briefings reach staff on fractional contracts (AP:RP2.4). Such a

change will nest easily into the existing process which begins in communication to all staff from HR on the promotions process/timetable. An invitation from the HoS for any staff member thinking about applying for promotion to meet with him to discuss their application plans then follows. The HoS also writes to all staff at the top of the F grade, encouraging them to apply. Once the process begins, applicants start to consult with the HoS, working to strengthen the data and the narrative. With the permission of the applicant, it might be appropriate to bring in other staff with relevant experience to help with the consultation leading up to submission. There are two members of staff with recent experience of promotions, both women and both are willing to offer advice and support. HASS also runs promotion workshops. There are

usually 3 or 4 months from the start of the process to submission, with plenty of time and opportunities for consultation and feedback. Post application, it is the HASS PVC who responds to requests for feedback from staff unsuccessful in their application for promotion on lecturer and reader grades, the VC responds to requests from unsuccessful applicants who have applied for promotion to professor. Feedback from the SS and the SAT around these processes was instructive and offered several learning points. In the SS, of the 34 who responded to questions about promotion, 65% found the process “fair and transparent” with many staff feeling “supported by colleagues in regard to promotions.” However, for some, there was a sense that staff were unsure of the process, the deadlines and indeed the committee-based nature of the process and the extent to which promotions lie firmly outside the gift of the HoS. One noted, “I don’t

really know how promotion works e.g. when I should be thinking of applying, what I have to do to make the higher grade.” To address these concerns, the AP asks for clearer, more frequent face-to-face communication and further briefings from the HoS and PDR reviewers so that understanding of the opportunities and processes becomes more widely understood (AP:RP2.4).

33

(iv) Department submissions to the Research Excellence Framework (REF)

Provide data on the staff, by gender, submitted to REF versus those that were eligible. Compare this to the data for the Research Assessment Exercise 2008. Comment on any gender imbalances identified. At REF2014 the School submitted 91% of all research active staff. There were 5 staff of a possible 51 who were not included in the census, 2 men and 3 women, a figure that, bearing in mind the 60/40 female to male split, shows that men were marginally more likely not to be submitted – it’s hard to draw meaningful conclusions from the data and no real evidence of inequality.

Table 4: SELLL Staff at REF 2014

REF 2014 Male Female Total

Eligible 21 42%

30 59%

51

Submitted 19 41%

27 59%

46

Not Submitted 2 40%

3 60%

5

As Table 5 below demonstrates, comparing REF2014 with RAE2008, submission rates have fallen. 97% of staff were returned in 2008, with 1 male member of staff not submitted. While the fall is significant in terms of School strategy, there is no evidence that the change reflects or creates a gender imbalance.

Table 5: RAE 2008

RAE 2008 Male Female Total

Eligible 22 52%

20 48%

42

Submitted 21 51%

20 49%

41

Not Submitted 1 100%

0 0%

1

What is interesting to note in comparing the two tables is that between 2008 and 2014, not

only has the School grown, but it has grown in ways that show a very significant rise in the number of female researchers in the School (up 13 from 20). Clearly, women have been very successful in securing new posts in the School. Continued oversight of REF data will form part of the work of the SAT at leading up to the next census.

34

5.2. Career development: academic staff (i) Training Describe the training available to staff at all levels in the department. Provide details of uptake by gender and how existing staff are kept up to date with training. How is its effectiveness monitored and developed in response to levels of uptake and evaluation? In the last three years, 107 workshops run by the SDU were attended by 28 different staff (18/10, f/m), just under 50% of staff. Staff are informed of opportunities in frequent circulars from SDU. Training is also a standard element of PDR. Where gaps are identified, the HoS is responsible for actioning. Staff requests can come through at any point in the cycle (in response to inquiries or an SDU circular). Since 2013, all requests for training have been

fulfilled. Figure 17 below gives the scale and distribution by m/f of training offered over the last three years. Figure 17: Training Uptake

For new staff, the Certificate in Academic Standards and Practice (CASAP) is an expectation, offering staff training on teaching and learning, reflection on University processes and discussion of the responsibilities of lecturers. Experienced staff with demonstrable prior learning/experience may be exempt, but for the majority, taking CASAP is key to their first year in post and supported by a WL allowance of 150 hours. In the last three years, five staff (2/5, f/m) have completed the programme, with six currently working their way through (2/4,

f/m). In the last three years, three more established staff (all women) have elected to take the Faculty Futures Programme. Again supported by a 150 hour WL allowance, this course gives staff the opportunity to undertake a research project on any aspect of the University’s business and, supported by mentoring and the work of formal sessions, to deliver the findings to senior University leaders (including the VC). Senior staff with leadership responsibilities also take the Academic Leaders Programme (run in conjunction with Durham University). Required for HoS, the course has also been taken by a Deputy HoS and an Institute Director (in last five years two male and two female staff have taken the ALP course). Unconscious

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Female 8 10 13

Male 8 2 4

Total 16 12 17

% Female 50% 83% 76%

% Male 50% 17% 24%

0%20%40%60%80%100%

02468

101214


35

bias, E&D training are key element of the ALP, sitting alongside reflective elements on culture

building and management styles. While the SAT’s review of training revealed good practice, there was a sense that more could be done to enhance uptake and the AP addresses this in terms of plans to extend the communication strategies, measures aimed at identifying particular groups of staff who could benefit from specific training, and evaluation of the efficacy (AP:RP2.10).

(ii) Appraisal/development review Describe current appraisal/development review schemes for staff at all levels, including postdoctoral researchers and provide data on uptake by gender. Provide details of any appraisal/review training offered and the uptake of this, as well as staff feedback about the

process. All staff undertake an annual PDR to review the past 12 months, to set objectives and to agree priorities for the coming year. PDRs for academics are conducted by either the HoS, Heads of Subject, the Director of Excellence in Teaching and Learning or the Director of Research (all members of SEC). Principle Investigators (Pis) undertake PDRs with Research Assistants (RAs) on specific research projects. The School Manager undertakes PDRs for PSS staff. She in turn has her PDR jointly with the HoS and the Director of Faculty Operations. The HoS’s PDR is held with the Faculty PVC. A vital part of School culture and essential for vertical and horizontal communication, the School dedicates considerable resources to PDR and consistently achieves a 100% completion

rate, with all PDRs completed before February each year. All staff running PDRs for the first time are required to undertake training by SDU and good practice is shared at School Executive. While in the SS, one staff member noted that “Any problems I have raised in my PDR have been met with a willingness to take action”, the SAT has shown there is more work to do with the AP identifying, briefing of staff running PDR and conversations about workload (WL) and promotions for attention (AP:RP2.11).

(iii) Support given to academic staff for career progression Comment and reflect on support given to academic staff, especially postdoctoral researchers, to assist in their career progression.

Beyond the formal support offered by Faculty/SDU processes, the School offers mentoring and access to targeted resources. The Research Support Fund (typically £900 per staff member) is available to all academics and supports conference attendance, research trips and other activities. With a larger sum offered to more junior staff, it also offers specific assistance for EC academics. To further their progression, the School provides an additional early career (EC) allowance (150hrs) in the Workload Allocation Model (WAM) to new lecturers joining the School on a permanent basis for their first year. More general support comes through the School’s 2 annual away days, one focussed on teaching, the other focussed on research. In addition, the Director of Research (DoR) runs 3

36

research visibility sessions pa, an informal gathering focussed around short presentations on

the research of 3 staff that aims to share insights, grant capture opportunities, enhance the School’s research culture and develop a collaborate sense of shared intellectual enterprise. Mentoring, the internal research leave scheme and support in applying for Faculty funds (discussed below) offer further support.

(iv) Support given to students (at any level) for academic career progression Comment and reflect on support given to students at any level to enable them to make informed decisions about their career (including the transition to a sustainable academic career). Briefings for UG students on career opportunities in academia are focussed in taught sessions

delivered as part of UG dissertation modules and in sessions publicising the possibilities of PG study and funding opportunities (particularly MA scholarships [6 are funded by the School] and presentations on the Doctoral Training Partnership [DTP]). This approach is extended at Mlevel, where briefings for DTP applicants point students towards the funding they’ll need, the steps required and the opportunities that lie beyond. Taught modules focussed on research skills and training also include specific sessions about PhD study and academic careers. At PGR level, the Doctoral Training Partnerships (DTPs) run training days focussed on skills and professionalization. Partnership opportunities developed through the DTPs or furthered by CDAs (three currently held by SELLL students) add depth to the support. The PG SSC also runs sessions, sponsored by the School, that invite EC staff to speak to current students about applications, interview processes and their experiences as EC academics. To support this, the HoS invites all current PhD students to attend the research presentations by

applicants that precede all academic job interviews in the School, giving PGR students a sense of the kinds of expectations that will face them in their careers. Establishing UG and PG diversity and equality representatives will help ensure that information, experience and insight on opportunity and equality is being properly captured and communicated with and across the whole School [AP: SE4.6]. The quality of the work done to help prepare students is evidenced in the success rate of former SELLL PhD students securing academic jobs. In the last 12 months alone, three former PHD students have secured posts.

(v) Support offered to those applying for research grant applications Comment and reflect on support given to staff who apply for funding and what support is offered to those who are unsuccessful. SELLL’s commitment to grant writing is evidenced in the Schools internally funded research leave scheme. Offered to all research staff, the system means colleagues can normally expect to secure one semester of leave after every seven or eight semesters. The School counts maternity leave as one of the eight semesters and also includes periods of research leave funded by external schemes in the semester count.

37

At Faculty level, grant capture is incentivised with financial reward (tiered according to

application value) for all applications approved to submission. The funds accrued can be accessed for research purposes (including seed corn for new pilots) even if the application is unsuccessful. Beyond that, the relevant Grants and Contracts (G&C) and Research Management Teams offer specialist support. This academic year, the School has had briefings from G&Cs at the research away day and a very well-attended surgery day run by the G&C Officer. In addition to this Faculty support, SELLL colleagues also have support from the DoR as well as the Heads of Institutes connected with the disciplines underpinning the School’s research culture (particularly the Newcastle University Humanities Research Institute (NUHRI) and research centres like the Centre for Research in Linguistics and Language Sciences [CRiLLS])

and the NCLA). Collaborative grant writing workshops have been run by these organisations in recent years, processes supported by surgery hours and informal mentoring. The Faculty also runs a bid preparation scheme that funds teaching buyout and/or RA time so that staff can allocate time to bid writing. In addition, ECRs are supported in the application process by their mentors within SELLL. Appointed to all new staff when they join the School, the mentor offers guidance on research planning, School processes and the wider research context. Moreover, the School operates an internal peer review mechanism that matches research proposals with experts who then act as critical friends who can advise the scheme’s guidelines and criteria, budget and other practical matters even as they engage in the reading of drafts. Though broadly positive (one member of staff recorded in SS that “The mentor system has been extremely helpful for me”),

the SAT’s reflection on this aspect of the School’s culture made it clear that more work on these informal mechanisms, communicating them to staff (both reviewees and prospective reviewers) and evaluating their efficacy is needed and these reflections have informed the AP. The SAT also identified post-application support as a gap, particularly with unsuccessful bids. Involving the mentor at this stage would bring real benefits, in terms of revising for resubmission or moving on with new plans, a process that will be outlined in the AP (AP: CDP3.1). 5.3. Flexible working and managing career breaks

(i) Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: before leave Explain what support the department offers to staff before they go on maternity and adoption

leave. Information about maternity leave provision for both academic and PSS staff is held on the HR site and staff are directed to this when first discussing their pregnancy with the HoS or SM. A link to the page containing the relevant documents is also available in the staff handbook. Before going on leave, staff are offered a meeting with the HoS or SM to discuss their maternity leave plans and, provided with information about Keeping in Touch (KIT) days and given an opportunity to talk through options for return to work. No academic or PSS staff have requested adoption leave in the School in the past five years.

38

(ii) Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: during leave

Explain what support the department offers to staff during maternity and adoption leave. Staff on maternity leave are eligible to use up to ten ‘Keeping in Touch’ days, but are not required to do so. In the last three years, staff have used their KIT days to maintain contact with PGR students, keep up to date with emails, attend conferences, meet with colleagues and undertake preparation work, all of which have served to ease their return to work. (iii) Cover and support for maternity and adoption leave: returning to work Explain what support the department offers to staff on return from maternity or adoption leave. Comment on any funding provided to support returning staff.

Staff preparing to return from maternity leave are asked to meet with the HoS or SM to discuss plans moving forward. In 2015/16 the School supported 1 member of academic staff returning from maternity leave in her application for a period of flexible working (switching to P/T working [0.5] for a FT period). Staff also have the opportunity to liaise with the HoS about teaching hours and timetabling and have been welcome to discuss adjustments designed to accommodate attendance at meetings and events. Starting teaching at 10am, instead of 9am, is possible, an adjustment that has made a significant difference to childcare arrangements. As one SS respondent put it, “I love flexible working, it makes me feel happier to come to work”. There is currently no additional funding for academic staff returning from maternity/adoption or paternity leave. However, in response to SAT scrutiny, the AP outlines proposals for additional research support funding to facilitate the return period (AP:CDP3.2).

More broadly, academic and PSS staff returning from maternity, paternity or adoption leave are invited to join the NU Parent’s Network, offering them the opportunity to meet and seek advice from other parents within the University.

39

(iv) Maternity return rate Provide data and comment on the maternity return rate in the department. Data of staff whose contracts are not renewed while on maternity leave should be included in the section along with commentary.

Figure 18: Maternity leave

Three members of academic staff and one member of PSS staff have gone on maternity leave since November 2013. All four have returned to the department. No maternity leave was

taken during the period 2012-2013. One full-time member of academic staff returned from maternity leave and has resumed work at 0.5FTE for one semester, having had a formal request for this change to her contract supported by the School. There have been no cases of either academic or PSS staff not returning to work post maternity leave, nor cases of a contract not being renewed during maternity leave. Because of the small numbers of staff involved (four), the data above combines PSS and academic staff data. One PGR student interrupted her studies from February to March 2015 while she took maternity leave. She returned to the School and is currently on her writing up year. Another PGR student interrupted her studies from November 2012 to May 2013 to take maternity leave and is currently in the 3rd year of her PGR degree. 1 English Literature UG student suspended her studies in 2013-14 to take maternity leave. She returned in September 2014

and graduated in June 2015. (v) Paternity, shared parental, adoption, and parental leave uptake Provide data and comment on the uptake of these types of leave by gender and grade. Comment on what the department does to promote and encourage take-up of paternity leave and shared parental leave.

One member of academic staff (grade F) took paternity leave in 2012-13 and again in 2014-15. The University’s policies on paternity and shared parental leave are outlined in the staff handbook with links to the relevant HR site, with new staff briefed as part of the induction

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15

Leave 0 1 3

Returned 0 1 3

Return Rate 100% 100% 100%

0

1

3

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0

1

2

3

Leave Returned Return Rate

40

process. In the last three years, no staff member has taken shared parental, adoption or

parental leave. Further work on promoting the available opportunities forms part of the AP (AP:RP2.9). (vi) Flexible working Provide information on the flexible working arrangements available. The University has a Flexible Working Policy (including an appeals process). Any member of staff can complete a Flexible Working Request Form. The request would go to the HoS for academics, the SM for PSS staff, with the School aiming to approve all requests. Likewise informal requests would be discussed with the HoS, lodged with HR and approved where possible. In the last three years, one formal request was made and supported. The AP

outlines measures to promote the opportunities and to collect and monitor data (AP:RP2.9). (vii) Transition from part-time back to full-time work after career breaks Outline what policy and practice exists to support and enable staff who work part-time after a career break to transition back to full-time roles. The University has clear policies and options for staff wishing to work PT following a career break. The HoS or SM would meet with the individual to discuss requests, working case-by-case. For a group of around 70 staff and backed by the University’s policies, there is considerable scope for the School to talk to individuals and develop plans to meet specific needs. Again, the AP outlines measures to promote the available opportunities and to collect and monitor data (AP:RP2.9).

5.4. Organisation and culture (i) Culture Demonstrate how the department actively considers gender equality and inclusivity. Provide details of how the Athena SWAN Charter principles have been, and will continue to be, embedded into the culture and workings of the department. SELLL has a long history of promoting equal opportunity, a tradition driven by imaginative and progressive leadership of successive Heads of School and sustained by a collegiate and motivated group of staff, for many of whom the study of gender politics is both fundamental to their personal principles and intrinsic to their research and teaching. The home of the first

female professor at NU (Professor Barbara Strang) and with senior women core to its management team and culture, female leadership has been central to the development of the School over many years and the culture is strong. SS responses found staff reporting “I am excited by my work” and that “The tendency towards collegiality is a huge strength in SELLL”. Supported by evidence from salary data, promotions, demographics across different grades, the results of the SS show the extent to which the School values equality and opportunity. There is little evidence in SELLL of a gender pay gap for example, or sign that women are being denied the chance to fill and succeed in senior positions. The demonstrable success of PG and EC and staff offers further evidence of the quality of the culture, one sustained by specific measures that include:

41

Core Hours for major School meetings (between 10 – 4) and flexibility around teaching timetabling to accommodate carer commitments.

Mentoring and support mechanisms designed to foster effective research, quality

teaching and encourage promotion.

A leadership team shaped by and still including significant numbers of very successful female academics, staff who help model and promote opportunities for women.

There are, however, as the SAT process has shown and as the HoS’s letter makes clear, areas of SELLL culture that need attention. The desire to see improvements in the induction process and communication, a need for greater transparency and commitment to structural measures that will embed strategies designed to explicitly monitor and promote the equality

of opportunity in the School informs much of the AP (AP:RP2.1/2.9). Communicating opportunities, creating support mechanisms and promoting positive engagement with these resources and opportunities is key, as will be the ongoing work of the SAT as the School plans for re-accreditation as part of its work as the E&D Committee in ways designed to feed back

to the SEC. The aim is then to see this submission as a way of capitalising on the history and culture of the School, its many successes and the commitment and dedication of staff, to embed scrutiny and robust processes in ways that will ensure the School continues as an equitable place to work for years to come.

(ii) HR policies Describe how the department monitors the consistency in application of HR policies for equality, dignity at work, bullying, harassment, grievance and disciplinary processes. Describe actions taken to address any identified differences between policy and practice. Comment on how the department ensures staff with management responsibilities are kept informed and updated on HR polices.

HASS policy gives the HoS and SM line management responsibilities, supported by monthly catch ups, opportunities to receive briefings on policy, cross reference queries and to follow- up actions around contracts, leave, occupational health etc. Primary staff with line management responsibilities are thus kept in regular touch.

Based on these meetings the SEC, as PDR reviewers, are briefed on relevant changes to policy, with staff briefed at School meetings. The School staff handbook offers another key resource, including information on sickness and absence policies, maternity leave etc. and links to relevant HR information. The SAT review has though identified areas where the handbook could be developed in order to foreground the emphasis on E&D (AP:RP2.9).

42

(iii) Representation of men and women on committees Provide data for all department committees broken down by gender and staff type. Identify the most influential committees. Explain how potential committee members are identified and comment on any consideration given to gender equality in the selection of representatives and what the department is doing to address any gender imbalances. Comment on how the issue of ‘committee overload’ is addressed where there are small numbers of women or men. The SEC is the key decision-making body in the School – all other committees report up. Its membership (Table 6) shows an f/m split that reflects the School’s demographic. Other committees demonstrate a similar f/m split, and again typically match the School’s f/m distribution. Reflecting the School’s culture, seniority and decision-making is not concentrated in the hands of any single group, but shared out among men and women. To further this culture, the School is looking to open out the membership of the SEC by inviting

two additional members of staff to join the committee each time it sits (monthly in term time), on a rotating basis, with the aim to bring greater transparency and inclusivity (AP:TSC1.2).

Research Committee is the only committee where this split is not reproduced. Assembling the submission data showed Research Committee to be the only committee with any gender imbalance (5/4, m/f). In response the AP data outlines a commitment to add a female member of EC staff to the membership from 16/17 onwards, to represent female researchers at the start of their careers. Table 6: Committee membership

Committee 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Female Male % Female Female Male

% Female Female Male

% Female

School Executive 5 4 56% 5 4 56% 8 4 67%

School Research 4 4 50% 4 5 44% 4 5 44%

UG Teaching 5 4 56% 5 4 56% 6 5 55%

Postgraduate 5 3 63% 9 3 75% 8 3 73%

Student/Staff (UG)

5 3 63% 5 2 71% 6 3 67%

Student/Staff (PG) 5 2 71% 10 3 77% 6 2 75%

Board of Studies (UG)

15 7 68% 15 7 68% 23 14 62%

Board of Studies (PG)

7 3 70% 10 3 77% 11 4 73%

Beyond the competitive national selection processes for HoS and SM, there is no formal selection process for any of the School’s other senior roles. PDR and the collegiate sense that all academic staff will take a share of the leadership and management of the School are the processes that inform selection, with seniority and experience the principle determinants for individual roles. WL management and longer-term individual career plans are also important. Staff understand that by making a significant contribution to the School, they can help build promotion cases.

43

Assigning roles and responsibilities is a key part of the School’s annual cycle. As committee

memberships are determined largely by role, equity in the assignation of roles ensures equity on committee membership. One of the tasks of the SAT going forward will be to monitor representation on School committees and to report to SEC (AP:TSC1.2). This process will feed succession planning and ensure that School committees are reflecting the diversity of the School. Because of the gender balance in the School and its size, the pressure on individuals to join a particular committee to ensure a diverse membership is small. Committee overload as a result of the need for gender balance is not an issue in SELLL.

(iv) Participation on influential external committees How are staff encouraged to participate in other influential external committees and what procedures are in place to encourage women (or men if they are underrepresented) to

participate in these committees? School staff are widely represented on influential University and external committees. Professor Jenny Richards, for example, sits on University Promotions Committee, is a member of the selection panel working on the appointment of the new VC and plays a key role on committees for the AHRC, the Wellcome Trust and the English Association. Two female staff sat on the REF2014 panel for UoA29. In all cases these duties are recognised in the WAM, with REF panel membership, for example, set at 0.2 of annual WL. Beyond WL allowances, participation on influential committees is recognised in the esteem component of promotions and thus contributes to the profile submitted to NU Promotions Committee.

(v) Workload model Describe any workload allocation model in place and what it includes. Comment on ways in which the model is monitored for gender bias and whether it is taken into account at appraisal/development review and in promotion criteria. Comment on the rotation of responsibilities and if staff consider the model to be transparent and fair. The School uses a Workload Allocation Model (WAM) for all academic staff. The model accounts for all teaching, research and administrative roles, allocating a set number of hours to each activity, with an allocation of 40% pa for research activity for all T&R staff. Responding to fair criticism from staff about WAM processes, criticism that emerged in the SS

(only 9 of the 27 staff who responded currently believe the model works well), the SEC has been working on a review that addresses questions of transparency and the tendency for the model to look back rather than to help plan forward. The result is that in May 2016, all staff will receive a draft WAM chart for the coming year. At that point, there will be the opportunity to snag missing items and consult, as part of the planning process for the coming academic year. Once this new process has bedded in, the model for the next academic year will not only be distributed to individuals in draft form in May 2017, but shared with the School, creating a more collective and transparent model, one that aids the management of individual

44

workloads, generates a clear sense of the range of duties undertaken by staff, and makes WL

allocation transparent. Major roles are not formally rotated in the School. The HoS is appointed by the University and usually serves for a fixed term (typically 5 years). Other roles are reviewed annually by the HoS in consultation with the SEC and as part of PDR. The process means that a range of factors that include experience, seniority, workload, the ambitions of individual staff and research leave allocations can be brought to bear. (vi) Timing of departmental meetings and social gatherings Describe the consideration given to those with caring responsibilities and part-time staff around the timing of departmental meetings and social gatherings.

Formal School Meetings are scheduled in core hours (10am and 4pm). In practice, much takes place on Wednesday afternoons to avoid UG teaching. To help staff plan, the dates of key meetings for the year are published at the end of August. Inevitably, informal or short notice meetings may need to take place outside of these hours but the norm is to consult about timings. Staff with prior arrangements are welcome to note apologies. Clarifying guidance around core hours and noting apologies forms part of the AP (AP:RP2.9). There are two formal staff social events each academic year, one at the start in late September and one following the end of the Exam Boards in June. Both take place at lunchtime, with food and refreshments available. Attendance at the events is high and there is a clear sense that staff, old and new, PSS and academic, across all grades are participating.

(vii) Visibility of role models Describe how the institution builds gender equality into organisation of events. Comment on the gender balance of speakers and chairpersons in seminars, workshops and other relevant activities. Comment on publicity materials, including the department’s website and images used. Many of the School’s most high profile events are driven by The Newcastle Centre for the Literary Arts, (NCLA), a University Research Centre based in the School. Led by former HoS, Professor Linda Anderson and supported by the work of Jackie Kay, Professor of Creative Writing in SELLL and Chancellor of Salford University, the NCLA programme models diversity and opportunity in high profile and influential ways, offering staff and students constant

engagement with high profile figures from the world of arts and cultures. In recent months, for example, the Booker Prize nominee Sarah Waters has been working in SELLL, with her work the centrepiece of a major programme of engagement. Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty at the National Council for Civil Liberties has also contributed to the NCLA programme in recent months. The NCLA Management Steering Group meets throughout the year to review activity and plan events with the promotion and model of diversity written into its mission statement. In order to secure this ambition going forward, the NCLA like other School committees will be making AS a standing item on its agendas (AP:TSC1.3).

45

As far as marketing and web presences are concerned, the School is currently engaged in an

extensive review of its marketing and publicity materials, linked to the University’s wider upgrade. News and events about our high profile events will remain key to our web presence. Part of the upgrade will involve work on the kinds of images we use to promote the School. Alongside the need to ensure diversity and representation of high achieving female academics, there’s also a need to give our male students, underrepresented in the UG student cohort, greater profile. True of the School’s web presence, it’s also key to our plans for reviewing our marketing and prospectus material and our open days, where male student speakers and hosts will be actively recruited (AP:SE4.3/4.4). (viii) Outreach activities Provide data on the staff and students from the department involved in outreach and

engagement activities by gender and grade. How is staff and student contribution to outreach and engagement activities formally recognised? Comment on the participant uptake of these activities by gender. SELLL runs an extremely wide range of outreach and engagement activities. Impact and embedded research delivering transformative social effects was core to the School’s REF success in 2014 (it was the top performing unit nationally on this measure) and these activities are core to SELLL’s mission. There isn’t room to identify all of the areas of good practice here, instead what follows offers a flavour of the range and quality of activities. The dissemination by Professor Karen Corrigan and Dr Adam Mearns of their unique digital database of Tyneside English, for example, has led to workshops for primary children at the

Discovery Museum (with a gender split of 50/50), master classes for Advanced Level students (70/30 f/m) and public lectures in the University’s Insights Series (60/40 m/f). One of these lectures was posted on iTunesU and subsequently downloaded over 1,700 times. Corrigan and Mearns have also participated in outreach activities linked to language and migration in Northern Ireland, offering workshops for children at the Mellon Centre for Migration Studies and the Linen Hall Library (50/50 M/F), master classes for Advanced Level students (100% female), and exhibitions/public lectures to celebrate race relations week. Dr James Procter leads a series of events under the heading ‘Migration, Readership and the Public Perception of Diaspora and Identity’. Moving beyond the consideration of the connections between diasporic literature and the migrant experience developed by professional metropolitan critics, this project takes the literature and the debates outside the

academy. Working with readers from across the UK and over four continents, the project fosters a ‘devolved’ debate on diasporic literatures. Involving school-children and adults, public libraries and book groups, migrant and ‘local’ readers, literary festivals and agencies such as the British Council, the project stages an encounter between migrant literary production and the public sphere on an unprecedented scale. Dr Tina Gharavi’s outreach activity with refugees and asylum seekers is award-winning and has culminated in a BAFTA-nominated feature film. Her production company and the community charity she works with engages with at-risk groups to produce films that offer

46

high visibility for minorities and include formal placements and the opportunity for UG

students to participate through work-based learning. Equally important to the School’s work and of real relevance to the focus on gender and equality, is our partnership with Seven Stories, the National Centre for the Children’s Book (accredited by Arts Council England in 2012). Building our expertise in children’s writing and the study of childhood, there is collaboration at many levels. In particular, our research underpins the development of the Seven Stories archive; supports their exhibitions; contributes to the training of staff; provides international advocacy, thereby raising awareness of this unique resource and helping to establish it as one of the world’s leading public centres for children’s literature.

Staff outreach contributions are formally recognized in the WAM. The ways in which these activities feed into our research culture (through the REF impact narrative) is also an important measure of recognition with the contributions staff make enabling career progression and contributing to cases for promotion. As far as students are concerned, their contribution to outreach activities is recognized in a range of ways that include monetary rewards as part of the Student Leadership scheme. They also have the opportunity to pursue credit for outreach on careers and employability modules. SELLL students have also been repeatedly recognised for their contributions at the University’s regular Celebrating Success events. [word count: 5,891]

6. FURTHER INFORMATION Recommended word count: Bronze: 500 words

Please comment here on any other elements that are relevant to the application. A thriving and successful School, delivering excellent performance in teaching and research, one consistently working to innovate and improve, SELLL has embraced the challenges set by AS. Proud of the equality and opportunities offered to staff and students and equally proud of our heritage, we’re also resilient and ambitious enough to welcome the more critical insights offered by the SAT and to recognise the need to make significant and effective changes to culture and process. Embracing these changes and implementing them will not always be easy, but the production of this submission has served to clarify the clear relationship between improving the School’s work on equality and overall performance. The benefits of AS are clear. Work on culture and equality will enhance the quality of educational opportunities available in the School and strengthen the energy and creativity of our research. Central to the School’s vision for implementation is the desire to place gender equality alongside a more self-conscious and critical focus on diversity in broader terms. It’s been fascinating to see so often in SAT meetings, colleagues raising wider concerns around sexuality, ethnicity, class and disability during discussions and there is clear evidence that again, while we’re striving to create a diverse culture, there is much more we could and

47

should be doing on diversity more generally. At the same time, there’s a lot of evidence of excellent work already achieved that has been hard to capture in our submission (our work with trans people for example). In summary, addressing gender equality and reflecting on the AS Charter as we‘ve drafted this document has served the invaluable purpose of pushing us towards asking vital question about our work on diversity more generally, prompted us towards scrutinising our processes and committed us to substantive change. Important for SELLL, these ambitions have real meaning in the University too. As the first School in HASS to go forward, we’ll have the opportunity to model the process and help the other eight units build towards their submissions (all HASS schools have now committed to submit within the next three years). As we do so, we’ll be able to influence widely, share our experiences and commitment and connect with broader institutional change. Evidenced in the recent appointments of a new Faculty Diversity Officer (a member of SELLL staff) and the new University Dean of Diversity, there is clear momentum at NU. The ambition is that SELLL’s experience with this submission will add energy to these developments. The staff and students in SELLL are intellectually curious, self-reflexive and challenging by nature, creative and restless too. The SAT process and this submission has been nourished and strengthened by these qualities, qualities that will continue to energise the process of implementation outlined in the AP. Well-organised, ambitious, self-critical and motivated, what’s outlined in this document is the product of a lot of hard work and scrutiny, mark of the School’s commitment to what lies ahead.

[word count: 487]

48

7. ACTION PLAN The action plan should present prioritised actions to address the issues identified in this application. Please present the action plan in the form of a table. For each action define an appropriate success/outcome measure, identify the person/position(s) responsible for the action, and timescales for completion. The plan should cover current initiatives and your aspirations for the next four years. Actions, and their measures of success, should be Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound (SMART).

49

Action Plan School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics, Newcastle University

1. TRANSFORMING SCHOOL CULTURE (TSC)

Action Point

Action planned as at April 2016

Rationale Action taken to date Responsibility Timescale Success Measure/Outcome

1.1 Produce SAT Terms of Reference (ToR) and communicate to the School. Allocate a formal secretary to the SAT from the PSS Team.

Identified that the remit of the group needs to be clear to members and non-members across the School.

SELLL SAT terms of reference have been drawn up and approved by the SAT and SEC.

SM E&D Officer.

March 2016 – ToR complete – review annually May 2016 Secretary to be appointed.

Annual reports to SEC on membership of the SAT as well as confirmation of success against this action plan. Review of Terms of Reference on an annual basis where issues have been identified through the SAT.

1.2 Invite 2 additional members of staff to join SEC, on a rotating basis. Implement monitoring of gender balance on formal School committees. Review the process

Identified that a very small number of committees do not have a representative gender balance.

SAT has reviewed the data as part of the AS application process.

HoS SM

June 2016 and annually thereafter.

Improved transparency and inclusivity evidenced through responses to the next SS at the end of 2017. Evidence that the m/f balance of staff on all SELLL committees aligns with the school

50

for allocating roles and responsibilities and how this feeds into the gender balance in the School.

demographic.

1.3 E&D issues to remain standard items on formal School Committees.

Identified the need to further promote and embed a culture of diversity in the School both formally and informally.

Since September 2015 this has been a standard agenda item on formal committees in the School.

SM/PSS and The E&D Officer. The new UG and PG E&D representatives where appropriate.

September 2015 and onwards.

Reports on actions received from formal and informal meetings to be a standard agenda item at SAT meetings. Any identified actions to be considered to SEC.

1.4 Staff Survey – repeat (with questions and processed reviewed based on recent experience) every 2 years and introduce a process for communicating the results.

Identified that there was no process in the School for gathering this type of data from staff. Survey circulated with a 70% response rate.

Continue to review the feedback from the 15-16 survey. Amend the survey as appropriate before circulation in 17-18.

HoS SM SAT

2015-16 onwards

Survey results to be kept and reviewed by the SAT. Issues highlighted reported to School Executive and action taken communicated to the School at school meetings annually.

1.5 SELLL Website – to include information and links on E&D and the work of the SAT on both the

Identified the need to reflect and promote the diverse culture of the School so it is

Complete and ongoing as part of the School’s ‘go-mobile’ update to the website.

School Marketing & Events Administrator.

2015-16

Increased numbers of application from male students. Equal numbers of job applications from

51

internal and external websites.

visible both internally (School/University) and externally (potential staff/students).

men and women.

52

2. RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION (RP)

Action Point



2.1 Appropriate analysis to be carried out to better understand female/male recruitment and promotion across all areas of the School.

Identified as an outcome from the AS process. Data has been available in the past but not reviewed systematically.

Analysis of data as part of AS Bronze submission through the SAT.

SAT Chair Immediate, embedded 2016-17 and ongoing.

Reporting incorporated into regular School committees in 2016/17. SAT and SEC to recommend appropriate actions on the basis of the annual analysis of the data.

2.2 Recruit and appoint a School E&D Officer.

Identified as an outcome from the AS application process.

Dr Tina Gharavi has been appointed to the role. A member of the current SAT.

HoS April 2016 Complete to be reviewed annually as part of WL.

To continue on the SAT team and join new Faculty diversity committees (from Sept 2016). Success of SAT measured by quarterly reports to SEC on SAT activity and impact.

2.3 Implement measures to ensure that women’s progress to higher grades is being

Evidence that women do progress more slowly in SELLL.

The data has been reviewed and discussed by the SAT and the need for review identified.

HoS and SAT March 2016 – promotions round and ongoing

Increase in the number of female staff applying and being successful in annual promotions

53

monitored and supported.

round. SAT to consider trends and identify any appropriate action to be taken by SEC.

2.4 Implement face to face group and drop in sessions with the HoS as well as communicating through PDRs and email the University promotion process including all staff on fractional contracts.

The staff survey identified that some academic staff in the School do not fully understand the University promotion process. Making this more transparent is a priority.

For 2016-17 the HoS communicated the promotion process by email to all staff as well as sending individual emails to all staff at the top spine point of their grade confirming that they were eligible to apply.

HoS and PDR reviewers

September 2016 and annually thereafter in September.

Increased awareness of and applications for promotion, evidenced in future staff surveys. Success rates measured by the SAT and issues reported to SEC.

2.5 Review gender of staff on fixed term contracts.

Identified that while there are a small number of staff on fixed term contracts in the School, the majority are female.

SAT Review School HR Officer to monitor data.

2015-16 onwards

Records to be kept and reviewed annually by the SAT. SAT to consider trends and identify any appropriate action to be taken by the SEC.

54

2.6 Introduce formal School exit interviews for leavers at all levels to gather data on staff who leave and their reasons for doing so.

Identified that the staff turnover rate is low and that the majority of staff leaving are at lecturer grade H and below. However, significant that all of the staff leaving at this grade were women.

School HR Officer has been briefed to set up formal exit interviews for all staff leaving at the end of this academic year.

School HR Officer HoS and SM

Academic year 2015-16 onwards.

Records to be kept and reviewed annually by the SAT to ensure that all staff have received an exit interview and details have been recorded. HoS/SM to report to SEC on a bi-annual basis on issues arising from exit interviews and confirm and appropriate action to be taken.

2.7 Recruitment: Monitor the gender balance of selection panels, applicants, shortlisted candidates and appointees across the whole School.

Identified that the recruitment process is key to ensuring diversity across the School.

Data to be collected from April onwards in the University e-Recruitment system and fed into School reports.

SM School HR Officer HoS

2015-16 onwards

Records to be kept and received annually by the SAT with reports made to School Executive Committee Strive to ensure that no gender is over-represented when shortlisting.

2.8 Ensure wording on job adverts makes vacancies appealing to all groups.

There will be a number of academic, research and PSS vacancies being

All job adverts have included the University’s recommended wording on diversity.

School HR Officer

2015-16 – complete and ongoing

All adverts now include the recommended wording.

55

advertised in the near future and we need to ensure that these are appealing to all groups.

Add AS information if awarded.

2.9 Implement an induction checklist for academic and research staff.

Identified that there are many queries from new staff regarding processes and procedures within the School and University.

A checklist exists for PSS staff and this will be expanded to include academic and research staff. The School’s Research, Finance and HR Officer (as part of the SSSDP Senior Support Staff Development Programme – run by SDU) is embarking on a project to design a SELLLs specific induction checklist for academic and research staff.

School Research, Finance and HR Officer

July 2016 to roll-out to new staff in Sept. 2016

All new staff from September 2016 onwards to be taken through the induction checklist process. Evaluation reviews of their experience will be carried out after 3 months and any suggested changes consider by the SAT and SEC and implemented for future appointments where appropriate.

2.10 Enhance the uptake of training available in the University for all staff using communication strategies aimed at identifying

SAT review of training identified good practice but there was a sense that more could be done to enhance uptake.

All training requests received in the last 3 years across the whole School have been approved.

E&D Officer through the SAT.

2016/17 onwards

Increase number of staff across the School attending University run training courses from just under 50% to 65% over the next 2

56

particular groups who could benefit from specific training.

years.

2.11 Implement briefing sessions for all staff who have responsibility for conducting PDRs and ensuring appropriate training has taken place.

SS/SAT identified more work to be done around the briefing of staff running PDRs.

All staff who ran PDRs in 15/16 had attended appropriate training.

HoS October 2016 the annually at the same time.

Training records will show that all PDR Reviewers have attended SDU PDR Reviewer Training. Improved feedback from next SS at the end of 2017 on the PDR process.

2.12 Provide Training which focuses on unconscious bias in recruitment and selection.

Identified that few members of the School have received training in unconscious bias. SAT and members of School Executive received School specific unconscious bias training on the 2nd March 2016.

Set-up further School specific unconscious bias training sessions which will be opened up for all to attend.

SM 1st training took place in March 2016. Target to be reached in 2016-17

22% of staff on open ended contracts currently trained. Achieve 40% in 2016-17.

57

3. CAREER DEVELOPMENT AND PROGRESSION (CDP)

Action Point



3.1 Implement a ‘critical friend’ scheme for staff who have unsuccessful internal and external research related bids/ applications alongside the process which already exist (this included mentoring).

Identified that there is no formal mechanism to support staff (outside of PDR/PRP) when applications are unsuccessful where they can share their experience with others.

Research visibility sessions have been set up on a quarterly basis where staff share their research plans.

DoR

October 2016 onwards.

Pool of ‘mentors’ and ‘critical friends’ increased. Improved success of grant applications.

3.2 Formal communication of availability of School RSF (Research Support Fund) as well as increased amounts being made available for staff returning from maternity leave until their children reach the age of 1.

Identified that RA’s on fixed term contracts are often unaware of the funding available to them through the School on an annual basis. SS identified that staff returning from maternity leave would like

Information is available in the staff handbook, on the School internal website and through the School Research, Finance and HR Officer.

SM School Research & Finance Officer.

Academic year 2016-17 onwards

Increased take up of RSF by all staff. Evaluate success of extra funding being made available to staff returning from maternity leave.

58

additional support to attend conferences etc. when their children are really young.

59

4. STUDENT EXPERIENCE (SE)

Action Point



4.1 Appropriate analysis to be carried out to better understand male student recruitment and degree attainment (UG and PG).

Number of male students on SELLLs degrees is known to be lower than number of female students. No significant gender imbalance identified on degree attainment except for English Literature in 2013/14.

Analysis of data as part of AS Bronze submission through the SAT.

SAT Chair Immediate, embedded 2016-17 and ongoing.

Reporting incorporated into regular School committees in 2016/17. SAT and SEC to recommend appropriate actions on the basis of the annual analysis of the data.

4.2 Set up a focus group of male UGs and PGs to identify those aspects of the degrees that are particularly attractive.

To understand why it might be take up of SELLL degrees is lower among men.

Identified that gender balance on SELLLs degrees is 70:30 female:male.

DELT with help from the UG E&D officer.

Immediate, Semesters 1&2 2016/17 and ongoing.

Increase in male student applications/entry.

4.3 To review the gender profile of students represented in marketing materials, web and print.

To understand whether male students are under-represented in SELLLs marketing materials.

None School Marketing and Events Administrator with help from the UG and PG E&D officers.

By end September 2016 and ongoing.

Ongoing equal presence of m/f students in all SELLLs marketing materials. Impact on male student applications/entry measured through SE4.1

60

4.4 To ensure that male UG students are represented and visible at open days. Specifically target male volunteers where possible to achieve more of a gender balance. We will be recruiting a new cohort of stage 1 student leaders/ambassadors in September 2016 and will highlight in our advert that we specifically welcome applications form male UG students.

Identified the number of female students volunteering to assist with open days was higher than the number of male students. We currently have 36 female and 6 male UG student leaders (86% female). This is not surprising with a 78% female UG student body. The HoS/SM interviewed everyone who applied to become a student leader – all were appointed.

All current male UG students have been invited to be involved in open days to promote UG study in SELLL to potential male applicants as well as being invited to apply to become student leaders.

UG Clerical Officer (Admissions)

2015-16 onwards

Male UG conversion rates from open day to entry to be increased. Impact on conversion measured through SE4.1 Increased number of male student leaders.

4.5 Set up a system for current UG male students to contact male applicants to talk through the applicants’ plans and offer insights into their experience in the School.

Identify whether there is a trend to why the take up of SELLL degrees is lower among men.

Discussed at the SAT Meeting on 13/4/16, agreement from UG male student rep that this would be beneficial to all involved.

UG Clerical Officer (Admissions)

October 2016 onwards

Male UG conversion rates increased. Trends identified and acted upon. Impact on conversion measured through.

61

4.6 UG and PG SSC committees to include E&D as standing items, with opportunities for E&D reps to bring items forward.

Increase staff student dialogue around E&D and create feedback channels; promote and create a forum for student scrutiny of SELLL equality issues and data.

Agreed at SEC (April 2016)

Staff Co-Chair of SSC/Student Co-Chair of SSC

Sept 2016 onwards

Documented input in SAT work going forward that will inform subsequent AS submission, with actions relating to E&D as it applies to the student experience and school culture coming forward from SSCs.

Department Application Bronze Award - newcastle.ac.uk Name of institution Newcastle University...

Documents

Transcript of Department Application Bronze Award - newcastle.ac.uk Name of institution Newcastle University...