Token women?

Our School has just introduced two new policies regarding the gender balance of seminar series. Firstly for our two main seminar series (one given by externally invited speakers, one by internal speakers) over any year, the list of speakers is to include at least 30% female, 30% male (our gender balance in the department is about 30% at postdoc level, less than this at faculty level and more at PhD). Secondly, any scientific meetings hosted by the SChool should have both male and female speakers (unless this is a very small field and people just aren't there).

A female colleague mentioned that she was thought this was a strange thing to do, as she didn't see how the organisers of such series or meetings had the power to ensure the gender balance is met.

I disagree - it may mean looking a bit harder for female speakers, but in principle certainly for seminar series in our field it is relatively easy to do.

The more complex argument is whether this is the start of quotas for women at various things. We already have some of these imposed by the university - e.g. on interview panels. The school is aiming to have female representation (in the spirit of enhancing diversity) on the main strategic committees and promotions committees. Hence I find myself on two new committees this term. Some would say I was there as the token woman. I have indeed felt resentful of this in the past. But I have a new motto:

"Just because you start as the token woman doesn't mean you have to stay one"

I figure that without women in senior leadership positions, the battle for increased diversity (which has a strong business case) will never be won. So my goal is to learn from and contribute to these committees where I can, and if I really feel that there is no sense for me being on one other than being female, I will say so and resign. Perhaps this is overly naive and aspirational since I haven't yet attended any of the meetings, but it can't hurt to start like this.

Apparently it's an OYCN (offer you can negotiate)

Well, in a previous post I described a dilemna about accepting a senior management position within a year of being promoted to full professor. My main issue was that since I work 0.8FTE, if I took the role (roughly 0.5FTE), this would make my workload unfairly biased towards admin compared to a 1.0FTE person taking the same role. After lots of negotiations and meetings, it appears that we have split off some aspects of the work to another person and so can now demonstrate that 20% of the load has gone. So it looks like I'll be a senior staff manager from Easter. Scary.

They're here...

Of course I don't mean the alien invasion, just that the students are back, oh hang on.. :-)

Actually aside from campus looking like a trash can at the moment, it's nice to see the place restored to (one of) it's primary functions. There was a danger for a week or so that I was about to actually acheive one of my summer research goals but now there's no chance. However, there is definitely a different buzz around the place.

Our new PhD students start today, and as admission tutor I feel excited that I have been involved in giving 15 students opportunities to follow our graduate programme.. but slightly nervous in case any of them turn out not to live up to expectations. For the coming year I wanted to try to get a better comparative measure than their paper applications, but I would have at most 10 mins with each student in which to do it. I wonder about
a) asking some very standard questions to each student (should these be technical or more open-ended e.g. what excites you about the subject X)
b) sending out something to be prepared in advance (e.g. get them to summarise a short paper in subject X)

Either of these would be more objective than a look at their paper application, a general chat, and a "gut instinct". But would they be more reliable?

Fieldcourses: expensive or priceless?

I've just returned from a week teaching 24 undergraduates on a fieldwork course (under the path of ex-hurricane Katia) and have yet again been reminded how rewarding teaching can be under the right circumstances. This course involves staff and students from two different universities and is residential in a remote place which has conditions very different to anything the students are used to. Days are long and intense - usually 7.30am to 9.30pm for students and longer for staff. Students complete several different exercises both outdoors (including a long hike) and indoors and hand in work for assessment before leaving to return home. The work to some extent depends on weather conditions and so there is always an element of "surprise" and crisis management. However, overwhelmingly the students and staff get a lot out of it, and I feel reconnected to teaching and to our undergraduates.

It is obvious that the staff/student ratio here is far better than you would ever get in ordinary teaching - approximately 1 to 6. Plus we use postgrad demonstrators and IT and technical support staff. We have to pay for board and lodging, transport and computers and field equipment. The students make a contribution but it is heavily subsidised by the department. I am increasingly conscious that it looks like a large amount for one module - and the less fieldwork based staff have sometimes questioned the use of resources. However, I will continue to defend field courses like this one because to staff they are refreshing and to students the requirement to combine knowledge across their other modules and the resulting revision ahead of the final year is a unique experience that cannot have a value placed upon it.

3 days

Well, I've just received an "invitation" to participate in a workshop to shape the admissions procedures and processes of the University (we have just re-organised to one central admissions office rather than separate undergrad and postgrad offices). Whilst I admire the ambition to include the views and creativity of people from all parts of the university and all steps in the change from application to acceptance - the workshop is for 3 consecutive full days 9-5 in week 4 of term. On what planet do people think that a part-time research active professor with full teaching and admin "service" loads can spend 3 full days navel gazing with administrators? I would have been happy to be involved for one or maybe even 2 days, but 3 is ridiculous.

Rant over.

OYCR or OYCN

"Offer you can't refuse" or "Offer you can negotiate"?

Is it ever acceptable to say "no thanks" to a suggestion from "management" that you "consider" taking over one of the 3 leadership roles in the Dept in 9 months time, which will be 9 months after your promotion to full professor. This role would put me in charge of all the teaching management, and the management of all Faculty academic staff, as well as strategic decisions regarding the direction of the department. It currently takes up around 0.6 of someone's full time post. I only work 0.8 FTE (full time equivalent) so unless I negotiate it down, I will be spending a disporportionate part of the next 3 years being an administrator. I accept that at some point I will need to do this or a similar role, but I wasn't expecting it to be yet. I am also conscious that there has never been a female HoD in this department (nor a part-time one either). Do I:

a) say "no, I can't do it now" - with justification that I am too inexperienced to do the academic staff management, and it would have a disproportionate reduction on the amount of time I have for research?

b) say yes ok, I'll take part of the role, but 20% of it needs to be split out to other people (I would rather this were the academic staff management role as I will feel very underqualified to be doing reviews of senior professors in the department)

If b, what else would you negotiate? More money? Sabbatical at the end of 3 years? A female mentor (mentorship for leadership positions is dire in this university).

Here we go - the September rollercoaster

Finally, the month of chaos is here. September sees me with a total of 8 days teaching on a fieldcourse (incidentally this absence quadruples the maximum time I have been away from home in one block since I had my first child), 5 days away at other conferences/meetings, 3 full day meetings in the office and approx 33 hours on long distance trains. This leaves 6 days unaccounted for in the office, but these will be taken up with preparation for all the meetings, and indeed for the new University term which starts in early October here. My youngest child moves rooms at nursery while I am away.

Now ordinarily I like roller-coasters, but only when I can freely wave my hands in the air and scream loudly - possibly not acceptable in a working environment.

Roll on October, when ironically, although the students are back, things will be a bit quieter.