Reporter 25/2/98: Opportunity 2000: Notice

Opportunity 2000: Notice

This is a report on the third year of progress under the University's membership of the Opportunity 2000 Campaign.

In November 1994 the Council and the General Board published a report on the University's membership of Opportunity 2000 (Reporter, 1994-95, p. 195). The Opportunity 2000 Campaign, which was initiated by Business in the Community, was set up to increase the quality and quantity of women's participation in the workforces of its member organizations at all levels. Membership of the Campaign entails the setting of clear, achievable, and measurable goals in order to pursue the overall objective of the Campaign and, on the recommendation of the Work and Stipends Committee and the Assistant Staff Committee, the Council and the General Board agreed a total of thirty long- and short-term goals in the following six areas:

Monitoring and collection of statistical information
Recruitment and selection
Childcare
Employment measures
Changes in attitudes and expectations
Teaching and learning

Reports on the first and second years of the University's progress were published in Reporter (1995-96, p. 396, and 1996-97, p. 316). In the third year progress has been made in a number of areas, although the rate of change varies according to the nature of the goal. Once again a progress report on work in relation to each of the six areas and the thirty goals is given below; also included in the report is up-to-date statistical information building on the data collected since 1994.

Monitoring and collection of statistical information

Improvements continue to be made in the collection of statistical information which allows more detailed monitoring across a broader range. Slow progress is being made in breaking down the occupational hierarchy in which women are under-represented at almost all levels in almost all categories of staff; in the CS (clerical and secretarial) Division of the assistant staff, where women have long been in a majority in the lower grades, they now represent an increasing proportion in the higher grades (81 per cent of CS5 and 64 per cent of CS6). For fuller details of the trends in assistant staff numbers see Table 1.1. Other data for staff and students are given in Table 2.1 (main academic grades), Table 2.2 (contract research staff), and Table 3.1 (students). With regard to monitoring and collection of data, progress has been made as follows:

(i)	Extension of the monitoring of appointments to cover all categories of academic and academic-related staff, both established and unestablished, including appointment to contract research posts.
	Data collected from Appointments Committees on gender returns for all established appointments at the point of application, short-listing, and appointment are given in Tables 4.1 and 4.2.
(ii)	Raising the profile of assistant staff monitoring in order to ensure full returns.
	Recruitment monitoring forms are now routinely returned for all posts filled. Women continue to be appointed in slightly higher proportions than those in which they apply. Data on recruitment monitoring for assistant staff is shown in Table 4.3.
(iii)	Extension of monitoring to cover promotions in all categories of academic and academic-related staff, both established and unestablished, including promotions from University Assistant Lecturer to University Lecturer (including timing), from University Lecturer to Reader, from Reader to Professor, and all other upgradings, as well as promotions among administrative, library, and computer staff and among contract research staff.
	Data on promotions from University Lecturer to Reader and from Reader to Professor are given in Table 4.6.
(iv)	Extension of monitoring to cover the award of discretionary payments to academic and academic-related staff.
	The results of monitoring in this area are given in Tables 4.4 and 4.5.
(v)	Acceleration of the introduction of the SECQUS computerized personnel record.
	SECQUS, which has been fully in operation in the Assistant Staff Office since 1995, is also now in place in the University Offices for records of academic and academic-related staff and contract research staff.
	All members of the academic, academic-related, and contract research staff are now able to request a transcript of their computerized personnel record from the staff database. There is also a schedule for providing recurrent and standard management information within the University Offices.
	A University-wide staff questionnaire, incorporating an equal opportunities survey, has been completed. A new appointments form was put into use over the Long Vacation 1997. Both the questionnaire and the new appointments form have been used to gather information on ethnicity and disability, the results of which are published for information in summary form in Tables 4.10 and 4.11. A similar questionnaire has been issued to assistant staff.
(vi)	Studying the gender composition of the assistant staff workforce in order to make year-on-year comparisons and to develop a means of tracking the career progress of staff of both sexes.
	The cohort studies for technicians reported in previous years in Table 4.7 have been discontinued because the investment of time required was disproportionate to the usefulness of the information. More general information about the composition of the assistant staff workforce is shown in Table 1.1. The proportions of women in the assistant staff as a whole and in each Division of the staff remain relatively stable. Overall numbers of women technicians have increased by one percentage point a year in the period under review. A similar rate of increase is seen in the two most highly populated grades, T3 and T4. Women are at least holding their own in the higher grades, although the numbers are so small that percentage variations are not meaningful. Among trainees, women have for some years been more highly represented than in the substantive grades, and their numbers seem to be increasing. It is thought unlikely that this cohort will have the same stable career patterns as many of those now reaching retirement age, and this distribution may not predict future staffing patterns. Trends in the figures for clerical staff are not clear since for the first time the 1996 figures exclude staff of the Local Examinations Syndicate on their removal from the assistant staff structure.
(vii)	Extension of monitoring to cover the award of discretionary payments to assistant staff.
	Figures for the award of additional increments and discretionary payments to assistant staff are shown in Table 4.8. The figures show that women receive marginally more awards than their representation in the workforce would suggest.
(viii)	Extension of monitoring to research students, including comparison of male and female research student statistics relating to applications, places offered, places taken up, fee source, submission and completion rates, all by Faculty and Department.
	As part of their continuing provision of statistical analyses sub-divided by gender, the Board of Graduate Studies in future hope to include such analyses of Ph.D. submission rates and sources of fee support in their Annual Report.

Recruitment and selection

The monitoring of appointments to established academic offices (see Table 4.2) continues to reveal a disappointingly low rate of applications from women for offices in all General Board institutions. Only in the School of the Humanities and Social Sciences does the proportion of applications from women approach 50 per cent. In the Schools of Technology and the Physical Sciences application rates are 13.7 per cent and 7.7 per cent respectively. Although in four out of the five Schools numbers of new appointments are very small (twelve or fewer over the year), making percentage comparisons potentially misleading, the rate of appointments of women is mostly encouraging. For example, in 1996-97 three out of five appointments in the School of Technology were of women. In contrast, no women at all were appointed in the School of the Physical Sciences in 1996-97 and only one woman was appointed in the School of Arts and Humanities. Efforts must continue to be directed to encouraging applications from women, and steps will continue to be taken to ensure that all recruitment and selection processes are transparent.

Recruitment process and selection criteria

(ix)	Reviewing and issuing of guidance on good recruitment and selection practice for all categories of staff, based on existing good practice in the University.
	Plans are being made to revise the General Board's booklet 'Guidance to Appointments Committees' during the academical year 1997-98. A designated officer in the Assistant Staff Office now has responsibility for the development of an advisory service on recruitment and selection for Heads of Departments and a revised note of guidance is in preparation. (See also the entry under goal xxvi.)
(x)	Issuing of guidance on good practice in relation to promotions of all kinds and for all categories of staff, especially the criteria used for promotion and the award of discretionary payments.
	A major exercise has been undertaken to introduce new procedures for promotions to personal Readerships and Professorships for the 1998 promotions round, and the results will be closely monitored by the central bodies.

Appointment and selection committees

(xi)	Monitoring of the gender balance of all groups and committees (formal and informal) involved in the recruitment, selection, and appointment of all categories of staff.
	The gender balance of panels appointing to assistant staff posts is routinely monitored; the results are given in Table 4.3. Monitoring of the gender balance of Appointments Committees has now been introduced, and the first results will be included in next year's progress report.

Application rates

(xii)	Investigating existing research on the efficacy of advertising some posts in a form which specifically encourages applications from women. Such advertising is permitted under s.48 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.
	No action has been taken as yet on this goal.

Childcare

Once again, significant activity has taken place in this area. The University Nursery is highly successful, but remains over-subscribed. The demand for play schemes is still buoyant.

(xiii)	Provision of a pilot holiday play scheme for 5-12 year-olds for the summer holidays, with a view to extending provision during school holidays and half-terms throughout the year.
	The programme of holiday play schemes continues to run, with very positive feedback from all users, both parents and children. The numbers of children catered for in the play schemes continue to rise, and schemes are now held on two sites during every holiday. Over the course of 1996-97 a total of 221 children from 147 families were catered for in the play scheme from Cambridge University. The University continues its partnership with Anglia Polytechnic University and has been approached by Cambridge University Press for a similar partnership arrangement.
(xiv)	To subscribe to Child Care Solutions (a service which provides employees with advice and information about childcare according to their particular needs, based on detailed local information).
	As reported in last year's progress report, this goal has been superseded by the appointment of the part-time Childcare Co-ordinator. The level of activity and demand demonstrates the need for a full-time Co-ordinator in 1997-98.
(xv)	To investigate the provision of additional day nursery places.
	The Nursery Liaison Committee and the parallel body for students, the Joint Committee on Childcare for Students, have continued to consider the provision of additional childcare for children under five, and it is hoped that significant progress will be made on this in the academical year 1997-98.

Employment measures

The Council and the General Board continue their activity in reviewing the extension of 'family-friendly' employment measures which are developed in parallel with the University's goal of maintaining its record of academic excellence.

(xvi)	To review existing policies to test their take-up and their efficacy, including schemes for flexible working and the possible need for a career break scheme, and to amplify this review by including a survey of present and anticipated caring responsibilities among all categories of staff, with a view to extending the range of family-friendly schemes available to all staff.
	Discussion continued during 1996-97 of proposals for a career break scheme for academic and academic-related staff, but the scheme has not yet been finalized. For assistant staff a revision of the rules governing employment by the University makes provision for up to six months' unpaid leave (additional to existing arrangements for compassionate leave) for members of staff in order to deal with family responsibilities, subject to a service qualification.
(xvii)	To ensure that all staff are aware of existing policies.
	A Staff Guide for academic and academic-related staff, including contract research staff, was published and circulated in the Michaelmas Term 1997. This and the Assistant Staff Handbook are periodically updated.
(xviii)	To ensure that an appropriate infrastructure is in place to support these policies (e.g. a policy to ensure that effective arrangements can be made to cover the jobs of staff on maternity leave).
	Work continues in this area.
(xix)	Revising the policy on harassment in the light of experience and knowledge of good practice.
	The revised policy on harassment and bullying was agreed during 1996-97 and a much revised booklet, Dealing with Harassment - Advice and Instructions for Staff, was circulated to all staff in the course of the academical year 1996-97.

Changes in attitudes and expectations

There is still a need to encourage and maintain cultural change in the University.

(xx)	Continuing with the 'Springboard' programme for women staff and students for as long as is necessary, including an assessment of the need and provision with a view to increasing the number of trainers from two to three or four.
	The 'Springboard' programmes for academic and academic-related staff, assistant staff, and graduate students, in single category groups and combined programmes, are being maintained in the light of continued demand from all categories and continuing positive feedback and evaluation from participants.
(xxi)	Developing a 'Springboard for undergraduates' programme.
	The Steering Group set up by the Secretary General's Women in Science Group have continued their collaboration with the Springboard Consultancy for the development of a 'Springboard for undergraduates' programme, and a pilot programme for undergraduates was scheduled for the Michaelmas Term 1997. Evaluation of the programme will continue throughout 1997-98.
(xxii)	Investigating the possibility of devising a development programme based on 'Springboard' principles for women in senior grades for whom some of the 'Springboard' material is inappropriate.
	Steady progress is being made towards this long-term goal.
(xxiii)	Ensuring that good practice in relation to equal opportunities is incorporated in all relevant documentation, procedures, training, and advice (including staff handbooks, the manual for Heads of Departments, and the Assistant Staff Manual).
	This continues as an ongoing exercise and is a key issue in the development of the manual for Heads of Departments and the Staff Guide for academic and academic-related staff. The General Board's Guidance to Appointments Committees includes advice on equal opportunities in relation to recruitment, selection, and appointment. The existing Assistant Staff Manual is periodically updated.
(xxiv)	Ensuring that information about all the University's Opportunity 2000 goals and any subsequent policies or reviews is effectively and fully communicated to staff and students.
	All policy changes continue to be announced in the Reporter and as relevant in the Assistant Staff Newsletter. More informally, news items are published in the University Newsletter and the Assistant Staff Newsletter. The new Staff Guide includes information about relevant policies and advice on good practice.
(xxv)	Investigating the experience of women (both staff and students) in the University, with the help of outside consultants, in order to inform training and guidance on good practice in all areas of relevant activity (recruitment, selection, appointment, promotion, teaching, and management).
	Plans made during 1996-97 to investigate women's experience will be realized during 1997-98, and a further report will be made next year on the results.
(xxvi)	Developing general awareness of the importance of equal opportunities, and of the need for cultural diversity and specific good practice, through training programmes.
	Proposals for further support in this area were considered by the central bodies in the Michaelmas Term 1997 and a further report on this will be made next year.

Teaching and learning

In the past year the Joint Committee on Academic Performance have devoted much time to scrutinizing statistical information on results in the University, and have made a number of recommendations about recording additional information, particularly with regard to the qualifications held by new students. During the current academical year the Joint Committee are considering postgraduate statistics.

The Joint Committee have continued to receive and discuss reports on gender and Tripos results produced by institutions and individuals in the University, and have also considered the report of the Working Group on Women in Science. Many important questions are identified in documents of this kind, and the Joint Committee see their role in part as being to act as a central focus for the work undertaken in Faculties and Departments, so that they may be in a position to disseminate information and ideas with a view to raising consciousness of the issues which need to be considered.

Work began in April 1997 on a research project entitled 'Predictors of Academic Performance', with the appointment of two Research Associates on a job-sharing basis. The project, which is overseen by a steering group drawn from members of the Joint Committee, is concerned with the entire spectrum of students' academic performance and its relationship to gender and to the educational, social, and ethnic backgrounds of students, as well as other factors.

(xxvii)	Issuing additional guidance and providing more comprehensive training in research student supervision, and ensuring that all Faculties and Departments have fail-safe procedures for ensuring that supervision is being properly conducted and that both research students and their supervisors have full and effective access to support if they meet difficulties in the supervisor-supervisee relationship (either academic or personal).
	The forthcoming editions of the Memoranda to Graduate Students and to Supervisors issued by the Board of Graduate Studies (to be published in 1997-98) pay particular attention to the provision, at Faculty and Departmental level, of sources of support for students and their supervisors and to the need for both parties to ensure their familiarity with that provision. Further work in this area may be expected once the expectations of the new joint Quality Agency become clearer.
(xxviii)	Providing more comprehensive guidance to supervisors of undergraduates about teaching skills and the criteria for judging essays and other undergraduate supervision work. The criteria should be explicit and should be made clear to students.
and
(xxix)	Ensuring that the criteria used in the assessment of examination scripts are made explicit and that examiners are given a clear description of the qualities held to be reflected in a particular mark or range of marks. Ensuring that all such information is available to examiners, teachers (including supervisors), and students.
	The General Board's Education Committee continue to oversee all aspects of these goals and to be proactive in monitoring and supporting Faculties and Departments in relation to examining and both University and College teaching.
(xxx)	Investigating the utility and the efficacy of existing systems of secure number codes for examination candidates.
	In 1997, at the request of the Faculty Board of History, the candidate numbers for the Historical Tripos were randomized before being allocated to students. In the light of this experiment and following consultation with Faculty Boards in the Michaelmas Term 1997, the Board of Examinations have asked their officers to bring forward detailed proposals for extending the randomization of candidate numbers to other examinations.
	Detailed information has been obtained from Faculty Boards about the procedures adopted by Boards of Examiners in translating candidate numbers into names; this is a matter which will be considered further by the General Board's Education Committee.

TABLE 1.1 - ASSISTANT STAFF NUMBERS - DECEMBER 1996

Technical and Related Staff (T Division)
	Men	Women	Total	% Women (1996)	% Women (1995)	% Women (1994)
T8	2	1	3	33	33	-
T7	11	1	12	8	10	14
T6	68	12	80	15	13	9
T5	154	45	199	23	23	24
T4	342	171	513	33	32	30
T3	127	86	213	40	39	37
T2	44	29	73	40	41	44
T1	10	23	33	70	66	60
Trainees	18	21	39	54	46	46

Totals for T Division	776	389	1,165	33	32	31

Clerical, library, and secretarial staff (CS Division)*
CS6	9	16	25	64	41	38
CS5	21	92	113	81	70	68
CS4	27	313	340	92	88	88
CS3	33	377	410	92	88	89
CS2	31	199	230	87	84	86
CS1	5	23	28	82	76	82
Age related	5	9	14	64	-	-

Totals for CS Division	126	1,020	1,146	89	83	84

Data Processing Staff (D Division)
D4	-	-	-	-	100	100
D3	4	-	4	-	53	53
D2	1	2	3	67	47	44
D1	-	6	6	100	100	100

Totals for D Division	5	8	13	62	63	63

Custodial and Manual Staff (M Division)
M4	14	2	16	13	25	26
M3	14	7	21	33	43	44
M2	38	6	44	14	16	15
M1	67	40	107	37	43	34

Totals for M Division	133	55	188	29	35	30

Total staff (excluding cleaners)	1,040	1,472	2,512	59	59	57

Cleaners	126	179	305	59	58	60

* Figures for 1997 exclude for the first time UCLES staff, which explains some of the changes in the CS Division

Percentages of assistant staff employed on outside funds

	% Men (1996)	% Women (1996)	% Men (1995)	% Women (1995)	% Men (1994)	% Women (1994)
T Division	13	39	14	37	16	40
CS Division	17	19	11	16	7	18
M Division	9	20	13	20	11	28

TABLE 2.1 - STAFF - MAIN ACADEMIC GRADES (TEACHING AND RESEARCH)

Table showing numbers of staff in main academic grades. Figures in brackets give the number of women as a percentage of the total.

			Professors			Readers			University Lecturers			University Assistant Lecturers			Senior Assistants in Research and Assistant Directors of Research
Year	Total		Men	Women		Men	Women		Men	Women		Men	Women		Men	Women
1990	1,029	(9.3)¹	158	9	(5.4)	80	3	(3.6)	638	65	(9.2)	57	19	(25.0)	Not included
1991	Not available
1992	1,053	(10.9)¹	175	11	(5.9)	100	4	(3.8)	614	80	(11.5)	49	20	(28.9)	Not included
1993	1,097	(11.6)	160	9	(5.3)	108	4	(3.6)	592	88	(12.9)	38	17	(30.9)	72	9	(11.1)
1994	1,109	(11.8)	165	10	(5.7)	121	4	(3.2)	581	93	(13.8)	37	16	(30.2)	74	8	(9.8)
1995	1,136	(12.7)	172	11	(6.0)	132	7	(5.0)	584	100	(14.6)	26	16	(38.0)	78	10	(11.4)
1996	1,174	(13.4)	185	12	(6.0)	140	15	(9.7)	577	99	(14.6)	34	18	(34.6)	81	13	(13.8)
1997	1,277	(13.9)	225	14	(5.9)	151	19	(11.8)	604	112	(15.64)	30	19	(38.8)	90	12	(12.6)

¹ Excludes ADRs and SARs

TABLE 2.2 STAFF - CONTRACT RESEARCH STAFF

Numbers of staff in the main Contract Research Grades (Research Assistant, Research Associate and Senior Research Associate). Figures in brackets give the number of women as a percentage of the total.

Year	Men	Women	Total
1991	897	422	1,319	(31.9%)
1992	1,002	503	1,505	(33%)
1993	798	430	1,228	(35%)
1994	900	486	1,386	(35%)
1995	913	525	1,438	(36.5%)
1996	888	533	1,421	(37.5%)
1997	1,196	745	1,941	(38.4%)

TABLE 3.1 FULL-TIME STUDENT NUMBERS 1968-97

	Undergraduates					Postgraduates					Totals
	Men	%	Women	%	Total	Men	%	Women	%	Total	Men	%	Women	%	Total
1968-69	7,371	89.1	900	10.9	8,271	1,837	85.6	308	14.4	2,145	9,208	88.4	1,208	11.6	10,416
1969-70	7,287	88.4	959	11.6	8,246	1,780	83.9	341	16.1	2,121	9,067	87.5	1,300	12.5	10,367
1970-71	7,346	87.1	1,091	12.9	8,437	1,909	83.6	374	16.4	2,283	9,255	86.3	1,465	13.7	10,720
1971-72	7,333	86.3	1,164	13.7	8,497	1,852	83.7	361	16.3	2,213	9,185	85.8	1,525	14.2	10,710
1972-73	7,352	84.0	1,402	16.0	8,754	1,735	83.5	343	16.5	2,078	9,087	83.9	1,745	16.1	10,832
1973-74	7,291	82.3	1,564	17.7	8,855	1,587	82.8	330	17.2	1,917	8,878	82.4	1,894	17.6	10,772
1974-75	7,181	80.8	1,711	19.2	8,892	1,567	80.6	378	19.4	1,945	8,748	80.7	2,089	19.3	10,837
1975-76	7,127	80.4	1,732	19.6	8,859	1,568	78.8	422	21.2	1,990	8,695	80.1	2,154	19.9	10,849
1976-77	7,228	79.6	1,852	20.4	9,080	1,479	77.9	419	22.1	1,898	8,707	79.3	2,271	20.7	10,978
1977-78	7,104	78.1	1,997	21.9	9,101	1,496	77.2	442	22.8	1,938	8,600	77.9	2,439	22.1	11,039
1978-79	6,992	74.6	2,386	25.4	9,378	1,460	76.2	457	23.8	1,917	8,452	74.8	2,843	25.2	11,295
1979-80	6,818	72.5	2,592	27.5	9,410	1,460	75.8	467	24.2	1,927	8,278	73.0	3,059	27.0	11,337
1980-81	6,739	70.8	2,781	29.2	9,520	1,470	75.0	489	25.0	1,959	8,209	71.5	3,270	28.5	11,479
1981-82	6,737	69.4	2,970	30.6	9,707	1,446	74.1	506	25.9	1,952	8,183	70.2	3,476	29.8	11,659
1982-83	6,498	67.7	3,106	32.3	9,604	1,389	75.5	451	24.5	1,840	7,887	68.9	3,557	31.1	11,444
1983-84	6,352	66.8	3,153	33.2	9,505	1,496	71.5	597	28.5	2,093	7,848	67.7	3,750	32.3	11,598
1984-85	6,135	64.7	3,346	35.3	9,481	1,577	72.1	611	27.9	2,188	7,712	66.1	3,957	33.9	11,669
1985-86	6,219	64.1	3,483	35.9	9,702	1,610	69.0	723	31.0	2,333	7,829	65.1	4,206	34.9	12,035
1986-87	6,182	63.0	3,624	37.0	9,806	1,669	69.2	744	30.8	2,413	7,851	64.3	4,368	35.7	12,219
1987-88	6,157	62.4	3,714	37.6	9,871	1,771	67.8	843	32.2	2,614	7,928	63.5	4,557	36.5	12,485
1988-89	6,131	60.8	3,950	39.2	10,081	1,939	68.9	874	31.1	2,813	8,070	62.6	4,824	37.4	12,894
1989-90	6,048	59.0	4,195	41.0	10,243	2,016	67.8	959	32.2	2,975	8,064	61.0	5,154	39.0	13,218
1990-91	6,121	59.0	4,261	41.0	10,382	2,123	67.0	1,048	33.0	3,171	8,244	60.8	5,309	39.2	13,553
1991-92	6,116	58.5	4,331	41.5	10,447	2,246	64.7	1,227	35.3	3,473	8,362	60.1	5,558	39.9	13,920
1992-93	6,108	58.4	4,348	41.6	10,456	2,362	63.6	1,353	36.4	3,715	8,470	59.8	5,701	40.2	14,171
1993-94	6,063	57.1	4,553	42.9	10,616	2,532	63.8	1,437	36.2	3,969	8,595	58.9	5,990	41.1	14,585
1994-95*	6,066	56.1	4,756	43.9	10,822	2,904	63.7	1,658	36.3	4,562	8,970	58.3	6,414	41.7	15,384
1995-96	6,205	55.8	4,910	44.2	11,115	2,712	60.7	1,758	39.3	4,470	8.917	57.2	6,668	42.8	15,585
1996-97	6,137	54.7	5,086	45.3	11,223	2,761	58.9	1,927	41.1	4,688	8,898	55.9	7,013	44.1	15,911

* From 1994-95 full-time students are as defined by the HEFCE. Previously the UGC/UFC definition was used.

TABLE 4.1 - APPOINTMENTS 1 MARCH 1989 - 31 MARCH 1996

Academic and Academic Related Offices (Percentages are given in brackets)

School	Women as a percentage of total applicants	Women as a percentage of short-listed applicants	Women as a percentage of total appointments
Arts and Humanities	38.6	37.5	39.7
Biological Sciences	25.7	26.3	25.5
Humanities and Social Sciences	29.0	29.0	27.7
Physical Sciences	11.9	11.6	14.4
Technology*	10.1	6.9	11.1
Total General Board institutions	21.2	22.6	23.2
Council institutions	33.8	34.0	36.1
Grand Totals	24.1	23.6	24.7

* School of Technology established 1 January 1993. No appointments were made in the School of Technology between 1 January and 31 March 1993.

TABLE 4.2 - APPOINTMENT STATISTICS 1 APRIL 1996 - 31 MARCH 1997

Academic and Academic Related Offices (Percentages are given in brackets)

School	Men	Women		Men	Women		Men	Women
	Applicants			Short-listed			Appointed
Arts and Humanities	145	50	(25.6)	26	7	(21.2)	6	1	(14.2)
Biological Sciences	298	106	(26.2)	54	28	(34.1)	18	7	(28.0)
Humanities and Social Sciences	150	138	(47.9)	17	21	(55.3)	5	7	(58.3)
Physical Sciences	83	7	(7.7)	20	3	(13.0)	7	-	(0)
Technology	88	14	(13.7)	17	5	(22.7)	2	3	(60.0)
Total General Board institutions	764	315	(29.2)	134	64	(32.3)	38	18	(32.1)
Council institutions	175	120	(40.7)	24	17	(41.5)	5	4	(44.4)
Grand Totals	939	435	(31.7)	158	81	(33.9)	43	22	(33.8)

The overall trend in the University as a whole is for women to be appointed in slightly higher proportions than those in which they apply for established academic and academic-related offices (in both General Board and Council institutions). However, this is not the case in all Schools; no women were appointed to offices in the School of the Physical Sciences in 1996-97.

Rates of applications from women remain disappointingly low in all Schools except Humanities and Social Sciences, and worryingly low in Physical Sciences and in Technology.

TABLE 4.3 - RECRUITMENT MONITORING 1995-1997 - ASSISTANT STAFF

All applicants

	Women applicants as a percentage of			Mixed interview panels
	All applicants	Short-listed applicants	Applicants appointed	Mixed interview panels
1995	61	68	74	70%
1996	61	64	65	67%
1997	65	69	70	65%

Ethnic minority applicants as a percentage of

	All applicants	Short-listed applicants	Applicants appointed
1996	5.2	3.0	5.4
1997	4.9	3.7	5.5*

Ethnic minority applicants (men and women)

	Women applicants as a percentage of
	All applicants	Short-listed applicants	Applicants appointed
1996	76	67	75
1997	75	79	70*

Applicants mentioning a disability (men and women)

	Candidates mentioning a disability as a percentage of
	All applicants	Short-listed applicants	Applicants appointed
1997	1.23	0.77	0.94

* Eighteen people who declared that they belonged to an ethnic group other than white were appointed, out of a total of 305 appointments recorded.

TABLE 4.4 - DISCRETIONARY PAYMENTS FROM 1 OCTOBER 1997 - ACADEMIC AND ACADEMIC-RELATED STAFF

Numbers (percentages are given in brackets)

School	Men	Women		Men	Women		Men	Women
	Number eligible			Number of applicants¹			Number of awards
Arts and Humanities	93	50	(35.0)	12	12	(50.0)	8	7	(46.6)
Biological Sciences²	171	34	(16.6)	141	31	(18.0)	8	3	(27.3)
Humanities and Social Sciences	140	45	(24.3)	27	7	(20.6)	9	6	(40.0)
Physical Sciences²	155	20	(11.4)	142	15	(9.6)	13	1	(7.1)
Technology²	143	23	(13.9)	125	20	(13.8)	11	3	(21.4)
Council and University Library³

¹ Or number considered in the case of CSPS, CSBS, and CST
² All eligible officers in these Schools are deemed to be applicants unless they opt out
³ Information not available for 1997 exercise

TABLE 4.5 - DISCRETIONARY PAYMENTS 1993-1997

School	Year	Women as a percentage of total eligible	Women as a percentage of total applicants	Women as a percentage of number in receipt of award
Arts and Humanities	1993	32.0	20.0	6.6
	1994	31.0	17.2	19.0
	1995	31.5	35.3	27.8
	1996	35.0	34.3	33.3
	1997	35.0	50.0	46.6
Biological Sciences	1993	15.5	17.6	21.4
	1994	12.7	13.7	18.5
	1995	14.0	14.9	8.3
	1996	15.4	16.2	6.6
	1997	16.6	18.0	27.3
Humanities and Social Sciences	1993	29.5	29.0	25.0
	1994	24.1	16.6	15.8
	1995	25.0	20.7	16.7
	1996	25.3	21.6	22.6
	1997	24.3	20.6	40.0
Physical Sciences	1993	12.8	-¹	-
	1994	7.0	5.5	4.0
	1995	9.8	25.0	10.5
	1996	11.5	9.3	-
	1997	11.4	9.6	7.1
Technology	1993	12.7	-¹	-
	1994	15.6	15.8	21.0
	1995	12.2	8.1	7.7
	1996	12.2	8.9	5.5
	1997	13.9	13.8	21.4
Council and University Library	1993	32.8	14.7	14.3
	1994	38.0	33.3	26.6
	1995	37.5	50.0	41.6
	1996	40.2	45.9	53.0
	1997²

¹ Numbers opting out not collected in 1993
² Information not available for 1997 exercise

TABLE 4.6 - NUMBERS OF MEN AND WOMEN APPOINTED TO PERSONAL PROFESSORSHIPS AND READERSHIPS FROM 1985 TO 1997

Year	Men	Women	Men	Women
	Professors		Readers
1985	2	-	9	-
1986	4	-	11	-
1987	4	1	10	2
1988	2	-	11	-
1989	4	-	15	-
1990	8	1	24	-
1991	8	1	23	1
1992	8	-	21	2
1993	4	1	20	-
1994	7	-	22	3
1995	9	-	24	8
1996	9	-	26	4
1997	11	1	25	4

[TABLE 4.7 - COHORT STUDY: PROGRESS OF TECHNICIANS APPOINTED IN 1985 - DISCONTINUED]

TABLE 4.8 - ADDITIONAL INCREMENTS AND DISCRETIONARY PAYMENTS AWARDED 1997 - ASSISTANT STAFF

Grade	Additional increments		Discretionary payments		Total	Women as a percentage 1997	Women as a percentage 1996	Women as a percentage 1995	Number in grade	Percentage of women in grade
Grade	Men	Women	Men	Women	Total	Women as a percentage 1997	Women as a percentage 1996	Women as a percentage 1995	Number in grade	Percentage of women in grade
T8	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	33
T7	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	12	8
T6	-	-	9	2	11	18	25	-	80	15
T5	3	1	7	2	13	23	44	-	199	23
T4	10	6	14	5	35	31	23	38	513	33
T3	2	2	6	3	13	38	46	20	213	40
T2	-	-	1	2	3	67	29	-	73	40
T1	-	2	-	-	2	100	-	-	33	70
Trainees	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	39	54

Total	15	11	37	14	77	32	23	26	1,165	33

CS6	-	4	-	1	5	100	100	-	25	64
CS5	1	3	2	5	11	73	73	67	113	81
CS4	2	12	-	30	44	95	93	100	340	92
CS3	-	15	2	14	31	94	92	91	410	92
CS2	2	6	-	5	13	85	100	77	230	87
CS1	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	28	82
Age related	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	16	64

Total	5	40	4	55	104	91	96	89	1,146	89

M4	-	-	1	-	1	-	-	2	16	13
M3	-	-	1	1	2	50	100	-	21	33
M2	-	-	2	-	2	-	-	25	44	14
M1	1	-	3	-	4	-	50	67	107	37

Total	1	-	7	1	9	11	40	33	188	29

All staff	21	51	48	70	190	64	58	65	2,512	59

TABLE 4.9 - MATERNITY LEAVE 1993 TO DATE - ASSISTANT STAFF

Year	Numbers taking leave	Numbers returning	Percentage returning
1993	31	20	65
1994	32	16	50
1995	35	24	69
1996	30	14	47
1997 (to date)	33	4

TABLE 4.10 ETHNICITY - ACADEMIC AND ACADEMIC-RELATED STAFF

Category	Ethnic origin stated		Not known		Total	% of category
Category	No.	%	No.	%	Total	% of category
Established
Professor	150	63.56	86	36.44	236	100
Reader	93	55.03	76	44.97	169	100
University Lecturer	381	53.36	333	46.64	714	100
University Assistant Lecturer	29	60.42	19	39.58	48	100
Assistant Director/Senior Assistant in Research	46	47.92	50	52.08	96	100
Associate Lecturer	69	54.76	57	45.24	126	100
Other academic offices	59	71.08	24	28.92	83	100
Administrative offices	110	77.46	32	22.54	142	100
Library offices	51	68.00	24	32.00	75	100
Curator offices	6	66.67	3	33.33	9	100
Keeper offices	7	58.33	5	41.67	12	100
Technical offices	25	48.08	27	51.92	52	100
Computing offices	59	56.19	46	43.81	105	100
Other academic-related offices	37	68.52	17	31.48	54	100
Research offices	5	50.00	5	50.00	10	100
Unestablished
Other academic posts	31	51.67	29	48.33	60	100
Administrative posts	18	66.67	9	33.33	27	100
Library posts	2	66.67	1	33.33	3	100
Computing posts	17	43.59	22	56.41	39	100
Other academic-related posts	60	62.50	36	37.50	96	100
Research posts	844	45.43	1014	54.57	1858	100

Total	2099	52.29	1915	47.71	4014	100

TABLE 4.11 DISABILITY - ACADEMIC AND ACADEMIC-RELATED STAFF

Category	Disability stated		No disability		Not known		Total	% of category
Category	No.	%	No.	%	No.	%	Total	% of category
Established
Professor	7	2.97	139	58.90	90	38.14	236	100
Reader	4	2.37	88	52.07	77	45.56	169	100
University Lecturer	20	2.80	361	50.56	333	46.64	714	100
University Assistant Lecturer	0	0.00	29	60.42	19	39.58	48	100
Assistant Director/Senior Assistant in Research	6	6.25	42	43.75	48	50.00	96	100
Associate Lecturer	1	0.79	68	53.97	57	45.24	126	100
Other academic offices	2	2.41	55	66.27	26	31.33	83	100
Administrative offices	10	7.04	98	69.01	34	23.94	142	100
Library offices	3	4.00	47	62.67	25	33.33	75	100
Curator offices	0	0.00	6	66.67	3	33.33	9	100
Keeper offices	2	16.67	5	41.67	5	41.67	12	100
Technical offices	1	1.92	22	42.31	29	55.77	52	100
Computing offices	2	1.90	57	54.29	46	43.81	105	100
Other academic-related offices	3	5.56	35	64.81	16	29.63	54	100
Research offices	0	0.00	5	50.00	5	50.00	10	100
Unestablished
Other academic posts	1	1.67	31	51.67	28	46.67	60	100
Administrative posts	0	0.00	16	59.26	11	40.74	27	100
Library posts	0	0.00	2	66.67	1	33.33	3	100
Computing posts	2	5.13	15	38.46	22	56.41	39	100
Other academic-related posts	1	1.04	57	59.38	38	39.58	96	100
Research posts	24	1.29	805	43.33	1029	55.38	1858	100

Total	89	2.22	1983	49.40	1942	48.38	4014	100

Table of Contents