**Lecture Notes in Educational Technology**

Francisco José García-Peñalvo Alicia García-Holgado Angeles Dominguez Jimena Pascual Editors

# Women in STEM in Higher Education

Good Practices of Attraction, Access and Retainment in Higher Education

# **Lecture Notes in Educational Technology**

### **Series Editors**

Ronghuai Huang, Smart Learning Institute, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

Kinshuk, College of Information, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA

Mohamed Jemni, University of Tunis, Tunis, Tunisia

Nian-Shing Chen, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Douliu, Taiwan

J. Michael Spector, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA

The series Lecture Notes in Educational Technology (LNET), has established itself as a medium for the publication of new developments in the research and practice of educational policy, pedagogy, learning science, learning environment, learning resources etc. in information and knowledge age, – quickly, informally, and at a high level.

### **Abstracted/Indexed in:**

Scopus, Web of Science Book Citation Index

More information about this series at https://link.springer.com/bookseries/11777

Francisco José García-Peñalvo · Alicia García-Holgado · Angeles Dominguez · Jimena Pascual Editors

# Women in STEM in Higher Education

Good Practices of Attraction, Access and Retainment in Higher Education

*Editors* Francisco José García-Peñalvo GRIAL Research Group University of Salamanca Salamanca, Spain

Angeles Dominguez Tecnologico de Monterrey Institute for the Future of Education Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico

Alicia García-Holgado GRIAL Research Group University of Salamanca Salamanca, Spain

Jimena Pascual Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso Valparaíso, Chile

ISSN 2196-4963 ISSN 2196-4971 (electronic) Lecture Notes in Educational Technology ISBN 978-981-19-1551-2 ISBN 978-981-19-1552-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1552-9

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2022. This book is an open access publication.

**Open Access** This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

# **Foreword**

### **W-STEM Project**

Gender equality must be central to how all our public organisations operate. Gender equality metrics must be transparent. Gender equality demands nothing less. Gender equality benefits everyone—men, women, students and society.

As the first minister in Ireland in charge of Higher Education, I wanted to implement change that outlived my tenure and that was a legacy for our young daughters, our granddaughters and for all the female students in the future who will aspire to a higher education in fair and equitable institutions.

Gender inequality exists in our third-level institutions not because of a lack of talent or ambition, but because of systemic barriers and a culture that means talent alone is not always enough to guarantee success. Gender inequality is discrimination, pure and simple, and I was committed to ensuring that this wrongful practice of discriminating against the appointment of senior female academics stopped within our publicly funded Higher Education Institutions.

I acknowledge the impressive body of work accomplished by Máire Geoghegan-Quinn and her team in the National Review of Gender Equality in Higher Education (2016). Although that report included sixty-six recommendations for action, there was unfortunately no real driver for change within the institutions. I used that report as a springboard to devise a clear and achievable road map and action plan on how we would provide transformative change within our Third Level Institutions. In November 2017, I established a Gender Equality Taskforce which gave a much greater emphasis to the work of achieving gender equality in our higher education institutions. I also want to acknowledge the work done by Department of Education and Skills officials and the Attorney General that allowed me to vehemently argue the case with my government colleagues and get cabinet approval.

A ground-breaking initiative I introduced which I am incredibly proud of is the Senior Academic Leadership Initiative (SALI). It was a blunt message to the Irish Higher Education institutions: Get you act together. It rocked boats especially the luxury liners of the male hierarchies.

The SALI female only initiative ensured that forty-five qualified, competent female academic staff could compete for professorial tenure without conscious and unconscious bias, within a three-year time frame.This breaks down gender role stereotyping, and students in disciplines traditionally underrepresented by women can now see role models that they can aspire to.

The achievement of gender equality requires a genuine commitment and I believe my department officials and I delivered on this.

I hope my work in this area resonates for years. For me rocked boats are frankly irrelevant especially when it came to the righting of an obvious and longstanding wrong.

> Mary Mitchell O'Connor Minister of State for Higher Education (2017–2020) Dublin, Ireland

## **Preface**

Equity, access and democratisation of Higher Education are targets related to the sustainable development goals (Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators, 2017). Although the fourth goal focuses on gender equality, ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education and promoting lifelong learning opportunities for all, gender equality is a cross-cutting objective present in most of the SDGs (Esquivel & Sweetman, 2016; Pradhan, Costa, Rybski, Lucht, & Kropp, 2017). The gender gap is a challenge in all sectors of society, but is especially visible in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics), both in an educational and professional context (Botella, Rueda, López-Iñesta, & Marzal, 2019; Gomez, Abadía Alvarado, & Bernal Nisperuza, 2020; Quirós et al., 2018; UNESCO. Director-General 2009– 2017, 2017; Wang & Degol, 2017; World Economic Forum, 2016). According to the UNESCO Institute for Statistics, the mean percentage of female students in tertiary education enrolled in engineering, manufacturing and construction programs is between 6% and 7% between 2015 and 2018; in contrast, the percentage of male students choosing these careers is around 20–21%.

The result of the underrepresentation group is that many important questions and different points of view are not discussed, losing many important questions and ideas, made by distinct and rich groups that compose the society, that can benefit all (García-Holgado, González-González, & Peixoto, 2020). Moreover, this is also an economic issue; according to the European Union, increasing the number of women in digital jobs will increase the Gross Domestic Product in Europe (Seo, Huang, & Han, 2017).

Organizations across the world are working on reducing the gender gap in STEM, but the situation depends on many factors not only related to cultural and socio-economic context but also factors such as self-perception, self-efficacy or previous educational experiences (Cadaret, Hartung, Subich, & Weigold, 2017; Leaper, & Starr, 2019; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2000; Moss-Racusin, Dovidio, Brescoll, Graham, & Handelsman, 2012; Malik, & Al-Emran, 2018; Salami, 2007; Salas-Morera, Cejas Molina, Olivares Olmedilla, García-Hernández, & Palomo-Romero, 2019; Seo, Huang, & Han, 2017). Furthermore, there are many steps across the development of the career where the number of women decreases in these areas: when they enter the university, when they join the labour market and when they achieve high professional positions (Seo, Huang, & Han, 2017; Amon, 2017).

Closing this gender gap requires a holistic approach that involves not only the educational sector (primary, secondary and tertiary education) but also other spheres. It is necessary to face this problem working on the social norms and stereotypes that influence in the perception of how a STEM person should be, the professional progression, the entrepreneurship and innovation sector, the gender balance and gender perspective in research, and the formulation of policies. In this context, higher education institutions have a crucial role in the implementation of measures to reduce the gender gap in STEM. They have an impact on other educational levels through the training of future teachers, and also have an impact in the labour market. Furthermore, there is a need for modernising policies, governance, and strengthening relations between higher education systems and the economic and social environment, including other educational levels, to work in closing the gender gap in STEM.

This book addresses the challenges related to women in STEM in higher education, gathering research, studies, good practices, experiences and so on about the engagement, accessing and retention of women in the STEM disciplines, also the strategies of the universities and policymakers to reduce the existing gender gap in these areas. The chapters provide an overview of the approaches implemented in different regions worldwide and provide numerous examples that can be transferred to other higher education institutions.

Salamanca, Spain Salamanca, Spain Monterrey, Mexico Valparaíso, Chile

Francisco José García-Peñalvo Alicia García-Holgado Angeles Dominguez Jimena Pascual

### **References**

# **Acknowledgments**

This publication has been possible with the support of the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union in its Key Action 2, "Capacity-building in Higher Education". Project W-STEM "Building the future of Latin America: engaging women into STEM" (Reference number 598923-EPP-1-2018-1-ES-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP). The content of this publication does not reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Responsibility for the information and views expressed in the publication lies entirely with the authors.

# **Contents**

M. Goretti Alonso de Castro and Francisco José García-Peñalvo

# **Chapter 1 A Model for Bridging the Gender Gap in STEM in Higher Education Institutions**

### **Alicia García-Holgado and Francisco José García-Peñalvo**

**Abstract** Women present a historic and worrying gap in science and technologyrelated disciplines, generally knowns as STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics), except in the case of health professions. A holistic approach is needed to support policymakers worldwide in bridging the gender gap in STEM, in which higher education institutions have a crucial role. Promoting this active implication of the universities in this problem, in the European project Building the future of Latin America: engaging women into STEM (W-STEM), a model to modernise the government, management and operation of higher education institutions in Latin America to improve attraction, access to and retention of women in STEM programs has been developed. This situation is not exclusive to Latin American countries, it is a global problem, so the results of the W-STEM project are also applicable to European partners and transferrable worldwide. The main goal of this chapter is to describe the W-STEM model based on three years of working on strategies and mechanisms to improve the attraction, access, guidance, and retention processes to engage more women in STEM programs. The model has been thoroughly tested in eleven institutions in Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Mexico, involving public and private institutions with different gender equality situations.

**Keywords** Gender gap · Higher education · Gender equality plan · Self-assessment · Women · STEM

A. García-Holgado (B) · F. J. García-Peñalvo

GRIAL Research Group, Computer Science Department, University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain

e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
F. J. García-Peñalvo e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
### **1.1 Introduction**

Gender equality refers to the equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities of women and men and girls and boys. This means that women's and men's rights, responsibilities and opportunities will not depend on whether they are born male or female (OSAGI, 2021). It is goal 5 in the 2030 agenda for Sustainable Development, but also gender equality cuts across all 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and is reflected in 45 targets and 54 indicators for the SDGs (Dugarova, 2019; Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators, 2017; Pradhan et al., 2017). Gender equality is also part of the European Union (EU) policies so that gender equality and women's empowerment are promoted and financially supported worldwide.

Higher Education Institutions (HEI) have a major role in contributing to the SDGs, not only in their internal policies but also in preparing students for the challenges of the twenty-first century. HEIs are a key element to ensure the sustainability of the SDGs. Besides goal 4, ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all, HEIs define processes and actions related to poverty (SDG 1), health and well-being (SDG 3), gender equality (SDG 5) or climate change (SDG13), among others.

According to the Global Gender Gap Report, no country has yet to achieve full gender parity. The Global Gender gap score in 2021 is 67.7%, which means that the remaining gap to close stands at 32.3% (World Economic Forum, 2021). This index measures the gender-based differences in four key dimensions and tracks the narrowing of these gaps over time: economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival and political empowerment. Each subindex provides a score related to gender parity. In particular, 95% of educational attainment gaps have been closed already. However, there are gender gaps in higher education worldwide, although the enrolment rates in tertiary education achieved full gender parity in most of the countries (UIS. Stat, 2016).

Women are persistently underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation Horizon, 2020; OECD, 2015; Tomassini, 2021; UNESCO, 2007; UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2018). Although most countries have more women than men enrolled in tertiary education, the number of women in tertiary education who choose STEM is around 15% (UNESCO. Director-General 2009–2017, 2017). For example, only 13.76% of women in tertiary education choose STEM compared to 35.12% of men in Colombia (0.39 gender gap score). The situation is worst in Spain, with a gender gap score of 0.33, Finland with 0.25 or Ireland with 0.38.

The STEM labour force is a fundamental tool for responding to the needs of twenty-first- century society; it has a crucial role in sustainable development. Moreover, market forces are transforming industries (World Economic Forum, 2016), not only in favour of technology skills development, but also the need for STEM skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving or innovation (World Economic Forum, 2020). Besides the lack of women in STEM, there is also a lack of workers to fill the needs of the STEM labour force.

On the other hand, evidence shows that increasing gender diversity in STEM may lead to more effective problem-solving and improved innovations (Kahn & Ginther, 2017), and can have long-term effects not only on gender equality but also on economic development (World Economic Forum, 2017). According to Quirós et al. (2018), more women in digital jobs would benefit the European Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by up to 16 trillion euros per year in the European context.

Increasing diversity in STEM, with a particular focus on women, is on the agendas of governments and public and private entities. Foster social inclusion and increasing the female participation in STEM is one of the key challenges of the European Union (García-Holgado et al., 2020a). The EU support actions through initiatives such as the European Platform of Women Scientists (EPWS) or funding projects like INGDVIS (Increasing Gender Diversity in STEM) (Ballatore et al., 2020) or Coding4Girls (Hoi´c-Boži´c et al., 2020).

A holistic approach is needed to support policymakers worldwide in bridging the gender gap in STEM. Many factors contribute to this problem, including selfperception, self-efficacy, interest in science, expectations of results, previous educational experiences, family and social context (Lent et al., 1994). According to the SAGA project (STEM and Gender Advancement) (UNESCO, 2016, 2018), the gender gap in STEM should be faced through seven macro objectives covering not only social norms but also educational and professional pathways, and research and decision-making (Fig. 1.1):

• Change perception, attitudes, behaviours, social norms, and stereotypes towards women in STEM in society.

**Fig. 1.1** SAGA gender objectives. Based on (UNESCO, 2018)

In this holistic approach, higher education institutions have a major role. They directly impact primary and secondary education because they prepare future teachers, so HEI can work on training pre-service teachers for fostering STEM vocations with an emphasis on engaging girls and young women. Likewise, HEI should work on measures to ensure gender equality in career development for staff. Furthermore, HEI plays an important role in research, so they can implement strategies and mechanisms to ensure the gender dimension in research content and develop studies that reduce the gender gap in STEM in a feedback loop. On the other hand, HEIs indirectly impact policies and entrepreneurship and innovation activities because they prepare future professionals and decision-makers.

In this context, the European project Building the future of Latin America: engaging women into STEM (García-Holgado et al., 2019; García-Peñalvo, 2019; García-Peñalvo et al., 2019) has developed a model to modernise the government, management and operation of higher education institutions in Latin America to improve attraction, access to and retention of women in STEM programs.

This chapter describes the W-STEM model for bridging the gender gap in STEM in higher education institutions. The chapter has been organised in the following way. Section 2 introduces the W-STEM project. Section 3 presents the W-STEM model. Section 4 describes the main results after piloting the W-STEM model in 10 Latin American universities. Finally, the last section summarises the main conclusions.

### **1.2 The Project**

There is a lack of contribution of Higher Education Institutions to face the challenges related to reducing the gender gap in STEM, as most actions remain at the public policy level. HEIs need to face specific demands:

W-STEM project, "Building the future of Latin America: engaging women into STEM" (Reference 598,923-EPP-1–2018-1-EN-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP), is a European project funded by the European Union through the Erasmus + program, capacitybuilding in Higher Education call. The project is a structural project that seeks a systemic impact in the Latin American region by promoting reforms in higher education systems, modernising policies, governance and strengthening relations between higher education systems and the economic and social environment (García-Holgado et al., 2019).

The project provides strategic intervention affecting gender equality policies, with a special focus on the attraction and guidance of women in STEM careers, important for current and future society. While some European countries are at higher developmental stages, culture on gender equality is embedded in the universities. Thus, they have mature procedures, experiences, regulations, etc., which can be transferred to Latin American institutions through this project. On the other hand, the gender gap is a global problem, so the European institutions will also learn how to improve their processes.

The funding period started in January 2019 and will finish in July 2022, although the network will continue reducing the gender gap in STEM (https://wstemproj ect.eu/). The consortium consists of fifteen HEI, five from Europe and ten from Latin America:

Furthermore, each university has also involved secondary education schools as associated partners to work with them in the attraction processes of girls and young women to STEM studies. Finally, UNESCO also participates as associated partner and Columbus Association as external evaluator.

### **1.3 W-STEM Model**

Higher Education Institutions can directly impact the attraction, access to and retention of women in STEM higher education at all levels (UNESCO, 2016, 2018). First, the attraction processes can impact before the students get to university. Later, the access processes mainly affect the application and enrolment activities when women students try to join STEM programs.

There is a critical issue regarding guidance and retention when women are at university due to dropout rates, both while studying and when they join the labour market. Previous studies identify the support received by the STEM students from their academic institutions and teachers is low (García-Holgado et al., 2020; Peña-Calvo et al., 2016). For this reason, HEIs must improve these processes.

The W-STEM model proposes a workflow with different tools and guidelines to impact these three processes, attraction, access and guidance/retention from the HEIs. The workflow involves four phases (Fig. 1.2). The first phase, situation analysis, is review and self-assessment tasks focused on reflection and insight. It is necessary to identify the current state of women in STEM programs because the rate of women in each program depends on different factors; it is not the same for science, technology, engineering or mathematics-related degrees.

The second phase starts once we know the real situation of our institution. This phase focuses on defining the Gender Equality Action Plan (GEAP) to define the

**Fig. 1.2** W-STEM workflow to reduce the gender gap in STEM

strategy and the objectives, and design actions to achieve them. Despite Gender Equality Plans (GEP) being mandatory at the university level in most European countries, this is not always required in Latin American HEIs. Moreover, the GEP usually focuses on gender equality among the staff and academic community but not are directly related to reducing the gender gap in STEM.

The next phase covers implementing the actions defined in the Gender Equality Action Plan. These actions work on attraction, access, and guidance processes. Finally, the last phase ensures compliance with the objectives established in the GEAP. It implements mechanisms to measure the impact and achievement of the objectives, and the results are used to update the GEAP or improve the implementation of the actions.

### *1.3.1 Situation Analysis*

The main objective of the first phase is to identify the current situation of women in STEM programs inside the HEI. The results associated with the situation analysis are three:

This phase is also divided into three stages or sub-phases, each one with an instrument to collect the required information and a dataset that serves as input for the definition of the gender equality action plan in STEM programs. Moreover, each stage is focused on one of the mentioned results and is an input for the next stage. Figure 1.3 summarises the process.

**Fig. 1.3** Situation analysis stages

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Self-Assessment**

The first stage is "self-assessment". It focuses on measuring STEM gender equality in the university concerning attraction, access, guidance, retention and other processes, only on the quantitative side. The data collected is key for the rest of the process because it will determine the strategy defined in phase 2, the Gender Equality Action Plan.

We designed a survey to collect quantitative indicators related to undergraduate education level only (bachelor's degree or equivalent), although it is possible to use it for a master's degree or doctorate. The baseline of this instrument is the UNESCO SAGA Toolkit, which is a conceptual and methodological framework to provide a series of tools to integrate, monitor and evaluate gender equality in STEM and assist in the design of gender-sensitive and evidence-based policies to strengthen the gender policy agenda (UNESCO, 2017). The survey is made up of items from the SAGA Indicator Matrix, a tool with 45 indicators to assess on an institutional level the effects of policies and instruments in science, technology and innovation as well as availability and possible need to further develop such policies and instruments to advancing women's participation and career advancement in STEM fields (UNESCO, 2017).

The indicators are organised into ten categories: institutional background information (total number of students and staff: males/females); STEM Programs according to ISCED 2013 classification—broad field; students; attraction; access; enrolment; discrimination; sexual harassment; guidance; dropouts.

The W-STEM self-assessment survey includes indicators from 4 to 26. Moreover, we modified indicator 9 "Total and share of women graduated from university programs by field of study and by educational level," replaced by "Total and share of women graduated from university programs by field of study". Besides, the survey includes two new indicators, 46 and 47. Indicator 46 is based on indicator 9, but focused on guidance of women enrolled and graduated in STEM programs, which also consists of four sub-indicators:

Concerning indicator 47, it measures female dropout in STEM programs, and it has two sub-indicators:

Finally, some indicators are complemented with a set of questions to identify related policies. The survey template is available on (W-STEM Consortium, 2019a). The self-assessment must be applied at the beginning of the process, collecting information from the last academic year. Although covering more academic years is possible, one year is enough due to a challenge to feed the indicators with sufficient data (García-Holgado et al., 2020c). On the other hand, all indicators are important; however, not all are mandatory. At least the institution should complete the indicators, 4 to 8, 14, 15, 46 and 47.

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Process Mapping**

Higher Education Institutions are complex organisations due to the multiplicity of purposes, the involvement of multiple actors in the decision-making processes, the different organisational cultures that coexist within the organisation or the complex structure that derives from its nature. Even though the people working on the gender gap in STEM is part of the institution, most will not be aware of all the details of the institution's functioning unless they have been part of the management team.

This stage provides a clear map of all the steps and the involved stakeholders in the key processes of the project: attraction, access, retention, and guidance. It complements the results of the indicators found during the self-assessment from a qualitative point of view and allows identifying bottlenecks, deficiencies, possibilities and who are involved and their roles.

The definition of the process mapping template (W-STEM Consortium, 2019b) and the guidelines was supported by an external expert to ensure that data collection is carried out in a similar way regardless of the institution and that all necessary elements are covered. The mapping should include plans, strategies and policies, measures and initiatives, institutional framework at different levels (university, department, etc.), and any stage (planning/execution/evaluation or closing phases, in development, or already finished).

The template has four datasheets, one per macro-categories (attraction, access, guidance and retention). Each sheet provides a set of columns to organise the input information. Each macro category is divided into subcategories and activities. For example, the access category could be divided into admission to the first undergraduate semester, tuition payment, academic enrolment, etc. These subcategories will depend on the institution.

Moreover, each subcategory is divided into activities and the following information is provided: the name of the activity, a short description of the activity and the impact on the target groups. Finally, the departments, services or units in charge of each subcategory and/or activity should be provided (García-Holgado et al., 2020c).

The mapping process can be carried out after the self-assessment or parallel and should reflect the current situation. It is a snapshot of the institution's performance on gender gap issues with special attention to STEM. The output of this stage will be useful to involve decision-makers in the next phase, the definition of the Gender Equality Action Plan.

### **<IP_ADDRESS> Benchmarking**

The gender gap in STEM is not a new issue; many organisations and communities are working on reducing the gender gap in STEM. Initiatives such as Niñas Pro in Chile (Vidal et al., 2021), a Female Engineer in Every School in Spain (Cerezo et al., 2018) or Women in Science & Engineering (WiSE) in the United States (Paderewski-Rodríguez et al., 2017) are some examples of actions developed by Higher Education Institutions to engage more girls into STEM.

The situation analysis phase includes a stage to consider those actions that already work and learn from the previous problems and decisions. The W-STEM model proposes two ways to conduct this stage. On the one hand, a systematic research projects review (SRPR) (García-Holgado et al., 2020d) to identify funding projects related to the gender gap in STEM. For example, in the European Union, there is a strong investment in projects focused on gender in STEM (García-Holgado et al., 2020a). Those projects have outcomes that can be transferred to other institutions, such as educational materials, online courses, examples of good practices or software tools.

On the other hand, benchmarking rounds focused on attraction, access and guidance/retention. The methodology proposed to conduct the benchmarking round is based on the Columbus Association methodology. It is a process applied in companies and can be transferred to universities. It is a structured process—a series of actions, steps, functions or activities—that leads to comparing services-activitiesprocesses-outputs-outcomes to identify and adopt good practices to improve university performance. In the W-STEM model, benchmarking rounds aim to identify policies, procedures and mechanisms that are considered good practices in attracting, accessing and mentoring women in STEM programs to be adapted to the needs identified in the institution.

The benchmarking can be conducted internally in large universities, for example, with different campuses, but it can also involve several institutions participating in the preparation process and the dynamics afterwards. Each institution has to collect examples of good practices that might be interesting and of novelty from an institutional point of view. This could be related to any of the three processes (attraction, access and guidance or retention); it may even impact more than one process at a time. Furthermore, the institution can identify lessons learned or problems encountered in implementing an action. The preparation process can follow the template prepared in W-STEM (W-STEM Consortium, 2019c). After collecting the information, each institution shares the good practices, lessons learned and problems in an event, face-to-face or online.

### *1.3.2 Definition of the Gender Equality Action Plan*

Typically, a gender equality plan (GEP implies establishing and making effective a set of basic principles to safeguard gender equality in all the spheres of academic life. It also establishes the core actions to be developed in the university, across its different levels: human resources practices and management processes, student services and institutional communication, research design and delivery, and institutional communication (Barros et al., 2018). However, the GEAP proposed in the W-STEM model is supplementary to GEP already developed in some HEI. Despite the GEAP implementing some measures to ensure gender equality inside STEM programs, the principal focus is reducing the gender gap in those programs through gender equality actions. Moreover, the GEAP works in attraction and access, which are not directly internal processes of the institution itself but seek to work outside the institution.

The GEAP includes specific actions to increase access, attraction and guidance of women in STEM programs. The results from the previous phase, situation analysis, are inputs to define the GEAP. First, indicators from the self-assessment will serve to identify the target STEM programs. Second, the process mapping will provide useful information about the processes already implemented in the institution, so the actions defined in the GEAP could change those processes or introduce new ones. Finally, the benchmarking results provide ideas and learning lessons to define some actions to achieve the GEAP objectives.

The definition of the action plan should follow three steps: define the strategy; design the objectives; and define the actions to achieve the objectives. The strategy definition should include a short text to contextualise the action plan. This is not a state of the art or theoretical introduction; its goal is to explain the plan's purpose.

Regarding the actions, it should be noted that each objective must be associated with more than one action; in another case, the objective is not well defined. The actions definition is not only the presentation of the action, but also the process to identify the person or persons responsible for each action, the services in the university that will help to implement the actions and achieve the objectives, and the persons that will support the implementation of the action. Furthermore, the description of the actions will include a timeline to establish the implementation timing for each action and identify the milestones.

### *1.3.3 Implementation of Actions and Measuring Impact and Achievement of Objectives*

The implementation of the actions defined in the GEAP, and monitoring are the last phases of the W-STEM model. The implementation phase depends on the actions defined by the institutions. However, it is necessary to consider the monitoring phase when we develop those actions. For this reason, the actions should include mechanisms to measure the impact to assess the achievement of the GEAP objectives and the quality of the implementation process.

Actions must include surveys, observation mechanisms, evidence gathering, etc., to have enough data to support decision-making processes during the monitoring phase. Furthermore, the measures will have an impact on the actions. Therefore, actions that are carried out on a regular basis will be updated or replaced by others if the expected impact is not achieved.

Finally, it is possible using benchmarking rounds as monitoring activities. These rounds can be organised internally, involving the stakeholders involved in the GEAP, to review the progress done, learn from the different actions implemented, and make decisions about the GEAP. Also, it is possible to invite other institutions to the benchmarking round, not only for identifying good practices, but also for sharing learning lessons and solving common problems.

### **1.4 Main Results**

The results of the W-STEM models depend on each institution. However, this section summarises some relevant results obtained during the implementation and validation of the model in the Latin American institutions involved in the W-STEM project.

In addition to the resources and materials developed to support the implementation of the W-STEM model, there are four primary results associated with the process that can be used in other contexts:

### *1.4.1 International Leadership Summer Camp*

First, the International Leadership Summer Camp (also named International Leadership Summit) was organised face-to-face in Cartagena de Indias and Barranquilla (Colombia). It was an event on the global and regional outlook on gender equality at STEM education and women in science participation. The aim was to make the problem visible to the policymakers from the higher education institutions involved in W-STEM to integrate them in the definition of the GEAP as a strategy to ensure the sustainability of the plan. Each participant university involved at least one institutional leader (rectors, vice-rectors, deans of STEM programs, institutional decisionmakers). Also, five experts from UNESCO, NRC (UK) and Liquid Galaxy Lab at FAÇENS (Brazil) participated in the event.

The Leadership Summit included sessions for building bridges between national/regional policies and the institutional level. Leaders, experts and the W-STEM team participated in a World Café, a set of roundtables focused on building bridges between public policy and institutional initiatives concerning the mechanisms and strategies about attraction, access and guidance of women in STEM programs (García-Peñalvo et al., 2019).

The second part of the Leadership Summit was focused on the first benchmarking round and a workshop to start the definition of the Gender Equality Action Plans.

### *1.4.2 Women in STEM Mobile App*

The purpose of the W-STEM app is to give visibility to women in STEM careers, not only women of a very high level in STEM, but also young women with different profiles—last year students, PhD students, young researchers, developers, etc. The app is a tool for schools and high schools in Latin America to show young women in STEM since the books and materials used in the classroom only show examples of men. It is intended to give young people ideas about what it means or why to select a STEM program (García-Holgado et al., 2020e). The app is available for iOS and Android, both for smartphones and tablets (https://wstemproject.eu/app/).

The app has two types of content. On the one hand, short bios provide some useful information to potential STEM students and share with them similar concerns that other people have had (Marín-Raventós et al., 2020). We used a survey based on (Ballatore et al., 2019) to identify prospective students, successful graduates and current students, with key aptitudes correlated to STEM disciplines/professions. A total of 6358 profiles were collected, 2071 have finished their university studies, and 4287 are students (45.33% male, 54.03% female, 0.34% preferred not to answer, and 0.3% non-binary).

On the other hand, the app facilitates access to 335 interviews of women in STEM from different countries, cultural backgrounds, ages, and career stages (not only senior positions). The goal was to show diversity in STEM and avoid stereotyping. The interviews duration is between 3 and 7 min, and the original language is Spanish or English with subtitles. Figure 1.4 shows a sample of the videos available on YouTube (W-STEM Consortium, 2020).

### *1.4.3 Attraction Campaigns*

The original plan was to conduct the attraction campaigns inside the secondary schools to engage the young women students and support them to enrol in a STEM program. However, the COVID-19 crisis impacted on education (García-Peñalvo, 2021; García-Peñalvo et al., 2020, 2021; Knopik & Oszwa, 2021) and forced the transformation of the attraction campaigns into virtual campaigns.

The involvement of the schools during the lockdown period in 2020 hindered the organisation of some activities. For this reason, the attraction campaigns also involved awareness-raising campaigns. Moreover, all the events were online, so a common schedule was prepared to avoid overlapping. Although there were many activities, the attraction campaigns guidelines included the following type of events:

**Fig. 1.4** Women in STEM interviews available on the W-STEM YouTube channel

### *1.4.4 W-STEM Mentoring Network*

We have created a network of mentoring programs with pilot experiences the eleven HEI from Ibero-America (Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, and Spain).

The Mentoring Network aims to empower women and encourage their active participation in STEM programs. The mentoring model implemented uses a threeway relationship. It involves a mentor teacher, the peer-mentor and the mentee (González Rogado et al., 2021). The guidelines for implementing the mentoring programs are common for all the network, but each institution has adapted them to its own contexts and needs according to its GEAP.

First, mentor teachers and peer-mentors receive cross-cutting training in leadership, women's empowerment, inclusive language and creating inclusive environments. Depending on the institution, mentor teachers and peer-mentors are men and women or only women. Regarding the mentees, they are first-year STEM female students. The goal is to support and empower them during their first year of studies.

### **1.5 Conclusions**

The gender gap in STEM is a reality that affects to a different extent by countries. Although there are countries with less gender gap in STEM, such as Oman, Myanmar, Morocco, Mauritania, Gambia or Benin, most countries have a remaining gap to close stands at 60–70% (World Economic Forum, 2021).

Higher Education Institutions have a major role in reducing the gender gap in STEM because they impact before, during and after tertiary studies. For this reason, HEI must implement gender equality action plans based on their gender equality situation. This chapter presents the W-STEM model, a proposal based on three years working on strategies and mechanisms to improve the attraction, access, guidance, and retention processes to engage more women into STEM programs.

The W-STEM model has been fully tested in eleven institutions in Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Mexico, involving public and private institutions with different gender equality situations. Each institution has adapted the model and the resources to develop the different context.

However, several caveats need to be noted regarding the W-STEM model. Although work has been done on the three processes of attraction, access, guidance and retention, the actions associated with access are lower than others. The main problem is that national education laws and policies regulate the access processes, so the institution could influence the support provided to the students during those processes but not in the process itself.

On the other hand, concerning the situation analysis, some important limitations need to be considered. First, the self-assessment and mapping process require the collaboration of different services and units, so there is a high risk of not achieving all information. HEI does not have a unique service that centralises statistical information.

Finally, there is a definite need to transfer the W-STEM model to other HEI, with a particular focus in Latin America. For this reason, the W-STEM project is developing a set of online training modules on policies, mechanisms and processes, as well as on the implementation of the W-STEM model to enhance the attraction, access and guidance of women in STEM.

**Acknowledgements** This work has been possible with the support of the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union in its Key Action 2, "Capacity-building in Higher Education". Project W-STEM "Building the future of Latin America: engaging women into STEM" (Reference number 598923-EPP-1-2018-1-ES-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP). The content of this publication does not reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Responsibility for the information and views expressed in the publication lies entirely with the authors.

### **References**

**Open Access** This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# **Chapter 2 A Review of Irish National Strategy for Gender Equality in Higher Education 2010–2021**

### **Julie Dunne, Ayesha O'Reilly, Ashley O'Donoghue, and Mary Kinahan**

**Abstract** This chapter provides a narrative of the key policies, initiatives and actions that have transformed both the landscape of gender equality in Higher Education in Ireland, and the role of gender equality in research policy and public engagement in STEM over the last decade. It aims to provide leaders committed to gender equality with examples of good practice within the EU-Irish context. The first part of the chapter focuses on the EU gender equality strategies for Higher Education. It explains the review of gender equality undertaken by the Irish Higher Education Authority (HEA), the significant findings, and the National Gender Action Plan designed to address the issues identified. It contains examples of high-level initiatives implemented to deliver on key actions. These include centres of excellence for Gender Equality, and affirmative actions taken to address imbalance at senior levels in the Irish Higher Education system. It also provides an account of Irish participation in the UK Advance Higher Education (*Advance HE*) gender supports including the women's leadership programme '*Aurora*', and the '*Athena SWAN*' charter that provides an accreditation framework for auditing, supporting and transforming gender equality in Higher Education Institutions. For context, some examples of implementing these in an Irish Institution are provided. The chapter then reviews the gender equality strategies and policies of the main research funding organisations in Ireland, namely Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), and the Irish Research Council (IRC). It indicates how gender equality manifests in achieving gender balance in the Irish research community; and in funding applications and consequently in research design to embed the gender element. It also provides an

A. O'Reilly e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
A. O'Donoghue e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
M. Kinahan e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
J. Dunne (B) · A. O'Reilly · A. O'Donoghue · M. Kinahan Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Ireland e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
overview of recent national studies carried out to analyse the Irish public's perceptions and awareness of STEM in society, and factors leading to career and study choices by young Irish people. It signposts to the recent actions to address gender equality provided under SFI's remit for public engagement in STEM.

**Keywords** Gender equality policy · Ireland · European union (EU) · Higher education · Research funding · Advance HE

### **2.1 Introduction**

Despite equality legislation and equality policies, gender inequality persists in Ireland and globally in many sectors of society. A World Economic Forum report on gender gaps in health, education, work and politics states it will take 99.5 years to close these gaps (World Economic Forum, 2019). In relation to the gender income gap, they found that women are heavily under-represented in technology (12%), engineering (15%), data and AI (26%). These are sectors which have experienced substantial wage increases in the last decade. The European Commission's She Figs. 2021 shows women are under-represented in technical professions with women representing 24.9% of self-employed professionals in Science and Engineering (S&E) and Information & Communication Technologies (ICT). In addition, women are under-represented in the highest academic levels (26.2%) and at the highest decisionmaking levels (26.2%) in academic institutions. This reflects the global issue of gender inequality in Higher Education research and innovation (Commission, 2021). Gender equality is an important ethical, legal and performance issue for Higher Education. Ethically, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 5 calls for Gender Equality and the right for women and girls to have equal participation in all aspects of society. Legally, many countries have equality legislation that prevents gender discrimination. In Ireland for example, the Employment Equality Act 1998 specifically legislates for the prevention of gender discrimination in the fair and equal access to employment and promotion opportunities (Employment Equality Act, 1998). In terms of overall performance, research shows that diversity is a key strength. Gender balance on executive boards is positively correlated with increased performance of organisations (Gratton et al., 2007; Carter & Wagner, 2011; Reinert et al., 2016) and research publications from ethnically diverse research teams are more highly cited than those published by ethnically homogenous teams (Hunt et al., 2015). Diversity brings different perspectives that increases creativity and innovation (Gassmann, 2001; Dai et al., 2019).

European Union Gender Equality Strategy.

Gender equality is a core principle of the European Union, but it is not yet a reality. In business, politics and society as a whole, we can only reach our full potential if we use all of our talent and diversity. Using only half of the population, half of the ideas or half of the energy is not good enough.

President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen.

The European Commission states that 'the under-representation of women threatens the goals of science in achieving excellence, as well as being wasteful and unjust' (European Commission, 2000). Building on the strengths and lessons learned from the Strategic Engagement for Gender Equality 2016–2019 (Publications Office of the European Union, 2020a ) and to address the persistent under-representation of women and girls in the labour market, the European Commission (2020b) developed the Gender Equality Strategy 2020–2025.

The European Commission Gender Equality Strategy 2020–2025 has identified the following concrete actions to address the equal participation of women and girls in the economy and society:

As part of the W-STEM project (García-Holgado et al., 2019; García-Peñalvo et al., 2019) TU Dublin staff from both professional services and academia have provided an overview of the gender equality policies and actions that have influenced the Irish context over the last decade. In the following sections, (1) the initiatives to support achieving gender equality in Irish Higher Education Institutions are discussed. These include undertakings by the Irish Higher Education Authority (HEA), specifically (1.1) a review of gender equality in Irish HEAs and (1.2) formation of a gender task force. The overview also includes (2) the UK-based Advance HE and the support it provides to Ireland and elsewhere including (2.1) Athena SWAN and (2.2) Aurora Women's Leadership programme. Thereafter, (3) a discussion follows on gender equality within Irish Research Funding organisations including (3.1) the Irish Research Council and (3.2) Science Foundation Ireland. The chapter closes with some concluding remarks which may be useful to those interested in understanding the systematic approach taken by Ireland and the EU to advance gender equality in Higher Education.

### **2.2 Gender Equality in Irish Higher Education Institutions**

To address the under-representation of women in senior levels across Irish Higher Education Institutions, several initiatives were implemented and are discussed in the following section.

### *2.2.1 The Higher Education Authority: National Review of Gender Equality in Irish Higher Education Institutions*

The Higher Education Authority (HEA) conducted a National Review of Gender Equality in Irish Higher Education Institutions (Higher Education Authority, 2016). This expert review aimed to address the numerous factors within Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), conscious and unconscious, cultural and structural, that result in women facing barriers to progression which are not experienced to the same degree by their male colleagues. The review conducted an in-depth analysis of the gender balance of academic and non-academic (professional service and support staff) staff across all grades of employment as well as institutions' management teams, academic councils and governing boards.

### Review Process

The review process began with the development of the Terms of Reference and appointment of the Expert Group. The approach taken in conducting the review involved the following stages:

HEA recommendations were identified for four key stakeholder groups to drive positive change for gender equality:

A total of 22 recommendations were specifically identified for *Higher Education Institutions* and, for context, the TU Dublin response to implementing these recommendations is outlined in Table A.1 in the Appendix to this chapter. Key initiatives implemented by TU Dublin include:

– *Career Development*. To support career development and progression, the university sponsors 20 women annually to attend the Advance HE Aurora Leadership Development Programme for Women to understand the barriers facing women in Higher Education. TU Dublin also assigns a mentor to all leadership development programme participants.

### *2.2.2 The Department of Education & Skills Gender Task Force—Accelerating Gender Equality in Irish Higher Education Institutions—Gender Action Plan 2018–2020*

Following publication of the HEA National Review of Gender Equality (Higher Education Authority, 2016), the Department of Education and Skills (DES, 2018) identified the review as an important first step in highlighting gender inequality in our HEIs. However, in monitoring the implementation of the HEA 2016 recommendations (Higher Education Authority, 2016), concerns were raised that progress remained exceptionally slow.

Data trends in the universities over the period 2013-2017, show that there has been a consistently low rate of change year on year, only 1-2% each year at professor level, from a starting position of 18% female professors in 2013 to just 24% in 2017. The HEA Higher Education Institutional Staff by Gender report (2018) highlights that in 2017 only 24% of professor posts were filled by women as compared to 51% female lecturers, the entry level for academic posts in the university sector. While the number of female professors is just one metric, it is a key metric used internationally to compare countries, and it clearly highlights the extent of the problem in academia.

Minister for Higher Education Mary Mitchell O'Connor, Gender Action Plan 2018–2020, p.2 (Higher Education Authority, 2016).

Drawing on the work of the HEA Expert Group, a 'Gender Task Force' was established to help embed the recommendations. Specifically addressing HEA recommendation 1.21—To ensure a roadmap for attainment of gender equality is developed, each institution will implement a gender action plan, the Gender Task Force outlined a Gender Action Plan 2018–2020 that identified goals, actions and targets to be integrated into the institution's strategic plan.

### Review Process

The Gender Equality Taskforce formally began their work in November 2017 following the development of their Terms of Reference. The approach taken by the Gender Equality Taskforce involved the following stages:

– Review of recruitment and promotion policies and practices in HEIs conducted by an external third party, Advance HE (please see below for further information).

Development of the three-year Gender Action Plan 2018–2020

The Gender Action Plan 2018–2020 (DES, 2018) identified specific actions and targets to accelerate progress in achieving gender equality in Irish HEIs:

	- Providing centralised support for HEIs.
	- Disseminate and share good practice and funding for innovative organisational and cultural change initiatives nationally through the HEA Gender Equality Enhancement Fund.
	- All HEIs shall submit their institutional gender action plan to the HEA and provide annual progress updates.
	- To accelerate gender balance, all HEIs shall set ambitious short-, mediumand long-term targets (1, 3 and 5 years) for the proportion of people of each gender which it aims to have at senior levels of academic and professional, management and support staff across the institution.
	- Each HEI will be held accountable for achieving their targets and performance will be incentivised through additional funding or funding consequences as appropriate, to ensure progress is constant and considerable.
	- Government funding for Higher Education shall be linked to an institution's performance in addressing gender inequality.
	- To drive performance there shall be rewards for progress through funding incentives and consequences for lack of engagement or effort.
	- HEIs shall apply for an Athena SWAN Institutional Bronze award by 2019.
	- Research Funding Institutions will require HEIs to have achieved an Athena SWAN Bronze award to be eligible to access funding.
	- All HEIs shall ensure that there are concrete actions in their institutional gender action plans, elaborated where appropriate at discipline and business unit level, to bring their existing policies in line with good recruitment and selection practice.
	- All HEIs shall strive for gender balance in the final pool of candidates for all competitions.
	- Each HEI is required to implement the flexible cascade model as a minimum (not a maximum) for both promotion and recruitment of academic staff and senior grades of professional, management and support staff.
	- Each HEI is required to set ambitious short-, medium- and long-term targets (1, 3 and 5 years), over and above the flexible cascade model for both promotion and recruitment of academic staff and senior grades of professional, management and support staff.
	- To enable HEIs to better monitor their progress and monitor patterns, data disaggregated by gender, contract type and broad discipline area or business unit should be collected on the number of applications, recruitments and promotions for all academic grades. This data should be submitted to the HEA annually for analysis at the sectoral and national level.
	- New and additional gender-specific posts, at appropriate levels, as well as other positive action measures, should be considered where they would be a proportionate and effective means to achieve rapid and sustainable change.
	- All HEIs shall ensure that there are concrete actions in their institutional gender action plan to address stereotyping of 'female' and 'male' roles.

The next section considers a specific example of positive action to address gender equality in senior leadership in the Irish Higher Education system, and was introduced by Minister Mary Mitchell O'Connor, who provided the foreword as part of the W-STEM project.

### *2.2.3 Senior Academic Leadership Initiative (SALI)*

SALI is an innovative and transformational positive action initiative implemented in 2019 across Higher Education alongside the Gender Action Task Force and championed by the Minister for Higher Education. The Senior Academic Leadership Initiative aims to achieve equality of outcome in the Higher Education sector. New and additional senior academic leadership posts have been funded in areas where: there is clear evidence of significant gender under-representation; where this appointment will have significant impact within the faculty/department/functional unit and the HEI; where they would be a proportionate and effective means to achieve accelerated and sustainable change within an institution. A total of 45 senior academic leadership initiative posts are being provided across sectors (e.g. university and institute of technology) over three cycles of awards. These posts are new and additional to the sector, i.e., they are in addition to the existing Employment Control Framework (ECF), and they are funded through new and additional funding provided specifically to help address the significant gender imbalance among academic staff at senior levels.

### **2.3 Advance Higher Education (HE)**

Advance Higher Education (HE) is a member-led education sector charity, based in Ireland and the United Kingdom, that provides support to Higher Education institutions across the world. The main purpose of this organisation is to improve Higher Education for staff, students and society by addressing systematic inequality in the HE sector (Advance, 2021a, b). Advance HE stresses the importance of enhancing teaching and learning, effective governance and leadership development as key to tackling inequality. Thus, through its equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) work, Advance HE provides support for Higher Education institutions that include charters, professional development programmes and events, fellowships, awards, student surveys, providing strategic change and consultancy services and services through membership (Advance, 2021a, b).

One of the most important services provided by Advance HE is the development of its Equality Charters which are frameworks used across the globe to support and transform equality within Higher Education (HE) and research. Charters include the Athena Swan Charter that focuses on gender equality in HE, Race Equality Charter that focuses on representation, progression and success of minority ethnic staff and students, and the International Charter that focuses on establishing equality frameworks like Athena Swan internationally that are globally comparable but also locally contextualised (Advance, 2021c) These Charters allow organisations to apply for an award recognising their commitment to, and progress on, equality and diversity. In Ireland, awards such as Athena Swan have been noted as essential for the success of European and international funding as it shows commitment to the delivery of UN Sustainable Development Goals of quality education and gender equality (Advance, 2021b). From these charters, Advance HE provides programmes and resources to assist organisations in achieving these awards by providing guidance on gender auditing an organisation, resources such as sample surveys, as well as templates and advice for leadership and development programmes.

With its successful programmes and awards, membership of Advance HE has become global, with over 380 members across the world (Table 2.2), including members in South America and Ireland (Advance, 2021b).

In Ireland, every Higher Education Institute (Institutes of Technology, Technological Universities, Universities) are international members and have relied on Advance

0-21

HE for resources and support in developing their own framework for development of an equality and inclusion strategy. Technology University Dublin (TU Dublin) are international members of Advance HE and are actively engaged in undertaking awards such as Athena SWAN, thus we are given access to their professional development resources, assistance in developing academic leadership programmes for all interested staff and can sponsor staff for the Aurora leadership program. By providing a gender equality charter for Ireland, Advance HE was invaluable to TU Dublin in guiding our own strategy for equality, diversity and inclusion. Advance HE provided the structure of the Athena SWAN awards and the methodology to conduct a gender audit. It also provided access to additional resources and to networks through the Aurora Leadership Programme for Women in Higher Education and the development of our own leadership programme.

### *2.3.1 Athena SWAN and Athena SWAN Ireland*

The Athena SWAN Charter provides an accreditation framework for auditing, supporting and transforming gender equality in Higher Education Institutions. Established in 2005, the focus of the original Athena SWAN Charter was to encourage and acknowledge commitment by HE institutions to the advancement of women's careers in STEMM. Over time, the charter has evolved to go beyond STEMM areas, to include all areas of women's careers in HE such as academic and professional services roles and by focusing on representation, progression of students into academia, career journey and working environment (Advance, 2021d). At its core the Athena SWAN Charter has a series of goals:

– Supports the promotion of inclusive working practices that can increase the retention of valued academics and professional and support staff, demonstrating an institution's commitment to an equitable working environment.

In order to provide a clear pathway and recognition of success, the Athena SWAN awards were created. By using the Athena SWAN award process, HE institutions use a targeted self-assessment framework to identify gender equality goals, areas of needed action and good practice, and provide actions to align with equality legislation as well as funding and research council requirements and promote inclusive work practices (Advance, 2021e) Different application routes apply for different levels of award (Bronze, Silver and Gold), depending on scale and size (e.g., Institution, department, small or specialised institute) and if located within/outside the United Kingdom.

The Bronze award is mainly about raising awareness and acknowledging the need for change in an organisation. The award affirms that a university or HEI is aware of gender inequality issues, has identified challenges, and has an action plan for these issues. A series of webinars about Athena SWAN are provided on the Advance HE website (https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/equality-charters/athena-swan-charter) that outlines what Athena SWAN is, how to get started, dealing with data, and undertaking gender analysis and a downloadable information pack is available on their website. Advance HE also provides information sessions and a detailed FAQs section that provides guidance to institutions on how to achieve an Athena SWAN Award. In June 2021, the Athena SWAN UK Charter has undergone further transformation to provide a new framework for new and existing members. This new charter supports greater inclusion for people in all roles, of all genders and intersectional identities (Advance, 2021e), provides greater clarification and expectations for each award level, more streamlined application, increased clarity and professionalisation of panel roles, and increased guidance and support for applicants.

In Ireland, the Higher Education Authority (HEA), mandated that all higherlevel institutes in Ireland (Higher Education Authority, 2019) must apply for Athena SWAN Bronze award by end of 2019, reapply within 18 months of a failed Bronze award application, and attain Bronze award within 4 years of the first failed application. In order to achieve a Bronze award, a HEI must undertake an institutional gender self-assessment and propose a 3-year action plan based on the findings of this self-assessment. For example, for TU Dublin to be successful, it would be strongly dependent on the strength of the self-assessment which involved the support of the organisation, access to data and staff, quality of data gathered and clear interpretation of data that subsequently helped guide the future action plan. Strong support from senior levels of the organisation and beyond are essential. As noted, HEA (Higher Education Authority, 2019) issued a mandate that all institutes had to apply for Athena SWAN award, thus it was seen as an essential programme to undertake. Strong institutional support and senior management buy-in are essential for success as it signals to staff that gender equality is a strategic priority. Lack of said support and buy-in can create significant difficulties and result in failure, thus TU Dublin approached different colleges/departments/faculty within the university to set up 'Athena SWAN Champions', senior-level individuals who would represent each department and discuss and advocate for Athena SWAN to the most senior levels of the organisation.

Unsuccessful Bronze award applications do not just result from lack of support but also from lack of qualitative data, lack of analysis and interpretation of data collected, not answering all questions or missing information, not using staff consultation to inform analysis and actions, and action plans not being SMART or data informed. Thus, it is important to create a self-assessment team (SAT) that can fulfil the criteria needed for the Bronze award. Members should include a mixture of individuals with different skillsets that can help at all stages of the process. Individuals should be interested in equality and change, with a proper representation of staff included (e.g., gender, ethnicity, mobility, age, etc.).

TU Dublin recruited SAT members by asking for expressions of interest which helped gather a diverse team of skilled individuals from all levels and areas in the institute. It is important to have a mixture of academic and professional, management, and support staff to help understand the formal and informal organisational structure and culture of the institute. In TU Dublin, a formal structure for SAT was created, with working groups for each area of the application. Working groups included:

Members of each working group reported to a Group Chair, who then communicated to the overall project manager of the application. Efficient two-way communication is essential within working groups and in the overall team to identify issues and actions. Each working group had regular meetings, but also regular larger meetings were held with all working groups so progress could be reported, and future steps discussed in a transparent manner with all SAT members. Thus, effective project management for the self-assessment and action plan is essential, with clear guidance to each working group on their purpose, goals and how their contribution feeds into the application as each working group has an important part in the process.

For Working Group 1, it is important to have staff who can access institutional data such as staff from Human Resources, ICT, and/or senior management such as Office of the President (or equivalent). Data gathered in this group provides objective information about the current status of the organisation in terms of staff statistics and comparison of the national average. In the case of TU Dublin, it helped identify several issues which were then examined in the staff survey and focus groups that consequently provided SMART actions for the future action plan.

For Working Group 2, it is important to include staff who are skilled in quantitative and qualitative analysis, preferably staff that also has expertise in gender research. Surveys should include validated/previously used Athena SWAN questions with Likert scales where possible. In TU Dublin, scales, such as Career Barriers Inventory (Higher Education Authority, 2019) were adapted for use. The TU Dublin Staff Survey and focus groups focused on attitudes towards a range of areas including gender inequality, career barriers (Swanson et al., 1996), promotion, training and performance reviews, work–life balance, stress at work, work environment, etc. Samples of surveys are available online which can be used as a template that can be tailored to your organisation. Contextually specific issues can also be included such as progression to Lecturer role, which was flagged as an issue by Working Group 1, which provided interesting findings and a specific action for the TU Dublin application. Data should be analysed using statistical programmes, like SPSS or R, by someone with statistical skill to examine and interpret whether statistically significant gender differences occurred in the data. Similarly for qualitative data, an individual who is skilled in facilitating focus groups and/or interviews and analysing data is important for complementary interpretation of the data. In TU Dublin, we had several individuals in Working Group 2 involved in survey design, collection and analysis, and involved in focus group design, facilitation and analysis of results. Data collection and dissemination of results to staff by Working Group 4 was fundamental to the success of Working Group 2, with Working Group 4 maintaining close contact with Athena SWAN champions and management in order to encourage staff participation.

Thus, the campaign by Working Group 4 and analysis by Working Group 2 using a mixed-method research approach provided a rich source of information for Working Group 3 to consider future actions. For Working Group 3, members with strategic focus are essential such as those in Human Resources, senior positions, etc., as well as those with expertise in gender and equality policies. For Working Group 4, a strong team with communication and marketing skills is essential. Members in TU Dublin were from Public Affairs unit and others including student academic affairs. As noted above, each working group is not a silo, and it is important that the dependency on each working group with each other is emphasised by the project manager.

TU Dublin holds a legacy award which was granted under the TU Legacy Award Process after a constitute HEI (DIT) was successful in the application of the Bronze award using the Athena SWAN Ireland Charter as a framework for our own process. The legacy award was received in recognition of TU Dublin's commitment to advancing gender equality. The university has undertaken a significant programme of work to raise gender awareness across TU Dublin and to help create equal opportunities for career advancement. Some highlights include:

### *2.3.2 AURORA Leadership Programme and Other Leadership Initiatives*

A part of TU Dublin's successful application was enhancing leadership programme offerings to include an equality and diversity dimension. The Aurora Leadership Programme for Women developed by Advance HE for women up to senior lecturer level or professional services equivalent in HE institutions aims to support women to understand and address the barriers to career progression identified in the HEA Review of Gender Equality in Higher Education (Higher Education Authority, 2016) and the Gender Task Force Action Plan (DES, 2018). Each year, TU Dublin sponsors 20 women to attend the Aurora Leadership programme to complete the following learning modules:

Participants have the opportunity to build their professional network across the Higher Education sector with over 100 women from the sector attending the annual Aurora programme.

Each participant is also assigned a mentor for their continued personal and professional development after the formal programme is complete. The mentoring programme enables self-directed personal and professional learning, critical thinking and the transfer of valuable organisation knowledge. The HEA expert report on Gender (Higher Education Authority, 2016) and the Department of Education and Skills Gender Action Plan (DES, 2018) have identified mentoring as an important development initiative to address the under-representation of women in senior roles in Higher Education.

### **2.4 Gender Equality Strategies and Policies of Irish Research Funding Organisations**

In recent times the strategies of the main funding organisations in Ireland have been developed to ensure the gender element is considered in the design of all funded research.

The two main funding agencies of research in Higher Education in Ireland are the Irish Research Council and Science Foundation Ireland.

### *2.4.1 Gender Equality Policy and the Irish Research Council*

The Irish Research Council was formed in 2012, through the amalgamation of the Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology (IRCSET), established in 2000, and the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS), established in 2002. It is an autonomous agency of the Irish Government's Department of Education and Skills, under the aegis of the Higher Education Authority (HEA). The IRC has a mandate to fund excellent research within, and between, all disciplines. Through a variety of funding schemes, including co-funding with enterprise partners, it supports the education and skills development of excellent individual early stage researchers and cultivates agile independent researchers and thinkers. It has a remit to enrich the pool of knowledge and expertise available for addressing Ireland's current and future needs, whether societal, cultural or economic, and to deliver for citizens through collaboration and enabling knowledge exchange with Government departments and agencies, enterprise and civic society. It also provides policy advice on postgraduate education, and on more general research matters, to the HEA and other national and international bodies. It gives particular attention to the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences.

Meanwhile Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), established in 2000, is the Irish national foundation for funding STEM research and talent within Higher Education institutions and SFI Research Centres. It aims to improve Ireland's economic competitiveness, create employment, and enhance vital areas of society, including healthcare, environment, agriculture and education. Also of relevance is SFI's remit to promote and support STEM education and engagement and create public awareness and understanding of the value of STEM to society and to the growth of the economy.

Consequently, to ensure the gender element is considered within STEM research, Higher Education, and public engagement in Ireland, it is important that each organisation includes gender equality in its high-level strategic plans, and consequent action plans.

To progress this the IRC developed a Gender Strategy and Action Plan 2013— 2020 (Irish Research Council, 2013). This strategy sought to address two main issues. Firstly, the under-representation of women in STEM leading to underutilising a significant population of highly talented researchers who could be vital assets in maximising collective research intelligence and optimising creativity and innovation potential. Secondly, the need to recognise the gender dimension in the definition of research projects including those which sex and/or gender may not be relevant in terms of the research content but may have poorer results and missed opportunities if there is a failure to integrate sex and gender analysis into the design, implementation, evaluation and dissemination of the research. Informed and supported by the EU policies on gender equality in research, and by ongoing initiatives between Irish organisations and Higher Education institutions and EU partners, the IRC's strategy and action plan centred around two key objectives:

Additionally, the IRC committed to a process of Internal Gender Proofing such that all efforts towards the two main objectives would be a shared, overall task for the organisation as a whole. This included internal training, review of funding policies and award assessment criteria and procedures, sex-disaggregated statistical data and analysis of funding trends.

Details of the specific actions under each objective can be found in the strategy document (Irish Research Council, 2013), and a progress update from 2016 is available (Irish Research Council, 2016). The IRC provided a short summary and update of its key actions in 2018, and this newly made reference to the Athena SWAN process, as well as a new collaborative fund with the EU, through the GENDER-NET PLUS programme, which specifically called for projects relating to the interactions and interdependencies between UN SDG 5 Gender Equality and other SDGs, specifically SDG 3 Good health and well-being; SDG 9 Industry, innovation and infrastructure; and SDG 13 Climate action (Irish Research Council, 2018).

The IRC has continued its commitment to gender equality, with inclusion of a key objective to 'Build on the IRC's leading track record in promoting gender equality and the integration of the gender dimension in research, in step with evolving international best practice' under a Strategic Goal to 'Enable excellence in people, skills and ideas across all disciplines for discovery and enterprise research' within its Strategic Plan 2020–2024 (Irish Research Council, 2020a). Further information can be found in the corresponding Implementation plan (Irish Research Council, 2020b).

### *2.4.2 Gender Equality Policy and Science Foundation Ireland*

Meanwhile, in 2016, following the publication and recommendations laid out in the HEA National Review of Gender Equality in Irish Higher Education Institutions (Higher Education Authority, 2016), Science Foundation Ireland outlined its Gender Strategy 2016–2020 (Science Foundation Ireland, 2016). The strategy was built around three strands:

Strands 2 and 3 resonate with the key objectives of the Irish Research Council. Of particular interest to readers of this book, Strand 1 was developed based on the findings of an SFI commissioned 2014 study into the career choices of young people in Ireland (Futures, 2014). (Note, the publication appendix includes the survey questionnaire used). The study examined the key influencing factors in course selection for a representative sample of first-year undergraduates and found that 'fitting in' and being able to identify themselves in a future role was the most important factor. Career opportunities and earning potential were also identified as important, but secondary. Information about a particular course or career would not even be sought by young people if they have no affinity with the associated stereotypes, which reinforced the importance of breaking perceived stereotypes. Consequently, Strand 1 sought to increase the participation and interest of girls in STEM-related activities, and thereby their confidence in the relevance of studying STEM subjects. Actions under this strand included developing partnerships with groups that support girls to explore STEM skills informally; ensuring gender parity is addressed in the role models profiled; and delivering training to avoid unconscious attitudes or statements that may impact on girls' aspirations. Additionally, the '*SFI Discover*' programme for public engagement in STEM would fund projects that aimed to increase the number of women pursuing STEM subjects and SFI would provide training in unconscious bias to *SFI Discover* supported education and public engagement projects. SFI also committed to ensuring its public engagement materials, activities and online content represented gender parity and challenged unconscious bias. The full list of actions relating to all three Strands are available (Irish Research Council, 2020b). These actions also resonate with the findings of another SFI study commissioned in 2015, 'Science in Ireland Barometer An analysis of the Irish public's perceptions and awareness of STEM in society' (Futures, 2014). (Note, the publication appendix includes the research methodology used). This further explored Irish awareness and trust in STEM, interest in STEM careers, as well as understanding the disengaged and disenfranchised members of the population. This study also found that the latter were more likely to be female.

The most recent SFI Strategy to 2025 (Science Foundation Ireland, 2015) focuses on three key areas, namely Excellent Research; Top Talent; Tangible Benefits. Within the 'Top Talent' area, there is an ongoing commitment to gender equality, captured within the expanded Equality, Diversity and Inclusion umbrella. Gender remains as a Key Performance Indicator, with targets of 35–40% females in STEM leadership and decision making, in keeping with Irish Government targets for gender representation for state organisations and agencies, including the Irish Research Council and the Higher Education Authority (Science Foundation Ireland, 2021).

### **2.5 Conclusion**

Although, like elsewhere, gender equality is still a feature of the Irish Higher Education System, there have been numerous and significant policies and strategies aiming to balance gender participation in all levels and areas of the system over the last decade. In a top-down approach, commencing with EU policy, there has been a steady and perceptible increase in focus on gender equality in Ireland. Considerable leadership from the Irish Higher Education Authority has ensured that senior leaders in all Higher Education Institutions must consider gender equality as part of institutional strategic planning. The framework provided by Athena SWAN has allowed all Institutions to carry out a systematic gender audit, and to develop an action plan to address identified gender equality issues. The linking of research funding to the requirement for Athena SWAN awards has been particularly impactful.

There may often be a bottom-up approach to gender equality, with interested individuals carrying out impactful initiatives, including those involved in the W-STEM project. However, without a policy framework to address gender equality, and without meaningful engagement of senior leaders with these policies, it will not be possible to address systematic gender inequality within Higher Education in a sustainable manner—in Europe, Ireland, Latin America, or elsewhere.

**Acknowledgements** This work is partially supported by the European Project W-STEM, 'Building the future of Latin America: Engaging women into STEM' (Reference number 598923-EPP-1-2018- 1-ES-EPPKA2- CBHE-JP). The content of this publication does not reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Responsibility for the information and views expressed in the publication lies entirely with the authors.

### **Appendix**

 years

### **References**

**Open Access** This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# **Chapter 3 Making and Taking Leadership in the Promotion of Gender Desegregation in STEM**

### **Mervi Heikkinen, Sari Harmoinen, Riitta Keiski, Marja Matinmikko-Blue, and Taina Pihlajaniemi**

**Abstract** In 2016, the United Nations (UN) Member States adopted a decision on the role of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in encouraging girls and women to be leaders in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and in science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM). This decision poses a special challenge for many sectors in society and posits unique opportunities for women's leadership in higher education institutions (HEIs). This chapter opens by presenting views on overcoming gender segregation in STEM. The roles of women in leadership positions in the higher education STEM research areas of a large multidisciplinary university in a Nordic country are explored. The unique paths in which four of these women have progressed in their profession, position, and promotion of equality through their diverse and multiple roles within their HEI are examined. From this collection, intertwined opportunities in assuming

University of Oulu, Pentti Kaiteran Katu 1, 90570 Oulu, Finland

S. Harmoinen Teachers, Teaching and Educational Communities, Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
### R. Keiski Environmental and Chemical Engineering Research Unit, Faculty of Technology, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
M. Matinmikko-Blue Centre for Wireless Communications (CWC), Faculty of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
T. Pihlajaniemi Faculty of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, ECM-Hypoxia Research Unit, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
M. Heikkinen (B)

Gender Studies/Values, Ideologies and Social Contexts of Education (VISE), Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
leadership in the promotion of gender desegregation in STEM are identified on a micropolitical levels. The chapter concludes by elaborating institutional strategies and synergies for overcoming gender segregation in higher education STEM fields from the perspective of leadership. This chapter ends with an annexed declaration useful for local policy development and practical action.

**Keywords** Gender · Gender equality · Gender segregation · Leadership · STEM

### **3.1 Introduction**

Gender equality has long been acknowledged as a key driver of social and environmental development, as well as of health and well-being. Gendered innovations (Schiebinger et al., 2020) and a gender-responsible approach to scientific knowledge production (Heikkinen et al., 2020), especially in STEM, contribute to scientific excellence and quality outcomes, enhance sustainability, make research more responsive to social needs, and promote the development of new ideas, patents, and technology (Schiebinger et al., 2020). Particularly, gender-responsible scientific approaches have become imperative in scientific knowledge production and sex and gender analysis as well as gender equality plan are required for research funding such as by the EC's *Horizon Europe* (European Commission, 2021).

The EC actively promotes gender equality in research and innovation (R&I) within the European Research Area (ERA). Its overall goal is to co-create R&I environments as gender-equal and diverse, where all talents can thrive (European Commission, 2021). Furthermore, researchers are requested to integrate the sex and gender dimensions in their research projects to improve the quality and ensure the social relevance of their produced knowledge, technologies, and innovations (European Commission, 2021). Thus, gender equality is presented as an essential condition for an innovative, competitive, and thriving European economy. Gender equality is said to create more jobs and raise productivity, which are needed for green and digital transitions and to address demographic challenges (European Commission, 2021), as well as to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Gendered career progression patterns and gender segregation in the R&I sector present challenges that highlight the need to consider the influence of organisational structural factors on gender equality. In European Research Area women occupy only 24% of leading research group positions (grade A); are prevalently under-represented in STEM fields, among others, at varying degrees among the study fields; and account for less than 10% of patent holders (Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (European Commission, 2019). Vertical gender segregation in STEM as illustrated in Fig. 3.1: Vertical gender segregation in STEM, EU-28, 2013–2016, presents the proportion (%) of men and women in a typical academic career in STEM, EU-28 countries in years 2013 and 2016 (EURAXESS, 2019).<sup>1</sup>

<sup>1</sup> Adopted from: https://euraxess.ec.europa.eu/worldwide/japan/status-update-gender-equality-res earch-careers-europe-she-figures-2018 (accessed 25.11.2021).

**Fig. 3.1** Vertical gender segregation in STEM, EU-28, 2013–2016

The gender perspective has been discussed and scrutinised in science in various ways that range from feminist critiques of the dominant and invisible male standard in science (Haraway, 1988) to a call for increased participation and more diverse roles for women and girls in STEM (UNESCO, 2017a). Gender considerations have been found to be significant for improving the reliability of scientific knowledge production and improving individual research projects. According to Nilsen et al., (2018), science and research should be generally managed in a gender-responsible way to strengthen high-quality research and societal empowerment. They argued that gender has an impact on three elements of research: (1) the composition of the research groups; (2) the research questions in research projects; and (3) the research methods used. Thus, they suggested an approach that can be summarised as: fix the numbers, fix the institutions, and fix the knowledge - briefly, a structural change. However, women in leadership positions in academia face challenges in structures, systems, and mindsets (Alcalde & Subramaniam, 2021), that require further analysis.

### **3.2 Background**

Over the last 20 years, there has been a visible shift in the management structures of many organisations, with more women hired in management positions, but still with little advancement in their roles (Smieszek et al., 2018). The roles and positions of women have been explored, and especially, how policy, education, international collaboration, and mentoring can support women's scientific careers and promote greater diversity among scientists. Despite the apparent significance and impact of the gender perspective on science and scientific knowledge production (Buitendijk & Maes, 2015; European Commission, 2020), it has not yet been fully integrated into research processes globally (Heidari et al., 2016), or specifically in the Arctic (AHDRII, 2015), and not even in the European Research Area ERA (European Commission, 2021).

Studies on women's leadership have shown that women are more likely than men to present transformational leadership characteristics that motivate innovation and growth through teamwork (Cheung, 2021). In the corporate world, companies with more female board members than other companies have been found to be more profitable (Sandberg, 2019).Why, then, are so few women appointed to top positions?

Gabriele Griffin and Marja Vehviläinen concluded their extensive research that spanned the United States, the United Kingdom, and the EU (Griffin & Vehviläinen, 2021), that context matters for understanding the dynamics of persistent gender inequalities in research and innovation (R&I) throughout the Western world in the twenty-first century. Their research included more recent and emerging STEM employment fields such as biotechnology, health technology, and digital humanities, which provided useful examples of the gendered R&I career struggles that are typical under the current regime of academic capitalism. The Nordic countries Finland, Sweden, and Norway have been ranking high in both the European Gender Equality Index and the European Innovation Scoreboard. However, specific everyday experiences of women working in R&I articulate persistent gender inequalities in the academe (Griffin & Vehviläinen, 2021). Each of the four researcher career stages doctoral student, postdoctoral researcher, researcher/university lecturer, and research director/full professor—have different gender inequalities at play. Their interplay contributes to the durable inequalities, such structural elements and practices that are hard to be recognised and articulated, but what accompany women's research careers in the Nordic countries. Griffin and Vehviläinen (2021) write:

*The Nordic version of the gender paradox in R&I (with the underrepresentation of women in top R&I positions and STEM fields) has to develop a gender equality that supposedly already exists (*Martinsson et al., 2016*, 1)*

Women's careers are often more disrupted than men's, particularly in the new technology-driven knowledge economy. Griffin and Vehviläinen (2021) described the shift as that from a linear career path to an increasingly flexible one, which may even consist of parallel career paths. They presented the shift as having had a specific impact on women's careers, and identifying such impact makes for both a timely and urgent research topic. Those fewer female professors do provide important mentoring for younger female colleagues, but since they themselves are always in a significant minority, they can achieve only a limited elevator effect through these practices (Griffin & Vehviläinen, 2021).

### **3.3 Design of the Study**

The recent studies both provide detailed understanding of gender segregation at the local level (Kaleva et al., 2019), and also identify and discuss on promising solutions (Ulvinen et al., 2021). This study complements the previous studies with insights on roles and paths of women leaders in STEM fields at the university. The purpose is to understand better how both gender and gender equality promotion are intertwined in their academic career paths in the STEM fields. For this purpose, four women in top leadership positions in different disciplinary areas at a Nordic higher education institution (HEI) were selected and invited to contribute to a chapter and joint elaboration of the matter. Three of them were originally educated in a STEM discipline, and one, in life science. All their work relates to STEM fields when they participated in this study. Thus, the study method forms a novel application of autobiographical study (Järvelä, 1996) consisting of publicly available career stories online, usually in a concise form. All career stories are contributing to a collective biography (Davies & Gannon, 2006) of women in STEM leadership and an organisational case study (Heikkinen, 2012) as an overall attempt to understand organisational culture and situations for structural change.

These women in top leadership positions in STEM fields were approached to ask them if they were interested to co-author this chapter and to request their permission for us to utilise various publicly available materials on their careers and on them as STEM role models for this study. All four women accepted both the invitation and use of their public materials, and two of them expressed interest in co-creating Wikipedia profiles that they did not yet have.

This chapter explores the roles and contributions of women in leadership positions in higher education STEM fields of a large multidisciplinary university in a Nordic country. Based on the career paths of these four women leaders in STEM fields, the chapter explores the individual situatedness professionally, positionally, and in relation to the promotion of equality within an HEI.

### **3.4 Professional Profiles of Women in Leadership Position in STEM Fields**

This chapter introduces four women in leadership positions in STEM fields at the University of Oulu. They are Vice-Rector in Research Taina Pihlajaniemi, Director of Sustainability and Regulation at 6G Flagship Marja Matinmikko-Blue, Dean of the Faculty of Technology Riitta Keiski, and Education Dean of the Faculty of Education Sari Harmoinen.

The four introductions are based on already existing public profiles on the women's accomplishments, such as their profiles on the University of Oulu website and their Wikipedia profiles.2 Additional online sources on their academic careerrelated activities, such as the university news and gender equality-related publications, interviews, and videos were also viewed to gain a broader understanding of their current and past leadership positions. From these sources, short descriptions of

<sup>2</sup> European Science and Innovation Commissioner Carlos Moedas discusses on the International Day of Women and Girls in Science, 11th of February 2019 how Wikipedia profile could be a one way to create more visibility for women's STEM careers. Source: https://youtu.be/YSgKLmCnJSE.

their backgrounds, career paths, research interests, and tasks related to their leadership were drawn together. Their professional public image, leadership in diverse tasks, and impacts on gender and STEM-related matters were our particular areas of interest.

### *3.4.1 Medical Biochemistry*

Dr. Taina Annikki Pihlajaniemi is a Finnish professor of medicine and collagen researcher. She is the Vice-Rector in Research at the University of Oulu for 2010– 2025. In 2012–2017 she was a director of the Academy of Finland's Center of Excellence in Cell-extracellular matrix research, which consisted of six research groups.

From 1996 to 2009, Dr. Pihlajaniemi was the scientific director of Biocenter Oulu and the director of the graduate school. Before assuming her position as Vice-Rector in Research, she served on the Board of the CSC—Center for Science Information Technology for 12 years, in the last four years of which she also chaired the organisation. Pihlajaniemi also served as the Founding Director of Biocenter Finland in 2006–2007, was a member of the Health Committee of the Academy of Finland in 1998–2003 and was a member of the Finnish Science and Technology Council chaired by the Prime Minister.

Dr. Pihlajaniemi graduated from the University of Oulu in 1981. From there, she went to Rutgers Medical School in the United States for three years as a postdoctoral researcher. In 1987, she had her firstborn. The same year, she became a Doctor of Medicine in Oulu and was appointed docent. In 1990, she received a professorship in Medical Biochemistry.

Dr. Pihlajaniemi is currently the Chairperson of the Equality and Non-Discrimination Board and has been leading a process of updating the Gender Equality and Non-Discrimination Plan of the University of Oulu for years 2022–2023.

### **Sources**

Wikipedia: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taina\_Pihlajaniemi.

University of Oulu: https://www.oulu.fi/university/researcher/taina-pihlajaniemi.

News: https://www.oulu.fi/yliopisto/uutinen/pohjoispohjanmaan-palkinto-pihlajani emelle.

Finnish Union of University Professors, Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/32626134.

### *3.4.2 Telecommunications*

Dr. Marja Matinmikko-Blue (until 2017, Matinmikko; born 1979 in the Rovaniemi countryside) is a Finnish researcher. She is a docent at the University of Oulu and has been the Research Coordinator in 2018–2021 and the Director of Sustainability and Regulation since October 2021 in the 6G Flagship at the University of Oulu.

Dr. Matinmikko-Blue graduated from the University of Oulu with a master's degree in Industrial Engineering and Management in 2001. She earned a licentiate in Communications Engineering in 2007, a doctorate in Communications Engineering in 2012, and a doctorate in Industrial Engineering and Management in 2018. Her research interests are interdisciplinary, combining technology, business, and regulatory perspectives in the development of ICT solutions. Since then, Matinmikko-Blue's main research topics have been related to the regulation of radio frequencies, future 6G systems, and sustainable development.

In 2013, Finnish Foundation for Technology Promotion (Tekniikan Edistämissäätiö TES) selected Dr. Matinmikko-Blue as the Young Scientist of the Year. The panel selected her for forging active and successful collaboration between research, industry, and administrations to develop the mobile networks of the future.

Dr. Matinmikko-Blue worked at Nokia as an intern in 1999 and 2000, at the University of Oulu as a teaching assistant in 2000, and at VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Ltd. (VTT) from 2001 to 2016 as a research scientist, senior scientist, and project manager. She joined the University of Oulu's Center of Wireless Communications in 2016.

She has published more than 170 scientific publications and prepared more than 150 contributions to national, European, and international regulatory bodies; chaired cognitive radio system studies at United Nations based International Telecommunication Union Radiocommunication Sector (ITU-R). She has been a lead writer in the White Paper on 6G drivers and the UN SDGs, a contributor to the linking of mobile communications with the UN SDGs and the mapping process and the further elaboration of sustainability as a challenge and driver for novel ecosystemic 6G business scenarios (Matinmikko-Blue et al., 2020).

### **Sources**

Wikipedia: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marja\_Matinmikko-Blue.

University of Oulu: https://www.oulu.fi/university/researcher/marja-matinmikkoblue.

News: https://www.oulu.fi/6gflagship/news/director-marja-matinmikko-blue.

Shaking up Tech: https://shakinguptech.aalto.fi/uratarinat/marja-matinmikko-blu eWomen Women In Digital: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neUjTsZImOg.

### *3.4.3 Environmental and Chemical Engineering*

Dr. Riitta Liisa Keiski (born Kalliokoski) is a Finnish professor. She holds a Professorship in Mass and Heat Transfer at the University of Oulu and has been the Dean of the Faculty of Technology since 2015.

Dr. Keiski graduated from the University of Oulu with a master's degree in Process Engineering in 1981, a licentiate in Technology in 1984, and a doctorate in Process Engineering in 1991, with her research focus on heterogeneous catalysis, environmental engineering, and reactor design. Since then, her main research topics have been related to sustainable development and green chemistry and technology. She also served as a Vice-Rector of the University of Oulu in 2006–2009.

At the start of 2011, the Finnish Association of Professors elected Dr. Keiski Professor of the Year 2010 for being a researcher, developer of postgraduate education, and highlighter of issues related to research ethics and equality. Her research interests include globally important research topics related to sustainable development and green chemistry and technology. In 2013, she was awarded a research grant by the Tapani Järvinen Environmental Technology Fund.

Dr. Keiski was awarded an honorary doctorate by Åbo Akademi University in 2018. She has also received *Doctor Honoris Causa* honors from the National Engineering University in Lima, Peru in 2015 and the Corvinus University of Budapest in Hungary in 2014.

Dr. Keiski served as a president of NORDTEK in 2017–2019 and as a member of the Board in 2016–2020. She was a member of the Research Council of Natural Sciences and Engineering of the Academy of Finland from 1998 to 2000 and its Chairperson from 2001 to 2006, a Vice-Chairperson of the Research Ethics Advisory Board in 2007–2010, a member in 2010–2013, and a Chairperson from 2019 to 2022.

During the years 2010–2012 Riitta Keiski has served as a Chairperson of the Gender Equality Board of the University of Oulu. Gender equality mainstreaming has been part of her leadership and she has acted as a role model for girls and inspiration for students in green engineering and sustainability (see e.g. Saavalainen 2020). Besides, she has been a member of the working groups for Gender Equality Plans of the Academy of Finland and the University of Oulu.

### **Sources**

Wikipedia: Riitta Keiski https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riitta\_Keiski.

University of Oulu: https://www.oulu.fi/yliopisto/tutkija/riitta-keiski.

Finnish Union of University Professors, Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/32625698.

Science for Girls, interview: https://www.tiedettatytoille.fi/riitta-keiski/.

### *3.4.4 Mathematics and Physics*

Dr. Sari Harmoinen is a lecturer on subject studies, mathematics, and physics at the Faculty of Education of the University of Oulu. She was appointed as docent on STEAM teaching and learning at the University of Turku 2020. Before teaching at the University of Oulu, Dr. Harmoinen was a high school mathematics and physics lecturer at the city of Oulu and a secondary school mathematics, physics, and chemistry. As the Education Dean of the Faculty of Education at the University of Oulu in the past six years, she has been responsible for all curriculum development and for the quality of education at the faculty. Together with her colleagues, she is developing two minor study subjects: Sustainable Development Studies (SDS) and STE(A)M. The SDS is expected to be launched in 2022.

Dr. Harmoinen has contributed widely to the quality and development of education both nationally and internationally. She was a member of the EUA peer group in 2019; Vice-Chair of FINEEC's Evaluation Council and member of FINEEC's Higher Education Evaluation Committee in 2018–2022; and a member of the Teacher Education Development Programme of the Ministry of Education and Culture.

According to the study on university students' readiness for social activity in climate actions (Harmoinen et al., 2020), students are interested in climate change but need reliable fact-based information on it. However, students are already considering contributing to climate actions.

### **Sources**

Wikipedia: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sari\_Harmoinen.

University of Oulu: https://www.oulu.fi/yliopisto/tutkija/sari-harmoinen.

News: https://www.oulu.fi/fi/uutiset/ilmastonmuutospuhe-kyllastyttaa-nuoriamutta-saa-aikaan-myos-tekoja.

### **3.5 Lessons Learned on Gender and STEM Leadership**

In the previous chapter, the successful and unique careers of four professional women in STEM and related fields at the University of Oulu were briefly presented based on already existing publicly available online materials. These women have been working as researchers and teachers, research group leaders, innovators, role models, supervisors, and supporters of younger female STEM professionals. Their scientific achievements in their own academic research areas—in medical biochemistry, telecommunications, environmental and chemical engineering, and in teaching of mathematics and physics—have been remarkable.

Furthermore, they have been elected to positions at the very top of their entire university: as the Vice-Rector in Research (Taina Pihlajaniemi), the Dean of the Faculty of Technology and former Vice-Rector in Education (Riitta Keiski), Director in Sustainability and Regulation of the 6G Flagship (Marja Matinmikko-Blue), and Education Dean of the Faculty of Education (Sari Harmoinen). As part of these listed administrative academic duties, they have also put in efforts to promote gender equality in STEM fields in various projects and campaigns and even more broadly, as one of them has chaired the Gender Equality and Diversity Board (GEDB) of the university, and one is the current Chair of the GEDB.

By elaborating these four unique careers, we were able to compile these women's multiple international professional roles in STEM fields and in relation to gender equality promotion in their university. As a result of this collective action their individual leadership roles as influential women in STEM fields become even more visible. Gradually it becomes apparent, that through their professions, institutional positions, duties, and responsibilities they were influencing further on attraction, access, and retention of other women in their STEM careers, as well as sustainable development in general and UN SDG's in particular.

These women are in their 40 s, 50 s, and 60 s. They all originate from Northern Finland and from the sparsely populated countryside municipalities, from places such as Haapajärvi, Halsua, Rovaniemi, and Rovaniemi countryside. They all have extensive international experience through their research and development projects. Despite their international academic careers and networks, they are affiliated to the University of Oulu. Two of them have built their careers at the University of Oulu and two of them have built a career first outside the university—one in the public sector and the other, in a state owned non-profit company. The following table presents the main public leadership channels of the four women working in STEM and related fields, as they appear in the public data: academic professions, administrative positions, and appointments to gender equality promotion tasks and projects (Table 3.1).

Many women in STEM fields receive requests to join various projects and campaigns to attract more women into the field (Brunila et al., 2005). Such campaigns and projects as the Shaking up Tech, Women in Digital, Science for Girls, Women in Mining, Women IT in addition to W-STEM appear in data. These projects include strategies for structural transformation through implementation of systematic institutional measures, which quite blatantly aim to expose gender as an organising principle at the institution (Garcia-Holgado et al., 2020; UNESCO, 2017b; EIGE 2016). Such transformative practices include gender mainstreaming in all institutional actions, gender equality planning (GEP), as well as sex and gender analysis of research projects (European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE, 2016). However, these tasks require at least human resources, so leadership to improve institutional gender equality is needed and in addition to that a collective, systematic commitment for its actual progression and for implementation of GEP.

Two of the leaders have chaired the Gender Equality and Diversity Board (GEDB) of the University of Oulu. The main role of the GEDB is to draft the university's GEP,

**Table 3.1** Channels for women's leadership in STEM—profession, position, and promotion of gender equality

to monitor its implementation and to revise it every other year. The GEP includes an evaluation of the current gender equality situation, statistical information on the number of human resources and salary levels in different job categories and selected institutional gender equality issues for improvement with defined measures and targets, timetable and named parties responsible for implementing those measures, and indicators to measure improvements towards targets (EIGE, 2016).

In addition to gender equality promotion women have been taking active roles in development activities related to the UN Sustainable Development Goals (UNESCO, 2017a) in universities. This has become apparent for instance in the White Paper on 6G Drivers and the UN SDGs led by Matinmikko-Blue et al., 2020), which describes the role of telecommunications in Agenda 2030. Also, minors in the Sustainable Development Studies (25 credits) and STE(A)M Studies (25 credits) under planning led by Sari Harmoinen are fostering educational capabilities for future professionals that will help them overcome their STEM subject silos and discuss global issues such as climate change (Harmoinen et al., 2020) on a transdisciplinary manner. Furthermore, supervision of postgraduate students in the Development of Sustainability Assessment Tool and Criteria for early stage process design projects (Saavalainen, 2020) has been in the core of activities in Riitta Keiski's academic work.

It is quite challenging to get women appointed to the top management positions in STEM-related fields and also more broadly to the top administration at the University of Oulu. First, it is highly likely that due to fierce competition the top positions will be filled with a candidate who is selected among the majority group of professionals from STEM fields. However, in those STEM research fields, which have the largest faculties in the University of Oulu, women are underrepresented, increasing likelihood that the minority position can create unconscious biases and thus hindrances for their career promotion, and against their access to the top positions (Frith, 2015) unless addressed by institutional support mechanisms (Husu et al., 2011).

### **3.6 Discussion—Strategies and Synergies for Women in Leadership**

These four professionals have been and are important role models, encouragers for the STEM fields, and public speakers for campaigns for more gender equality in academia. They have built networks and alliances with SSH disciplines at the institutional, national, and international levels. Two of our focus women have a longterm affiliation with the university. In addition to an excellent academic record being familiar with one's Higher Education Institution, known and respected by colleagues may raise one's chances of having a leadership position there. Additionally a mentor's support is valuable (Husu et al., 2011). Two of the current women leaders have spent considerable time working outside the university right after their graduation providing them invaluable experience. Contacts to regional actors, municipalities, companies, and other research institutions are assets for career building also within University and for a leadership position in STEM fields.

Within the University of Oulu, institutional awareness of gender segregation as the underrepresentation of women in the STEM fields as more of a sustainabilityrelated problem has increased. Global actions for gender desegregation are needed in both the STEM and SSH fields (Microsoft, 2017a). Identified barriers to women's entry into the STEM fields (UNESCO, 2017a) are just parts of the problem and thus, are enticing to solve for a start. Detailed understanding of the problem both on European (Bettio & Verashchagina, 2009) a national (Brunila et al., 2005; Microsoft, 2017b) and at the local level has increased (Pursiainen et al., 2018; Kaleva et al., 2019). Promising practices to solve the situated challenges have been identified and discussed further by various locally influencing actors (Brunila et al., 2005; Heikkinen et al., 2014; Ulvinen et al., 2021) during past two decades.

The W-STEM project has enabled networking, collaboration, and further articulation of the locally appearing challenges but also formulation of aspired-for solutions within an HEI. Synergies within our own local university, with W-STEM consortium partners and more extensively, through international networking have been and are empowering. Our local W-STEM work related to theoretical and conceptual development is contributing to closing the gender gap in STEM. This practical work took the form of articles published in the Arctic Yearbook 2021, entitled "Intersectional Gender-Responsibility in STEM: Co-Creating Sustainable Arctic Knowledge Production" (Heikkinen et al., 2020) and "The SAGA of Sustainable Development: Gender and Other Differences in Knowledge Production of HEIs in the STEM Field". The latter is an analytical project description published in the Finnish Gender Studies journal called Sukupuolentutkimus (Heikkinen et al., 2021). Furthermore, a piece of an academic discussion on an institutional policy enforcement aimed at structural transformation, "Gender Equality in STEM Programs: A Proposal to Analyse the Situation of a University about the Gender Gap", was published in the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference proceedings (Garcia-Holgado et al., 2020).

### **3.7 Conclusion**

Gender-based differences in participation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields have been apparent in higher education for decades (Brunila et al., 2005). According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 2017a), in (2014–2016), just around 30% of female college students worldwide selected STEM-related areas as their areas of study. The lowest proportion of women studied technology, manufacturing and construction, science, mathematics and statistics, and information and communication technology (ICT). One topic that has been brought up in literature is the Nordic gender paradox a behavioural pattern among Western women of tending not to seek careers in STEM despite their success in school, due to which women remain a minority in STEM (Griffin & Vehviläinen, 2021). Within this broad global challenge, identified barriers to women's entry in STEM fields (Microsoft, 2017a) are particularly challenging to solve. Global actions are needed to address gender segregation in both the STEM and Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) fields by solving the identified root causes of the problem (Bettio & Verashchagina, 2009).

How could we provide appropriate support to our W-STEM project partners solving issues on gender segregation in Latin America, when we have not been able to solve them appropriately in Europe, including in global gender equality leaders Nordic countries? Certainly, we can learn from each other and hopefully, from our mistakes, so that we would not repeat them, but rather co-create new gender responsible and sustainable ways of seeing, being, and becoming with STEM and STEAM (Heikkinen et al., 2020) and further making and taking leadership.

In theW-STEM project, we have discussed with the consortium partners on critical science political issues such as the appropriateness to attract more women into STEM fields as change agents, as well as related geographical, societal, and cultural issues. Due to the course of W-STEM project we attempted to generate inspiration for locally tailored, evidence-based approaches for gender desegregation both in Latin America and in Europe to support such work also elsewhere. It seems that it is the way forward—to think globally and act locally.

Globally available online gender equality resources provided by UNESCO and EU have been beneficial for the local work. The UN STEM and Gender Advancement (SAGA) tool (UNESCO, 2017b) offer remedies for addressing gender equality issues in the STEM fields within an institution, including leadership. The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) provides useful applicable promising practices for institutional gender equality work through the Gender Equality in Academia and Research (GEAR) tool (EIGE, 2016). These SAGA and GEAR tools could be systematically utilised as part of the institutional GEP process, but most importantly in addition to leadership, the institutional gender equality work needs committed people, a community of practitioners—CoP's, that would benefit on interorganisational networking, support, and exchange of promising practices (Thomson et al., 2021).

Therefore, it is worth sharing that the University of Oulu launched its own Declaration on Responsible Science (Appendix) in 2020. The declaration includes gender responsibility, as follows:

*We take into account the implementation of gender equality and diversity in the composition of research groups and research decision-making. We improve the scientific quality and the societal relevance of the produced knowledge, technology, and innovation by integrating gender analysis in research content.*

Local Declaration on Responsible Science and European Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) approach,3 as well as diverse ways to improve research integrity (Mejlgaard et al., 2020), pave the way for further intersectional gender equality mainstreaming at the HEIs. These approaches provide a set of useful tools for all leaders who take time from academic research for gender equality promotion at their institutions, for both women, men, and people who identify themselves differently. Thus, the administrative challenge is to provide appropriate academic merit for an individual on those institutional gender equality promotion efforts since they require serious personal input and leadership. Besides creating an equal culture and climate in HEIs is important for health and well-being of academics, it is also a profound matter in co-creating excellence in the academic outcomes.

**Acknowledgements** The authors acknowledge the Erasmus+ Programme of the EU in its Key Action 2, "Capacity-building in Higher Education." We also thank Project W-STEM, "Building the future of Latin America: Engaging women into STEM" (Reference number 598923-EPP-1-2018- 1-ES-EPPKA2- CBHE-JP), for the collaboration and important work in the field. The authors are solely responsible for the information and views expressed in this paper.

### **Appendix**

### **Declaration on Responsible Science**

The University of Oulu promotes open and responsible science, responsible conduct of research, sustainable development, equality and non-discrimination in research, and responsible research assessment.

We follow the responsible conduct of research, the principles that are endorsed by the research community, that is, integrity, meticulousness, and accuracy in conducting research, and in recording, presenting, and assessing the research results.

<sup>3</sup> Responsible Research and Innovation tools: https://rri-tools.eu/ Accessed 29.11.2021.

We promote sustainable development in all our research activities and take into account its ecological, cultural, social, and economic dimensions.

We are committed to freedom of scientific research and to promoting open access to research knowledge.

We take into account the implementation of gender equality and diversity in the composition of research groups and research decision-making. We improve the scientific quality and the societal relevance of the produced knowledge, technology, and innovation by integrating gender analysis in research content.

We are committed, by signing the Finnish Declaration for Open Science and Research 2020–2025, to: promote openness as a fundamental value throughout the research community and its activities, strengthen societal knowledge base and innovation, and improve the quality of scientific and artistic research outputs and the educational resources based on them, and the fluid mobility and impact of research outputs throughout society.