Thread by @NotRightRuth

Really looking forward to attending and speaking at this event on #AthenaSWAN and equality schemes this afternoon, alongside the amazing @KalwantBhopal and @ctzanakou!

https://twitter.com/CSWGWarwick/status/1542050949052653569

If you didn't manage to register in time for the event, I am hoping to livetweet from some of the talks.

First up is Professor @KalwantBhopal, whose "Competing Inequalities" is looking at Higher Education equality schemes.

Bhopal notes that UK universities are legally required to have equality policies in place - but argues that the primary beneficiaries have been white women.

Bhopal notes that if equality schemes are linked to funding, it increases their takeup. For example, #AthenaSWAN saw a 400% increase in takeup within medical schools after this happened.

Unlike #AthenaSWAN, Advance HE's Race Equality Charter is only available to whole institutions - not individual departments.

There has only been two major published studies on the Race Equality Charter to date, compared to numerous on Athena SWAN.

Bhopal: findings from studies on Advance HE Athena SWAN and Race Equality charter marks show that they *can* achieve change. However, there is a danger of them becoming a 'tick box' exercise, especially around race, and concerns that changes stop once the award has been achieved.

Bhopal: Research found a disconnect between narrative and rhetoric around racial and gender inequalities in Higher Education, and how charter marks play out on the ground. Gender inequality often prioritised over race inequality, oppression deeply embedded in micro-processes.

Bhopal asks: who has the responsibility for charter marks? Academics ultimately have much of the responsibility, often falling on 1-2 individuals. Reflecting my own findings with Tzanakou, she found this takes people away from their research and creates emotional labour.

Bhopal: research participants saw involvement of senior and middle management in equality charters as crucial. HR issues around student involvement, in spite of its importance. Problems with accessing institutional data.

Bhopal outlines serious issues around collection of data on racism for the Race Equality Charter. In cases where people who experience racism in universities don't feel comfortable reporting it, institutions are liable to portray absence of complaints as a success.

Bhopal explains that recognition of charter mark work is inconsistent across and within Higher Education Institutions, meaning that in some cases there is recognition of the work, but in other contexts there is no workload recognition.

Bhopal highlights how "competing" gender and race inequalities are played against one another, e.g. "there are more women than people of colour in the population so gender inequality is more important". Universities often make choices about which inequalities to address.

Bhopal: Many research participants felt that a single HE equality charter would be better - but others feared that race would be sidelines in a single charter. Inclusion of intersectionality in Athena SWAN used as an excuse to sideline Race Equality Charter.

Bhopal emphasises white middle class women are main beneficiaries of Higher Education policy making. Shaped by the conflation of gender and race in equalities work, and "logics of efficiency". In working towards equality and diversity in general terms, we lose sight of specifics.

In response to audience question, Bhopal notes that in areas of good practice, Athena SWAN and Race Equality Charter applicants tend to support one another in collegiate way. Worked best in institutions where good practice already existed.

Next up is @ctzanakou, who has been doing research on the possibility of Europe-wide approaches to gender equality and intersectionality in Higher Education.

"You're going to find there are more questions than answers!"

Tzanakou notes #AthenaSWAN is being adapted worldwide - e.g. versions in Brazil and India. Adaptions of Athena SWAN in North America have taken a broader insectional approach

From 2022, the European Commission's Horizon Europe funding scheme will require institutions to have some form of gender equality plan. #AthenaSWAN action plans meet (and go beyond) many of the eligibility criteria.

Like Bhopal, Tzanakou notes that Higher Education institutions do respond to incentives (e.g. funding) in taking up equality plans. Brand recognition etc is also important - but so too can be possibility for mutual learning and support.

Tzanakou notes that England's National Institute for Health Research funding eligibility requirements for #AthenaSWAN were dropped during the Covid-19 pandemic. Could the new Horizon Europe eligibility criteria provide a new motive for uptake?

Tzanakou's research findings echo Bhopal's in terms of participant discomfort around race/ethnicity (and sexuality) - people doing diversity work in Higher Education institutions often more "comfortable" with gender equality work. #AthenaSWAN

Do you certify the process or the outcomes when running equality schemes? Tzanakou notes that the participants in her research favour addressing both - as with #AthenaSWAN.

How should certify equality in Higher Education, and who should pay? Tzanakou notes some differences between different countries. Whereas @AdvanceHE run a subscription model for institutions, in other contexts funders are running and/or paying for equality schemes.