Outcome of the GENERA interview series
Appendix. The Interview Study Methodological Guideline
The Interview Study Methodological Guideline - study design, scenario and structured note
Prepared by the Jagiellonian University team
1 Study design
1.1 Aims of the research
The main idea standing behind this study is to provide a complex sociological portrait of gender equality policies in physics, built upon various standpoints and perspectives of both female and male physicists who have an experience of working in research organization, including universities and non-academic institutes. The main aims of this qualitative research is to:
- analyze women's and men's career paths in physics, especially structural, political, organizational and cultural barriers to and factors that enhance the success;
- determine subfields in physics that are attractive for women and analyze why;
- identify successful approaches and innovative ideas for GE measures in physics oriented research field and successful gender actions of institution and countries for strengthening women's careers in physics and leading to reaching better gender balance in their participation;
- define set of immediate implementation activities for all other partners and countries to be included in toolbox and Gender Equality Plans.
1.2 Individual Semi-Standardized Interviews and Expert Interviews - An overview
In order to gather all necessary information for answering research questions introduced in the project application, two separate methods of interviewing will be applied.
The first one - the semi-standardized interview - will be introduced to the interviews carried out among physicists, both female and male. This method is based on an assumption that people in general as social actors construct their “subjective theories” about their life and experiences. The notion of “subjective theory” refers to the fact that “the interviewees have a complex stock of knowledge about the topic under study” (Flick 2006: 155). Some of the information could be delivered by the respondents in an explicit way (e.g. if we ask an open question about his/her career path, the interviewee will give us a response containing all the events/processes/moments he or she finds crucial for the career development). The other information (“implicit assumptions”) must be articulated with a support of methodological aids (e.g. several additional questions; following the example used below, we could ask about more details regarding some steps of career path or about relations between the events mentioned by the respondents). A general rule is that in every sub-section of the interview the interviewer starts with an open question (usually very general) and then ask several following more detailed questions.
You should conduct 6 semi-standardized interviews in total (see Chapter 1.3 below). In order to conduct these interviews, please see Scenario I as well as Structured note from the semi-standardized interviews.
The expert interview technique is usually applied in the research with a very specific and restricted area of study. It helps to exclude from the interview all unproductive topics that may occur e.g. during the narrative interviews. The expert interview is therefore centered around a very specific topic and organized by a list of questions. This method will be applied to the interviews with physicists in leading positions. The experts interviews will be focused only on measures for fostering gender equality.
You should conduct 2 experts interviews in total (see Chapter 1.3 below). In order to conduct the expert interviews, please see Scenario II as well as Structured note from the expert interviews.
1.3 Participants' selection - research sampling
At least 8 interviews should be conducted in each partner institution, including both male and female academics:
- 6 interviews with physicists;
- 2 interviews with leaders / scientists in a leading position.
To ensure a diversified sample and include to the research various perspectives, experiences and standpoints, the interviews should be conducted with physicists and leaders in accordance with the following criteria:
Table 1. Interviews distribution in the sample of one institution
| Semi-standardized interviews - 6 interviews in total | Expert Interviews - 2 interviews in total | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 4 female and 2 male physicists | Gender | At least 2 researchers [one female, one male] who have been in a leading position in your institution for at least 2 years (e.g. administrative position or being a leader of a research project) or recently has stepped down from a leadership position (in the last 2 years) |
| Research experience | 3 young researchers (up to five years after obtaining PhD) and 3 senior researchers (at least 10 years of experience of working in an academic / a research institution) | ||
| Working in emerging subfields in physics | At least 2 persons (but at least 1 female) working in emerging subfields in physics (the emerging subfield may be different for different institutions) | ||
Semi-standardized interviews (please see Scenario I) will be conducted with 6 physicists, including:
- 4 female and 2 male researchers;
- 3 young and 3 senior researchers (for details, see the table 1);
- 2 researchers [at least one of them will be female] working in emerging subfields in physics.
Expert Interviews (please see Scenario II) will be conducted with 2 physicists [one female, one male] who have been in a leading position in your institution for at least 2 years.
Additional recommendations regarding the sample (if applicable): to conduct at least one interview with a female physicist or a female leader who have been a beneficiary of GEP in the institution she works/worked for.
Please note that one interviewee may represent more than one characteristics e.g. young female researcher working in an emerging subfield.
1.4 Preparations for both types of the interviews
Before starting an interview an interviewer should make sure that he or she have all the necessary materials / equipment with him/her:
- a dictaphone;
- an interview scenario
- a consent form [in a language of the interviewee];
- a piece of paper and a pen (for making notes during the interview);
- basic information on the GENERA project in a printed form [in a language of the interviewee].
1.5 Interview plan
The meeting should be organized according to the following order (see scenario for more details):
- Welcome
- Presenting GENERA Project
- Presenting the main research goals and benefits from the participation
- Describing the course of the meeting and rules of the interview (e.g. recording, confidentiality)
- Answering any possible questions concerning the interview from a respondent - concerning empirical material collected during the interviews, anonymization, data storage, use of the empirical material etc.
- Obtaining written consent for participation (Annex 1) - same of both types of the interviews
- Conducting the interview following the scenario
- Thanking for the participation
1.6 Important information to share with an interviewee
Before starting an interview, the researcher is obliged to share with the respondents all the important information about the research in general and the interview itself.
- The research project;
- The goals of the research;
- Details concerning the interview as well as information about further using of the collected empirical material and data storage;
- A name (and email address/ phone number) of a contact person from the project team in case of any further questions [to be determined by each partner institution].
A good practice of conducting interviews is to prepare all the information before the interview and carry them in a printed form with you for the meeting. You may for example prepare a short note you will present to the research participants. The information can be also sent to participants before the interview (e.g. by email).
1.7 Interviewer's characteristics
The interviews should be conducted by researchers with an experience of conducting a qualitative study in which in-depth/semi-structured interviews (IDI) or expert interviews were applied as a core method (having participating in at least one qualitative research project, having conducted at least 5 interviews themselves).
Researchers chosen to carry out the interviews should be familiar with the subject matter of the GENERA project, the main aims of the research, as well as the actions undertaken throughout the project's duration. A basic knowledge in gender studies is also advisable. The interviewers should be able to present the project to the interviewees, as well as answer possible questions concerning the study.
1.8 Deadlines for conducting interviews and preparing notes
The interviews should be conducted before the end of February 2017. The structured and anonymized notes from the interviews (so called GRIDs) should be sent to JU TEAM prior to March 30, 2017.
Scenario I: Semi-Standardized Interviews with female and male physicists
Total time: 1 - 1,5 hours
Introductory phase
- Welcome - Thank you for meeting with me today. My name is X and I am a researcher at GENERA project. I have an experience in conducting sociological research in an area of [gender studies].
- Presenting GENERA Project
- Presenting the main research goals and benefits from the participation in the research
Your participation will help us understand the career paths in physics. This information will be used to plan the main gender equality measures and actions that could be implemented in physics departments and research centres. We also plan on implementing some of them in several research/academic institutions, [also in your own institution - if applicable]. The data we collect will also be used for academic publications and other forms of disseminating knowledge and promoting physics.
- Describing the course of the meeting and rules of the interview (e.g. recording)
We will start the interview shortly, but firstly let me give you some basic information about our meeting. Our conversation will last around 1 to 1,5 hours. If you do not want to answer any of the questions, just let me know and we will move on to the next part of the interview. If you agree, our interview will be recorded, though the data will be used for research purposes only. All the identifiable information about you will be anonymized. The recordings will be stored safely at [to be determined by the consortium]. The information recorded is confidential, and no one except for [the GENERA researchers] will have access to the recordings. The recordings will be destroyed after [to be determined by the consortium].
- Do you have any questions concerning the interview / empirical material collected during the interviews / anonymization / data storage / use of the empirical material?
- Obtaining written consent (Annex 1: Consent form) from the interviewee.
Getting to know the interviewee
Could you tell me about your work? What is your field of research? What are your main research interests?
Where do you work (institution/department/institute/research team/project)? At what position? What are your main tasks at this position (e.g. research, teaching, administrative work)? Are you a permanent staff member or you have a limited contract (if so, until when?)? Are you a full-time or a part-time employee?
The main part of the interview
Career path
Open questions:
When was the first moment you thought of becoming a physicist? How old were you?
How did your parents/peers/friends react to your choice to pursue a career in physics?
Were there any critical moments or turning points during your professional path? Can you tell me about them?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
[studies] What did you study for your Master/undergraduate and graduate courses? At which institutions/ where?
[PhD programme] What was the topic of your PhD? Which field/subfield of physics does this research belong to? When did you finish/defend your PhD? How old were you then?
[first job] What was your first job as a physicist? How did you get it? What was the recruitment like? Was it at the same institution where you did your PhD? What was your motivation to stay in/change the institution/department?
[current place of work] Please tell me about your current place of work. What do you work on? What is your expertise in? Do you work in a team or alone? Do you feel a sense of belonging to your institution or do you think you will move somewhere else eventually? What are the reasons?
[comparison of career paths] Do you consider your career progression slow or fast when compared to your colleagues working in physics field? Why? Does it differ between other female versus male colleagues?
Work conditions
Open questions:
How were the work conditions in places that you have been working so far?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
What were the provisions regarding the job contract, compensation, workload, and other demands?
Are you free to schedule your working hours? How do you find the opportunity for managing your own schedules? Do you find that being a scientist gives you flexibility?
Do you teach/supervise students, PhDs? How many have finished their PhD? Were they mostly men or women? Could you tell me how do you evaluate motivation of male and female PhD candidates? How do you evaluate their competences? Did you ever try to support young women physicists in any particular way?
How do you balance between different obligations at your work (research, teaching, supervision, administrative issues etc.)? Do/did you need to do any administrative work during your career?
How much do you rely on equipment/laboratory access in your work? Do you have sufficient access to the equipment/laboratories?
Do you get sufficient resources/support from your institution? Do you have your own office/office space? Do you receive sufficient funding for research, mobility, networking or conference participation? Do/did you have opportunity to build a team to support you in your research?
Work environment
Open questions:
Do you enjoy the working environment in your institution?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
Could you tell me more about it. Which environment is inspiring or provides most opportunities for you?
Do you find the working environment very competitive? How do you deal with this?
Do you find the working environment stressful? For what reasons?
Mobility and migration
Open questions:
Have you always worked here in [name of the country]? If not, where did you go to, how long have you stayed? What were the forms of your stays abroad, e.g. change of workplace, grants, research visits? Please tell me more about these experiences.
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
Is international mobility important to making a career as a physicist? Do you like this pattern?
Do you think that this mobility was important for your career development? Do you find it difficult to be mobile (foreign institutions, or challenging locations of research (e.g. desert)?
Scientific networks
Open questions:
Are you a member of any (formal/informal) networks gathering scientists/physicists? Why do you belong to such a network? Did it help you in your career to be a member of a network? Why are you not a member?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
Which networks are the most important for your work? Do you feel that networks are sufficiently open in your working environment? Do these network mostly consist of women or men?
- [for women] Are you a member of any associations supporting women in science or have you been in one in the past? What do you think about this kind of associations?
Mentorship and guidance
Open questions:
Were there any persons or events without whom or which you would not be able to reach the place you are now at? Have you had a teacher, a mentor or someone else who encouraged you to pursue/stay in physics/academia? What support did you get?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
Did you ever have a boss that was a woman? Are there any differences between working with a female leader/boss and a male leader/boss? What are they?
Have you been a mentor to any young female physicist? What do you think was the most useful for your mentee?
Did you have a role model that you could refer to/that inspired you at different stages of your career during your career? What is the greatest inspiration for your work?
Family-work reconciliation
Open questions:
If you don't mind me asking, what is your family situation? [if having a partner] Is your partner supportive towards your career? In what ways?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
Is your partner/wife/husband also working in research or academia? How do you evaluate the fact of you both being engaged in physics/academia in context of your and his/her career? What was the impact? What is challenging or helpful to have a partner from the same profession?
Do you have children? How many and how old? Have you taken time off to take care for the children? If yes, how long was your career break (or breaks)? How do you organize childcare for your children? How has it been when they were very young and how is it now? Has becoming a parent impacted on your career? In what ways?
Do you feel like you have enough time for both work and family life? What percentage of your time do you dedicate to your family/ work/ yourself? Do you have other family duties, e.g. those linked to caring for elderly or sick-persons?
Were there some moments when family life and career was difficult to balance? What support did you get in balancing work and family duties? From whom/where: from your colleagues/supervisors/institution/employer/state? Which solutions offered by your employer were the most useful? What in your opinion could be useful but was not offered?
Being male/female physicist
Open questions:
As data shows there are more men than women in physics - what is your opinion on this matter? Are there any particular reasons for this situation? Why do you think there are so many more men than women in physics?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
Do you think it is difficult to be successful in physics if you are a woman? What are the reasons for that?
Did you feel that men are privileged in physics? Please, give me some examples. Did you feel that women have it more difficult to succeed in physics? Please, give me some examples.
Do you think you were discriminated against or treated worse than men/women in some situations because you are a woman/man? Please, give me some examples. Do you think you were privileged in some situations because you are a woman/man? Please, give me some examples.
Were you discriminated against or treated worse than others in some situations because of other reasons (e.g. age, ethnic background)?
Do you agree with the belief that women are more willing to work in the new emerging subfields of physics? Why do you think so? [for person working in a new subfield] How was it for you?
- [if applicable] How do you compare the conditions/atmosphere/career opportunities in the new subfield you are engaged in and the previous one?
Role of research institutions/universities
Open questions:
What would be the ideal solutions to raise women's participation in physics in your view? Who should implement those solutions? Do you think research institutions should support women in physics in particular ways?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
What do you think about women in physics being offered some special measures/affirmative action e.g. have preference for employment/quotas in grants in order to raise their participation? [The interviewer be prepared to give an example of preferential treatment or to explain what quotas are]
What do you think about introducing women quotas in e.g. departmental boards, to ensure more equal participation of both genders?
Evaluation of the institution work towards more gender equality
Open questions:
Do you think that gender equality is an important problem in the field of physics?
Additional questions - if an interviewee doesn't mention some of the information, please ask the following questions:
Did/do you think that gender equality is an important problem in your institution?
Is your institution taking any actions to support women in physics? Is your institution taking any actions to prevent gender discrimination? Is your institution taking any actions to assure more equal participation of women and men? Does your institution engage in any outreach or gender-relevant activities to encourage the change in perception of women in STEM or bring more women into the field?
- [if applicable] How do you find those actions? Do you think these actions bring some positive change? If not, why?
Is your institution implementing Gender Equality Plan or some programmes/projects/schemes/activities for enhancing gender equality? How do you evaluate it? If not, is it in your opinion advisable to implement one?
Is there anything that your institution could do better? Are there any solutions or actions that should be undertaken?
Closing
Is there anything that you would like to add about your experience in physics, or gender dimension in physics more broadly?
Thank you very much for your time!
Scenario II: Expert Interviews with leaders —- Total time: 45 minutes - 1 hour
Introductory phase
- Welcome - Thank you for meeting with me today. My name is X and I am a researcher at GENERA project. I have an experience in conducting sociological research in an area of [gender studies].
- Presenting GENERA Project
- Presenting the main research goals and benefits from the participation in the research
Your participation will help us understand the career paths in physics. This information will be used to plan the main gender equality measures and actions that could be implemented in physics departments and research centres. We also plan on implementing some of them in several research/academic institutions, [also in your own institution - if applicable]. The data we collect will also be used for academic publications and other forms of disseminating knowledge and promoting physics.
- Describing the course of the meeting and rules of the interview (e.g. recording)
We will start the interview shortly, but firstly let me give you some basic information about our meeting. Our conversation will last around 1 hour. If you do not want to answer any of the questions, just let me know and we will move on to the next part of the interview. If you agree, our interview will be recorded, though the data will be used for research purposes only. All the identifiable information about you will be anonymized. The recordings will be stored safely at [to be determined by the consortium]. The information recorded is confidential, and no one except for [the GENERA researchers] will have access to the recordings. The recordings will be destroyed after [insert date - to be determined by the consortium].
- Do you have any questions concerning the interview / empirical material collected during the interviews / anonymization / data storage / use of the empirical material?
- Obtaining written consent (Annex 1: Consent form) from the interviewee.
Getting to know the interviewee
Could you tell me about your work? What is your field of research? What about your leading position? Could you tell me what are your work duties?
The main part of the interview
Being male/female physicist
As data shows there are more men than women in physics - what is your opinion on this matter? Are there any particular reasons for this situation? Why do you think there are so many more men than women in physics?
Do you think it is difficult to be successful in physics if you are a woman? What are the reasons for that?
Did you feel that men are privileged in physics? Please, give me some examples. Did you feel that women have it more difficult to succeed in physics? Please, give me some examples.
Do you agree with the belief that women are more willing to work in the new emerging subfields of physics? Why do you think so?
Role of research institutions/universities
What would be the ideal solutions to raise women's participation in physics your view? Who should implement those solutions? Do you think research institutions should support women in physics in particular ways?
What do you think about women in physics being offered some special measures/affirmative action e.g. have preference for employment/quotas in grants in order to raise their participation? [The interviewer be prepared to give an example of preferential treatment or to explain what quotas are]
What do you think about introducing women quotas in e.g. departmental boards, to ensure more equal participation of both genders?
Evaluation of the institution work towards more gender equality
Do you think that gender equality is an important problem in the field of physics?
Did/do you think that gender equality is an important problem in your institution?
Is your institution taking any actions to support women in physics? Is your institution taking any actions to prevent gender discrimination? Is your institution taking any actions to assure more equal participation of women and men? Does your institution engage in any outreach or gender-relevant activities to encourage the change in perception of women in STEM or bring more women into the field?
How do you find those actions? Do you think these actions bring some positive change? If not, why?
Is your institution implementing Gender Equality Plan or some programmes/projects/schemes/activities for enhancing gender equality? How do you evaluate it? If not, is it in your opinion advisable to implement one?
Is there anything that your institution could do better? Are there any solutions or actions that should be undertaken?
Questions about measures undertaken to fostering gender equality
When on leadership position, did/do you take any actions to support women in physics?
Did/do you believe that some actions were/are important? Which one? Did/do you take chance to implement them? If not, why? If so, did/do they work? Are/Were there any obstacles in implementation? How was the collaboration with institution bodies/scientific circles/governmental bodies/staff?
For now, do you think there are things that should be done to enhance gender equality in physics as a field? Could you suggest some pragmatic measures/programmes/ideas for doing it? What should be done on the national level (e.g. ministry) and what at the level of the institution?
For now, do you think there are things that should be done to enhance gender equality in your institution? Could you suggest some pragmatic measures/programmes/ideas for doing it?
Closing
Is there anything that you would like to add about your experience in physics, or gender dimension in physics more broadly?
Thank you very much for your time!
4. Structured note from the Semi-Standardized interviews
After conducting the interview, a researcher/interviewer on the basis of the recording will prepare a structured note from the interview. The note has to be very detailed and contain all the relevant information from the interviews. As the researchers preparing the final report from the study will not be using original recordings nor transcripts, it is critical that the notes are of highest quality - otherwise the analytical work can be hindered if notes are superficial or incomplete. Please always provide a summary in your own words (but as close as possible to words of respondent) and 1 to 3 citations for each section (if available).
Remember to always distinguish between what a respondent told during the interview (this should be included in the table e.g. “I was never privileged as a man”) and your research interpretation (this should be always additionally marked if you wish to add it as 'researcher interpretation' e.g. “It appears that the respondent has never reflected on the fact that he was privileged as a man in academia”).
Section 0. Interviewer and interview situation
=Name of the interviewer=
Partner institution
Place of the interview
Date of the interview
Start of the interview (00:00)
End of the interview (00:00)
Interview situation (interruptions, atmosphere)
Questions that were difficult for the respondent
Comments about research tool
Any other remarks
Section I. Respondent's characteristics
=Gender F/M=
Age
Country of birth
Scientific title
Topic of the PhD
Year of the PhD completion
Research field/subfield
Research interests
Working in emerging field of physics (yes/no)
Place of work (institution, department, research team)
Position at work
Country of work
Fulltime or part time employed
Permanent staff or time-limited contract researcher
Leading position in institution for at least 6 months - yes/no
Section II. Respondent's Narrative
| CAREER PATH | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Critical moments or turning points during respondent's professional path
Three most important obstacles in the career
Evaluation of the career - slow/fast compared to colleagues, female and male
Most important support that respondent received during her/his career
Change of subfield careers (please describe the reasons)
| PLACE OF WORK | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Evaluation of work conditions: job contract, compensation, workload
Evaluation of workplace environment: atmosphere, inspiration, stressfulness, competitiveness
Work flexibility
Working in a team - yes/no, please describe
Evaluation of work in the team
Balance research and other duties (teaching, supervision, administrative issues etc.)
Access to equipment/laboratory
Access to own office space, funding and other resources
| MOBILITY AND MIGRATION | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Migration during the career (please describe)
Mobility during the career
Importance of mobility in a career in physics
Mobility evaluation (was it difficult/helpful?)
| SCIENTIFIC NETWORKS | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Scientific networks - belonging and reasons for membership/lack thereof
[for women] Women's scientific network - belonging and reasons for joining
Evaluating networks for openness and gender balance
| MENTORSHIP AND GUIDANCE | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Role model or inspiration for work
Importance of mentors in the career
Support received from a mentor during the career
Female boss - evaluation
Being a mentor to a young female physicist
| FAMILY-WORK RECONCILIATION | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Support of the partner in the career
Husband also in academia/research or physics - evaluation of the impact
Having children, how many, how old?
Impact of having children on the career
How the care over small children was managed?
Evaluation of balancing work and family duties
Other family duties, e.g. those linked to caring for elderly or sick persons
Support in balancing work and family duties - from whom, what types?
Evaluation of solutions offered by employer
What else should be offered?
| BEING MALE/FEMALE PHYSICIST | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Reasons for domination of men in physics
What makes it difficult for women to be successful in physics?
Experience of discrimination or privilege
Presence of women in new emerging subfields of physics - general reasons
Experience as a women in new emerging subfields of physics
| ROLE OF THE INSITUTION FOR ENHANCING GENDER EQUALITY | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Gender equality as an issue in physics
Gender equality as an issue in your institution
Solutions for raising women's participation in physics/enhancing gender equality - who should do what?
Opinion about affirmative action, special measures (general)
Opinion about quotas (general)
Evaluation of work of your own institution for enhancing gender equality
Describe the actions that institution is taking
Suggestions for what institution should do for enhancing gender equality
5. Structured note from the expert interview
Section 0. Interviewer and interview situation
=Name of the interviewer=
Partner institution
Place of the interview
Date of the interview
Start of the interview (00:00)
End of the interview (00:00)
Interview situation (interruptions, atmosphere)
Questions that were difficult for the respondent
Comments about research tool
Any other remarks
Section I. Respondent's characteristics
=Gender F/M=
Age
Country of birth
Scientific title
Topic of the PhD
Year of the PhD completion
Research field/subfield
Research interests
Working in emerging field of physics (yes/no)
Place of work (institution, department, research team)
Position at work
Country of work
Fulltime or part time employed
Permanent staff or time-limited contract researcher
Leading position in institution for at least 6 months - yes/no
Section II. Respondent's narrative
| BEING MALE/FEMALE PHYSICIST | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Reasons for domination of men in physics
What makes it difficult for women to be successful in physics?
| ROLE OF THE INSITUTION FOR ENHANCING GENDER EQUALITY | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Gender equality as an issue in physics
Gender equality as an issue in an institution
Solutions for raising women's participation in physics/enhancing gender equality - who should do what?
Opinion about affirmative action, special measures (general)
Opinion about quotas (general)
Evaluation of work of your own institution for enhancing gender equality
Describe the actions that institution is taking
Suggestions for what institution should do for enhancing gender equality
| QUESTIONS ABOUT ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY LEADERS | Summary of the main results | Citations (1-3 per section) |
Evaluation of activities undertaken as a leader in an institution
Actions undertaken to support women /to enhance gender equality in an institution
If no activities, please state the reasons for no implementation
Support from other institutional bodies/scientific circles/governmental bodies/staff for respondent's initiatives
Recommendations for institution
Recommendations for other bodies, national level, governmental bodies etc.
Annex 1. A consent form from the respondent
| Consent Form GENERA Research Project GENERA is a new Horizon 2020 project aiming at continuing, monitoring and improving the Gender Equality Plans of Research Institutions and Organizations specifically in the physics research field. These three actions will be performed by a Consortium of 12 beneficiary partner research performing and research funding organizations and a number of associate partners and observers. The GENERA Consortium includes a considerable representation of women physicists active in their careers at different levels and will engage with further women physicists active in various Institutions to benchmark and monitor the effectiveness of already active and previously proposed measures and the ones which will be proposed by the Consortium. The end goal is to propose and create organizational structures allowing physics research in Europe to benefit from the greater presence of talented women at all levels, and which can open up more opportunities for women to create successful careers in physics research and in related fields. While the end goal will focus on the research world, GENERA will look into the origin of the problem by creating liaisons with schools and proposing suitable programs to foster the field from early stages and to propose measures that can be adopted by middle and high schools. Another major goal of GENERA is to contribute to overcoming the under-representation of women in physics research which is long-standing and persistent even if the prevailing cultures adopt the assumption of being 'gender neutral'. Still, these assumptions did not produce the desired effect of increasing female representation in the physics research field. GENERA will focus on the implementation by European research organization of Gender Equality Plans customized to circumstances and needs of the physics research community. The customized Gender Equality Plans involve systematic examination of all decision-making processes to identify any possible sources of gender bias in the research organizations active in physics and related fields |
Please, thick a box if you consent
I confirm that I understand the research goals and that I was given an opportunity to ask questions about the study
I confirm that I understand my participation in the interview is voluntarily
I understand that my identifiable information will be anonymized and used as empirical material for the GENERA study
I understand that anonymized material will be used for further analysis and research purposes (e.g. for presentations at conferences or publications), as well as other forms of dissemination of findings
I agree to participate in the interview
| …………………………………. ………………… ……………………… Name of the interviewee Date Signature Name of the researcher: ……………………………………… |
Annex 2. Sample of invitation letter
Dear Sir/Madame/Professor/Doctor X
My name is X and I'm a researcher at the GENERA project which is co-implemented by Y University / Organization [insert a name of your institution]. GENERA is a new Horizon 2020 project aiming at continuing, monitoring and improving the Gender Equality Plans of Research Institutions and Organizations specifically in the physics research field.
As a part of the project activities we conduct a qualitative sociological research by carrying out interviews with physicists, both female and male working at each partner institution. This study aims at analyzing a specificity of male/female career paths in physics as well as exploring successful approaches and innovative ideas for gender equality measures in this discipline of knowledge. As a physicist you may provide us your valuable perspective and reflections on gender equality in physics, based on your own experience and observation.
We would like to invite you to participate in our research. An interview will last no longer than two hours and have rather informal character. You will not have to answer all of the questions if you don't want to. If you decide to participate, an interview would be arranged at a time and place of your convenience. All the identifiable information about you will be anonymized.
