http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/15258
we have now got our public toilet petition going, please circulate as very relevant to women and see attached press release and click on above link to sign and please tell everyone you know as we have to get 100,000 and we are all contacting whoever we can
thanks clara
Dr Clara Greed MBE, FCIOB MRTPI, FRGS
Emerita Professor of Inclusive Urban Planning
Department of Planning and Architecture
University of the West of England
Frenchay Campus
Bristol
BS16 1QY
01275 844448 and 0117 32 83383
From 31st July 2011 please always copy messages to me to
[log in to unmask]
________________________________________
From: Women and Geography Study Group Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joanne Sharp [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 16 September 2011 12:14
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: new HEFCE proposals for REF
Dear all
This discussion is very worrying. I thought that the document that is currently out for discussion did indicate that the REF panel were going to take leave seriously but perhaps there has been a recent change of policy to suggest it will not? Either way, we should respond before the 5th Oct.
I have read through the material in the REF consultation document and my understanding is that there is to be consideration of maternity leave and other circumstances - and that, to an extent, these were to be considered routinely (rather than as an exception). The consultation document for the working methods for all panels states:
"49. Category A and C staff may be returned with fewer than four outputs without penalty in the assessment, if one or more of the following circumstances significantly constrained their ability to produce four outputs...
iii. Maternity, paternity or adoption leave (note that maternity leave may involve related constraints on an individual's ability to conduct research in addition to the defined period of maternity leave itself. These cases can be returned as 'complex'..."
[which would then require further info but could mean that more than just one paper would be discounted. 61: suggests that individual cases are made regarding the impact of maternity leave and then ...]
...62. In discussions with the REF panels, a possible alternative approach was identified to taking account of pregnancy and maternity: that staff who had periods of maternity leave during the assessment period may reduce the number of outputs by one for each discrete period of maternity leave, without penalty in the assessment..."
Point 63 invites respondents to the consultation to indicate which approach they find most appropriate. This is where we can make representation about how the WGSG and others would like this to be dealt with - ie whether we would prefer a system that allows each case to be explained (where for example constraints on the ability to do fieldwork before and after maternity leave had a greater impact on the ability to produce good outputs than "just" the period of leave itself), a system where a period of leave automatically led to a reduction in paper submissions, or some combination of the two.
Apologies if I have misunderstood the issues here - I don't find these sorts of documents easy to read!
Jo
-----Original Message-----
From: Women and Geography Study Group Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Rachel Pain
Sent: 15 September 2011 13:58
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: new HEFCE proposals for REF
Its not good enough, but it may not be too late. Leading up the last RAE a small group of us lobbied on this issue - and especially for those working on fractional contracts - and things did change. At that time the exact guidance varied from panel to panel, Geography altering quite late on as I remember. It is worth making the case, collectively and individually to panel members.
Maybe WGSG could come up with a statement in response, others of us could get support from other research groups, and see what the RGS is planning in terms of a generic response too?
Another level of awareness raising locally is sometimes needed, too - because even when you officially make it as someone with "clearly defined circumstances", departments may not be keen to 'show weakness' or 'make excuses' (both direct quotes from my years of maternity leave and part-time work). I hope this is no longer typical.
rachel
-----Original Message-----
From: Women and Geography Study Group Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maclean, Kate
Sent: 15 September 2011 12:48
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: new HEFCE proposals for REF
I've had a number of concerned colleagues email me about this and like the others who've commented I am really shocked and saddened. I think there have always been huge gender issues with RAE/REF but it seems to be getting worse. Apparently (and i only have this second hand) alternatives were suggested by arts and humanities panels, but were vetoed by the scientists on the grounds that they favoured women!!!!!
Is it worth responding to the consultation - either as an individual or a group? They're taking comments until 5/10/11 http://www.hefce.ac.uk/research/ref/pubs/2011/03_11/consult/
The Women's Network here at King's is having a session on Gender and the REF on 10th November to raise awareness of the issues and what can be done about them. Are there similar events elsewhere? Perhaps we could bring them together in some way for a concerted response.
Best,
Kate
Dr Kate Maclean
Lecturer in Human Geography
King's College London
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/geography/people/academic/maclean/index.aspx
tel +44 (0)207 848 2802
________________________________________
From: Women and Geography Study Group Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Janet Townsend [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 15 September 2011 10:20
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: new HEFCE proposals for REF
I agree with Suzy and sympathise with Clara. I was amazed. Janet
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Women and Geography Study Group Discussion List
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Clara Greed
>Sent: 14 September 2011 7:44 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [WGSG] new HEFCE proposals for REF
>
>every birth and every death should count as at least the equivalent of one
>international journal article, if not a whole series!
>
>clara
>
>Dr Clara Greed MBE, FCIOB MRTPI, FRGS
>Emerita Professor of Inclusive Urban Planning
>Department of Planning and Architecture
>University of the West of England
>Frenchay Campus
>Bristol
>BS16 1QY
>01275 844448 and 0117 32 83383
>From 31st July 2011 please always copy messages to me to
>[log in to unmask]
>________________________________________
>From: Women and Geography Study Group Discussion List
>[[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Avril Maddrell
>[[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 14 September 2011 11:54
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: new HEFCE proposals for REF
>
>Dear Suzy,
>
>Many thanks for flagging this. WGSG will follow this up, but if it is as it appears,
>it will need concerted and co-ordinated responses from across the sector:
>departments/ universities, unions, learned societies etc..
>
>Watch this space.
>
>Best wishes,
>Avril
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Women and Geography Study Group Discussion List
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Suzanne Reimer
>Sent: 14 September 2011 11:22
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: new HEFCE proposals for REF
>
>(Just to preface this with apologies for being a lapsed WGSG member--will
>sort this out in a minute, but as I'm still subscribed to the mailing list...)
>
>Has anyone else encountered the news publicised yesterday by UCU (see
>http://www.ucu.org.uk/index.cfm?articleid=5716&from=5710)? Apparently
>HEFCE has draft proposals for new REF guidelines on maternity and adoption
>leave which will penalise new mothers. I'm saddened, shocked and angered
>in fairly equal measure.
>
>Suzy
>
>Dr. Suzanne Reimer
>Geography and Environment
>University of Southampton
>Highfield, Southampton
>SO17 1BJ
>email: [log in to unmask]
>tel: 02380 598816
|
