Georgia Tech-NSF ADVANCE Institutional Transformation Program

Mary Lynn Realff, Director and Co-PI March 31, 2005

NSF ADVANCE at Ga Tech

NSF’s Goal The goal of the NSF ADVANCE: Institutional Transformation Program is to increase the representation and advancement of women in academic science and engineering careers, thereby contributing to the development of a more diverse science and engineering workforce. Ga Tech’s Objective The NSF ADVANCE Institutional Transformation Program at Georgia Tech takes an integrated approach to institutional factors that supports the full participation and advancement of women, and provides a model of best practices in academic science and engineering.

Program Initiatives

• • • • •

Inter-college network of professorships Collect and use resource data for equity and development of best practices Hold annual retreats of women in science & engineering, school chairs, deans, Provost Strengthen and extend the scope & impact of family-friendly policies Institutionalize training in evaluation for P&T committees

A Year in Review

•

GT hosted a national conference 250 participants

•

Networks were further developed through Professorships and cross college activities

–

Research productivity and performance

– – – – –

Grant writing workshops Mentoring Career coaching Work/family ‘balance’ WST/ADVANCE co-sponsored events

•

Dissemination of policies/procedures

–

Active service modified duties

–

ADEPT instrument developed and available on web became part of formal RPT process

Significant Accomplishment: ADEPT

Computer Instrument to Reduce Bias in Evaluation Awareness of Decisions in Evaluating Promotion & Tenure • Interactive learning tool • Identification of institute best practices • Fictional P&T case studies • Interactive P&T meeting GT Promotion and Tenure ADVANCE Committee • Scholarship on bias • GT ADVANCE research & surveys • PTAC report & surveys

A Year in Review

• • •

Research expanded to other universities and more in-depth study of GT female faculty Third year external review of the program First female Regents Professor

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Female Faculty by Rank

Assistant Professor Professor Associate Professor Regents Professor 1% 18 % 21 % 27 % 29 % 33 % 42 % 40 % 40 % 49 % 97-98 38 % 00-01 33 % 03-04 30 % Current

160 140 120

Female Faculty Flux Chart

Regents Prof essor Prof essor Associate Prof essor Assistant Prof essor

124 120 135 38 142 42 144 42 33 28 100 80 51 52 55 55 57 60 40 20 0 41 39 42 44 43 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 Academic Year 2003-2004 2004-2005

160 140 120 100

Female Faculty Flux Chart

Regents Prof essor Prof essor Associate Prof essor Assistant Prof essor

124 120 135 38 142 1 42 144 42 33 28 3 3 4 3 6 80 57 51 55 55 52 60 3 40 20 4 41 7 39 6 42 44 6 43 0 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 Academic Year 2003-2004 2004-2005 Up - Prom otions

160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

Female Faculty Flux Chart

Regents Prof essor Prof essor

1

Associate Prof essor Assistant Prof essor

124 120 1 28 33 3 6 135 2 38 3 3 142 1 42 4 1 144 1 42 3 4 3 55 3 55 57 6 51 2 52 4 4 41 7 9 39 6 11 42 6 3 44 11 6 43

In - Hires Out - Retirements, Resignations, Terminations Up - Promotions

2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 Academic Year 2003-2004 2004-2005

160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 6

Female Faculty Flux Chart

Regents Prof essor Prof essor Associate Prof essor Assistant Prof essor

124 120 1 1 28 1 33 3 6 2 135 2 38 3 3 142 1 42 4 2 2 1 144 1 42 3 4 3 5 3 55 51 3 55 3 57 2 52 2 6 4 4 41 6 7 9 39 4 1 1 42 2 6 3 44 1 11 43 6 1

In - Hires Out - Retirements, Resignations, Terminations Up - Promotions

2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 Academic Year 2003-2004 2004-2005

160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

Female Faculty Flux Chart

Regents Prof essor Prof essor Associate Prof essor Assistant Prof essor

124 120 1 1 28 1/0 33 3 6 135 0/2 2 38 3 0/0 3 142 1 42 4 6 51 0/0 2 52 0/2 3 55 4 6 4 7 41 0/1 9 39 0/4 11 42 1/2 3 55 3 1/1 6 44 0/2 1 144 1 42 1/2 3 0/2 4 57 6 0/1 11 43 0/5 1/5

In - Hires Out - Retirements/ Resignations+ Terminations Up - Promotions

2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 Academic Year 2003-2004 2004-2005

800 700 600 500

Regent s Pr of essor Pr of essor Associat e Pr of essor Assist ant Pr of essor

685 2 9 330 7/8 11

Male Faculty Flux Chart

744 695 2 712 1/ 0 2 22 1 12/6 6 743 1/0 1 11/5 17 17/5 13/4 357 336 363 331 400 300 8 18 193 2/1 9 10 194 12 5/8 12 191 7/6 14 19 192 1/8 6 18 192 2/3 200 100 15 38 133 15 0/10 32 139 10 1/10 31 152 0/8 32 15 161 0/8 15 17 153 0/6 0 2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005

In - Hires Out - Retirements/ Resignations+ Terminations Up - Promotions

Collaboratively Set Expectations and Create Solutions

Identify best practices Identify barriers to success Make recommendations

Conference Breakout groups

Feedback to next year Advantages – People give you better ideas when they know you are going to implement them – People “buy in” when they have contributed to the solution – Format gives a good balance of “complaining” with generation of “actions” Outcomes – Faculty and administrators develop solutions together – Group interaction builds networks & leverages best practices across campus Implement their recommendations

We need your feedback

• • •

Conference survey Participation in discussion break out groups Experience with ADEPT instrument

Program Initiatives

• • • • •

Inter-college network of professorships Collect and use resource data for equity and development of best practices Hold annual retreats of women in science & engineering, school chairs, deans, Provost Strengthen and extend the scope & impact of family-friendly policies Institutionalize training in evaluation for P&T committees