Abstract
AbstractAthena Swan was established in 2005 with the goal of advancing the careers of women in STEMM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics and Medicine) subjects in higher education. Since then, it has expanded its remit in various ways and has generated some controversy. This paper explains how Athena Swan operates as a policy‐scoring scheme, requiring universities to submit plans for policy improvement in order to receive a bronze, silver or gold award. We explain that the implications of rewarding plans for improvement have not been widely understood. We document Athena Swan's changing policies on sex and data collection, which for a period discouraged data collection on sex. We demonstrate the way in which activists were able to capture Athena Swan's policy development process and argue that policy‐scoring schemes can lead to groupthink and pose risks to academic freedom. The outsourcing of equalities work to such schemes does not encourage evidence‐based prioritisation and discussion of the needs of competing characteristics.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
