Community of Practice for Gender Equality in the Network of Mediterranean Engineering Schools
ISBN: 978-1-80262-122-8, eISBN: 978-1-80262-119-8
Publication date: 25 July 2022
Abstract
Gender competence as part of engineering education can better prepare men and women to work on sustainable solutions that benefit entire societies. This chapter describes the framework and lessons learned of a community of practice (CoP) for gender equality facilitated by the Mediterranean Engineering Schools Network. Faculty and students from Mediterranean European, North African and Middle Eastern countries came together in this CoP, which was supported by the TARGET project, to develop a practical plan using a reflexive approach. The transfer of knowledge between generations is achieved by using participatory learning processes, facilitating mindful awareness, widening experiences, deepening understandings and building a gender-sensitive mindset. Students embarked on the journey to become change agents. The process led to the consolidation of gender equality knowledge, competence building and the development of change agents for gender equality. This CoP can inspire other institutions to undertake a participatory path towards gender equality – at local, regional, or global level.
Keywords
Citation
Zabaniotou, A., Tsirogianni, A., Cardarilli, M. and Guarascio, M. (2022), "Community of Practice for Gender Equality in the Network of Mediterranean Engineering Schools", Wroblewski, A. and Palmén, R. (Ed.) Overcoming the Challenge of Structural Change in Research Organisations – A Reflexive Approach to Gender Equality, Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 91-111. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80262-119-820221006
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2022 Anastasia Zabaniotou, Aigli Tsirogianni, Monica Cardarilli and Massimo Guarascio
License
Published under exclusive licence by Emerald Publishing Limited. This work is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this book (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode 26th April 2021, signed by Angela Wroblewski and Rachel Palmén
Introduction
Achieving gender equality in and through higher education institutions (HEIs) requires a change in culture, structures, norms, dynamics, policies, plans and budget allocation to enable males and females to succeed (Unterhalter, 2019). The European Union (EU) has made considerable efforts in the last decade to advance gender equality in Member States by financing projects to promote communities of practice (CoPs) as tools for change at universities and research organisations (Barnard, Hassan, Dainty, Álvarez, & Arrizabalaga, 2016).
CoPs are self-organised groups of people, informally bound together by a shared vision and context, interacting to exchange knowledge, respond to changes, drive strategy and build expertise. They are learning platforms where members can attend expert meetings and events to exchange ideas and experiences and organise joint projects to achieve common goals (Li et al., 2009). They are knowledge-based dynamic constructs that grow with practice, in contrast to the codified knowledge offered by universities (Kothari et al., 2012). They use a participatory approach to encourage cooperation between stakeholders for overcoming barriers in implementing new concepts (Steins, Veraart, Klostermann, & Poelman, 2021). There are three main characteristics of a CoP (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015): (1) the domain, (2) the community and (3) the practice. These characteristics provide a guide for the development of a CoP (Mohajan, 2017). Although CoPs are like informal networks (Norman & Huerta, 2006) or multidisciplinary teams, they do require leadership and facilitation efforts (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002).
Higher education engineering institutions (HEEIs) are in general far from achieving gender equality, although this has partly been accomplished in some universities. In HEEIs, gender inequality is a systemic problem, due mainly to the persistence of the masculine-dominated institutions in patriarchal societies where women do not fully have equal opportunity to reach senior positions and engage in academic career development. This is often related to stereotyped gender expectations and beliefs, and the masculine construct of leadership in those institutions. Furthermore, in HEEIs, the process of gaining gender competence is more complex than in the social sciences, humanities, or management studies because faculty has limited gender equality expertise, while bias and stereotypes are embodied in the system – since engineering was traditionally considered a male domain.
Providing engineering faculty and students with opportunities to come together at the national and international levels to share experiences and reflect on the links between gender interventions and technological innovations is becoming even more pressing (López-Iñesta, Botella, Rueda, Forte, & Marzal, 2020; Tikly, Vogel, & Kurvers, 2020). There is also a need to cultivate CoPs in the context of engineering education to enable a participatory gender equality learning process.
In this context, this chapter reports on the experience gained from a faculty- and student-driven network-based CoP for gender equality advancement within the community of the Mediterranean HEEIs. It also details the lessons learned in the period from 2017 to 2021 when this CoP, facilitated by the Network of Mediterranean Engineering Schools (RMEI), was drawing on internal and external expertise from the Horizon 2020 TARGET project to better capture gender equality knowledge and good practices from other European countries.
Context
The CoP for gender equality in engineering education in the Mediterranean community was facilitated by RMEI and the student sub-network Giovani Ambasciatori Mediterranei (GAMe) with the support of the TARGET project.
The Network of Mediterranean Engineering Schools (RMEI)
RMEI was created in June 1997 and currently includes around 90 schools from 17 Mediterranean countries.1 It is also affiliated to the UNESCO UNITWIN Chair of Innovations for Sustainable Development. Its mission is to advance sustainable development in the Mediterranean region through education. The network embraces a diverse range of cultures, religions, political and socio-economic differences that exist among the Mediterranean countries. It envisions equitable and sustainable development for the Mediterranean region. RMEI strives to enhance the ethics of responsibility of young engineers through education and culture, given that education plays a key role in contributing to social transformations. RMEI is a trusting network involving relationships built on common values, dialogue, mutual understanding, friendships and shared responsibility. The dialogue in the network and the sharing of tacit knowledge leads to shared practice, which creates new and collective ‘practice-based knowledge’.
RMEI achieved learning potential and inspired informal and structural changes for gender equality among its members by developing a gender equality strategy, unravelled the link between gender equality, sustainability and other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and integrated gender equality into interventions for the sustainable development of the region by mobilising the network’s human resources – from professors and students to academic managers (rectors, deans, managers of the schools). The gender equality policy statement was unanimously approved thanks to the commitment of RMEI member institutions to SDGs (Zabaniotou, 2020). The transformative learning and gender equality plan (GEP) implementation process were part of the network’s vision for sustainable development and contributed towards a shift from the global challenges and inequalities towards equality through co-existence (Zabaniotou, Boukamel, & Tsirogianni, 2021).
The Young Ambassadors of the Mediterranean (GAMe)
GAMe is an acronym that stands for Giovani Ambasciatori Mediterranei, which translates into English as Young Ambassadors of the Mediterranean. It is a Mediterranean network of students and alumni from RMEI engineering school members. It was founded in 2011 during the First Michelangelo Workshop (MW), which was held at Fort Michelangelo in Civitavecchia near Rome. Its mission is to support students in their personal growth, help them to express themselves through art-based activities and assist them in the development of their characters and social skills to ‘break down silos’ across disciplines, nationalities and perspectives. It offers opportunities for students to meet in different Mediterranean countries, familiarises engineering students with the Mediterranean cultures, makes students aware of their role in society, prepares them for the future and inspires practical and collaborative learning on gender equality. It is made up of an international board composed of one representative student per Mediterranean country (member of RMEI) and an elected president.2 The representatives, who are known as ambassadors, are both supporters of and supported by the network. GAMe decisions and actions are always in line with its vision on diversity and equality for Mediterranean societies. Furthermore, its members, being more a community than a group, maintain relationships even after graduating from university and becoming alumni. Its strategy is committed to gender equality via the students’ work, which it addresses through activities such as workshops, competitions and other initiatives focused on common values, issues and challenges, as well as on raising students’ awareness and engagement.
The TARGET Project
Since 2017, RMEI has been a partner in the TARGET project consortium. TARGET aims to contribute to the advancement of gender equality in academia and research and innovation (R&I) and supported the advancement of a GEP at RMEI. The TARGET project emphasised an iterative and reflexive process towards equality at the institutional level as well as the establishment of a CoP for gender equality within the network. Starting point and anchor of the process was a tailored GEP, which was designed, implemented, monitored, self-assessed and evaluated during TARGET.
In this process, RMEI followed the circular and reflexive learning (loop learning) approach proposed by the TARGET project, thereby questioning the assumptions that underlie the actual goals and strategies. The linear approach of following routines that are less risky for the individual and the organisation and afford greater control was avoided in favour of a circular process that facilitates creativity and reflexivity.
The TARGET project partners encouraged knowledge building (as a pre-condition for success) for cultural change (as the final desirable outcome). One TARGET partner with extensive expertise in gender equality processes supported RMEI but did not take part in RMEI activities, while the financial support from the TARGET project enabled the CoP activities. TARGET proposed a gender equality audit (GEA) as the starting point of the process towards gender equality change, followed by the design implementation, monitoring and evaluation of a GEP.
The logic model approach was likewise proposed by the TARGET project at the different steps in the process in order to provide the network with a road map that described the sequence of related events connecting the need for a planned programme with its desired results. TARGET used a novel evaluation approach that assumes that successful and sustainable implementation of GEPs requires reflection on existing structures and practices regarding inherent gender bias, the development and implementation of alternative practices and the assessment of gendered effects of such interventions (Zabaniotou, Boukamel, et al., 2021).
Conceptual Background
RMEI engaged in a complex process of change for gender equality via the CoP. The transformative processes at the collective and individual levels encompass ways of self-organising, self-learning and self-catalysing. The focus lay on RMEI as a network and thus addressed its member institutions. The members of the CoPs participated on a voluntary basis and regarded the experience as a personal development exercise. In order to develop an alternative framework of change, a ‘back casting’ methodology was used, that is, a planning method that starts with the definition of a desirable future and objectives and then works backwards to identify activities, methods and roadmaps that will connect that specified future to the present (Holmberg & Robèrt, 2000).
The CoP concept proposed by Wenger (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998; Wenger et al., 2002) was consulted along with the theoretical framework proposed by Argyris and Schön (1978) in which espoused theories and theories-in-use are used to examine professional practice. Espoused theories refer to the worldview that guides people’s behaviours, while theories-in-use refer to the worldview and values reflected in the behaviours that drive people’s actions (Savaya & Gardner, 2012). Espoused theories are those that an individual claims to follow, while theories-in-use are those than can be inferred from actions (Argyris, Putnam, & McLain Smith, 1985). According to Argyris and Schön (1978), people use mental maps more than espoused theories to guide their actions. The distinction between espoused theories and theories-in-use framed our questions about the conceptions and philosophies that guide gender equality learning in the Mediterranean cultural diversity.
Complementing the CoP approach, the engineering context offered us some scientific mechanisms that we considered useful for setting up the CoP (Zabaniotou, Boukamel, et al., 2021), namely the ‘stigmergy’ phenomenon in addressing complex problems of self-organised collective schemes with coordinated actions and interactions of individuals and feedbacks, and the ‘spillover’ behavioural phenomenon advocating that a person’s behaviour causes the adoption of related behaviours by others.
In designing the CoP, we reviewed articles examining transformative processes as mechanisms of working (Karp, 2005) regarding values, collective activities, narratives and ethical codes. We also searched EU projects for methods that were thematically and structurally applicable, aiming to identify types of actions towards the perceived CoP and adapt them to the specificities of RMEI. The EU ACT project was consulted, for example, because it offers a practice toolkit and an online hub for sharing knowledge and experiences (Palmén et al., 2019).
The RMEI CoP was built around three key elements that address the specific needs of its member institutions:
Domain: There is a need to build capacity for gender equality at engineering schools to define the knowledge area and practice because many engineering schools in Mediterranean countries lack GEPs.
Community: There is a need to foster opportunities for learning and practice exchange, along with the development of tools and capacity building, in Mediterranean countries (geographical focus).
Practice: There is a need to develop solid evidence of good practice on gender equality, based on evaluation.
The Engineering Education Domain
Although continued steps have been made to advance gender equality at HEIs within the EU and institutional changes through GEPs in academia, many differences still exist between countries and scientific fields (EIGE, 2016; Linkova, 2019). Technology and engineering faculties are the most male-dominated in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM), as witnessed by the persistent under-representation of women in promotion committees (Loots & Walker, 2016) and by a glass ceiling in the top-management and senior academic levels (Žalėnienė, Krinickienė, Tvaronavičienė, & Lobačevskytė, 2016). Women in science and engineering fields leak from the academic pipeline, occupying mainly the teaching-intensive positions (lecturer and technical assistant) that eject them from the tenure system as the prerequisite to advance to senior academic positions (Eagly, 2020). This is partly due to the pressures that research-intensive positions put on women with childcare responsibilities (Ginther & Kahn, 2014; Mason, Wolfinger, & Goulden, 2013) and the potential prevailing hegemonic masculine culture within a department or school (Silbey, 2016).
Although the number of female students in STEM subjects has increased remarkably (>50%), gender imbalance is still particularly prevalent in technology and engineering institutions (<20% female representation: Huang, Gates, Sinatra, & Barabási, 2020). Gender equality, however, goes beyond equal representation, also challenging gender-biased processes and procedures. Although women in engineering have often successfully overcome stereotypes in school and family at an early age, when they enter academia, they encounter difficulties in gaining promotion to senior academic positions, frequently due to existing gender norms and bias within the university community that discourage female agency in gaining status in department, faculty and top university positions (Duch et al., 2012). Sometimes, they themselves avoid getting into a male-dominated and heavily biased environment due to its predominantly competitive nature (Makarova, Aeschlimann, & Herzog, 2019).
The lack of gender equality in the engineering education domain is not only an issue of fairness but also signals a large absence of the potential for growth and innovation (pool of talents), thus resulting in missed opportunities. Schools must adopt a ‘whole-institution change’ approach that includes transformative leadership and creating a new mindset during change, which occurs in higher education in engineering within a complex system, while the various parts of the system create change agents (Reinholz & Andrews, 2020).
Socially constructed barriers must be dissolved through gender-sensitive initiatives for shaping the future scientific workforce (Loots & Walker, 2016). Women in engineering schools need empowerment to build self-confidence, competence and ability within the academic self-concept, which is based on a self-assessment formed partly through interpretations influenced by the evaluations of male-dominated committees (Ertl, Luttenberger, & Paechter, 2017). To uphold women’s rights and fully leverage the potential of women’s leadership in the engineering education domain, the perspectives of women must be integrated into the formulation and implementation of policies and programmes (Unterhalter, 2019).
For professional practice, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary actions are needed that allow engineers to work closely with experts from other fields (social sciences, humanities, etc.), to collaboratively find solutions to social problems (Salvioni, Franzoni, & Cassano, 2017). The openness of professors at engineering schools when it comes to supporting creative ideas from students in the process of solving complex problems also plays an important role.
In the case of the RMEI CoP, it was helpful to use a dynamic process that focused on possibilities and practical solutions rather than on concepts, ideology and opinions to drive gender equality change.
The Aims of the CoP
RMEI envisioned a CoP that would support gender equality processes in engineering education across its member institutions, recognising that HEEIs in Mediterranean countries are comprised of dense networks of masculine power relationships and that interactions, key ideas of excellence and competition guide decisions, affecting women’s careers negatively. While girls have achieved an important level of representation among undergraduates in engineering schools, the shares of women in corresponding academic careers and/or with access to power are still low. To pursue this vision, the RMEI CoP formulated multiple objectives:
- a.
establish an understanding of gender equality among CoP members as the result of an organisational change process;
- b.
raise awareness for gender bias in culture, values, and language as well as gendered power relations;
- c.
build knowledge, capacity and dialogue on gender equality by organising local, regional and national workshops (NWs);
- d.
bring together various national stakeholders in a gender equality discourse;
- e.
provide a hierarchy-free space for mutual learning based on relationships of trust;
- f.
empower students to express themselves using Pythagorean approaches (learning through science and art);
- g.
treat all participants with dignity and respect all cultures when discussing gender equality issues;
- h.
enhance transparent communication when transferring gender equality knowledge to member institutions; and
- i.
develop change agents within GAMe and equip students with the competences to raise gender issues in their (future) families and workplaces.
The RMEI CoP
The RMEI CoP called on all member-engineering schools to nominate representatives. The CoP started gradually with a group of people who were willing to learn how to proceed with gender equality change following best practices (Sánchez Milara et al., 2020) and guided by the TARGET partners. Initially, 10 pioneering schools voluntarily joined the CoP. These schools are in Northern Mediterranean countries in Europe (France, Spain, Italy, Greece), Southern Mediterranean in Africa (Morocco, Tunisia, Egypt) and Eastern Mediterranean countries in the Middle East (Palestine, Lebanon).
Faculty members and institution managers from these schools act as change agents for other schools, following the ‘spillover’ behavioural phenomenon. The RMEI CoP is continually enriched by people of different ages (students, faculty) from various engineering schools in European, North African and Middle Eastern countries, who are engaged in the gender equality process within RMEI. They are all bound by a common vision, shared values and a relationship of trust.
The multigenerational CoP comprises students and faculty of all ages. It is a multinational and multicultural community of representatives of 12 engineering schools (from among the 90 RMEI member schools) in 10 Mediterranean countries (see Fig. 5.1.).
Innovative Aspects of the RMEI CoP
The RMEI CoP is the result of co-creation processes and interventions, collaborative learning, ethical commitment to SDGs, tailored policy mixes aimed at advancing gender equality in typical male-dominated, engineering institutions where women’s representation in management and senior faculty positions is low. The important components of the CoP that paved the way for gender equality were the emotional drivers of cognitive, affective trust and joy shared among the members and the feeling of belonging to the same family. The innovative elements and characteristics of the RMEI CoP are shown in Table 5.1.
Innovative Characteristics of the RMEI CoP.
| No | Element | Need | Approach |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | SYSTEMIC APPROACH | For systemic new thinking, solutions, innovations | The CoP aimed at increasing awareness for gender equality and the corresponding need for cultural and institutional change |
| 2 | INTER-GENERATIONAL OBJECTIVE | To inspire all generations and especially young students to become change agents | The CoP is composed of senior professors of Mediterranean HEEIs of all ages and young students from the GAMe network; many other stakeholders are also involved in the dialogues |
| 3 | NEW WAYS OF LEARNING | To change the traditional way of learning in engineering education | The CoP established a learning culture in which collaboration, empowerment, courage, trust, and joy replaced competition, uncertainty and fear |
| 4 | NETWORK-BASED CoP | To gather people from various universities in a common process of learning | Collective learning took place in trustful networks reaching beyond the classical university-based top-down learning (teacher to student learning); building trust |
Table 5.2 presents the types of CoP participants and their roles.
Participants in the CoP.
| Stakeholders | No | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Faculty members from HEEI members of RMEI in the Mediterranean region | 15 |
|
| Top managers in HEEIs (rectors, deans, presidents, etc.) | 10 |
|
| GAMe students and alumni | 150 |
|
Gender equality training for managers, faculty and students (participants in the RMEI CoP) was regarded as essential to enable them to understand the challenges and build the capacity and competences needed for mainstreaming gender equality strategies into their institutions. This would, in turn, allow members to construct their own mechanisms for gender equality change, proceed slowly or quickly (set the pace of change) according to the specificities and culture their institution’s culture and develop tailor made GEPs that are appropriate in their institution.
A bottom-up approach of co-creation, fulfilment and commitment was used – in stark contrast to the top-down learning imposed in universities. Training workshops and art-based learning approaches were the primary tools chosen to pursue CoP objectives.
Activities of the RMEI CoP
When designing training activities, care was taken to ensure a good balance between practical and theoretical aspects, while the national context was also an important factor in shaping activities of the CoP. Different types of workshops were organised, including capacity-building workshops (CBWs), NWs and the MWs (see Table 5.3).
While institutional workshops (IWs) help in gradually building competence and expertise in a journey-like process, NWs bring publicity to each of the organising institutions and the host country. NWs also bring various stakeholders – government ministries, academia, associations, industry, etc. – into the discussion towards formalising a common will on national policies for gender equality. MWs are co-organised annually in a different Mediterranean country by GAMe and mentor professors from RMEI. These workshops aim at bridging science, society and culture regarding awareness for gender equality, discussing topics at the nexus of sustainability – resilience – gender-differentiated vulnerability to climate change disasters.
During the first year of the project, three IWs were held to establish a common level of knowledge on the tools and instruments used to develop, implement and monitor the RMEI GEP. These workshops provided RMEI with knowledge on the structure of a GEA, a GEP and monitoring. Two of the more recent CBWs addressed reflexivity and sustainability issues.
Five IWs were open to the whole CoP. The first IW focused on how to develop a GEA, the second centred on defining gender equality priorities for the GEP, the third and fourth guided the drafting of the gender equality mission statement, which was subsequently presented, discussed and agreed at the network’s 2018 general assembly. The focus of the fifth IW lay on the applicability and practicability of the GEP in terms of consolidating a sustainable line of action. This feedback focused specifically on cultural differences between countries, which should have been addressed adequately in the supporting activities.
The NWs aimed at initiating a participatory and stakeholder-oriented dialogue at national level focusing on cultural and institutional change for gender equality. They were co-organised by the member institution in the respective Mediterranean country with the support of RMEI. Other national established gender-based thematic associations and stakeholders were likewise invited to participate (Zabaniotou, 2020).
The MWs were organised by GAMe and were named in honour of the Italian High Renaissance artist, sculptor, architect and poet, Michelangelo (6 March 1475–18 February 1564). MWs were devoted to bridging science, society, culture and gender equality awareness across students and alumni, thus empowering young engineers to practice gender equality in their future lives and work. MWs support cross-disciplinary mindsets through creativity and inclusiveness, empowering a kind of new-Pythagorean spirit through scientific breakthroughs aimed at cooperative harmony across the Mediterranean. Theatre and philosophy born in ancient cultures and Mediterranean societies were used as tools to communicate scientific concepts and share understanding of common values and human connections. MWs aim to broaden students’ horizons and promote the significance of a Common Mediterranean Vision emerging from a common history and envisioning a more inclusive and sustainable development (Demaidi & Al-Sahili, 2021; Zabaniotou, 2020). Shared visions, values, goals and mutual influence encourage dialogue and open communication, with interpersonal interactions that require profound attentiveness and trust.
GAMe students prepared a questionnaire-based survey of students at the affiliated Mediterranean engineering schools to detect students’ perspectives of gender inequality and discrimination within the academic environment.3 The results of the questionnaire were published in a corresponding report and presented in a video at the 2018 MW, confirming the importance of establishing a strategy to reduce gender stereotypes and inequality in and through engineering education. They also stressed the need to raise students’ awareness for gender equality issues and participate in activities against gender inequality within their institution. Following the survey, an article on the introduction of the Gender Issues Strategy was published in the first edition of the GAMe Newsletter. The newsletter represents an important means to spread a message among students. Students also attended events on gender equality issues, in which they stated their experiences and commitment to this topic. Among the main events, GAMe participated in the international congress on ‘Bridging the Future: The Women’s Perspective’ at the eCampus University in Novedrate, Italy, in 2018, where GAMe representatives gave a presentation on gender equality and rights in education.4
Four annual MWs were organised to involve students in a dialogue on global challenges and future foresights. The topic of discussion was at the nexus of sustainability – resilience – gender equality to face the dangers of climate change, whose impacts highlight gender-differentiated vulnerabilities (UNDP, 2020). The 2019 MW focused on the relationship between disaster risk frameworks and gender-related issues to underline the existing discriminations, interfaces and dependencies. The workshop took place at the Sapienza University in Rome and was attended by 60 students, 15 experts and many faculty members. Under the title Risks & Resilience in Networks and Gender Inequalities, the MW sought to build bridges among higher education experts and young engineers in the Mediterranean countries5. The event promoted an integrated system of transnational research and action plans, bringing together professors (academia), private companies and research institutions from across the region.
The MWs draw attention to statements and strategies implemented through student projects and initiatives. Art and culture are considered the most effective tools for allowing engineering students from different national contexts (different languages and inherited cultures) to fully understand each other. Several keynote speakers from international organisations contributed to the workshops, focusing on intersectionality (i.e. social class, gender, youth, religion, minority groups) and stigma-raising prejudice, discrimination and conflicts, thereby providing the participants with food for thought and further action, facilitating knowledge exchange and the sharing of experiences among students, universities and other relevant stakeholders in Mediterranean countries.
Description of Activities.
| Type of Activity | No. | Goal | Objectives | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Institutional Workshops (IWs) | 5 | Support the reflexive learning approach of gender equality processes among RMEI members |
|
|
| National Workshops (NWs) | 4 | Initiate a gender equality discourse at national level |
|
|
| Michelangelo Workshops (MWs) | 4 | Train students and create change-agents for gender equality |
|
|
ahttps://www.rmei.info/images/pdf/game-newsletter-activities-and-events-2017.pdf; http://www.rmei.info/images/pdf/game2019.pdf Accessed on 8 november 2021.
Lessons Learned
With the RMEI CoP, a dialogue-based, down-top approach to formulating the strategy was applied, with more importance placed on the views and experiences of the participants than on seeking to impose a particular view of the situation. Important lessons learned for the implementation of a sustainable network-based CoP on gender equality are the commitment of the institutions’ top managers to SDG5 was essential for adopting the gender equality policy statement.
A participatory approach (EIGE, 2016) was used in all activities to pursue RMEI CoP objectives.
It was made clear that with few women in decision-making roles, engineering schools lack inspirational female leaders, which constitutes one of the most formative learning experiences – along with mentoring and widening the belief systems of young people.
By encouraging and developing new ways of thinking through CoPs and supporting change agents, students can engage with others to tackle gender imbalances throughout their lives and in the future professions.
Creating an effective and strong CoP takes several years. One of the biggest challenges remains the need to change the deep-rooted, culturally embedded gender stereotypes in academia.
In the following, we will take a more detailed look at the most significant lessons learned.
University Barriers
The effectiveness of the CoP depends on the active role taken by network members (although around 90 Mediterranean engineering schools are members of RMEI, only 12 are active in the CoP for gender equality). The activation of the others (passive members) depends on efforts by the network to inspire them into boosting the willingness of faculty members to work for subjects that are not their core scientific interest (i.e. engineering education and research). In addition, some faculty members do not get actively involved in the CoP because they feel they lack knowledge on gender equality change processes and on social innovations in general.
Many young faculty members are in the tenure clock phase so do not dedicate time to outreach activities that do not count as promotion criteria and requirements. Instead, they need time and energy to establish academic recognition in preparation for promotion, which requires a heavy teaching load and extensive administrative, scientific and research efforts.
Student members of the CoP move progressively towards their chosen professional path after graduation and only remain on board if they wish to stay connected as alumni. The continuation of CoP activities thus requires continuous efforts to inspire new students to join.
Another very important issue is the fact that participation in the CoP is an unpaid activity (or at least is not financially rewarded). The CoP is organised on a volunteer basis, which sometimes takes a heavy toll and requires paid personnel for organisational support. The lack of funding is a strong limiting factor for the effectiveness and sustainability of the CoP. Its members are volunteers, who give their time and energy to the activities not because they are paid to do so but because they believe in the need for change. This often creates a limitation because many people prioritise their financial needs instead of volunteering for a social task.
Need for Support: Support Received by TARGET Partners and Framework
Advancing gender equality measures in HEEIs requires considerable investment in terms of resources, time, knowledge, skills and institutional accountability to track progress. It was therefore understood that gender equality transformation is a long-term strategic process, which also requires sustained commitment and efforts – as well as specific competences – which tend to be lacking in faculty members at engineering education institutions (Zabaniotou, 2020).
Performing the activities of the CoP required financial support to cover travel, meeting and catering costs, the expenses of invited experts, publication fees, etc. Third-party funding projects like TARGET can provide financial resources for the duration of the project. Without the financial support of the TARGET project, the CoP would have been weak and limited.
Need for a New Gender–Competent Leadership
By enlarging the CoP, attitudes towards gender equality, reflections and feedback would possibly differ. Gender–competent leadership and an understanding of the ‘spillover’ phenomenon help in homogenising the CoP.
The gender–competent leader should be able to create strategies to support gender equality, analyse gender imbalances, report on related activities, utilise resources in effective ways, communicate online, focus on group discussion and communicate via interviews, videos and digital means. Gender–competent leadership must provide a more profound understanding of attitudes towards gender equality and the CoP. People usually construct gendered meanings in each situation based on their own expectations of the situation. A gender–competent leader needs to be aware of these expectations, recognise when someone’s expectations cloud their ability to make meaning and help people through the difficult process of aligning their expectations with their espoused commitments (Argyris, 1991).
Flexibility, team spirit, keeping balance in heterogeneity, distributing responsibilities to the right people, empowering, taking a win-win approach and supporting sustainability are all elements of transformative leadership. Additionally, the CoP facilitator should demonstrate the added value of being an active member of the CoP (e.g. promising to help with publications on collaborative projects, consortium development, networking activities, project partner matching activities), all of which will help members in academic promotions, etc.
Competence Building
The CoP participants can deepen their understanding of systemic inequality and prompt, challenge and inspire each other to make progress towards collective change. CoP members begin a journey of looking inward when it comes to gender equality. They integrate mindful learning and respect for cultural differences and move towards gender-sensitive actions.
Becoming an embodied change agent is like learning something new – it takes time-. With art- and game-based collective learning (GAMe and MW approaches), gender equality can be better sensed and embodied (especially by young students).
Dedicated workshops and training allow CoP members to take a closer look at why many equality actions do not bring a sustainable outcome and how opening hearts with the help of theatre, poetry and philosophy (which past Mediterranean civilisations and ancient communities offered to the occidental and global worlds) can help people to experience the importance of active and collective learning.
Facing the Disruptions
The COVID-19 pandemic limited the possibility for face-to-face meetings of the RMEI CoP. The difficulties were overcome by adopting an engineering approach of problem-solving. At RMEI, CoP activities did not stop but instead followed an alternative path during the lockdowns, namely the path of knowledge consolidation. The CoP members collaborated in preparing interdisciplinary and intersectional publications for peer review journals and dissemination via online tools and digital platforms.
Conclusions
The network-based RMEI CoP of gender equality has an inclusive and intergenerational character; it is composed of faculty and student volunteers from 12 member institutions in the Network of Mediterranean Engineering Schools in 10 countries. It is tailored to the engineering education sector, aiming to better capture gender equality knowledge, share good practices and develop change agents using tailor-made mechanisms.
The RMEI CoP is driven by motivated young engineering students, who share a common vision for sustainable development (GAMe students). It is intergenerational and intercultural because it integrates top managers, faculty and students of all ages and from different Mediterranean countries in a horizontal engagement in joint activities, negotiation of mutual relevance, peer recognition, identity, trust and commitment to SDGs. People are bound together in a self-assembling process to learn and then lead gender equality change processes in their respective schools.
The RMEI CoP is based on relationships of trust and a sense of belonging to the same family; it creates joy, provides a space for non-experts to share knowledge and ideas on gender equality, gives legitimacy to participants for gender equality activities at their school of origin and enhances the members’ commitment to SDG5 by engaging university management. It offers an alternative to the traditional top-down university learning (teacher–student learning), allowing space for uncertainty and addressing persistent barriers to gender equality in the engineering domain across the Mediterranean region. It also offers an attractive alternative to the vertical transmission of knowledge in a university, having a transversal perspective over Mediterranean engineering education systems.
The tangible achievements of the RMEI CoP include gender equality knowledge capacity building, training, awareness, empowerment of members to advocate gender equality in their institutions, establishment of change agents and development of gender competences among members.
A change framework was developed along with a model suggesting avenues for enquiry and opportunities for reflection on how to tackle gender inequality challenges in difficult contexts and domains, with the potential for a scale-up linked to a system-level change. New ways of learning are proposed that include personal development, and awareness of unconscious bias and stereotypes, collaboration against competition, values, character, emotions, knowledge and action value.
In our experience, financial support to cover travel, meeting and catering costs, the expenses of invited experts, publication fees, etc., is indispensable for performing CoP activities. Third-party funding (in our case, the EU TARGET project) provided the financial resources for this CoP. Without the financial support from TARGET, the CoP would have been weak and limited. The TARGET project also provided the knowledge and support to take a participatory, reflexive approach towards building the GEP.
Finally, we learned that becoming a gender equality change agent takes time and practice; becoming a gender equality leader in engineering is a journey.
http://www.rmei.info/index.php/en/ Accessed on 8 November 2021.
https://www.jeangilder.it/mw17/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Game.pdf. Accessed on 8 November 2021.
http://www.cmungo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/MichelangeloProgramme-Workshop-2019_-ROME.pdf. Accessed on 8 November 2021.
References
Argyris 1991Argyris, Chris (1991). Teaching smart people how to learn. Reflections: The Sol Journal, 5, 4–15. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/1991/05/teaching-smart-people-how-to-learn. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Argyris, Putnam, & McLain Smith 1985Argyris, Chris, Putnam, Robert, & McLain Smith, Diana (1985). Action science: Concepts, methods, and skills for research and intervention. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Argyris, & Schön 1978Argyris, Chris, & Schön, Donald A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Barnard, Hassan, Dainty, Álvarez, & Arrizabalaga 2016Barnard, Sarah, Hassan, Tarek M., Dainty, Andrew, Álvarez, Lucía, & Arrizabalaga, Ezekiela (2016). Using communities of practice to support the implementation of gender equality plans: Lessons from a cross-national action research project. Loughborough University. Conference contribution. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/2134/23681. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Demaidi, & Al-Sahili 2021Demaidi, Mona N., & Al-Sahili, Khaled (2021). Integrating SDGs in higher education – Case of climate change awareness and gender equality in a developing country according to RMEI-TARGET strategy. Sustainability, 13(6), 3101. doi:10.3390/SU13063101
Duch, Zeng, Sales-Pardo, Radicchi, Otis, Woodruff, & Nunes Amaral 2012Duch, Jordi, Zeng, Xiao Han T., Sales-Pardo, Marta, Radicchi, Filippo, Otis, Shayna, Woodruff, Teresa K., & Nunes Amaral, Luís A. (2012). The possible role of resource requirements and academic career-choice risk on gender differences in publication rate and impact. PLOS One, 7, e51332. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0051332
Eagly 2020Eagly, Alice H. (2020). Do the social roles that women and men occupy in science allow equal access to publication? PNAS, 117(11), 5553–5555. doi:10.1073/pnas.2001684117
EIGE (European Institute for Gender Equality) 2016EIGE (European Institute for Gender Equality). (2016). Promoting gender equality in academia and research institutions. Luxembourg: European Institute for Gender Equality. doi:10.2839/384762
Ertl, Luttenberger, & Paechter 2017Ertl, Bernhard, Luttenberger, Silke, & Paechter, Manuela (2017). The impact of gender stereotypes on the self-concept of female students in STEM subjects with an under-representation of females. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 703. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00703
Ginther, & Kahn 2014Ginther, Donna K., & Kahn, Shulamit (2014). Academic women’s careers in the social sciences: Progress, pitfalls and plateaus. In Alessandro Lanteri & Jack Vromen (Eds.), The economics of economists: Institutional setting, individual incentives, and future prospects (pp. 285–315). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holmberg, & Robèrt 2000Holmberg, John, & Robèrt, Karl-Henrik (2000). Backcasting: A framework for strategic planning. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 7(4), 291–308. doi:10.1080/13504500009470049
Huang, Gates, Sinatra, & Barabási 2020Huang, Junming, Gates, Alexander J., Sinatra, Roberta, & Barabási, Albert-László (2020). Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines. PNAS, 117(9), 4609–4616. doi:10.1073/pnas.1914221117
Karp 2005Karp, Tom (2005). An action theory of transformative processes. Journal of Change Management, 5(2), 153–175. doi:10.1080/14697010500124134
Kothari, Rudman, Dobbins, Rouse, Sibbald, & Edwards 2012Kothari, Anita, Rudman, Debbie, Dobbins, Maureen, Rouse, Michael, Sibbald, Shannon, & Edwards, Nancy (2012). The use of tacit and explicit knowledge in public health: A qualitative study. Implementation Science, 7, 20. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-7-20
Lave, & Wenger 1991Lave, Jean, & Wenger, Etienne (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Li, Grimshaw, Nielsen, Judd, Coyte, & Graham 2009Li, Linda C., Grimshaw, Jeremy M., Nielsen, Camilla, Judd, Maria, Coyte, Peter C., & Graham, Ian D. (2009). Evolution of Wenger’s concept of community of practice. Implementation Science, 4, 11. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-11
Linkova 2019Linkova, Marcela (2019). Gender equality in R&I: 20 years of EU activities and still a long way to go. Brussels: European Universities Association. Retrieved from https://eua.eu/resources/expert-voices/87:gender-equality-in-r-i-20-years-of-eu-activities-and-still-a-long-way-to-go.html. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Loots, & Walker 2016Loots, Sonja, & Walker, Melanie (2016). A capabilities-based gender equality policy for higher education: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 17(2), 260–277. doi:10.1080/19452829.2015.1076777
López-Iñesta, Botella, Rueda, Forte, & Marzal 2020López-Iñesta, Emilia, Botella, Carmen, Rueda, Silvia, Forte, Anabel, & Marzal, Paula (2020). Towards breaking the gender gap in Science, technology, engineering and mathematics. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 15(3), 233–241. doi:10.1109/rita.2020.3008114
Makarova, Aeschlimann, & Herzog 2019Makarova, Elena, Aeschlimann, Belinda, & Herzog, Walter (2019). The gender gap in STEM fields: The impact of the gender stereotype of math and science on secondary students’ career aspirations. Frontiers in Education, 10(60). doi:10.3389/feduc.2019.00060
Mason, Wolfinger, & Goulden 2013Mason, Mary Ann, Wolfinger, Nicholas H., & Goulden, Marc (2013). Do babies matter? Gender and family in the ivory tower. Newark, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Mohajan 2017Mohajan, Haradhan (2017). Roles of communities of practice for the development of the society. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 6(3), 27–46. Retrieved from https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/82954/1/MPRA_paper_82954.pdf. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Norman, & Huerta 2006Norman, Cameron, & Huerta, Tim (2006). Knowledge transfer & exchange through social networks: Building foundations for a community of practice within tobacco control. Implementation Science, 1(20), 1012. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-1-20
Palmén, Caprile, Panadès, Riesco, Pollitzer, & Vikenburg 2019Palmén, Rachel, Caprile, Maria, Panadès, Rosa, Riesco, Julia, Pollitzer, Elizabeth, & Vikenburg, Claartje (2019). Conceptual framework. Deliverable D1.1 Horizon 2020 – Science with and for Society (SwafS-2017-1). Retrieved from https://www.genderportal.eu/sites/default/files/resource_pool/act_d1.1_conceptualframework_08feb2019_submitted_1.pdf. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Reinholz, & Andrews 2020Reinholz, Daniel L., & Andrews, Tessa C. (2020). Change theory and theory of change: What’s the difference anyway? International Journal of STEM Education, 7, 2. doi:10.1186/s40594-020-0202-3
Salvioni, Franzoni, & Cassano 2017Salvioni, Daniela, Franzoni, Simona, & Cassano, Raffaella (2017). Sustainability in the higher education system: An opportunity to improve quality and image. Sustainability, 9(6), 914. doi:10.3390/su9060914
Sánchez Milara, Pitkänen, Laru, Iwata, Cortés Orduña, & Riekki 2020Sánchez Milara, Iván, Pitkänen, Kati, Laru, Jari, Iwata, Megumi, Cortés Orduña, Marta, & Riekki, Jukka (2020). STEAM in Oulu: Scaffolding the development of a community of practice for local educators around STEAM and digital fabrication. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 26, 100197. doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2020.100197
Savaya, & Gardner 2012Savaya, Riki, & Gardner, Fiona (2012). Critical reflection to identify gaps between espoused theory. Social Work, 57(2), 145–154. doi:10.1093/sw/sws037
Silbey 2016Silbey, Susan S. (2016). Why do so many women who study engineering leave the field? Harvard Business Review Home. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2016/08/why-do-so-many-women-who-study-engineering-leave-the-field. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Steins, Veraart, Klostermann, & Poelman 2021Steins, Nathalie A., Veraart, Jeroen A., Klostermann, Judith E., & Poelman, Marnix (2021). Combining offshore wind farms, nature conservation and seafood: Lessons from a Dutch community of practice. Marine Policy, 126, 104371. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104371
Tikly, Vogel, & Kurvers 2020Tikly, Leon, Vogel, Epke, & Kurvers, Carmen (2020). Boosting gender equality in science and technology: A challenge for TVET programmes and careers. Paris: UNESCO and UNESCO-UNEVOC International Centre for Technical and Vocational Education and Training. Retrieved from https://unevoc.unesco.org/home/UNEVOC+Publications/lang=en/akt=detail/qs=6430. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) 2020UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2020). Human development report 2020. The next frontier-human development and the anthropocene. New York, NY: United Nations Development Programme. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr_2020_overview_english.pdf. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Unterhalter 2019Unterhalter, Elaine (2019). Achieving gender equality in and through education. A Knowledge and Innovation Exchange (KIX) Discussion Paper. Global Partnership for Education. Retrieved from https://www.globalpartnership.org/sites/default/files/2019-07-kix-gender-final-english.pdf. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Wenger 1998Wenger, Etienne (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder 2002Wenger, Etienne, McDermott, Richard Arnold, & Snyder, William M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Wenger-Trayner, & Wenger-Trayner 2015Wenger-Trayner, Etienne, & Wenger-Trayner, Beverly (2015). Communities of practice. A brief introduction. Retrieved from https://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/07-Brief-introduction-to-communities-of-practice.pdf. Accessed on November 08, 2021.
Zabaniotou 2020Zabaniotou, Anastasia (2020). Towards gender equality in Mediterranean Engineering Schools through networking, collaborative learning, synergies and commitment to SDGs: The RMEI approach. Journal of Global Transitions, 2, 4–15. doi:10.1016/j.glt.2019.12.001
Zabaniotou, Boukamel, & Tsirogianni 2021Zabaniotou, Anastasia, Boukamel, Oumaïma, & Tsirogianni, Aigli (2021). Network assessment: Design of a framework and indicators for monitoring and self-assessment of a customized gender equality plan in the Mediterranean Engineering Education context. Evaluation and Program Planning, 87, 101932. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101932
Zabaniotou, Pritsa, & Kyriakou 2021Zabaniotou, Anastasia, Pritsa, Anastasia, & Kyriakou, E.-A. (2021). Observational evidence of the need for gender-sensitive approaches to wildfires locally and globally: Case study of 2018 wildfire in Mati, Greece. Sustainability, 13(3), 1556. doi:10.3390/su13031556
Žalėnienė, Krinickienė, Tvaronavičienė, & Lobačevskytė 2016Žalėnienė, Inga, Krinickienė, Eglė, Tvaronavičienė, Agnė, & Lobačevskytė, Agneta (2016). Gender equality and its implementation in Universities of Lithuania. Economics and Sociology, 9(1), 237–251. doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2016/9-1/16
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge all participants and stakeholders of the RMEI CoP.
- Prelims
- Introduction
- Part I: Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
- Chapter 1: A Reflexive Approach to Structural Change
- Chapter 2: Relevance of Monitoring for a Reflexive Gender Equality Policy
- Chapter 3: Relevance of a CoP for a Reflexive Gender Equality Policy: A Structural Change Approach
- Part II: Substantive Issues of a Reflexive Gender Equality Policy
- Chapter 4: EU Policy and Gender Mainstreaming in Research and Higher Education: How Well Does it Travel from North to South?
- Chapter 5: Community of Practice for Gender Equality in the Network of Mediterranean Engineering Schools
- Chapter 6: Institutional Mechanisms for Combatting Sexual Harassment in Higher Education Institutions: The Case of the University of Belgrade
- Chapter 7: Promoting Gender Studies in Romania – Working in a Difficult Context
- Chapter 8: Incorporating the Gender Perspective in Engineering Curricula: The Case of École Centrale Marseille
- Part III: Experiences with Implementation of the Target Approach in RPOs and RFOs
- Chapter 9: Structural Change Towards Gender Equality: Learning from Bottom-up and Top-down Experiences of GEP Implementation in Universities
- Chapter 10: Promoting Structural Change in Small Organisations: Strengths, Resistance and the Quest for Excellence
- Conclusions
- Index