1 periodic report hypatia - expect everything · d1.2 1st periodic report hypatia 2 table of...

D1.2 1st Periodic report Hypatia

1

1ST PERIODIC REPORT HYPATIA

Work package

number:

WP1

Report number: 1

Contributors: Aliki Giannakopoulou, Meie van Laar

Institutions: NEMO SCIENCE MUSEUM

Revision Date: 25/07/2016

Status: Final


2

Table of Contents

SUMMARY 3

WORK PROGRESS- GENERAL OVERVIEW 4

WORK PROGRESS- DIVIDED IN WORK PACKAGES 6

WP1 – MANAGEMENT 6

OBJECTIVES AND MILESTONES 6

PROGRESS TOWARDS OBJECTIVES– TASKS COMPLETED/ISSUES RAISED 6

DELIVERABLES SUBMITTED 11

WP2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 11




WP3 HUB COORDINATION AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 14




WP4 TOOLKIT DEVELOPMENT 19




WP5 TOOLKIT IMPLEMENTATION 22




WP6 DISSEMINATION 22




WP7 ETHICS REQUIREMENTS 31



DELIVERABLES OVERVIEW 32

MILESTONES OVERVIEW 33

USE OF RESOURCES 33

OVERVIEW OF ELIGIBLE COSTS 33

OVERVIEW OF PROGRESS PER WP 34


3

Summary

The Hypatia project was launched on August 1st. Hypatia addresses the challenge of bringing

more teenagers into STEM related careers. The project aims to communicate sciences to young

people in a more gender inclusive way. In order to achieve this we are involving schools, industry,

science centres and museums, policy makers and teenagers directly. To do so, the project will

produce a toolkit, work around national hubs and organise a series of events. The project is also

producing a campaign targeting teenagers all around Europe. Called “Expect Everything”, it

builds on the results achieved by the campaign Science it’s a Girl Thing.

The Hypatia National hubs are led by science centres and museums, they are located in 14

countries: Austria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Poland, Serbia, Spain,

Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK. Their main aim is to organize a series of events for

teachers, head teachers and teenagers and will translate, adapt and implement Hypatia’s

modules. Their goal is to link representatives of industries, teachers, policy makers and

teenagers and strengthen the interaction among the stakeholders and disseminate the Hypatia

digital toolkit on a national level.

Hypatia will also produce an accessible, practical and ready-to-use digital collection of modules

aimed at teenagers that will be used by teachers, informal learning organisations, researchers

and industry. The modules produced by Hypatia will have a central focus on gender-inclusive

ways of communicating STEM, empowering teenagers and exploring the range of skills that are

needed for a great variety of STEM studies and careers open to young people. The Hypatia hubs

will provide a sustainable basis for these activities to be carried out on the long term, with a

focus on dissemination through networks and stakeholder engagement allowing the project

impact to multiply.

Finally events will take place in science centres and museums in 14 countries and will be

specifically focus on engaging teenagers in a variety of future careers related to science. Other

events dedicated to teachers and head teachers will be organized. Besides putting forward new

events and activities based on the project tools, hubs will adapted existing events, making use of

the toolkit and improving the extent to which these events address issues on gender.

This current document reports the main activities undertaken by the project in its first year from

August 2015 to July 2016.

For the period August 2015- April 2016 partners were asked and have delivered their input for

the preparation of an Internal report that gave information both on their content contribution and

their financial spending on the project. The internal report produced was used as means for

internal monitoring of the project. This process gave valuable feedback to the coordinator and

assistance to the partners to ensure WPs are developing well and in good cooperation, budget is

spent in a correct way and so on. The main objective of that report as well of this current one that

includes content updates of the additional three months ( May 2016-July 2016) is to identify

mistakes and difficulties partners are facing in the project so far in order to avoid future

problems for the elaboration of the 1st periodic report , which will be submitted to the European

Commission until Month 17 (December 2016) that will cover the period ( M1-M15) ( August

2015 – October 2016) .


4

This document has been divided in three parts:

Work Progress ( Outline of the tasks undertaken by the partners during this period)

List of deliverables produced and milestones achieved so far

Use of Resources spent in the first 9 months of the project ( personnel time and direct

costs)

Work Progress- General overview

From the beginning of the first year of Hypatia NEMO as coordinator and WP1 leader was

responsible to set up the coordination and management mechanisms of the project. One of the

first tasks completed was the production of a Quality and Assurance plan ( D1.1) , this document

detailed the mechanisms for managing the interaction between the beneficiaries during the work

execution; gave details on how and when the project documentation has to be exchanged within

the beneficiaries and in relation to the European Commission; proposed mechanisms for

ensuring the consistent progress of the work, on a regular basis and set up the editorial

standards for project document contents. The first consortium meeting was held in Amsterdam in

the beginning of month 4 of the project from November 2-4 in the premises of NEMO Science

Museum and the 2nd Consortium meeting was held in Brussels on the 28-30 June 2016 on

month 11th of the project. In the meantime Online Management team meetings were held every

two months since the kick off meeting. The coordinator was in charge of selecting the external

evaluator of the project, setting up a call on Month 1, signing up a contract with the selected

partner, de Montfort University in the UK on the 20th of October 2015. WP1 has also produced an

internal report for Hypatia M1-M9 and this current report overlooking the first year of the project.

As soon as the project begun and in order to prepare the ground for the production of the Hypatia

Toolkit, UCPH as leader of WP2 began setting up the project theoretical framework. The first

action they took in as WP leaders was to work on the criteria of what makes an activity gender-

inclusive. UCPH set up a Gender Panel, a board of gender experts that would provide feedback in

several elements of the project including this list of criteria. During the kick off meeting in

Amsterdam that was attended by both main partners and third parties the WP2 leader gave a

workshop on gender inclusion to all partners using the criteria developed in D2.1. UCPH collected

a list of activities from all partners in order to create a pull of activities to select the basis of the

modules for WP4 and made an analysis of them. During this first year it also produced a report of

the relations between gender and STEM education in the 14 European countries participating in

the project getting input from both partners and other resources (D2.3). Additional the original

foreseen tasks and in order to ensure a good cooperation between WP2 and WP3 an extra

meeting was held in December 2015 between UCPH, MUST and NEMO. The purpose of this

meeting was to link the D2.2 outcomes with the first task of WP4, the development of the first

modules.

As soon as the project begun, WP3 leader begun by finalising the members of the Advisory Board

committee (D3.1). During the kick off meeting in Amsterdam, the Advisory Board came together,

met the project partners and held a meeting in order to set up clear roles and responsibilities

during the project. Bloomfield Science Museum also produced a guide plan for partners on how

to set up their National Hubs. The plan included information about how they should establish

their Hub (how to map relevant stakeholders, recruit them etc), guidelines on how to


5

administrate the Hub ( information about how to communicate with their members , how they

could set up the youth panels in each country etc) and information about the Launch events the

main partners would be holding and the general support they would provide as leaders of this

task. Beginning in May 2016 and lasting until June 2016 all main partners held their National

Hub launches attracting a number of stakeholders in each country and attention.

Already from the 3rd month of the project the leader of WP4 that deals with the development of

the toolkit, made their first plan about the mechanism the selection of the activities for the

modules will be implementing. On month 5, December 2015, a meeting was held as mentioned

above with WP2 leader and the coordinator in order to set up the model of selection of the

activities that will create the basis of the modules from the initial big pull of activities collected by

WP2. MUST as WP leader with the collaboration of all main partners selected then the basis for

the first 15 modules D4.1 ( 5 for schools, 5 for industries, 5 for museums) and allocated to each

partner 6 modules they would be piloting, the piloting of the modules has now begun and will be

taking place until month 14 of the project.

Even though the tasks of WP5 are only beginning officially on month 19, WP leader has already

presented a first set of ideas to the partners and shared idea and received feedback from

partners during the second Consortium meeting in Brussels about the format of the Hypatia

Seminars and the selection of the modules for all partners during the large implementation

phase of the project. It has also been agreed that an extra meeting will be held in October 2016

between WP4 leader, WP5 leader and the coordinator in order to agree on the mechanism of

allocation of the modules to each project main partner and third party.

WP6 plays a major part in Hypatia. This WP leads the dissemination of the project to the relevant

stakeholders (institutional campaign) and the development of the Campaign that follows up the

legacy of ‘Science it’s a girl thing’ Campaign of the European Commission. As soon as the project

was launched Ecsite lead the elaboration of the dissemination strategy. A designer company,

Hyperbrow, was hired to create the branding image of both campaigns and the website and all

partners were involved in a collaborative process in coming up with key messages and input for

dissemination. Teenagers themselves in Netherlands and Ireland were involved in the process

giving their input on the proposed campaign. The campaign for teenagers ( ExpectEverything) and

project website were launched eventually in April 2016, on month 9 of the project. Ecsite took

over the management of the Facebook group of the Science it’s a girl thing campaign and

produced several dissemination tools such as press releases, factsheets , newsletter, and so on.

On month 11 of the project ( 30th june 2016) it was held in Brussels, the European stakeholders

Event of Hypatia with great success, attracting 64 key stakeholders from the industry sector

,policy makers and museum representatives. An interesting element of the dissemination of the

project is the fact that it has been decided that all museum partners will be leading the setting

up of Youth Panel editorial boards. These panels consisting of teenagers will be responsible each

month for the production of content for the project dissemination channels ( videos, blogs,

articles, interviews etc). This process begun already in May 2016 and Netherlands produced the

first content.


6

As this first period is coming to an end, the project is moving ahead towards a very active period

with tasks in the coming months including:

Piloting of Hypatia Modules

Production of the first version of the toolkit to be posted on the Hypatia website

National Seminars for head teachers in 14 countries

Work Progress- divided in Work packages

WP1 – Management

Objectives and Milestones

To set-up the management infrastructure (quality plan, procedures, risk, project

management tools, internal web site

To provide financial and contractual management of the consortium, including

maintenance of the Consortium Agreement, follow-up of contractual obligations

(contractual reporting, deliverable issuing, monitoring of resources

To coordinate an independent evaluation which assesses the running of the project, the

achievement of its objectives and its impact, reflecting a cross section of materials,

activities, relationships, experiences and educational outcomes and the viewpoints of all

the key stakeholders.

To manage the participation of the nine Third Parties in the project.

Progress towards objectives– tasks completed/issues raised

T1.1 Project Coordination

Leader: NEMO

Quality control

NEMO produced a quality and assurance plan (D1.1) that was shared with the project partners

during the kick off project meeting. The plan is one of the project deliverables submitted to the

European Commission and has in extensive details information related to the management of

the project, the reporting and financial issues. The plan has been since then shared on

basecamp the internal communication channel of the project.

Maintain and monitor the work plan


7

Distributing partner shares according to consortium agreement agreed rules, providing

financial helpdesk services, establishing and maintaining financial records, etc.

NEMO first and then all project partners signed the Grant Agreement with the European

Commission following a number of adjustments and corrections from the initial proposal in

August 2015.

A Consortium Agreement that was prepared by NEMO was also signed by all partners and third

parties on the same time.

Ecsite prepared and circulated a Third Parties Agreement for all the third parties. All third parties

signed these contracts.

NEMO transferred the pre financing amount that received from the European Commission to all

the partners. NEMO begun the procedure in August 2015 as soon as the amount was received

and following some questions, clarifications and doubts all amount were transferred to the

partners within a month time.

Organise project launch: establish procedures, project management methods and tools (project

management plan, quality plan, risk register, indicators); prepare project kick-off meeting,

A Kick off meeting took place in Amsterdam from the 2-4 November 2015. At this meeting

representatives of all main partners and third parties took place. During the three days, the

project plan was explained in detail, WP leaders had the chance to share their plans, concerns,

ideas for the coming months. UCPH as WP2 leader had also the time to organise a workshop as

will be described in more detail under WP2. A physical advisory board meeting also took place at

the end of this meeting.

Organise periodic project consortium meetings for project progress review, decision making and

conflict resolution (Management team meetings)

A Management team meeting has been taking place every two months since the kick off meeting

of the project. One representative at least from each Work package leader takes part in this

meeting where issues are raised and progress is monitored.

More specifically following the kick off meeting in November 2015 the following Management

team meetings have taken place:

- 28/01/2016

- 31/03/2016

- 02/06/2016

- 29/06/2016

Further than the management team meetings, skype calls have been organised with WP leaders

and NEMO in regular basis to monitor progress of the specific work packages more in detail.

During the last Management team meeting on 29th of June, it was decided that Universcience

would join the team meetings even though they are not WP leaders in the project. This way as the


8

only remaining main partner science museum in the project will be able to be better connected

with the project developments and decisions.

Co-ordinate timely production of deliverables

All deliverables of the period M1-M12 have been submitted to the European Commission. A

procedure was set in order to ensure the quality of the deliverables in which always NEMO and

one more main partner would review the document before it was officially submitted. Some

deliverables were submitted with a delay of a month from the original day as the time allocated

for their preparation was very tight. .

kplan,

according to milestones, indicators and contractual commitments,

contractual documents (Project programme, Consortium Agreement)

NEMO has circulated all relevant documents to the project partners, has uploaded them on the

internal communication website ( basecamp) and maintains all copies of financial documents

within the financial department of the museum.

internal and contractual periodic reporting

Information about the reporting procedures has been circulated by NEMO already from the kick

off meeting. The Quality and assurance plan has given in detail all information related to

reporting and partners received templates and instructions for reporting almost 2 months before

initial deadline. Collection of information has been running overall smoothly with some small

delays by some partners for the internal reporting. Lessons learned will be used for the 15th

months interim reporting procedure.

Status : this task has been taking place without deviations from original planning

T1.2 Risk and Quality Management

Leader: NEMO

A risks plan has been part of the Quality and Assurance plan that was shared with all partners on

month 3 of the proejct. The plan is regularly reviewed during physical consortium meetings and

any actions needed to be undertaken are reviewed and agreed upon. The progress of the project

is monitored via a series of documentations ( deliverables, minutes of meetings) and the internal

reports in addition to the periodic reports the project is foreseen to deliver.

The Internal report that was produced in the project for the period M1-M9 identified some issues

that the Coordinator had to pay special attention to. More specifically:

Submitting of deliverables on time: Ensuring that all partners, complete their tasks on time and

do not lose track of their responsibilities has been one of the biggest challenges. During this first


9

period a number of deliverables were submitted with smaller or bigger delay with maximum one

month delay deriving from the original plan. The coordinator had already set the Q&A plan, the

internal website and online meetings in order to ensure the completion of tasks but as this task

emerged extra measures needed to be taken in order to avoid delays in delivery.

Action: It was decided that the coordinator will look ahead in upcoming deliverables and related

milestones and foresee together with the partners responsible what specific issues may arise.

Together a specific action plan per wp will be made and additional cooperation actions among

wps will take place ( see for example extra meeting between WP4-5 Leaders to be organised in

October 2016).

Management of third parties. A number of third parties requested for an updated list of the

upcoming deadlines for activities and reporting due for Third Parties so that these partners can

plan for these well in advance.

Action: Ecsite organised skype calls with every third party in July 2016 to see individual issues

and update them on the project progress and expected tasks. Ecsite produced a new document

with deadlines and milestones for third parties for the 2nd year of the project.

Role of the partners. As some of the project partners are not involved in European projects in a

regular basis ( see Industry partners for example), it was identified a need for each of the

partner’s task to be clearly explained by the coordinator and WP leader well in advance.

Responsibilities and expectations need to be reminded and monitored very often.

Action: NEMO to produce action list specifically for the industry partners and keep them more

closely updated regarding their tasks and responsibilities

Internal website: Navigation on the internal website has been challenging for some partners

finding difficult to keep up with messages from the project.

Action: prioritising information in the coming months in the project internal portal will be

important for the good management of the project. NEMO agreed following the second

consortium meeting to clean up BASECAMP from drafts of documents and collect and archive

them in zip files. Each WP leader has agreed to take responsibility to keep their folder clean and

up to date.

Translations: as most of the information on both Hypatia and EE websites is currently available

only in English there is foreseen an issue with especially teachers from different countries that

expect to receive as much information possible in their own languages.

Action: the project has already foreseen that modules will be translated in local language.

Additionally to this it was decided that Ecsite will create for the toolkit webpage only, language

specific pages. In this case this page’s main text will also be translated in 14 countries and

partners will have access to their local page in order to disseminate it to teachers and other

stakeholders directly and avoid language issues that may arise.



10

Task 1.3 Coordinating of External Evaluator

Leader: NEMO

On the 28th of August 2015 NEMO made a call for the external evaluator of the project. 5

complete entries were received and NEMO in consultation with two more partners ( UCPH and

MUST) selected the subcontractor ( De Montfort University in Leicester). The evaluator

participated in the kick off meeting of the project laying down the evaluation plan and has

submitted a first more detailed strategy of the evaluation of the project in December 2015. In

July 2016 the evaluator begun implementing the strategy with interviews with project partners (

one interview took place with MUST, WP4 leader) in July 2016.


Task 1.4 Coordination of third parties

Leader: Ecsite

At the start of the project Ecsite coordinated all the administrative procedures that led to the

signature of the contracts between Ecsite and all the third parties. Following this, and before the

kick off meeting, the project manager scheduled 9 calls (one with each third party) to inform

them and to give more information about the project, answering possible administrative and

technical questions and in general introducing the project. During these months, Ecsite has sent

reminders to the third parties for them to identify the precise legal and ethical requirements of

the project in each country making sure that they delivered on time. Finally, Ecsite made sure

that all of the third parties gave in on time its input for WP2 leaders to make their report on the

state of the art of how gender inclusively STEM is communicated in the 14 countries of the

project. Following the second consortium meeting in June 2016, Ecsite begun a series of calls

with third parties and the preparation of a document for them in order to collect information

about tasks completed in the project so far and tasks foreseen in the project for them in the

coming months. The involvement of the third parties becomes more significant once WP5 comes

into action.


Task 1.5 Ethical Management

Leader: NEMO

The coordinator made sure that all the museums partners ( including third parties) identified the

precise legal and ethical requirements for the project in each country and obtained the necessary

approvals before month 8 of the project :

a. ethical approvals by the competent local/national Ethics Committees

b. ethical approvals by the national data protection laws

The coordinator reviewed the standards and guidelines of Horizon 2020 regarding ethical issues

in order to prepare the templates and instructions of the partners. The deliverable corresponding


11

to this task has been enriched according to the European Commission’s recommendation with 7

more deliverables as part of a new WP dedicated on ethics WP7

Deliverables submitted

D1.1 Project management and quality assurance manual

D1.2 the present document, first periodic report

WP2 Theoretical Framework


To ensure the work of the project is in line with the latest European research on how to

ensure STEM in communicated in a gender-inclusive way

To define criteria as to what makes a STEM engagement activity for teenagers gender-

inclusive

To select existing European gender-inclusive good practices and guidelines on engaging

teenagers in STEM

To report on the state of the art of how gender-inclusively STEM is communicated in the

14 countries of the project

To establish institutional communication guidelines for schools, museums, research

institutions and industry to ensure they communicate STEM in a gender-inclusive way


Task 2.1 Criteria for gender inclusion

Leader: UCPH

Partners: NEMO-NCWT, MNST DA VINCI, BSMJ, AEESTI / Ecsite, Experimentarium, EPPDCSI,

BUREAUQ BV, PPG Europe, L'OREAL Foundation

The first task in WP2 was the development of a set of criteria for gender inclusion that were

based on Hypatia’s theoretical framework for gender, and operational with respect to its target

institutions: Museums and science centres, schools, research institutions, and industry. UCPH

developed these criteria in M1-M3, and presented their framework at the Consortium Workshop

in Amsterdam in November 2015. The feedback they received through the workshop from the

partners and the feedback they received from the project’s Gender Panel helped the WP leader

to finalise the criteria as Deliverable D2.1. The criteria are bringing out very interesting concepts

related to gender inclusion, science and science education. In spite of its image as being

objective and unbiased, the gendering of science according to the report of UCPH has been on-

going since its early origins. A number of studies show that gender has influenced the production

of scientific knowledge at multiple levels through history. Instead of transcending sexual

differences, the ideals of science have thus effectively helped to establish them. Another

interesting concept elaborated in the criteria is Tt assumption that girls and boys belong to


12

distinct, internally homogeneous groups based on their biological sex . This according to the D2.1

‘creates a stereotype of girls and boys that fits no one in particular. The assumption that sex

equals gender is increasingly being challenged. These are a few of the basic concepts that were

brought out in this document that created the basis of a number of actions within Hypatia. It has

also been decided to decipher the findings of this deliverable into guidelines and useful

factsheets for Industries and policy makers interested in the topic of gender inclusion.


Task 2.2: Consortium Workshop on Gender Inclusion

Leader: UCPH

At the Consortium Workshop in Amsterdam in November 3, 2015, UCPH shared their findings on

the developed framework, and engaged the partners and third party participants in a workshop

to analyse three cases of science education activities, set in a museum, an industrial setting, and

a research institution setting, respectively. This workshop gave them valuable feedback for

finalising Deliverable 2.1 and introduced the Hypatia partners to the Hypatia theoretical

framework.

Figure 1: Marianne Achiam during Workshop on gender inclusion in Amsterdam


Task 2.3: Collection of Existing Activities and Guidelines

Leader: UCPH

Participants: NEMO, MUST, BSMJ, EXP, UNIV, PPG, L’OREAL, Third Parties]

Task 2.3 consisted of the collection of science education activities that represent good practices

for bringing gender into the way STEM is communicated. Using an online survey, UCPH collected


13

49 science education activities from the Partners or Third Parties from Hypatia’s 14 European

countries. The activities were summarised in terms of stakeholder involvement, content, format,

and intended audience. The activities were then analysed in terms of the gender inclusion

framework. This analysis allowed them to identify good practices for each of the ten identified

activity formats. The complete, categorised list of activities was delivered to Work Package 4

leader (MUST) together with a guideline on how the activities constituted good practices and

further points for consideration (Deliverable 2.2) at the end of M5. A physical workshop also took

place that month so that UCPH could elaborate with MUST on their findings and ensure the

communication among the partners was sufficient.


Task 2.4 State of the Art in Gender

Leader: UCPH

Participants: NEMO, MUST, BSMJ, EXP, UNIV,PPG, L’OREAL, Third Parties

Task 2.4 consisted of a mapping of how gender is addressed in the current STEM curricula in 14

EU countries, in guidelines teachers and head teachers receive on how to approach the topic of

gender in classrooms, and in national structures to guide inclusive STEM education in schools,

museums and science centres, research institutions, and industry. UCPH collected a total of 41

documents of three types: 22 primary documents that directly prescribe the content of science

education (national science curricula), 15 secondary documents that address the ways in which

science education is carried out in practice (such as guidelines for teachers), and finally, 4

tertiary documents that report on the status of gender and science education across nations or

regions (such as EU reports). What was found was significant gender polarisation in the

curriculum documents, and a relative scarcity of guidelines or teachers and other educators on

how to conduct gender-inclusive teaching. This indicates that there is work yet to be done to

make science education gender inclusive across Europe. However, the findings (presented in

Deliverable 2.3) may be subject to change over time, as Hypatia’s knowledge- sharing network

becomes better.


Task 2.5 Institutional communication guideline development

Leader: UCPH

Participants: BUREAUQ, NEMO, MUST, BSMJ, EXPT, UNIV, PPG, L’OREAL, Third Parties

This task will begin in month 24 of the project; nevertheless the project consortium is already

beginning to think how what has been developed by the above tasks and will eventually feed in

these guidelines will be disseminated in the most effective way possible.


D2.1 Criteria for gender inclusion


14

D2.2 Set of existing good practices on gender inclusion in STEM communication

D2.3 State of the art report on gender in STEM

WP3 Hub Coordination and Stakeholder Engagement


To establish and coordinate local Hubs that will support the project’s activities;

To establish and coordinate a European Advisory Board to feed into the project;

To ensure stakeholders are engaged at all stages of the project and mobilised in order to

implement the project activities.


Task 3.1 European Advisory Board

Leader: BMSJ

Participants: NEMO, ECSITE, PPG, L’OREAL

BMSJ has developed a detailed description of the European Advisory Board, with input from the

board following a physical meeting in Amsterdam during the kick off of the project. The European

Advisory Board consists of a great mix of representatives ranging from Industry, policy makers,

the European head teachers association. The roles of the committee members as well as the

details regarding the management of this board are submitted as deliverable D3.1.. The input

the Board has given has assisted the project in several aspects such as the preparation of the

European Stakeholders Event, the establishment of the local hubs, the dissemination material of

the project and so on.

The WP leader has been responsible for planning the agenda and coordinating 4 AB meetings so

far:

1st- during the KOM- face to face on 4/11/15

2nd skype meeting on 15/12/15

3rd teleconference meeting on 15/2/16

4th teleconference meeting on 2/5/16

5th Physical meeting during the second consortium meeting on 29/6/16

Status: There has been a change in one of the Advisory Board members. Jean Pierre Alix from

Euroscience has been replaced by Anne Sophie Godfroy from the Sorbonne University.

Task 3.2 Strategic plan for local/national stakeholder engagement


15

Leader: BMSJ

Participants: NEMO, MUST, EXP, UNIV, PPG, L’OREAL

BMSJ has developed a strategic plan for stakeholders engagement with input from the Advisory

Board members and disseminated a template to all partners for monitoring the Hubs activities in

all science museums partners (deliverable D3.2. ). The plan includes guidance to the partners on

how they can establish their own hub and on how they could run it during the project lifetime. It

includes guidelines and information related to the launch hub events for the main partners and

more details regarding the supporting mechanism the WP leader will provide to all partners and

the reporting procedures they will need to respect.

Status : this task has taken place without deviations from original planning

Task 3.3 Hub management

All main partners have set up the teams that consist of their Hub committees and begun in

month 9 launching their Hubs. The Launch events were completed by all partners by month 10 of

the project.

For these reason and under the guidelines provided by BMSJ Project meetings dealing with the

Hub establishment and the launch event took place in main project partners, partnerships are

being built with ( Ministries of Education (MoE) and with the Ministry of Science and Technology

(MoST), industries, etc).

In addition to the Hubs special youth panels have been setting up in all main partners.

Recruitment strategies have been proposed by WP leader in order to recruit participants in the

youth panels. The third parties have begun this task of building their youth panel on month 9 of

the project. Ecsite has set up together with Bloomfield a monitoring procedure for their work as

the youth panels offer input for the dissemination of the project too. NEMO has been the host of

the first youth panel that has offered input to the project and social media in June 2016.


16

Figure 2: The youth editorial board of Science Museum NEMO

The Internal report that was produced in the project for the period M1-M9 identified some issues

related to the Hubs management that WP leader had to pay special attention to. More

specifically:

Engaging all stakeholders during the Hub creation: One partner reported some difficulties in

engaging commercial companies as part of their national hub.

Action: In order to solve this challenge the partner has foreseen for this reason a special

recruitment advertisement for partners on their website. This process will be shared with the

other partners that might face similar issues.

Teenagers participation in youth boards: The participation of the youth panel was noted by some

partners as one of the most important tasks in the project but also a very challenging task to

complete. ( time schedules, ages, commitment, etc) . Teenagers involvement needs a lot of

dedicated time but their feedback has proven to be very useful.

Action: Partners agreed to share more their strategies on recruiting teenagers and NEMO that

was the partner that first created the youth panel agreed to assist the partners taking over.

Hubs management developments: . A lot of information on this is already shared on Basecamp

but it is often lost and “drawn” among all the other stuff there

Action: Providing the hubs as well as our organizations internally with updates on the progress of

the project internationally could strengthen the interest and engagement of the project. It was

agreed to discuss in the coming consortium meeting whether there is a need of a more concise

strategy on sharing these news among the partners.


17

Status: this task has been taking place without deviations from original planning

Task 3.4 National launch event

Leader: BSMJ

Participants: NEMO, MUST, EXP, UNIV, PPG, L’OREAL

All partners planned and held their National Launch events bringing together keynote speakers

and participants, organised and operated them and organised and operated the first meetings of

their youth panels. The Launch events were held in the following dates:

NEMO 12/05/2016

Figure 3: The Dutch Launch invitation sent by Science Museum NEMO

MUST: 27/06/2016


18

Figure 4: The Italian Launch invitation sent by MUST

BLOOMFIELD 11/04/2016

Figure 5: The Israeli Launch invitation sent by BLOOMFIELD


19

UNIVERSCIENCE 1/06/2016

Figure 6: The French Launch invitation sent by universcience

EXPERIMENTARIUM 26/04/2016

Status: this task took place without deviations from original planning


D3.1 European Advisory Board

D3.2 Strategic plan for stakeholder engagement

WP4 Toolkit Development


To adapt and develop the Hypatia good practices into a set of modules to be

implemented, complete with support material

To guarantee the feasibility, sustainability and impact of the activities and tools through

pilot and feedback phases


20


Task 4.1 Development of modules

Leader: MUST

Participants: NEMO, BSMJ, EXP,UNIVERSCIENCE

MUST as WP leader coordinated the modules development from all the museum partners and:

- developed and provided 3 modules templates for the 3 different contexts: museum,

school and industry/research institute

- supported the partners in choosing the activities to test and producing the descriptions

- collected, review, and commented in collaboration with UCPH and NEMO, all the activities

for the 3 contexts proposed by all the Hypatia partners.

- organized the implementation of the pilots.

Every museum promised to pilot their 3 proposed activities and 3 activities imported from

another museum in such structure:

o MUST proposes and pilots 3 activities, 1 for school, 1 for museum, one for

industry/research institutes. Moreover MUST pilots 1 activity for museum imported from NEMO,

1 activity for school and 1 activity for industry/research institutes imported from BMSJ.

o BMSJ proposes and pilots 3 activities, 1 for school, 1 for museum, one for

industry/research institutes. Moreover BMSJ pilots 1 activity for museum imported from MUST, 1

activity for school and 1 activity for industry/research institutes imported from NEMO.

o NEMO proposes and pilots 3 activities, 1 for school, 1 for museum, one for

industry/research institutes. Moreover NEMO pilots 1 activity for museum imported from BMSJ, 1

activity for school and 1 activity for industry/research institutes imported from MUST.

o UNIVERSCIENCE proposes and pilots 3 activities, 1 for school, 1 for museum, one for

industry/research institutes. Moreover UNIVERSCIENCE pilots 1 activity for museum, 1 activity for

school and 1 activity for industry/research institutes imported from EXPERIMENTARIUM.

o EXPERIMENTARIUM proposes and pilots 3 activities, 1 for school, 1 for museum, one for

industry/research institutes. Moreover UNIVERSCIENCE pilots 1 activity for museum, 1 activity for

school and 1 activity for industry/research institutes imported from UNIVERSCIENCE..

In order to support the implementation of the activities MUST developed and shared with the

partners 2 more guidelines about facilitation and gender inclusion to be added to the description

of the activities. The guidelines are aimed especially at companies and researchers with a low

experience in informal education, facilitation and gender inclusion who could implement the

activities in their own contexts. In general they are a valid support also for museum educators

and school teachers in supporting dialogue and gender inclusion. “Facilitation guidelines” are


21

aimed at supporting the discussions and experimental activity conduction. “Gender guidelines”

are aimed at facilitating gender inclusiveness in implementing the activities and sharing the

results deliverables of the WP 2 in the practice of the WP 4

MUST Prepared a piloting feedback system composed by an observation sheet, an activity

feedback form and the feedback instructions. All the materials are stored and shared on

basecamp. The WP leader produced the D 4.1, the description of the set of developed modules.


Task 4.2 Piloting of modules

MUST as leader of this task coordinated the piloting of modules of all the partners and monitored

the piloting calendar and the activity feedback system. In order to support efficiently the partners

MUST started immediately the pilot of their activities and shared with the others the results.

Besides specific notes and comments, in general the WP leader noticed common outcomes from

all the piloting information received so far such as:

Organizing the activities in a variety of modalities fostered an inclusive engagement and

participation of the teenagers, The concrete and direct presence of professionals had a strong

impact among the participants, Teenagers showed to be aware and reflective about gender issue

and stereotypes, although it happened that they reproduced some unbalanced gender visions in

comments or behaviour, in an implicit and indirect way.

The process of piloting of modules has been taking place in all countries and mostly completed

by month 12. Some partners have still some modules to test and arranged dates have been set

for September 2016 for the remaining ones.

Organisation for the pilots of the modules: Some partners faced challenges in finding

comfortable dates for testing especially the industry modules as it meant organising both the

testing for school classes in collaboration with industries.

Action: Partners shared tips and ideas on how to overcome these obstacles during the second

consortium meetings. Partners have until September 2016 to complete their pilots. Additional

guidelines especially for industry partners has been decided they will be developed ( this task will

be led by UCPH and NEMO) in order to assist in the involvement of industries.

Status: this task is taking place without deviations from original planning

Task 4.3 Production of the toolkit

This task is foreseen to begin on month 15. Nevertheless discussions on the layout of the toolkit

on the Hypatia website have already begun on month 9. Discussions that took place during the

consortium meeting on month 11 resulted with a plan for Ecsite to send a concrete proposal

about the presentation of the toolkit on the Hypatia website, and arranging of an extra meeting

between WP4-WP5 on October 2016.


22


D4.1 Set of developed modules

WP5 Toolkit Implementation


To adapt and roll out Hypatia activities into classrooms, science centres and museums,

research institutions and industries across Europe.

To establish a long-term ‘tradition’ of gender inclusion in STEM by making these part of

these institutions’ permanent provision across Europe.


Task 5.1 National selection and adaptation of modules

Not an activity for this report though discussion between WP5 leader, NEMO and WP4 leader

have already been taking place about the process of selection and adaptation of the modules.

Task 5.2 National seminars

Not an activity for this report though discussion has been taking place among all partners on this

and EXP conducted a workshop during the 2nd consortium meeting with main partners to discuss

about this topic.

Task 5.3 Implementation of toolkit activities

Not an activity for this report


No deliverables submitted during this period

WP6 Dissemination


To raise awareness of the project, its objectives, activities and outcomes, among

specified target groups of stakeholders and citizens.

To increase awareness of the importance of challenging gender stereotypes and to

develop recommendations as to ‘how this can be done’ – (to be developed)

To encourage target groups to take advantage of opportunities to participate in project

activities

To ensure a strong online presence for the project and its activities


23

To bring together stakeholders in formal and informal education, research, industry and

policy on a national level for seminars organised by the Hubs in each of the 14 countries

of the consortium

To advocate for the inclusion of gender issues in STEM outreach activities on a European

level

To support the sustainability of Hypatia tools and outcomes long after the project lifetime.


Task 6.1 Dissemination plan and campaign strategy

Lead: Ecsite

Participants: BQ

The plan developed by Ecsite in association with BureauQ describes the activities that will help

promote the outcomes of the project throughout the project. It describes target audiences, key

messages, branding, dissemination tools and dissemination materials as well as promotion

events that will be organised by science centres. It sets the guidelines to make the most efficient

use of the tools available to the consortium to disseminate and promote the project. It maps the

whole consortium and third parties means of communication and gives clues on how to use

them. It also provides the rationale behind the slogan “expect everything” and the branding.

Finally it outlines the action plan that will be undertaken during the life span of the project and

how the monitoring is going to be achieved. It is important pointing out that the project takes over

the legacy of the European Commission’s campaign, Science it’s a girl thing. The Dissemination

plan and campaign was a 6 months’ work that was finalised at the end of January 2016. The

campaign is supported by the combined work of the partners of the project as well as the third

parties

In parallel to the dissemination plan and campaign strategy, Ecsite also produced a sustainability

strategy that aims at ensuring that the outcomes of the project remain used and available after

the end of the project. This strategy has a twofold aim: to increase the scope of the outcome and

to use the partnerships that will be created during the life span of the project. To do so the

strategy is based on a strong communication plus the establishment of a network based on

community interests.

Status : this task took place without deviations from original planning

Task 6.2 Dissemination activities

Lead: Ecsite

Participants: BQ, NEMO, MUST, BSMJ, EXP, UNIV, COP, PPG, L’OREAL, Third Parties

The implementation of the dissemination plan is the core of this task. Ecsite oversees the

coordinated partners’ effort across Europe in order to ensure that the plan is implemented

correctly and as widely as possible, extending the project’s impact across all the relevant


24

networks of stakeholders. Ecsite gathers regular information from the partners and disseminates

it through the 2 websites of the project as well as by using the social media tools.

Partners post their events on Basecamp or contact Ecsite’s project managers and provide them

with details of their events that are updated online.

Since March 1 and until the launch of the “Expect Everything campaign” on April 21 Ecsite had

been posting on Science it’s a girl thing” Facebook page various posts. To do so Ecsite prepared

a monthly plan of Facebook posts, following the template that the Science it’s a girl thing

campaign created.

These are the posts that were produced during this period:

Figure 7: Facebook posts by Ecsite on Science it’s a girl thing page

A total of 13 posts were produced during one month, a rate of 2 posts per week in average.

Ecsite used birthdays and celebrations as a hook to engage young people.

In the first 12 months of the project Ecsite prepared 3 press releases coinciding with the kick-off

meeting, the launch of the websites, and the European stakeholders event. They were shared

with the partners and third parties. Partners adapted them to better attract their local audience,

translated them and shared them with their contacts.

The Newsletters were sent on November 13th and April 28th to a growing database. The first one

reached 453 people whereas the second one was sent to 644 subscribers.


25

Figure 8: 1st press release of Hypatia Figure 9: Second press release

All project partners have been engaged in this first period in dissemination activities for the

project producing articles in national newspapers such as Bloomfield and AHHAA science centre

or Centre for the Promotion of Science in Serbia that had Hypatia mentioned in the Ellle

Magazine accompanied by a post on the WP leader of Hypatia in Serbia.


26

Figure 10: Article in Israeli newspaper on Hypatia

Status : this task took place without deviations from original planning

Task 6.3 Coordination of the project website and branding

As soon as the project was launched Ecsite started to work on the development of a branding

image, a web portal and a factsheet. Ecsite prepared the brief for the selection of the designers

and developers. Ecsite circulated the call among partners and third parties to find a suitable

design studio and gathered the proposals and together with BureauQ and NEMO, analysed them

and chose the most suitable option for this work. Once the designers were selected, the chosen

one, HyperBrow studio (http://hyperbrow.com) started to develop the right tools.

The website serves a twofold objective: to promote the results of the project and the usability of

the Toolkit; and on the other side, to captivate the interest of teenagers, especially girls in STEM.

For the first main goal we have developed a website www.hypatiaproject.eu that contains all the

relevant information concerning the project, as well as room for the toolkit. To fulfil the second

objective, a website catered for teenagers has been developed, www.expecteverything.eu. This

second website, together with the social media, will be the backbone of the Expect Everything

campaign that is taking over the EU Campaign “Science is a Girl Thing” and redeveloping it,

starting a new approach to engage teenage girls in STEM studies and careers. This website has

been developed both in mobile version and computer version.

The final website is the result of a very participatory process from all the partners of the project.

The process that has led to these websites has been intertwined with the development of all the

branding and campaign visual image, as one could not be developed without the other.

Process:

A poll was developed by BureauQ, NEMO and Ecsite. It was shared with all of the partners and

third parties. 9 out of 17 partners answered the call. Once the results of the poll where were

gathered and analysed, Ecsite together with NEMO and Bureau BQ held 4 face to face meetings,

including one with the selected designers.

Structures, contents, trends, relevant information and strategies were discussed and decisions

were made concerning working methods, the schedule and above all, structure, tone and

contents of the website.

Several meetings took place in Amsterdam, Dublin and Brussels among WP6 , WP1 and

designers to prepare the branding and websites.

In order to ensure that the website was gender inclusive all the contents and wireframes were

reviewed by Hypatia gender panel. Ecsite coordinated this revision making sure it was delivered

on time and that their comments were implemented. The website was finally launched on April

15, 2016.

The coordination of the website portal included as well the development of branding image as

well as the factsheet of the project. The development of these 3 sub-projects started before the

kick-off meeting and finished with the delivery of the final website on April 13 of 2016.


27

Figure 11: Front page of ExpectEverything website

Figure 12: Front page of Hypatia website

Factsheet

At the request of the advisory board, Ecsite coordinated the production of a factsheet. Instead of

a traditional factsheet, the factsheet developed is foldable and playful.


28

Figure 13: Hypatia Factsheet


29

Status : this task took place partially with a small deviation from original planning as the website

was launched with a month’s delay

Task 6.4 European Stakeholder Workshop

This European workshop took place in Brussels on the 30th of June 2016 and had a twofold aim.

The first was to share the initial development of the resources and receive feedback on how they

can be shaped to be relevant for the research and industry partners. The second aim of the

workshop was to discuss in depth the role of industries and research institutions in Europe on

inspiring girls in STEM related careers. The preparation for this Event begun on M6 of the

project. The event was titled : Making your Business More Gender Inclusive.

An invitation for the event was circulated to all partners and dissemination efforts of the event

were led by Ecsite.


30

Figure 14: European stakeholders Event invitation

The event eventually brought together 63 participants from 14 countries.

The report of the event will be found in the Annex of this report. The programme included

presentations from policy maker Julie Ward member of the European Parliament, Donna

Herdsman from Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Marjolein van Breemen from NEMO, a discussion

among David MacDonald from L’Oreal Foundation and Ken Armistead from PPG Industries and a

workshop that involved all participants into sharing their thoughts regarding obstacles

encountering in their environment for making the industry sector more gender inclusive, and

opportunities they see for becoming more gender inclusive in the future. The list of participants

can be found also in the annex ( under the event Report). Ecsite is currently preparing a report of

the meeting to be circulated among all participants and be used in the project.

Figure 15: Participants of European Stakeholders Event in Brussels, 30 June 2016

Figure 16: Host Quentin Cooper , David MacDonald and Ken Armistead at the European Stakeholders

Event in Brussels, 30 June 2016


31

Figure 17: Small group discussions at European Stakeholders Event in Brussels, 30 June 2016

Status : this task took place as planned with no deviations.


D6.1 Dissemination plan, campaign strategy

D6.2 Sustainability Strategy

D6.3 Public web portal

WP7 Ethics requirements


Ethics deliverables were introduced in the Hypatia project by the European Commission in order

to improve the management, presentation, and monitoring of ethics requirements.


D7.1 Copies of authorization, Opinion or notification by the competent institutional data

Protection officer / authority

D7.2 Procedures for data collection, storage, protection, retention and destruction and

confirmation

D7.3 Clarifications on how consent/assent will be ensured in case children and/or adults are

unable to give informed consent are involved

D7.4 Details on procedures and criteria to recruit research participants

D7.5 Detailed information must be provided on the informed consent procedures that will be

implemented ( category HUMANS)

D7.6 Detailed information must be provided on the informed consent procedures that will be

implemented ( category PROTECTION OF PERSONAL DATA)


32

Deliverables overview

WP Deliverable Deadline Uploaded

WP1 D1.1 Project management

and quality assurance

manual

M5 M6

WP2 D2.1 Criteria for Gender

inclusion M3 M4

WP2 D2.2 Set of existing good

practices on gender inclusion

in STEM communications

M5 M6

WP2 D2.3 State of the art report

on gender in STEM M8 M9

WP3 D3.1 European Advisory

board M3 M4

WP3 D3.2 Strategic plan for

stakeholder engagement M5 M6

WP4 D4.1 Set of developed

modules M8 M9

WP6 D6.1 Dissemination plan,

campaign strategy M6 M7

WP6 D6.2 Sustainability plan M6 M8

WP6 D6.3 Public web portal M8 M10

WP7 D7.1 Copies of authorization,

Opinion or notification by the

Competent institutional data

Protection officer / authority

M8 M8

WP7 D7.2 Procedures for data

collection, storage, protection,

retention and destruction and

confirmation

M8 M8

WP7 D7.3 Clarifications on how

consent/assent will be

ensured in case children

and/or adults are unable to

give informed consent are

involved.

M8 M8

WP7 D7.4 Details on procedures

and criteria to recruit

research participants

M8 M8


33

WP7 D7.5 Detailed information

must be provided on the

informed consent procedures

that will be implemented (

category HUMANS)

M8 M8

WP7 D7.6 Detailed information

must be provided on the

informed consent procedures

that will be implemented (

category PROTECTION OF

PERSONAL DATA)

M8 M8

Milestones overview

WP Milestone Deadline Status

MS1 Launch of gender criteria M3 Achieved

MS2 First version of

modules complete M9 Achieved

MS3 Launch of National

Hubs M10 Achieved

MS4 European

Stakeholder

Workshop

M12 Achieved

Use of resources

All project partners provided the coordinator with the requested financial information for the first

internal reporting period (M1-M09) filling in a financial form distributed to them and shared in

the internal communication website. This Excel template included a specific “Explanation of the

use of resources” tab so that partners could describe in detail all costs incurred by major cost

items and allowed the coordinator to track the financial information submitted by beneficiaries,

check if some items were not properly described and give them relevant feedback for

improvement, whenever needed. Additionally Partners were requested to send their timesheets

in order for the coordinator to track down more specifically the time spent by partner per Work

package.

Overview of eligible costs

The overview below covers the reporting period of month 1-month 9 of the project. Partners were

requested to report on this period based on the quality and assurance plan the coordinator

developed in order to give enough time until the one year report to gather all information from all

partners, to give them back feedback and to be able to provide on time a representative image of

the situation so far. Below it can be found the overview of budget spent so far in the project in


34

matter of personnel costs, travel and other direct costs. The partners have spent in the period of

month 1 –month 9, 31% of their person month allocated, 24% of their personnel costs and 28%

of their travel expenses. In general the budget is spent in accordance to the work plan and to the

tasks foreseen by the project. The amount spent on the other direct costs is slightly less than the

average of this period but this makes sense as most related expenses ( hubs launches, seminars

for head teachers etc ) will occur in the coming months.

Category DOA M1-M9 %

Person months amount 15,850.00 49.17 31%

Personnel 907,535.00 221,784.52 24%

travel 75,700.00 20,862.79 28%

other direct costs 220,260.00 34,782.00 16%

Total other direct costs 295,960.00 55,644.79 19%

subcontracting 8,000.00 2,400.00 30%

indirect costs 316,083.00 71,953.87 23%

Total Costs 1,839,388.00 407,477.14 22%

Overview of progress per WP

The following table gives indication of the time spent per partner per work package.

Partner number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Name NEMO MUST BSMJ Ecsite EXP UNIVER UCPH BUREAUQ AD

SC

CA

IXA

CP

N

EX

PE

RY

ME

NT

NO

ES

IS

AU

ST

RIA

N N

ET

W

SC

IEN

CE

GA

LL

ER

Y

TE

KN

IKE

NS

HU

S

AH

HA

A

lore

al

pp

g

WP1 3.82 0 0 0.72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

WP1 12.50 0.00 0.00 2.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

WP2 0.37 0.53 0.35 0 0.39 0.43 4.93 0 0.47 0.2 0.3 0.29 0.54 0.53 0.22 0.1 0 0 0

WP2 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.00 0.30 0.30 6.50 0.50 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

WP3 0.56 0.56 4.04 0.27 1.4 1.82 0 0 0.49 0.25 0.29 0.22 0.14 0.03 0.15 0.3 0.2 0.33 0.86

WP3 3.00 2.50 6.00 0.50 2.50 2.50 0.00 0.00 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.2 1.2

WP4 0.5 5.69 2.35 0 1.82 2.06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

WP4 3.00 7.00 3.00 0.00 3.00 3.00 0.50 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

WP5 0.08 0 0.04 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0.04 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0

WP5 4.50 4.50 4.50 0.00 5.50 4.50 0.00 0.00 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.7 0.7

WP6 0.77 0.54 1.3 4.79 0.51 0.8 0.04 1.11 0.23 0.2 0.1 0.52 0 0.17 0.26 0.15 0 0.16 0.86

WP6 2.00 2.00 2.00 9.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.2 1.2

PMS SPENT 6.1 7.32 8.08 5.78 4.12 5.21 4.97 1.11 1.19 0.69 0.69 1.03 0.68 0.73 0.63 0.64 0.2 0.49 0.86

PMS FORESEEN 25.3 16.3 15.8 12.7 13.3 12.3 9 2.5 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.70 5.7 5.7 3.4 3.4


35

WP PMs % spent

WP1 4.54 30%

WP1 15.20

WP2 9.76 83%

WP2 11.80

WP3 11.82 36%

WP3 32.90

WP4 12.42 64%

WP4 19.50

WP5 0.26 0.50%

WP5 56.40

WP6 12.58 43%

WP6 29.50

Total PMs 50.52 31%

Total PMs 165.3

According to the analysis made above, WP1 efforts in the first 9 months of the project reached

30% of the time spending. This reflects the setting up efforts of both coordinator of the project

(NEMO) and Ecsite as coordinator of Third parties to set up management structures for the

project overall and for the third parties respectively.

WP2 efforts have reached out 83% of the overall time spent and this reflects the fact that WP2

efforts are concentrated according to the project planning on the first year of the project as this

WP is setting up the theoretical framework of the project.

When it comes to WP3 efforts, the amount spent (36%) of the overall time considered for this WP

reflects the time spent by main partners in setting up the Hubs and preparing the launches.

WP4 efforts similarly correspond to the fact the efforts of this WP are concentrated on the fiest

year of the project.

WP5 efforts are saved for the second and third year of the project and thus time spent so far on

this wp is very limited.

WP6 efforts have been heavy since on the first year Ecsite prepared and launched project

branding and campaign as well as prepared the main European dissemination event of the

project the European Stakeholders event.

Looking at the time spent per partner, there is overall a consistency with Third parties saving

their pms for their main tasks in the project. WP3 has the biggest variation in time spent per WP

as depending on the country the models of Hubs vary from a smaller to a much bigger number of

members.


36

Annex

European stakeholders event report

Report

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (H2020-GERI-2014-1) under the grant agreement No. 665566. 1

REPORT: MAKING YOUR BUSINESS

MORE GENDER INCLUSIVE: AN

OPPORTUNITY FOR GROWTH

Work package

number:

6

Task number: 6.4

Contributors: Carmen Fenollosa and Suzana Filipecki Martins

Institutions: Ecsite

Revision Date: 22 July 2016

Status: Final

Report

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (H2020-GERI-2014-1) under the grant agreement No. 665566.

2

Summary: 2

Summary of Sessions 3

Welcome and introduction by Marjolein van Breemen 3

Key note by Julie Ward 3

Key note by Donna Herdsman 3

Presentation by Marianne Achiam 4

Conversation with David McDonald and Ken Armistead 4

Sharing Experiences 5

What is next? 9

A few tweets from the event 9

Pictures 11

Speakers’ Bios: 15

Marianne Achiam, University of Copenhagen, Denmark 15

Ken Armistead, PPG Industries, UK. 15

Marjolein van Breemen, NEMO Science Museum, the Netherlands 15

Quentin Cooper, Science Oxford, UK 15

Donna Herdsman, Hewlett Packard, UK 15

David Macdonald, L’Oréal Foundation, France 15

Julie Ward, Member of the European Parliament, UK 16

Feedback from participants 16

Participants’ list 16

Summary:

This report presents the outcomes of the workshop “Making your Business More Gender

Inclusive: An Opportunity for Growth”, which took place on 30 June 2016 in Brussels. Organised

by Ecsite, in the context of the Hypatia project, “Making your Business More Gender Inclusive”

gathered 64 top European industry representatives, European policy makers, researchers and

museum professionals from 14 countries to discuss the role the industry sector has in engaging

young people, and especially girls, in STEM related careers. Invited participants were curated by

partners and third parties to assure quality, diversity and representativeness of participants. The

workshop presented five sessions in which participants had the chance to exchange views on the

current research on gender in relation to building the next generation of the European workforce,

retaining talent and discussing how having a more gender diverse sector is beneficial for

organisations. The event was moderated by Quentin Cooper, host of BBC Radio 4’s Material

World. Speakers included, Julie Ward, Member of the European Parliament, David McDonald,

Philanthropy Director for Women in Science, L’Oréal Foundation, Ken Armistead, Director of

Corporate Communications at PPG EMEA and Donna Herdsman, Director at Hewlett Packard in

the United Kingdom & Ireland Enterprise Service Business.

Report


3

Summary of Sessions

Welcome and introduction by Marjolein van Breemen

Marjolein van Breemen, Head of NEMO’s Science Learning Centre and Hypatia’s project

Coordinator, welcomed participants and introduced the project. Through her years at NEMO

Science Museum, Ms van Breemen worked in many projects related to gender. This experience

culminated with Hypatia, a project that presents a new approach: instead of targeting one

segment of stakeholders, Hypatia gathers industry, schools, policymakers, parents and last but

not least teenagers themselves to make more young people enthusiastic about STEM studies

and careers. Hypatia project aims for a more gender inclusive education both in schools,

museums and industries. The project develops a European wide campaign for and with

teenagers, encouraging young people to open up their possibilities, to expect everything and to

be confident. Further, the project creates a set of activities and guidelines especially designed for

schools, museums and industries in order to engage teenagers. As a museum, company,

university or other organisation we have the obligation for the future generations to work

together for more interest in STEM careers.

Key note by Julie Ward

During her presentation, Julie Ward, member of the European Parliament, shared her

experiences not only as a policy maker, but as an artist and activist. One particularly interesting

story tells the tale of how she was the only woman participating in a project in which artists and

engineers were invited to collaborate. Sitting historical engineers, Ms Ward illustrated how

women contributed to engineering but were quite often forgotten: Women come to engineering in

quiet ways but their presence ruffles the water. During her presentation, Ms Ward stressed how

the interaction between artists, scientists and citizens is key to the development of functional

societies and to bringing added value to both arts and sciences. One strategy that encourages

synergies and cooperation between the two fields is to push for the agenda for STEAM - putting

the A for Arts back into Science Technology Engineering & Maths (STEM). Serving in both the

Parliament's Culture & Education Committee and the Committee on Gender Equality and

Women's Rights, Julie Ward has a tracked history for pushing for the development of gender

equality, and often highlights "Gender diversity is not just for the benefit of women, but for men

and society as well".

Key note by Donna Herdsman

With a vast experience in STEM companies, Donna Herdsman eloquently answered the question:

why business should be concerned with gender equality? Research indicates that diverse teams

make better decisions. Companies in the top quartile for gender or racial and ethnic diversity are

more likely to have financial returns above their national industry medians. Further, when

companies do commit themselves to diverse leadership they are more successful. Noland,

Moran & Kotschwar for Peterson Institute found a positive correlation between the presence of

women in corporate leadership and performance. A single woman on the board may not lead

directly to more profit. However, they concluded that at least three women are needed for their

voice to be heard and for the dynamics of the board to change substantially. Among the

challenges faced by STEM industries, Herdsman indicated issues with affording STEM university

studies, cultural stereotypical perceptions of women, unconscious biases and lack of role

models. Herdsman ended her presentation putting forward actions that can generate changes in

gender equality in STEM related industries such as initiating apprentices and mentoring

Report


4

programmes, proactive talent management, better recruitment practices and visible senior role

models.

Presentation by Marianne Achiam

Marianne Achiam was in charge of presenting to the participants the way the Hypatia project

approaches gender. Marianne presented the key findings of her work with Henriette Holmegard

that led them to producing Hypatia’s framework for gender inclusion.

She started going back to the differences between

biological sex and gender as they do not fully coincide.

Growing evidence suggests that the ‘essential, hardwired

differences’ between the two sexes may be a majority

opinion rather than a scientific fact. Biological sex is

biological sex whereas gender is a concept that refers to

the social differences between women and men that have

been learned are changeable over time and have wide

variations both within and between cultures. This

background information leads to the question of why this

is a problem in bringing more young people and especially

girls to science. That is, as Marianne explained, because

society is gendered, so is science. Thus, the way we

understand gender is crucial. This has many implications

as to change youth’s access to science, there needs to be

an understanding of how STEM cultures include specific

ways of doing gender while excluding others. To do so, the

two researchers have produced a framework for gender

inclusion that goes from the individual level to the societal

level and what are these different levels:

To wrap-up she made a summary that explains in 2 sentences the way Hypatia approaches

gender in science education:

Considers the interests, aspirations and personalities to vary as widely within the groups

of biological sexes as they do between the groups

Considers gender to be constructed at the individual, interactional, institutional and

societal/cultural levels

After her presentation Ms Achiam invited participants to join her in a gender bias test.

Conversation with David McDonald and Ken Armistead

Quentin Cooper discussed successful programmes addressing gender on STEM related

industries with David McDonald and Ken Armistead. Since science and women are both core

themes to L’Oréal and its foundation, the L’Oréal Foundation started working with the issue of

under representation of women in Science nearly 19 years ago. In 1998, the foundation

established an awards programme with UNESCO to recognize leading women scientists who

could go to win the Nobel (3% of women go on to win a scientific Nobel prize). The programme

aimed from the beginning to shine a light on the problem and to create more female role models.

In 2001, the foundation created fellowships for doctoral and postdoctoral women to help give

Report


5

them the means they need to continue their careers, noting that it is at this stage of their careers

we see a drop-off in the number of women scientists.

Ken Armistead from PPG comes from a total different field where women are underrepresented.

Answering to the questions of Quentin Cooper, he presented how PPG has been working on the

issue and their strategic approach and new targets they have set to recognise and create a

balanced work environment that attracts, retains and advances women. The public had the

chance to exchange with David McDonald and Ken Armistead after the interview. We will just

highlight two of the comments:

Sharing Experiences

Working in small groups, participants were invited to share best practices and challenges that

they are facing when addressing gender issues in their work. The exercise started in the

beginning of the workshop, when Quentin Cooper asked participants to consider the challenges

and opportunities they saw in their filed in relation to gender inclusion. Participants were invited

to write down the challenges in red cards and the opportunities in green cards and bring their

notes to the small group discussions in which they were working afterwards. Each group had a

facilitator from one of the Hypatia’s partner organisations and its participants were appointed

before the event by taking into account both the field and country of residency of participants,

aiming to assure diversity. The groups were as follow:

Group Facilitator

1 Meie van Laar Alexandra

Georges-Picot Evelyn Renault Ken Armistead Orna Somech

Katrien

Goossens

2 Marjolein van

Breemen Helen Wexler

David

McDonald

Catherine

Franche

Richard

Northcote Julie Ward

3 Marianne

Achiam

Alien De

Deken

Inmaculada

Pulido

Maggie Wissink

ook Geerdink

Yael Doron

Drori

Valeria

Mazzagatti

4 Sheena Laursen Andrijana

Mališić

Melissa

Rancourt Hayley Barnden

Vasiliki

Moukriotou

Trisno

Hardjosusono

5 Marie-Agnès

Bernardis Anja Andersen

Isabella

Lenarduzzi Solenne Timon

Ainhoa

Echeverria

6 Aliki

Giannakopoulou Aurelia Takacs Diane Baras

Barbara

Kowatsch Ulrike Reimann Anett Ruszanov

7 Eti Oron Cécile

Jabaudon

Majella

Henchion

Monique

Westland Tania Durán

8 Sara Calcagnini Camilla Zacho Donna

Herdsman Jelena Lucin Tina Ibsen

9 Maya Halevy Chiara Tripepi Eva Kollenz-

Roetzel

Laurence

Reckford

Sebastiaan

Smit

10 Rolf Schreuder Cecilie Frick Isabelle

Biadatti

Alexaundra

Zanella Sabrina Madi

11 Lisanne

Bronzwaer

Minji Park Romy Harink Clara Delaney Lia Tedeshvili

At the end of the session, one person per group reported on the most striking fact, or the idea

that the group thought was more important to share with other participants.

Report


6

A few challenges mentioned:

“Gender equality related topics are not

considered strategic. Lack of budget.

Gender washing” (Isabella Lenarduzzi)

“Embracing awareness of the problem being

relevant” (Anja Andersen)

“The people that are part of the problem are

trying to create the solution – (can’t see the

wood for the trees)”

“Men world still.”

“How to engage girls + boys? Equally?

Change people’s mind-sets on how it is

presented? Girls are interested in science,

not the topic / Preference to employ men-

engineers! In male oriented industries

(working shifts – considered hard…)”

“Combating gender stereotypes. How to

stimulate one group without the group

approach?”

A few opportunities mentioned:

“Science Education combines requirements

that correspond to ‘feminine’ traits and

‘masculine’ traits so there seem to be good

opportunities for gender inclusion”

(Marianne Achiam)

“Getting women’s magazines to showcase

examples”

“The discussion on gender has become

more qualitative” (Anja Andersen)

“Women are the target talent poll. War for

talent” (Isabella Lenarduzzi)

“Raise awareness about unconscious bias”

“Opportunity for external experts /

influences to support large organisations

(external / neutral perspective)”

“1) The potential to increase number if

students choosing STEM is in girls. 2)

Business awareness is there! The education

system is the key to change the number of

graduate girls. HR in business looks for

plans to motivate girls to choose STEM”

“Diversity -> Network”

Report


7

Report


8

Report


9

What is next?

The project partners have been working in setting up good foundations and doing a lot of

background work during the first year of the project. During the next months and especially

starting in February 2017, the work will become more public and the different stakeholders will

be able to have a more active participation.

Stakeholders will have the chance to:

Join one of the local hubs and be actively involved in the project

Join the LinkedIn group that has been created to exchange interesting documents, good

practices, events and many more on gender inclusion in STEM

Use the toolkit in their day to day practice

Promote and disseminate the use of the toolkit modules

A few tweets from the event

Report


10

Report


11

Pictures

Marjolein van Breemen during her presentation

Julie Ward during her presentation

Report


12

Donna Herdsman during her presentation

Marjolein van Breemen, Julie Ward and Donna Herdsman during

Q&A moderated by Quentin Cooper

Eti Oron (BSMJ - Bloomfield Science Museum in Jerusalem) and

Helen Wexler (Jnext Hi-tech and Entrepreneurship Programme)

during Donna Herdsman’s presentation

Donna Herdsman and Melissa Rancourt (greenlight for girls)

during coffee break

Marianne Achiam during her presentation

Marianne Achiam during the gender bias test

Report


13

David McDonald, L'Oréal Foundation Diane Baras, L'Oreal and

Sabrina Madi, L'Oreal Foundation during the gender bias test

Aliki Giannakopoulou, NEMO Science Museum during gender

bias test

Quentin Cooper in conversation with David McDonald and

Ken Armistead

Isabella Lenarduzzi (Jump) during Q&A with David McDonald and

Ken Armistead

Participants share their experiences and perspectives during

small group session

Participants share their experiences and perspectives during

small group session

Report


14

Yael Doron Drori (Google) during group session

Richard Northcote (Covestro) during group session

Quentin Cooper presents closing remarks

Donna Herdsman is conversation with Romy Harink (member of

Expect Everything’s Dutch Editorial Board) and young interns

from greenlight for girls during networking lunch

Report


15

Speakers’ Bios:

Marianne Achiam, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Marianne Achiam is an Associate Professor at the Department of Science Education, University of

Copenhagen. She has a M.Sc. in biology and a Ph.D. in science education. Her research interests

include science and particularly biology dissemination in out-of-school contexts such as

museums, science centres, zoos, aquaria and botanical gardens. She is the head of the

Departmental research group on science education in out-of-school settings. She is the co-author

of ‘Criteria for Gender Inclusion’, a report developed in the framework of the Hypatia project.

Ken Armistead, PPG Industries, UK.

Ken Armistead is the Director of Corporate Communications for PPG Europe Middle East and

Africa. He is responsible for Employee Communications, Media Relations and all Community

Engagement including Corporate Social Responsibility activities across the region.

Marjolein van Breemen, NEMO Science Museum, the Netherlands

Marjolein van Breemen is the Head of the NEMO Science Learning Center since 2011. She

worked as senior project manager on several national and European projects including the

European gender projects GAPP and TWIST. In the Hypatia Project, Marjolein heads the

responsibility as coordinator of the project. She set up the successful project “Tube Your Future”

about STEM careers for teenagers and developed a “gender checklist” commissioned by the

Dutch Network of Science Centers and Museums. Professionals can use it to make their museum

and activities attractive for a broad audience, including girls. Marjolein holds a Master of Science

(Biology).

Quentin Cooper, Science Oxford, UK

Quentin Cooper is one of the most familiar voices of science in the UK. He’s the Creative Director

of Science Oxford, one of Britain’s largest science outreach organisations, and hosts the UK and

International finals of the world’s largest science communication competition, FameLab. For over

a decade he presented Britain’s most listened to science show, the live weekly Material World on

BBC Radio 4 and he still regularly hosts The Forum for BBC World Service.

Donna Herdsman, Hewlett Packard, UK

Donna Herdsman has over 29 years’ experience as a management consultant, auditor and

accountant. She has been a Director at Hewlett Packard Enterprise focusing on Transformation,

has worked for IBM as an Executive Partner in their Global Business Services, as well as Chair of

IBM’s Ethnicity Leadership Team focused on developing the leadership skills of ethnic minority

talent, and a member of IBM’s UK and Ireland Diversity Council. Herdsman is passionate about

developing people, in particular women and Black and Ethnic Minorities and speaks at and

supports related initiatives. For the third year in a row, she is a Judge for the Black British

Business Awards that highlights black talent thriving that positively contribute to both their

organisations and wider communities at large. She was recently appointed the Financial Times

UPstanding’s top 100 ethnic-minority executives.

David Macdonald, L’Oréal Foundation, France

David is the Director of the L’Oréal Foundation’s scientific projects. He is responsible for running

the ‘L’Oréal-UNESCO for Women in Science’ programme across 111 countries to address the

underrepresentation of women in the sciences. He is also developing ‘For Girls in Science’, a pilot

programme in France with the national education ministry to inspire girls to study sciences.

Report


16

Previously, he worked in a number of communications roles at L’Oréal, France, Paris since 2008

and managed corporate communications for the company’s subsidiary in the UK where he

worked with the local UNESCO commission and scientific institutions to run the For Women in

Science programme locally. He also developed the L’Oréal Young Scientist Centre at the Royal

Institution. Prior to that David worked for Orange, a French telecommunications company.

Julie Ward, Member of the European Parliament, UK

Julie Ward is a Labour Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for the North West of England.

She is also a writer, theatre-maker and cultural activist who began her working life on the factory

floor before becoming a community arts worker. She is a member of the European Parliament’s

committees on Culture and Education, Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and Regional

Development. Julie is also a children’s rights champion; she co-founded the cross-party

Intergroup on Children’s Rights and sits on the Labour Party’s Children and Education Policy

Commission. She is a board member of the European Internet Forum, and a founding member of

the European Caucus of Women in Parliament.

Feedback from participants

Following the workshop, a questionnaire was sent to all participants to assess their impressions

and gather feedback. Out of 64 participants, five filled out the questionnaire (7.8%). Overall they

were happy with the sessions and speakers, but thought a longer event with more time for

discussion would have been more interesting.

There questionnaire can be found here.

Participants’ list

1. Marianne Achiam, University of Copenhagen

2. Anja Andersen, Dark Cosmology Centre

3. Ken Armistead, PPG industries

4. Diane Baras, L'Oreal

5. Hayley Barnden, UK Ministry of Defence

6. Marie-Agnès Bernardis, Universicence

7. Isabelle Biadatti, IBM

8. Lisanne Bronzwaer, NEMO Science Museum

9. Sara Calcagnini, MUST - Museo Nazionale della Scienza e della Tecnologia "Leonardo da

Vinci"

10. Quentin Cooper, Science Oxford

11. Alien De Deken, ERM - Environmental Resources Management

12. Clara Delaney, greenlight for girls

13. Yael Doron Drori, Google

14. Tania Durán, Mirada TV

15. Ainhoa Echeverria, EPFL - Ecole polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne

16. Carmen Fenollosa, Ecsite

17. Suzana Filipecki Martins, Ecsite

18. Catherine Franche, Ecsite

19. Cecilie Frick, Danish University of Technology

http://goo.gl/forms/d3lrF3pKb50XxNXk2

Report

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (H2020-GERI-2014-1) under the grant agreement No. 665566. 17

20. Alexandra Georges-Picot, greenlight for girls

21. Aliki Giannakopoulou, NEMO Science Museum

22. Katrien Goossens, Euroclear

23. Maya Halevy, BSMJ - Bloomfield Science Museum in Jerusalem

24. Trisno Hardjosusono, Jet-Net

25. Romy Harink, Expect Everything Dutch Reporter

26. Majella Henchion, ESB - Electricity Supply Board

27. Donna Herdsman, Hewlett-Packard

28. Tina Ibsen, Tycho Brahe Planetarium

29. Cécile Jabaudon, Microsoft innovation Centre

30. Eva Kollenz-Roetzel, Siemens

31. Barbara Kowatsch, European Commission

32. Sheena Laursen, Experimentarium

33. Isabella Lenarduzzi, Jump

34. Jelena Lucin, greenlight for girls

35. Sabrina Madi, L'Oreal Foundation

36. Andrijana Mališić, Agency for Integrative Communications

37. Valeria Mazzagatti, EBC - European Builders Confederation

38. David McDonald, L'Oréal Foundation

39. Dorian McLaggon, Donna Herdsman’s Team

40. Vassiliki Moukriotou, Hellenic Petroleum

41. Richard Northcote, Covestro

42. Eti Oron, BSMJ - Bloomfield Science Museum in Jerusalem

43. Minji Park, greenlight for girls

44. Inmaculada Pulido, Celworking

45. Melissa Rancourt, greenlight for girls

46. Laurence Reckford, Total

47. Ulrike Reimann, European University Association

48. Evelyn Renault, General Electric

49. Anett Ruszanov, ERRIN - European Regions Research and Innovation Network

50. Rolf Schreuder, Bureau Bq

51. Sebastiaan Smit, Jet-Net

52. Orna Somech, The 5X2 Initiative

53. Aurelia Takacs, Cisco

54. Lia Tedeshvili, Ecsite

55. Solenne Timon Universcience

56. Chiara Tripepi, European Commission

57. Marjolein van Breemen, NEMO Science Museum

58. Meie van Laar, NEMO Science Museum

59. Julie Ward, European Parliament

60. Monique Westland, ESHA - European School Heads Association

61. Helen Wexler, Jnext Hi-tech and Entrepreneurship Program

62. Maggie Wissink ook Geerdink, Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, the

Netherlands

63. Camilla Zacho, Engineer the Future

64. Alexaundra Zanella, greenlight for girls

Annex I: Sharing Experinces

We are pleased to invite you toMAKING YOUR BUSINESS MORE GENDER INCLUSIVE: An opportunity for growth

June 30, 2016From 10:30 to 13:30,

followed by a networking lunch atHalles des Tanneurs,

Rue des Tanneurs, 60a 1000 Brussels

What’s it about?

This workshop will gather top European industry representatives, European policy makers, researchers and museum directors to discuss the role the industry sector has in engaging young people, and especially girls, in STEM related careers.

In its recently published report, “The Industry Gender Gap” the World Economic Forum stated that females remain one of the most underutilized business resources. In order to better compete in the new business arena, it will be crucial for the industry to address this issue and gain competitive advantage. During the event you will be informed about the current research on gender in relation to building the next generation of the European workforce, retaining talent and discussing how having a more gender diverse sector is beneficial for your company.

Participate

There will be room for discussing case studies, best practices and exchanging with your peers. We will also share exciting new tools developed by the Hypatia project, especially tailored for the industry in order to become more gender inclusive in its practice.

The event will be moderated by Quentin Cooper, host of BBC Radio 4’s Material World. Keynote speakers will include, Julie Ward, Member of the European Parliament, David McDonald, Philanthropy Director for Women in Science, L’Oréal Foundation, Ken Armistead, Director of Corporate Communications at PPG EMEA and Donna Herdsman, Director at Hewlett Packard in the United Kingdom & Ireland Enterprise Service Business.

Any questions please contact: Carmen Fenollosa – [email protected]

It is time to create a more gender diverse

industry sector!

Hypatia project has received funding from the European Union´s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (H2020-GERI-2014) under the grant agreement No. 665566. This page reflects the views of the author, and the European Union cannot held responsibility for any use which might be made of the information

contained therein.

Annex II: Invitation

MAKING YOUR BUSINESS MORE GENDER INCLUSIVE: AN OPPORTUNITY FOR GROWTH

MODERATED BY QUENTIN COOPER, HOST OF BBC RADIO 4’S MATERIAL WORLD. KEYNOTES BY JULIE WARD, MEMBER OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, DAVID MCDONALD, PHILAN-THROPY DIRECTOR FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE, L’ORÉAL FOUN-DATION, KEN ARMISTEAD, DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE COMMU-NICATIONS AT PPG EMEA AND DONNA HERDSMAN, DIRECTOR AT HEWLETT PACKARD IN THE UNITED KINGDOM & IRELAND ENTERPRISE SERVICE BUSINESS.

AN INDUSTRY WORKSHOP AND NETWORKING LUNCH, IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HYPATIA PROJECT.

THURSDAY, 30 JUNE 2016, 10:30 - 14:30, BRUSSELS

In its recently published report,

“The Industry Gender Gap” the

World Economic Forum stated

that females remain one of the

most underutilized business

resources. In order to better

compete in the new business

arena, it will be crucial for the in-

dustry to address this issue and

gain competitive advantage.

This workshop gathers top Euro-

pean industry representatives,

European policy makers, re-

searchers and museum directors

to discuss the role the industry

sector has in engaging young

people, and especially girls, in

STEM related careers.

It is time to create a more gender

diverse industry!

Annex III: Programme

BIOGRAPHIESPROGRAMME

Welcome & Intro-duction, Marjolein van Breemen, Julie Ward and Donna Herdsman

10:30

Coffee break11:40

Gender bias vs Inclusion - Marianne Achiam

12:00

Marianne Achiam, Associate

Professor at the University of

Copenhagen invites participants

to take a gender bias test.

Marianne will be also present-

ing Hypatia’s framework for

organisations to address gender

inclusion when conducting STEM

related activities.

Conversation with David McDonald and Ken Armistead

12:25

Quentin Cooper discusses gen-

der on STEM related industries

with David McDonald, Director

of Philanthropy at the L’Oréal

Foundation and Ken Armistead,

Director of Corporate Communi-

cations at PPG industries.

Sharing Experiences13:05

Working in small groups, partici-

pants are invited to share best

practices and challenges that

they are facing when addressing

gender issues in their work.

Closing remarks by Quentin Cooper

13:30

Networking Lunch13:40

Marianne Achiam, University of Copenhagen, DenmarkMarianne is an Associate Professor at the Department of Science Education, Univer-sity of Copenhagen. She has a M.Sc. in biology and a Ph.D. in science education. Her research interests include science and particularly biology dissemina-tion in out-of-school contexts such as museums, science centres, zoos, aquaria and bo-tanical gardens. She is the head of the Departmental research group on science education in out-of-school settings. She is the co-author of ‘Criteria for Gender Inclusion’, a report developed in the framework of the Hypatia project.

Ken Armistead, PPG Indus-tries, UK.Ken is the Director of Corporate Communications for PPG Europe Middle East and Africa. He is responsible for Employee Com-munications, Media Relations and all Community Engagement including Corporate Social Responsibility activities across the region.

Marjolein van Breemen, NEMO Science Museum, the NetherlandsMarjolein is the Head of the NEMO Science Learning Center since 2011. She worked as sen-ior project manager on several

national and European projects including the European gender projects GAPP and TWIST. In the Hypatia Project, Marjolein heads the responsibility as coordinator of the project. She set up the successful project “Tube Your Future” about STEM careers for teenagers and developed a “gen-der checklist” commissioned by the Dutch Network of Science Centers and Museums. Profes-sionals can use it to make their museum and activities attractive for a broad audience, including girls. Marjolein holds a Master of Science (Biology).

Quentin Cooper, Science Oxford, UKQuentin is one of the most familiar voices of science in the UK. He’s the Creative Director of Science Oxford, one of Britain’s largest science outreach organi-sations, and hosts the UK and International finals of the world’s largest science communication competition, FameLab. For over a decade he presented Britain’s most listened to science show, the live weekly Material World on BBC Radio 4 and he still regularly hosts The Forum for BBC World Service.

Donna Herdsman, Hewlett Packard, UKDonna has over 29 years experi-ence as a management consult-ant, auditor and accountant. She

has been a Director at Hewlett Packard Enterprise focusing on Transformation, has worked for IBM as an Executive Partner in their Global Business Services, as well as Chair of IBM’s Ethnic-ity Leadership Team focused on developing the leadership skills of ethnic minority talent, and a member of IBM’s UK and Ireland Diversity Council. Donna is passionate about developing people, in particular women and Black and Ethnic Minorities and speaks at and supports related initiatives. For the third year in a row, Donna is a Judge for the Black British Business Awards that highlights black talent thriving that positively contribute to both their organisations and wider communities at large. Donna was recently appointed the Financial Times UPstand-ing’s top 100 ethnic-minority executives.

David Macdonald, L’Oréal Foundation, FranceDavid is the Director of the L’Oréal Foundation’s scientific projects. He is responsible for running the ‘L’Oréal-UNESCO for Women in Science’ programme across 111 countries to address the underrepresentation of wom-en in the sciences. He is also developing ‘For Girls in Science’, a pilot programme in France with the national education ministry to inspire girls to study sciences.

Previously, he worked in a num-ber of communications roles at L’Oréal, France, Paris since 2008 and managed corporate com-munications for the company’s subsidiary in the UK where he worked with the local UNESCO commission and scientific insti-tutions to run the For Women in Science programme locally. He also developed the L’Oréal Young Scientist Centre at the Royal Institution. Prior to that David worked for Orange, a French telecommunications company.

Julie Ward, Member of the European Parliament, UKJulie is a Labour Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for the North West of England. She is also a writer, theatre-maker and cultural activist who began her working life on the factory floor before becoming a community arts worker. She is a member of the European Parliament’s committees on Culture and Education, Women’s Rights and Gender Equality and Regional Development. Julie is also a children’s rights cham-pion; she co-founded the cross-party Intergroup on Children’s Rights and sits on the Labour Party’s Children and Education Policy Commission. She is a board member of the European Internet Forum, and a founding member of the European Caucus of Women in Parliament.

ABOUT HYPATIA PROJECT

When it comes to attracting

young people to Science, Tech-

nology, Engineering and Mathe-

matics (STEM) formal education

cannot do it all. Informal educa-

tion plays a key role in attracting

girls and boys to these areas of

study. With Europe’s knowledge

economy developing and new

technologies on the rise, skills in

science, technology, engineering

and mathematics will be needed

for a broader range of careers

than ever before. The evidence

suggests that in the coming

years Europe will face a shortage

in its workforce. Science centres

and museums are working to

promote a more gender inclusive

way of communicating science.

Hypatia is an EU Horizon 2020

funded project that addresses

the challenge of gathering dif-

ferent societal actors around

bringing more teenagers, espe-

cially girls, into STEM careers

both in school and as a choice

of learning and career in the

future. It aims at changing the

ways sciences are communi-

cated to young people in and out

of school to make them more

gender inclusive.

To do so, the project will produce

a toolkit, work around national

hubs and organise a series

of events. There will also be a

campaign targeting teenagers all

around Europe. Called “Expect

Everything”, it will build on the

results achieved by Science it’s

a Girl Thing.

Who we are

NEMO Science Museum, Project

Coordinator (The Netherlands),

Bloomfield Science Museum

(Israel), BureauQ (The Neth-

erlands), Ecsite (Belgium),

Experimentarium (Denmark),

Fondation L’Oréal (France),

Museum of Science and Technol-

ogy Leonardo da Vinci (Italy),

PPG Industries (UK), Univer-

sity of Copenhagen (Denmark),

Universcience (France), ASDC,

the UK Association of Science

and Discovery Centres (UK),

CPS, Center for the Promotion

of Science (Serbia), Experyment

(Poland), La Caixa Foundation

(Spain), Noesis Science Centre

(Greece), Science Centre AHHAA,

(Estonia), SCN, ScienceCenter-

Network (Austria), Science

Gallery Dublin (Ireland) and

Teknikens Hus (Sweden).

Hypatia project has received funding from the European Union´s Horizon 2020 Framework

Programme for Research and Innovation (H2020-GERI-2014) under the grant agreement

No. 665566. This workshop reflects the views of the author, and the European Union cannot held

responsibility for any use which might be made of the information contained therein.

1 periodic report hypatia - expect everything · d1.2 1st periodic report hypatia 2 table of...

Documents