Success rate for women on Royal Society fellowship tumbles

A research funder has seen success rates for women applying to one of its fellowships plummet by more than 30 per cent since 2010

September 25, 2014

The Royal Society is to investigate why so few female researchers secured its University Research Fellowships in 2014.

It announced on its In Verba blog that, of the 43 individuals who won the funding, just two were women – giving female scientists a success rate of 4.6 per cent.

The fellowships, for early career scientists with the potential to become leaders in their field, provide five years of funding with the possibility to extend for a further three years.

Writing on the blog, Sir Paul Nurse, president of the Royal Society, said he was “very disappointed” by the statistics. “[T]his sends out a bad message to young female scientists,” he said.

In 2012 and 2013, 18.9 and 17 per cent of the grants, respectively, went to women. Prior to this, the success rate for female candidates was higher, and in 2010 sat at 36.6 per cent before dropping to 22.5 per cent the following year.

In 2012 the Society launched a new early career research fellowship specifically for biomedical scientists, a field in which women are generally better represented than in other branches of science. As a result, fewer women applied for URFs in subsequent years.

Data provided on the blog show that 75 female researchers applied to the scheme in 2014, comprising 18.9 per cent of the total. Just 17 of these, or 13.5 per cent, made it on to the shortlist and the Society subsequently interviewed six, or about 8.8 per cent, of these. In the previous year women accounted for around 20 per cent of candidates at each stage of the process, according to the blog post.

Sir Paul wrote: “It is possible that this year is an anomaly, as 2010 appears to have been, but we cannot assume that to be the case. It is important, however, to take account of the figures over a number of years to get a true picture.”

He added that women comprised around a fifth of the committee members who made the decisions on who should get the funding.

“We do not know why the numbers this year are so different to previous years but I have asked for an investigation. We need to find out what happened and if we identify problems in our systems we will correct them,” he said.

holly.else@tesglobal.com

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Reader's comments (1)

It should be noted that the new 2012 fellowship, mentioned here as an excuse for 'stealing' women from the URF, ALSO has a very poor history of recruiting women, with less than a quarter going to women, despite them making up at least 50% of early-career biomedical researchers (if not more!). For those interested, numbers of women awarded the last four Henry Dale fellowships are as follows: Nov 2013: 3 of 15 (25%) June 2013: 3 of 17 (21%) Nov 2012: 2 of 11 (22%) June 2012: 2 of 12 (20%)

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Most Commented

Monster behind man at desk

Despite all that’s been done to improve doctoral study, horror stories keep coming. Here three students relate PhD nightmares while two academics advise on how to ensure a successful supervision

Sir Christopher Snowden, former Universities UK president, attacks ratings in wake of Southampton’s bronze award

opinion illustration

Eliminating cheating services, even if it were possible, would do nothing to address students’ and universities’ lack of interest in learning, says Stuart Macdonald

Female professor

New data show proportion of professors who are women has declined at some institutions

Reflection of man in cracked mirror

To defend the values of reason from political attack we need to be more discriminating about the claims made in its name, says John Hendry