Actions for gender equality in scientific-technical areas in Spanish universities Acciones para la igualdad de género en las áreas científico-técnicas de las universidades españolas

Abstract

En este artículo se analizan las acciones llevadas a cabo en las universidades españolas para alcanzar la igualdad de género en las disciplinas científico-técnicas, donde las mujeres siguen estando infrarrepresentadas y existe una baja transversalización de la perspectiva de género que puede afectar a la investigación y a la innovación. Para realizar un diagnóstico de la situación se elaboró una encuesta dirigida a las unidades de igualdad que forman parte de la Red de Unidades de Igualdad de Género para la Excelencia Universitaria (RUIGEU). La encuesta estaba formada por trece preguntas relativas a: las acciones para favorecer el acceso y permanencia de las mujeres en las áreas PECS (Physics, Engineering, Computer, Science), el reconocimiento de trabajos de estudiantes realizados con perspectiva de género, la valoración de la docencia e investigación con perspectiva de género, la visibilización y reconocimiento de investigadoras y las acciones para la igualdad efectiva. Esta encuesta era anónima y fue respondida por veintiocho unidades. De las respuestas obtenidas podemos extraer una baja implicación de las universidades para impulsar la igualdad en este ámbito. Además, el análisis de arquetipos nos muestra que sólo cinco de las universidades que participaron en este estudio están comprometidas con la igualdad en el ámbito científico-técnico y llevan a cabo acciones para conseguirlo. Estos resultados ponen de manifiesto, por un lado, que es posible implementar acciones para la igualdad en este ámbito y, por otro lado, que necesitamos de la colaboración de otras instituciones (Ministerio de Universidades, Agencia Nacional para la Evaluación de la Acreditación (ANECA) y Conferencia de Rectores de la Universidad Española (Crue)) para impulsar la igualdad en todas las universidades.

Full text

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 19
Educación XX1
ISSN: 1139-613X · e-ISSN: 2174-5374
Actions for gender equality
in scientic-technical areas
in Spanish universities
Acciones para la igualdad de género
en las áreas cientíco-técnicas de las
universidades españolas
Irene Epifanio 1*
Encina Calvo-Iglesias 2
1 Universitat Jaume I, Spain
2 Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Spain
* Corresponding author. E-mail: epifanio@uji.es
Cómo referenciar este artículo/ How to reference
this article:
Epifanio, I., & Calvo-Iglesias, E. (2024). Actions for gender
equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities.
Educación XX1, 27(2), 19-36. https://doi.org/10.5944/
educxx1.38279
Date received: 07/09/2023
Date accepted: 19/03/2024
Published online: 28/06/2024
ABSTRACT
This arcle analyses the acons carried out in Spanish universies to achieve gender equality
in scienc-technical disciplines, where women are sll under-represented and there is a low
level of gender mainstreaming that can aect research and innovaon. In order to diagnose
the situaon, a survey was carried out aimed at the equality units that form part of the
Network of Gender Equality Units for University Excellence (RUIGEU). The survey consisted
of thirteen quesons relang to: acons to favour the access and permanence of women in
the PECS areas (Physics, Engineering, Computer, Science), the recognion of student work
carried out with a gender perspecve, the valuaon of teaching and research with a gender
perspecve, the visibility and recognion of female researchers and acons for eecve
equality. This survey was anonymous and was answered by 28 units. From the answers
obtained, we can extract a low level of involvement of the universies in promong equality
in this area. Furthermore, the analysis of archetypes shows that only ve of the universies
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 19 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Epifanio et al. (2024)
20 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
that parcipated in this study are commied to equality in the scienc-technical eld and
carry out acons to achieve it. These results show, on the one hand, that it is possible to
implement acons to promote equality in the scienc and technical eld. On the other
hand, the collaboraon of other instuons (Ministry of Universies, Naonal Agency for
the Evaluaon of Accreditaon (ANECA) and Conference of Rectors of the Spanish University
(Crue)) is necessary to promote equality in all universies.
Keywords: gender equality, gender stereotypes, gender bias, STEM educaon, research
training, women sciensts
RESUMEN
En este arculo se analizan las acciones llevadas a cabo en las universidades españolas
para alcanzar la igualdad de género en las disciplinas cienco-técnicas, donde las mujeres
siguen estando infrarrepresentadas y existe una baja transversalización de la perspecva de
género que puede afectar a la invesgación y a la innovación. Para realizar un diagnósco
de la situación se elaboró una encuesta dirigida a las unidades de igualdad que forman parte
de la Red de Unidades de Igualdad de Género para la Excelencia Universitaria (RUIGEU).
La encuesta estaba formada por trece preguntas relavas a las acciones para favorecer el
acceso y permanencia de las mujeres en las áreas PECS (Physics, Engineering, Computer,
Science), el reconocimiento de trabajos de estudiantes realizados con perspecva de género,
la valoración de la docencia e invesgación con perspecva de género, la visibilización y
reconocimiento de invesgadoras y las acciones para la igualdad efecva. Esta encuesta era
anónima y fue respondida por veinocho unidades. De las respuestas obtenidas podemos
extraer una baja implicación de las universidades para impulsar la igualdad en este ámbito.
Además, el análisis de arquepos nos muestra que sólo cinco de las universidades que
parciparon en este estudio están compromedas con la igualdad en el ámbito cienco-
técnico y llevan a cabo acciones para conseguirlo. Estos resultados ponen de maniesto, por
un lado, que es posible implementar acciones para la igualdad en este ámbito y, por otro
lado, que necesitamos de la colaboración de otras instuciones (Ministerio de Universidades,
Agencia Nacional para la Evaluación de la Acreditación (ANECA) y Conferencia de Rectores
de la Universidad Española (Crue)) para impulsar la igualdad en todas las universidades.
Palabras clave: igualdad de género, estereopos de género, sesgos de género, educación
STEM, Formación en invesgación, ciencas
INTRODUCTION
In Spain, female students are in the majority in university classrooms, but
there is sll a signicant horizontal segregaon by degree, with a lower presence
of women in some disciplines linked to STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering
and Mathemacs) or PECS (Physics, Engineering, Computer, Science) areas. This
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 20 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 21
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
last acronym is used to emphasize that it is in these areas where women are less
represented (Cimpian et al., 2020; Sáinz, 2017). Approximately three out of every
four students in undergraduate and rst and second cycle studies in Health Sciences
are women, i.e. 71.8% of students in these disciplines, while in Engineering and
Architecture the percentage of women drops to 26.5%, as shown in the report
Ciencas en Cifras 2023 (Unidad de Mujer y Ciencia, 2023).
This situaon is not new in Spanish universies or in the Western context, since
almost sixty years ago Alice Rossi (1965) asked the queson: why so few women?
Since then, numerous studies have been carried out that show the inuence of
mulple social and cultural factors in the gender gap that exists in certain careers
in the scienc-technical eld and the need to connue our eorts to reduce this
gap (Verdugo-Castro, 2022). Thanks to this research, we now know that the low
representaon of women in university careers related to PECS disciplines is not
related to girls’ performance or skills in these elds, but to the gender stereotypes
that condion their choices at school (Bian et al., 2017; Couso, 2023). These
stereotypes aect girls from an early age: at the age of six, girls already believe
they are less bright than boys (Bian et al., 2017) and in primary school they perceive
themselves to be less competent in mathemacs and show greater anxiety before
mathemacs exams (Ayuso et al., 2021). Moreover, taking into account that
students’ interest in science decreases as they get older (Marn et al., 2023), acon
should be taken in the early stages of educaon to promote more vocaons in the
STEM eld; without forgeng the stereotypes and expectaons that teachers have
and that they can transmit to students (Couso, 2023), and that we must combat by
providing gender training to acve teachers and future teachers so that they can
educate in equality.
The parcipaon of women sciensts and researchers in the celebraon of the
Internaonal Day of Women and Girls in Science has been fundamental in providing
students with female references in PECS areas, helping girls to see these careers as
a possible career opon. This promoon of scienc-technological vocaons in girls
and young women is an equality measure successfully implemented in 2022 (Women
and Science Unit, 2023), although it seems to be carried out primarily in secondary
educaon. Given the importance of these promoonal acvies, the parcipaon
of female researchers and professors should be recognised and prevented from
becoming an increase in women’s “academic housework” at university (Heijstra et
al., 2017), as they devote more hours than their male colleagues to these tasks of
care and service to the students (Cabero et al., 2023).
But it is not only a maer of increasing the number of female students in these
degrees, we also have to take into account that “when scienc-technical areas are
a socio-economic scenario of high employability and excellent salaries for qualied
people, men move to occupy these socio-economic centres and women remain
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 21 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Epifanio et al. (2024)
22 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
on the margins” (Samper-Gras, 2022, p. 209), which could explain the changes in
enrolment in the mathemacs degree in recent years. We should also be able to
retain our female students (González-Pérez et al., 2022) and researchers (González,
2018) and end the dynamics that push them out of the system, including harassment
(Yang & Wright, 2018; Bernardo, 2021), which has remained silenced in Spanish
universies (Valls et al., 2016) and the criminalisaon of motherhood (Gallardo,
2021; Powell, 2021). Not forgeng that there are gender biases in the scienc
evaluaon system (Moss-Racusin, 2012) and that women are systemacally denied
publicaons and citaons, hindering their professional promoon (Sugimoto
& Larivière, 2023), which favours vercal segregaon or the so-called scissors
eect that sll persists in universies and public research organisaons (Women
and Science Unit, 2023) and contributes to a 12.7% pay gap in universies (De la
Cal, 2023). This scissors eect also aects other more feminised areas, such as
biomedicine, and to overcome this inequality “it is necessary to distribute women’s
and men’s me fairly, favouring conciliaon; and that equality policies between
women and men are implemented eecvely, not only by liming themselves to
establishing recommendaons but also by taking concrete acon and sanconing
non-compliance” (Segovia et al., 2023, p. 408). Otherwise, we will connue with
this low female representaon in the eld of science and technology, which, in
addion to reducing work opportunies and women’s parcipaon in future
advances and decisions, also aects the quality of science, since “the presence of
women in science (like other groups) is not a sucient condion for beer science,
but it is necessary” (García Dauder & Pérez Sedeño, 2017, p. 9). On the other hand,
Schiebinger and Klinge (2020) show us the importance of including sex and gender
in research and innovaon, and the consequences of not doing so (harm to people,
delay of innovaons...).
The involvement of universies is of great importance in order to solve the
problems listed in the previous paragraphs. To this end, they should promote the
incorporaon of the gender perspecve in the teaching of disciplines related to
PECS (Calvo-Iglesias, 2022a), and teach students to introduce the sex/gender
approach in research (Calvo-Iglesias, 2022b), thus complying with the laws in force
at both European and naonal level. Universies should also train future pre-
school, primary and secondary school teachers to promote coeducaon and to
support a non-stereotypical choice of university studies. All of this would contribute
to achieving Goal 5 “Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls”
of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set by the United Naons. And we
must not forget that, although “we currently nd ourselves in a favourable context
in which new educaonal laws allow us to rethink the development of teacher
training in which coeducaon becomes an essenal element” (García-Lastra, 2022,
p. 33), for now the integraon of the gender perspecve in university teaching is
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 22 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 23
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
scarce, as stated in Miralles-Cardona (2020). Although important steps have been
taken towards this, such as the collecon of guides published by the Xarxa Vives
d’Universitats (Calvo-Iglesias et al., 2022), which already has thirty-eight guides,
twelve of them belong to the eld of science and engineering, and the provision
of training courses on gender perspecve among teaching and research sta, but
male parcipaon in these courses is very low (Unidad Mujer y Ciencia, 2023). To
understand this situaon, we must take into account the resistance to implemenng
gender equality iniaves in Spanish universies (Castaño & Vázquez-Cupeiro,
2023) and the neoliberal context that has been implemented in the university and
which directs teaching and research sta to promote their research acvity (Saura
& Caballero, 2020) in order to climb posions in the rankings. This evaluaon policy
based on rankings is beginning to be quesoned aer the recent scandals (Galán,
2023) and it is not going to help us achieve gender equality, as shown by the study
carried out by Reverter-Bañón (2020) on the Times Higher Educaon ranking.
Based on the report prepared by the Network of Gender Equality Units for
University Excellence (RUIGEU), which shows the diagnosis of the mainstreaming
of the gender perspecve in teaching and research, the measures for prevenon
and acon against harassment, and the measures for joint responsibility and
work-life balance in the public and private universies that make up the network
(RUIGEU, 2022), we have prepared and analysed a survey to carry out a diagnosis
of the situaon of the acons to promote gender equality in STEM areas carried
out in Spanish universies. This survey has been addressed to the equality units
because, as stated in the Organic Law 2/2023 of 22 March on the University System
(23 March, 2023), they are “responsible for advising, coordinang and evaluang
the mainstreaming of equality between women and men in the development of
university policies, as well as for including the gender perspecve in all the acvies
and funcons of the university”. This is the rst me that this diagnosis has been
carried out and, therefore, it complements the RUIGEU report (2022). The purpose
of this survey is to nd out about the implementaon of measures to favour the
presence of women in STEM or PECS areas, which should be implemented at all
stages of educaon, from infant educaon to the recognion of women in PECS
disciplines in appointments as Honorary Doctorates, showing that we are not just
guests, but that women have made and connue to make important contribuons
to science and technology.
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 23 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Epifanio et al. (2024)
24 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
METHOD
Parcipants
The Network of Gender Equality Units for University Excellence (RUIGEU)
includes the equality units of all Spanish public universies and those of private
universies that have applied for membership. In 2023, the RUIGEU is made up of
the units of 54 universies (RUIGEU, 2022).
To collect informaon about each university, a survey was sent out with
quesons about the iniaves and policies carried out in their university on gender
equality with emphasis on the PECS eld. The survey was sent to the 54 RUIGEU
units during December 2022 and January 2023 on three occasions (two reminders),
in order to collect more responses. A total of 28 units responded, i.e. 52% of the
units.
Survey
The survey was elaborated with Google forms and consisted of 13 quesons
so that it did not take long to answer and was easy to answer. The answers were
given with several opons and there was always a secon for others, so that they
could oponally write if they wished to clarify their answer. The full quesonnaire
is available at hps://bit.ly/3v8IdiY and the quesons are also specied in the
Results secon. However, they can be grouped into several areas: a) acons to
ght against gender stereotypes before access to university (quesons 1 to 3); b)
acons to favour access and permanence in the PECS areas (quesons 4 and 5); c)
recognion of students’ work carried out with a gender perspecve (quesons 6
and 7); d) valuaon of teaching and research with a gender perspecve (quesons
8 to 10); e) visibility and maximum recognion of female researchers in the STEM
area (queson 11); f) acons for eecve equality (quesons 12 and 13).
Limitaons
Since not all units responded, the informaon comes from a self-selected
sample. Therefore, the study is exploratory, only descripve stascs will be used,
not inferenal stascs.
The survey did not deal with personal data, but with data from the instuons.
However, in order to avoid possible non-response to hide a low involvement in
gender equality on the part of some universies, the survey was anonymous. It
could be answered without specifying informaon about the instuon. In any case,
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 24 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 25
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
a response rate of 52% is much higher than the usual response rates for university
sta, which range between 25 and 35% (Cabero & Epifanio, 2021). Moreover,
according to Menachemi (2011) it seems that in online surveys conducted in
universies, response bias is undetectable.
On the possible bias of non-response, Armstrong and Overton (1977) suggest
three approaches. The rst would be to compare with known values in the
populaon. However, this is not possible in our case because we do not collect
data from the responding universies and trying to nd the answers to the survey
quesons on the websites of the 54 universies is an arduous and complicated
mission, in addion to the fact that such informaon is not always available on
the websites. It is precisely for this reason that we designed the survey. The
second approach would be to consider subjecve esmates of non-response. It is
assumed that those people most involved in the issue will respond. So, in our case,
the non-responses could correspond to those universies with a lower degree of
involvement in equality policies, especially in the STEM eld. The third approach
would be based on comparing the responses of the dierent waves of respondents.
Here it is assumed that the respondents aer the last reminder are more similar
to the non-respondents. In the last reminder, 5 universies responded, which is a
small number to draw conclusions from. In any case, their responses are not out
of line with those obtained previously, although there are perhaps slightly more
negave responses and unknown answers.
Despite these limitaons, this study provides a snapshot of the situaon of
equality policies focused on the STEM eld in Spanish universies, which has not
been carried out to date. Therefore, although it is possible that it reports stascs
that might overesmate to some extent the equality policies in STEM currently in
place, if indeed the universies most involved responded in greater proporon,
this study oers a novel and important contribuon to poinng out avenues for
improvement in relaon to equality in STEM.
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 25 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Epifanio et al. (2024)
26 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
RESULTS
As each queson had dierent possible answers and all of them are categorical,
the results of each queson are presented and analyzed separately.
Regarding the rst queson: “at your university, is there any programme or
iniave to bring STEM careers to primary school girls?”, 15 units (54%) stated that
no such programme existed at their university.
The second queson “If your university oers teaching or primary and early
childhood educaon degrees, in the subjects dedicated to mathemacs didaccs, is
there any topic dedicated to coeducaon in mathemacs?” reported the following
results: in six of the 28 universies those degrees are not taught, three of those
where it is taught were unaware of it, and in only three cases the answer was
armave, while in 16 cases the answer was negave. Consequently, of those
universies with teaching degrees, according to the data available to the equality
units, only 16% have a topic dedicated to coeducaon in mathemacs.
The third queson “If your university oers a Master’s degree in teacher training
in the subjects of science (physics and chemistry), technology and/or mathemacs,
is there a topic dedicated to coeducaon in these disciplines? “Therefore, of the
universies that oer such a Master’s degree, according to the data provided by
the equality oces, only 5% of the universies that do oer such a Master’s degree
devote a topic to coeducaon in these scienc-technical disciplines.
In reference to the fourth queson “In your university, is there any acon
to favor the incorporaon of female undergraduate students in PECS (Physics,
Engineering, Computer Science)?”, 14 universies (50%) indicated that there was
no acon. Among those that did and indicated what they consisted of, the most
repeated acons were campaigns and scholarships.
Regarding the h queson “In your university, is there any posive acon to
favor the permanence of women in pre- and post-doctoral stages in PECS areas?”,
one did not know the answer, while 21 units (78%) answered that there was none.
Of those who answered in the armave, three corresponded to the undergraduate
stage, and four to the doctoral and postdoctoral stage. One of these iniaves was
a mentoring programme.
The sixth queson “At your university, are there any specic awards for
dissertaons and theses in mathemacs-intensive areas, such as PECS, to assess
gender mainstreaming in these areas?” yields the following data: six universies do
not oer awards in any area; 19 units oer awards, but not specic to these areas,
while three universies do oer specic awards in dierent elds.
The informaon obtained from the seventh queson “In your university, do any
of the criteria for awarding extraordinary doctoral prizes consider that the thesis
incorporates the gender perspecve?” is shown below: four units do not know,
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 26 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 27
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
two universies (8%) answer armavely, one of them indicates that only a few
doctoral programmes, while 22 units indicate that it is not considered.
Regarding the eighth queson “if your university has a programme for assessing
teaching, such as the DOCENTIA programme or similar, for example, for the
recognion of ve-year periods, do you get extra points if you teach with a gender
perspecve or training in equality, as a specic secon?”, one unit does not know,
22 universies (81%) answer in the negave, three units indicate that teaching with
a gender perspecve is valued and two universies value training in equality as a
specic secon.
The responses to the ninth queson “If your university has a programme to
fund educaonal innovaon projects, are extra points awarded for projects that
integrate the gender perspecve?” are as follows: one unit does not know; the
programme does not exist in four universies; it is not valued in 17 universies
(74%), while it is valued in six universies.
In reference to the tenth queson “If your university has a programme to
nance research projects, is equality valued in the projects? “Again, one unit does
not know; the programme does not exist in six universies; it is not valued in 16
universies (76%); and among the ve universies that do value it, it is valued in
the following way: in one university extra points are given if the project is directed
by a female researcher; in another extra points are given if the team is an equal-
gender team; and on another occasion extra points are given for the two previous
condions; and nally, in two universies it is valued that the project integrates the
gender perspecve.
The eleventh queson asks whether “in your university, is there an Honorary
Doctorate in STEM disciplines?”, with the result that two units do not know, and in
11 cases the answer is negave (42%).
The informaon collected in the twelh queson “in your university, do people
who have suered a break or reducon in research, either due to situaons
recognised by leaves of absence, or due to other situaons, such as care in the
COVID crisis, have the possibility of reducing their teaching in order to recover
research, if they so wish, by means of a specic programme for this purpose? “The
answer is summarized as follows: two units do not know; in 18 universies there is
no programme at all (69%); in ve of the universies only for maternity leave; while
in three of them, in addion to leave, there is also leave for caregiving. None of
them consider situaons not recognized as leave situaons.
In the thirteenth queson “In your university, in the event that a student suers
inappropriate behavior or even harassment, are there mechanisms in place so
that this person can immediately change university (by paying for the transfer) or
research group if they wish to do so? “The following answers were obtained: one of
the units does not know; 19 units (70%) answer in the negave; in the armave
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 27 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Epifanio et al. (2024)
28 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
cases, the answers are very heterogeneous, in some cases only indicang a change
of research group within the same university or on dierent campuses; while in
others it is explicitly stated that the transfer is paid for.
Archetype analysis
In order to analyze the responses in a mulvariate way and thus to discover
the joint behavior of the universies, archetype analysis with missing data is used
(Epifanio et al., 2020). Using this stascal technique that is similar to cluster
analysis, but with important dierences (see Cabero et al. 2023 for a discussion
of archetype analysis in educaon), the archetypical universies, those with the
most extreme responses, are found and the rest of the universies are expressed as
percentage mixtures of these archetypical universies. This helps the interpretaon
of the results. Three archetypal universies are considered in order to facilitate the
visualizaon and analysis of the results. Table 1 presents the responses to the 13
quesons, denoted by P, for the three archetypal universies obtained, where 0
indicates a negave response and 1 a posive response. In the sixth queson, 0.5
indicates that awards are given for TFG and TFM with a gender perspecve, but not
by eld. Missing data are denoted by NA (“not available”). The data and the code
to reproduce the results are available at hp://www3.uji.es/~epifanio/RESEARCH/
datoscodigo.zip.
Table 1
Responses from the three archetypal universies.
Almost all responses from both A1 and A2 universies are negave, i.e. they
are universies with few equality iniaves in the STEM eld. Both A1 and A2
were universies that responded aer the last reminder. In contrast, almost all the
responses from university A3 are posive, i.e. it is a university that is highly involved
in implemenng equality policies in the STEM eld. Universies A1 and A2 would
represent the archetype of a university with low involvement, while university A3
represents the opposite archetype.
To visualize the behavior of the universies in the survey, Figure 1 shows a ternary
diagram, whose verces corresponds to the three archetypal universies and the
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 28 25/06/2024 9:38:40

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 29
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
rest of the universies are represented as a percentage mix of these universies.
Only ve of 28 universies (18%) are similar to A3, with percentages above 50% in
Figure 1. Consequently, the vast majority of universies are more similar to A1 and
A2 universies, with low involvement in STEM equality policies.
Figure 1
Ternary diagram of the universies’ responses to the three archetypes.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Although in recent years there have been various legislave reforms to introduce
gender equality in educaon in the university system (Calvo et al., 2022), the results
of the survey show that the necessary acons to achieve equality in the STEM eld
have not been carried out.
If we compare the survey responses to quesons 1-3, on acons to favor access
and permanence in the PECS areas, with those found in the literature, we can see
that most of the acons are aimed at secondary educaon, although there are
also specic iniaves in primary educaon, such as that described by Ayuso et al
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 29 25/06/2024 9:38:41

Epifanio et al. (2024)
30 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
(2021). These iniaves are not without resistance, since, as Castaño and Vázquez-
Cupeiro (2023) report, some universies opposed them with arguments associated
with the supposed discriminaon of men. For example, Resa’s study (2023), aer
analyzing the teaching guides for subjects in the Primary Educaon degree at 38
universies in the 2019-20 academic year, shows that only 6% of the guides contain
content related to gender equality. In addion, the study by Miralles-Cardona et al.
(2020) notes:
greater recepveness to equality training among students of the undergradu-
ate degrees in early childhood and primary educaon than among students of the
master’s degree in secondary educaon, as well as a much more favorable percep-
on of gender training among female students. (p. 247)
Therefore, it is sll necessary to promote coeducaon in kinder and primary
educaon and in the master’s degree in secondary educaon, as can be deduced
both from the survey data and from the studies by Miralles-Cardona (2020) and Resa
(2023) menoned in the previous paragraph. Furthermore, “the emphasis given by
the LOMLOE to gender equality must undoubtedly be reected in the training of
students in the facules of educaon, i.e. the future teachers responsible for pung
these regulaons into pracce” (García-Lastra, 2022, p. 35). Therefore, it would be
important to carry out acons to try to involve especially the male students who
are studying for a Master’s degree in secondary educaon and come from the PECS
areas.
In relaon to quesons 4 and 5, on acons to favor access and permanence
in the PECS areas, we observe that acons to favor access are more important
than those to favor permanence. Although we can nd publicaons on mentoring
programmes such as the one promoted by the Royal Academy of Engineering of
Spain which has been carried out in dierent universies (Calvo-Iglesias, 2022a).
When promong university degrees, it would be interesng that universies would
consider that the movaons of men and women are dierent. For example, for
women, social ulity seems to be an important factor (Sáinz et al., 2020). The
changes made by universies such as Carnegie Mellon University and Harvey Mudd
College in the USA to adapt the academic culture to women should also be analyzed
in order to move from 10%-15% of female students enrolled in computer science
degrees, as is currently the case in Spain, to 50% (Díaz, 2021).
The lack of recognion of students’ work carried out with a gender perspecve,
as shown in the answers to quesons 6 and 7, is in line with the results of a recent
review of the TFGs awarded for integrang the gender perspecve in disciplines
related to the STEM eld in dierent universies (Calvo-Iglesias, 2022b). Even so,
we would like to highlight that more and more universies are implemenng these
awards and giving them visibility through repositories, so we can nd TFGs that
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 30 25/06/2024 9:38:41

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 31
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
incorporate this perspecve in degrees such as Physics, or engineering degrees
such as Computer Science (Calvo-Iglesias, 2022b).
There is also no recognion of teaching and research with a gender perspecve
(quesons 8 to 10). Dierent invesgaons show that both educaonal innovaon
projects in the eld of PECS and publicaons on teaching experiences or research
projects with a gender perspecve are sll insucient (Calvo-Iglesias, 2022a;
Unidad Mujer y Ciencia, 2023), although there have been important projects such
as that of the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (Calvo et al., 2022). And to reverse
this situaon, mandatory training should be provided to teaching and research sta
and instuonal incenves should be created (Lombardo et al., 2021). For example,
including the assessment of teaching with a gender perspecve or aendance at
gender training courses could help the involvement of teachers, especially male
teachers whose parcipaon in gender training courses is reduced (Unit of Women
and Science, 2023). This involvement of male teachers in PECS areas is fundamental
since they are masculinized and therefore more focus should be placed on their role
as allies to achieve equality. As recent research highlights, it is essenal to know
what men’s movaons are to become allies and plan strategies to involve them
in equity issues, showing them that their eorts are important (Nash et al., 2021).
The answers to queson 11 show that there is sll much to do in recognizing
women as honorary doctors (RUIGEU, 2022; García, 2023), although there are
universies that have chosen women from PECS elds such as Wendy Hall, Margaret
Hamilton, Lisa Randall, Jocelyn Bell or Inmaculada Paz Andrade.
And nally, we want to comment that the lile involvement of universies in
response to the eect of the pandemic on the careers of researchers is striking,
taking into account that there are studies that prove the stoppage in scienc
producon that they experienced during this period (Izquierdo- Useros et al., 2022).
Furthermore, to combat harassment it is necessary to take measures and it would
be advisable that they be the same throughout the university system, as is already
done in the Catalan university system (Generalitat de Catalunya, 2023).
All these responses show us, as we have commented at the beginning of
this secon, that there is a low involvement of universies in equality policies.
Furthermore, it is striking that in numerous cases the response reected a lack of
knowledge of the situaon on the part of the equality unit, which may be due to
changes in management and the lack of stable personnel, for example, an equality
technician. We want to highlight that it is not enough to have a gender equality unit,
but rather it is necessary to provide it with the necessary means, both in human
and economic resources, to give visibility to the acons and support them without
resistance. In this sense, we highlight the opposion to using inclusive language,
for example, School of Engineering instead of School of (male in Spanish) Engineers
(Castaño & Vázquez Cupeiro, 2023).
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 31 25/06/2024 9:38:41

Epifanio et al. (2024)
32 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
The analysis of archetypes conrms this low involvement and shows us that only
ve of the universies that parcipated in this study are commied to equality in the
scienc-technical eld and carry out acons to achieve it. We hope that soon more
universies will join these acons following the example of the most commied
ones and to do so it is necessary for the Ministry of Universies, the Conference of
Rectors of the Spanish University System or the Naonal Accreditaon Agency to
take appropriate measures, incenves and sancons, not just recommendaons,
so that equality is a priority. A clear example of acon would be for ANECA and
other quality agencies to establish that to accredit degrees or DOCENTIA programs,
the gender dimension must be considered, following the line undertaken by the
Agency for the Quality of the University System of Catalonia (AQU). Likewise, the
focus of acon should be changed, which is highly directed at women, and think
about acons to involve male teachers and students of these degrees so that they
parcipate in equality acons.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We acknowledge to all the equality units of the Spanish university system
that responded to the survey and who, with their collaboraon, made this study
possible. We hope that our work helps them connue promong equality in the
scienc-technical eld.
Work parally supported by the Research grant TRANSUJI/2023/6 from Jaume
I University.
REFERENCES
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Esmang nonresponse bias in
mail surveys. Journal of Markeng Research, 14(3), 396-402. hps://doi.
org/10.2307/3150783
Ayuso, N., Fillola, E., Masia, B., Murillo, A. C., Trillo-Lado, R., Baldassarri, S., Cerezo,
E., Ruberte, L., Mariscal, D., & Villarroya-Gaudó, M. (2021). Gender gap in STEM:
a cross-seconal study of primary school students’ self-percepon and test
anxiety in mathemacs. IEEE Transacons on Educaon, 64(1), 40-49. hp://
dx.doi.org/10.1109/TE.2020.3004075
Bernardo Álvarez, A. (2021). Acoso. #MeToo en la ciencia española. Next Door
Publishers.
Bian, L., Leslie, S., & Cimpian, A. (2017). Gender stereotypes about intellectual
ability emerge early and inuence children’s interests. Science, 355(6323), 389-
391. hps://bit.ly/49spkp7
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 32 25/06/2024 9:38:41

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 33
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
Cabero, I., & Epifanio, I. (2021). A data science analysis of academic sta workload
proles in Spanish universies: gender gap laid bare. Educaon Sciences, 11(7),
317. hps://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11070317
Cabero I, Epifanio, I., & Gual-Arnau, X. (2023). Analysis of archetypes to determine
me use and workload proles of Spanish university professors. Educaon
Sciences, 13(3), 295. hps://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13030295
Calvo-Iglesias, E., Epifanio, I., Estrade, S., & Mas de les Valls, E. (2022). Gender
perspecve in STEM disciplines in Spain universies. In R. Huang, Kinshuk, M.
Jemni, N. -S. Chen, & J. M. Spector (Eds.), Women in STEM in higher educaon:
good pracces of aracon, access and retainment in higher educaon (pp.
165-179). Springer Nature Singapore. hps://bit.ly/3PUTudF
Calvo Iglesias, E. (2022a). Perspecva de género en la docencia universitaria de las
materias STEM, una revisión. In L. Molina García, D. Cobos Sanchiz, E. López
Meneses, A. Jaén Marnez, & A. H. Marn Padilla (Eds.), Educación y sociedad:
pensamiento e innovación para la transformación social (pp. 807-815). Dykinson.
hps://bit.ly/3vxiLnt
Calvo Iglesias, E. (2022b). Premios a los Trabajos de Fin de Grado con perspecva de
género en las disciplinas CTIM, una revisión. In J. M. Esteve Faubel, A. Fernández
Sogorb, R. Marnez Roig, & J. F. Álvarez Herrero (Eds.), Transformando la
educación a través del conocimiento (pp. 191-200). Octaedro. hps://bit.
ly/3U2HE3A
Castaño Collado, C., & Vázquez-Cupeiro, S. (2023). Resistance and counter-resistance
to gender equality policies in Spanish universies. Papers. Revista de Sociologia,
108(2), Arculo e3105. hps://doi.org/10.5565/rev/papers.3105
Cimpian, J. R., Kim, T. H., & McDermo, Z. T. (2020). Understanding persistent
gender gaps in STEM. Science, 368(6497), 1317-1319. hps://bit.ly/3vIeWvz
Couso, D. (2023). Invesgación educava con perspecva de género: ¿de qué
estamos hablando? [Vídeo]. YouTube. hps://bit.ly/3U4D70x
De la Cal, M.L., Etxezarreta, A., Galbete, A., & Marnez, E. (2023). Estudio brecha
salarial de género en las universidades públicas españolas. hps://bit.ly/3TtEh4e
Díaz, C. (2021). Cuando las informácas rompen el techo de cristal. [Webinar]. Tv
USC. hps://bit.ly/49n4R4Z
Epifanio, I., Ibáñez, M. V., & Simó, A. (2020). Archetypal analysis with missing data:
see all samples by looking at a few based on extreme proles. The American
Stascian, 74(2), 169-183. hps://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2018.1545700
Galán, A. (2023). Tiempos convulsos para la éca en la ciencia y en el uso de las
métricas. Educación XX1, 26(2), 9-14. hps://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.37562
Gallardo, M. (2021). Does maternity aect women’s careers? Percepons of
working mothers in academia. Educación XX1, 24(1), 405-428. hp://dx.doi.
org/10.5944/educXX1.26714
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 33 25/06/2024 9:38:41

Epifanio et al. (2024)
34 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
García, C. (2023, 7 marzo). La brecha de género persiste en la universidad: el abismo
de los honoris causa. elDiario.es. hps://bit.ly/3IJf9RY
García-Dauder, S., & Pérez-Sedeño, E. (2017). Las” menras” ciencas sobre las
mujeres. Catarata.
García-Lastra, M. (2022). Coeducación y formación del profesorado: una (nueva)
oportunidad para repensar la prácca educava. In N. Morales (Ed.), Igualdad
y coeducación. Retos para las escuelas del siglo XXI (pp. 33-45). Ediciones
Universidad de Salamanca. hps://doi.org/10.14201/0AQ0336
Generalitat de Catalunya (2023). Protocol guia d’àmbit universitari per prevenir i
reparar amb diligència deguda les situacions de violència masclista, assetjament
sexual i assetjament per raó de sexe, orientació sexual, identat de gènere o
expressió de gènere. hps://bit.ly/49XqiL2
González-Pérez, S., Marnez-Marnez, M., Rey-Paredes, V., & Cifre, E. (2022). I
am done with this! Women dropping out of engineering majors. Froners in
Psychology, 13, Arculo 918439. hps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.918439
González Ramos, A. M. (2018). ¿Por qué abandonan las mujeres? En A. M. González
Ramos (Ed.) Mujeres en la ciencia contemporánea: la aguja y el camello (pp.
39-66). Icaria.
Heijstra, T. M., Steinthorsdór, F. S., & Einarsdór, T. (2017). Academic career
making and the double-edged role of academic housework. Gender and
Educaon, 29(6), 764-780. hps://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1171825
Izquierdo-Useros, N., Marin Lopez, M. A., Monguió-Tortajada, M., Muñoz-Moreno,
J. A., Agus Benito, C., Morón-López, S., Evans, H., Gualdrón-López, M., Müller,
J., & Prado, J. G. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 lockdown in a biomedical research
campus: a gender perspecve analysis. Froners in Psychology, 13, Arculo
906072. hps://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.906072
Ley Orgánica 2/2023, de 22 de marzo, del Sistema Universitario. Bolen Ocial del
Estado núm. 70, de 23 de marzo de 2023. hps://bit.ly/4amSmrA
Lombardo, E., Bustelo, M., Alonso, A., Verge, T., Elizondo, A., Tildesley, R., Diz I., &
La Barbera, M. C. (2021). Igualdad e interseccionalidad en las universidades.
Recomendaciones. hps://bit.ly/4cLKUHZ
Marn Carrasquilla, O., Muñoz San Roque, I., & Santaolalla Pascual, E. (2023).
Actudes hacia la ciencia en la educación STEM: desarrollo de una escala
para la detección y fomento de vocaciones tempranas. Revista Española de
Orientación y Psicopedagogía, 34(1), 122–140. hps://doi.org/10.5944/reop.
vol.34.num.1.2023.37421
Menachemi, N. (2011). Assessing response bias in a web survey at a university
faculty. Evaluaon & Research in Educaon, 24(1), 5-15. hps://doi.org/10.108
0/09500790.2010.526205
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 34 25/06/2024 9:38:41

Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36 35
Actions for gender equality in scientic-technical areas in Spanish universities
Miralles-Cardona, C., Cardona-Moltó, M. -C., & Chiner, E. (2020). La perspecva de
género en la formación inicial docente: estudio descripvo de las percepciones
del alumnado. Educación XX1, 23(2), 231-257. hps://doi.org/10.5944/
educxx1.23899
Moss-Racusin, C., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J.
(2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. PNAS,
109(41), 16474-16479. hps://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109
Nash, M., Grant, R., Moore, R., & Winzenberg, T. (2021). Male allyship in instuonal
STEMM gender equity iniaves. Plos One, 16(3), Arculo e0248373. hps://
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248373
Powell, K. (2021). The parenng penales faced by scienst mothers. Nature,
595(7868), 611-613. hps://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01993-x
Red de Unidades de Igualdad de Género para la Excelencia Universitaria (2022). Las
polícas de igualdad universitarias: XV Encuentro RUIGEU 2022: diagnósco de
los grupos de trabajo. hps://bit.ly/49rhpZl
Resa, A. (2023). Igualdad de género y formación inicial del profesorado en España:
entre la utopía y la realidad. Profesorado, Revista de Currículum y Formación
del Profesorado, 27(1), 255–275. hps://doi.org/10.30827/profesorado.
v27i1.21192
Reverter-Bañón, S. (2021). La igualdad de género en la universidad. Capitalismo
académico y rankings globales. Invesgaciones Feministas, 12(2), 271-281.
hps://doi.org/10.5209/infe.72331
Rossi, A. S. (1965). Women in science: why so few? Social and psychological
inuences restrict women’s choice and pursuit of careers in science. Science,
148(3674), 1196-1202. hps://bit.ly/3xgWzyb
Sáinz, M. (2017). ¿Por qué no hay más mujeres STEM? Se buscan ingenieras, sicas
y tecnólogas. Ariel y Fundación Telefónica.
Sáinz, M., Fàbregues, S., Rodó-de-Zárate, M., Marnez-Cantos, J. -L., Arroyo, L., &
Romano, M. -J. (2020). Gendered movaons to pursue male-dominated STEM
careers among Spanish young people: a qualitave study. Journal of Career
Development, 47(4), 408–423. hps://doi.org/10.1177/0894845318801101
Samper-Gras, T. (2022). A lo importante, ya van ellos. Una propuesta contextual
desde los nuevos materialismos para comprender por qué hay tan pocas mujeres
en ciencias técnicas. Cuesones de Género: de la Igualdad y la Diferencia, 17,
209-231. hps://doi.org/10.18002/cg.i17.7248
Saura, G., & Caballero, K. (2020). Capitalismo académico digital. Revista Española de
Educación Comparada, 37, 192. hps://doi.org/10.5944/reec.37.2021.27797
Schiebinger, L., & Klinge, I. (2020). Gendered innovaons 2: how inclusive analysis
contributes to research and innovaon. Publicaons Oce of the European
Union.
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 35 25/06/2024 9:38:41

Epifanio et al. (2024)
36 Educación XX1, 27 (2), 19-36
Segovia Saiz, C., Briones Vozmediano, E., Tomás Mateos, J., González María, E., & Gea
Sánchez, M. (2023). El techo de cristal de las mujeres invesgadoras en ciencias
de la salud en España. Feminismo/s, 42, 385-412. hps://doi.org/10.14198/
fem.2023.42.14
Sugimoto, C. R., & Larivière, V. (2023). Equity for women in science: dismantling
systemic barriers to advancement. Harvard University Press.
Unidad de Mujer y Ciencia (2023). Ciencas en Cifras 2023. hps://bit.ly/3JdtMx7
Valls, R., Puigvert, L., Melgar, P., & Garcia-Yeste, C. (2016). Breaking the silence at
Spanish universies: ndings from the rst study of violence against women on
campuses in Spain. Violence Against Women, 22(13), 1519-1539. hps://doi.
org/10.1177/1077801215627511
Verdugo-Castro, S. (2022). La brecha de género en los estudios universitarios del
sector STEM en el espacio español de educación. [Tesis doctoral, Universidad de
Salamanca]. GRIAL Repositorio documental Universidad de Salamanca. hps://
bit.ly/3AqxPTH
Yang, Y., & D. Wright Carroll. (2018). Gendered microaggressions in Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathemacs. Leadership and Research in
Educaon 4, 28-45. hps://bit.ly/3PPixii
01 Epifanio (inglés).indd 36 25/06/2024 9:38:41