Sep 30

Having 3 children doesn’t have to damage your career

If you have time, do read these two online articles: the first, entitled ‘Working Moms: Women With Three Children Less Likely To Have Jobs Than Those With Two, Study Says’, reports on the findings of a research study in Australia, published in July, which looked at how women with more than two children were less likely to be in employment than women with fewer than two children. The second, on bnet.com, written by Laura Vanderkam, is called ‘More Kids Won’t Kill Your Career-Unless You Want Them To’ and takes slight issue with the findings, pointing out that the figures are less depressing than mothers of three or more children might think.

I might be said to have a vested interest, as I have three children of my own and a career, but in fact I was just curious to explore why it might be that the study findings were as they were (other than, of course, the obvious costs both financially and in time of managing large families). What was really interesting, however, was that despite the headline – which re-emphasised the ‘difficulty’ aspect of working motherhood, as captured too in the film and book ‘I don’t know how she does it’ (see my previous blog) – the facts were somewhat different. In fact, an average of 55% of the women with three children interviewed in the study actually did work outside the home. This means that women with three children were more likely to work than not to work – a fact which did not make the headlines. Given that only 21% of women under 30 with three children were working, (not surprising, as it is quite hard to manage to have three children before the age of 30 as well as study and work), then this suggests that a much higher proportion of older women with three children were working too.

So the picture is not bleak at all … but in any case, I would question whether we should even worry about statistics, except in as far as they highlight areas where employers need to address hurdles which prevent women from working and having families. Let’s move instead away from an entrenched position where we assume that life is difficult for working mothers; what really matters is that women are allowed to make their own choices, and that there is nothing to prevent this happening. As Laura Vanderkam says at the end of her article, ‘Sure, it’s challenging, but so are most things that are worth doing in life. Three kids doesn’t have to be the kiss of death, and isn’t for most Australian women, apparently. Even if that didn’t make the headlines.’

Indeed.

Sep 27

Re-forming the state education landscape in this country

There has of late been a whirlwind of activity in the field of national educational debate in the UK, with a drive on the part of Government to encourage independent schools to sponsor failing state schools as they become Academies – effectively, semi-independent state schools. (I say ‘semi-independent’ because I have yet to be convinced that Academies will have the true independence experienced by fee-paying independent schools, which can – albeit within a regulatory framework designed to keep children safe – respond immediately and effectively to the needs of their children and their parents.)

At a lunch last term at Guildhall in the City of London, Michael Gove said that independent schools should ‘hang their heads in shame’ if they did not sponsor an Academy; at a meeting in Downing Street earlier this month both David Cameron and Michael Gove made a similarly robust case for independent schools to take over state schools; a symposium on Academies at Wellington College last Thursday was well-attended by the great and the good in the independent sector; independent school leaders are meeting with Government officials – the Girls’ Schools Association, for instance, met with Dr Elizabeth Sidwell, the Schools Commissioner, last week. It seems very much as though there is a movement which is taking us towards a blurring of the boundaries between state and independent education, and there seems to be a cross-party commitment to the Academies programme.

Why is the Academies programme so important? The argument is as follows: education is without doubt vital for the future of the young people in this country and for the country as a whole. There are too many under-performing schools, which are blighting the education and aspirations of too many young people. A good – great – school has a strong, aspirational ethos, outstanding teachers and strong, robust, autonomous leadership. Independent schools have this expertise, this ‘DNA’, as Lord Adonis called it several years ago. It takes only a small step of the imagination to see that the state sector could benefit from the involvement and engagement of the independent sector.

So why should independent schools even entertain the notion of ploughing time, effort, and – no doubt, in due course – financial resources – into state education? This question has yet to be answered in the minds of many, and many more are extremely cautious, but when the answer comes, it will be connected with the original charitable aims of our independent schools, many of which were set up to educate the poor and disadvantaged. It will also be because as educators we have a strong sense of moral purpose in what we do, and this means reaching out beyond what we do in school to the wider community and world. It will be because we recognise that we have huge experience in running extraordinarily fine schools, and that we have a responsibility to share this. And it will be because we understand that our pupils will benefit when our teachers will gain an even greater breadth of experience.

There are many difficult hurdles ahead, both practical and conceptual – the relationship between Government and schools, for example, not to mention the thorny issue of funding and investment (who pays and how much?). No school should be rushing into this kind of relationship. But when you look at all the successful and mutually rewarding partnerships we already have in place across the independent-state divide, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that we might edge yet closer.

If our young people benefit, then we owe it to them at the very least to consider it.

Sep 25

The Pseudoscience of Single-Sex Schooling: do single-sex schools really make pupils more sexist?

I wish that I could gain access to the full study published in this month’s edition of Science journal which appears to conclude that single-sex education is bad, wrong, immoral, not worth it – you can imagine the tone. As the website of the American Association of the Advancement of Science, who publish Science does not allow free access to the whole article, I have had to make do with the summary, and with the number of press articles (including in the Telegraph) picking up the highlights (possibly from edited press releases, although I would hope that the AAAS have given education journalists access to the full report).

I would love to read the whole article, partly because I enjoy soaking up research on anything to do with education, but partly too because I am extremely curious to see what makes the authors of this report so certain of their conclusion. I have no issue with them claiming that ‘there is no well-designed research showing that single-sex (SS) education improves students’ academic performance’, as I suspect that they are probably right – how would one design such research in a way that was ethically and practically acceptable? Besides, each young person is a unique individual; how can we ever be certain that what works for one person will work for another? And at what point in their life could we take a stand and draw a conclusion about the effect of their school experience – at 18, 30, 65? And how would we distinguish their experience of schooling from all the other experiences they will have had in their lives? And how could we pull apart all the very, very many aspects that make up education or schooling anyway: different teachers, teachers at different times of the day, teachers at different stages of their lives, teachers with different life stories who interact with their charges in different ways as a result – and so on, to name but a few?

I do, however, have a problem with the authors of this report claiming that this lack of scientific evidence makes single-sex education ‘deeply misguided’. If there is no evidence to suggest that single-sex education is better or worse than co-ed education, as they claim, then the same must be true of co-education. And what evidence are they drawing on to conclude that ‘sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism’? This is so far removed from my experience of single-sex education that I find it completely perplexing. When a statistical analysis conducted by the Girls’ Schools Association shows that, ‘compared to all girls nationally, in GSA schools over 70% more girls took A level maths; over 50% more girls took a science at A level; over 90% more girls took a physical science (physics or chemistry) at A level; over 80% more girls studied French, German or Spanish at A level.’, then you have to wonder how the authors of this new report came to their conclusion. Surely they haven’t fallen into the trap of judging schools today by the outcomes of schools several decades ago, when our social history was very different?

The aspect of the report, though, which caused me quite simply to put the report out of my mind and file its conclusions as verging on opinion rather than fact is the affiliation of all of its authors: ‘All authors are founders and uncompensated board members of the nonprofit American Council for CoEducational Schooling.’ As I said in my letter to the Telegraph the day after the news was published, which was sent on behalf of the Girls’ Schools Association, I sense a strong self-interest here in the research group reaching such a radical conclusion. What a shame that this should undermine a legitimate research goal.

By all means let us keep researching the area of single-sex education, as every other part of education, in the search for what helps young people learn and grow into well-rounded, well-grounded young adults. Let us debate, let us share experience, let us develop good practice. But let us recognise too that in a healthy national and international education system there will always be sufficient choice for parents to be able to find the right place at the right time for their daughters and their sons, and a part of this must be choice in schools with different gender balances. I know some great single-sex schools, and I lead one myself. The girls emerge as amazingly well-balanced human beings, with a self-knowledge and ease of being which surpasses most of their expectations, and those of their parents. I would defy any of the researchers to come and experience my girls’ school and still think single-sex education was even remotely ‘misguided’!

Sep 23

Women’s depression rates: how can we prevent them rising further?

A relatively well-considered article in the Daily Mail last week drew attention again to the rise in the number of women who are being treated in this country for depression, and who are as a result of this diagnosis are being prescribed anti-depressants. As usual in the Daily Mail, it is important to read beyond the sensationalist title, which accuses (on this occasion) drugs companies of cynicism in encouraging prescriptions of their own products; equally, it is important to gloss over the usual embedded criticisms of women – especially working women – which surface briefly. And do – as ever – steer clear of the comment streams which follow the article, which contain polarised, ancient views of women which can border on the ludicrous.

This aside, the main drive of the article is that we do not really know why women suffer from depression more than men, although we have a fair inkling that it lies in the speed at which social change has occurred over the past few decades, and the impact that this has had emotionally and physically on women’s lives. This change, of course, is to be welcomed: with every decade we move closer to a situation where gender inequality is no longer a reality, and where women and men are able to be more authentically themselves. It stands to reason that when we reach such a harmonious state – and I am under no illusion that this will be hard to attain – then we will end up with a happier, healthier, more balanced society.

What we must not forget, though, is the period of time between now and then. Change is hard; transition causes stress, and the psychological hardships experienced by women and men in relation to their shifting gender roles should not be underestimated. Drugs, as part of an arsenal of approaches to help ease this transition, can of course be of benefit. The point of the article, though, is that we should be more robust; more appropriate than drugs, perhaps, are personal counselling and guidance to help women deal with these enormous changes.

This makes perfect sense. We should be supporting all our women, young and old, to make the most of themselves, and we should not be afraid to stand up and argue for this kind of help. Muddling through will get us only so far; the more resources we can devote to enabling women to develop strength and resilience, the better. Girls’ schools make a phenomenal starting point; the medical profession should catch up.

Sep 20

“I don’t know how she does it” … or do I?

Media and lifestyle critics have been engaged in a frenzy of comment these past couple of weeks over the film ‘I don’t know how she does it’, based on the 2002 bestseller book of the same title by Allison Pearson. The film stars Sarah Jessica Parker as the heroine Kate Reddy, who balances (or doesn’t) life as an investment manager with life as a mother, and you cannot have failed to see the coverage: endless comment pieces about how true or not the film is, and countless reviews, most of which say it is an ‘all right’ sort of a film – lighthearted and without huge substance, but moderately entertaining. It is in the mould of most films, then – and there is nothing wrong with light entertainment, after all.

I haven’t of course seen it – not enough time while actually balancing work and family – but I can appreciate its content. Interestingly, however, although the main thrust of the comment pieces has been that ‘this has happened in my life too’, there is an ascerbic tinge both (according to reviewers) to the movie, and to the commentaries on it. The competition that can exist between women is highlighted – encouraged even – and it is debatable how helpful this is in our striving to move things forward more generally for women, including working mothers. The debate for women often centres around the question of whether it is possible ‘to have it all‘, and there is a certain malicious delight – not a pleasant emotion – which often seems to surface when it becomes clear that you can’t actually have everything in life.

But what a foolish assumption to make in the first place! Taken to its extremes, of course you can’t have everything in life – every consumer good, every experience, every state of being. To have children and not have children at the same time; to live simultaneously in New York, Delhi and the wilds of West Africa … how absurd even to contemplate it! We can add experiences to our lives, and this is one of the messages we should be communicating to our young people – make the most of your opportunities, and you will lead a richer life – but just think of all the information there is in the world: how ridiculous to expect we could know, or even encounter, a fraction of all of it! So much is unknowable, so much is impossible to do.

Seen with in this context of the truly impossible in life, it seems eminently possible to consider that we might be able to conduct the relatively simple actions of (a) having children and (b) working. Why on earth do we create such a fuss about it? It doesn’t mean that it is easy – but why would we expect it to be? Everything that is worth anything in life requires hard work, and therein lies the satisfaction of it. What matters is our attitude to it – a positive, optimistic, ‘can-do’ attitude, which acknowledges that there is no such thing as perfection, and that this is fine. We need to change the language around women’s lives – ‘choices’, not ‘compromises’, for example.

So … do enjoy the film. I expect that I will at some later stage in the future, but it doesn’t worry me not to be able to see it now. In the meantime, go and enjoy your family and your work. We do know how she does it, just as we know how we do it – with humour, determination, and an embrace of all that life has to offer. Go for it!

Sep 19

Kofi Annan, children’s radio, and the immense power of charitable action

On Saturday morning I had the tremendous privilege of hearing Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations, in conversation with Edward Mortimer, Trustee of the Children’s Radio Foundation, at the University Church in Oxford, where I was taking part in the annual Alumni Weekend, which involved me in chairing a session of Q and A with the Vice-Chancellor in the Sheldonian. Hearing Kofi Annan speak, however, was a highlight of the weekend: it was the first time I had heard him in person, and I was struck forcibly by his dignity, presence and total commitment to making the world a better place. Since retiring from the UN in 2006, Mr Annan has devoted his time to continuing to press for better social policies for the poor and vulnerable, particularly in Africa, and he has also been an active mediator in areas of conflict – in Kenya, for example, in the terrible post-election violence in 2008. He is also a member of the Elders. He had agreed to speak in Oxford to highlight the fantastic work being done by the Children’s Radio Foundation, who empower young people by giving them a voice in the medium which is still the most effective means of communication throughout the great continent of Africa, and it was fascinating to hear of their work.

Perhaps it is because I am more attuned to them personally, having reached that stage in my life where I have a voice and the means and network to support them, but I have the glorious sensation at the moment of seeming to encounter charitable ventures at almost every turn. A week ago I was visited by an Old Girl of St Mary’s Calne who lives in Zambia, in the town of Livingstone, and who is organising a series of events and projects to mark David Livingstone’s bicentenary, raising money too for the Anglican Street Children’s Project. On Friday night I met a fellow alumnus of Oxford University who has recently set up a charity, Mardi, to connect recent graduates of a number of universities in order to share knowledge and experience to help charity organisations in the developing world. Throughout 2011 I have been supporting – through school and through the Girls’ Schools Association – two major charities: The Prince’s Trust (South West) – and in particular their Women Into Enterprise programme, giving business grants to disadvantaged young people – and Plan UK, the children’s charity, which does amazing work in 50 countries around the world to support young people, and which lobbies governments to make a change for the futures of the youth of the world. Their ‘Because I am a Girl’ campaign has been – and continues to be – far-reaching, and seeks to address the issue that 75 million girls in the world are not in education. I will have the huge privilege of accompanying them in October this year on a field trip to one of their projects in Bangladesh, where they are working to reduce the instances of early and forced marriage, which prevent millions of girls each year from completing their education.

In all of this work done by the people I meet, I see the real power of action, and what can be achieved in this world if people put their mind to making a difference. We all have our own families to care for, our own circles of friends, our own jobs and organisations to tend … but in addition, if we are to be global citizens and contribute to the development of humanity, then we must all realise that our responsibility – and our capacity to influence – spreads out beyond our immediate relationships. It is incumbent upon all of us to reach out to others and to help make the world a better place.

I asked Kofi Annan a question on Saturday: what advice would he give the girls and young women in my school about what they could do to help? His response was that they should go beyond what they do at home and at school and stretch out to give to others. “If each of us does something, collectively we will make a difference.”

Great words from a great man. Let us heed them.

Sep 15

It is natural to feel conflicting emotions about your children going to university

With the new university term now fast approaching – and just started for some – it is natural for parents of first-time university students to feel very strange. Such a conflict of emotions – pride in your child for gaining a place and hope for the future, for new relationships and new horizons, balanced against fear of the unknown, of what they might encounter, and fear too of the aching gap that they will leave in your home. No matter how infuriating your teenager can be at times, she or he is still essentially your baby, whom you have nurtured and cared for, through thick and thin, for the past 18 or 19 years. Is it really time for them to leave?

These are entirely natural, human feelings. You have invested enormously in your child – not just financially (try not to think about how much this is, but an article in the Guardian last year set the figure at over £200k … excluding school fees), but, more pertinently, emotionally. Although as parents we understand rationally that our children are their own independent selves, emotionally we are bound to see them as extensions of our own selves. A part of us resides in them, and while we want the very, very best for them, and we know that this means that they must leave us and forge their own path in life, nonetheless a strong tie holds them to us, and part of us wishes that they would never leave.

So how can you prepare for their departure? Distract yourself by preparing with them – reading about the course, helping to sort out accommodation issues and practicalities such as bank accounts. Speak to other parents for advice on areas – I wrote a short article for the MyDaughter website, for example, a while ago, in response to a parent who was worried that her daughter might be lonely at university. Read Khalil Gibran’s poem ‘On Children’ again and cry, but know that you have done the most amazing job in bringing your child to adulthood.

And then sit back and wait for the end of term, and the inevitable load of washing which will come your way, and for which you will secretly be glad.

Sep 13

Women in teams: the way to combat the gender pay gap?

I missed this article, ‘Women compete better in teams’, which appeared in Sunday’s Observer, but luckily one of my senior staff passed it on to me. It gave details of research published in the Economics Journal about an experiment conducted by researchers about team exercises, and the results were fascinating, with implications for understanding and creating opportunities for women to compete equally with men in gaining top appointments.

In the experiment, participants – men and women – had to answer maths problems as quickly as possible, and had to decide – in teams – whether they wanted to be paid according to the number of problems their two-person team answered correctly or whether they wanted to enter a competition against three other teams. Individual participants decided whether they wanted to compete against three other individuals.

The male and female participants performed equally well, answering the same proportion of questions correctly; what was extremely interesting, however, was that a significant difference emerged in how the genders chose to participate. No fewer than 81% of men chose to compete as individuals compared with 28% of women; when, however, participants competed in teams, the gender competition gap dropped by 31 percentage points to 22%, with 67% of men choosing to enter the competition compared with 45% of women.

These statistics are of relevance because achievement – in the workplace, as elsewhere – is closely related to a desire to compete. Put bluntly, you have to be ‘in it to win it’. One of the main areas of concern for Boards seeking to appoint women is that the pipeline of women coming through from middle management positions dries up, and this has been linked to a lack of desire on the part of women to compete. If this desire to compete grows when women are placed in teams, then it is entirely feasible that with changes to the environment in which women work, learn and prepare for their futures, many more women may be prepared to put themselves forward for the top jobs.

The success of any initiative based on this research – and there is still much creative thinking to be done in this respect in order to work out how this might translate into practice in interviews -will of course still depend on the environment at the top evolving to make it attractive for women – but this research opens a door. It is good to see that there is active work going on to make it possible for us to break down the remnants of gender inequality which still bedevil our workplaces.

Sep 11

The valuing of fatherhood

Fathers who would like an uplifting read should take a look at Dylan Jones’ comment piece on The Times website. Entitled ‘Men who juggle: School runs, nappies, long hours at work’, the article is in effect a piece in praise of fatherhood, recognising the value that fathers have in their children’s lives, and celebrating the fact that their involvement in their lives is increasingly regarded as normal.

Dylan Jones, of course, is the editor of GQ, the stereotyped ‘lads’ mag’ image of which is as far removed from sensible fatherhood as one can imagine. And he is the first to admit that he has not always thought the way he does now: ‘When I started at GQ a decade ago I banned all mention of children in the magazine; photographs too. If our readers have children, I told the staff, they don’t want to be reminded of them when they read our magazine. They want to escape domesticity and imagine for a while that the likes of Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow are still attainable, that the world of private jets, nightclubs and chilled Cristal is only a cab ride away.’

Now, however, he has seen how outmoded and restrictive such an attitude is, and he is not afraid to stand up and be counted. In this day and age, when mothers and fathers are much more likely to want to share jointly in the care of their children, and when it has at last become acceptable for fathers to express the deep love they have for their offspring, this article reminds us that we have made enormous social progress, and yet must still speak out in order to get to the end of the final straight: ‘Men no longer want to miss out on the early years. We no longer want to miss out on any years. It is time that we stopped sniggering about the so-called feminisation of men, time we embraced the idea of men who want to juggle their careers to care for their children, time we celebrated stay-at-home dads.’

In the same week that a study showed that boys who grow up without fathers are far more likely to fall – in what might be interpreted as a sad search for love and fulfilment – into early fatherhood themselves, it is also a reminder that fathers are incredibly important. Fathers … feel valued this week.

Sep 09

Boardroom quotas and social change

A very interesting comment piece appeared in The Telegraph on Wednesday of this week, and I thoroughly recommend that you read it. Entitled ‘Quotas won’t resolve the battle of the sexes’, it was written jointly by Dominic Raab and Priti Patel, Conservative MPs for, respectively, Esher and Walton, and Witham, and it challenged the recommendations of Lord Davies’ Report on Women on Boards, published last February. In particular, the authors of the piece questioned the wisdom of mandatory quotas of women on UK boards, arguing that they are a ‘short-term sticking plaster; not a long-term solution’.

Of course, Lord Davies himself did not advocate fixed, mandatory quotas; what he did say, however, was that boards should set themselves the target of 25% of women in the boardroom by 2015, and this month of September marks the date by which he expected boards to comply in this respect. A target without a process is mere window-dressing, though, and the Telegraph comment piece is quite right to deplore the setting of quotas which result in women being on the board just because they are women, and not because they are the best candidate. To be fair to Lord Davies, however, this is clear in his recommendations; and boards have had six months in which to work out how they are going to bring more women on to their boards in a way which is meaningful and both recognises and rewards female talent, ensuring that it is nurtured and developed in the pipeline leading up to board level. A more diverse board, after all, has been proven to be a more competitive one.

Where the problem will lie is if boards either fail to set targets, or set the kind of superficial target which fails to work out how to attract, develop and retain outstanding women directors. Neither of these should happen if boards set their minds to the task at hand – how can they create an environment which allows women to grow and thrive in their business context? Part of the answer lies in the suggestions listed by Raab and Patel – more family-friendly policies, for instance, which will retain women at a time of their lives where they seek flexibility. Equally important, though, is the changing of attitudes towards women, recognising the weight of social history and compensating for it – questioning the ‘old boys’ club’ mentality of some firms, and developing mentoring and support structures for women who have never had access to these in the past.

Quotas shouldn’t be necessary, and with luck, hope and a fair wind they will disappear entirely as a concept, as we witness a real and practical determination on the part of boards to prepare for stronger governance reflecting the gender diversity of their clients and of society. Until this happens, however, the threat of quotas is a sharp reality check, the power and usefulness of which should not be underestimated.