 I'd like to begin just by introducing a little bit about myself and Regina because there are two people, actually three people involved in producing the database. I'm a mathematics educator. I'm not a mathematician. My PhD is in mathematics education. My research is in mathematics education. I was a teacher educator. I was a secondary school teacher of mathematics and chemistry. Regina's PhD is in physics education and she's a qualified teacher of secondary school physics and biology and agricultural science. I feel a bit of a fraud standing up here telling you about task three. Yes, I was responsible for this part of the project, but most of the work was carried out by Regina, who was a postdoctoral research fellow who worked with me at the University of Limerick. You might be wondering why Regina isn't here. Indeed, she did attend most of our team meetings in Paris and Berlin. There's a very good reason. She's on maternity leave. She about two months ago gave birth to her first child, a little boy, and as Susan was presenting yesterday and speaking about what we've discovered, about career interruptions and how that affects women's careers in STEM and what kinds of support need to be provided. I was thinking about Regina and I was thankful that our university does provide good support for its staff to go away on maternity leave and to come back and to get some support for returning to research. So I'm very thankful to Regina for all the work that she's done on the database. I also want to acknowledge the assistance of Samantha Pryor, who was a research assistant towards the end of this time in helping produce short abstracts of all the initiatives, which I'm going to show you at the end. So that's by way of introduction. And I'd also like to thank Marie Francoise for allowing us, inviting us into this project because I think it brings a very interesting dimension to our work. One of the things that makes this project special and unique is it's an interdisciplinary project. Not only does it bring together so many scientific disciplines, but it also brings in an education and social science perspective. I have found that very, very enjoyable. It's been challenging, but I think it adds a very special dimension to our project. Yes, indeed, I should acknowledge Bill. So I wasn't originally part of the project team. Originally it was Bill Barton who was in the team as president of ICMI, the International Commission on Mathematical Instruction. Bill was about to finish his term as president and indeed to retire as an academic. So Bill was at the first meeting and he asked me if I would like to be involved because I had just become vice president of ICMI. So that reminds me, I need to probably send an email to Bill to tell him how everything has turned out. Thank you. So here is the outline for what I'd like to talk about today. Firstly, some of us are very familiar with the aims of Task 3. Other people will be new to this. So I'd like to say something briefly about the aim and rationale for developing a database of good practice. I'll say a little bit about how did we do this? How did we find examples of good practice and develop the database? How did we organise this information? Because databases need to have a structure. What is the structure of this one? Then I'll tell you a little bit about the features of the initiatives that are in the database, what regions and countries are represented, which disciplines are represented. And most importantly, because this is meant to be about good practice, what do we mean by good practice? What are some dimensions by which we can characterise good practice? I'm going to show you some examples of initiatives that are in the database and finally reflect on what we learned. And I'll say at this point that there will be time later in the program for you to explore the database by going to the computer lab, getting onto the website where the database is. So hopefully by the time I finish talking you'll be very keen to have a look at it and that will be possible. So let me begin then with the aims. Before I go into that, well firstly, the aim was to gather and make available information and resources on effective practices for enhancing the participation of girls and women in science at all levels. I just need to point out that the three tasks of this project were conducted largely independently of each other, either at the same time or in overlapping phases. So that means that the three tasks did not necessarily speak to each other during the life of the project or influence or respond to each other's findings. And so when we created the database it was not necessarily in response to the findings of the other tasks. But as I know what the other tasks have found, I am confident that what we have created does indeed respond to those findings. Even though we didn't have the findings of the other tasks to inform us while we were creating the database, that wasn't really a huge problem because there is a very large literature on gender inequity in STEM and in STEM education. And so we were able to use that literature to inform our search for good practices. I think it would be interesting though now that the database has been created to investigate the extent to which the initiatives it contains actually do address the challenges that were identified, particularly in task one. You'll see the second aim is to gather and generate evidence about effectiveness of these practices. And I think this is probably the most important aspect of this task. What do we mean by effectiveness and what does evidence look like? This was a seriously nontrivial task that involved quite a lot of research into finding some principles that might define good practice and effectiveness. And I'll explain how we did that. The other aims listed there are to investigate the extension of proven practices to larger audiences, different levels or age groups, and other natural sciences. I'm not sure that we actually did that during the life of the project. I think that's something that needs to come next if there is a next. And then finally, to develop, translate and disseminate selected practices worldwide, focusing on context where participation of girls and women is particularly low. Again, I think this will be an outcome of having produced the database. And hopefully that's something that you will be able to make happen. So the rationale for the database is described here. We know the gender gap exists in many countries, so we also know that there exist many initiatives that are aiming to meet these challenges, and they are very broad ranging from intervention programs even before primary school, secondary school, tertiary education, industry-based interventions. So note that the focus of task three is different from tasks one and two. So task one and two were concerned with the experiences of women working in the STEM, academic or professional fields. You can see I hope that task three has a broader remit, because as was mentioned yesterday, gender inequity begins, or the seeds are sown very early in a child's life, and so a database of good practices needs to go right back to the very earliest years. Another difference is the audience for task three. So it was very clear that the audience for the database includes families, communities, schools, teachers, as well as universities, industry, policymakers and so on. So going on to the other parts of the rationale, we're interested in what works. What is the evidence? Can effective practices that are working in one context be used in another context? And how do we know these things? These are not easy questions to answer. And so we went ahead and created an online database. Before I leave this slide, I want to foreshadow something of the structure of the database, and it means I want to say something about perceptions. So I was struck by the question that was raised yesterday about the task one survey tapping into people's perceptions. One thing that we know from many years and a vast amount of research into gender issues in STEM is that one of the most persistent and significant barriers to female participation is the perceptions that girls and women hold about themselves and about what the STEM disciplines are. So self-perceptions include things like self-efficacy, self-assessment of ability and sense of belonging in the discipline. This is a well-established finding from research. In other words, females' perceptions of themselves and of STEM do inhibit their participation. And so what you'll see is that there are many interventions and initiatives on gender equity that aim to change those perceptions. In fact, the first dimension of the seven dimensions of the database is all about challenging perceptions. Not only to change the way that girls and young women think about themselves and about the world, but also to change the social and structural conditions that lead females and males to develop these perceptions. So how do we go about actually creating the database? Members of the project team might remember this slide. We used colour coding at each of our team meetings to show how far have we progressed around the circle. So it's all the same colour now because it means we have pretty much finished or we finished this stage anyway. So we began very small. We started with a very small number of initiatives that were suggested to us by members of the project team. But we knew that we couldn't just go shopping for initiatives and just pull things off the shelf and put them in our supermarket trolley. We needed to organise them and evaluate them in some way. We needed a conceptual framework in order to characterise these disciplines. And so we started to search for frameworks and we mapped between our initial framework and these six initiatives. We then, as a result of that, refined the framework and I'll show you how we did that. And then we looked for some more initiatives. So it was a gradual iterative process of adding more initiatives and refining the framework as they spoke to each other. And I'm bending down because the type is very small and my eyes are old. By the time that we had finished and had sufficient numbers of initiative and that's another question, how many is enough, which I will talk about next, we had initially all of these initiatives in a spreadsheet with various columns that allowed us to characterise all the details. But a spreadsheet is not a database. Neither of us are technical experts in creating databases. So we had to find technical support, which we did thanks to Marie-Francoise and her connections, thanks also to the IMU and their technical help. So it's only in the last week, probably, that that part of the work has been done. So this is very shiny and new. In fact, it was only overnight that I was sent a link that showed the database in a form that I am willing to share with you. So it's been rather palpitations building up to today. Now, it's not perfect. There are still probably things that don't work. So, you know, please be gentle, be patient, give us some feedback and we'll make it better. So we're at the next stage now, which is sharing a live version of the database. That's going to happen right here. The next part is organising refining of the database. And I'll talk also about how you can help with that because the database is alive. It's going to grow, hopefully, with your help. So that's the process we went through there. But I want to say something more about how did we find initiatives? Because I'm fairly sure when you see it that you'll think, oh, but I know of a really good initiative and it's not there in the database. Why is that the case? Let me try and explain before you even ask that question. So we imagined that there would be three strategies for finding information. The main one was through a direct, structured, online search of the internet. So if a website is not easily discoverable, then it may not turn up very easily in a search. So Regina spent many months doing these searches. If she found a potentially interesting website that seemed to be lacking essential information, she contacted the Contact Us part of the website to find out more. So it was a very proactive search. But we knew that that would not be enough. So we also drew on as many networks as we could. And, of course, our project team was a wonderful network, very international, very connected to all of the different disciplines. After several months, we wanted to have a database that was reasonably representative of as many geographical regions as possible. And so as time went on, we knew that we would have to specifically target unrepresented regions. So we looked for country champions that we could write to who would have knowledge of gender initiatives in their region and ask them for information. It also happened that during the time we were doing this work that there was a big international conference in Dublin, not where we lived, but close to where we lived, the European Conference on Gender Equality and Higher Education. So we both attended that conference, spoke about this project, and gathered many other contacts there as well. The third strategy is through dissemination of the database, which we're starting here at this conference. So we are confident that as people look at the database that they will want to suggest adding initiatives. And there is a facility in the database to do that, which we'll explore during the conference. So I just want to emphasize again that this was not an attempt to be comprehensive, that is impossible. There are goodness knows how many initiatives around the world. The numbers in the database are not necessarily representative of the spread of initiatives around the world. We have no way of knowing what that is anyway. So our brief was to create, to select examples of good practice and then invite people to add some more. We did look at examples of other databases of gender initiatives in STEM. And yes, there are other databases. Here are a small sample that Regina looked at, which we hoped might inform the design of our database. She considered though that all of these had some flaws or gaps or outdatedness, so it was useful to see that. The other thing that was interesting, if you look at the second column from the right, we wanted to know how many initiatives should we aim for. And in that selection, it varied enormously. There was one that had only four initiatives, one that had only 15. We found in those examples with very small numbers that there was masses of information there. So small number of initiatives, lots of information. We thought too much for users to want to look at. Then at the other extreme, there were some that had very large numbers, one with 109. So lots of initiatives, but almost no information about them. So there were two extremes there. We decided to aim somewhere in the middle. So initially we aimed to collect 50. We ended up with more, but we aimed for 50. And we wanted to get some kind of geographical spread. So the very targeted search that we ended up doing was for examples from different countries, rather than having lots of initiatives from the same region. So as I mentioned, we initially used a spreadsheet. And all of these, so these are the column headings which are now used to structure the database. So obviously we want the name of the initiative. Often there is an acronym and of course the web link, which is really important. So we wanted the database to have minimal information, enough for people decide whether this is interesting or not, because the information is in the initiative's web link. And the people who design that initiative, they are responsible for keeping it up to date. The year of origin can be interesting. Is this very new? Is it a long-established initiative? We coded both the country and the geographical region. The funding source, we thought was a useful piece of information. Obviously the disciplines, is it say mathematics alone, science alone, technology alone, engineering alone, is it some combination of those things? Is it all disciplines? By target level, we mean who are the intended participants in this? Is it, for example, primary school girls? Is it high school students? Is it undergraduates? Is it graduate students? Is it women in STEM? We also recorded whether there was any evidence of effectiveness and impact, yes or no, and if so, what kind of evidence? And then the dimensions of good practice, which is where most of our work was in deciding how to do that, and I'll say more about that. So let me now tell you a little bit about the features, but the shape of the database before eventually diving into some examples. So for regions and countries, we ended up with 67 gender initiatives from more than 40 countries. At the suggestion, the excellent suggestion of the project team, you'll see down the bottom there, scientific bodies. We also searched the websites of the unions and organisations who were supporting our project to make sure that we were including gender initiatives there. So maybe the first thing that will strike you is that despite our search all over the world, about a third of the initiatives are from the Western European group, but there is still a good geographical spread. From Africa, the Asia Pacific, Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America, Oceania. And then down the bottom, there are some that spread across more than one of those regions, which is why you see something of there like America, Europe, because it goes across regions and three that claim to be global. So there's a geographical spread. For the disciplines, nearly half of these initiatives claimed to target STEM, science, technology, engineering, mathematics. There were some three that said they targeted just all disciplines rather than mentioning STEM. And there were some that were very specific to the individual disciplines. For mathematics and for science, there were some that were specific to physics. 12 specific to technology, which would be digital technologies. So if you're looking for a specific discipline, for example, mathematics, you can search for that, but you should probably also search for ones that say all disciplines as well or even STEM as well. Now I want to say something about what do we mean by good practice? This was a really important part of doing this work. We could have created our own conceptual framework based on our knowledge of the literature. But when we discovered that the Saga project that UNESCO carried out, we thought it would make good sense to start with this framework. So this report was published by UNESCO in 2016, and we thought we'll use this as our initial conceptual framework to try to capture dimensions of good practice. So these are the Saga Science Technology and Innovation Gender Objectives list. So they were originally created with the intention of classifying policies and policy instruments. And that's not quite the same as what we were intending in the database. So our audience was not just policymakers. In fact, our main audience was teachers, schools, families, instructors, universities, industry perhaps. So we knew that we would have to make some adaptations there. But we're still very pleased that we chose this framework to start with. And we think the modifications that we made are probably a major contribution of this project. There are seven gender objectives in this framework. We made adaptations to four of them based on the existing research and on the characteristics of the initiatives that we found. So let me take you through these seven dimensions. So here's the first one. This is the one that's about perceptions. The first objective is about changing perceptions, attitudes, behaviors, social norms and stereotypes. Not just towards women in STEM, but held by women in STEM. The bold face text there is what we added to these objectives. So there's a lot of information there. I'm not going to go through all of it. There's a lot about promoting awareness, overcoming biases, promoting visibility of women in STEM, mainstreaming gender perspectives. If you go down to 1.4, we wanted to add a category about the influence of families and communities in changing attitudes towards STEM. So it's one thing to promote STEM to girls, but it's another thing to think about. Does that, might that be contrary to cultural expectations and norms, either for a culture, for a society or for a family? The other one that we added was to acknowledge outreach activities that are aimed at developing scientific literacy for everyone, not just STEM special expertise for some. The second dimension is about engaging girls and young women in STEM in primary and secondary school education, as well as technical and vocational education and training. So there's a lot there about promoting vocations, mainstreaming the gender perspective in educational content. So there are implications there for teacher training, for curriculum development, for how teaching happens and for developing teaching materials. That one's very important for me, given my background. Promoting gender-sensitive teaching approaches, gender balance amongst STEM teachers. Is it that all the physics teachers are male and all the biology teachers are female? And promoting gender equality in school-to-work transitions. Now again, we added some categories here. Mentoring was a strategy which we found a lot of evidence of in the research literature and in many of the initiatives that we discovered. So mentoring of young girls by either university students or by women who are working in STEM. Doing something about developing confidence in girls at school. Promoting equal access to subjects in single-sex schools. In the country where I live now in Ireland, there are many all-girls schools which do not offer physics, do not offer technology subjects. And so if girls are brave enough to say, yes, I want to do this, they have to go to the nearby and maybe not so nearby boys' school. And in the process of traveling to and from, missing some lessons in their own school. So there are structural barriers there that are needless and should be overcome. Work shadowing opportunities in secondary school. Many school systems will have work experience, for example. And networks. So there's a lot of peer support strategies that are being promoted there. Networks amongst female students. If we go on to the third category. So that previous one was about school. The third one is about recruiting and retaining young women into higher education. So again, these were the initial categories. So it's similar to what we saw on the previous slide, but it's just a different context now. So promoting access, removing barriers, preventing discrimination, going down a little bit further, promoting gender equality and mobility for students, promoting daycare, childcare facilities for students in higher education. So it might look similar, but here the focus is more on not so much subject choice as it is in schools, but starting to think about career pathways. Here are the ones that we added. There was more on mentoring in the higher education sector, more on developing young women's confidence in other schools, things like leadership, communication, critical thinking. So it's not just saying you have to be more confident. It's about how do you develop those, those very important skills so that you can speak for yourself, so that you can understand what's going on and challenge it. And similarly providing training to university students in outreach and advocacy so they can become advocates for their field. Now if we go on to the fourth dimension. So we're moving through the age ranges now. So now we're looking at graduates and women who are in career. So what about gender equality and career progression? He was some of the original, well actually all of the original subcategories. So gender equality and access to job opportunities and recruitment, equal work conditions. Can you hear echoes of this in the findings from survey one? I think it lines up very nicely here. Equal opportunity, access to opportunities in the workplace, work-life balance. Wouldn't that be nice? More about international mobility for post-ops and researchers. Gender balance in leadership positions. You can see there with the bold face some of the things that we've added. 4.7 is about removing some obstacles. Regina wanted to add something there about that there's a subtle thing going on there. So there are some obstacles in the workplace that will be experienced by both men and women. For example, short-term contracts for early career researchers seem to be gender blind. But a short-term contract can have different impacts on men and women, depending on social norms and values because women may be deterred from taking a one year or two year position if there are no benefits like maternity leave. And that's the case in my university where people who are on post-doctoral fellowships, it looks the same for everyone but there's no maternity leave. So there are some subtle things there that we need to understand. And the bold face things that we've added are very similar to what we found at the other levels of education. Mentoring, gender bias training, which certainly happens in my university. Networks, scholarships and awards. More about public speaking, industry skills debts and female networks. Then we move on to dimensions five, six and seven. We didn't change any of these possibly because these focus on research and policy and entrepreneurship, which are all important, but probably not the main focus of the main audience for our database, families, schools, communities, as well as industry and policy makers. So in research, there are recommendations to establish gender-oriented R&D programs, incorporating the gender dimension into evaluation of projects, into analysis, into dissemination and communication. We did find initiatives that did these things too, by the way. So we left all of these in the database. This one's about policy making, making sure there's a gender balance in STEM-related policy designs. So who are the decision makers? Who gets consulted? Who gets onto committees? Who gets onto expert groups? And ensuring not just representation but that the topic of gender becomes something that is visible and needs to be discussed in terms of policy. And then finally, gender equality in entrepreneurship. And there's a whole range of strategies there. So access to C capital, to support visibility for women entrepreneurs' role models, more access to mentoring and networks, more incentives for women for female-led innovation, promoting gender equality in access of enabling technology and more about equal opportunities, particularly for start-up companies, sorry. So if those were the dimensions, how are they distributed in the database? I went through and counted, and so I've presented a table here where the left column just lists the seven top-level dimensions, but I counted the number of subcategories that appeared in total for all of the initiatives in the right-hand column. Obviously they don't add up to 67 because each dimension exemplified multiple categories. What I've highlighted there are the two where there were the largest number of initiatives. So what we have in this database, the most, the initiatives that are addressed most often are around primary and secondary education and in career progression. So there seems to be a lot of activity in those areas. The next most frequent dimensions that were addressed were around doing something about perceptions, social norms and stereotypes, and in the higher education sector, this is for students, and there were some initiatives that addressed the other areas that were more around policy and research and entrepreneurship. Then I wanted to find out which were the subcategories that seemed to have the most initiatives related to them. So I found that there were three subcategories that had more than 10 entries in each, 10 entries each in the database, and these were the three. The first one was about promoting STEM to girls and young women in school. There were 30 of them that do that. Promoting access to and attracting women to STEM in higher education, so that's recruitment and retention, and then promoting mentoring of girls, school-age girls. So I'm going to show you some examples of initiatives that do those three things, just to give you a little taste and hopefully encourage you to go and have a look yourself. So here's the first one. So this one addresses the school sector. This one is from North America, and it's called Million Women Mentors. This is a screenshot from the website. This is a little bit from the summary that we created, which I noticed is not yet in the database, but will be there eventually. So I'll just take you to that website so you can see what it looks like. And I thought it was interesting to see this big word right in the centre here, which is impact. We didn't find many that talked about impact, and I'll say something about impact a little later on. So you can see this initiative has created one million mental relationships. That's impact. And there's also links here towards evidence about influence and this information there, scalability, 50 corporate sponsors, and sustainability. So there are 2.3 million commitments and growing. So that's some examples of what impact looks like. The next one at Girls STEM, this one is from the Ukraine, also aimed at school-aged children. So this one involves 20 Ukrainian women who are STEM industry professionals who are working as mentors with girls, encouraging them to choose STEM education and careers. So these are women who are in IT, technology companies, academics, NGOs, universities. So they're in companies like SAP, Microsoft, I know both of those, I don't know the other companies. So you'll see that not all of the initiatives in the website are in English. We were able to read this one in English. We used a lot of Google Translate, trying to work out what was going on here. So you can see there's some information there, a whole lot more information than I had on that previous slide. So these 20 women are working with 500 girls aged 13 to 19. So there's a whole lot of information there about what they're doing. Next one, this is from Brazil, Girls in Science Project. Again, encouraging girls to look at careers in science and technology. And encouraging women who are already there to persist and become a viable part of Brazil's scientific community. So what they want to do is they're monitoring it. So they're looking at impact through the training of students and undergraduates to encourage them to share their love of science and technology by taking these subjects in schools. So I think this one is all in Portuguese. And this was the slowest one to load. But it will be here in a second. So I mean, these are all very nicely presented websites. They look professional, lovely photos. There's some robotics going on there. There's some of the girls. So it's a very welcoming kind of website. You feel like you want to explore it. Next one. So we're getting on now to, this is about recruitment and retention of university students. This one is in Chile. Gender Equality Admissions Program. I know the person who initiated this. She told me about it. That's why we had to look at it in the database. So this is an initiative to improve female participation and eliminate cultural biases that have limited their choices. So the way it works in this university, there is an offer of special quotas in the Common Engineering and Science Plan for the first 55 female applicants who are on the waiting list. So they haven't quite made it in. They're on a waiting list. But there is a special provision for these young women to get them in and then support them while they're there. So again, this one is all in Spanish. But I know from talking to the person who's done this work that this is just one aspect of an entire program that's happening at this university. So there's a great deal of information there. I think I've got two more to show you. This one's from Germany. Go Mint. So I discovered that Mint is the German acronym for STEM. Mathematics, Informatics, Natural Sciences and Technology. Sounds a whole lot nicer than STEM. Appeals to me because mathematics is first, but that's my bias, I'm a maths person. So this is about increasing young women's interest in the degree courses and attracting them to careers in business, which is interesting. More than 300 partners are supporting this name. So again, there's more information here. This is in a mixture of German and English. So there's a whole lot more information there. A lot of text, but there are some links there to other information. And then final example is from Norway, girl project Arda from NTNU, one of the, it's the biggest university in Norway, promoting education of more female engineers and masters graduates. So they're encouraging more women to apply for these programs and supporting them to complete their studies. This one is, this page is in English, but the parts are in Norwegian. So there's a whole lot of information there about the activities that go on to support that project. And interestingly, what the project is not. This was interesting. In no way do these girls stand back for men and academically, they don't need any special treatment. It doesn't provide special teaching, extra teaching or anything else intended to make the academic work easier. I thought it was interesting to see that kind of, that kind of information there. Okay, so what did we learn? We learned lots of things from this project. I think you could see, we learned that we needed to modify some of the categories in the Saga objectives to align with the interests and concerns of our target audience. Features that are important to include in the database, we tried to keep it fairly minimal, just the key information so that we could categorize the initiatives. We wanted the database to be easy to navigate by using dropdown menus to select search criteria. I don't think it's quite there yet, but we'd love your feedback on this. We wanted to have an option for you or anyone in the world to submit an initiative that will expand the database. And there is a function in the database where we are soliciting that information to be submitted. Then we need to be able to verify the information that's there to make sure that this is a high quality, monitored, rigorously put together database. But we learned some other things as well. Evidence of effectiveness and impact, we found very difficult to identify and yet this is so very important. Now, it's not to correct to say that there is no evidence there if there's nothing on the website. There may be something going on evaluating effectiveness that hasn't been reported. So we need to be careful about the conclusions that we draw, but only 10 of the 67 initiatives in the database had measures on the website that demonstrated the impact of the program. And providing this evidence is really important. Not only for the people who are running the project, but also for potential participants, for stakeholders, for policy makers and especially for funders, knowing how do we know this is making a difference. So I want to say something about defining impact. Many countries in the world have evaluations of research impact. This is not research, of course, but just thinking about impact is important. So research impact is often defined in this way. It's the demonstrable contribution that research, or in this case a gender initiative, can make to the economy, to society, to culture and so on, beyond contributions to academia. So it's not just about publications, citations and so on. And in countries where this kind of evaluation happens, the advice that's given often takes the form of an impact pathway, which is a kind of logic model that looks like this. So we can think about, for one of these initiatives, for example, what resources did they have? Did they have funding? Did they have staff? Did they have infrastructure? What kind of activities are going on? And you can see that certainly on the websites. Was there some kind of research project? Was there a teaching innovation? Was there professional development? And I think all of those gender objective lists capture that what did they do part of it. But we need to go past that and ask, what were the outputs? What has been produced? Were the resources for teachers? Were there activities that have become part of a regular program? Were there publications out of this? And often in academic life, that's where we stop. So we have our project, we publish our work, we get our citations and that's it. But it's the next two parts of the pathway that get into impact territory. So how are these materials or outputs used? How do we know these resources were taken up? For example, there's information on the website I showed you about how many mentors were there, how many businesses were working with the project. Has this resulted in a change in policy? Has this work been incorporated into teacher education? So it's about how has this work spread? And then finally, what is the benefit? What has changed or improved? Do we have any evidence that there is greater female participation in STEM? Do we see enrollment figures? Do we see subject choices? Do we see employment figures? But it's not just the numbers that matter, it's about the experience of women as well. Have teaching practices improved? Have attitudes and perceptions changed? Those are the kinds of questions that need to be asked in evaluating any kind of initiative like the ones in our database. And just to show you that some initiatives did do this kind of evaluation and this is my second last slide. Two that I will show you, this is Project Juno, which is conducted by the Institute of Physics in the United Kingdom. And down here you'll see Juno Evaluation. So the Institute of Physics commissioned an independent evaluation to understand the impact that it's had on physics departments in its first five years of operation. It isn't necessary to do it that way, but they obviously had funding to do it and there are two reports there. That can be looked at. And one that's quite different. Y-Sci Girls STEAM camp. So it's not how it looks on the screen, yeah. Did it show the previous ones? No, no, no, no. Oh, I'm so sorry, because I'm looking at this screen. And it did work before. There you go. Anyway, well, I won't, okay, so I'm telling you what's on the screen here then. Because it's, you need to have, you need to go and have a look at it yourself. I probably didn't need to do that anyway, but at least there are a couple there that do have evidence of impact. Okay, so we'll just come back to here. This is where the pilot version of the database is located. So it's on the IMU website in the CWM page, the Committee for Women in Mathematics. I could click, now, will you be able to see it on there? No, you can't, you can't see it on there. That means you'll just have to come to the computer lab on Thursday and get your hands on a computer so you can look at it yourself. Because I don't seem to be able to demonstrate this to you. But it is a fully searchable database and there are 67 very interesting initiatives there. So I do hope that you'll have a look at it. Have you got a minute to show me how to do it? Just quickly, because I want to stop now. I know there's something. Because I'd like everyone just to see what this... Maybe the same thing works as the next one. Oops, sorry. It's too disbursed, please. What worked for me yesterday was to... I knew it was going to be the same. So that worked for me too. Oh, yeah, okay. No, you've got it. Yes, yes. There it is, the database. All right, it doesn't look particularly pretty, but it's here. So the opening page simply lists them all down the screen like that. So you can click on anyone there and go straight to it if you want to look at every single one. This part here goes to the web form to add some data. This is where you can add or propose to add an initiative, and it will then be evaluated and decided whether it's going in or not. So here is... At the moment, we have four search criteria that may well change, depending on your feedback. So if we just do one... At the moment, you can... I'm not sure whether you can search more than one at the same time. Let's just look for initiatives in Africa. Click Apply, and there you'll see the ones in the African group. South Africa, Kenya, a group of countries, Nigeria. And then if you click on View, that takes you to the full page, which has all the information about the initiative, and you can get to it from there by clicking on the web link. So that's where I'm going to stop. I'm happy to answer questions either now or maybe later on, and I do hope that you will take the opportunity to come to the computer lab session, which I think is on Thursday evening, and we will explore and try to improve the database. Thank you very much. The address is not in the report, because at the time the report was printed...