By Stephen Portz
2013/2014 Albert Einstein Distinguished Educator Fellow
August 21, 2015
The good news is we are seeing even distributions of female participation in chemistry and math along with even higher numbers in biology (bordering on 2/3). The concern comes with female retention through the professional ranks and representation as full professors at the top of their fields.
Reasons for the loss in female participation are troubling and are what is referred to as "leaks" in the talent pipeline. Some of these reasons may be:
- Inadequate preparation for STEM
- Poor attitudes toward science
- Negative experiences with science
- An absence of female role models
- Male oriented curricula, pedagogy, and a "chilly" climate toward females
- Socialization: Pressure to conform to gender roles
- Biological gender differences i.e. having children
Perhaps the most compelling reason for increasing female participation in STEM is access to the explosion of computer science and computer related fields where there is a much lower female rate of participation. For women to have the same access and opportunities at high paying, high demand employment, measures must be taken to encourage entry into computer related fields.
Even within some of our most progressive high tech companies the percentage of male to female computer science workers is a glaring contrast. If these corporations are struggling with female enrollment, what does that say about the rest of America and what can be done to reverse the trend?
Apple 80/20
Twitter 90/10
Facebook 85/15
Google 83/17
With job projections in computer science and related fields threatening to expand to 1.4 million new jobs by 2020, female recruitment is key to access these new opportunities. Not only are the male to female ratios poor and reflect great untapped potential, but US citizen participation in general is also a critical need:
- At our present rate less than 29% of the 1.4 million new computer jobs will be filled by US citizens.
- Less than 3% will be filled by women.
Cultural Bias
"Three things happen when [women] are in the lab: You fall in love with them. They fall in love with you, and when you criticize them, they cry.
Tim Hunt
Noble Prize in Medicine and Physiology
In response to Mr. Hunt's unfortunate remarks the Twitter Universe lit up with many humorous retorts:
Finally, a tweet that put everyone's concerns to rest with the origin story behind the sentiment that was causing all the problems in the first place:
Clearly, there are powerful cultural and gender biases in play. One real barrier to increasing participation in STEM generally and science in particular is the fact that elementary teachers are often not strong either in science pedagogy or interest, and must fight to get science equal time in an already full day of instruction. Obviously this is accomplished in direct proportion to the interest that the teacher has in science. Since most elementary school teachers are female, the problem is compounded by the fact that they had limited role models in science and they are then poor role models in science. Additionally, with our assessment mentality craze, if science is not one of the tested areas, where in many cases it isn't, there is even more of a disadvantage to our students.
But problems like this cannot be solved unless you are willing to ask every question. Are there predispositions beyond cultural and gender bias at play in any of these challenges? We must ask ourselves this question because vast untapped potential for workforce, economic, product development, and markets are at stake.
Is it a matter of trying it, fully understanding it, and still not liking it?... or is it like the proverbial character from Dr. Seuss's Green Eggs and Ham book where he didn't think he would like it and wouldn't try it even though it was packaged in all these different varieties and settings. But after trying it, deciding that in fact he really did like it.
How much of this factor is at play with underrepresented populations in computer science and STEM?
Irrespective of the source of the attitude toward choosing STEM professions, there is a distinctive "you are not welcome here" atmosphere as indicated by the triple bind condition that females encounter in male dominated professions:
- People often hold negative impressions of women in "masculine" professions like that of a scientist or engineer.
- People judge women to be less competent than men in "male" jobs unless they are clearly more successful in their work.
- But when a woman is clearly more competent in a "masculine" job she is considered to be less likeable.
Our daughter at about six years of age... she loved everything about the technical world, construction sets, action figures... seen here playing dress up as a construction worker. She ended up rejected the technical world in favor of a music degree. Our second daughter took drafting and architecture, really excelled at it and loved it, but refused to continue on that path as well. When I asked her about it she told me that her class was mostly guys, just her and one other girl, so that she had a good feeling for what life would be like in a male dominated workplace. What she told me broke my heart about why she would not be pursuing a technical career either. In her estimation females have three choices when competing in a traditional male dominated workplace:
- Be a strong and confident worker - Be thought of as a beast woman
- Just fit in and be one of the guys - endure sexism and off color jokes
- Be invisible - Keep your head down and just do your job - be underestimated and stepped on.
"The boys club mentality in tech has to change if we are going to make the world better and products better for everyone... It is in all of our best interests"
Robin Hauser Reynolds
- Director of Code
Robin Hauser Reynold's point is very well taken. If you consider all the untapped markets and product potential that underrepresented populations can access through the filter of their needs, desires, and culture, the opportunities for innovation become virtually endless. But they can only be accessed when members of those communities have a seat at the table as developers.
The Female Factor - A study by the Carnegie Mellon University study reporting in the Harvard Review:
"... Regardless of the collective IQ of the individuals of a group, if a female is included in the group, the collective IQ increases."
Solutions to attract females in STEM:
- Spread the word about great females in STEM.
- Expose girls to successful female STEM role models.
- Teach students about the stereotype threat and the very real impact it has on student performance.
- Promote a Nurture over Nature mentality - intellectual skills are not fixed in time and can continue to be developed.
- Encourage students to develop special skills.
Probably one of the most damaging educational policy to female and other under-represented group participation is the notion of student "giftedness." The damage done by this philosophy alone has left students with the idea that mental abilities are something that is a genetic endowment (nature) as opposed to something that can develop through time (nurture).
"Promote a Growth (nurture), rather than a "Gifted" (nature), mentality about the origins of our abilities...."
If you are curious, you can test your gender bias by participating in an activity by Harvard University called Project Implicit and, it is eye opening:
No comments:
Post a Comment