Are all girl FIRST team counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST? [Archive]

mwtidd

27-03-2011, 17:39

why is having an exclusive team seen as a positive thing?.
i do not include teams that are hosted by all girl groups like girl scout troops or all girl schools or what ever. but teams that actively only allow girls in there community to join.
i feel if you made a team exclusive to boys then not only would people think it was nothing special but would think it was wrong. where a team that only allows girls to join is seen a positive. doesn't this just say that being female is a handicap?

There was an all girls team that regularly competes at BAE, and they had male mentors. That being said, being an all girls team actually gave them an interesting point of view. They were not just FIRST, but habitat for humanity too. They received chairmans because there was a human aspect to their team. Nerdy girls are typically more humanistic than nerdy guys.

I don't mean to be biased, but speaking as the older brother of 4 sisters, girls have a different way of looking at things. All girl teams increase the impact of this human influence, and allow the importance to be blatantly obvious to other teams. Girls have this impact on all teams, but where there's an all girls team the impact is much greater. Also the girl who spoke at BAE was awesome, and once again showing, nerdy girls are more human.

I don't think its counterproductive because of the influence all girls teams have on the teams around them.

I would rather be on an all girls team than an all guys team. Actually during my time at WPI, I worked mostly with girls. I honestly think girls are often much better and much less stubborn then men. Girls are also better at working together than guys. Our egos get in the way. It is no way a handicap.

Bethie42

27-03-2011, 17:44

I see your point.
I think exclusive teams are okay as long as there is a local, viable team nearby for others to participate in. For instance, in some areas with high densities of FRC teams, girls could easily feel a bit lost on a huge team. It is probably far more encouraging for them to form their own team in that case. In a lot of areas though, it wouldn't work at all [whatever team formed for the boys would be pretty much all-male for one thing...]

Personally, I doubt I would enjoy being on an all-girls team, for a number of reasons [I have always been respected and treated very well by the boys both on my team and at regionals], but I don't think you can just forbid them from having exclusive teams. Because of the unique male/female dynamics of FIRST [relatively few girls, and I think girls can easily feel intimidated by the thought that 'boys know more about mechanical stuff than I do'] all-girl teams may well be the only way some girls would join FIRST.

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 17:46

Name some teams that are all girls teams that are formed solely to exclude boys. Do you know of any?

Also, does it hurt to use capitalization in your sentences? Just asking...

Jane

Andrew Schreiber

27-03-2011, 18:05

Name some teams that are all girls teams that are formed solely to exclude boys. Do you know of any?

Also, does it hurt to use capitalization in your sentences? Just asking...

Jane

I agree with your second point but question why you put it in this post as opposed to the hundreds of others that are just as bad that you have responded to without this question.

As for your first point, just because the OP doesn't know of a team doesn't mean they don't exist. Nor do they need to exist for his questions to valid. It is an important question to answer, should we encourage diversity?

I want to point to a thread a couple years ago in which a very similar question was raised and the lessons learned from an experiment attempted by 842.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56504

I do have to wonder what the reaction would be if the roles were reversed, what would have happened if the OP had asked if all male teams should be allowed? Or if teams were allowed to discriminate against students who have learning disabilities or who don't speak English?

Rather than viewing this as saying that "all girl teams are evil!" or as "that is sexist!" view it as an opportunity to discuss the benefits of having a diverse team and why working with people who have different views than you is a good experience.

GaryVoshol

27-03-2011, 18:11

As long as equal opportunity exists, there is nothing wrong with forming a team solely for females. If it means that males cannot take part, or would have hardships in taking part, then it's wrong. For example, if an all-girls team was formed in an isolated city that could only support one team and the guys would have to travel 50 miles to find a team, that would not be right.

Single-gender schools have shown positive results for both males and females. The same could be true for FRC teams.

Akash Rastogi

27-03-2011, 18:12

Staying on topic regardless of grammar and punctuation....

What if the team also only had female mentors? What about a mix of female and male engineers?

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 18:15

I agree with your second point but question why you put it in this post as opposed to the hundreds of others that are just as bad that you have responded to without this question.

In this case, the OP (original poster) created this thread. It takes time and effort to create a thread in ChiefDelphi. The topic that this OP is presenting also takes time and effort to think about and decide to create a thread about. (That's my opinion, of course - I realize that some people create threads without giving them much thought.) By using capitalization in the sentences and proper punctuation, the OP brings more credibility to the topic. It is a topic that I enjoy reading discussions about and I enjoy thoughtful posts regarding the topic of women in the fields of math, science, and engineering and girls on FRC/FTC/FLL/VEX/BEST teams that will help to increase the numbers of women in the fields of math, science, and engineering.

I hope this answered your question, Andrew. If not, let's take it to a private message.

Jane

Koko Ed

27-03-2011, 18:17

Staying on topic regardless of grammar and punctuation....

What if the team also only had female mentors? What about a mix of female and male engineers?

Team 2340 tried to have all female mentors to work along their all girls team but I don't think they were quite able to have it be exclusive to just females.
If a dad has skills in the shop and offers to help a team would be crazy to turn down assistance from someone who wants to help no matter what their gender is.

Andrew Schreiber

27-03-2011, 18:21

davidthefat

27-03-2011, 18:22

I think having a "gender" quota is more counter intuitive than having an all female or male team.

Koko Ed

27-03-2011, 18:26

And if a student has passion and wants to learn it would be crazy to turn them down just because they are slightly different than the norm.

2340 was started at an all girls school that closed last year and absorbed by another Catholic School that has both genders but I'm told the school is not to interfere with the team's makeup at the risk of losing a huge donation to the school if they do.

Akash Rastogi

27-03-2011, 18:31

Andrew Schreiber

27-03-2011, 18:34

2340 was started at an all girls school that closed last year and absorbed by another Catholic School that has both genders but I'm told the school is not to interfere with the team's makeup at the risk of losing a huge donation to the school if they do.

So, if I am understanding this correctly, if the school asked the team to allow males on it the SCHOOL would lose donations?

Let me just tell you that being told, "I'm sorry but they have money" sucks. I was told that by a school principal once about 15 yrs ago. I was told I was wrong not because I was but because the other group donated money to the school. Do these people have any clue the effect this has on students?

Koko Ed

27-03-2011, 18:44

Wait...am I understanding this right? If the team doesn't stay exclusively female students...they lose a sponsor/grant/donation?

Sounds kind of...wrong?

Now I'm curious about how 433 is actually run.

So, if I am understanding this correctly, if the school asked the team to allow males on it the SCHOOL would lose donations?

Let me just tell you that being told, "I'm sorry but they have money" sucks. I was told that by a school principal once about 15 yrs ago. I was told I was wrong not because I was but because the other group donated money to the school. Do these people have any clue the effect this has on students?
It's a private donation so they can do what they want and the school can choose to honor the agreement or do as they are told. Private schools are often pressed for cash so they are no doubt inclined to respect the doner's wishes.

Andrew Schreiber

27-03-2011, 18:46

It's a private donation so they can do what they want and the school can choose to honor the agreement or do as they are told. Private schools are often pressed for cash so they are no doubt inclined to respect the doner's wishes.

I know, my remark was more directed at the donor rather than the school. Makes you wonder what sort of person would want to teach kids that if you have money you can make the rules.

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 18:46

Wait...am I understanding this right? If the team doesn't stay exclusively female students...they lose a sponsor/grant/donation?

Sounds kind of...wrong?

This topic is not a topic that is cut and dried or black and white. I wish that it were and I wish that it would become so in my lifetime. At the rate we are moving, my lifetime will end and this will still be a topic of discussion that generates controversy.

Controversy can be very healthy and this is.

It's easy to be idealistic and say what's the big deal? Women have to work in the real world, they may as well get used to it by working on teams that include boys/men.

That's fine and dandy. Look at some of the winning teams' photos that are cropping up in CD and look at the team photos and mentor listings/descriptions on their websites. Where are the technical women mentors on the college level teams and the corporate level teams? Where are the majority of technical mentors that are women on these teams? See any?

Look around in the engineering and science classes in your high school and in your college courses and see how the numbers break down. I've talked with corporate leaders who are well aware of the lack of women in these fields and therefore, cannot hire them - because they don't exist.

How many girls actually go through the FRC program and decide on an engineering major? How many women that had their start in these robotics programs have gone on into fields of math, science, and engineering?

I welcome posts from the women who are scientists and engineers and who read CD. Share your thoughts.

Jane

davidthefat

27-03-2011, 18:51

Katie_UPS

27-03-2011, 19:01

That's fine and dandy. Look at some of the winning teams' photos that are cropping up in CD and look at the website of their websites. Where are the technical women mentors on the college level teams and the corporate level teams? Where are the majority of technical mentors that are women on these teams? See any?

Look around in the engineering and science classes in your high school and in your college courses and see how the numbers break down. I've talked with corporate leaders who are well aware of the lack of women in these fields and therefore, cannot hire them - because they don't exist.

How many girls actually go through the FRC program and decide on an engineering major? How many women that had their start in these robotics programs have gone on into fields of math, science, and engineering?

I welcome posts from the women who are scientists and engineers and who read CD. Share your thoughts.

Jane

I'm not an engineer... yet.

My sister started high school wanting to be a Vet. She was on 1675's team her senior year, which was also their rookie year. Between FRC and another adventure she was on, she picked engineering. Now she works for Lockheed Martin with her electrical engineering degree.

I wanted to be a journalist my freshman year, four years later, I can't see myself in anything other than engineering (granted metallurgy sounds pretty cool too). I plan on studying mechanical engineering in college.

FIRST works.

purpleandplasma

27-03-2011, 19:03

i am a girl, and i agree. however, i know from personal experiences that girls have gotten less respect on our team just because we are girls. I have fought for it, and now, after what the 11th week of the season, we are finally treated equal. so i can see the point were they are promoting girls in engineering fields and trying to gain that respect (trust me, starting an all girls team just to get some respect for all the girls on our team has crossed my mind a few times) but it is counter productive as to that first is for everyone

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 19:06

I'm not an engineer... yet.

My sister started high school wanting to be a Vet. She was on 1675's team her senior year, which was also their rookie year. Between FRC and another adventure she was on, she picked engineering. Now she works for Lockheed Martin with her electrical engineering degree.

I wanted to be a journalist my freshman year, four years later, I can't see myself in anything other than engineering (granted metallurgy sounds pretty cool too). I plan on studying mechanical engineering in college.

FIRST works.

It does but sometimes, students who are inspired in high school by being a part of a team, change majors in college - away from engineering.

Jane

bobosalad

27-03-2011, 19:06

Lets look at the reasoning for "exclusively girls teams" They are not all bad, in fact, some only have girls who are able to join. Example: in MN, there is an all girl team (except maybe a handful of male mentors at most) because they have an all girls school. Many of the teams in MN only have students from one school including this team. This team has to be all girls because their school is all girls. They seem to do well year to year.

purpleandplasma

27-03-2011, 19:07

Wait...am I understanding this right? If the team doesn't stay exclusively female students...they lose a sponsor/grant/donation?

Sounds kind of...wrong?

Now I'm curious about how 433 is actually run.
i know for a fact that women of engineering will only support an all girls team, and if a team started up for all girls, had them as a sponsor, then added guys, they would loose that sponsor... which i get, but i think it is unfair

purpleandplasma

27-03-2011, 19:13

i like being on a co-ed team jane, but i wouldn't mind having an all girls team either. It sets them apart, and shows that girls CAN do things by themselves! i don't think its fair to start an all girls team at, for example, a school that is co ed, and has no other team, but starting an all girls team, when there is already an existing team wouldn't hurt anyone. I see both sides of the story, and have gone back and forth on this feed, because i feel both ways. For me, the biggest part of being an all girls team would be that you wouldnt have sexist comments from guys. I am a girl driver, and its hard to deal with the comments from the guys, but i proved that i was good, and so they stopped, where as an all girls team wouldnt have those kinds of comments.. it depends on how you look at it, but from being a girl in first, i dont neccisarily agree or disagree

Foster

27-03-2011, 19:13

In that other thread are some great posts by the girls on the teams and by Faridodin “Fredi” Lajvardi, co-mentor of team 842.

I am as competitive as the next guy, but I also know and believe that it really isn't about the robots. Its just the gimmick used to get all of us together to celebrate math, science and technology in a venue that has proven to be a successful model, sports.
...
One side note to all this, as a mentor I saw how teams and people treated us differently between being co-ed to all girls.

We have three "all-girl" teams out of our 15 VEX teams. They do a great job and they have a slight edge on the boys teams because they do a better job of listening to each other. One of the teams has a woman mentor, the other two have men. The teams are some of our strongest and they do know their robots. So in this case, it's not counter productive to have all-girls teams.

I agree with Fredi, it's not about the robots, but about the other stuff.

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 19:20

In that thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56504), which is a valuable read, please also note how long it took for the girls on the team to post their thoughts. When they did, they did so very thoughtfully and very carefully, making sure that we, their readers, understood what they experienced and what their thoughts were regarding that experience.

Jane

Karthik

27-03-2011, 19:21

That's fine and dandy. Look at some of the winning teams' photos that are cropping up in CD and look at the team photos and mentor listings/descriptions on their websites. Where are the technical women mentors on the college level teams and the corporate level teams? Where are the majority of technical mentors that are women on these teams? See any?

Look around in the engineering and science classes in your high school and in your college courses and see how the numbers break down. I've talked with corporate leaders who are well aware of the lack of women in these fields and therefore, cannot hire them - because they don't exist.

How many girls actually go through the FRC program and decide on an engineering major? How many women that had their start in these robotics programs have gone on into fields of math, science, and engineering?

This is a very interesting point that is rarely talked about in FIRST. Take a look at this post from 6 years ago by Andy Baker:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=401634&postcount=54

Andy makes a list of 43 technical mentors who have had huge impacts on the engineering evolution of FRC. Every single one of them is a male. Why is that? Where are all our female rockstar engineers? Why aren't there female Raul Olivera's or Paul Copioli's? (I know they exist, but not nearly at the proportion that they should) It's an important question I've been pondering for years, but still don't have an answer for.

JLenhart

27-03-2011, 19:43

I personlly do not see an issue with an all girl FIRST Robotics team. If group of girls who share an interest and science and technology want to hang out and be on a robotics team, let them. Having girls interested is fantastic and being able to get thirty or forty girls on the team who enjoy it is great. I was impressed by the Girls Of Steel team at Pittsburgh this year. They were not afraid to get their hands dirty and built an impressive robot also. Some girls just want to hang around other girls. I`m sure these all girl teams wouldn`t say no to helping start another team that allows both genders anyway if one was started and needed help.

mahumnut

27-03-2011, 19:48

Unless the formation of the team is the result of battling marginalization from a coed team, which very well might be the case for some teams, I find that the formation of these teams are only adding to the overall sense of marginalization within a community and hindering the sense of equality.

This of course excludes cases where a team is formed from an all girls school or any other reasonable exception.

YAK'ker

27-03-2011, 19:51

well, the poll wasn't exclusively for all-girl teams...
Having been a girl scout leader and a 4-H leader, I have to argue that it's better to provide ample opportunities for kids to participate together in a positive, team-focused program that isn't focused on physical prowess. That's my answer on gender exclusiveness. But my pop, who was a civil, mechanical, and electrical engineer said "women make the best engineers" so I think making sure you have girls on the team is SUPER important!

As to being exclusive in any other way...I guess teams that are based in all-Christian schools are already that way, but as long as their bylaws don't specifically require members to be of some religious affiliation, they are OK with the philosophy of FIRST, which has no religious exclusivity implied.
Personally, I think most of our robotics programs are magnets for kids who are square pegs - those who don't necessarily do well in other school groups. I would love to see what the percentage is of our kids who have autism-spectrum disorders, for example.

RoboMom

27-03-2011, 20:01

This is a very interesting point that is rarely talked about in FIRST. Take a look at this post from 6 years ago by Andy Baker:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=401634&postcount=54

Andy makes a list of 43 technical mentors who have had huge impacts on the engineering evolution of FRC. Every single one of them is a male. Why is that? Where are all our female rockstar engineers? Why aren't there female Raul Olivera's or Paul Copioli's? (I know they exist, but not nearly at the proportion that they should) It's an important question I've been pondering for years, but still don't have an answer for.

I have no idea what a "female rockstar engineer" looks like, but it appears there have been many women who have won WFFA in the last 6 years. Maybe someone can update Andy's list.

I have worked with some women engineers locally who are terrific role models.

They more often are quietly working with teams, going about the business of mentoring in a way that matches what the team needs.

I have also had the pleasure of working with women engineers in the field of "engineering education" including some real rocket scientists.

FRC does not tell teams how they should run their team. So I am a little baffled by all the opinions here. I will try to read over the posts again to see what I am missing. For example, I just read a book about a FRC team where only seniors are allowed on the team...

treffk

27-03-2011, 20:10

I do have to wonder what the reaction would be if the roles were reversed, what would have happened if the OP had asked if all male teams should be allowed? Or if teams were allowed to discriminate against students who have learning disabilities or who don't speak English?

At the GKC regional this year there was an all-male team. It was a all male military school. I'm sure there are many more all-male teams in situations like that too.

Although, I do support single gender teams especially within Girl Scouts because they are focusing on introducing the girls into technology. There are single gender schools that also have teams. Do you think they should combine with another single gender teams of the opposite sex?

Grim Tuesday

27-03-2011, 20:11

Our team was proud this year to recruit 11 new girls, bringing our total to 13. Yes, we only had two girls carry over from last year, which is to say, we had very few last year (5 out of 40). The team is now 13 out of 50 girls, which while not gender equal, is much closer to the same proportion of girls in tech classes. Though we have had some new...issues this year, it has certainly been a great experience. I couldn't imagine the team without either gender; some of the ladies have taken up very important fields (welding for one...)

In any case, I feel that any team made to exclude any group is bad, and shouldn't be allowed in FIRST, if not officially, it should be frowned upon. If someone founded a team in my school which disallowed girls (or guys) from joining, there would be quite a hullabaloo.

DeAnnaC

27-03-2011, 20:13

One all-girls team that we have played before is the Robettes, from Mendota Springs, MN.

Their team is school based and they attend an all-girls Catholic school but their mentors appeared to be all male.

There is an all-boys Catholic school and all-girls Catholic school here in St. Louis, but they joined together to form one FRC team.

When the Robettes attended the St. Louis Regional, they'd wear very colorful hot pink tights and the plaid school skirts. Maybe a little distracting to the boys.. or is that part of their strategy? They always held their own against the mixed gender teams and usually went home with a trohphy of some kind.

The completion of the team stats each year for our team is interesting.. 1/2 of our team is homeschooled and many of those parents do not keep track of what 'grade' their student is in. This year we've got students from 5 different counties and 12 different schools, so it's quite the mix of students to figure out the % of low income students in your district.

On the Autism Spectrum question - by my 6 years of experience with the team, we've had 1-2 students every year that exhibit some spectrum behaviors. Does robotics draw those kind of kids in because it's ok to be a little obsessive about things that Autistic kids are good at like rules/safety or 3d animation? FIRST is different than most teams - it's ok to work on some things at your own pace, in your own way and still be part of a team, so maybe that is part of the attraction?

DeAnna

Phcullen

27-03-2011, 20:14

Name some teams that are all girls teams that are formed solely to exclude boys. Do you know of any?

Also, does it hurt to use capitalization in your sentences? Just asking...

Jane

team 3504 was givin the funding by CMU to have an all girls team. im not saying they are there to exclude boys and i agree that maybe it is a more comfortable situation for girls to have that environment. but i think that teams should be open

Koko Ed

27-03-2011, 20:16

Kims Robot

27-03-2011, 20:22

This topic is very very close to my heart, as I am a female engineer... am an engineer because of FIRST... and have seen how hard it is to be a female in engineering and how few women engineering role models there are.

I'll start with that I see absolutely nothing wrong with all-girls teams. Teams "exclude" all the time... some teams are seniors only, some require applications and hand select students, most ONLY allow students from their school. Whatever the reason, those teams aren't "complained" about. Exclusivity is not just in all girls teams.

1511's second year I organized a "Girls Night"... all the girls came over to my apartment, we had food, painted nails, stuff like that. Yes we excluded the boys on purpose, it was a chance for the girls & female mentors & moms to "bond". The boys complained to no end. I told them I had ZERO problem with the boys organizing a "boys night". Yet they never did.

I also offered to personally sponsor an all girls FLL team if one got started in the Rochester area. I feel VERY strongly that especially at the middle school age boys push girls aside and don't give them the chance/credit that they deserve. And most girls will just back off and let the boys do the work. This (IMO) is why so few girls end up in technical careers. The only girls that "make it" in engineering are the ones that aren't afraid to push past the boys and give it their all. I often see the same happen on FRC teams. Unless a mentor actively drags girls into design & engineering tasks, the girls often gravitate to things like the Chairmans Award, media, spirit, etc.

Thus I think an all girls team is a great way for girls to have exclusive access to all tasks and realize that they really CAN do it just as well as boys. The point isnt to exclude the boys or deny them opportunity, the point is to push the issue that arises when boys & girls mix. Now the real world is Co-ed, so to me FLL is the most appropriate place to do an all girls team. FRC should be a micrcosm of the real world. But I see the point of continuing it in FRC. I had the chance to see 2 all girls teams at DC, and it was great to see girls really getting their hands in the robots, not just standing on the sideline charging the batteries.

Andy makes a list of 43 technical mentors who have had huge impacts on the engineering evolution of FRC. Every single one of them is a male. Why is that? Where are all our female rockstar engineers?

This provoked a lot of thought in my head... and also a little bit of hurt at first. I remember sitting at the Championship Panel presentation last year staring at all the men. It was frustrating and aggravating. I knew the answer to every question that was asked, and I was a female engineer. But I'm not a "Rock Star". Why? I have no idea really. I can talk gear ratios, battery capacities, power curves, PID loops, PWM wiring, networking, scouting statistics, rules & ranking points with anyone. But the odder thing was sitting there, knowing I knew all of that, yet I couldn't think of a single other female mentor that I knew that knew all the same. Every "involved" female mentor outside of my team that I could name was a team leader, a mom, a teacher... none were engineering mentors. Even sitting here now, I am dumbfounded to think of one. But I also think about nearly all my posts here on CD. Most have to do with organization, leadership, scouting, strategy, rules, etc... I don't do a lot of the tech-e talk here. And maybe thats what makes an FRC engineering rock star?

I graduated from Clarkson with an Electrical Engineering Degree and have worked as a Systems Engineer for nearly 9 years now. I have a nearly complete Masters in Robotic Intelligence from RIT. In looking at my career and watching other women, I have to say that I think some of what I have noticed has spilled over into FIRST.

In general, Women are big picture thinkers. They are organizers, they are managers. Its the reason I gravitated towards systems engineering. I liked the big picture better than sitting at a desk drawing up digital electronics for the rest of my life. I like having enough technical depth to work with customers to define their exact needs and define the requirements & specifications for our products & systems. Am I doing the board layout? no. Do I do the packaging design? no. Do I design the power circuits? no. Do I program in the networking stack? no. But can I tell you a heck of a lot about all of it? of course. Its the same reason I liked being an FRC team leader, and the team's systems engineer.

I guess I wish I knew how to change this. We need to find the female engineering mentors in FIRST and start having them present/co-present technical conferences at the championships. We need to start showing the girls on the teams that there are female engineering "rock stars" to look up to.

But personally, I think its fine to have all-girls teams. For the original poster... Think about the DC regional you were just at... even with 2/63 FRC teams being all-girls, I guarantee that less than 20% of the students attending the event were female. (And heck, I know the boys on our team loved having the all-girls Waldo team to "hang around" with!) Plus I am pretty certain that there was an All-Boys team there... and no one complained (Boys Latin School).

Vikesrock

27-03-2011, 20:28

One all-girls team that we have played before is the Robettes, from Mendota Springs, MN.

Their team is school based and they attend an all-girls Catholic school but their mentors appeared to be all male.

The Robettes have both male and female mentors.

As long as it isn't preventing males from participating (either they have another team as an option, or there aren't any to exclude like in 2177's case) I have no problem with all female teams. If the mentors of that particular team think that is the best way to work towards the goals of FIRST, who am I to say otherwise?

Note: The above doesn't mean that I would be against female teams even if I felt it were my place to judge.

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 20:33

If someone founded a team in my school which disallowed girls (or guys) from joining, there would be quite a hullabaloo.

You don't have girls' basketball, soccer, lacrosse, volleyball, softball, or track?

Jane

purpleandplasma

27-03-2011, 20:36

This topic is very very close to my heart, as I am a female engineer... am an engineer because of FIRST... and have seen how hard it is to be a female in engineering and how few women engineering role models there are.

I'll start with that I see absolutely nothing wrong with all-girls teams. Teams "exclude" all the time... some teams are seniors only, some require applications and hand select students, most ONLY allow students from their school. Whatever the reason, those teams aren't "complained" about. Exclusivity is not just in all girls teams.

1511's second year I organized a "Girls Night"... all the girls came over to my apartment, we had food, painted nails, stuff like that. Yes we excluded the boys on purpose, it was a chance for the girls & female mentors & moms to "bond". The boys complained to no end. I told them I had ZERO problem with the boys organizing a "boys night". Yet they never did.

I also offered to personally sponsor an all girls FLL team if one got started in the Rochester area. I feel VERY strongly that especially at the middle school age boys push girls aside and don't give them the chance/credit that they deserve. And most girls will just back off and let the boys do the work. This (IMO) is why so few girls end up in technical careers. The only girls that "make it" in engineering are the ones that aren't afraid to push past the boys and give it their all. I often see the same happen on FRC teams. Unless a mentor actively drags girls into design & engineering tasks, the girls often gravitate to things like the Chairmans Award, media, spirit, etc.

Thus I think an all girls team is a great way for girls to have exclusive access to all tasks and realize that they really CAN do it just as well as boys. The point isnt to exclude the boys or deny them opportunity, the point is to push the issue that arises when boys & girls mix. Now the real world is Co-ed, so to me FLL is the most appropriate place to do an all girls team. FRC should be a micrcosm of the real world. But I see the point of continuing it in FRC. I had the chance to see 2 all girls teams at DC, and it was great to see girls really getting their hands in the robots, not just standing on the sideline charging the batteries.

This provoked a lot of thought in my head... and also a little bit of hurt at first. I remember sitting at the Championship Panel presentation last year staring at all the men. It was frustrating and aggravating. I knew the answer to every question that was asked, and I was a female engineer. But I'm not a "Rock Star". Why? I have no idea really. I can talk gear ratios, battery capacities, power curves, PID loops, PWM wiring, networking, scouting statistics, rules & ranking points with anyone. But the odder thing was sitting there, knowing I knew all of that, yet I couldn't think of a single other female mentor that I knew that knew all the same. Every "involved" female mentor outside of my team that I could name was a team leader, a mom, a teacher... none were engineering mentors. Even sitting here now, I am dumbfounded to think of one. But I also think about nearly all my posts here on CD. Most have to do with organization, leadership, scouting, strategy, rules, etc... I don't do a lot of the tech-e talk here. And maybe thats what makes an FRC engineering rock star?

I graduated from Clarkson with an Electrical Engineering Degree and have worked as a Systems Engineer for nearly 9 years now. I have a nearly complete Masters in Robotic Intelligence from RIT. In looking at my career and watching other women, I have to say that I think some of what I have noticed has spilled over into FIRST.

In general, Women are big picture thinkers. They are organizers, they are managers. Its the reason I gravitated towards systems engineering. I liked the big picture better than sitting at a desk drawing up digital electronics for the rest of my life. I like having enough technical depth to work with customers to define their exact needs and define the requirements & specifications for our products & systems. Am I doing the board layout? no. Do I do the packaging design? no. Do I design the power circuits? no. Do I program in the networking stack? no. But can I tell you a heck of a lot about all of it? of course. Its the same reason I liked being an FRC team leader, and the team's systems engineer.

I guess I wish I knew how to change this. We need to find the female engineering mentors in FIRST and start having them present/co-present technical conferences at the championships. We need to start showing the girls on the teams that there are female engineering "rock stars" to look up to.

But personally, I think its fine to have all-girls teams. For the original poster... Think about the DC regional you were just at... even with 2/63 FRC teams being all-girls, I guarantee that less than 20% of the students attending the event were female. (And heck, I know the boys on our team loved having the all-girls Waldo team to "hang around" with!) Plus I am pretty certain that there was an All-Boys team there... and no one complained (Boys Latin School).
Can i just say thank you. This really is an inspiration to me. I am a girl that wants to be an engineer, and we lack female mentors. I worked on the robot, on drive team, yet did doc. & pub. and spirit. I think it is so important to have girls, and its nice to see/ hear from a woman that was in first and moved into engineering. You are an inspiration, and thanks!

Koko Ed

27-03-2011, 20:41

This provoked a lot of thought in my head... and also a little bit of hurt at first. I remember sitting at the Championship Panel presentation last year staring at all the men. It was frustrating and aggravating. I knew the answer to every question that was asked, and I was a female engineer. But I'm not a "Rock Star". Why? I have no idea really. I can talk gear ratios, battery capacities, power curves, PID loops, PWM wiring, networking, scouting statistics, rules & ranking points with anyone. But the odder thing was sitting there, knowing I knew all of that, yet I couldn't think of a single other female mentor that I knew that knew all the same. Every "involved" female mentor outside of my team that I could name was a team leader, a mom, a teacher... none were engineering mentors. Even sitting here now, I am dumbfounded to think of one. But I also think about nearly all my posts here on CD. Most have to do with organization, leadership, scouting, strategy, rules, etc... I don't do a lot of the tech-e talk here. And maybe thats what makes an FRC engineering rock star?

I graduated from Clarkson with an Electrical Engineering Degree and have worked as a Systems Engineer for nearly 9 years now. I have a nearly complete Masters in Robotic Intelligence from RIT. In looking at my career and watching other women, I have to say that I think some of what I have noticed has spilled over into FIRST.

In general, Women are big picture thinkers. They are organizers, they are managers. Its the reason I gravitated towards systems engineering. I liked the big picture better than sitting at a desk drawing up digital electronics for the rest of my life. I like having enough technical depth to work with customers to define their exact needs and define the requirements & specifications for our products & systems. Am I doing the board layout? no. Do I do the packaging design? no. Do I design the power circuits? no. Do I program in the networking stack? no. But can I tell you a heck of a lot about all of it? of course. Its the same reason I liked being an FRC team leader, and the team's systems engineer.

I guess I wish I knew how to change this. We need to find the female engineering mentors in FIRST and start having them present/co-present technical conferences at the championships. We need to start showing the girls on the teams that there are female engineering "rock stars" to look up to.

But personally, I think its fine to have all-girls teams. For the original poster... Think about the DC regional you were just at... even with 2/63 FRC teams being all-girls, I guarantee that less than 20% of the students attending the event were female. (And heck, I know the boys on our team loved having the all-girls Waldo team to "hang around" with!) Plus I am pretty certain that there was an All-Boys team there... and no one complained (Boys Latin School).
I've always referred to you as The Prototype, Kim. You were what Dean envisioned when he started FIRST. Started out as a dedicated student, went to college and started a successful FIRST team and started another successful FIRST team when you went out into the workforce.
That is terrific for anyone no matter what their gender is.

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 20:54

I don't do a lot of the tech-e talk here. And maybe thats what makes an FRC engineering rock star?

This might be a good topic for a different thread: What makes an engineering rock star?

My thinking: visibility. It could be via forums, videos, emceeing/announcing... there are WFAs that are very quiet and have very little presence outside perhaps their own local sphere. They are well-respected but are they rock stars?

Do girls need rock stars or do they desire more? Intelligence, visionary thinking, aptitude, common sense, hands-on applications, efficiency, knowledge?

I'm not dissing rock stars but it's funny that you were in the audience at that conference presentation instead a part of the panel. Not surprising though. Just as the powerful teams need to find a way to invite a worthy rookie team to be a part of their alliance, so do the powerful male mentors need to find ways to be more inclusive with their invites. And, they should have been all along - if they would like to help shift the culture. If not, no biggie. FIRST needs to step it, too - helping to highlight women and minorities in their webcasts/videos, like the Kick Off webcasts/videos - giving women more opportunities than just introducing a male VIP or FIRSTer - if they want to shift the culture. If not, no biggie.

Jane

dag0620

27-03-2011, 20:55

Despite some slight grammar issues, I want to thank the OP for bringing up a topic that has actually been on my mind for a little while.

To anserw the question as to wether all Girls teams are counterproducive, I don't think so. The philosphy, or at least part, is to get youth involved with Science and Technology, and if there is a FIRST team, I'm sure these ideals are being met.

I understand completely the need to get more females involved both in FIRST and the various STEM fields used into today's world. All girls teams do a great job showcasing the need to get more female involved, both as students and mentors, and I commend them for that.

However beyond publicity and awareness, I fell that having an all girls, or all guys team for that matter, doesn't add to the program.

Part of FIRST is to try to lay the groundwork of working with others, a skill that will be needed in the workplace. I feel that if you want to get that right, teams that have both males and females is the way to go. I understand that this is not always the truth (I'm not trying to be stereotypical) but as a member in any workplace, usually working with a member of your own gender, and working with a member of another gender are going to be different.

What I'm trying to say is that I am 100% fine gender specific teams, or any team that have special criteria for that matter, but if you want to go above and beyond, having a great mix of people on your team will make the experience that much better.

I apologize in advance for any un-clarity in my thoughts - as I've said in the past I'm better with oral expression vs. written expression.

ThaineP

27-03-2011, 21:03

I can see that this discussion is going to get a lot of posts.

Are you talking about a team from an all-girls school? There isn't any problem with that, then.

A team from a co-ed school, though, is another matter. If there is another team at the same school that is all-male, it would still not work. (remember Plessy v. Ferguson?) I personally think they are a bad idea, because they cause tension whether or not they have a male counterpart, and because of society's view of all-male groups versus all-female groups, the practice of two teams would be condoned merely for the existence of the all-male group. Plus, there is not really any reason to split the teams.

Boydean

27-03-2011, 21:12

I don't think all girl teams work against FIRST's goals.

If you look at other sporting competitions you see a clear division between male and female teams (better said, leagues). The reasons for this can go unspoken, but does this division have a negative impact on the sport's primary purpose? If you asked people this I would imagine most would say it doesn't.

What makes FIRST any different? What makes FIRST different is that an all girl team has the same chances (maybe even better chances as described by earlier posters) as guy/girl team, competing in the same competition, to gain the title as winner. Imagine the inspirational impact on those girls when they win that regional (whether it be winner, or chairmans).

The real problem would be if there was a girl only team in the community with only one FRC team, and leads no attempt to start another team for guys (or the other way around). Although, I believe that is a discussion to be left for another time.

Phcullen

27-03-2011, 21:13

You don't have girls' basketball, soccer, lacrosse, volleyball, softball, or track?

Jane
they do that because girls and boys are physicality different saying that this is the same would suggest that girls and boys are incapable of competing against each other fairly in a FIRST competition

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 21:18

they do that because girls and boys are physicality different saying that this is the same would suggest that girls and boys are incapable of competing against each other fairly in a FIRST competition

Yes, but that post stated a team, it did not state - a robotics team. I chose not to assume something about that post that was not stated clearly.

This is a good topic and I'm glad that you have started this discussion. It makes people uncomfortable and sometimes when people are out of their comfort zones, they actually have to do some thinking and become more aware of the status quo.

If people really wanted to do some thinking, they could look at grants and scholarships that are available to women and minorities. That would help deepen their awareness or make them think harder - so much so that maybe it would make their head hurt. :)

Jane

Molten

27-03-2011, 21:21

Every time people speak of gender roles and equality, they make mentions of the way men and women think differently. Some can try and state one is smarter or better, but I've yet to see any proof to that extent. I have, however heard of study after study that proves we think differently. These differences mean that we aren't the same. We can be equal, but not truly the same. Each job requires a specific skill set and style of thinking/acting in order to do well. If we think differently depending upon our gender, wouldn't it only make sense that some fields would be made up of mostly men while others be made up of mostly women? I don't believe that its simply cut and dry, boys are good at this and girls are good at that. Some of us think differently then our gender would dictate. I'm perhaps the least hands-on engineering student I know. I don't like working with cars or even care how they work. I like the design side of engineering. I know girls in my classes that are very hands on that I'd gladly ask to change a tire or check any other car problem if I needed it. That said, there is a general variation between the sexes. It would seem that engineering fields tend to align with the men's thinking processes so it really wouldn't make sense for engineering to be a perfect 50-50 split. Should it be 60-40? 70-30? 80-20? or should we even really say? I find the problem with mindless feminism* is that it isn't actually feminism at all. I treat girls the way I'd treat a guy(besides some basic chivalry acts). If a FIRST team is all-female due to being an all-girls school or the sort, that is fine. I understand this and have no issues with it. However, I have noticed a few stating that nobody is hurt in situations when girls choose to be on their own team if there are enough in the area. I disagree. I think all sexists need to be put in their place every once in a while. If the girls simply avoid the problem, the problem doesn't go away. The boys will probably just become more stereotyping. Even seeing an all-girls team do well at competition allows them to see girls do well once. Seeing girls on their team taking on leadership roles and doing technical work allows them to see girls do well for weeks. The girls are also going to learn they can do well at the cost of learning to assert themselves. In short, there are definite benefits to having some all-girls teams. It allows them to see how good they are while not getting pushed around. However, this is not an ideal solution. There should be a way of helping the girls without segregating.

To summarize my thoughts, there isn't going to be an 50-50 distribution for most fields due to inherent differences of gender. This does not say we are not equal, but it does suggest we should stop pushing for a 50-50 distribution and just ensure that anyone that wants into the field is allowed and welcome.This means not only that they are allowed on the team but that they are not discriminated against. This discrimination includes any act that treats them differently then any other member of the team. As long as we can guarantee that all are allowed and welcome, we really shouldn't be placing our own bias on how many of which gender we believe should be on the team.

I apologize for this lengthy post after not posting for a while. I hope it was all worth reading.

Jason

*I specifically said mindless feminism. By that, I refer to those that suggest anything that pushes for "equality" without thinking about the actual word equal.

ATannahill

27-03-2011, 21:21

Re: Are all girl FIRST team counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST?

Simply put, no. F.I.R.S.T. is For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology. These teams inspire girls to pursue science and technology (I have no statistics to prove this but I am going to assume as such).

Are they (or any team that excludes based on something petty) the best at inspiring science and technology? I doubt it. A diversified team can bring more ideas and different view than one that is not.

Now to address the question in your poll. Should exclusive teams be allowed in FIRST?

IMO no. I don't care if your parents paid money to send you to an exclusive school or if mentors or sponsors feel that it is in the best interest for XYZ to happen. You WILL at some point have to work with other kinds of people. If you demand to not work with person X because they are ______, your going to be the one on the ugly end of the stick.

I have seen people talk about awards or how well a team's robot did. I find this information counterintuitive to the point that should be expressed in this thread.

emekablue

27-03-2011, 21:26

Grim Tuesday

27-03-2011, 21:35

You don't have girls' basketball, soccer, lacrosse, volleyball, softball, or track?

Jane

But there is also a boys basketball, soccer, lacrosse, volleyball, softball, and track.

You would be hard pressed to find a school/area with enough money/sponsors to support two teams so close.

SGS

27-03-2011, 21:41

This of course excludes cases where a team is formed from an all girls school or any other reasonable exception.

I am the captain of an all girls team. We are not all-female because we have anything to prove, but merely because we are based out of an all-girls school.

Coincidentally, my cousins are on an all boys team you may have heard of:
254 Cheesy Poofs is a male-team. No one has ever had a problem with that. They are based out of a Boys school.

All of our mentors are men, which has led to some interesting working environments, because yes, girls do not learn the same way as boys do. Most of girls join us never using a tool before and often scared to use power tool. But girls leave our program with welding and machining experience and about 75% go on to study a STEM career.

At Alamo and Lone Star we have girl come to our pit saying "You guys are an all girl team? Really? The girls on our team just do outreach and PR." If this is the result of a co-ed team, I fear for the future of engineering.

Our team strives to be a normal team and escape the stigma that comes with being an all-femal team. However, we strive to show girl that YES they can be successful in a STEM situation (we are a 3rd year team, 2 time finalist, alliance captain, Engineering Inspiration winners, and 2 time spirit award winners) and that girls belong building the robot and not just in PR.

A girls-team is the perfect place for girls to learn about technology, why? Because more timid girls will not be embarrassed or intimidated by male-peers who are more likely to have experience with tools and be less timid around them. You can accuse me of making assumptions, but studies show girls learn better in an all female environment while boys learn better in a co-ed environment because of this reason.

On final note consider this. Before every match, my team is not announced as "3103 the team from Duchesne Academy" we are "3103 the GIRLS from Duchesne Academy" I am not ashamed to be a girl, but does it really matter if your team has girls, boys, or is co-ed? Aren't we all trying to achieve the same things?

Akash Rastogi

27-03-2011, 21:55

If this is the result of a co-ed team, I fear for the future of engineering.

I never blame outcomes on the structure of a team, I see everything as an effect of the people involved.

If the mentors on those teams are not encouraging ALL students on the team to learn about ALL aspects of the team, they might be missing the point of an FRC team.

Again, don't blame the structure of a team, blame the people involved.

JaneYoung

27-03-2011, 22:03

But there is also a boys basketball, soccer, lacrosse, volleyball, softball, and track.

You would be hard pressed to find a school/area with enough money/sponsors to support two teams so close.

I'm not saying there needs to be. I was addressing the word, hullabaloo. Did I spell that right?

Honestly, my thinking is constantly evolving, thanks to some wise mentors who have spent time talking with and mentoring me. One is Sarah Plemmons from FRC 1902, Exploding Bacon. Another is Cynette Cavaliere from FRC 1511, Rolling Thunder. Another is Andy Baker from well, we know who Andy is and where he is from, but for this discussion, he is a WFA 2003 from the TechnoKats, FRC 45, and from AndyMark, Inc. These 3 have helped me in my road to understanding the roles of women in this robotics world and what their impact is on our future world of math, science, and engineering. I have also been inspired by posts made here in CD by Dave Lavery, Engineering mentor for FRC 116, and Program Executive For Solar System Exploration for NASA, and by the thread that we referred to here in this thread, where FRC 842, Falcon Robotics, undertook an incredible experiment/journey and came out wiser for it and able to share their wisdom with us, the FIRST and CD community.

I value the all-girls teams like 2881, the Lady Cans, here in Austin, a Girl Scout team that is so inspirational to be around and to compete with. I also value teams like FRC 234, Cyber Blue, a co-ed team that has a selection process. If you study that team and its business plan, you will understand the thinking, the process, and the team's standards of excellence. No team should be denied entrance into FIRST or judged by how it represents itself and its community. It may have goals and purposes that we will only learn about by asking its membership or reading its Chairman's submission and business plan. Because you feel a certain way today, don't let that stop you from learning and thinking about tomorrow. Allow yourself some discomfort when thinking about change.

Jane

David Dawson

27-03-2011, 22:12

While I don't have a strong opinion about girls teams. I still feel the need to stomp out any sports comparisons. First is not a sport. Just because you have a team doesn't make it a sport. And the only reason sports separate girls and boys are due to the physical differences between their bodies.

davidthefat

27-03-2011, 22:15

Just to tell you, there was a girl on a local varsity football team a few years back. And another freshman football team2 years ago. (different schools) and they weren't the kicker, they were tight ends

SGS

27-03-2011, 22:24

If the mentors on those teams are not encouraging ALL students on the team to learn about ALL aspects of the team, they might be missing the point of an FRC team.

Again, don't blame the structure of a team, blame the people involved.

You are correct, its just I have seen this occur numerous times and it breaks my heart.

Dancin103

27-03-2011, 22:26

Team 2340 tried to have all female mentors to work along their all girls team but I don't think they were quite able to have it be exclusive to just females.
If a dad has skills in the shop and offers to help a team would be crazy to turn down assistance from someone who wants to help no matter what their gender is.

I'm not really sure what to think of this thread, but I have a few things to say (I think they're relevant, but if they are not please do let me know). Why does it matter who (students and mentors) comprise a team. Yes, if a team is denying letting a certain student in for being male or female that is discriminatory. If a team is all male, all female, or split down the middle, what does it matter. If they are successful what does it matter? Success can be measured in many different ways whether success is completing the robot or winning the competition, if a team is successful, why does it matter who comprises the team? (Yes it is great to have a team in which half is female and half is male, because let's face it the STEM world is primarily male dominated, and females in the field are rare to come across so getting them involved is FANTASTIC!) A team is a team and functions as one, if the team is all girls that's great, if it's all guys that's great too, and if it's a mix of many diverse students that's great as well. In my opinion, the things that matter are a.) were the teams end goals met and b.) did everyone have fun?

This is just my $0.02. Feel free to comment as necessary. :)

Cass

Dancin103

27-03-2011, 22:40

I never blame outcomes on the structure of a team, I see everything as an effect of the people involved.

If the mentors on those teams are not encouraging ALL students on the team to learn about ALL aspects of the team, they might be missing the point of an FRC team.

Again, don't blame the structure of a team, blame the people involved.

This is true in every single way. We take the time to teach our students each aspect of our team and let them choose what department they want to be apart of. All the mentors and students involved are what make the team.

Cass

Chris is me

27-03-2011, 22:49

Apparently now it's popular to attack all girls teams, especially if you're an adolescent male who's never been on them. Whatever happened to the "live and let live" attitude toward team organization these same posters were pushing on people every time people argue about student versus mentor built robots? Does that just go away when something you disagree with happens?

Here's what happens with girls on many, MANY FRC teams. A girl joins. This girl is intimidated by the prospect of building a robot and doesn't have the expertise the boys do. She is pushed by other team members, consciously or subconsciously, toward Chairman's, Safety, or other parts of the team that aren't engineering related. This girl is now not doing anything relating to why she joined the team and gives up. The above cycle happens on so many teams it's not even funny. When a boy joins and doesn't know about robot making, his peers welcome and teach him. When a girl joins, she has to fight for that - but the societal pressures, team pressures, and general social stigma lead her away from that.

Yes, I know there are exceptions to the above rule - usually very independent, strong willed girls. But this does happen, a lot.

What all girls teams do is eliminate all of that. The environment is suddenly not so alien. They now have to learn about the robot, because no one else is going to do it. This gives them opportunities they might not have on mixed gender teams.

So maybe this isn't how your team runs, and maybe it isn't how you want your team to run. But, as with many team styles that aren't your own - there are good reasons behind what they do, so how about you live and let live instead of criticizing someone for actually trying to address a great societal problem in an innovative way.

davidthefat

27-03-2011, 22:53

Tom Bottiglieri

27-03-2011, 22:57

What doesn't matter: Whether a team is all boys/girls/californians/etc.
What does matter: The work environment and outlook on group participation that the mentors foster.

For example, we're not an all girls team, but most of the student work on the robot is done by girls. We don't treat them any differently from the guys. And I'd be willing to put a couple of our girls up against any of the "best" and "brightest" students in FRC.

So really I think "all-anything" teams, with the exception of all girls/boys schools, are counter productive. If a couple of college guys can run a team where female high schooler involvement drives the creation of the robot, anyone can. You need to put everyone on a level playing field. Sure some of the girls (and boys) may need a bit of a push from the mentors to get them to feel comfortable joining the conversation, but you can't treat your team members differently in group situations based on that.

It's not fair to let "all-this" or "all-that" labels lower expectations for a particular group. I've never once in my time in FRC witnessed someone change their expectations of a team in a positive way once they heard it was all girls/boys/student-built/etc. It sucks, but it's the truth. I mean what are the boys who are supposedly pushing them out of the way supposed to think when they see some girls get a special all girls team? It just drives the division.

Am I absurdly off the mark here?

CallieJ

27-03-2011, 23:28

As a member of an all-girls team that shares a lab with an all-guys team, and currently attending a school with a co-ed team, I think that there's nothing particularly wrong, or right with any of these systems. Am I glad that I am on the team I am? Yes. Do we occasionally get all sorts of responses we'd rather not receive? Of course.

I think that female teams offer a much more comfortable environment for girls who are intimidated by the level of prior knowledge and intensity on some teams. I've found that most of the guys on both the all-guys team and the co-ed team had some experience with engineering, machining, programming and electronics before they joined. This is true of some girls on our team and on the co-ed team, but there are a lot fewer of them. If you are going into robotics as a girl, with no experience, it can be an uphill battle.

On the whole a lot of our team members are people who probably would not have joined FIRST if our team was not available. We tend to attract a demographic that is not the FIRST norm and have had great success with introducing a wider range of girls to science and technology, which is the point of having a team in the first place. Personally I think this is exactly supporting the philosophy of FIRST.

Jaine Perotti

27-03-2011, 23:31

Like Kim, this is a topic close to my heart -- as I am also a female engineering student who is close to completing her degree.

There is a false equivalency being presented in the OP's poll question, which asks -- "should exclusive teams be allowed in FIRST?"

The question implies that having a female-exclusive team is equivalent to having a male-exclusive team. Let me ask you this question -- do you think that a team which only includes ethnic minorities is just as discriminatory as a whites-only team?

I sure hope that the answer is no -- as there is a clear difference between starting a team to give a leg-up to underrepresented minority groups, versus starting a team which allows only white students (who already enjoy a great deal of cultural advantage within STEM fields).

Likewise, starting a male-only team only serves to reinforce dominant cultural narratives that engineering/science is meant only for boys. There is already a WHOLE WORLD out there telling young men and boys that -- yes, if you are smart enough and work hard enough -- science and engineering are easily accessible careers for you. To deliberately exclude women from a team (other than by circumstance, such being from an all-boys school) is unequivocally sexist, just as a whites-only team would be unequivocally racist.

But what about the girls? We are not advantaged in the same way men are. All of our young lives have been punctuated with subtle messages that we should leave mechanics and electronics and computers to the guys. Starting literally from day one, media (especially advertising) shows us that girls play with dolls, furry animals, and tea-sets (and generally act passively), whereas boys play with legos, transformers, and nerf-guns (and generally act assertively). Just take a walk down the toy aisles at Toys-R-Us, or watch the advertising on a channel like Cartoon Network that's geared towards children -- it's clear that these ideas about technology and gender are instilled in us from a very young age.

When I was in high school, I ran several Lego League teams and summer camps. One summer, I ran a girls-only camp called RoboCamp for Girlz. We surveyed the students about why they never felt comfortable joining the co-ed Lego League team or summer-camp. The responses were summed up by one particularly memorable quote by one of the girls -- "I was afraid that it would just be taken over by the boys." We have been conditioned since birth to just leave the mechanics/electronics to the guys... and holding our own in those realms can be pretty intimidating sometimes.

Some people have expressed worry that girls-only teams will not prepare girls to work in a mixed-gender environment. I disagree however -- my RoboCamp for Girlz helped the girls build a foundational level of confidence -- such that they had no worries about being pushed aside by the boys once they joined the co-ed team. The boys already had that foundational level of confidence just by virtue of their upbringing. The girls-only program merely served to level the playing field.

I really believe that there is a place for programs which give a leg-up to culturally disadvantaged students. They enable the participants to envision themselves successfully completing engineering challenges, without external judgments about their gender or race weighing them down. One of the hardest things about being a woman in engineering (and probably for ethnic minorities in engineering too) is having your failures being representative of your gender (or race), not who you are as an individual. The following xkcd comic just about sums it up:

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/how_it_works.png

-- Jaine

Phcullen

27-03-2011, 23:41

thank you for your thoughts i am glad most of you are taking this maturely and putting though into everything that you are saying.

again i would like to state that i do not include teams based out of already exclusive groups like schools and scouts.

though my years on my team i have worked with and developed close relationships with people that i probably would have never met without FIRST mentors and students we were always equal maybe things are different on other teams but i never saw women being discouraged from doing anything on our team and were always clearly just as capable as anyone (if not more as in many cases). it would certainly be nice to see more women mentors. but there really are not many out there and that is because historically that is not seen to be a womans profession and first is there to change that by exposing students to these fields because things certainly feel more tangible when you see peers doing them.
FIRST's goal, as it has been explained to me, is not to make everyone who joins become an engineer or whatever but to expose as many people who would not be exposed otherwise as possible to the field. and with that in mind it is certainly important to get girls involved but when groups will only fund/support a team that is "girls only" then you are placing that one demographic at a higher importance. and that is where i see these teams conflicting with FIRST's philosophy. why are all girl teams seen as more impressive when they exclude men from joining? wouldn't it me more impressive to have a strong female population on a co-ed team, showing that they have encouraged others that statistically are less likely to have tried it out? why is it when they announce all girl teams at competition they announce them as all girl teams just as they announce a team from a school for the deft like they had to over come a challenge just because they are girls? the formation of all girl teams seem to be more for political reasons then for the benefit of the members of the team

Alan Anderson

27-03-2011, 23:42

Makes you wonder what sort of person would want to teach kids that if you have money you can make the rules.

Team Hammond (FRC #71) is one of the winningest FRC teams around. The team operates under an explicit "Golden Rule": Their sponsor has the gold, so gets to make the rules.

Karibou

27-03-2011, 23:43

At Alamo and Lone Star we have girl come to our pit saying "You guys are an all girl team? Really? The girls on our team just do outreach and PR." If this is the result of a co-ed team, I fear for the future of engineering.

I'm not on an all-girls team (last year we had 3 girls and 25 guys, this year we have 7 girls and 30 guys), but I have found that a lot of people are surprised when they find out that I do a lot of mechanical and machine work. I try to talk to other teams as much as I can at events, and most people sound really impressed about that. I think that I've only had three or four people blatantly say "our girls pretty much just do PR," but it is still obvious that a lot of other teams are like that as well.

You would be hard pressed to find a school/area with enough money/sponsors to support two teams so close.
Welcome to Michigan, namely SE Michigan. Oakland County has an insane density of FRC teams, and many of them are big-name teams to boot: Killer Bees, Wings of Fire, HOT, RUSH. I know that Rochester Community Schools sponsors two teams (201 and 245). Returning to Wayne County, there are two teams located in the Grosse Pointes, one from the public schools (1189) and one from a local private school (3175)...and we are by no means a large city. Our public school system will not allow students who do not attend our public schools to join 1189 due to liability, tax, and political issues.

Back on topic:
I don't have a problem with single-gender/"exclusive" teams. Single-gender schools will often lead to single-gender teams. While all-girl teams don't give the girls the kind of real-world immersion into science and technology that a co-ed team would - the male-dominated environment - they do eliminate the gender-domination issues that sometimes happen on co-ed teams. No girl will be faced with sexual discrimination of any kind on an all-girls team. For some, that's the only barrier preventing them from doing mechanical work, or even joining a team. The girls will still have to work with male students at events. They're not totally isolated from the real world. No matter how much anyone argues "well, they have to get used to dealing with men," that doesn't solve the problem of girls not joining a team because they're scared of the boys.

Is it fair to the boys who want to join a team, but said team restricts itself to females? No. So therefore, should all-girls (or all-boys, or all-Jewish, or all-anything) teams not be allowed? IMO, no - you'll be hard-pressed to find a blanket rule that benefits everyone. I think a rule saying that a FRC team must be open to any student willing to join would hurt far more people than it would help, since many districts, schools and clubs only allow students from that district, school or club to join that organization's sponsored activities.

Since we're talking about female underrepresentation in engineering:
I think that I am very fortunate in my immersion into engineering. I joined my team during the first year that they started really pressing females to do robot-related work, and thus I did not face any discrimination when I started working in the shop. Still, I would not have gone to my first work session if I had not gone with my friend. I didn't know anyone on the team at that point, and was a very shy freshman who had real problems with introducing myself to new people. If I hadn't gone with her, I wouldn't have gone at all, and probably would have stopped showing up shortly after Kickoff because I wouldn't have had anything to do (we didn't really have any kind of designated PR team at that point, just a few upperclassmen that I didn't know and were not actively recruiting PR members). By the end of freshman year, I was a lathe operator. My friend dominated the mill. We were both part of the uncrate team and the pit crew. She became our build group leader sophomore year. We never faced discrimination from the male members of our team. Due to my establishment as a hardworking team member, I haven't had any problems from new mentors and students over the past few years.

If I had joined an all-girls team, I would not have felt so intimidated about going to work sessions. However, I don't think that I would be as comfortable around guys as I am now. I'm sure that my involvement in other male-dominated activities (radio astronomy team, drumline) has helped with that, but I joined the radio astronomy team because of the influence of a female teacher, and the drumline because of the influence of a female friend. It takes a lot of willpower for a girl just out of the torments of middle school to find her place in a male environment without another female to help her along the way.

As a note, I don't think that 1189 has had a female engineering mentor until this year, which is our 9th season. We didn't have a female build group leader until the 2008-09 season, or a female build captain until 2009-10.

CallieJ

27-03-2011, 23:59

Again I would like to state that I do not include teams based out of already exclusive groups like schools and scouts.

Just out of curiosity-- are there many all-female teams that are not based out of a school or Girl Scouts?

Those are the only two groups I have ever run into that support all-girls teams, and the only Girl Scout team I've ever met is our own (I know there was another Girl Scout FRC team in Austin on 2009 and 2010 but I don't think they're operational this year).

If so, are these teams more common in other parts of the country? Does anyone have any reason why that might be? The last regional my team attended there were only 3 all-female teams out of ~55 teams, and two of those were from Catholic high schools (the other one was us).

JaneYoung

28-03-2011, 00:11

(I know there was another Girl Scout FRC team in Austin on 2009 and 2010 but I don't think they're operational this year).

If you are talking about the Lady Cans, FRC 2881 (http://www.frcteam2881.com/history.html), they competed at Lone Star this year.

Jane

nitneylion452

28-03-2011, 00:54

Although, I do support single gender teams especially within Girl Scouts because they are focusing on introducing the girls into technology. There are single gender schools that also have teams. Do you think they should combine with another single gender teams of the opposite sex?

I find it interesting that you would bring this up, and that I would read this. The situation which you described is very similar to what my team did. We are from an all-boys Catholic high school. For our first year, we were an all boys team. Over the summer, we opened membership to a local all-girls Catholic high school. Currently, we have about 2 or 3 active members from the girls school.

When we first opened membership, there was a very good response. Roughly 30 or 40 girls showed up to our "orientation" meeting, which we held to get the girls ready for an all girls competition hosted by the Firebirds (FIRST Team
433). About 10 of those girls showed up to the competition, which was about all we had enough room for. Since then, we haven't seen most of those girls (many of whom admitted to their friends that they showed up for the boys. Who can blame them? We've got some fine looking gentlemen on our team! :p ).

N7UJJ

28-03-2011, 01:29

Generally, because of our culture, girls do not enter high school with the same technical skill set (power tools, mechanics, etc) that boys do and male mentors value. As a result, girls, generally, lack the experience that would allow them to excel in a relatively short time. Males, culturally, have a great advantage entering engineering fields.

The 842 "We Left the Boys at Home" showed how quickly the girls learned with the experience of designing, maintaining our robot at a competition.

I emailed the girls who were on that team to read this thread. Most of them have or are about to graduate with an engineering degree. Hopefully, some will share their experiences.

We are also dong research on gender distribution in engineering education, engineering companies, and FIRST competitions. While we had not completed our study, the U.S. has a lot of "culture changing" to do before women are equals in STEM education and employment. While FIRST actively seeks to attract women and minorities into FIRST teams and STEM, it is obvious that women are not yet on par with men in their numbers nor their responsibilities on teams, and in FIRST itself.

So what can we do to "change the culture" so more females will participate? I think an all girls team is a great experiment.

Phcullen

28-03-2011, 01:53

The 842 "We Left the Boys at Home" showed how quickly the girls learned with the experience of designing, maintaining our robot at a competition.

I emailed the girls who were on that team to read this thread. Most of them have or are about to graduate with an engineering degree. Hopefully, some will share their experiences.

thank you i hope they do too.

Apparently now it's popular to attack all girls teams
I am not attacking any teams and i hope nobody else here is. i am just proposing a thought i have not seen this presented anywhere before bur according to you it has come up before so maybe this is worth thinking about.

As for student vs. mentor built robots. Please keep this out of my thread i would like this to keep on subject.

Molten

28-03-2011, 02:20

The question implies that having a female-exclusive team is equivalent to having a male-exclusive team. Let me ask you this question -- do you think that a team which only includes ethnic minorities is just as discriminatory as a whites-only team?

I sure hope that the answer is no -- as there is a clear difference between starting a team to give a leg-up to underrepresented minority groups, versus starting a team which allows only white students (who already enjoy a great deal of cultural advantage within STEM fields).

As long this is the opinion of the majority, those that believe in equality will have failed. To truly support equality you must try to remove the differences that are already there, not instigate new ones to balance the problem. Yes, you can allow for about the same opportunity by doing this but in the end everyone is just going to be prejudiced against in different ways. I firmly believe in equality in its purest form. If you want to make things "fair" eliminate the cultural advantages given to the white males. Teach your little girl to use a power drill and other tools. The only way we'll ever have a truly equal situation is if we start giving our girls lego's and our boys dolls. Treat them the same, and in their eyes they will be. Anything less isn't true equality at all and to some extent abandonment of the original goal.

I know its hard to have a co-ed scenario where the girls and boys have equal treatments. I'd suggest rather then separating the two completely, to find a way to work together. The real world has made it work, why can't we? In the business world, a person who makes sexist/racist comments is fired. Why shouldn't we be similar? It could be immediate removal from the team depending on the nature, but at the very least sent home from the meeting or reassigned to a less favorable task. A year working on shirt designs and PR would certainly make the guys think twice before suggesting a girl be better suited there.

In short, treat the problem not the symptoms. Otherwise the problem will never be solved.

Jason

Tristan Lall

28-03-2011, 04:25

As long this is the opinion of the majority, those that believe in equality will have failed. To truly support equality you must try to remove the differences that are already there, not instigate new ones to balance the problem. Yes, you can allow for about the same opportunity by doing this but in the end everyone is just going to be prejudiced against in different ways. I firmly believe in equality in its purest form. If you want to make things "fair" eliminate the cultural advantages given to the white males. Teach your little girl to use a power drill and other tools. The only way we'll ever have a truly equal situation is if we start giving our girls lego's and our boys dolls. Treat them the same, and in their eyes they will be. Anything less isn't true equality at all and to some extent abandonment of the original goal.
...
In short, treat the problem not the symptoms. Otherwise the problem will never be solved.While I'll withhold judgment as to the best course of action with respect to teams and gender constraints, I note that there's both a short-term and a long-term component to this sort of question.

For example, is it always objectively preferable to immediately banish discrimination at every turn? Or are there legitimate reasons for using those classifications as a proxy for hardships that are systematically related to disadvantaged groups?

When the same classifications that were once used to discriminate against a group are instead used to improve the relative standing of that group (in other words, to discriminate in their favour), there is presumably a tangible benefit to the disadvantaged demographic in the short term. Contrast that with a strict equality regime, suddenly imposed—will we actually see that same degree of improvement with any immediacy? Over the long term, so long as some sort of social mobility is possible, it's plausible that the social situations will average out—but should we as a society wait that long? Is that actually the right thing to do, given that the affected people may not personally reap the benefits of this enlightenment within their lifetimes?

I note that this isn't really about "righting historical wrongs" (as such endeavours are often misconstrued). It is fundamentally more about using an approach that is feasible in the context of society, and which results in a modest but tangible short-term improvement rather than an idealized, hypothetical long-term benefit.

Practically speaking, isn't it easier to segregate a few all-girl teams than it is to remove the relevant cultural obstacles? While this is somewhat lacking in elegance, once the "friction" in the system is accounted for, it may prove to be the only reasonable course of action. (After all, given the political and social climate in the United States, would it actually be possible today to impose a perfect equality between women and men?)

In short, if there are practically unassailable barriers to treating the root cause, is it appropriate to treat some symptoms instead? Possibly.

What if the treatment exacerbates some symptoms (employs discrimination) while alleviates others (disadvantages of being female)? Isn't this situation-dependent? I don't think that the assumption that all discrimination is equally odious is appropriate here.

The real world has made it work, why can't we? In the business world, a person who makes sexist/racist comments is fired. Why shouldn't we be similar?Ideally, yes, in civilized society, such consequences exist. The reality is a lot less clear-cut—to the point where I must strenuously object to the notion that these are solved problems in the real world. Sexism and racism (in the negative sense—discrimination against those groups) are hardly artifacts of the past. In the same jobs, with the same responsibilities (i.e. controlling for a number of explainable differences), women in the United States earn substantially less than men on an annual basis (ranging from around 10% to 30%, depending on the study). Members of racial and ethnic minorities are similarly observed to be systematically less successful than might be inferred from their qualifications. One potential explanation for those disparities is that racism and sexism have not been banished, but merely driven deeper, into places beyond the reach of simple occupational regulations.

Another problem I have with this comparison is that business dealings are driven to a much greater extent by a model of economic costs and benefits. The difficulties of describing social justice in terms of economic value are a constant thorn in the side of economic theory. At present, if we were to take a cynical view of the situation, we might say that a person is fired if the costs of defending them against the allegations of impropriety outweigh the benefits of retaining them. It's easy to let a middle manager go—they're a dime a dozen, but if the successful CEO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dov_Charney) is the subject of the alleged wrongdoing, a simple firing isn't the usual course of action.

Now, although I disagree with your comparison to the business world, I do see value in disincentivizing insensitive behaviour. But a year's worth of penance? It won't work, except in the rarest of cases. This is a voluntary activity, and high school students are not to be trifled with—if they sense you're just punishing them to prove a point, or if they decide that their new assignment doesn't interest them anymore, most will just quit. And if they leave, either out of dissatisfaction or because you actually kicked them off, there are plenty of other things to occupy (and perhaps even inspire) them. These sorts of drastic measures are last resorts—the actions you take when you're not sorry to see them go, because their continued presence and behaviour is so intolerable that you've exhausted all other options.

Their ignorance needs to be alleviated with education, not crushed with discipline.

Tristan Lall

28-03-2011, 04:34

With regard to the original question, "allowed" implies a regulatory solution. I think there's a broader question: should gender-specific teams be encouraged within FIRST?

The regulatory angle is one way to discourage them (or eliminate them entirely), but it shouldn't be the only thing we consider.

From a formal point of view, I'd need strong evidence that they were almost always a bad thing to ban them, but would be satisfied with moderate evidence that they were usually bad as a reason for discouraging them, and would interpret ambiguous evidence as a reason for not actively encouraging them. Those represent several degrees of "no", but I think they better express the continuum of options.

SGS

28-03-2011, 06:28

Just out of curiosity-- are there many all-female teams that are not based out of a school or Girl Scouts?

Those are the only two groups I have ever run into that support all-girls teams...

3103 Iron Plaid from Houston, but we are based out of a school.

Isaac501

28-03-2011, 07:59

Coming from a non-exclusive team where the girls are generally more enthusiastic, more creative, and more focused, I can't say it would be a bad thing. We've seen some pretty fantastic all girl teams, absolutely.

That said, I team which is on-policy female-only is not right. You have legal issues, you have ethical issues. It's a mess. The exact same if it's a male-only by policy team.

Phcullen

28-03-2011, 08:16

Apparently now it's popular to attack all girls teams
i am not attacking anyone and i am certainly not saying that any teams should be kicked out of FIRST i am just proposing a question that from your statement seems to be on the mind of more people than myself

i would like to refine my objection a bit to focus more on the teams who have sponsors that will only support them if they stay all girl. especially when said sponsor is not already a feminist group they simply start a all girl team because thats what they want there name attached to for political reasons. this is in no way on the fault of the students or mentors but still seems to be an abuse of the system for the sponsor's political gain.

Rich Kressly

28-03-2011, 09:24

I like this discussion ... a lot.

- Regardless of the OP question which I think is tough to answer at all, I like Patrick's amended question and I like the broader discussion even more.

-Karthik's "Rock Star" strain here is a good one. There are examples of female FIRST alums and what they are doing who are being promoted - I saw one speak at the Robotics Ed Caucus lunch briefing I attended fall 2009 and another I worked with personally who has been featured in FIRST marketing, etc. However, I'm unsure of the total numbers (probably small), and the numbers of female grads actually mentoring and working with teams. I'd venture a guess that, since STEM fields have been historically "male dominated" that finding the career female engineer/scientist who isn't a FIRST alum to hold up as an example would be somewhat harder than finding the younger female engineer/scientist who is a FIRST alum. It would seem obvious, however, that we need more female engineer/scientist guest speakers at events and more female engineer/scientist working with teams (in lead roles). I do believe there have been positive strides in this direction during my 10 years in FIRST, but it will certainly take a long while to move a culture away from the "male dominance" (both real and perceived) over time.

-Now, the discussion of "how" best to "grow" more females toward STEM (and still maintain one's soul, integrity, insert any other such parameter here) becomes the part of this discussion that was originally called for. In general, there is some educational value, supported by research, that "clustering" works. There are schools that have intentionally placed all females together in math and science classes and have seen interest and test scored rise as compared to a control group over time. However, the difference here is that every other student in that same school still has access to math and science. In some cases discussed here, an exclusively female FRC team COULD (notice I said "could") exclude certain populations of students from the opportunity based on gender. It's this scenario that makes me, personally most uncomfortable. Now an all-girls school FRC team with all girls? That's a no-brainer. However, I would have serious philosophical reservations about denying access to an FRC team SOLELY based on gender. In an effort to give more girls a chance (noble, indeed), you'd potentially be shutting out the next great male astronaut (ouch). Does a sponsor/donor still have the right to donate based on certain exclusionary desires? You bet. Do I have the right to choose whether or not I'd like to be associated with that? You bet.

Carry on..great discussion here ...

Brandon Holley

28-03-2011, 09:54

-Now, the discussion of "how" best to "grow" more females toward STEM (and still maintain one's soul, integrity, insert any other such parameter here) becomes the part of this discussion that was originally called for.

This is the key topic that should be discussed in this thread. Every team has their own reasons for running a team the way they do. Jane mentioned several dozen posts back that its not uncommon for college students to change their majors as they progress through their education. When referring to females in engineering/science I would hope they are choosing to do this based on a genuine change of heart and not because they feel they will not be able to succeed in a mainly male driven environment.

This got me thinking about all girls teams and how they may or may not deal with this feeling. Certainly an all girls team will give females a better chance to get more involved in the program. What they won't provide is the window into the way the world really is. Now, I'm not sure if at a high school age this is a good thing or a bad thing, and I certainly don't agree with the world being that way, but change will not happen overnight. This is something a female pursuing a STEM field will have to endure.

To me, it would seem a girl who spent 4 years on an all girls FRC team vs a girl who spent 4 years on a co-ed FRC team would come out with different experiences, this is for certain. However, if the environment is established by the team and mentors to allow girls to succeed in a co-ed environment than I would argue the girl on the co-ed team had the better experience (this is all very hypothetical of course). More than likely this girl would have experienced the hardships many of the female mentors and engineers have spoken about in this thread. When this girl gets to college or becomes an intern or even gets a real job, she may have already had to overcome some gender barriers in her career. Maybe this life experience that has been instilled in her will truly make her stick in STEM.

Just some food for thought..

-Brando

martin417

28-03-2011, 10:20

I have mixed feelings about exclusivity. On the one hand, the prime directive of FIRST is to inspire kids. ALL kids, not just a select group. I personally welcome any kid, male, female, any race or nationality, from any school (or home school). I know of teams in the area that will not allow a kid to participate unless he is a student at that school. I even know of a team that requires a student to be a junior or senior to participate. I do not agree with these policies, or any similar policies, but the team leaders have the right to make the rules.

What I have the most issues with is the double standard. It is OK to make an all girls team, or an all African American team, but not OK to make and all boys team or an all Caucasian team. Not that I would agree with either of those policies either. I just don't like double standards.

In college, I remember meetings posted for SWE (Society of Women Engineers) and NSBE (National Society of Black Engineers). At the risk of igniting a firestorm, I would bet that if anyone tried to start the NSCCME (National Society of Conservative Caucasian Male Engineers, that the world would fall upon them and vilify the person responsible.

Jaine Perotti

28-03-2011, 11:08

As long this is the opinion of the majority, those that believe in equality will have failed. To truly support equality you must try to remove the differences that are already there, not instigate new ones to balance the problem. Yes, you can allow for about the same opportunity by doing this but in the end everyone is just going to be prejudiced against in different ways. Equality is not a zero-sum game. Do you really think men are suffering on an institutional level (equivalent to how women currently suffer) just because of a few all-girls STEM programs? Given that the whole rest of the universe is already giving men/boys a much larger leg up culturally, I honestly don't see how a handful of girls-only FIRST teams could possibly do that much damage. The idea of these teams isn't to teach girls that boys are bad or inferior, but simply to give girls room to expand their horizons without feeling the pressures of being judged by their gender. Equality for women doesn't require the loss of equality for men.

I firmly believe in equality in its purest form. If you want to make things "fair" eliminate the cultural advantages given to the white males. Teach your little girl to use a power drill and other tools. The only way we'll ever have a truly equal situation is if we start giving our girls lego's and our boys dolls. Treat them the same, and in their eyes they will be. Anything less isn't true equality at all and to some extent abandonment of the original goal. In a perfect world, I would simply wave my magic wand and instantly make all parents raise their children without prejudice. How do you propose to magically remove the cultural advantages given to males without making any real concerted effort to level the playing field?

I agree with you that parents should raise their children equally, but how do we convince people that equal treatment is necessary? The only way to do that is by shattering the stereotypes and demonstrating to the world that women and girls CAN make great scientists and engineers, and that raising them differently on the basis of their gender is patently wrong. And how do we do that? By giving more women and girls a safe space in which they can pursue those dreams, where they are at least somewhat protected from the harsh judgements of a sexist society. Certainly co-ed teams are capable of providing that safe space, but not ALWAYS. And that is why all-girls teams can play an incredibly important role in transforming our culture.

I know its hard to have a co-ed scenario where the girls and boys have equal treatments. I'd suggest rather then separating the two completely, to find a way to work together. The real world has made it work, why can't we? In the business world, a person who makes sexist/racist comments is fired. Why shouldn't we be similar? It could be immediate removal from the team depending on the nature, but at the very least sent home from the meeting or reassigned to a less favorable task. A year working on shirt designs and PR would certainly make the guys think twice before suggesting a girl be better suited there.

Again, you must think we live in some kind of dream world where every instance of sexism and racism is dealt with swiftly and justly. I can tell you from personal experience in engineering that this is not the case. If it were possible to ensure that no sexism was ever allowed to occur on any FIRST team ever, then yeah -- obviously there wouldn't be any need for all girl-teams. But until that day -- when we have stamped-out all forms of sexism -- we need to keep trying to effect positive cultural change, and many of the all-girl teams have proven themselves quite effective at doing just that.

In short, treat the problem not the symptoms. Otherwise the problem will never be solved.
JasonNearly two decades ago, a man named Dean Kamen saw that there was a very troubling problem with our society. Our nation's young people were losing interest in the things that mattered, and instead were devoting their attention to mindless entertainment -- numbing themselves to the ways in which the world needed them. He could have just tried shouting at the top of his lungs -- "Stop raising your children this way! Make your children care!" But he knew that simply telling people wouldn't convince them. He needed to show them, adults and children alike... and that is why FIRST was born.

Likewise, we can't just tell people to stop being sexist (i.e. attacking only the "problem")... but we can show them why and how stereotypes fail by giving young women room to grow without judgement. The more visibly successful women there are in STEM, the more people's prejudices will begin to break down. In this way, I don't see how we could view the mitigation of the "symptom" as anything other than a success.

MamaSpoldi

28-03-2011, 11:41

This topic is not a topic that is cut and dried or black and white. I wish that it were and I wish that it would become so in my lifetime. At the rate we are moving, my lifetime will end and this will still be a topic of discussion that generates controversy.

Controversy can be very healthy and this is.

It's easy to be idealistic and say what's the big deal? Women have to work in the real world, they may as well get used to it by working on teams that include boys/men.

That's fine and dandy. Look at some of the winning teams' photos that are cropping up in CD and look at the team photos and mentor listings/descriptions on their websites. Where are the technical women mentors on the college level teams and the corporate level teams? Where are the majority of technical mentors that are women on these teams? See any?

Look around in the engineering and science classes in your high school and in your college courses and see how the numbers break down. I've talked with corporate leaders who are well aware of the lack of women in these fields and therefore, cannot hire them - because they don't exist.

How many girls actually go through the FRC program and decide on an engineering major? How many women that had their start in these robotics programs have gone on into fields of math, science, and engineering?

I welcome posts from the women who are scientists and engineers and who read CD. Share your thoughts.

Jane

I am a software engineer... and have been for more years than many of the readers and posters here have been alive. :ahh: And I would like to say that I am in a quandry about the issue of all-girls teams.

Even seeing an all-girls team do well at competition allows them to see girls do well once. Seeing girls on their team taking on leadership roles and doing technical work allows them to see girls do well for weeks. The girls are also going to learn they can do well at the cost of learning to assert themselves. In short, there are definite benefits to having some all-girls teams. It allows them to see how good they are while not getting pushed around. However, this is not an ideal solution. There should be a way of helping the girls without segregating.
Exactly! I would say that the best situation would be to have a co-ed team where everyone is equally respected and given equal opportunity in all aspects of the team, but I would be lying if I said that this can be expected to happen everywhere. I only wish this kind of activity had existed when I was in high school. I suspect that can be very empowering for girls to be on a team on their own where they are expected to step up and get it done rather than having to push their way in. But if they are heading into engineering they will need to deal with that at some point and need to be ready to stand on their own 2 feet.

Andy makes a list of 43 technical mentors who have had huge impacts on the engineering evolution of FRC. Every single one of them is a male. Why is that? Where are all our female rockstar engineers?

This provoked a lot of thought in my head... and also a little bit of hurt at first. I remember sitting at the Championship Panel presentation last year staring at all the men. It was frustrating and aggravating. I knew the answer to every question that was asked, and I was a female engineer. But I'm not a "Rock Star". Why? I have no idea really. I can talk gear ratios, battery capacities, power curves, PID loops, PWM wiring, networking, scouting statistics, rules & ranking points with anyone. But the odder thing was sitting there, knowing I knew all of that, yet I couldn't think of a single other female mentor that I knew that knew all the same. Every "involved" female mentor outside of my team that I could name was a team leader, a mom, a teacher... none were engineering mentors. Even sitting here now, I am dumbfounded to think of one. But I also think about nearly all my posts here on CD. Most have to do with organization, leadership, scouting, strategy, rules, etc... I don't do a lot of the tech-e talk here. And maybe thats what makes an FRC engineering rock star?

To my knowledge, I am the first and only female engineering mentor that our team has had. [I have been with the team for 5 years of the 13 we have been around.] But it is just the luck of the draw... some teams have access to female engineers and some do not. We must acknowledge that we are in somewhat limited supply. And I must say that it can be difficult being the only woman in conversations among the team mentors, but that is life... I face that same challenge every day at work.

But I relish the opportunity to encourage the girls on our team to get involved in the engineering aspects of the team... and also to be there for them as a woman to talk to and to celebrate or commiserate with them when they need that. And I also relish the opportunity to let the boys on the team see that a woman can be an engineer and that she often has knowledge, experience, and insight to offer. I think what I am trying to say here is that I don't need to be considered a "FIRST Rock-Star" to feel that I am making a real impact on the lives of both the young men and women that I mentor on our team. I know what I have done... the impacts that I have made. I am proud of that. :D

[On a side note, several of our male mentors have indicated that they often prefer working with the girls on the team because they listen and take direction better. :) ]

Thus I think an all girls team is a great way for girls to have exclusive access to all tasks and realize that they really CAN do it just as well as boys. The point isnt to exclude the boys or deny them opportunity, the point is to push the issue that arises when boys & girls mix. Now the real world is Co-ed, so to me FLL is the most appropriate place to do an all girls team. FRC should be a microcosm of the real world.
Some people have expressed worry that girls-only teams will not prepare girls to work in a mixed-gender environment. I disagree however -- my RoboCamp for Girlz helped the girls build a foundational level of confidence -- such that they had no worries about being pushed aside by the boys once they joined the co-ed team. The boys already had that foundational level of confidence just by virtue of their upbringing. The girls-only program merely served to level the playing field.

Kim and Jaine - I agree with this wholeheartedly! Who are we to decide what works best for any team? However, as others have stated I would be sad to hear of an all-girls team that was created simply to exclude the boys (ie. not from an all-girls organization or not having another co-ed or all-boys team in the area).

Even seeing an all-girls team do well at competition allows them to see girls do well once. Seeing girls on their team taking on leadership roles and doing technical work allows them to see girls do well for weeks. The girls are also going to learn they can do well at the cost of learning to assert themselves. In short, there are definite benefits to having some all-girls teams. It allows them to see how good they are while not getting pushed around. However, this is not an ideal solution. There should be a way of helping the girls without segregating.

On final note consider this. Before every match, my team is not announced as "3103 the team from Duchesne Academy" we are "3103 the GIRLS from Duchesne Academy" I am not ashamed to be a girl, but does it really matter if your team has girls, boys, or is co-ed? Aren't we all trying to achieve the same things?

Agreed! And... one thing that I see that truly upsets me is when an all-girls team receives an award and it is implied that the judges were impressed by what they did considering it was all girls. This is completely unacceptable either to give the award for that reason or to imply such when it is in fact not the case. If the girls are not held to the same standards as the boys, they are left feeling like they cannot measure up those standards - a ridiculous notion. And implying that the standard is different is as just as damaging. So I ask that people judge females in engineering not because they are girls but regardless of it.

Alan Anderson

28-03-2011, 12:03

Even seeing an all-girls team do well at competition allows them to see girls do well once. Seeing girls on their team taking on leadership roles and doing technical work allows them to see girls do well for weeks. The girls are also going to learn they can do well at the cost of learning to assert themselves. In short, there are definite benefits to having some all-girls teams. It allows them to see how good they are while not getting pushed around.

On the other hand, consider an all-girl team that happens not to do well for whatever reason.

Even with other teams all around doing just as poorly, and even with some of those other teams having no girls present at the competition, I heard the "wrong" sort of comments about the reason for the all-girl team's lack of success at the event. It was one of my least favorite moments of that weekend.

SGS

28-03-2011, 12:31

Does anyone know how many girls teams actually exist? And how many are not based out of girl-school or the Girl Scouts?

JaneYoung

28-03-2011, 12:33

This comment is going to bring a rain of criticism down on my head so I've opened my umbrella in advance.

Here goes - I have had the privilege of meeting mentors on teams for several years as I've traveled to different events. I've also met mentors here in Chief Delphi and read their profile information. Almost every single time, the NEMs that I've met that are engineers, think of themselves as a team mom and a lot of times, that is how they market themselves - as moms.

I'm not interested in being a mom. I do that job, hopefully very well - at home. I'm interested in being a nontechnical mentor. Sometimes, for the students, there isn't a difference. Sometimes, for the parent or the mentor, there isn't a difference. The fact is - there is a difference and it is important to get that out there to the team and to the program. Whether you are in a technical role on the team or serving as a NEM, you are bringing your training and skillsets to the talent toolbox that helps build the team. Don't hide the training/education or the effort it took to obtain the skillsets. By presenting yourself as an engineer who works as a NEM on a team or as a engineering mentor, you are inspiring your students and students on other teams. We've already witnessed this type of inspiration in this thread.

I think moms are great. On FRC teams, I think mentors are greater. It is all in the perception and reality. I'm not interested in helping grow girls into being moms. That's not my role as an FRC mentor. I'm interested in helping grow girls into realizing their dreams through education and their careers.

I am also thinking way beyond NSCCME (National Society of Conservative Caucasian Male Engineers) and into other cultures. I'm thinking globally and towards the future. In some of those cultures, I can see some very powerful lessons and opportunities for girls on teams, including all girls teams. If you've read the post by the girls on 842, you'll understand how cultural expectations impact the thinking and behaviors of girls. I'm interested in changing the impact of those expectations and helping to forge new realities and expectations.

It can start with a mentor calling herself an engineer or mentor instead of a mom when participating in CD, in FIRST programs, and in talking with people about your role on a team. Very small shift but very significant.

Jane

Kims Robot

28-03-2011, 13:17

i would like to refine my objection a bit to focus more on the teams who have sponsors that will only support them if they stay all girl. especially when said sponsor is not already a feminist group they simply start a all girl team because thats what they want there name attached to for political reasons. this is in no way on the fault of the students or mentors but still seems to be an abuse of the system for the sponsor's political gain.
As a potential sponsor of an All-Girls FLL team I think this statement is a generalization. I think there are plenty of sponsors who may make that decision for the right reasons. They realize they don't have the diversity they want in their recruiting, so they reach deeper, to a point where they can impact the pool of potential hires available. They wish to get more girls more hands on time, and get more girls into the STEM pipeline. I think this can be the case, and is in the case of the sponsorship that I offered.

However, I have seen the mar diversity can place on a corporation. I was a college recruiter for several years (for my engineering group), and we were told that if we recruited 40% minorities overall, we would get a bonus. To me, it was a very very dumb rule. I wasn't going to hire a female just because I would get a bonus. I was going to have to work with that female, and if she couldn't do the job as well as the male, I'm sorry, but I would rather hire the male. Now if I had two candidates that were exactly/nearly equal, I would hire the female, but any recruiter knows candidates NEVER come out exactly equal. I interviewed plenty of women who it was unfortunately painfully clear that others had "carried" them through their classes, or teachers perhaps had just given them passing grades.

...When referring to females in engineering/science I would hope they are choosing to do this based on a genuine change of heart and not because they feel they will not be able to succeed in a mainly male driven environment.
...
More than likely this girl would have experienced the hardships many of the female mentors and engineers have spoken about in this thread. When this girl gets to college or becomes an intern or even gets a real job, she may have already had to overcome some gender barriers in her career. Maybe this life experience that has been instilled in her will truly make her stick in STEM.

See... I don't know... having gone through all of this myself, I am not convinced that there is ever a "right place" or "right time" to be exposed to the discriminations we do faces as female engineers. Here's what I tell a lot of people about being a girl going into engineering...

Is it EASY to be a Female in Engineering?
1. Yes. Its EASIER to get into college. Engineering colleges strive for diversity. I joke that I probably got "the female scholarship" even though none of my scholarships specifically said that.
2. No. It SUCKS being a female engineer in college. You face professors that don't think women should be engineers. You face boys that don't think you would make a good lab partner because you are a girl. You face a room of 64 men as the only female because you chose the electrical/computer engineering department. It SUCKS. Sure there are the girls that get all the starry eyed boys to do all the work for them, but that doesn't lead to a real education in my mind.
3. Yes. Getting a job out of college IS easier as a girl. I guarantee I got a few extra interviews BECAUSE the name on my resume was female. I wont deny that. I like to think the job offers I got, I got on my merits & accomplishments, but I wont pretend that my resume with a 3.3 GPA was any more impressive than some of my male friends with 3.5's that didnt get an interview. I had the most job offers of any of the Electrical/Computer engineers graduating from Clarkson my year... however, I attribute that to my THIRTY on campus interviews, not my gender. Sometimes girls just work harder :)
4. No. Being a female in engineering ISNT easy. My first internship, there was a guy who didnt want to work with me or give me the time of day because he didnt think female engineers were smart enough. I hit heads with plenty of old engineers that thought the same. I also encountered several female interns/engineers that were clearly "giving us a bad name" as they always let the guys do the work for them. Its frustrating to see these girls that have/had so much potential just give in to society and use their gender to more advantage than their brain. It aggravates me to no end.

I think what I am trying to say here is that I don't need to be considered a "FIRST Rock-Star" to feel that I am making a real impact on the lives of both the young men and women that I mentor on our team. I know what I have done... the impacts that I have made. I am proud of that. :D
I completely agree with this, and I think up until seeing the panel last year, I was on the same exact thought process. But these "FIRST Rock Stars" have kids asking for their autographs, they are sought out at competitions, they are the Idols that Dean & Woodie were hoping would come out of this program... yet not a single female among the ranks. Im far from caring if I or anyone I know is THAT female rock star, as as you state, I know the impact I have made. I've seen it in all that 229 & 1511 have accomplished, in their alumni who email me with their latest accomplishments or ask me for recommendations... yet I still want SOMEONE to be that female rock star, the one that we can all see up on those pedestals alongside all the males. Some teams are fortunate to have female mentors like that, but for those that don't, I want there to be a female Rock Star for all those girls to look up to. To know that they can succeed and wont be pushed out in college or once they enter their career. To know its possible.

Jon Stratis

28-03-2011, 13:34

As a male mentor working with an all girls team for the past 5 years (the Robettes, I think we've been mentioned a few times in this thread already :) ), I wanted to share my perspective on this subject.

First, lets talk about the pits. I challenge everyone here to walk around the pits at their next regional a few times and count the numbers of males and females actually working on the robot. You'll find a huge gender bias, and the reasons for that have already been outlined in this thread: Boys have more experience growing up, and naturally tend to take over, pushing girls out of the way. It can be a real eye opener to see a pit that has all girls working on the robot.

Next, lets talk about the Robettes. Every year we have close to 25 students. We currently have 3 male mentors from Boston Scientific and two female teachers working with the team. While we've had female mentors from Boston Scientific with the team in the past, when the team was first formed the students made a conscious decision to encourage female mentors to work with other teams instead - that way, those females could provide direct inspiration in male-dominated teams.

Our team structure has evolved over the years, but one thing is certain - our students come with practically no experience, and leave being able to design and build a robot. When I say no experience, I mean none. Some of them have never even used a drill before. How do you compare a student, regardless of gender, with that level of experience with one who grew up building tool boxes and bird houses in Boy Scouts? With one that learned first hand some basic engineering principles in designing and building a PineWood Derby car? There really is no comparison. Those students coming in with experience quite simply will take over.

Finally, I wanted to share some stories the team has been collecting. These stories show exactly what sort of impact an all-girls team can have, not only on its members, but on the wider community.

This first one comes from a Second grader who saw our team compete last year.
I like the Robettes and I think what they are doing is cool. I go to their website a lot. I like looking at the pictures of what they are building. Last year my dad, he is a medical engineer at HCMC, took me and my sister to see the Robettes compete. I really liked the soccer game and the area where they did the building. I like building things. I build a lot of things at my house. When I was little, like five or six, I thought building things was boyish. When I saw the Robettes I just changed my mind.

This next one comes from one of the founding students of the team, and really highlights what this experience provides for the students.
Being a part of The Robettes opened my eyes to my future. I always knew that my passion was with math and science, but I had no outlets for it at my high school, until we started the Robettes. There are many parts of my experiences as a part of the Robettes that I value greatly and I can say with confidence that would not be where I am today without them. The Robettes gave me the tools I needed to understand where I wanted to go in life. I was inspired by my fellow teammates, the other students I met at competition, but most importantly my mentors. I had never known any engineers before my involvement with the Robettes and my mentors gave me so much insight and guidance in deciding where to go to college and what major to pursue. However, I feel that the most important thing our mentors did for my team was to make us, an all-girls team, feel empowered and more than capable to enter a competition that was mostly male-dominated. I never felt intimidated, inferior, or less intelligent. This is something that has transpired into my college career in classes heavily dominated by males. I can see that my experiences with the Robettes have really put me ahead of the game in this sense--I see other girls in my class who lose sight of themselves or don't speak up because the classes are predominately male and taught by male professors. I have never felt overshadowed or afraid to ask a question or give an answer in class. I don't think I would have felt this way if it wasn't for my time with The Robettes. I cannot express how much the Robettes and FIRST have inspired me--I have so much love and respect for the program and I am so proud to say that I was once a part of it.

This final one is from a current member's grandmother, and really helps to highlight the type of gender bias the team is working against.

My granddaughter is a member of the Robettes. I grew up in the era (1950’s) where women who attended college could be teachers or nurses. These were the only career paths offered to women. I choose business administration and to major in finance and accounting. I was the only woman in most of my classes for 4 years and I actually had professors ask why I was taking classes in those majors. I am thrilled to see a program that offers girls a chance to compete in a science and technological fields, to make it possible for them to aspire to careers in math, science and engineering, something unheard of in my day Our country cannot realize it’s true potential when 50% of the students (women) are left out of the most promising fields of advancement. The rallying cry of “you go, girl” needs to be shouted the loudest for these girls to compete at the highest level . I am thrilled that my granddaughter is one of them.

If your at the North Star regional later this week, stop by our pits to read all of the stories we've collected so far!

Mikell Taylor

28-03-2011, 13:36

Alright, so, I can't keep my nose out of gender and engineering threads, so here goes.

Background: I attended an all-girls school for part of middle school and all of high school. That school had an all-girls FRC team that I was a part of (and captained one year), and our mentors were almost exclusively male engineering students from Ohio State. I then went to Olin College, which is about 50/50 male/female, and I'm now a systems engineer and project manager at an 80 person company where I am the only female engineer and the only female project manager.

I understand the frustration at girls-only teams that are sponsored, or supported, by environments that are co-ed. And I think having an all-girls team at the *expense* of giving boys the opportunity is wrong; everyone should get to do FIRST! But fundamentally, whether you're at a co-ed school or a single-sex school, the basic question is, why is an all-girls team a valuable option for a young women interested in FIRST?

True, most of us never got to work on cars with our dads, or had LEGO or Erector Sets as toys, or were encouraged to program, or anything like that. Some of us were even actively discouraged from doing those things, which puts us at a disadvantage against the people -- yes, often boys -- who maybe were more likely to have all that knowledge and experience from an early age. So yeah, that can be intimidating, to know you're walking into that situation.

But let me share some anecdotes from my experiences as a female engineer, and on an all-female FIRST team, surrounded by people -- men -- who are very supportive of me and my passion for robotics. Many of you male commenters are stating that you see "no difference" in how female students on your team are treated, and that many of them are "even better than the guys" at engineering tasks, and "no one makes negative comments." One of you even said "the real world has figured out how to make engineering co-ed, why can't we do it in FIRST?" I applaud each of you for being open-minded and supportive of your female peers, but I'm going to try to explain why things might not always be as they seem.

If you look in the FRC Regional Competition manual you'll notice there's a rule that no one may form a "human tunnel" during the awards ceremony. There's a story behind that. In 2002 my (all-girls) team attended the Midwest Regional at Northwestern. Not only did we make it to the quarterfinals as an alliance partner, my team also won the KPCB Entrpreneurship Award. When we were called up, a human tunnel had already been formed for the award winners to run through. My team ran through. And each of us got our rear ends squeezed, and some girls got touched up front as well. Well, you grope a group of 20 highly opinionated assertive teenage girls, we're going to complain -- and we did. We talked it over with the FIRST staff, committee, and other leadership onsite, who went to go talk to the teams. They agreed to talk with all the lead mentors about the incident and ask them to communicate to the teams that this was entirely unacceptable behavior. After talking with the mentors, several -- from co-ed teams -- went up to the staff member and said, "Oh, I'm glad you said something. A girl (or a couple of girls) on my team experienced the same thing, but I wasn't sure what to do about it."

So think about that. There were girls on co-ed teams, who I'm sure many people thought were great contributors and smart people and "no one treats them differently," but they were, let's face it, harassed at an engineering event and their team leadership, for whatever reason, were unwilling or unable to really deal with this treatment effectively. Had my team of angry girls and very supportive mentors not gone to the Powers that Be to complain loudly about this, no one ever would have known it had happened and these girls could have felt completely marginalized, feeling like their mentors -- the ones who are supposed to be helping them navigate the world of engineering -- weren't willing to stand up for them when they were treated inappropriately just because of being female.

I'm lucky now, even though my company doesn't have many other women, to at least be working with men who are open-minded, progressive, and many of whom are even married to female engineers, so my gender is very much a non-issue at work. And yes, if I felt I were treated inappropriately, with the right documentation, escalation to management, possible legal battles, etc, someone could be fired for treating me that way. However, that doesn't stop visitors to my company from hitting on me after a presentation I give, or telling me I should have a "dream job" like their wives where I can stay at home, or having customers asking obviously leading questions about my experience and background to determine whether they think I'm qualified to be in a leadership position I'm in (when I can clearly observe they're not asking these questions of my similarly aged male colleagues). These things all happen on a regular basis. And it sucks. The real world does not have the co-ed thing figured out by any means.

But thank god, thank god, I started my engineering career through FIRST, with a group of young women who supported each other and encouraged each other, with great male mentors who understood the challenge women face and who worked hard to give us the skills and experience we'd need to be competitive with anyone and everyone. Thank god I had the opportunity to realize, in a safe, supportive environment, how much I absolutely love the world of robotics and how important it is to me to make great things happen. Thank god I know I love it, because if all I knew was that I regularly got treated like crap because of being a woman, well, I'd be out of here pretty quick.

It is getting better. My mother was one of the first women allowed to be hired into a male-dominated environment (the Air National Guard) and she had it much worse than I did. My life is easy compared to what she went through. But it ain't over yet, and unfortunately, that means things like all-girls teams are still necessary if we want to help even out the playing field.

So. The moral of the story is, there is a reason all-girls teams exist. They are not for everyone. One poster mentioned that she thought she was better working with men for having had a co-ed team experience; for me, it's the opposite. I think I'm more assertive, more confident, and more daring in my primarily male office for having had the experience of building all that confidence in an environment that was more comfortable. Not every school can or should offer an all-girls team, but I think for those who can, if it is an option, it can be a very, very valuable one.

Also, just to throw my opinion on another pile: all of the above said, I still really, really hate it when the judges or game announcers make a point of saying that a team is an all-girls team.

MamaSpoldi

28-03-2011, 13:42

This comment is going to bring a rain of criticism down on my head so I've opened my umbrella in advance.
...
It can start with a mentor calling herself an engineer or mentor instead of a mom when participating in CD, in FIRST programs, and in talking with people about your role on a team. Very small shift but very significant.

Jane, I'm not here to rain on your parade. But I just want to offer up this perspective. I am an engineering mentor for my team first and foremost. However, as you see in my title here, I also very much consider myself a Team Mom which is another title I wear with pride. I feel that both aspects of my team role are applicable to who I am and how I portray myself on CD. And although I sometimes provide NEM support to my team, my primary role is that of the programming mentor and the other roles I play do not diminish that primary role or the skills that I learned to get there; they enhance my ability to interact and inspire ALL the students on my team.

I must emphasize that everyone on my team and those that I have interacted with in FIRST are well aware that I am an engineer, not "just a team Mom". But both of those roles are ones that I am proud of.

As a potential sponsor of an All-Girls FLL team I think this statement is a generalization. I think there are plenty of sponsors who may make that decision for the right reasons. They realize they don't have the diversity they want in their recruiting, so they reach deeper, to a point where they can impact the pool of potential hires available. They wish to get more girls more hands on time, and get more girls into the STEM pipeline. I think this can be the case, and is in the case of the sponsorship that I offered.

However, I have seen the mar diversity can place on a corporation. I was a college recruiter for several years (for my engineering group), and we were told that if we recruited 40% minorities overall, we would get a bonus. To me, it was a very very dumb rule. I wasn't going to hire a female just because I would get a bonus. I was going to have to work with that female, and if she couldn't do the job as well as the male, I'm sorry, but I would rather hire the male. Now if I had two candidates that were exactly/nearly equal, I would hire the female, but any recruiter knows candidates NEVER come out exactly equal. I interviewed plenty of women who it was unfortunately painfully clear that others had "carried" them through their classes, or teachers perhaps had just given them passing grades.

See... I don't know... having gone through all of this myself, I am not convinced that there is ever a "right place" or "right time" to be exposed to the discriminations we do faces as female engineers. Here's what I tell a lot of people about being a girl going into engineering...

Is it EASY to be a Female in Engineering?
1. Yes. Its EASIER to get into college. Engineering colleges strive for diversity. I joke that I probably got "the female scholarship" even though none of my scholarships specifically said that.
2. No. It SUCKS being a female engineer in college. You face professors that don't think women should be engineers. You face boys that don't think you would make a good lab partner because you are a girl. You face a room of 64 men as the only female because you chose the electrical/computer engineering department. It SUCKS. Sure there are the girls that get all the starry eyed boys to do all the work for them, but that doesn't lead to a real education in my mind.
3. Yes. Getting a job out of college IS easier as a girl. I guarantee I got a few extra interviews BECAUSE the name on my resume was female. I wont deny that. I like to think the job offers I got, I got on my merits & accomplishments, but I wont pretend that my resume with a 3.3 GPA was any more impressive than some of my male friends with 3.5's that didnt get an interview. I had the most job offers of any of the Electrical/Computer engineers graduating from Clarkson my year... however, I attribute that to my THIRTY on campus interviews, not my gender. Sometimes girls just work harder :)
4. No. Being a female in engineering ISNT easy. My first internship, there was a guy who didnt want to work with me or give me the time of day because he didnt think female engineers were smart enough. I hit heads with plenty of old engineers that thought the same. I also encountered several female interns/engineers that were clearly "giving us a bad name" as they always let the guys do the work for them. Its frustrating to see these girls that have/had so much potential just give in to society and use their gender to more advantage than their brain. It aggravates me to no end.

I completely agree with this, and I think up until seeing the panel last year, I was on the same exact thought process. But these "FIRST Rock Stars" have kids asking for their autographs, they are sought out at competitions, they are the Idols that Dean & Woodie were hoping would come out of this program... yet not a single female among the ranks. Im far from caring if I or anyone I know is THAT female rock star, as as you state, I know the impact I have made. I've seen it in all that 229 & 1511 have accomplished, in their alumni who email me with their latest accomplishments or ask me for recommendations... yet I still want SOMEONE to be that female rock star, the one that we can all see up on those pedestals alongside all the males. Some teams are fortunate to have female mentors like that, but for those that don't, I want there to be a female Rock Star for all those girls to look up to. To know that they can succeed and wont be pushed out in college or once they enter their career. To know its possible.
Well said! Wow, Kim... I hope I have a chance to meet you sometime. I think we would have a lot to talk about. I agree with you completely in both your lack of enthusiasm for "forced diversity" as well as your assessment of the ups and downs of being a female engineer in college and the workplace. Not sure if it is reassuring or disappointing to know that things have not changed too much in the last 20 years. :rolleyes:

Brandon Holley

28-03-2011, 13:54

See... I don't know... having gone through all of this myself, I am not convinced that there is ever a "right place" or "right time" to be exposed to the discriminations we do faces as female engineers. Here's what I tell a lot of people about being a girl going into engineering...

I have no idea either, my thoughts are just that, thoughts. Is there a "right time" to be exposed to discrimination? Absolutely not. However, as a female pursuing a STEM career, its tough to ignore that discrimination exists.

I'm a huge believer in live and let live. Our team is very unique in itself for our own reasons, but I hope other teams can just accept it as the way we do things and move on.

I don't think there is a right answer here, and I don't think anyone's made an argument that there is one. For some teams and individuals an all girls team may be the best option, for others it will not be. It's very important that we not paint with such a broad brush on these types of issues.

-Brando

Robert Cawthon

28-03-2011, 14:14

I will give my opinion just because. I do not feel that creating a team of the same sex for the purpose of having the same sex is proper. It may happen that a team is all girls (boys) just because of the fact that the school is all of one sex, or because it just worked out that way. (Most likely to be an all boys team but it could happen with the girls.) Blocking (or discouraging) members from the opposite sex from joining a team should be prohibited or strongly frowned upon. My .02

Phcullen

28-03-2011, 17:10

one thing that I see that truly upsets me is when an all-girls team receives an award and it is implied that the judges were impressed by what they did considering it was all girls. This is completely unacceptable either to give the award for that reason or to imply such when it is in fact not the case. If the girls are not held to the same standards as the boys, they are left feeling like they cannot measure up those standards - a ridiculous notion. And implying that the standard is different is as just as damaging. So I ask that people judge females in engineering not because they are girls but regardless of it.
this is what i was referring to when i stated that the formation of these teams implies a handicap

i know for a fact that women of engineering will only support an all girls team, and if a team started up for all girls, had them as a sponsor, then added guys, they would loose that sponsor... which i get, but i think it is unfair

here is a problem where we see a group that has all the right to chose who they support and they obviously would want to support teams encouraging women to go into engineering. but wouldn't supporting teams that have women mentors be a better use of there money? not only would it give the girls on the team an example of a woman who has succeeded in that field but also discourage boys on the team from developing thoughts that women are incapable or less capable of succeeding in those fields

once again i would like to restate a question and instead of asking if all girl teams should not be allowed in FIRST what i really want to ask is <u>should the development of all exclusive teams be discouraged on FRC teams in FIRST?</u> because it encourages the thought that men and women are not equally capable. no one can say they have never felt differently about a team when they hear that it is all girl regardless of this feeling being positive or negative having the segregation will make you think differently and subconsciously question equality between the sexes not only in opportunity but also in capability. i also specifically stated FRC in this because i do see in importance to discourage the stereotype that are being installed into young children

if sexism to the point of discouragement for women to advance in education is still as prevalent in other arias and more of a problem than i have personally ever seen, where girls are not encourage to participate that maybe having teams strictly for girls is the way to go. but then this really doesn't do anything to change the prejudice that is there and only shelters the girls from that

Mikell Taylor's story is wonderful and give good reason to the development of all girl teams. I would like to thank her for her input

Kims Robot- i enjoyed what you wrote too but when you answer your own question of "Is it EASY to be a Female in Engineering?" you seem to start blaming women who " give in to society and use their gender to more advantage than their brain." and yet you state earlier in your same set of answers that you certainly did take advantage of this with job interviews where you knew your gender was the only thing that made you more desirable to the potential employer. i am not accusing you of anything and nor should anyone else nobody would give up any advantage they had on there competition. just as they found a way to get payed without doing as much work there is clearly a problem but no one is going to remove quotas for employment or enrollment in fear of being accused that they are against equal opportunity.

if there are any members or alumni of co-ed teams with an all girl team in the aria i would like to hear your views on this topic and how you think having that effects your team/the girls on your team(if there are any) and anything else you would like to say. your thought would be greatly appreciated//if you know anybody in this scenario could you please refer them to this thread?

ZipTie3182

28-03-2011, 17:31

Athena's Warriors, team 3182 from CT is an all girls team not sponsored through a school for those who were wondering if we existed :D We also are all female mentored except for one mentor who is the husband of one of our female mentors. We were founded by the Women of Innovation group.

As the Co-Captain of our team, I can say that many or even most of the girls on our team would not have joined if it had been a co-ed team, myself included. Two years ago when I found out about the team, I really had no interest (or no idea of my interest) in robotics. I've always loved technology, but my knowledge was limited mostly to graphic design. Now, I am the co-captain of my team and robotics is really my life. I don't know what I would do without it truthfully. I spend most of my free time researching new ideas for our robot or reading chief delphi for hints. Let me say I was really intimidated when I first began reading as last year was our rookie year and all the technical terms on here made my head hurt. Now though, I have learned enough to keep up, one of the things I am most proud of :D

Robotics was never something I would have considered before, and now I want to be an engineer.

I could never say having an exclusively female team is wrong, because frankly my team has changed my life so drastically.

-Anna

maryliz:)

28-03-2011, 19:59

The Firebirds (433) are one of the longest-running all-female FRC teams. We are based out of an all-girls high school, so therefore the only logical option would be to not have boys on the team. Our school stresses the importance of empowering women through single-sex education.

We comprise 55 student team members, and 80 percent of our alums have gone on to major in STEM (as opposed to only 5% national avg for women). Frankly, I think these statistics are AWESOME. Because we're an all-girls team, our students have to do everything, from building to programming to designing to PR to spirit. Each girl on the team finds an area where she feels she can excel, but we encourage every team member to work with power tools at least once in her career. Many end up finding a passion for drills and saws that they never knew they had, which is why we've been able to inspire so many alums to continue their engineering education. Also, no matter what field our team members end up in, they will surely succeed due largely in part to the confidence instilled in them by being on a FIRST team.

This past October, we hosted our first off-season competition, the girlPOWER Invitational. Ten teams attended POWER (Promoting Outstanding Women Engineers through Robotics), only 3 of them all-girls. The rest were coed teams, but only girls on the team were allowed to drive the robots and work in the pits. We decided to host this event after attending too many competitions where the girls were discouraged from working in these technical positions. We wanted to give the girls on every team the opportunity to benefit from everything a FIRST team has to offer, and hopefully give them the confidence to return to their own teams and try something new on the build team, or try out for the drive team. As long as the girls who want to build the robot are given a fair shot, we have accomplished something.

FIRST is such an amazing program, and no student should be limited in any way from participating, regardless of gender. Yes, it just so happens that girls on robotics teams are extremely outnumbered. But on our team we don't see this as a disadvantage, or anything that should be given a sympathy vote. In the words of one of our mentors and a team alum: “I like to think of us as a great team that just happens to be all-girls, not an all-girls team who just happens to be great. We are equals and can hold our own with the boys. And if along the way we just happen to change the
face of what a typical FIRST robotics student looks like, then we have accomplished something truly wonderful. This accomplishment hopefully can be replicated in all aspects of society, one Firebird at a time.”

lgaroppz

28-03-2011, 20:09

Speaking as a member of an all-girls team (Team 433), I'm obviously going to say they're a positive thing.
Guys tend to be more controlling than girls. If we had guys on our team I don't think I would ever get to do anything in the way of power tools or heavy lifting.
Because there is a lack of testosterone on our team, the girls get a chance to use the power tools and prove that we can carry the robot too.
Sometimes I even find it hard to wrestle work away from our male mentors (though I don't blame them, it's addictive).
Point being: being female is not a handicap, and having all-girl teams around allows us to enter more easily into a typically male dominated area.

Molten

28-03-2011, 20:12

Ok, as a reply to Jaine:

"Do you really think men are suffering on an institutional level (equivalent to how women currently suffer) just because of a few all-girls STEM programs?"

My point isn't that we are suffering equally by it. My point is that your just adding more differences. Your widening the gap of equal treatment between men and women. Whether it is for one gender's benefit or the other, sexism is sexism. You can't both fight it while promoting it.

"How do you propose to magically remove the cultural advantages given to males without making any real concerted effort to level the playing field?"

I'm not saying that you shouldn't try to help girls out. I'm just suggesting that you might be better off having after-school activities that promote learning how to use power-tools to all kids from a younger age. If you want, make it mother-daughter nights and father-son nights. Do the same with cooking and other things guys generally avoid. This issue really should be dealt with at the youngest age possible before the child is completely set in their sexist ways.

"I agree with you that parents should raise their children equally, but how do we convince people that equal treatment is necessary? The only way to do that is by shattering the stereotypes and demonstrating to the world that women and girls CAN make great scientists and engineers, and that raising them differently on the basis of their gender is patently wrong."

I really don't see this as a means of convincing at all. I mean, I've seen alot of successful people of minorities and none of them have made those around them believe that equal treatment is necessary. The first woman in space was back in 1963. That is about as big a publicity stunt I can imagine. If that didn't work, what do you think would? In short, that is not "the only way". I'm not even sure if that way really works. It would seem a way would be to promote technology to all students starting in elementary and working its way into power tools.

"Again, you must think we live in some kind of dream world where every instance of sexism and racism is dealt with swiftly and justly. I can tell you from personal experience in engineering that this is not the case. If it were possible to ensure that no sexism was ever allowed to occur on any FIRST team ever, then yeah -- obviously there wouldn't be any need for all girl-teams. But until that day -- when we have stamped-out all forms of sexism -- we need to keep trying to effect positive cultural change, and many of the all-girl teams have proven themselves quite effective at doing just that."

On this one I think you missed my point completely. If you were to stamp out all sexism and racism in the world except for women only and minority only teams/scholarships/organizations/whatever, sexism and racism would still exist because these organizations exist. I'm also not suggesting that the world is perfect on this matter. Sometimes things go unnoticed, but if a worker is discriminating...eventually it will catch up with them. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but at some point there will be repercussions.

"Likewise, we can't just tell people to stop being sexist (i.e. attacking only the "problem")... but we can show them why and how stereotypes fail by giving young women room to grow without judgement. The more visibly successful women there are in STEM, the more people's prejudices will begin to break down. In this way, I don't see how we could view the mitigation of the "symptom" as anything other than a success."

This one I'm just going to admit I'm confused. How is showing successful women prove they are disadvantaged? I found the story by Mikell Taylor's story was a much stronger statement of why it is wrong than all the personal statements of success this thread has had combined. Women who are successful are poor examples of the sexism because of their success. Instances of women who could do amazing things but were discouraged would be much more compelling.

Note to all: Though this is a direct response to Jaine and her comments, I welcome thoughts from all and thanks for the interesting topic.

Jason

davidthefat

28-03-2011, 20:19

"FIRST is here to inspire you, to challenge you. Part of that process is giving you a task too hard, resources too little, people too many, time too short." - ebarker

That really stood out to me in the spotlighted posts. Now, I see an all female team as a direct challenge against stereotypes. Now, personally, the way I see it is that all teams are essentially that: a challenge against the stereotypes and the socially acceptable norm. Every team is essentially a business; society still holds the belief that teens are not mature enough to run such a business successfully. Now, I see teams everywhere that directly refutes that belief. I think an all female team should be embraced, not shunned. I personally find an all female team inspiring, especially when they kick my butt.

"You got a dream, you gotta protect it. People can't do something themselves, they wanna tell you that you can't do it. You want something? Go get it. Period." -Christopher Gardner

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_yW3152Ffc

MariaCastro

28-03-2011, 21:04

Being female is not a handicap, The STEM Field has been predominantly men since the BC times. There has been a sub-conscience belief in society that the man has an advantage in these fields. (Archimedes, Galileo,Newton, Einstein are just example of how long men have dominated in STEM) It is extremely difficult to change society and to fully accept females into STEM within only 50 years.

Even though Many teams in FIRST have females on there teams, not all are engaged with the robots, There ARE females in leadership positions and major roles, but as an overall males are still dominant.

All female teams are just a bridges that facilitates a females entry into the world of STEM. This is just a stepping stone for some. One our team we have an All Girls Underwater Robotics Team named LEGIT (Leading and Empowering Girls Into Technology). Some females may feel insecure directly going into the main team that has some male leaders. (our FIRST team has a majority of females). Having the all girls teams has allowed us to recruit more females and has enabled them to work side by side with the more experienced members of our team.

MentorOfSteel

28-03-2011, 21:41

JesseK

28-03-2011, 21:43

Where are all the female rock stars?

Give a smart female the ego of a male counterpart and I think you'll find the rock star in FRC. I only say this because the very poignant female leader of my team pointed this out as something for me personally to improve so I don't intimidate any potential upcoming female engineers who show interest in joining our team. The process of working on my ego in that context has led me to believe that until a specific behavior is directly called out, I seriously doubt that any male (especially an adolescent) can empathize with females that have those types of hurdles to overcome. Ergo, I believe we need to celebrate the all-female teams as much, if not more than, co-ed or all-male teams.

After having done some of our own all-female research with FLL and [FVC] teams, we came to some conclusions which I'll adapt to the current metaphor. They weren't "rock stars" simply because none of them wanted to be rock stars. They wanted to succeed and it seemed to be an intrinsic quality they were after more than the competitive edge. However, there is another team, Einstein's Daughters (all-girl FTC team), who I would say are famous (in FTC) due to their consistency with success in a competitive environment. Perhaps someone could contact them to get their input?

Jaine Perotti

28-03-2011, 21:55

My point isn't that we are suffering equally by it. My point is that your just adding more differences. Your widening the gap of equal treatment between men and women. Whether it is for one gender's benefit or the other, sexism is sexism. You can't both fight it while promoting it.
.
.
.
If you were to stamp out all sexism and racism in the world except for women only and minority only teams/scholarships/organizations/whatever, sexism and racism would still exist because these organizations exist.

Running an all-girls team is not sexism. Sexism is the institutionalized (i.e. widespread and prevalent throughout all aspects of our culture) favoring of one gender over another. When looking at the existence of girls-only teams in the wider context of a society which overhwelmingly favors men in STEM fields, they don't do any real harm to men (in a general sense at least*). If sexism ever truly ends someday, there will be no need to have any more all-girl teams... they will simply cease to exist. Your contention that they would linger solely to oppress men is ridiculous. I highly doubt that the people running the all-girls teams are secretly plotting to marginalize all men once women are no longer culturally disadvantaged... in fact, many of the people running those teams are men themselves. :rolleyes:

I'm not saying that you shouldn't try to help girls out. I'm just suggesting that you might be better off having after-school activities that promote learning how to use power-tools to all kids from a younger age. If you want, make it mother-daughter nights and father-son nights. Do the same with cooking and other things guys generally avoid. This issue really should be dealt with at the youngest age possible before the child is completely set in their sexist ways.

These are all fine suggestions, there is nothing wrong with them. But I still don't see any harm in girls-only teams. The many positive testimonies in this thread clearly show that they are a powerful tool for bringing more women into STEM fields.

I really don't see this as a means of convincing at all. I mean, I've seen alot of successful people of minorities and none of them have made those around them believe that equal treatment is necessary.
.
.
.
This one I'm just going to admit I'm confused. How is showing successful women prove they are disadvantaged?
.
.
.
Women who are successful are poor examples of the sexism because of their success. Instances of women who could do amazing things but were discouraged would be much more compelling.

I for one would feel pretty discouraged if the only news stories about women in STEM fields were about our failures and difficulties. I suppose they would garner some sympathy, but probably not in a good way... i.e. you would probably get a lot of Archie Bunker-esque responses like "oh, those poor, silly wimminz, what do they think they are doing trying to do manly things like math and science? Why do they worry their pretty little heads about trying to get ahead in careers which obviously weren't meant for them?"

On the other hand, seeing more and more positive stories about women making scientific and engineering breakthroughs would probably shock, maybe even change (and at the very least shut up) the Archie Bunkers of the world. It would also be testimony to the success of the programs and scholarships (such as all-girl FIRST teams!) dedicated to helping advance women in STEM. Even more importantly, it would serve as inspiration to the women out there like me who rarely get to hear about women's success in engineering. Trust me, it helps a lot to hear about the success stories of other women... just reading the responses of the other women in this thread has truly been a source of comfort and support for me. Not to say that we shouldn't talk about the problems we face at ALL (it's important to share those too), but I believe it's equally important to share our victories as well as our defeats.

On this one I think you missed my point completely. I'm also not suggesting that the world is perfect on this matter. Sometimes things go unnoticed, but if a worker is discriminating...eventually it will catch up with them. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but at some point there will be repercussions.

You are still living in a dream world, my friend. Trust those who have actually had real-world experience trying to contend with discrimination.

--Jaine

*I'm not saying that they can NEVER hurt men... obviously it would be unfair if there was an all-girls team in a region where there were no other alternative tech-related activities for the boys to participate in... on the other hand, it's not like anyone would be actively stopping someone from starting their own co-ed team in such a region if they wanted one.

Seth Mallory

28-03-2011, 22:22

Molten

28-03-2011, 22:43

To Jaine:

"Sexism is the institutionalized (i.e. widespread and prevalent throughout all aspects of our culture) favoring of one gender over another."

dictionary.com makes no reference to the institutionalized part. I guess part of our disagreement is based on a difference of definitions.

"Your contention that they would linger solely to oppress men is ridiculous."

Please read my words before ridiculing them. I didn't suggest once they'd linger to oppress men. Whats more, I've not once suggested they oppress men in the least. Just that they, in themselves, are a form of sexism as long as they have a gender requirement to be a part of the team.

"I for one would feel pretty discouraged if the only news stories about women in STEM fields were about our failures and difficulties."

I completely agree. I'm not suggesting showing these failures and difficulties to little girls. I suggest showing them to their parents in hopes that it would motivate them to raise their kid in a more unisex manner so that one day such failures and difficulties won't have to be faced.

"You are still living in a dream world, my friend. Trust those who have actually had real-world experience trying to contend with discrimination."

Please don't make assumptions about other people's pasts. I've been through discrimination. I was the only guy clarinet player out of 30 for my freshmen year not to mention being severely outnumbered in that respect for the 3 years prior to high school. Often it was regular for the marching band coordinator to not notice me and refer to as a group as "ladies". As you can imagine I was placed in many awkward situations while being the only guy, and when with the other parts of the band I'd always be told how "lucky" I am. They'd make suggestions that were completely inappropriate. I know what its like to go through discrimination. I completely admit that I don't have to deal with this every day of my life as women in professional engineering do. I have however had "real-world experience trying to contend with discrimination".

As you continually reference to my living in a dream world...Yes I dream big. So has most of the people who have had real impact in this world. Martin Luther King Jr is most famous for his "dream" speech. I imagine many people back then thought he lived in a dream world. That was less then 50 years ago today. In the grand scheme, 50 years for a dream world to come to reality...that's pretty fast. Maybe if more people shared my "dream world" we could live in it in another 50 years.

Final message: Please don't put words in my mouth or make false assumptions about my past. I feel you have made great contributions to this thread, but I can't help but read your posts as being rather condescending. You've been through and seen things. We all have. Please post your thoughts without belittling mine in the future.

Thanks,
Jason

DonRotolo

28-03-2011, 22:59

Accidentally clicked "no", since the question posed by the poll is opposite that posed by the thread title.

MikeE

28-03-2011, 23:32

Short answer to the thread title: no, as long as there are similar opportunities for males (having to start a new team does not count as a "similar opportunity").

I was going to pepper this post with statistics from various US & European studies on gender balance in STEM education, and Engineering in particular, but they all show the same trend, so I'll just summarize.
While the percentage of women earning Bachelor degrees in Engineering has increased over the past 3 decades (roughly doubling), there is still a minority (~20%) female enrollment in Engineering degrees. However this is within a broader trend of a declining number of Engineering degrees awarded.
So perhaps, to poorly paraphrase the great Dave Lavery and others, we shouldn't be spending out time focusing on how to split the small pie we have in front of us, but on how to make the pie much bigger.

Mandatory class war comment.
One set of data I couldn't easily locate was a reliable analysis of socioeconomic status on STEM education. But I would hazard that a female from a wealthy family attending a private girls' school has significantly more likelihood of attending college and completing a STEM degree than almost any "privileged" white male from the other end of the socio-economic spectrum.

JaneYoung

29-03-2011, 00:15

Give a smart female the ego of a male counterpart and I think you'll find the rock star in FRC.

Going through my mental Rolodex and nothing's clicking. There's bound to be some though.

Ya think?

Jane

Jaine Perotti

29-03-2011, 00:15

I didn't suggest once they'd linger to oppress men. Whats more, I've not once suggested they oppress men in the least. Just that they, in themselves, are a form of sexism as long as they have a gender requirement to be a part of the team.
If they aren't contributing to the oppression of men, especially in a broad societal sense, then they aren't sexist. What's the use in labeling something "____ist" when it doesn't contribute to the oppression of a group?

I completely admit that I don't have to deal with this every day of my life as women in professional engineering do. I have however had "real-world experience trying to contend with discrimination".
I'm not going to try to tell you that the things you have gone through weren't difficult or challenging, but as you admitted yourself -- what you've described hardly comes close to being representative of the kinds of institutionalized discrimination women face in engineering. You simply haven't had the experience of being discriminated against in a workplace where, for example, making a complaint about sexism/harassment by one of your superiors could cause you to get passed over for leadership positions and promotions, could ruin your reputation amongst colleagues, and could even cost you your job.*

I'm not trying to be condescending, although I am sure my irritation is coming through in my posts. It's hard not to let some frustration rise to the surface when someone compares being accidentally called a "lady" in a high school marching band to the experience of a woman contending with the kind of discrimination that can ruin her career. This is the stuff of my life -- not some abstract theorem that I can discuss without any emotional involvement.

(I know I know, us silly laydeez and our craaazy emotions!!1!11 :p) <-- just a joke, not trying to put words in your mouth

As you continually reference to my living in a dream world...Yes I dream big. So has most of the people who have had real impact in this world. Martin Luther King Jr is most famous for his "dream" speech. I imagine many people back then thought he lived in a dream world.
Big difference between the words of Dr. King and the things you said to me. Dr. King had visions of a dream world which did not yet (and still does not) exist. You tried to tell me that the dream has already arrived, when I know for a fact that it has not.

-- Jaine

*not saying that this is the case in EVERY engineering job... there are many great companies for women to work, and a lot of supportive men out there. But these are real experiences that come from actual colleagues of mine... different workplaces can vary widely in their supportiveness/hostility, and sometimes the workplace dynamic doesn't end up being as supportive as it seemed initially.

MrForbes

29-03-2011, 00:18

Going through my mental Rolodex and nothing's clicking. There's bound to be some though.

Ya think?

Karen (842) is up there in my book....

Akash Rastogi

29-03-2011, 00:25

Going through my mental Rolodex and nothing's clicking. There's bound to be some though.

Ya think?

Jane

Although I don't know many female mentors very well, I know a few current students who I have a great deal of respect for for the work they do on their teams:

Kara from 1189, Nikki from 2016, Stephanie from 1323 all come to mind.

And I have no idea how people can forget Kyle Hughes, mentor of 27, Team RUSH.

Molten

29-03-2011, 00:47

Final post to Jaine(if you'd like to discuss this further, I'll be happy to do so in PM because we are kind of starting to derail this thread into a person discussion):

"What's the use in labeling something "____ist" when it doesn't contribute to the oppression of a group?"

The point is using the appropriate word. I've yet to figure out what dictionary your using to define sexism. I've checked two online and neither have come with the implications that you make.

"I'm not going to try to tell you that the things you have gone through weren't difficult or challenging, but as you admitted yourself -- what you've described hardly comes close to being representative of the kinds of institutionalized discrimination women face in engineering."

I wasn't referring to my experience being on par with a woman in the workplace but with girls joining a robotics team. And I assure you that my experiences went much farther then simply being mistakenly referred to as a lady. There were alot of things I went through that could be direct parallels to what is seen by the things girls have gone through.

"I'm not trying to be condescending, although I am sure my irritation is coming through in my posts. It's hard not to let some frustration rise to the surface when someone compares being accidentally called a "lady" in a high school marching band to the experience of a woman contending with the kind of discrimination that can ruin her career. This is the stuff of my life -- not some abstract theorem that I can discuss without any emotional involvement."

Some of the best advice I've been given on this forum comes from JaneYoung. She once said that she often takes a day or two before making a post to think the post over. She could tell you why better then I can, but I've tried to do that for anything that I feel so close to that I can't think objectively. Honestly if you can't discuss a topic without getting frustrated, you should wait for your anger to settle before posting. Honestly, you've had good points but your posts have been anything but professional.

"Big difference between the words of Dr. King and the things you said to me. Dr. King had visions of a dream world which did not yet (and still does not) exist. You tried to tell me that the dream has already arrived, when I know for a fact that it has not."

I'm not suggesting I am Dr. King. Far from it, I'd be happy to be a fraction of the man he was. I don't believe my words are all just a dream. Yes, it isn't everywhere yet. But there are places that have figured out how to have a co-ed environment without unchecked sexism. That is what exists today. I fully admit that I am strongly idealistic but that doesn't mean that what I see doesn't already partly exist.

Final note: I am not posting anymore responses directly to Jaine in this thread simply because this is meant to be a public forum rather then a conversation between two. I will gladly discuss things via PM if you wish Jaine.

Jason

JaneYoung

29-03-2011, 00:50

Although I don't know many female mentors very well, I know a few current students who I have a great deal of respect for for the work they do on their teams:

Kara from 1189, Nikki from 2016, Stephanie from 1323 all come to mind.

And I have no idea how people can forget Kyle Hughes, mentor of 27, Team RUSH.

I was focused on the "give a smart female the ego of a male counterpart and I think you'll find the rock star in FRC" part.

There are some powerful egos in the FRC community. Those egos may drive innovation and continue to raise the bar. They may do that by challenging each other and themselves. I can't seem to identify those egos in any women in FRC that I know, have met, or have heard of. What makes the ego? Can it be developed? Can it be transplanted or inspired?

But - keep the list of outstanding women/young women coming. It's awesome.

Jane

mwtidd

29-03-2011, 08:42

Dancin103

29-03-2011, 08:55

Give a smart female the ego of a male counterpart and I think you'll find the rock star in FRC.

Why must a strong leader have an ego? This part I'm curious about. The leaders we are all inspired by in FIRST, male or female, do not necessarily have this "ego complex" that is being suggested. Yes, ok most leaders have egos, but every strong mentor I can think of does not. My question is, again, why must a strong leader have an ego? To me, having ego is a bad thing, and if we are trying to get more women involved in mentoring FIRST teams, let them be all male, all female, or a co-ed team, why would we want them to pursue having a negative attribute.

I don't know, this one line really tripped me up. Just my $0.02.

Cass

thefro526

29-03-2011, 09:18

Why must a strong leader have an ego? This part I'm curious about. The leaders we are all inspired by in FIRST, male or female, do not necessarily have this "ego complex" that is being suggested. Yes, ok most leaders have egos, but every strong mentor I can think of does not. My question is, again, why must a strong leader have an ego? To me, having ego is a bad thing, and if we are trying to get more women involved in mentoring FIRST teams, let them be all male, all female, or a co-ed team, why would we want them to pursue having a negative attribute.

I don't know, this one line really tripped me up. Just my $0.02.

Cass

Cass, an ego isn't always a bad thing.

I'm an avid believer that "you are what you think you are", so if you think you're a rock star mentor, then you act like rock star mentor and eventually you become a rockstar mentor. You don't necessarily need to have a bad ego, or one where you think that you're the best, you just need to believe in what you're able to do... Or something like that.

-Dustin.

Dancin103

29-03-2011, 09:22

Cass, an ego isn't always a bad thing.

I'm an avid believer that "you are what you think you are", so if you think you're a rock star mentor, then you act like rock star mentor and eventually you become a rockstar mentor. You don't necessarily need to have a bad ego, or one where you think that you're the best, you just need to believe in what you're able to do... Or something like that.

-Dustin.

Dustin, I definitely agree with you here. I guess to me, hearing the word ego, always seems to strike as a negative thing.

Cass

Karthik

29-03-2011, 09:26

Kims Robot

29-03-2011, 09:40

t
Kims Robot... you seem to start blaming women who " give in to society and use their gender to more advantage than their brain." and yet you state earlier in your same set of answers that you certainly did take advantage of this with job interviews where you knew your gender was the only thing that made you more desirable to the potential employer. i am not accusing you of anything and nor should anyone else nobody would give up any advantage they had on there competition. just as they found a way to get payed without doing as much work there is clearly a problem but no one is going to remove quotas for employment or enrollment in fear of being accused that they are against equal opportunity.
Ok so you caught me, I stretched the truth a little to make a point (that likely happens). The truth is that employers look at more than GPA. They may consider gender. But I'm pretty certain what set my 3.3 above my 3.5 male counterparts was not my gender but my extensive leadership experience. I was MVP & a leader of my FIRST team in high school for 3 years. As a freshman I founded a FIRST team & was a member of the varsity ski team throughout college. I have tons of outreach & volunteerism on my resume. I worked on a student committee for the governor of CT, was a HOBY leader, held a job since I was 14, had 3 internships, on and on...

Honestly, I never asked any of my interviewers or employers if my gender had anything to do with it, as I had the confidence that my skillset and knowledge would set me apart, even if it was possible that my gender is what got me in the door. Frankly I dont care if it was my gender or that they liked the purple font I printed my name in. It gave me a chance to discuss my real potential.

My frustration with these girls that "use their gender instead of their brain" is that when they get into industry and start doing that, men in engineering start (understandably so) stereotyping all women into that category, so when they see a woman added to the team, they automatically assume that means that the men are going to have to do more work to compensate for the female. Or that men can end up assuming women got a promotion simply because of their gender, not because they worked insanely hard (I saw this happen after a female who "didnt work for it" got promoted). THAT is what bothers me. The women who create that name for those of us who have worked hard to get where we are, and use our brains. I believe that there is probably a much higher percentage of women who use their brains, but it only takes working with a few who don't and a not-so-open mind to create the stereotype when there are so few of us to begin with.

So I wont pretend to deny that my gender may have gotten me advantages to get my foot in the door, though I dont know that for a fact. I wouldnt say I deliberately "took advantage" of that, I think its just a possible fact that I would not refute. In reality, its likely my resume that got me where I was and am, but I know that companies are actively hunting for women & minorities that meet their needs, so I simply acknowledge the possibility.

Phcullen - I'm just curious, on your team, how many girls are on your pit crew? on your drive team? how many have YOU actively brought & encouraged into a technical role?

The world needs more engineers, this is one of the underlying tenets of FIRST. Girls represent a great, under-tapped pool of future engineering talent. We should be doing everything we can to encourage them and to give them safe places to learn how to stretch their engineering wings.
EXACTLY! Its already been said several times, but the dynamic with boys around is just SO much different. I've witnessed the strongest & most empowered girls back off or walk away from technical roles on a co-ed team because the boys would dismiss them or shove them aside. And often no amount of mentoring or even punishment will bring this dynamic back in balance. All-girls teams can be a way to allow those girls to stretch their wings as you say!

Why must a strong leader have an ego? This part I'm curious about. The leaders we are all inspired by in FIRST, male or female, do not necessarily have this "ego complex" that is being suggested.
Cass
Cass - I believe this was a response to my wondering of why there are no female Rock Stars in FRC. I think this was a polite way of saying what sets the Rock Stars apart from all of the rest of the mentors we look up to individually on our teams is that the "Rock Stars" have egos that make them bold and out there. Ego is generally a negative term, but in this case, I think it makes sense and isn't necessarily a bad thing. The Rock Stars are proud of what their teams (and they) have accomplished, and they will come right out and say it. For many, their egos aren't the same as normal rock star style egos though. FIRST Rock Stars - true to the vision - will stop and help anyone that asks. They aren't too egotistical that helping those less advantaged is below them, in fact many reach out to others & other teams. But to me the ego comment is true. The FIRST Rock Stars are powerful figures, they are proud figures, they have loud voices, and often aren't afraid to speak their minds. I don't think the comment was meant that all FRC leaders have to have egos to be looked up to... its just what makes the household name. To bring it to a current example, I would guess 80% of America knows who Charlie Sheen is (he definitely has an ego). How many people know his costars names? I would admittedly have to look them up myself...

And really, this rings true in industry as well. I have only known one female at a Director level in my career... and she certainly had an ego. But females willing to have/use an ego like their male counterparts is few & far between. I forget the actual saying, but its something like "A man with an ego is considered a leader, a woman with an ego is considered a..." well you fill in the blank. And perhaps we need to change that.

P.S. Karthik answered this one better than I, but I didnt catch it as I was typing :)

MamaSpoldi

29-03-2011, 10:08

Why must a strong leader have an ego? This part I'm curious about. The leaders we are all inspired by in FIRST, male or female, do not necessarily have this "ego complex" that is being suggested. Yes, ok most leaders have egos, but every strong mentor I can think of does not. My question is, again, why must a strong leader have an ego? To me, having ego is a bad thing, and if we are trying to get more women involved in mentoring FIRST teams, let them be all male, all female, or a co-ed team, why would we want them to pursue having a negative attribute.

I don't know, this one line really tripped me up. Just my $0.02.

Cass

I suspect Jane was indicating this as a distinction between some people's idea of a "Rock Star" and just a great mentor. Many feel that you have to be over the top and desire the spotlight to reach that status.

There's a fine line between cockiness and confidence. Confidence is one of the major keys to success and happiness in life. As long as one can carefully stay on the right side of the line, staying confident while remaining humble, and ego can be quite beneficial.

YES! Confidence without bravado. That is a goal all mentors should aspire to. Knowing what you know... and more importantly what you don't know. Being ready and open to share your knowledge and prepared to learn as well - because we all have things we can learn from working with others.

Mentoring at its best is a 2-way street.

TEntwistle

29-03-2011, 10:47

As a mentor of an all-girls team (433), I have come to see the benefit to the girls with this arrangement. While it is clear that some girls on some teams excel in FIRST, it is clear that others are held back. Some never get involved because they do not think that they will be welcome. Some never reach to do more once on the team because there is already someone (a male) in that role, and some are actively discouraged from reaching out.

An example of the latter is a girl who was on our team several years ago. Mid-way through high school she transfered to another high school in the area and joined their robotics team. Despite her experience with our team, she was told that she could not use the power tools without supervision of the boys, could not design or drive. She was welcome to program and administrate. In my mind, that is what can happen when adolescent boys and adolescent girls mix in an area that has been historically the realm of the males. It also happens later in life, but that is another matter.

The real question for all teams out there is "How are you doing in making sure that girls have the same opportunity as the boys?" The sub-questions are "Is there equal representation amongst the membership of the team?" and "Do girls participate at equal levels in building, driving and all of the really fun parts?" If the answer to these questions is "No", then the answer to the main question is that "All-girls teams are not counterproductive". Yes, there are all-boys teams out there. There are some because they are from all-boys schools and some that just discourage girls from joining. The latter don't promote it because it only makes them look bad. The all-girls teams promote their uniqueness for several reasons. One is that they can catch the attention of other girls and show them that FIRST can be for them to. Another is to show their pride in being able to compete on an even playing field with the boys. Another is to show the boys that they can succeed. Later in life, these kids (as adults) will be making hiring decisions, and a boy who has seen the girls compete will be more open to hiring the female candidate than the one who has not, or more likely to work for that same woman.

Overall, the statistics for female participation in FIRST is poor compared to other areas of science (over 50% of medical students are female!). The rate of females in key roles on these teams is even worse. Other than the all-girls teams, does anybody know of any team where there are 2 girls as the first and second drivers? Until the perceptions of female particpation changes, this will never improve. The all-girls teams are just one way in which perceptions can be altered. What they need to be careful about is that they use their status as a way to get more girls involved (and at higher levels) and not use it as a crutch.

Our team hosted girlPOWER (an off season event) last fall and had 10 teams participate. There were a few things worth mentioning that demonstrate how powerful that was for promoting girls' involvement. One girl from a coed team showed up without a team, and joined a group of girls from other teams on the "orphan team" (another school had brought a practice robot). As lead driver, she was able to take that team far in the competition - something she may not have been able to do without this opportunity. An all-boys school team lent their robot to an all-girls school who had no team and let them compete. They are now looking into combining as a coed team or having the girls school develop an official separate team. Again, an opportunity they would never have had. Finally, there were young girls from middle schools in the region who came to the competition and saw first hand how much fun the kids were having. A few of these might end up in FIRST, but all of them saw how girls can succeed if they try.

Molten

29-03-2011, 11:37

EXACTLY! Its already been said several times, but the dynamic with boys around is just SO much different. I've witnessed the strongest & most empowered girls back off or walk away from technical roles on a co-ed team because the boys would dismiss them or shove them aside. And often no amount of mentoring or even punishment will bring this dynamic back in balance. All-girls teams can be a way to allow those girls to stretch their wings as you say!

My question is why the teams must be separated based on gender? Lets say a school has 2 teams, one historically all-boy and the other historically all-girl. Had I gone to this school, I would have probably fit in better with the all-girl team with respect to prior technical skills. I never learned machining or welding in high school because there were other guys that already could and were eager and waiting. Had I been on a team that had forced me to(as has been suggested the advantage of an all-girls team it) I would have learned these valuable skills. I completely agree with the notion that there could be room for 2 teams in the right area. One that has prior experience and is more assertive, and others that are more passive or lack the experience. I completely reject the notion that they should be separated on gender lines alone. That is where we are having a disagreement. Historical gender lines are becoming more and more fuzzy(which is good), as these lines blur we are going to really going to need a better way of sorting then gender.

In short, I completely agree that people without experience or that are perhaps more passive can benefit from being on a team without the more outright and experienced. I just disagree that this is always as simple as girl/boy. I've known girls that in my prior example would have fit in better with the all-boy team and I personally would have fit in better with the all-girl team. The line just isn't that clear anymore.

Jason

Jon Stratis

29-03-2011, 12:03

My question is why the teams must be separated based on gender? Lets say a school has 2 teams, one historically all-boy and the other historically all-girl. Had I gone to this school, I would have probably fit in better with the all-girl team with respect to prior technical skills. I never learned machining or welding in high school because there were other guys that already could and were eager and waiting. Had I been on a team that had forced me to(as has been suggested the advantage of an all-girls team it) I would have learned these valuable skills. I completely agree with the notion that there could be room for 2 teams in the right area. One that has prior experience and is more assertive, and others that are more passive or lack the experience. I completely reject the notion that they should be separated on gender lines alone. That is where we are having a disagreement. Historical gender lines are becoming more and more fuzzy(which is good), as these lines blur we are going to really going to need a better way of sorting then gender.

In short, I completely agree that people without experience or that are perhaps more passive can benefit from being on a team without the more outright and experienced. I just disagree that this is always as simple as girl/boy. I've known girls that in my prior example would have fit in better with the all-boy team and I personally would have fit in better with the all-girl team. The line just isn't that clear anymore.

Jason

I know some schools have Varsity and Junior Varsity robotics teams for exactly this purpose, and that's great. All girls teams do, however, still have a place in FIRST. As Dean Kamen put it, FIRST's goal is "To transform our culture by creating a world where science and technology are celebrated and where young people dream of becoming science and technology leaders." Take a step back for a second, and look at how that applies not only to the members of a team, but also to all those we bring in off the streets to see our competitions. How is a Girl Scout troop inspired when they see 90% boys driving, and 90% boys working in the pits? Frankly, most of them look at that and, instead of coming away inspired towards science and technology, they come away thinking there's no place for them in this male-dominated culture. Only a very small minority will decide they want to fight that culture and try to change it.

That's where an all girls team plays a pivotal role in FIRST. As a team, it sets an example for all the fans, all the randoms off the street, all the Girl Scout troops. It shows all of those girls that there is a place for them - not only that, but it shows them that girls can do it just as well as boys can.

Now, these stats are a little old (it's the best I could find on Google)... only 20% of engineering undergrads in 2004 were Women. How do we fix that? How do we get more girls interested in Engineering? You can't solve that problem by influencing the female members of your team - for most teams the male/female ratio is just as bad as that statistic. You solve it by getting more girls to join a FIRST team. You solve it by inspiring even younger girls to want to be a part of the team. You do it by providing role models for those young girls. That is perhaps the most important thing an all girls team does. Inspiring that younger generation will increase female participation in all teams across the board. The day we see equal participation between males and females both in the pits and on the field is the day we'll no longer need all girls teams.

bam-bam

29-03-2011, 12:32

Isn't it the whole point (of exclusive-gender teams) to get girls interested in engineering? Isn't that the whole point of the POWER camp at IUPUI that comes to IRI every year?

Jaine Perotti

29-03-2011, 12:46

Final post to Jaine(if you'd like to discuss this further, I'll be happy to do so in PM because we are kind of starting to derail this thread into a person discussion):
I feel that our posts have been on topic, and therefore don't constitute a derail. I think a lot of people are interested in reading the back-and-forth, so I'm going to reply here.

The point is using the appropriate word. I've yet to figure out what dictionary your using to define sexism. I've checked two online and neither have come with the implications that you make.

The dictionary of experience. :p

Again, if something doesn't contribute to the oppression of a group, how can you call it "____ism"?

There are functional reasons for excluding certain people from groups that have nothing to do with actively discriminating against them. People with entry-level resumes are excluded from jobs which require extensive leadership experience. People who can't swim are excluded from lifeguarding. Non-athletic people are excluded from professional sports teams. People with low SAT scores are excluded from the Ivy League. Yet in these instances, no-one would say that actual discrimination is taking place against people with no job experience, no swimming ability, no athletic talent, or poor test-taking skills.

Likewise, excluding boys from an all-girls team is done for a practical reason: to give girls a leg up in a field which overwhelmingly favors male participation. If there were no functional need for all-girls teams (i.e. sexism against women in STEM didn't exist), then yeah -- having a gender-specific team would be sexist. But until that day comes, girls-only teams can serve an important role in bringing more women into STEM (as you can see through all of the positive testimonies here in this thread).

I wasn't referring to my experience being on par with a woman in the workplace but with girls joining a robotics team.

You said:
"I completely admit that I don't have to deal with this every day of my life as women in professional engineering do. I have however had "real-world experience trying to contend with discrimination".

...in direct response to my post about how discrimination against women in engineering firms is not always dealt with as swiftly and effectively as a lot of people think it is. I suggested that perhaps you didn't have the relevant experience with workplace discrimination to fully understand why it's still a problem (granted, I was a bit abrasive about it), and you countered with your marching band example. We were clearly talking about your perception of workplace justice. (Not to say that the things girls can experience when joining a male-dominated robotics team can't closely mirror what happens in the real world... those experiences can be just as challenging and intense.)

I do sympathize with your experiences as a male in a female-dominated environment -- guys absolutely do face a lot of unfair pressure/stereotyping about what it means to be a man. On the other hand, you have to recognize that those challenges don't really affect men on the same scale that they affect women (possibly because a lot of the male stereotypes have to do with being aggressive and assertive... i.e. taking charge and getting what you want). To use your example, I don't think the lack of male participation in marching bands is a widespread societal problem (like the lack of female participation in STEM is). Almost all women in STEM have a story they can share about their discrimination... but I doubt the same holds true for men in marching bands.

But there are places that have figured out how to have a co-ed environment without unchecked sexism. That is what exists today. I fully admit that I am strongly idealistic but that doesn't mean that what I see doesn't already partly exist.
I didn't say that there weren't ANY workplaces in which the environment/colleagues were supportive of women. See the footnote on my last post. What I did say is that prejudice in the workplace DOES still present a significant barrier for women in the field. You appeared to dismiss that problem as insignificant.

Some of the best advice I've been given on this forum comes from JaneYoung. She once said that she often takes a day or two before making a post to think the post over. She could tell you why better then I can, but I've tried to do that for anything that I feel so close to that I can't think objectively. Honestly if you can't discuss a topic without getting frustrated, you should wait for your anger to settle before posting. Honestly, you've had good points but your posts have been anything but professional.

Jane can speak for herself on this matter if she so chooses. I will admit that she often has a cooler head than I... if only I possessed her restraint... :p

Seriously though, I don't see why someone's frustration over a topic should invalidate their contributions to a discussion about it. Some issues will never stop making people feel frustrated, because it will always be a part of their lives. If anything, being personally affected by an issue gives you more objectivity, because you fully understand it's personal ramifications.

I did use some strong wording, and if I could have gotten my point across in a less harsh way -- I'm sorry. But I'm not sure why anything I've said would be considered unprofessional -- I haven't called anybody names, and I've backed up my arguments with clear reasoning and personal experience.

--Jaine

N7UJJ

29-03-2011, 12:59

“I know some schools have Varsity and Junior Varsity robotics teams for exactly this purpose, and that's great.” If this is a proposal for an all boys/ all girls team it will result with the girls in the JV team, which is a “lesser” team. Guess which team gets the greater resources and opportunities.

Girls in the U.S. are bombarded daily on what is feminine, attractive, desirable. Watch TV programming and commercials with a critical eye. Look through a “girls” magazine and check out the ads and articles. Girls today are pressured to be skinny, wear makeup, be fashionable, be popular, take care of everyone and attract guys. Don’t really see much on using tools, being mechanically clever, increasing math skills, etc. I think we all would object to overt sexism, but it is the constant, insistent, cultural push that is inflicted on girls that is the hardest to counteract. It will take a real “change the culture” movement to modify advertising and programming in the media.

Has anyone seen a coed team that had 4females on a drive team? Have you ever seen 4 male drivers on a coed team? We may strongly object to a proposal to have a “all girls” team because it seems sexist, but don’t we, in fact, had de facto sexism which greatly favors males?

Generally, girls in the U.S. are raised differently than boys and the FIRST robotics competition inadvertently favors those brought up in the boy culture. Boys wind up on the construction and driving teams while girls are more likely involved in fund raising publicity. It is not necessarily because boys push them away, but because girls are more socially aware and are more willing to do what is best for the team. If a girl believes that a boy’s skills with tools are superior to hers, she is more likely to back off from the pit crew for the good of the team. Our culture reinforces the stereotype of boys being mechanically superior and as a result, girls usually have less experience with tools.

An all girls team is one approach to rectifying the de facto segregation of women. The best electrician is a girl, the best designer is a woman, the best pilot is a female. Also the person who breaks the most things is a female. The team clown is a girl. The girls can choose any role(s) they desire without the subtle sexist pressure that exists in a coed team.

BTW, it does not mean a school has to field a female team. Team 842 was going to go to 3 regionals and the championship but was faced with the problem with having students miss too much class time. That was the year when we decided to have only the girls go to one of the regional competitions. (read here) (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56504) It was far cheaper than forming a separate team and had very positive results for the girls and the boys and the mentors. That one competition had a very positive effect. Just about all the girls wound up in engineering and are graduating with their degrees.

Anyway, we need more females in FIRST and engineering. To do so, we have to counter our national culture that persistently, subtly dissuades girls from the "manly experiences" in robotics, engineering, physical sciences, etc. An all-girls team allows girls to experience FIRST with out a lot of the inadvertent sexist baggage that can inhibit their exploring engineering.

JaneYoung

29-03-2011, 13:07

I suspect Jane was indicating this as a distinction between some people's idea of a "Rock Star" and just a great mentor. Many feel that you have to be over the top and desire the spotlight to reach that status.

Actually, I was thinking that there are many powerful egos in FRC. There are great mentors with powerful egos. The trick is to control them (egos) and not let the egos control the mentors.

Post 101 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1046697&postcount=101), JesseK's, is brilliant regarding this discussion about the ego. If a mentor with an incredible sense of self and ego can help to power a team to success and achievement while in control of the ego, it can be a magnificent journey. Why do high school and college students spend so much time and energy looking at the numbers in a variety of settings but always coming down to the elite teams leading the way in those numbers? What drove those teams to garner the wins and achievements? What was the power and the motivation? In some of those cases, we'll see the very strong, very healthy egos as part of the bigger picture. And, for many teams, the mentors have learned to harness the ego and turn it into a source of positive energy and inspiration. That is where a team that has access to this energy can have a lot going for it in ways that can be talked for years to come.

I'd also like to talk about the wisdom in post 100 (www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1046695&postcount=100). This mentor, George Kantor, is helping the team explore their sense of self and to develop their ego and, in some ways, he is as surprised as anyone as to how amazing the discoveries are.

Fantastic posts by these two awesome mentors and what I'm actually talking about regarding the ego.

--
Jaine - I'm just now reading about my suggestion to think a while before posting that was made by Jason. I may send you guys a pm later after I've had some time to think about what I want to say. It's no biggie, it's just that I know both of you and I also know that historically, each of you loves an excellent and sometimes, heated discussion.

Jane

Dancin103

29-03-2011, 13:34

I am a (male) mentor on FIRST team 3504, Girls of Steel, a FIRST team composed of girls from all over the Pittsburgh area. This thread is timely for me. I undertook mentoring 3504 with many of the same reservations about all-girl teams that have been expressed in this thread. But my experiences over the past six or so months have convinced me that all-girls teams are a good thing and can play a real role in increasing the number of girls who decide to pursue technical careers.

As a faculty member at Carnegie Mellon University's Robotics Institute, I have been involved in robotics research and education with students ranging from highschool to Ph.D. for the past ten years. I have seen first hand many of the negative dynamics that have been reported in this thread. There are small numbers of women in our classes. I have seen women who marginalize themselves to fit in better with their more aggressive male peers. Alternatively, I have seen women assert themselves and suffer socially for it. You can point to these symptoms as an indictment to society, or our educational system, or even my own poor skills as a teacher. But these are deep seated issues that have no immediate solution, or at least not one that I know of.

What I can say is this: the girls of 3504 are thriving in ways that I have never seen girls/women thrive in a co-educational setting. They are gaining confidence and taking on responsibilities that many of them would concede to the boys on a mixed-gender team. Sure, they will need to work with boys/men someday, but when they get there they will have the skills to go head to head with them and the confidence that goes along with it. I find it surprising that anyone can criticize my actions as "counterproductive". If you don't believe me, you are welcome to come help us mentor 3504 and see for yourself. Or better yet, start your own all-girls team.

I'll finish this post (my first ever on CD) with an attempt to provide some perspective that I have not yet seen in this thread: The world needs more engineers, this is one of the underlying tenets of FIRST. Girls represent a great, under-tapped pool of future engineering talent. We should be doing everything we can to encourage them and to give them safe places to learn how to stretch their engineering wings.

-George

George, what you are doing, teaching, and encouraging your students to do is fantastic. I have been involved in FIRST for the last 16 years of my life. It has only been in the past few years (ok maybe 8 or 9) that our team has been able to develop into a culture in which both guys and girls are working along side one another to create this great sense of knowledge and environment that you are talking about.

Your encouragement to girls and women to doing nothing but to strive an excel in what can still be considered a man's world is fantastic. You are an outstanding mentor and if you are in St. Louis, I would love to stop by and just say hello. Thank you for taking the time to teach these girls to follow their passions and thank you for showing them not to be afraid to "get in there" and take charge.

For my team personally, we are an even split, just about, of guys and girls. I believe the ratio is something like 14 girls to 16 guys. We also have a group of 5 officers that are the President, VP of Marketing, VP of Manufacturing, Secretary, and Treasurer. Three of these positions held are female and two are male. I am so proud of my students for the work they produce and the students that they are and will become.

Cass

Alan Anderson

29-03-2011, 13:38

Again, if something doesn't contribute to the oppression of a group, how can you call it "____ism"?

X-ism does not mean oppressing based on X. It merely means making a distinction based on X. It isn't automatically a negative thing.

There are functional reasons for excluding certain people from groups that have nothing to do with actively discriminating against them. People with entry-level resumes are excluded from jobs which require extensive leadership experience. People who can't swim are excluded from lifeguarding. Non-athletic people are excluded from professional sports teams. People with low SAT scores are excluded from the Ivy League. Yet in these instances, no-one would say that actual discrimination is taking place against people with no job experience, no swimming ability, no athletic talent, or poor test-taking skills.

What you've described here is exactly discrimination. You seem to be treating the word as if it is describing something unfair, and that's not what it means. It just means taking that attribute into account when deciding how to treat someone. Discrimination based on things other than ability or performance is often (not always) unfair, but discrimination based on how well one can do the job is perfectly appropriate.

I'm afraid that the mismatch between your personal definitions and the customary and "correct" definition is going to mess up most discussions you want to have on the topic, and that's a shame. People probably would agree with you wholeheartedly if you could find common vocabulary.

Phcullen

29-03-2011, 15:05

Phcullen - I'm just curious, on your team, how many girls are on your pit crew? on your drive team? how many have YOU actively brought & encouraged into a technical role?

of my 3 years on a team i remember that on my first year there were 8 that i can remember that worked directly with the robot (7 on build 1 programmer). 4 of them (1 programmer and 2 end effector and 1 mobility captain) where on pit that year.

the following year we lost 3, 2 due to graduation 1 (who was team captain until that point) for personal reasons, but gained 2 more (1 worked hardware the other chose to work chairmans but still would help with build when she was free) leaving us with 7. that year 5 (1 mobility, 1 hardware, 3 end effector) of them were on pit.

my senor year on the team our only senior on build graduated the year before leaving us down 1 girl, but there was also 1 freshman girl that joined hardware that year bringing us again back to 6 (out of the 11 seniors on the team that year 5 of them were women). that year one of our build captain was a girl and there were 3-4 on pit (, 1 hardware, 2-3 end effector)

none were on flight for my three years on the team but of the 11 women I saw 5 of them take leadership rolls in out team
of the 10 that have already graduated
3-Virgina Tech (2 I know are studying engineering)
1-GMU( believe she is studying engineering)
1-JMU (not engineering)
1-CNU (politics)
1-WVU (music education)
1-RPI (mechanical engineering)
1-VCU*full ride* (chemical engineering)
1- unknown (programmer from my first year)

this year I know that both of our drivers and our human player are girls 2 of them are rookies

that is just our FRC build team our animation team this year was run by a girl who has been a predominant animator all three years she has been on the team and at the beginning of this year was the only nomination for team captain but refused so she could stay focussed on the teams animation. she was granted with the Dean's list award this year at the DC regional and next year will be studying chemistry at Cornell University

you would have to ask them how there experiences with FIRST and our team affected them

I'll leave you to determine if our team is a positive environment for women to try there hand in the STEM fields if you don't feel so then please speak up, I'm sure any suggestions you have would have the potential to benefit everybody. but try to be progressive

Jon Stratis

29-03-2011, 15:22

Vikesrock

29-03-2011, 15:52

Ask anyone in Minnesota about the Robettes, and there's two things you'll hear: They're an all girls team, and they have consistently built great robots that have earned them finalist medals every year at 10,000 Lakes. We aren't a secondary team. We aren't a JV where you can shove girls who don't know how to use power tools. We're one of the premier teams in Minnesota and proof that, in this arena, girls can do just as well as boys.

When this thread was first posted it made me think about how I had thought about and described the Robettes to others, something I had never really paid attention to. I was glad to find out that I was thinking of and describing them as a great FRC team that happened to be all girls and not an all girls team that managed to be successful at FRC.

I would go as far as to suggest that 2177 has been the best team in Minnesota, robot wise, over the last 5 years (as a whole, not each year individually).

Jaine Perotti

29-03-2011, 16:11

X-ism does not mean oppressing based on X. It merely means making a distinction based on X. It isn't automatically a negative thing.

What you've described here is exactly discrimination. You seem to be treating the word as if it is describing something unfair, and that's not what it means. It just means taking that attribute into account when deciding how to treat someone. Discrimination based on things other than ability or performance is often (not always) unfair, but discrimination based on how well one can do the job is perfectly appropriate.

I'm afraid that the mismatch between your personal definitions and the customary and "correct" definition is going to mess up most discussions you want to have on the topic, and that's a shame. People probably would agree with you wholeheartedly if you could find common vocabulary.
I feel that most people attach some kind of negativity to the words "discrimination" and "sexism"... but I suppose not everyone will. When the claim was made that all-girls teams were "sexist" to men, I assumed the "sexism" was being considered unfair... otherwise why bring it up? You seem to want to remove the negative connotation from those words -- and that's fine if you want to define it that way for yourself. Just keep in mind that when I used those words, I meant for them to retain that connotation. My main point was simply to say that not ALL exclusion enforces cultural hegemony (is that a good enough word?).

So, to clarify: when I talk about sexism and discrimination, I'm referring to acts which contribute to a society-wide culture of oppression. Using my definition, is it sexist to exclude men from using the women's bathroom? Most people would probably say no because it serves a practical need for privacy. Is it sexist to exclude men from women's sports teams? Most people would probably say no, because the purpose is to make sure that the players have similar physiques/ability levels. Is it sexist to run an all-girls FIRST team? No it's not, because all-girls teams also serve a practical purpose -- to combat the problem of female underrepresentation in STEM fields. These restrictions aren't sexist to men, because men already have their own bathrooms and sports teams and (over)representation in STEM. The above examples exist not as manifestations of women wielding cultural advantage over men, but as practical solutions to problems.

--Jaine

ETA: I have gotten some feedback that this reply was too harsh-sounding. I really didn't intend for it to come across that way, I only meant to clarify what I meant to you and others. If I have sounded abrasive in some of my posts, I apologize; it's hard not to get defensive when it seems as if my experiences are being minimized and dismissed.

Siri

29-03-2011, 16:23

Has anyone seen a coed team that had 4females on a drive team? Have you ever seen 4 male drivers on a coed team?We've fielded a 4-girl drive team on occasion (and have done 3-1 or 2-2 for 3+ years). I remember an once MC pointed out that our entire alliance had only girls behind the glass. Every other match I saw that day: all guys.

I can definitely see the benefit of all-girls teams. I'm not convinced there aren't any significant losses, but I know I was one of those rookies who didn't really get taught anything her first season. I just sort of stumbled around with ratchets and sockets in my pocket too intimidated to ask the difference and/or unable to find someone who appeared patient enough.
This wasn't a girl thing on the team's side: we've always--though not intentionally--had at least one female captain (including me) and usually have a near-even split in mechanical. (Then again, that captain was basically the only one who was really patient with me at the beginning.) But on my side, yeah, I was intimidated.

I got over it eventually, but I still see girls suffer through it every day in college. Incidentally, the alumnae from our team tend to hold their own very well in college engineering. I don't know if this is solely because it changes us fundamentally or because coed teams (especially without structured rookie training) just self-select girls who will. It's probably a little of both, but I do know that I wouldn't be the person I am today without that experience.

I completely agree with the notion that there could be room for 2 teams in the right area. One that has prior experience and is more assertive, and others that are more passive or lack the experience.This is an interesting concept. I'm not sure what I think of it. Would it have been a whole lot easier as a rookie to have someone actually teach me what the heck a nylock nut was, or give me feedback on how I was doing? Oh yeah, and I've worked on that as a mentor. But would I have wanted to work with just new students? Probably not. I feel like it would have taken a lot of the inspiration out of it. Maybe this is just based on my FIRST experience (characterized by not being directly "taught" much of anything, from welding and design to tax forms and project management), but I liked learning by watching/working with veteran members and mentors.

Dmentor

29-03-2011, 17:04

It is getting better. My mother was one of the first women allowed to be hired into a male-dominated environment (the Air National Guard) and she had it much worse than I did. My life is easy compared to what she went through.

Is it EASY to be a Female in Engineering?
...
3. Yes. Getting a job out of college IS easier as a girl.
...

I loved reading these comments.

My research colleague, mentor and friend retired from Lockheed-Martin (LM) a couple of years ago after almost forty years as a practicing engineer. After graduating with a doctorate in chemistry from Carnegie Mellon in the 1960s she was unable to find a job. After a long and fruitless search she went on to do her post-doctorate work at Harvard really out of frustration. She finally was able to find a job at IBM where it turned out that her work in theoretical chemistry could be applied to very early ballistic missile defense systems and she eventually migrated to the field of anti-submarine warfare localization and tracking. Over the years I have been blessed to learn amazing things from her. Her first-hand stories of prejudice and gender bias in the workplace were quite eye opening for me as a young engineer and ones that should never have to be relived.

Being a father of a twelve year old girl, I'd like to think that things are significantly different now (and in many ways they are); however, when I look at my department (which specializes in the development of acoustics, sonar signal processing, detection, estimation and tracking algorithms) today we only have 2 female engineers out of 16 (12.5%). Looking across my entire second line systems engineering organization, I see 23 female engineers out of 106 (22.7%) which is a little bit better but nothing to write home about. And when I look at recent and current LM fellows (which are the top 1% of LM engineers), I see that about 1.5% of them are female. While we may be making inroads, they are certainly slow coming in the most complex fields and particularly at the pinnacle of technical engineering.

karinka13

29-03-2011, 23:10

A mentor sent this thread my way and said I might want to weigh in, so here I am (I know, I know, I haven't been on this forum in quite some time).

While I would certainly never agree with telling a team how to run itself, I think a very important point to bring up is that when you purposefully separate by gender, you MAKE gender into an issue. Hear me out.

I'm not saying there aren't gender gaps in the world anymore. As a senior studying engineering at MIT, I can fully attest that girls have to work harder to earn the respect of their peers, even the other female ones. In many cases, especially the other females. I love working in the machine shop in my lab, and it took me at least a year to earn the respect of the shop guys. But now they give me free range and all is well. It takes extra work, but the end result is worth it. Besides, complaining about it isn't going to make anything better, anyway.

See, if you constantly run around talking big about how you're a "female in engineering" or an "all girls robotics team," you're making your gender a major part of your identity. My gender is a part of who I am as a person (see my love of miniskirts and Victoria's Secret), but it is not a relevant part of my professional life. If I were to make it part of that, I would be opening myself up to being judged based on my gender.

An all-girls robotics team that uses that label to define themselves invites themselves to be the point of judgment for all robotics teams. This means whenever they do poorly, that all-girls stamp will do poorly as well. When they do well, that stamp just adds to a thought of "look, they did well, and they even overcame that obstacle." It's a way of thinking that we aren't going to outgrow as a people anytime soon.

But if we do want to outgrow it, we need to stop labeling ourselves so strongly. Stop throwing those stamps in people's faces. When I was a member of 433 (a team from an all-girls high school in the Philadelphia area), my theory on the matter was always something along the lines of "Oh, we're all girls? What an odd thing for you to notice."

Refusing to make it a big deal is really the only way we'll ever outgrow this.

Ogehsim

29-03-2011, 23:35

Boys wind up on the construction and driving teams while girls are more likely involved in fund raising publicity. It is not necessarily because boys push them away, but because girls are more socially aware and are more willing to do what is best for the team. If a girl believes that a boy’s skills with tools are superior to hers, she is more likely to back off from the pit crew for the good of the team.

This corresponds with my own experience. I joined the team to build. I was encouraged to join the team by a middle school (male) tech teacher who helped me design and build my own hoverboard as an independent project.

However, between the fact that there were a large number of freshmen, young and inexperienced leadership, and a sudden gap in parent support as many of the most dedicated left with their graduating students within about 2 years, there was a gap. The gap namely being the entire side the team's existence that wasn't the robot.

No one else was volunteering, so I did. And that's what I did my entire time on the team. I have never contributed to any part that ever made it on to our robot - which was my entire reason for joining the team. I remember a crushing moment in freshman year after competition season, when the robot was sitting in my tech class and I realized I had not touched a single part on the robot, and I had learned absolutely nothing about building, designing, or anything else that goes into making a robot.

I have had bitter outbursts about my lack of a technical experience on the team to my friends, but I believed (and still do) in the mission of FIRST and in spreading it, so I organized the demos, and wrote the Chairman's, and ran recruitment, and did outreach to elementary schools willingly because no one else was going to do it and it needed to get done. I don't regret doing any of this, but now being at college with so many other FIRST alumni and they'll talk gear ratios and transmissions and other things and they go right over my head. I feel like I'm playing catch-up in my engineering classes. They'll shy away too when I mention what I did on my team. They'll be like "Oh, that's.... nice..." and then leave as fast it's polite to, as if I am not a "real" FIRST student.

I remember one incident my freshman year, I was helping to make a prototype with a mentor (just cutting and drilling some wood someone else had pre-marked). An older boy came and started helping us, and started slowly taking over my jobs, and relegating me to holding boards as he drilled and such. Eventually I was left watching. And then I was ordered to go somewhere else and find something else to do. The mentor was right there the whole time.

I agree, all-girl FIRST teams could prove extraordinarily beneficial to their members. In FIRST there is no way to dumb down the rules and the challenges, like what has happened as our district's all-girl technology classes. But I agree too that making a huge issue of girl vs. boy may only serve to perpetuate the inequalities. There's not really a right answer.

Really, all I want to say, is for all the mentors: do not ever let another student push someone away who is trying to learn. I'm sure 99.99% of you don't. But it happens. And the only way to fix it is to make people aware.

lightsandmusik

29-03-2011, 23:58

I think that each team serves to a certain area or group. i.e. My school serves to Mira Costa and Redondo Union High Schools. However, we do have a couple of home-schooled kids as well as another boy from a neighboring school. The all boy or all girl teams usually serve to the scout scout troop, or the single sex school. I know that Loyola(all male) and Marlborough(all female) got together to make one team. So really, they aren't doing anything wrong. They built a team in a certain environment and that is who the team is serving.

(sorry if it didn't make any sense. I'm not the most eloquent writer)

pianogrrl71

30-03-2011, 08:20

I'm currently on an all girls rookie team called the Girls of Steel. We come from eleven different schools, and we're not from any organization like Girl Scouts or anything like that. We're simply a bunch of girls from a 400 square mile area around Pittsburgh that wanted to get involved in science and technology, and none of our schools had FIRST FRC teams. Most of us really didn’t know each other before we started the team in October, but now we are cohesive team, all friends. :) We also now know how to work all of the machine shop tools, design and build new parts, and how to use CAD to pre-prototype the parts we want.

So far this year, we've made it into the Pittsburgh Regional elimination rounds, won Rookie All Star in Pittsburgh, and then went on to win Rookie All-Star in D.C. as well. We're going to St. Louis in April (can't wait to see all the awesome teams there!)

We've also received some flack because we don't allow guys on our team. People have told us that by being an all girls team, we're discriminating against guys. But within a 10 minute radius of where our team meets, there are about 3 others teams that accept guys -- and one that only accepts guys (all-guy catholic high school). So it's not like because we don't have guys on our team, there aren't any options for guys to become involved in FIRST.

We've also been told that we're not getting "real world" experiences. And I wholeheartedly agree—we're not getting “real world” experiences. And that’s the way we want it to be!

We don't want to follow the "real" world model, where women make 77 cents to every dollar a guy earns. We don't want to mimic a world where the science and technology fields are populated by a large majority of male workers and women have to fight to be heard. We want to create a new "real world" and we want to change how the world views females in science in technology.

We also want to support and encourage more girls to get interested in these fields through opportunities like FRC, FTC, FLL, and other programs. By giving anyone (guy or girl!) the chance to feel valued in these groups, all FIRST participants will be more likely to be more interested in science and technology. Because there are so many all guy or mostly guy teams already, we want to create an environment where the girls can explore science and technology without competing with the guys to be heard so that when we get to college and our careers we will have the confidence to succeed and level the playing field.

Most of our mentors are guys, and we work with a lot of other co-ed and guy teams as well. We are proud to provide a different opportunity for high school girls in the Pittsburgh area and look forward to the opportunity to share our team’s story and the principles of FIRST to inspire many others—both girls and boys of all ages. :D

Andy Baker

30-03-2011, 09:51

Wow - what a thread! This is an excellent discussion. It is impressive to see the passion and conviction of opinions, along with the thoughtfulness of making clear points while also being open to others' opinions.

This topic resonates well with me, as I have seriously considered starting an all-girls FRC team in the Kokomo area during the past year. We have discussed this with many people, receiving many opinions from many friends, including influential women in FIRST. To my amazement, we received opinions from women which were both supportive AND non-supportive to an all-girls team.

Before I describe who was most influential to me during this process, I will give you some background:

My wife and I have three daughters, and the oldest will be a freshman next year at a high school which does not have an FRC team. Graciously, the TechnoKats (45) have invited her to be a member of the team. At the same time, we have also met with the Superintendent and Principal of her school (Northwestern High School in Indiana), and they have agreed to start a new FRC team. As a family, we have decided that the best thing for us to do is start this new team at NHS. I will still have close ties to team 45, but next year my focus will be as a mentor on this Rookie FRC team. This team will be a girls and boys team, with much emphasis on making sure that the team's culture allows for girls to have equal chances that guys have within the team.

So, back to the idea of starting an all-girls team: as I mentioned, we talked to many women in FIRST about this. However, there was one person who influenced me the most in making sure that girls should be welcomed and supported equally on a mixed gender team instead of purposely segregated from the boys. This person is one of the "rock stars" in FIRST: Kate Pilotte. Kate grew up with a house full of boys, and was successful as an engineering graduate of WPI. She even got to yell at guys at WPI as a coxswain (I think that's the term) on the rowing team. Now, she is in charge of the FRC Kit of Parts as a FIRST engineer. She serves as an FTA for many events, and has seen many all-girl teams in FIRST. If you can get her to talk about this, she definitely has some opinions. Her point is that girls should be supported and integrated with boys so that they can learn to work together, productively, at an early age.

Kate's opinion further opened my eyes to this issue, and I am pledging to continue to support a culture within FIRST that supports female involvement.

Thank you, Kate.

Sincerely,
Andy Baker

RoboMom

31-03-2011, 15:23

I have no idea what a "female rockstar engineer" looks like, but it appears there have been many women who have won WFFA in the last 6 years. Maybe someone can update Andy's list.

I have worked with some women engineers locally who are terrific role models.

One of my personal rock stars.
Abbie Roth. She is featured in the very first segment of the Chesapeake shout out video: http://www.youtube.com/user/MarylandFIRST?feature=mhum#p/u/2/paCYkuoPDHE

JosephC

31-03-2011, 15:57

I'm a firm believer in FRC teams that are multi-gender. One of the main reasons being that all guy (or girl) teams are missing huge parts of what makes a FRC team different then any other high school team.

All guy teams miss out on the calming, soothing effects that girls bring to a team. And lets face it guys, Most of us wouldn't want to be in the business group or spending 4 hours a day making buttons (which mainly girls do on our team). Our team wouldn't be able to survive without one of our female members, who runs the meeting 75% of the time, and gives 105% to our team.

But then there is the other side to it. All female teams miss out on the egocentric guys who really push that robot to the max. See, this is what happens during our design stage. 2 guys end up having different ideas (say a telescopic arm or a 3 stage arm like the one 68 has right now), and both of them want the team to use their idea. So what ends up happening is the 2 males go home and spend all night doing math and making a prototype. The next day they come in and we spend the day figuring out which is right. You see, if it wasn't for their egos we would never have prototypes done so fast.

So no matter which way you turn it around, The true thing that seperates FIRST from other high school teams is the chance to do something you love, while at the same time spending time with the opposite gender. Besides, I swear our girls do a good job at humanizing our more "serious" teammates.

whackedwatchdog

31-03-2011, 16:53

I'm a firm believer in FRC teams that are multi-gender. [...] All guy teams miss out on the calming, soothing effects that girls bring to a team. And lets face it guys, Most of us wouldn't want to be in the business group or spending 4 hours a day making buttons (which mainly girls do on our team). [..]

But then there is the other side to it. All female teams miss out on the egocentric guys who really push that robot to the max. See, this is what happens during our design stage. 2 guys end up having different ideas (say a telescopic arm or a 3 stage arm like the one 68 has right now), and both of them want the team to use their idea. So what ends up happening is the 2 males go home and spend all night doing math and making a prototype. The next day they come in and we spend the day figuring out which is right. You see, if it wasn't for their egos we would never have prototypes done so fast. [...]

I really hate to say it, Joseph, because I agree with th co-ed teams (something I realize puts me in a minority), but I have to disagree with your reasoning. It sounds a bit like you're continuing to put people into boxes and follow stereotypes, even if the ones you're portraying are positive. I'm sure it's not what you meant, but the end of your first paragraph, and second in particular seem to imply that women "are more useful" on the business side of things, while guys are inherently more useful building and prototyping. That, in particular, is what a lot of the all-female teams are created to combat.

In my personal opinion, all-girl teams are somewhat counter-productive towards the goals of FIRST, but like others, I can see how they are fairly necessary. In a perfect world, everyone would work together perfectly, and there would be no sexism, de-facto or otherwise. That's not the case, though. A lot of people, mostly unconsciously, lump people into one group or another, and gender is one of the easiest and most obvious ways of characterizing a person. Give it time, and wait until STEM has a 50/50 -- or even 60/40 split (who knows, maybe women and men are mentally "wired" differently...), and then I think that's the time that they should fade out.

Dancin103

31-03-2011, 17:11

All guy teams miss out on the calming, soothing effects that girls bring to a team. And lets face it guys, Most of us wouldn't want to be in the business group or spending 4 hours a day making buttons (which mainly girls do on our team). Our team wouldn't be able to survive without one of our female members, who runs the meeting 75% of the time, and gives 105% to our team.

Hey now, some of our greatest button makers have been the boys! It's not just a job for the girls.

Why do we classify jobs like this to different genders? Would you then say that the PR/Marketing department is just for girls and that the boys are the only ones that are allowed to build the robot and be in the shop? One of our greatest PR/Marketing leaders was a guy, who has been very VERY successful in this field, he will be graduating at the top of his class in college, and has taken what he learned as our teams leader and applied that to the concept of being the student body president in college. He was a phenomenal leader to our team. As well, we have had outstanding females that worked down in the manufacturing department that could "show the boys up" in that field as well. No department or job on any team should be boy or girl designated.

Cass

Madison

01-04-2011, 01:22

Andrew Schreiber

01-04-2011, 01:35

Kims Robot

01-04-2011, 09:24

All female teams miss out on the egocentric guys who really push that robot to the max.

Haha... you've never been in a design debate with me... I don't back down until you prove me wrong, and I have some very very strong (and well founded) design opinions.

Trust me, there are girls with "egos" as well. There are girls with very strong opinions. And jeez... try putting a whole ton of girls in a room together... you DEFINITELY get some opinions then! I don't think having an all girls team will stop this dynamic. In fact I would argue its one of the few places you will see girls push the limits, when they don't have to "worry" about what guys think of their ideas, or of a "guy" coming up with a better idea.

I will admit that through this discussion, I have realized that it is very true that in general (not always), women/girls will decide to do what is "needed" on the team... not necessarily what they really "want" to do. If there is a job that needs doing, even if its not as exciting, the women/girls will make sure it gets done. The men in general (again not always) tend to gravitate towards what they WANT to do... the tech-e type stuff... the design/build. These are of course very general statements, not true for every person in each gender, but I think it does explain why we often hear people assume that girls are "better at buttons, PR, etc..." and the boys "are better at design & build".

But I'm back to the point of "to each their own". I don't advocate that every girl in FIRST should be on an all girls team. Nor do I advocate that we deny these "exclusive" teams access to the competition. There is a place for all of them, and good reasons for all of them. As long as we are working on getting girls more involved in the technical side of things, I think we are on the right path.

JesseK

01-04-2011, 09:39

But I'm back to the point of "to each their own". I don't advocate that every girl in FIRST should be on an all girls team. Nor do I advocate that we deny these "exclusive" teams access to the competition. There is a place for all of them, and good reasons for all of them. As long as we are working on getting girls more involved in the technical side of things, I think we are on the right path.

Quite true!

mwtidd

02-04-2011, 18:25

Go 1868!

Girl Scouts tearing it up at SVR :)!

Foster

03-04-2011, 08:43

<snip> all but the signature at the end.
Evil and Smart?
Fear it. Embrace it.

Exactly. I've seen the Firebirds in action for a number of years. Top notch engineering, amazing sponsors, roboteers that work their fingers off, drivers that drive the wheels off the robot. They have been a "point to them" team for me for my VEX girls teams.

While they are an all girl team, they are the Firebirds, feared and loved on the East Coast.

... but next year my focus will be as a mentor on this Rookie FRC team. This team will be a girls and boys team, with much emphasis on making sure that the team's culture allows for girls to have equal chances that guys have within the team.

Cool, Andy at the helm of a new mixed team, again for the right reasons for them. (Maybe they can get FIRST to assign them team number 4500, I think it's up soon.

IKE

03-04-2011, 09:38

One of the things I love about FRC is that teams have the freedom to be run they way the team wants to be run. Teams frequently choose some direction that will both help and hinder them in some aspect. The all boy/girl teams are one of these choices. Having a single sex team has benefits, but it is also unrealistic for the working world (other than some very specific instances). I think you can make a comparison to a team deciding to CNC EVERY part versus a team that decides to HAND CRAFT every part. You will learn very different skill sets from both of those choices. Both skill sets are valuable, and both will allow you to be better and gain additional depth in the particular area. This depth though comes at a cost of breadth.

All girls teams (by choice) are a tool that can be used to promote involvement, just like FRC is a tool to promote STEM involvement. FRC takes the most fun and exciting elements of a technical career and lumps it into a fun competition.
Why remove the option of a tool? That would be as ridiculous as not allowing a perfectly good (an readily available) switch to be used in a minibot.
All "anything" (girl/boy/CNC/Hand Crafted/Plastic/Wood/...) teams should have an open discussion that their decision to go that direction will likely have some detractors, and they should be aware of the PROs/CONs of their choice.

********Women Rockstars************************
I am a bit surprised no one has mentioned Kyle Hughes in this thread. She is the team lead for 27 and a WFA winner. She has also been included in Kickoff videos and panels.
Kyle is definitely one of the "Rockstars" of FRC. http://www.teamrush27.net/whoweare/mentors.html

carii99

03-04-2011, 12:05

Boys wind up on the construction and driving teams while girls are more likely involved in fund raising publicity. It is not necessarily because boys push them away, but because girls are more socially aware and are more willing to do what is best for the team. If a girl believes that a boy’s skills with tools are superior to hers, she is more likely to back off from the pit crew for the good of the team. Our culture reinforces the stereotype of boys being mechanically superior and as a result, girls usually have less experience with tools.

I think the first part of this, the part about girls ending up being part of publicity is exactly right. While this weekend was my first ever competition I saw almost immediately that almost all of the scouts and mascots were female. I'm not saying there were no male mascots or scouts, I'm just saying that many of the scouts and mascots I saw were female.

As to the comment about girls believing that a boy's skills are superior that is exactly why my team is an all-girls team. The goal isn't to discriminate but to teach girls what they are capable of. The goal of FIRST is to convince kids that the STEM technologies are within reach and to inspire kids to find careers in those fields but unfortunately girls are still left wondering if there is really a place for them.

While I understand that these stereotypes are being shattered daily they still exist in many places. In my own experience my all boys robotics class (in school and separate from my team) has generally acted as if I am inferior despite my higher grade and experience level. My ideas are tested last, wrenches are taken from my grasp, and I have been informed-- in an way that may be interpreted as joking or serious depending on the student-- that I am a woman and therefore cannot drive. Having an all-girl's team makes those kind of actions obsolete. Instead girls are encouraged in all of their ideas and all of their actions.

Finally an all-girl's team caters to the girl. My team feels like more than a family. We have had some serious issues that have been worked out without the help of a mentor. Some of us have gone to each other when support couldn't be found in their own households. I don't have the experience to say if this isn't true in a coed team but I know that having such a tight bond has made me a happier person and raised doubts over whether I would want to switch to a coed team.

JaneYoung

03-04-2011, 13:23

My team feels like more than a family.

I think you would find that on a co-ed team that has developed with integrity, kindness, and a focus on building a strong team. Not all teams have that intent or focus, whether they are co-ed or not, and it is their loss if they don't.

Perhaps the discussion really is centered about the maturity of a team and its ability to recognize the importance and value of teamwork and the opportunity to introduce all of the students and mentors to the importance of all of the aspects of the competition - none of which are gender specific.

I spoke with one of our mentors on the team about this thread. Her reaction was that this lack of women in engineering, sciences, and technological fields is all generational. Ms. Earnhart thinks that the experiences that she has had are vastly different than the experiences of my (and her mother's) generation. Doors have opened that were once closed and the windows of opportunity are clearly there. She also said something very interesting regarding the role models/egos part of this discussion. Earnhart looked around her as a child and realized that her role models were male - so she fashioned herself after those role models, using their attributes and strengths to help turn her dreams into reality, not letting the lack of female role models deter her in reaching for and obtaining her goals. Bill Nye the Science Guy was recognized for his knowledge and what he could teach her. I thought her insight and perspective was very interesting and I'm looking forward to having more discussions with her.

Jane

Lledargo

03-04-2011, 13:40

mwtidd

03-04-2011, 14:01

Exclusive teams should not be allowed in anything, let alone FIRST, it is counter productive to society. Everyday people must work with others that are different genders, races and so on. Creating exclusive groups makes it harder for the people included in the groups to work in a diverse group. on top of that you are promoting the belief that different groups of humans should be separated from each other.

lastly you have the issue of double standards. If a team that was exclusively for boys was created, it would be called gender discrimination. Where as an exclusively girls team is called inspirational for doing the same thing.

What you say is definitely true, but I don't think it is something FIRST should try to govern. Once FIRST begins to govern teams it is a very slippery path. "The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

I would prefer FIRST to remain separate from the politics of individual teams. Once a few bylaws are created, more are certain to come. The beautiful thing about FIRST is that it can be whatever you want it to be. Introduce bylaws for teams, and this will change very quickly.

Abra Cadabra IV

03-04-2011, 14:11

I have to say I'm really impressed by the discussion going on in this thread. It's hard for me to find something to say that hasn't already been said - but I'll do my best.

I'm a proud alumna of two teams - one all-girl, and one coed. (Made possible by doing FTC and FRC concurrently for three years - FTC #25 is a Girl Scout team with mostly female mentors and FRC #2429 was run by my high school.)

The biggest difference between the two teams was probably how they treated new students. The girl scout team made sure everyone had an equal opportunity to learn, ask questions, and participate. In contrast, on my high school team you had to be pretty assertive to ever do anything. We also never had more than four girls on the team (out of ~20 or so members), most of whom had very little previous experience with anything technical. It was really hard to speak up, and even harder to be taken seriously.

Being on an all-girls team did wonderful things for my confidence and inspired me to become an engineer. I honestly can't say things would be the same if I'd only joined the coed team. Without all-girl teams, how many people like me would miss out?

caffel

03-04-2011, 15:16

In this case, the OP (original poster) created this thread. It takes time and effort to create a thread in ChiefDelphi. The topic that this OP is presenting also takes time and effort to think about and decide to create a thread about. (That's my opinion, of course - I realize that some people create threads without giving them much thought.) By using capitalization in the sentences and proper punctuation, the OP brings more credibility to the topic. It is a topic that I enjoy reading discussions about and I enjoy thoughtful posts regarding the topic of women in the fields of math, science, and engineering and girls on FRC/FTC/FLL/VEX/BEST teams that will help to increase the numbers of women in the fields of math, science, and engineering.

I hope this answered your question, Andrew. If not, let's take it to a private message.

Jane

By the way, what is your answer to OP's question:
Re: Are all girl FIRST team counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST?

JaneYoung

03-04-2011, 17:07

By the way, what is your answer to OP's question:
Re: Are all girl FIRST team counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST?

My answer is: absolutely not.

There is a word that I value and place great emphasis on when mentoring teams and individuals: freedom. We have the freedom to develop as teams and as individuals. We have the freedom to grow. We have the freedom to mature into creative forces of genius, innovative, problem-solving, and dynamic influence that changes our world in small and large ways - for the better. If we remove the freedom and create cookie cutter molds that set very rigid boundaries and create monotonous patterns/designs - then we are being counterproductive - in my opinion. Let's allow the freedom to grow and develop to be encouraged. Let's see what the next 20 years brings.

My hope is that the alumni take what they've learned, nurtured by the philosophy, and inject it into the status quo - in their careers, their educational experiences, their management styles, their small and large businesses/corporations, their professional lifestyles. This would include opportunity for everyone to achieve and be successful, conducting business through the wisdom and merit of Gracious Professionalism and integrity.

Jane

Lledargo

03-04-2011, 17:20

What you say is definitely true, but I don't think it is something FIRST should try to govern. Once FIRST begins to govern teams it is a very slippery path. "The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

I would prefer FIRST to remain separate from the politics of individual teams. Once a few bylaws are created, more are certain to come. The beautiful thing about FIRST is that it can be whatever you want it to be. Introduce bylaws for teams, and this will change very quickly.

I cannot disagree with you, FIRST teams have a lot of liberty and that is a wonderful thing, however an exclusive team is counterproductive, and should be discouraged.

Madison

03-04-2011, 17:36

I cannot disagree with you, FIRST teams have a lot of liberty and that is a wonderful thing, however an exclusive team is counterproductive, and should be discouraged.

...based on what evidence?

Yipyapper

03-04-2011, 17:52

I, for one, think that all-girls exclusive teams are out to prove that just because there are no guys on the team, doesn't mean that they aren't capable of making a good robot or do anything special. Look at one of our partners for winning the west GTR, the "Where's Waldo" team 1547. They are all-girls. As for any other exclusive teams, they might be doing the same.

This is only an opinion.

Yipyapper

03-04-2011, 17:55

And also, the team that was all girls from 1547 are from Whitby, Ontario, which their school has another team that is both male and female egibile. This further reinforces that they are trying to tell people that girls can do the same as guys.

I'm not a feminist, just a guy that is trying to tell people what some people believe what they think is right.

mwtidd

03-04-2011, 18:10

I cannot disagree with you, FIRST teams have a lot of liberty and that is a wonderful thing, however an exclusive team is counterproductive, and should be discouraged.

Also remember that when FIRST discourages or encourages something it is almost always viewed as FIRST law. I think this is why FIRST has been very particular on what is suggests is proper for FIRST teams. Anti-GP is the only thing I can think of that has been discouraged. By discouraging exclusive teams, you would essentially put anti-gp and exclusive teams on the same level. In FIRST you don't need a mandate for something to be viewed as law. Where there is a clear and blatant divide in the polls, meaning neither side is right, I think that the best thing FIRST can do is do nothing. I hope FIRST continues to stay away from an inter-organization political agenda.

I don't think the bigger issue is the rightness or wrongness of exclusive teams, but rather or not we want FIRST to begin ruling on what is and isn't ethical. We don't need parties in FIRST, they already make enough of a mess in the US.

Lledargo

03-04-2011, 20:47

...based on what evidence?
The goal of FIRST is to inspire innovation, and teach students how to work in todays rapidly growing society. Exclusive teams only let people work with others of the same demographic, meaning they will not have to try as hard to learn to work with others that they may disagree with. which is not only counterproductive to the FIRST philosophy but to society in general.

Also Lineskier, you have a very good point. Many people do follow the FIRST guidelines as if they were law. I suppose I would like to see FIRST support social integration, but I can also see such a stance from FIRST causing many exclusive teams to disband which would be in itself counterproductive to the FIRST philosophy. I suppose that it is one of those lose-lose options.

Over all, as much as I support social integration, I support learning and intelligence more. I could not bare to see teams break up if FIRST started discouraging exclusive teams.

Mikell Taylor

03-04-2011, 22:53

You know, I really don't think it's FIRST's responsibility to make FRC teams look just like "the real world." Think about your co-ed team. It is made up of people in a specific school district, right? Chances are most of you are the same ethnicity, or the same socio-economic demographic, or all immigrants from the same country, or the same in any other number of characteristics. That's not always the case, true, but because schools are built around neighborhoods and neighborhoods tend to attract similar types of people, there's a really good chance your team doesn't look at all like "the real world."

FIRST as a program is designed to encourage and inspire students in a controlled environment. The problem they set out for you to tackle is achievable -- challenging, but achievable. Everyone is working with your best interest in mind. Everyone is trying hard to help you succeed and learn as much as you can. I can assure you that does not in any way resemble the real world of engineering. FIRST is structured to make it comfortable and easy for you to learn what you need to learn so that you are inspired to go tackle it in the unstructured, un-cushioned, much more intimidating "real world."

So while I appreciate the concern in this thread from all the men who are worried that women on all-girls teams will enter the engineering world as wilting flowers unable to suddenly deal with a co-ed environment, I don't think they have any more problem than you do going into college coursework with people richer than you who have had way more opportunities (and possibly more education), people poorer than you who haven't had the privileges and opportunities you have, people from different ethnic backgrounds and even different countries -- the list goes on. All an all-girls team does is offer female students who might otherwise be intimidated enough to be discouraged from STEM fields a chance to try something out in what feels like a safer, more supportive environment, to have a chance to build their confidence and emerge from the program willing and able to handle anything the "real world" can throw at them.

There are plenty of women in this thread who've said their co-ed team experiences made them the successful engineers they are today. There are plenty who have said the same thing about their all-girls team experience. There is no single answer. But I think it is clear that all-girls teams do play an important role in helping FIRST achieve their goals.

JesseK

03-04-2011, 23:51

LightWaves1636

04-04-2011, 00:59

You've said A & B, but haven't linked them. This still doesn't provide evidence even implying that FIRST wants teams to learn to work with a diverse group of people. It's not in FIRST's mission at all.

Agreed, I don't see it in here:

Our mission is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders, by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering and technology skills, that inspire innovation, and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication, and leadership. (http://www.usfirst.org/aboutus/content.aspx?id=34)

Lledargo

04-04-2011, 08:12

My mistake, I suppose I should judge the mission off of the mission statement, and not what I remember Dean saying at the kickoffs I have attended.

However a part of the mission statement is "foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication, and leadership." Firstly the word 'including' implies that those three skill are not all FIRST wants to encourage, but rather any skill that will give a FIRST student a heads up in the real world. Secondly, students who come from a diverse team(however rare) will tend to have better communication skills,because good communication skills are needed to work in any group, and better communication tend to be needed to work in a group of people who simply don't think alike.

That being said I still do feel that Exclusive teams are counterproductive to the FIRST mission. However as I said before discouraging the existence of such teams would take away the chance for students to learn all of other valuable skills they would learn on their team. So I feel it would be more counterproductive to FIRST to discourage the existence of exclusive teams.

Kims Robot

04-04-2011, 08:41

My mistake, I suppose I should judge the mission off of the mission statement, and not what I remember Dean saying at the kickoffs I have attended.

If you can find the transcript of where Dean has said that exclusive or all-girls teams are wrong, I'd be interested to re-read it. I've listened intently to every one of Dean's speeches for 16 years, and I never heard anything discouraging exclusive or all girls teams. I remember him saying at champs (maybe 2 years ago) teams without mentors are missing out... but I never remember anything about exclusive teams.

To a point made earlier... there ARE all male teams. And just like all female teams, often the reason is because of school. An all boys catholic school simply isnt going to permit girls on the team. Just like an all girls school won't have boys on the team.

I met such an all girls team this weekend at the CT regional. I spoke with their three seniors at the alumni networking luncheon. They were from an all girls school in NYC. One of the girls was going to attend Harvey Mudd in the fall. My jaw dropped when I heard that. It was my dream school... they accept 1400 out of 14,000 applicants and in 4 years you get something like 4 engineering degrees. Anyways, this quiet girl from an all girls FIRST team was going there. Her two friends were both more artsy and very likely never would have touched anything science or techy if it weren't for the FIRST team. They were exposed to something they never would have tried, and very likely they wouldnt have touched the robot had it been a co-ed team. But because it was all girls, and they had only 3 seniors, they were all very involved. I was impressed, and convinced that any style of FIRST team can do wonders for its students.

And also, the team that was all girls from 1547 are from Whitby, Ontario, which their school has another team that is both male and female egibile. This further reinforces that they are trying to tell people that girls can do the same as guys.
And Im not sure where you get this, the Trafalgar Castle School (http://www.castle-ed.com/) is an all girls school. If you are talking about 1075 (Sinclair Secondary School (http://sinclair.ddsbschools.ca/) - a different school), I don't believe the two are affiliated, just both happen to be listed from Whitby ON (though I could be wrong). I doubt these teams were created to offset eachother, I believe they are just a result of the makeup of the schools they are centered in.

For those of you "against" all girls teams... I would highly suggest you go talk with some of these girls that are on these teams. Contrast that with some of the girls on your own team or other teams, and you might see the value that both types of teams provide.

Lledargo

04-04-2011, 11:26

If you can find the transcript of where Dean has said that exclusive or all-girls teams are wrong, I'd be interested to re-read it. I've listened intently to every one of Dean's speeches for 16 years, and I never heard anything discouraging exclusive or all girls teams. I remember him saying at champs (maybe 2 years ago) teams without mentors are missing out... but I never remember anything about exclusive teams.

To a point made earlier... there ARE all male teams. And just like all female teams, often the reason is because of school. An all boys catholic school simply isnt going to permit girls on the team. Just like an all girls school won't have boys on the team.

Firstly, I personally disagree with all exclusive teams, not just all girls teams, as they are no worse that a team that is all boys.

Secondly, I never said that Dean said All Girls teams are bad, but rather that I seem to remember that he has said FIRST is to inspire innovation in youth, and teach people how to work in todays growing diverse society. Excluding people of a different demographic creates less chance for major disagreements, and less opportunity to learn how to deal with such situations.

I also understand that many all boys, or all girls teams are started at a school where it is all boys or all girls. However I also disagree with all boys or all girls schools regardless of their involvement in FIRST.

I have said multiple times now, that I understand why FIRST should not discourage exclusive teams. If FIRST begins to discourage such teams then people involved on those teams will lose the chance to learn all of the other important skills they could have gained.

Jon Stratis

04-04-2011, 12:12

Secondly, I never said that Dean said All Girls teams are bad, but rather that I seem to remember that he has said FIRST is to inspire innovation in youth, and teach people how to work in todays growing diverse society. Excluding people of a different demographic creates less chance for major disagreements, and less opportunity to learn how to deal with such situations.

Clearly you've never worked with an all girls team :) Our team has had some major disagreements over the past 5 years, and the students have learned a lot from them. The biggest was probably after kickoff in 2008 - the team was completely split 50/50 on what direction to go, and it was a huge, emotional discussion. We helped them learn, however, that there was a middle ground. That they could work towards a compromise that would make everyone happy and we ended up with a great robot that year.

You don't avoid any disagreements by being in an all girls or all boys team. Working with my team, I've come to see that it really doesn't matter what the make up of the team is - same gender, mixed gender, same ethnicity, mixed ethnicity, whatever. In the end, it's all about the engineering process. Sex and ethnicity of your coworkers simply doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is what they are capable of doing, and you judge that on an individual basis. If you are finding major disagreements arising from working with a mixed group, then your group really isn't getting it. They aren't focused on the important aspects of FIRST.

Lledargo

04-04-2011, 16:11

Clearly you've never worked with an all girls team :)
You are correct... I find that tends to be true for all male students. :p However, I will admit that I have never worked with an all boys team either.

You don't avoid any disagreements by being in an all girls or all boys team. Working with my team, I've come to see that it really doesn't matter what the make up of the team is - same gender, mixed gender, same ethnicity, mixed ethnicity, whatever. In the end, it's all about the engineering process. Sex and ethnicity of your coworkers simply doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is what they are capable of doing, and you judge that on an individual basis. If you are finding major disagreements arising from working with a mixed group, then your group really isn't getting it. They aren't focused on the important aspects of FIRST.

I understand what you are saying, It is true that anytime you get 2 or more people working together their is potential for a conflict. I suppose that while you may have more conflict and learning experience in a more diverse team, there is still plenty to disagree about and plenty of chances to learn how to deal with such situations.

however, I still do not completely support exclusive teams. As, the people being excluded are missing out on the learning experience simply because of their demographic. So I would like to ask, is it common for exclusive teams to help mentor, ore even start co-ed teams?

Jon Stratis

04-04-2011, 17:02

Lledargo - our team has mentored a few co-ed teams, most notably the Firebears from Roseville HS. In addition to providing any help their rookie year, we've coordinated with them on scouting and had them in to our build space when some of our equipment was useful for them. This year, we even shared a bus with them when heading up to the Lake Superior Regional.

In addition, it's important to keep in mind that most teams are, to some degree, excluding people. Every school team naturally excludes people who don't go to their school, denying any home-schooled children in their district a chance to participate. Likewise, the Robettes, coming from Convent of the Visitation HS (an all-girls catholic school), only accept students from their school. Their "brother school", St. Thomas, has a separate EV car team, but has thus far decided not to be involved in FIRST, preferring to focus on what is already offered.

The fact that the Robettes are an all girls team really doesn't affect how they interact with other teams (although we've seen cases where it affects how other teams interact with them, and not in a positive way). We work with other teams just like anyone else. We have great relations with many teams in the area. This past year, we presented at the annual Minnesota Splash event.

Madison

04-04-2011, 17:56

however, I still do not completely support exclusive teams. As, the people being excluded are missing out on the learning experience simply because of their demographic. So I would like to ask, is it common for exclusive teams to help mentor, ore even start co-ed teams?

There is, thus far, no evidence that any all-male or all-female teams have been formed instead of a "co-ed" team nearby. Consequently, nobody is being excluded or denied an opportunity to participate because of their gender in a manner that is more meaningful than someone that lives in New Jersey being "excluded" from being a member of a new team in Washington.

These teams create new opportunities for students to participate in FIRST programs that did not previously exist because the number of teams continues to grow year over year.

Ignoring all of that -- FIRST does not exist in a bubble. The people you're defending in your argument against exclusion -- males -- are given far greater access to opportunities and encouragement that are similar to what FIRST provides than women are.

Alan Anderson

04-04-2011, 18:58

Every school team naturally excludes people who don't go to their school, denying any home-schooled children in their district a chance to participate.

I apologize for the tangent, but I had to correct this. The TechnoKats team doesn't require that its members attend Kokomo High School. We have an explicit policy that anyone is welcome, both home-schooled and from other area schools that lack an FRC team. All we ask is that a parent be an active participant as well.

Molten

04-04-2011, 20:26

I apologize for the tangent, but I had to correct this. The TechnoKats team doesn't require that its members attend Kokomo High School. We have an explicit policy that anyone is welcome, both home-schooled and from other area schools that lack an FRC team. All we ask is that a parent be an active participant as well.

I haven't been involved with 1766 in a while so I can't say what the rules are currently. But we have always been of the mindset that anyone that wanted to join, could. We actively wanted students from nearby schools to join.(They were reluctant due to the driving distance, but we did succeed with a couple of students.) I imagine if someone from California wanted to be on the team, we would have let them. Admittedly, they would have had limited access to the robot unless they was willing to travel.

vhcook

05-04-2011, 00:20

The goal of FIRST is to inspire innovation, and teach students how to work in todays rapidly growing society. Exclusive teams only let people work with others of the same demographic, meaning they will not have to try as hard to learn to work with others that they may disagree with. which is not only counterproductive to the FIRST philosophy but to society in general.

I'm going to have to jump in and disagree you here. Exclusive teams work with other demographics at competition. Working with people from other demographics that you may disagree with is pretty much the definition of the alliance system for matches, complete with occasionally incompatible goals.

I haven't worked with any of the other all-girls teams (or if I have, I didn't notice they were all girls), but I've been to several competitions with the Robettes. They spend as much time working with other teams as anyone else (and are generally wonderful to work with). The all-girl teams get plenty of exposure to other demographics.

Dancin103

05-04-2011, 10:48

Every school team naturally excludes people who don't go to their school, denying any home-schooled children in their district a chance to participate.

This isn't necessarily true. There are a lot of teams in the PA area that have teams that are comprised of students that attend different high schools. My team has had students from other schools. There are a few large teams that I can think of off the top of my head that aren't affiliated with a school and are comprised of a copious number of surrounding high schools. Two teams that I can think of are MOE (from Delaware and the surrounding areas), and Exploding Bacon (from Winter Park, Florida).

If you took a poll of how many teams are one high school, you would be surprised as to how many are actually multiple schools coming together.

Cass

sithmonkey13

05-04-2011, 23:06

An all boys catholic school simply isn't going to permit girls on the team.

False: 1178, D.u.R.T. is primarily from an all boys Catholic high school (De Smet Jesuit High School) but we allow girls in from the other high schools that do not have teams but want to participate. Are there less girls than guys? Yes (3 girls this year on a ~30 member team).

From personal experience, I believe that gender separate teams can actually convince more people to join. (One girl who went to a meeting in the pre-season to see what our team was like hid herself for 15 minutes waiting for the rest of the girls to arrive because she was scared of all the guys. After that meeting she never returned (We were told this one reason, but there were also other reasons that we were told were there, just not what they were.) If she found an all girls team and therefore learned all about FIRST, that is beneficial to the philosophy of FIRST, not detrimental.)

Just my thoughts on a complex issue.

CallieJ

05-04-2011, 23:45

Kims Robot

06-04-2011, 08:11

False: 1178, D.u.R.T. is primarily from an all boys Catholic high school (De Smet Jesuit High School) but we allow girls in from the other high schools that do not have teams but want to participate. Are there less girls than guys? Yes (3 girls this year on a ~30 member team).

Thats pretty cool! Im glad to hear that. I know in general (mostly for liability), most teams only allow students from their own schools as has been pointed out. However, there are always exceptions, and I guess I should have added the words "In general" to my statement :) Glad to see an all boys school allowing girls to participate!

There are always exceptions... 1511 has had students from other schools, one of the first of which was a girl who came to our team because we had some extra seats to attend a few competitions our rookie year and offered them to local teams. When we met this girl, she told us that her mentor had told her that she should stick to their spirit and chairmans teams because she was a girl & a cheerleader. When she really wanted to do the engineering work. She was frustrated, and ended up joining our team. We also "adopted" the students from team 73 one year when they lost their sponsorship. Its a bit of a headache to work out the liability & insurance stuff, but it can be worth it, and I'm glad to see other teams do it.

But sithmonkey's story is very true... I've even seen it on teams where the girls are from that school... the girls (in general :)) aren't as comfortable as the boys at jumping right in, and if they don't have a friend or two that they are close with, they often leave the team, regardless of their interest. Heck, when I joined, it was only because 3 of my good friends were joining (one of which was another female a year older than me).

Rachel2177

07-04-2011, 15:51

How many girls actually go through the FRC program and decide on an engineering major? How many women that had their start in these robotics programs have gone on into fields of math, science, and engineering?

I welcome posts from the women who are scientists and engineers and who read CD. Share your thoughts.

Jane

Well I figured it was time to share my piece...

I was a junior in high school when my school started our FIRST robotics team, The Robettes. Up until then, I was planning on going to college for psychology. After I joined FIRST, like everyone else who is on a team, it became my life and I knew engineering was what I wanted to do with the rest of my life. You know the saying "Do what you love and you will never work a day in your life," well that is how I feel.

I did not decided go to a "regular" college, I went to an engineering and science college. So if I changed my mind about my major I would have to leave because they offer math, science, and engineering degrees. I am now a junior working toward my electrical engineering degree.

Let me just say if I wasn't a member of the Robettes AND I didn't attend an all-girls high school, I probably wouldn't have made it two semesters. None of my college classmates would let me do any work in our labs and they always dismissed what I would say. Unfortunately for them, they didn't realize that because of the Robettes I knew I was good at engineering and I knew what I was talking about and I wasn't going to let them walk all over me. It's horrible, but the girls that didn't make it just couldn't stand the way they were being treated and decided to switch to a different field completely (hey if they were getting treated like this is college, they really weren't looking forward to working in the real world).

As a freshman in college I got an internship with EchoStar. The man who hired me said he knew I haven't taken any core EE classes yet, but he was familiar with FIRST and knew I could handle it. As a sophomore in college I got a internship with John Deere. They hired me because of my previous engineering experience and my GPA. And as I type this I am currently in Atlanta doing a co-op with Johnson & Johnson. If it wasn't for FIRST getting the ball rolling none of this would be happening for me.

I am one of only 6 girls in my college's whole Electrical and Computer Engineering Department. I was the only freshmen in my class to get an internship and I was the only sophomore in my class to get over 8 internship offers and work for a huge engineering company. Junior year I got over 15 internship and co-op offers. Please don't take this as me bragging, take this as if I couldn't be involved in FIRST because single gender teams weren't allowed look at all the opportunities I would miss out from.

Sexism never goes away. And maybe I missed over it, but I didn't see any females in this thread agree that single gender teams shouldn't be allowed. Because until you are a female in a male dominated interest, you honestly don't know how hard it is for us and all we have to go through.

Dancin103

07-04-2011, 17:14

Sexism never goes away. And maybe I missed over it, but I didn't see any females in this thread agree that single gender teams shouldn't be allowed. Because until you are a female in a male dominated interest, you honestly don't know how hard it is for us and all we have to go through.

Rachel, I think that what you are doing is absolutely awesome. I, like you, am in a male dominant field at my college, however, I could easily change that. I love math and I always will. Thank you for sharing your story and your words of encouragement.

The statement that I quoted from Rachel is entirely true. Rachel, thank you again for your thoughts. They go along way. In today's society, wait almost always, it has been difficult for females to dominate in this male dominent world.

Cass

Molten

07-04-2011, 19:46

None of my college classmates would let me do any work in our labs and they always dismissed what I would say.

Just to be clear, this isn't sexism. I think this has happened in most group oriented situations I've seen. I've kind of learned not to trust a person until I've worked with them a while. I take my hat off to anyone that can go with college without becoming a bit this way. I'm not saying the rest of your points aren't valid, but I just don't want you to think that the sole reason you was treated this way was because you was a girl. At my college, you'd probably be treated this way until you've proven that you know what your doing. After that, they are more likely to let you do more(if not most) of the work without issue.

Madison

07-04-2011, 20:13

Just to be clear, this isn't sexism. I think this has happened in most group oriented situations I've seen. I've kind of learned not to trust a person until I've worked with them a while. I take my hat off to anyone that can go with college without becoming a bit this way. I'm not saying the rest of your points aren't valid, but I just don't want you to think that the sole reason you was treated this way was because you was a girl. At my college, you'd probably be treated this way until you've proven that you know what your doing. After that, they are more likely to let you do more(if not most) of the work without issue.

You can't POSSIBLY know that it is or isn't sexism. That you've experienced or seen something similar happen in other circumstances has absolutely NO bearing on her experience and it should not be used to invalidate what she's written.

This thread. Argh.

Chris is me

07-04-2011, 22:36

Just to be clear, this isn't sexism.

You can't be serious.

Molten

07-04-2011, 23:52

You can't be serious.

I just wanted to bring to light that not everything bad that happens to a woman is sexism, nor everything that happens to a minority is racism. I found she had many good points, but being ignored and not trusted is kind of a part of being new to lab groups. I suppose I should have said "This isn't necessarily sexism." Its true that in her circumstance that particular school might be completely trusting of anyone but women. Its true I couldn't know whether or not that is true and if that is the case I completely retract my statement with full apologies. However, my intended point stands true. This could have just as easily been the fact that they didn't know her. I've been burned many times for trusting a stranger with my grade and am unlikely to let that happen again.

Sorry for the tone I've had a really bad week. I could have definitely worded my thoughts better. However, I do believe that it is often easy to jump to the conclusion that the reason a person is treating "me" a particular way is because of X. Honestly, we can't know why people treat us the way they do unless they tell us. That was the point I was trying to convey. Nothing more or less.

Jason

smurfgirl

08-04-2011, 00:19

I'm surprised that anyone could think that an all-girls team isn't a positive force in their community - an all-girls team, like any other FIRST team, provides students with hands-on experience, role models, development opportunities, and is generally inspirational. Each FIRST team that exists is something positive, period.

Also, while representation of, opportunities for, and treatment of women in the STEM fields has come a long way, there is a still a long way to go. Anything that promotes women's advancement in these fields and provides young women with positive role models is a good thing, in my opinion.

I'm not really seeing why this thread exists.

Jon Stratis

08-04-2011, 09:41

I just wanted to bring to light that not everything bad that happens to a woman is sexism, nor everything that happens to a minority is racism. I found she had many good points, but being ignored and not trusted is kind of a part of being new to lab groups. I suppose I should have said "This isn't necessarily sexism." Its true that in her circumstance that particular school might be completely trusting of anyone but women. Its true I couldn't know whether or not that is true and if that is the case I completely retract my statement with full apologies. However, my intended point stands true. This could have just as easily been the fact that they didn't know her. I've been burned many times for trusting a stranger with my grade and am unlikely to let that happen again.

Sorry for the tone I've had a really bad week. I could have definitely worded my thoughts better. However, I do believe that it is often easy to jump to the conclusion that the reason a person is treating "me" a particular way is because of X. Honestly, we can't know why people treat us the way they do unless they tell us. That was the point I was trying to convey. Nothing more or less.

Jason

The thing your missing here Jason is that, in her situation, everyone was new. Taking the general ed/freshman classes, everyone is new to the school and the environment. Given that, why should she be excluded any more than others in her class?

I can tell you from my experiences in college... even in my first semester physics lab, my lab partners never excluded me or ignored me. But, we were all guys (seriously, have you tried to find a girl in an Electrical Engineering and Computer Science department?). We were all new to the school, no one knew anyone else... it was a perfect environment to be open to others ideas without the baggage of past experiences and expectations.

I can tell you, without a doubt, Rachael is one of the Robettes all stars. She was the first person on the team who really "got it", and by far the most dedicated. She has personally inspired and drawn in quite a bit of the team, and she's one we still talk about when we're trying to inspire the girls. Anyone in her labs would really have to be foolish not to listen to her.

Finally, a closing thought from working with an all-girls team for 5 years. Our drive team is most often ignored by other drive teams. Not because we don't have something valuable to say, or because our students are timid or shy, or because we've done poorly in the past (highest seeded rookie team, finalist the next 3 years, and winning at North Star this year). Can you explain why that is if it's not gender based?

Molten

08-04-2011, 18:04

The thing your missing here Jason is that, in her situation, everyone was new. Taking the general ed/freshman classes, everyone is new to the school and the environment. Given that, why should she be excluded any more than others in her class?

I can tell you from my experiences in college... even in my first semester physics lab, my lab partners never excluded me or ignored me. But, we were all guys (seriously, have you tried to find a girl in an Electrical Engineering and Computer Science department?). We were all new to the school, no one knew anyone else... it was a perfect environment to be open to others ideas without the baggage of past experiences and expectations.

I can tell you, without a doubt, Rachael is one of the Robettes all stars. She was the first person on the team who really "got it", and by far the most dedicated. She has personally inspired and drawn in quite a bit of the team, and she's one we still talk about when we're trying to inspire the girls. Anyone in her labs would really have to be foolish not to listen to her.

Finally, a closing thought from working with an all-girls team for 5 years. Our drive team is most often ignored by other drive teams. Not because we don't have something valuable to say, or because our students are timid or shy, or because we've done poorly in the past (highest seeded rookie team, finalist the next 3 years, and winning at North Star this year). Can you explain why that is if it's not gender based?

Honestly, my college must be different because everyone started out rather skeptical of one another. Perhaps the culture difference. Also, I know several girls in mechanical engineering and one in electrical that I share classes with this semester. I can't speak as to the computer sciences as I've not taken any of those classes myself. Note: I'm not saying they aren't vastly outnumbered.(I'd estimate them being outnumbered 20 to 1 but thats really more a guess then anything else as it varies alot between classes and semesters)

As far as the reason your team is ignored: I thought back to when I was a student on 1766 and alot of teams are so focused on their own team that they tend to ignore whats going on around them. I'd estimate that this makes up some fraction of the reason people aren't paying attention to your team. I would not estimate it to be the only reason. Just part of it. Thats the thing, there are too many variables to something like this. Can you really tell me that the only reason people are ignoring you is due to your team gender? I have no doubt that it isn't the reason for some teams. I just suggest we don't paint with such a big brush. Some of those teams ignore you for other reasons and don't deserve to be assumed to be sexist. Inconsiderate, yes but please don't assume intentions unless the person tells you or there has been a strong trend with that individual person.

ghandler94

09-04-2011, 22:01

I go to an all-girls school and hate that aspect of it. Personally, it doesn't work for me. It is not anything like the real-world and there is an obvious lack of balance in the classroom.

I am on an all-girls rookie team because it is the only team I am eligible to join. It came as a shock how much I appreciate the inspiration it has given me. The extreme lack of women in STEM careers is astounding and from visiting FIRST teams with one or two girls and seeing how ostracized they are, I've really grown an appreciation. I'm fairly assertive and would not let anyone, boy or girl, have a demeaning effect on me. But, it's still been a really awesome experience to have!

Katie_UPS

10-04-2011, 00:07

As far as the reason your team is ignored: I thought back to when I was a student on 1766 and alot of teams are so focused on their own team that they tend to ignore whats going on around them. I'd estimate that this makes up some fraction of the reason people aren't paying attention to your team. I would not estimate it to be the only reason. Just part of it. Thats the thing, there are too many variables to something like this. Can you really tell me that the only reason people are ignoring you is due to your team gender? I have no doubt that it isn't the reason for some teams. I just suggest we don't paint with such a big brush. Some of those teams ignore you for other reasons and don't deserve to be assumed to be sexist. Inconsiderate, yes but please don't assume intentions unless the person tells you or there has been a strong trend with that individual person.

I get that you dislike the "oh, I'm a girl, people don't listen". I do too. I want to rise above it, not complain about it. But you're coming off as if to say that it is us (girls) overreacting... but lets be honest. It DOES happen. In actually strategy meetings, team's aren't THAT absorbed in themselves. In the lab, she didn't just happen to be ignored. Sure, we shouldn't assume... but we are just as capable as you are to drawing logical conclusions.

Molten

10-04-2011, 00:33

I get that you dislike the "oh, I'm a girl, people don't listen". I do too. I want to rise above it, not complain about it. But you're coming off as if to say that it is us (girls) overreacting... but lets be honest. It DOES happen. In actually strategy meetings, team's aren't THAT absorbed in themselves. In the lab, she didn't just happen to be ignored. Sure, we shouldn't assume... but we are just as capable as you are to drawing logical conclusions.

I don't believe you(or anyone) are overreacting when you are being unfairly discriminated against. It shouldn't happen at all, but it does. My main point is that nobody can really tell right away what a persons motives are. It takes a little bit of time to really know the person before you can tell exactly what their motives are. Afterall, what happened to innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? I'm not saying there aren't signs that it might have been discrimination. But I definitely believe there's plenty of room for reasonable doubt. I'm sure I've done many things with respect to a minority that would seem racist if you didn't wait to see that I do it with people of my same race. Perfect example, when I get into a group that requires presenting I look each member of my team in the eye and ask how they are at public speaking. I've had some minorities react as if I'm asking because they are a minority, but I assure you I ask the same thing to anyone that I haven't seen do a presentation. I know my example isn't as bad as ignoring a lab partner but it was honestly the most illustrative example I could come up with at the moment.

Jason

Tristan Lall

10-04-2011, 02:09

My main point is that nobody can really tell right away what a persons motives are. It takes a little bit of time to really know the person before you can tell exactly what their motives are. Afterall, what happened to innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? I'm not saying there aren't signs that it might have been discrimination.As you're mentioning this, I thought I might add that discrimination is not necessarily a conscious process. Implicit bias occurs on a subconscious level, without the need for an articulable logical justification. (Explicit bias is where motives enter the picture.) This makes the problem of identifying and confronting discrimination harder: if someone is not cognizant of a another person's implicit bias that leads to discriminatory behaviour, it could be overreaching to ascribe that behaviour to a conscious motive.

Incidentally, the "innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" stuff is a common law standard of proof for criminal charges. Technically, it's not applicable to the civil realm, where discrimination tends to be litigated. If you apply that as your personal standard of proof when judging discrimination, that's fine—but there's no legal requirement to apply that standard on a personal basis.

pdepra

23-04-2011, 01:05

The mission of FIRST is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders... As long as any team does that, how can it be counterproductive?

I think that if there are young women out there who are inspired by being on "all-girls" team, and they would not have joined a co-ed team, then YAY!!

prettycolors91

23-04-2011, 21:59

I suppose that I will add my bit about females and FIRST as well.

I began my experience with FLL in middle school, working on a co-ed team with both female and male mentors. We were all encouraged to work on all parts of the team, and for a time I worked in "programming" (well, it felt like programming to a seventh grader). Personally, I took to the research portion of the team. Working on Mission: Mars provided a unique opportunity to hone scientific research skills as well as presentation/communication abilities.

I moved onto the HOT team, and was there for my entire high school career. I moved on to become the Scouting Captain, and worked heavily in the Chairman's subgroup. As a female, I have caught some flack from other female students to "defaulting" to these positions, and falling into female "stereotypes". I find it unfortunate that these aspects of the team are regarded as easier, or below the harder engineering roles. FIRST has taught me that there are many aspects to a successful team of people. You can have a fantastic robot, but without proper scouting and communication skills, it's very difficult succeed (especially in Michigan).

I'm currently and Environmental Science major at Michigan Technological University. If any of you know of MTU, you'll know that to begin with, the ratio of males to females is currently about 3:1. This gap widens once you move into the harder STEM fields of the university. Being in FIRST gave me the ability to look at people's abilities, rather than their gender. I have also found that being confident in your abilities can go a long way in terms of respect. If you approach a group situation comfortable with what you can do, then you'll have a much different experience than if you go in doubting yourself. FIRST teaches girls that they ARE smart and that they CAN do these things.

I'm taking over the Robotic Systems Enterprise next academic year, as one of the few girls in the group. We run three FRC teams in the area (857, 2586, 3771), a few FLL teams, support a SailBOT collegiate level team, and hope to be involved in the FIRST collegiate pilot program next year. FIRST gave me the leadership experience needed to take over a position like this, and I am SO grateful to the program for that.

As a result of my experience in FIRST and the Robotic Systems Enterprise, I've been offered an internship from General Motors this summer. I'll be working on reducing the environmental impact of my assigned plant. STEM careers emerge in all sorts of places...

In closing, I guess it doesn't matter if there are exclusive teams or not. As long as students are all given an opportunity in an area to participate, then an all girls or all boys team can sometimes be the best solution for an individual.

Ankit S.

23-04-2011, 22:53

All girl teams are great, unless they are made by a co-ed high school with no alternative for the boys.

If an all girls(boys) team was created by my school, and I(or a girl) was given no where to go to, then that would be sexist. However, all girl teams that are created with all brother teams, or created by an all girls school, are fine. In fact, they are better for the girls because they are given more chances to work on the robot. Many of the girls I know are shy and would give up their spot for a boy or someone else so having a single sex team is good.

Becca334

24-04-2011, 23:20

I have read through all of these posts and was unsure on my stance on this topic until after I read many of your ideas.

I have been involved with FIRST for around the past 5 years. I was on FLL for all of my time in middle school where the environment was very encouraging. I would say our team was even 50-50 in terms of gender. I went on to learn the "programming" on that team and truly enjoyed it because of all the support and how much I learned. I can truly say being involved in FIRST during middle school is what makes me so interested in the STEM field today.

I am now a sophomore in high school and have been part of Team 334 since the first week of my freshman year. After learning about programming from FLL, I went on to learn Java from a fellow teammate and become one of the team's 2 programmers. My team consists of around 50 students, and I'd say we have around 4-6 female members, with only 2 actually working with the robot. I've had many of the boys on my team talk to me and try to convince me that because I am a girl I can not do as well as they are. That actually made me want to do more and I am now the only one on my team who does electrical. Not only that but I also run the team's website and also edited the chairman's video. This year I went on to be one of the first female drivers our team has ever had, and yes there were a lot of sexist comments about me driving the robot.

The two different FIRST teams I've been on have had two completely different environments. I can say that in the end we should not be worrying about the gender make-up of a team, we should be more focused on making sure that students are encouraged to continue being involved in STEM. I've talked with other girls in my school and some have straight out told me that they do not want to join robotics because they feel like they would be pushed aside because of our 40+ male members.

I do agree though that female engineers are not as common as male engineers, but I'm not sure if FIRST is the right place to be debating wether or not it's 'right' or 'wrong' for these teams to exist. There are organizations such as SWE(Society of Women Engineers) and AWIS (Association for Women in Science) that solely support the advancements of more women entering into the STEM field. I personally started a SWE club in my school to hopefully get more girls to realize that STEM fields are not just for guys.

In short summary: Girls are often discouraged on co-ed teams, and I've been the victim of that first hand; too many times to count. Never being a part of an all-girls team, I can not comment on what it's like for them. But no matter what your team make-up is, FIRST should be more focused on an environment that is encouraging you to learn more in the STEM field. Some may say that an all-girl team is a better environment, some may disagree. In the end, it's your own personal opinion on the pros and cons on these types of teams.

erobo2520

08-05-2011, 22:14

N7UJJ

08-05-2011, 23:12

"it does not allow girls to develop the thicker skin they will need if they want to pursue a career in science and technology."

My daughters went to an all girls school and were on all girl teams. My daughters handle themselves very well in coed society. It would be interesting if there is a study that has examined all girl teams and if there is any difference with girls who are on coed teams. Anecdotal stories are interesting, but not necessarily descriptive of a group.

"girls to develop the thicker skin" I know what you mean, but isn't it sad that the girls must adapt to feel accepted instead of the culture welcoming talented, productive women into the science and technology fields? Perhaps we need to change the culture so that thick skins are not required.

JaneYoung

09-05-2011, 14:56

"girls to develop the thicker skin" I know what you mean, but isn't it sad that the girls must adapt to feel accepted instead of the culture welcoming talented, productive women into the science and technology fields? Perhaps we need to change the culture so that thick skins are not required.

This is the part that I've been confused about for the last 5 years. It's like the FRC program creates a bubble of Gracious Professionalism that is touted, used, put into effect, and mentored while students are a part of the program. Then, as the students leave the program and move on to further their educational goals and establish careers, that bubble is burst. The part that has been confusing, disheartening, frustrating, and very uninspiring, is the role that mentors of teams may play in contributing to the bubble burst. It may be that in their careers, they are accustomed to and celebrate, the tough skinned mentality, projecting the 'deal with it, this is reality' attitude.

So what that does is limit the possibilities that FRC creates among students, mentors, and teams - by helping to maintain the status quo of the work environmental culture and mentality outside of it.

If men are accustomed to behaving a certain way and the women have to adapt to that behavior, that is sending a very clear signal that it's a man's world. If men are told that there are female employees present and to keep it clean - that is still sending a very clear signal. The expectation should be that employees maintain a professional behavior and attitude all the time. Period. That allows for opportunities like Gracious Professionalism, mutual respect, and courtesy to be a part of that expectation, fundamentally.

I'd love to see a button that says: Gracious Professionalism, it starts here. Even better: Gracious Professionalism begins with me - worn by bosses, engineers, VIPs, politicians, and celebrities. That would really rock the culture.

Jane

Siri

09-05-2011, 15:33

All girl teams are not counterproductive to the mission of FIRST but it does not allow girls to develop the thicker skin they will need if they want to pursue a career in science and technology.So I was on a co-ed team, but I'm not sure it influenced much of a gendered "thick skin" for me. Maybe I already had it, but most of what I learned was how to deal with people--lead them, work with them, inspire them--females and males alike. Did the guys bring something specifically guy-like to the team? Yeah, I think so, but I don't think it had an overwhelming effect on my ability to stand up as an honors ME major, lead in AFROTC, or work on rural engineering in developing countries. Pretty sure that was good mentors.

I'd be interested in hearing from the all-girls teams what benefits it's had and whether they feel they've been better inspired. It's an interesting consideration. Has anyone done both?

...and handing one a jig saw does not come naturally to male mentors especially if they have daughters.

This I find a little odd. I've had a lot of men had me jig saws over the years and quite a few of them have a daughter. (One has 3, all of whom he's done the same to.) They seemed quite ok with it, to the point where it sometimes precedes "how do you use this?"
Is this issue more common than I think it is?

Jane: Unfortunately, I think one needs a thick skin to change a thick culture. ...But do I sense an IRI 2012 button project? ;)

JaneYoung

09-05-2011, 15:38

Jane: Unfortunately, I think one needs a thick skin to change a thick culture. ...But do I sense an IRI 2012 button project?

I like the idea of building thicker skills rather than thicker skin. I think there is a difference. Determination is not for the weak or the weak-minded. Neither is being equipped to mentor in what Gracious Professionalism is and what its potential/impact can be to people outside of FIRST. Being capable of doing that in order to implement a change in attitude and mentality is a skill.

An IRI button project = awesome. :)

Jane

GaryVoshol

09-05-2011, 16:01

"Growing a thicker skin" gets tossed about all over the place when somebody really means, "I've been acting like a jerk, what'cha gonna do about it?"

My other refereeing passion is soccer. (Thank goodness FLL and FRC seasons usually don't overlap with soccer season.) There has been much speculation about this video on the soccer bb's lately: http://vgportal.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/video/sport/football/3561034/Lineswoman-Sian-Massey-clattered.html

Sian Massey is the only female referee in the English Premier League. Earlier in the season a promenent TV commentator was fired over his sexist remarks about her. Now this incident - did the player mean it? Was she run over intentionally? Why didn't he at least check if she was OK?

As far as we have come, we have not gotten rid of sexism and racism in society. Hopefully graciously professional behavior can serve to further the process toward everyone eventually being equal, so no one has to be told to "grow a thicker skin."

Jon Stratis

09-05-2011, 16:03

The mission of FIRST is so inspire in students a desire to pursue science and technology. Are girls on co-ed teams inspired? yes, if they can stick around. It is really hard to get both the mentors and the other students to over look the steriotypes our society instills in people. For some reason people are hardwired to protect girls and women, and handing one a jig saw does not come naturally to male mentors especially if they have daughters. So do all girl teams inspire female students better? Probably, but it also does not prepare them for the starck reality that is sexism in science and technology. All girl teams are not counterproductive to the mission of FIRST but it does not allow girls to develop the thicker skin they will need if they want to pursue a career in science and technology.

I think the portion I bolded here says more than anything else.

FIRST isn't about preparing students for the "real world" (even though much of what we do does have direct parallels in the "real world") - Even school isn't about preparing students for the "real world". 99.9% of FIRST graduates aren't going to end up with jobs where they have only 6 weeks to develop a solution to a new problem. Heck, most of them won't even end up with jobs where they get large, unique problems even once a year. For the most part, they'll be taking work that's already been done and expand on it, fix the bugs, and push it to market.

FIRST is about inspiring. If coed teams have trouble inspiring girls, to the point where you feel its necessary to include an "if they can stick around" qualifier to your answer above, then it's not the best medium for inspiring girls in STEM fields. I've seen first hand with the Robettes - girls leave inspired and energized, and that carries them into engineering majors in college. Sure, they meet some of that sexism from their classmates in college, but their experiences on an all girls team provides them with confidence and determination, and they can build that thick skin if they really need to... or they can work to change the culture at their schools and work places by refusing to accept the "norm". Being the best at what you do will overcome sexism faster than anything else.

Finally, if you think all girls teams don't deal with sexism, you clearly haven't interacted with one before. My team's gone out there and proven themselves again and again at competitions, but still they have to deal with poor attitudes from other teams just because they're girls. Not all other teams, true, but enough that girls comment on it. When we talk about possible alliance members at competition, invariably the drive team tells us about teams that treated them badly, who they don't want to work with in the eliminations.

Cynette

09-05-2011, 17:54

I keep reading this thread and each time I ponder giving a response, but I'm never sure where to begin. Today, I'll give it a go, spurred on by the "thick skin / thin skin" discussion.

Why does it matter what the demographic make-up of a team is in FIRST? All girl, all boy, coed... why is that even a discussion? Do we have the same discussion about teams formed with all honor students, or all gifted students, as opposed to all levels of ability students? Should we wonder about the efforts to start teams in inner cities where they will be more likely to be poor and minority instead of affluent and white? And there are schools that have the audacity to force students who want to be on FIRST teams to take a specific course curriculum to be eligible! The characterizations could go on.

Let's ask the same question about those groups. Is it counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST have a team of all gifted kids? Surely they don't need to be be given the opportunity to participate with other gifted students in a program like FIRST? They need to be able to get along with the normal kids to survive in the future, don't they? Aren't there average kids who are being denied participation on a FIRST team if it is exclusive like that?

Is it counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST have a team from an inner city or totally rural area? If they wanted to be on a FIRST team, surely they can move to a school which already has one? The amount of effort expended to have a successful team in those areas is much higher than a suburban school; won't we cause more inspiration if we get FIRST teams in all of those first?

I hope everyone realizes that these are indeed rhetorical questions and that the answer in each of these cases is NO! It is not counterproductive to the FIRST philosophy.

As a engineer who happens to be a female... and who has been an engineer for almost 30 years, I find it rather sad that we still need to have this discussion. I still cannot understand why in the 34 years since I started on my path to become an engineer, it has not become more transparent for young women to pursue engineering as their career choice, or why we have girls in our schools today who are still told that girls shouldn't like math, or why girls on FIRST teams are directed to non-engineering tasks.

Based on my experience with Team 1511 - which is coed, 1 in every 4 of the girls who start on our team has the personal fortitude to push through the circle of boys to become the mechanical, electrical, or programming star. If you get one, she will take at least one or two others with them. If you don't have one of "those" girls, you need something special on tap to push them through that barrier. All-girl teams prevent that barrier from forming in the first place. Should it be that way? No. But it is. I've watched brilliant girls circle around the outside of that barrier and not be able to break through. They don't stay on the team. Is that counter-productive to the philosophy of FIRST? I think it is.

FIRST needs us to use every tool in our arsenal to provide inspiration to as many students as possible. Forming All-girl teams are part of that tool-kit. They work.

A note on the "Thick Skin" discussion: We all need coping tools for learning to deal with jerks. But it doesn't require a thick skin, because jerkiness should not need to be tolerated. I've never mastered the thick skin, but I have mastered handling myself as a professional in those situations. I give credit to my husband as a true gentleman for teaching me those skills rather than lowering myself to take on traditional hardened reactionary response mechanisms.

Molten

09-05-2011, 23:21

From my experience everyone should have thick skin and nobody should need it. We all say stupid things sometimes. We are all jerks sometimes. That means we all need to learn to with each other's stupidity. We need to tolerate each other when people are jerks. This is no excuse for people being that way. As I said, nobody should need thick skin. At the same time, until everyone around you is perfect...you should have thick skin to make up for their faults. Yes, fixing those around you is better. Since that can't be done fully, thicker skin is to help make those moments of imperfection more tolerable.

Jason

Phcullen

28-10-2013, 17:56

Finally, a closing thought from working with an all-girls team for 5 years. Our drive team is most often ignored by other drive teams. Not because we don't have something valuable to say, or because our students are timid or shy, or because we've done poorly in the past (highest seeded rookie team, finalist the next 3 years, and winning at North Star this year). Can you explain why that is if it's not gender based?

for the past 2 (possible 3) years my former team had an all girl drive team despite not being a all girl team and i would be very interested to hear from them on weather they experienced this as well. i no longer believe that all girl teams should be discouraged by FIRST but I do believe that they shouldn't be encouraged. In my years in first the announcement of every all girl team has been preceded by "the all girl team from _______ it's ______" however the only other case i have heard an announcer do that is with a team from a deaf school comprised of all deaf students. if i remember correctly, in all ,my years with FIRST, i used my ears more than my penis and would only consider one of those things a handicap.

my point is; if FIRST treats being a woman as a handicap then its no wonder that products of that organization. will look at girls from all girl teams as being sheltered and less component.

this can also be seen in sports you cant probably build a list of objectively the best mens and womans basketball teams in order. but it would be quite hard to make a single objective list if the two leags never interact

Seth Mallory

28-10-2013, 20:46

The point of FIRST is to inspire students to learn. Different people work best in indifferent ways. That is the reason teams have different ways that they function. Our team is coed and some of our captains have been girls. Since all the students have to take the same training they all use the machine tools. Our school also has many girls on the local Girl Scouts team. I would like them on our team but if they want to be on the Girl Scouts team that is where they belong. At the regonals some of the teams the girls have minor rolls and do not work with the robot. When asked they respond that they do not work on the robot during build. Many of those girls would be better off on a all girls team just to get the chance to learn. Diffrent teams for diffrent folks.

It has been two and half years since I posted on this topic. Last year our drive team was half female including the lead driver. This year we have a female team captain, 25% female members. and one third of our mentor staff is female and she is the lead mentor. We have female students in all of our groups and they are some of our best lathe and mill operators. The Girl Scouts still take many from our school since they take fresmen and GRT does not. The new girls each year have to compete to get on the team the same way the boys do. I still feel that if a girl would feel better on a all girls team then she shoud be on one. What ever inspires the students to learn is where they belong.

Phcullen

28-10-2013, 21:39

thank you for coming back. For myself it was interesting reading though everything again i think we had a pretty good discussion. i cant say that it has compleatly changed my view but it has been molded by a few of the posters. I would now say that all girl teams (again not attached to all girl schools/all girl organizations) are undesirable but necessary in completing the end goal of giving students the fill experience and opportunity that First has to offer. but i do dissagree with how FIRST or at least many people within FIRST talk about all girl teams as if they were over coming a handicap. hopefully in the past two years that i have not been involved this has changed. i think it would be intresting to hear from people again and from new people on what they have observed recently in FIRST and in higher education

xitaqua

28-10-2013, 21:56

I am a Girl Scout Mentor and last year we were the first all Girls FTC team, this year we have 2 Girls Scouts team, and another all girls from an all girls school in St. Louis.

I am also a member of SWE, and yes I am the only male member.

and I have to say it is a different perspective.

Do we have other male mentors mentoring all girls team ?

Cheers,
Marcos.

karomata

29-10-2013, 08:50

I feel that the push to get women into STEM is a great cause, however the methodology being used is wrong.

By excluding males from teams or team activities, you are only creating a split within the entirety of the team. While it is great to get women involved in STEM, pushing out the guys is not fair nor gracious professional.

Another issue I personally have faced, being a high school senior this year and applying for WPI FIRST scholarships, I have found that they are female preferred. As a 9 year FIRST student who has put much time and effort into contributing to FIRST, learning about science and technology, and embodying the values of gracious professionalism, it really grinds my gears at times to know that I am disadvantaged because of who I am.

We as FIRST participants often speak of rising above the opponent instead of dragging them down, however in a competative setting for scholarships, isn't having a bias towards women dragging down the guys in FIRST? Is it gracious and professional to distribute these scholarships with a preferance?

I'm not saying I only got into FIRST for the scholarships, but for how often FIRST speakers talk about having 16+ million dollars in scholarships, I don't think it reflects well on FIRST that some of these scholarships are bias. FIRST preaches gracious professionalism, a belief in the FIRST culture that has allowed all of us to thrive, but I believe these preferences on the scholarships to not embody the FIRST spirit. Even if the colleges are determining the criteria, as FIRST students we are entering a world where not everyone is always gracious and professional, and at times having some influence from a higher power (FIRST) even the odds would be very helpful.

Jon Stratis

29-10-2013, 10:42

For those who don't want to read 14 pages of a several year-old thread, the general consensus isn't that we should form all-girls teams by excluding boys... but rather that there is room for all-girls teams in appropriate situations. If the team comes from a girl scout troop, they aren't excluding boys to have it. If they come from an all-girls school, they aren't excluding boys to have it. If their school has two teams, one of which is all-girls, then they aren't excluding boys to have it.

So when you hear about an all-girls team or talk about it, please don't think it's about exclusion. I have yet to hear about a single instance where an all-girls FRC team was formed by excluding otherwise available boys.

A side note from my team... Yesterday we did a presentation at another local high school to help their team. At the end of it, we had recruited 2 new female students for them. That's just a small example of how an all-girls team can help other FIRST teams!

karomata - Your experience with scholarships is unfortunate, but it's not something FIRST can solve. Colleges try to create a balanced class, since including even numbers of males and females, and including minorities is perceived as a "good thing" (whether it is or not is a whole other topic for another thread). Unfortunately, that means that some under-represented portions of our society need extra encouragement to enter certain fields. Going to school, majoring in engineering, and looking around at your lecture hall of 100 students only to see 2 girls (true story!) is pretty discouraging, and something colleges are trying to change through targeted recruitment and, unfortunately, preferential scholarships. I'm sorry to say, but it's something everyone has to get used to, as our society has decided that diversity needs to be encouraged. If you look at the group I work in, out of 4 people (including me) on my current project, one is female, two are Indian, one is Chinese, and then there's me, a white male. If there wasn't a push in our society for diversity in the workplace (and in colleges), how diverse do you think this group really would be? (Please don't take this as dismissing any of my coworkers, they're all great at what they do and I wouldn't trade them for anyone)

Kims Robot

29-10-2013, 11:41

We as FIRST participants often speak of rising above the opponent instead of dragging them down, however in a competative setting for scholarships, isn't having a bias towards women dragging down the guys in FIRST? Is it gracious and professional to distribute these scholarships with a preferance?

I'm not saying I only got into FIRST for the scholarships, but for how often FIRST speakers talk about having 16+ million dollars in scholarships, I don't think it reflects well on FIRST that some of these scholarships are bias. FIRST preaches gracious professionalism, a belief in the FIRST culture that has allowed all of us to thrive, but I believe these preferences on the scholarships to not embody the FIRST spirit. Even if the colleges are determining the criteria, as FIRST students we are entering a world where not everyone is always gracious and professional, and at times having some influence from a higher power (FIRST) even the odds would be very helpful.

EVERY scholarship has some sort of bias... Are people whining that the ASME scholarship is only for mechanical engineers? Are people whining about the fact that WPI is only providing scholarships to kids that want to go to WPI? Are people whining that Penn State's scholarship only goes to those in Engineering, not business or nursing?? Or how about the Society of Women Engineers, are you upset that their scholarship only goes to women?

As an FRC High School senior, you have the option of over 158 scholarships conveniently located on a single page with details, information, and application links laid out for you. Other students at your school do NOT have that option... are they complaining that they can't get those 158 scholarships because they didn't join the FIRST team? I get that many of these things are things you can "choose" - you can "choose" your major, you can "choose" to join an FRC team or not, but you cannot choose your gender.

However, use your own "rise above" statement and rise above these challenges. Have you applied for every single one of those 158 scholarships that you are eligible for? Have you scoured the internet looking for other scholarship opportunities, read up on how to write a killer essay, used spell check 3x over, practiced college interviews with college graduates, reviewed your applications with your guidance counselors and teachers?

Only 6 of the 158 indicate a "preference for women", however only ONE is exclusive to women, and it is NOT the WPI scholarship. Make your resume and your essay and your interview far more attractive than any of the female candidates offered, and you still stand a shot at getting that scholarship. You are not excluded from it. When you have done absolutely everything you can to "rise above" your "disadvantage", then lets talk.

Welcome to the real world where you have to work for it, it won't be handed to you. Don't use the word "preference" to justify your lack of trying.

xitaqua

29-10-2013, 12:32

Right on !.

Chris is me

29-10-2013, 13:37

By excluding males from teams or team activities, you are only creating a split within the entirety of the team. While it is great to get women involved in STEM, pushing out the guys is not fair nor gracious professional.

It must feel pretty unfair to be excluded from something based on your gender. It would certainly be really painful if that happened to you on a systemic and regular basis, throughout your attempted career in a STEM field. That's what happens to women in STEM all the time and continuously. A common term used to discuss this phenomena specifically in academia is the "leaky pipeline (http://www.rensenieuwenhuis.nl/the-leaky-pipeline-of-womens-academic-careers/)", where systemic discrimination against women gradually and continuously pushes them away from advancement.

This happens on FIRST teams as well, all the time. It's rarely the product of someone actively deciding that women shouldn't be doing STEM work. It's in the little decisions and actions of team members and leaders. Gradual and subtle (or not-so-subtle) nudges away from mechanical and software into communications are far too common. A mentor grabs a handful of freshmen that they pick at random to build a prototype; the coding team works together to recruit a few new programmers; the CAD team leads find "buddies" for teaching. All of these examples are simple opportunities for women to be subconsciously excluded or shunned by not being selected into a program.

On many teams, confident and headstrong women fight for their position as a mechanical leader, drive coach, or software captain. Yet, the women who join the team whom are curious about (but not totally sold on) a STEM career - the people FIRST teams should do everything to inspire - are going to have a harder time breaking into these groups. Lots of people on teams join and show up with neither the requisite skill set nor the understanding of where to go to learn. In these situations, it's harder for women to break into a new job or role, especially when they're surrounded by a dozen of their male peers with more understanding and experience. It's certainly intimidating.

Another issue I personally have faced, being a high school senior this year and applying for WPI FIRST scholarships, I have found that they are female preferred. As a 9 year FIRST student who has put much time and effort into contributing to FIRST, learning about science and technology, and embodying the values of gracious professionalism, it really grinds my gears at times to know that I am disadvantaged because of who I am.

A recent study that I will find and link to after my classes indicated that 97% of scholarships do not prohibit white male applicants (the study was also addressing similar objections to race based affirmative action scholarships, but the point stands as "white male" is a subset of "male). You're complaining about a tiny minority of scholarships that aim to help counteract the many barriers to entry that disadvantaged minority groups face in their attempts at STEM careers.

While few to no scholarships actively state that women are less likely to receive them, in practice that's what has happened, especially in STEM. Not to mention all of the accumulating discrimination and social pressure from before and after this point in their careers. Do those people not get to be upset for being disadvantaged because of who they are? In what ways can we counteract and mitigate this disadvantage without producing opportunities that apply to the disadvantaged groups?

We as FIRST participants often speak of rising above the opponent instead of dragging them down, however in a competative setting for scholarships, isn't having a bias towards women dragging down the guys in FIRST?

Not at all, not even slightly. Listen to yourself. You're saying that not giving men eligibility for 100% of the available free college money is "dragging them down". Giving scholarships to women sounds exactly like bringing the bottom up / rising above circumstance to me.

Dumper FTW 435

29-10-2013, 13:56

After graduating, I started mentoring my old FRC team. I have always enjoyed teaching, and mentoring was no different. Around a year after I started mentoring, a friend of mine sent out an email asking first graduates to come mentor a girl scouts team. The team is very new (I think), and very in need of mentors.

What made me angry was that she specifically asked for girl mentors and said "If you are a guy and REALLY want to mentor the Girl Scout FRC team specifically it would probably be okay for you to come too...". Now I'm not throwing her under the bus, since she was probably relaying this info from the team, or her interpretation of the team's policies, but this makes me very angry.

Why are boy mentors not wanted? Especially when the team is so in need of mentors. I understand that girl scouts is specifically focused on girls, but that doesn't mean that they can't get help from guys! I was in boy scouts for years, and we had plenty of female leaders despite the fact that the children in the troop were male.

Maybe they want girls because they want the kids to have strong female role models? But I hate that idea. Why do they assume that a kids role model has to be the same gender as them? I have both male and female role models that I aspire to be more like. It seems sexist to show a girl a strong female role model for the purpose of saying "even girls can be good at this!" instead of showing them any strong role model to say "this is the type of person you can become if you work hard!".

In summary, boys can learn from girls, so why can't girls learn from boys?

bduddy

29-10-2013, 16:17

By excluding males from teams or team activities, you are only creating a split within the entirety of the team. While it is great to get women involved in STEM, pushing out the guys is not fair nor gracious professional.
Do you have any examples of this happening? As far as I know, all of the all-female teams in FIRST are sponsored by all-female organizations, like the Girl Scouts or all-female schools, that aren't open to boys in the first place.

Phcullen

29-10-2013, 16:42

Phcullen

29-10-2013, 16:49

Do you have any examples of this happening? As far as I know, all of the all-female teams in FIRST are sponsored by all-female organizations, like the Girl Scouts or all-female schools, that aren't open to boys in the first place.
i dont have the numbers but some teams were mentioned earlier in the thread as being started for the purpos of all girl teams. i believe there was one started by CMU. there were also cases mentioned of teams funded by SWE that would have to find all new funding if they chose to be co-ed. there were also cases mentioned more recently of public schools that have both a co-ed and a all girl team.

Siri

29-10-2013, 18:41

Tristan Lall

29-10-2013, 22:20

Do you have any examples of this happening? As far as I know, all of the all-female teams in FIRST are sponsored by all-female organizations, like the Girl Scouts or all-female schools, that aren't open to boys in the first place.
Emery C.I. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=439166&postcount=6) in Toronto. Of course, there was a boys' team too.

Kims Robot

30-10-2013, 10:02

Maybe they want girls because they want the kids to have strong female role models? But I hate that idea. Why do they assume that a kids role model has to be the same gender as them? I have both male and female role models that I aspire to be more like. It seems sexist to show a girl a strong female role model for the purpose of saying "even girls can be good at this!" instead of showing them any strong role model to say "this is the type of person you can become if you work hard!".

In summary, boys can learn from girls, so why can't girls learn from boys

I agreed with you 100% (and I AM a female engineer), just going off my own experience. I was on a team in high school, with only male engineers, and I felt like I learned a ton... though I did push my way in... but they were always accepting and often even turned to me for a lot of things on the team. I originally thought I felt, like you, that it didn't matter the gender of a role model. As long as the role model was equally open to teaching males or females, I felt it was fine. One thing I did eventually realize is that from a young age, two of my biggest role models were my aunts - one of whom was a Geology professor, and the other was a programmer at financial company. From a very early age, I knew that women could do Science & Technology.

So, as I thought more about it, I decided to ask several of the females that I had mentored (and were now in college), and asked them if it had made a difference to them, since they had both male & female mentors... and while they were close to me, they were also close with several of the male mentors. The overwhelming response came back that it had made a huge difference to them (much more than I had realized). Many of them were a bit more "timid" than I was, and to see a Female in engineering running the team from an engineering perspective (not just administratively), it had given them a lot more confidence that they could succeed in engineering roles on the team. It did help that I had great support from male mentors - there was a male programmer on our team who did an amazing job mentoring 2 of them (and all of the students) when they were on the programming team (he is now a WFA winner). I never directly pushed to have these girls included any more than any other student on the team, but I guess just having me there, pushing for everyone to have a role, gave them a lot more confidence. One is off at NASA on an amazing internship, another is traveling the west coast for Toyota, and another is now pursuing Nursing!

So while I don't know that it is anyone's intention to exclude male mentors, I do think it may be more important than we realize to have female role models and females in leadership positions. And as others have mentioned, girls/women tend to take "whatever role is needed" and often on teams that is leading a chairman's group, or designing the spirit items, or whatever... Not that other roles aren't important, but there is a huge gender difference in our field, and its reflective of the pipeline... the pipeline needs to be fixed, and one way people are focusing on fixing this is to have more female role models in engineering mentorship roles.

Jon Stratis

30-10-2013, 10:51

You know Kim, your reply there seems to go along quite well with something my students said way back in the beginning... the specifically asked for male mentors, in order to allow female mentors to work with other teams. They felt that girls in mixed-gender teams could benefit more (ie get inspired more) by having strong female mentors, while our all-girls team wouldn't necessarily need that sort of example in front of them - the seniors on the team would always be there as the inspiration for the Freshmen, and just the nature of being an all-girls team meant that it was easier for girls to be involved with all aspects of the team than on a mixed-gender team.

Andrew Schreiber

30-10-2013, 11:02

If their school has two teams, one of which is all-girls, then they aren't excluding boys to have it.

My personal opinion is that this is just as bad as excluding the boys. It is draining resources from both teams. Plus, what if Team Boys has a crazy awesome mentor but Team Girls doesn't? Wouldn't it be better to have one team and let all the students learn from them? Why double the cost of this program, instead maybe build a great team instead of a pair of mediocre ones?

Course, as a male I CLEARLY can't understand this problem.

Tungrus

30-10-2013, 11:27

This conversation is going on for too long! It is very simple, if you don't like the idea, just don't compete. No one is forced to have "ALL GIRLS" in their team denying opportunity to "BOYS"!

Last year we had no girls in our team, we initiated a scholarship program to recruit young ladies, and now we have two. They bring their own ideas, perspective and dynamics to the team. If we had two more and if were not preoccupied with other activities, our team would be competing.

Chris is me

30-10-2013, 11:34

What's that they say about "don't tell other people how to run [their] teams"?

Don't worry about other teams, they are doing what they feel is best. Live and let live.

Ah, got it. :)

---

Wouldn't it be better to have one team and let all the students learn from them?

It would be better, if mentoring effectiveness was equal to the sum of the intelligence of all of the team's mentors. But that isn't always the case. What if this team discovered that women work best with women mentors? What if this team decided the most effective way to inspire women was to give them a space where they *can't* be co-opted by the men? If studens have the option to do one or the other, all the better.

Why double the cost of this program, instead maybe build a great team instead of a pair of mediocre ones?

You're inserting your value judgement here. The single team might have been a great program for those students that get to fully engage in it. Perhaps those students are disproportionately male even relative to the gender ratio of the team as a whole. Maybe the team will have more on-field success, and one could argue that such success equates to inspiration, but I'd be willing to bet that teams splitting off into co-ed and all-girls believe they are inspiring a net greater number of people, especially those who may need that inspiration the most.

Course, as a male I CLEARLY can't understand this problem.

The concept of privilege is such that those in a majority class are inherently less able to perceive social difficulties that oppressed groups face. It requires active effort to observe as well as listening to the concerns and actions of those groups (in this case, women).

Andrew Schreiber

30-10-2013, 13:56

What's that they say about "don't tell other people how to run [their] teams"?

Ah, got it. :)

---

Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough... allow me to restate in a clearer manner

My personal opinion...

It would be better, if mentoring effectiveness was equal to the sum of the intelligence of all of the team's mentors. But that isn't always the case. What if this team discovered that women work best with women mentors? What if this team decided the most effective way to inspire women was to give them a space where they *can't* be co-opted by the men? If students have the option to do one or the other, all the better.

You're inserting your value judgement here. The single team might have been a great program for those students that get to fully engage in it. Perhaps those students are disproportionately male even relative to the gender ratio of the team as a whole. Maybe the team will have more on-field success, and one could argue that such success equates to inspiration, but I'd be willing to bet that teams splitting off into co-ed and all-girls believe they are inspiring a net greater number of people, especially those who may need that inspiration the most.

Yes, I inserted a value judgement, I'm an engineer. I don't see the value of increasing costs for what, in my estimation, is no performance increase in the system. In my experience teams don't exist in vacuums, given X resources if you have 2 teams sharing those resources you are not inspiring MORE people you are inspiring the same number of people (likely less due to the fact that there's a minimum level of competency required and it's easier to reach that with more resources). I just don't see why splitting already scarce resources (mentors) is a good idea for something that a watchful mentor can prevent.

So let's talk resources - Community has a fixed amount of money, what do you think is a better use of it? Running a second team OR attending a second regional? They also have a limited number of mentors each of whom have different teaching styles and skill sets, wouldn't it be better to let students gravitate towards mentors who can inspire them rather than limit them by gender?

Idk, I just don't see the value added by limiting inspiration on a gender divide.

Jon Stratis

30-10-2013, 14:14

Perhaps I didn't make it clear enough... allow me to restate in a clearer manner

My personal opinion...

Yes, I inserted a value judgement, I'm an engineer. I don't see the value of increasing costs for what, in my estimation, is no performance increase in the system. In my experience teams don't exist in vacuums, given X resources if you have 2 teams sharing those resources you are not inspiring MORE people you are inspiring the same number of people (likely less due to the fact that there's a minimum level of competency required and it's easier to reach that with more resources). I just don't see why splitting already scarce resources (mentors) is a good idea for something that a watchful mentor can prevent.

So let's talk resources - Community has a fixed amount of money, what do you think is a better use of it? Running a second team OR attending a second regional? They also have a limited number of mentors each of whom have different teaching styles and skill sets, wouldn't it be better to let students gravitate towards mentors who can inspire them rather than limit them by gender?

Idk, I just don't see the value added by limiting inspiration on a gender divide.

You're making the assumption that the same total number of students that exist between two teams at the same school would join a single team. From my experience, that's simply not true. If you have a single, mixed-gender team, generally speaking fewer girls join, and less of those that join get involved on the technical side of the team.

How else can you explain the vast difference between two relatively competitive schools: A school with 500 students per grade, 40 members on the team and 3 girls, only one of whom works on the robot, versus a school with 80 students per grade, 25 students on the team, all of them girls (real-life example), and over half working on the robot? What is the mixed-gender team doing wrong that they can't recruit girls?

Being guys, it's extremely difficult for us to understand the huge perceived barrier girls face when joining a team. Most of them come in with less related experience (like working with power tools) than guys their age. They're all inundated from birth with societal expectations pushing them towards female stereotypes and away from technical fields. It can be very difficult for some of them to even admit an interest in robotics, for fear of not fitting in with their peer group. Having a local all-girls team, especially one that's established and respected, can go a very long way towards convincing prospective girls that it's really OK to come and play with robots. That's what happened just earlier this week when my team demo'd at another school and recruited two new girls for that school's team! Those two new girls saw that it really was OK to do admit their interest and join the team, despite not having shown any interest to the team's earlier recruiting efforts.

Alexa Stott

02-11-2013, 04:24

Jon Stratis

03-11-2013, 00:32

*puts on women's studies hat

Outside of cases where the team comes from an all girls school, girl scout troop. or another all girls organization, I actually disagree with having all girls teams. It was discussed in this thread about having two teams at the same school: one for girls and one for boys. I think this sends the message to young women that they can only succeed so long as they are segregated from the men.

It may seem like a good idea in that it would guarantee that the young women on the team would be able to fully participate. Though, as others pointed out when this thread was first started, it's almost like viewing being female as a handicap.

I think it's far more valuable to teach boys (and male mentors) on FIRST teams to value girls' input and to see them as equals than it is to remove girls from the equation entirely by putting them on a separate team. Girls should be in leadership positions based on meritt Segregating the genders just leads to further reinforcement of the that women cannot succeed in a male-dominated field.

Unfortunately, this is not FIRST's problem; it's a societal issue.

What if you have an all-boys and an all-girls team at a school, and the all-girls team consistently does better at the regionals (places higher, goes further in elims, or wins more trophies) than the all-boys teams? Would you worry that the boys might start thinking they can only succeed through segregation? Would you start to see having an all-boys team as a handicap?

It's not about "removing girls from the equation" (that's looking at it from a male-centric point of view). It's about attempting to provide the best environment possible for every student to both participate and succeed. If a team gets so large they want to split into two teams, how do you determine how to split it? In this case, splitting by gender may actually help to encourage even more female recruitment and participation.

I'll leave you with one parting thought... It's pretty much accepted as a given that schools will have all-girls and all-boys programs. Soccer, volleyball, and baseball/softball all come to mind almost instantly. Are we accepting that there is a gender-based difference in performance in these sports? Are we saying that the only way a female athlete can succeed is by only playing with and against other girls?