Quote:
Originally Posted by ThaddeusMaximus
*slow clap* (Bolding is mine.)
Spout all theory y'all want, but we're engineers, and we know that theory doesn't hold up in the real world and we must deal with it. The best way is to practice. The worst thing to do to a budding engineer is to give them a false sense of what reality is. I have never coddled, and will never coddle my students- whether it's about discrimination, workload, etc.
(This is about the direction I feel FIRST is going in in general. I feel there's too much hype and superficiality and quite frankly, disconnect from industry in general...)
Someone mentioned that so many females leave STEM fields after joining. Even if bucking up female involvement is a goal, is false advertising somehow NOT hampering retention?
Personally, I just want more freaking great engineers. I don't care what they look like.
|
This sounds very...weird to me. As a woman and former girl, I can assure you that we do not attend all-girls events in any field and think, "oh wow, the whole field must be guy-free like this!" Trust me, no girl old enough for FRC is ignorant about gender situation in society or slow enough to miss it. You cannot fool me with an off-season. Having an single-gender event, regardless of topic, is the substantive equivalent of hanging up a flashing neon sign that says "we have difficult a gender equality problem in this area, and it won't be easy for you. But we're really trying!" Regardless of whether you think this is trying correctly, there is no universe in which an all-girls event or a thousand of them is false advertising. We understand the way the world works; we've lived here for years regardless of where we go on some weekends.
You are free not to coddle your students, just as others are free to coddle them. Personally I call it incubating, which is also what we do with startup businesses. The goal is not to deceive anyone; it's to build up strengths. It's the same reason you scrimmage with your own sports team in addition to playing others. No, you can't simulate everything you face in a real game (in this case handling professional coed interactions), but you have to work on the fundamentals too. This may seem silly when it comes to coed professionalism, and maybe it is for some people. Maybe your students and potential students are all as naturally talented in this as they are in varsity basketball.
But I am not one of those people. My female students (and some of my male students), by and large, were not those people at the onset. You quoted a fellow mentor of mine from a rather successful MAR team that has a bit of a reputation for good coed work. What Gary says about how we encourage integration is absolutely true, and we're pretty good at it. I should know; I got it as a student! But it's not nearly the whole story of what we provide. In fact as a female former student and mentor, I can assure you that much of the strength of our female recruitment and retention is informal friendships and mentorships within the gender. Our integration work is absolutely critical for making successful teammates and future professionals, but it doesn't cut it alone in terms of retention or recruitment.
My own interactions with male students and mentors would have driven off me the team as a rookie in 2006, had it not been for the other girls and young woman to support me. As a student and later mentor, I have relived that situation over and over and over again. In fact virtually all of the best female students we've ever had came to me at some point(s) (usually as rookies when they were least integrated and most likely to leave) to express discomfit, difficulty interacting, or to quote, "I give up, the guys just won't listen to me." And by that they meant both male students and mentors. Fortunately, I, with my previous years of awesome 1640 'how to work work with guys' experience, would walk over each time and build bridges. But you have to recruit and retain long enough to teach students those skills. You have to practice in the safe zone. If I hadn't built that understanding with the girls--that sort of incubation, coddling, girlfriendship, special treatment, whatever you want to call it--many of them wouldn't've felt comfortable coming to me or even known not to just accept it. I know, because I vividly remember not feeling comfortable and not understanding what I was experiencing--and having an older girl/woman there to help.
1640 does all this without attending all-girls events. Lots of teams do so, and lots of others attend. Our system works for the girls on the team, at least without a comparison. And that's okay. But I have known girls I've tried to recruit or girls that've left quickly because even that first hurdle into the proverbial 'incubator' is too distressing. And sometimes you're inside, but things get to be too much and you want to give up. (This can also involve extra gendered pressures above the standard datum.) If an all-girl event lowers that hurdle or lessens that burden for someone, somewhere, well then I hope they're very a lucky future engineer.
You (general "you") can say this shouldn't be necessary, and I agree. (I fault societal pressures, not the individual girls receiving them.) But even if it shouldn't be needed, what do we say to the girls that would benefit from this event? 'Sorry kid, you should've been stronger?' 'Come back if you don't want to be coddled?' 'No, I'm not going to incubate you enough.' Some people need more help than others. I got what I needed, and instead of walking away ten years ago, and I now have an honors BSME and have coached Einstein twice. You can never know who you're not helping.
For the record, if someone cares to articulate an analogous case of why an all-boys event would be of similar benefit, I say go for it. I'll ref. As I've mentioned previously, this case does indeed exist in some other fields, including nursing.