Attracting Females to STEM/FIRST

[Taylor]

There is an interesting discussion going on in the I Am Jane Cosmetics thread about a specific instance, early in the process, of attracting females to STEM hobbies and careers. There are also many other threads throughout the years discussing the issues involved in being a female interfacing in what is perceived to be a male-dominated field.
What can we do to, as Dean referenced several times at CMP, become more inclusive? What can we do to become more attractive to females? Should we target specific ages?
By virtue of my own gender, I do not feel comfortable making suggestions here. I'd like to know what you, the Chief Delphi community, and specifically the female denizens, find appealing about the program and how to make this feel safe, comfortable, and attractive to all - especially women.

[ebarker]

There are two great places to start, the executive summary here: http://kellrobotics.org/files/pdf/wp/EWE.pdf

And from the National Academy of Engineering: http://kellrobotics.org/files/pdf/wp...nversation.pdf

But in a nutshell here is a super fast summary answer:

“Why are academically prepared girls not considering or enrolling in engineering degree programs?”

We know the issue is not one of ability or preparation. We know that girls are taking high school science and math courses at approximately the same rate as boys. The problem is one of perception.

Girls and the people who influence them—teachers, school counselors, parents, peers, and the media—do not understand what a career in engineering looks like and therefore don’t consider it as a career option.

High school girls believe engineering is for people who love both math and science. They do not have an understanding of what engineering is. They do not show an interest in the field nor do they think it is “for them.” The common understanding among all audiences is that engineering is perceived to be a man’s profession and there is little to no encouragement for girls to consider engineering.

Professional interests for high school girls hinge upon relevance. Relevance incorporates that a job is rewarding, and it suggests that the profession is for someone “like me.” Girls want their job to be enjoyable, have a good working environment, make a difference, offer a good salary, and be flexible.

Girls and their career influencers need to be educated in what an engineer really does and how they live their lives. When a high school girl asks “what does an engineer do” the answer should not be the typical task oriented answer suitable for investment bankers and personnel recruiters. It should be an example of a real person living their daily life, with an accent on why this job is relevant to them and to the larger community.

In our Chairman's video from 1:20 to 1:23 we try to point out the 'relevance' issue. So far the way we are addressing the 'daily life' issue is by job shadows, networking, etc.

This isn't a complete answer but it is a pretty good start and it works for us. We currently have 20 girls and 16 boys on the team and that has been a consistent ratio for years. A more complete answers is forthcoming but this is all I could collect in 2 minutes.

[Jon Stratis]

Having worked with an all-girls team for the past 8 years, I've had a chance to see some of this in action.

First off, I've heard anecdotally from a teacher involved in FLL that the problem isn't attracting young girls - it's keeping them. From what she's seen, you can get girls involved in FLL very easily, and have large numbers of them. But then they move from elementary to middle school, and lose their connection with the team. They don't have anything at the middle school level to support their interest (at least locally, FLL has primarily been elementary school, and FTC hasn't really gotten big here yet) and so they move on... by the time they get to high school, peer pressure and other interests prevent them from joining an FRC team. As a community, we need to work on capturing students young, and ensure they have a clear path of involvement all the way through to college. Get them into an FLL program, graduate them from there straight to an FTC program (along with all their friends who were in FLL with them), and from FTC to FRC. Don't let there be a gap of a year or two between programs, because that's when you'll lose them.

From my team's experience, sometimes you just need a critical mass of girls. It can be extremely intimidating to be a female walking into a male-dominated team. Last fall my team went to another school in the area and did a promotional demo along side an experienced team from that school. After the demo, the team had a surprisingly large number of girls sign up - the girls just needed to see that they could be successful. They needed to see that girls could be included right alongside the guys, and be just as successful.

As guys in this male-dominated field, we need to be truly inclusive. We need to treat everyone the same, promote those females involved, and ensure we don't leave anyone behind. Girls and boys grow up in very different worlds. I got experience with machines and tools early as part of just being a boy - I build birdhouses and toolboxes in cub scouts, I helped my dad replace light fixtures and run cable around the house, and had all sorts of opportunities to do such "manly stuff". The girls we get in our program don't have those opportunities. We have to teach them how to use a drill and a saw and which way to turn a screw driver.

I think some (many?) coed teams forget this vast difference in backgrounds (and to be clear, the difference can be between anyone, not just male/female... it's just the gender gap that often is most apparent). The boys step in and use their prior experience to push forward and try new things, while the girls get intimidated because they just don't know as much right from the start. We need to make sure we have orientation and training for everyone on the team that starts right from the basics and works its way up. As mentors, we need to constantly push forward those students (regardless of gender) who tend to sit quietly in the back of the room. The biggest success we can have is when a parent comes to us and tells us we truly changed their kids life (for the better), and not just by providing a team, but by the direct interaction we had with that kid.

[wilsonmw04]

Blue Cheese has had some success increasing the number of young ladies into our program. Our strategy is simple: have the girls on the team lead recruitment of other girls. Girls what to hear about what happens on your team from their peers. They can tell a story about girls in STEM better than any boy can.

Have them talk to girls in their classes. Have them lead your recruitment activities. Have young ladies drive the robot in public and encourage girls to drive as well. Once you get them hooked, they become some of your best students.

[Jessica Boucher]

The longer I'm here, the more I feel that the bigger problem is not about attracting them, it's about keeping them there.

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Jessica Boucher

The longer I'm here, the more I feel that the bigger problem is not about attracting them, it's about keeping them there.

The question we're asking should not be, "How do we attract girls to FIRST?" It should be, "What did we do to drive them away?"

There is very little difference among small children with respect to performance in STEM-related subjects and interest in STEM-related topics. As they grow older, they internalize expectations set in our culture for how they should behave and what they should value. At this stage, they are driven away from interest in STEM. This is the problem we need to address; it's the root cause of the issue.

[Tungrus]

We have hard time inspiring girls into FRC. They are smart do good in science and maths, some are better than average males students. For some reason not many are willing event to try...

I don't believe anyone is trying to drive them away...from any team.

[sammyjalex]

Let's bring up what might be a sore subject.

A number of studies http://advances.asee.org/wp-content/...ssue02-p11.pdf show through qualitative survey and observation that girls demonstrate more consistently positive attitudes toward science and technology when applications demonstrate the social value of the field - the fight against disease, geriatric care, managing natural disasters, or modifying the food we eat. The reasoning is consistently used to discuss the rising numbers of women in biology, environmental science, and even biomedical engineering as opposed to the stagnantly low numbers in physics, mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, etc. More recently, we are seeing computer science join the former category.

The example sees girls demonstrate more confidence and more positive attitudes than boys and even draws upon a handful of quantitative measures through which a sample of girls outperform boys.

The examples I chose might sound familiar - these are recent FLL challenges. We lose most girls after FLL. Coincidentally, our structure also changes dramatically in the move from FLL to FTC/FRC, from one in which research into and presentation of "real-world problems" take center-stage alongside the robot, to one in which we pull our hair out over robot performance. (Yes, I know the actual chronology of the programs' creation)

Could this shift be a contributing factor for our struggle keeping girls on our teams? Can we isolate the issue as the prominence of the robot game or the lack of "social change-motivated projects"?

There are a handful of teams that I know have used engineering to address social change and to build beneficial products for their communities in the off-season. I would love to hear from representatives from these teams (842 and the DREAM Act Campaign, 2158 and the knee brace project, 1712 and the mobile inspiration project). Do you have more success keeping the women on your team over teams that place more focus on robot iteration and the robot game?

[ebarker]

Originally Posted by sammyjalex

Let's bring up what might be a sore subject.

A number of studies http://advances.asee.org/wp-content/...ssue02-p11.pdf

I don't quiet see why this is a sore point ? Social relevance is a huge positive factor, well supported by studies. Trying to get the public to under stand the relevance to engineering is a big factor in recruitment and retention of students, especially girls.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by sammyjalex

Let's bring up what might be a sore subject.

The examples I chose might sound familiar - these are recent FLL challenges. We lose most girls after FLL. Coincidentally, our structure also changes dramatically in the move from FLL to FTC/FRC, from one in which research into and presentation of "real-world problems" take center-stage alongside the robot, to one in which we pull our hair out over robot performance. (Yes, I know the actual chronology of the programs' creation)

Could this shift be a contributing factor for our struggle keeping girls on our teams? Can we isolate the issue as the prominence of the robot game or the lack of "social change-motivated projects"?

I think FRC has the right focus on using "team sports" as the proper framework to attract the broader audience. FLL is more like a "game"; a "sport" generates more enthusiasm, and FRC is intended to use that enthusiasm to generate more STEM students.

Participation in girls sports has grown dramatically since the 1970s, to where they are almost equal with boys. One of the most interesting aspects is that girls participation is highest in two sports where the boys and girls train together in the same season track & field and cross country. (Almost all other sports have distinct girls and boys seasons.) So these sports show that girls can be attracted in droves to highly competitive activities.

I think the problem is not the structure of the organization but rather a tendency for who is on these teams now and how that affects the culture of the teams. Making the culture comfortable for girls will make them more happy to join.

[lamk]

In the world of medicine, girls are starting to dominate. Over half of a medical class nowadays are girls. When I went to medical school 30 years ago there is only 25 girls in a class of 150.
However in my girl's high school robotics club there is only one girl, my daughter. That's one of the main reason why I become heavily involved with the club.
Going to the championship in St. Louis has really inspired my daughter. I hope more girls have that opportunity.

[AndrewPospeshil]

One thing I want to point out is that just saying "omg don't just encourage girls to join encourage EVERYONE to join!" is a relatively fair argument for encouraging shy students to stand up and become leaders, but it doesn't help girls specifically at all. Really, most actions that aren't specifically aimed at helping girls join/stay with FIRST is going to lead to a decline. Because gender-neutral recruitment/encouragement really draws in mostly boys, as STEM is still a male-dominated field, and is seen as a "manly" thing. To encourage girls to become leaders in STEM you really have to bring them in specifically.

Now Monochron makes a very good point; recruiting girls because you need diversity or statistics or whatever is worthless. It tells them "we want you only to be able to say we have you, we don't actually care what you gain out of this." Which is very bad, obviously. But at the same time, just gathering people to FIRST teams yields mostly guys in most cases. A masculine-associated activity is not going to bring many women unless you destroy the stigma that building is for men. There is no blanket solution for bringing girls into FIRST because girls are vastly different people and aren't some "species" to "understand." The simple answer is to encourage girls as individuals, and don't make them join because they're female and you need females (for your purposes), but for them to challenge themselves, get benefits that men have that they might not have before, and so they can get the full advantage afforded to them (for THEIR purposes). Even if you just have each girl on your team bring one or two of their friends onto the team next year, this can have a positive effect because these girls will be joining the team already knowing they have a friend or two, and won't be completely alone.

TL;DR: Make girls understand that this is an incredible opportunity. Don't recruit them because they're female, recruit them because everybody deserves to be a part of FIRST.

[Monochron]

Originally Posted by AndrewPospeshil

Because gender-neutral recruitment/encouragement really draws in mostly boys, as STEM is still a male-dominated field, and is seen as a "manly" thing.

I see what you mean with this point, but I would argue that gender neutral recruiting can be just as effective as long as it is done right. Case in point, at one of our recent open houses I made a point to speak with most every girl who came by and give them more personal attention than the average boy. I asked them all what they are interested in, what they like to do, and what other teams or activities they participate in. Basically, I made the conversation much more personal with them and was able to pick out a few of their interests and say "Oh, we really need people interested in <blank> on our team" and list a couple examples of tasks/projects in that area. My goal was to make them feel necessary and needed and that their interests are incredibly valuable to us; that we need their passion.

This is my general approach with boys as well, but I make a more concerted effort with girls because I know of the societal prejudice pushing them away.

Originally Posted by AndrewPospeshil

The simple answer is to encourage girls as individuals, and don't make them join because they're female and you need females (for your purposes), but for them to challenge themselves . . .
TL;DR: Make girls understand that this is an incredible opportunity. Don't recruit them because they're female, recruit them because everybody deserves to be a part of FIRST.

Well said, I think we agree

[Toa Circuit]

Originally Posted by AndrewPospeshil

One thing I want to point out is that just saying "omg don't just encourage girls to join encourage EVERYONE to join!" is a relatively fair argument for encouraging shy students to stand up and become leaders, but it doesn't help girls specifically at all. Really, most actions that aren't specifically aimed at helping girls join/stay with FIRST is going to lead to a decline. Because gender-neutral recruitment/encouragement really draws in mostly boys, as STEM is still a male-dominated field, and is seen as a "manly" thing. To encourage girls to become leaders in STEM you really have to bring them in specifically.

Now Monochron makes a very good point; recruiting girls because you need diversity or statistics or whatever is worthless. It tells them "we want you only to be able to say we have you, we don't actually care what you gain out of this." Which is very bad, obviously. But at the same time, just gathering people to FIRST teams yields mostly guys in most cases. A masculine-associated activity is not going to bring many women unless you destroy the stigma that building is for men. There is no blanket solution for bringing girls into FIRST because girls are vastly different people and aren't some "species" to "understand." The simple answer is to encourage girls as individuals, and don't make them join because they're female and you need females (for your purposes), but for them to challenge themselves, get benefits that men have that they might not have before, and so they can get the full advantage afforded to them (for THEIR purposes). Even if you just have each girl on your team bring one or two of their friends onto the team next year, this can have a positive effect because these girls will be joining the team already knowing they have a friend or two, and won't be completely alone.

TL;DR: Make girls understand that this is an incredible opportunity. Don't recruit them because they're female, recruit them because everybody deserves to be a part of FIRST.

Agreed mostly.
If a team is 90% boys and 10% girls, whatever. If that's the opposite, whatever. If it's equal, whatever. A good program is a good program regardless of how many males or females it has involved. A program that focuses on equality is prone to produce those 'token minorities', and that's even worse since it leads to further enforcement of stereotypes and demeaning of individuals. A segregated approach to recruiting only leads to segregation, in my experience.

[caboosev11]

Probably one method that's taken for granted is telling girls that STEM activities isn't just for boys. Most of the time, they have doubt and would probably feel like there aren't any other girls in the team. Give an example of a girl in the team who has made massive contributions. It does work.