Recruiting Girls

[waialua359]

I spent two days last week on a very informative Women in CTE/STEM Training Workshop.
It was very informative and the workshop was based on a lot of research and studies done in many Universities across the U.S.

Our program currently falls under a larger STEM (STEAM) Learning Center we established about 4 years. We have roughly 30% girls but most of them are in our Graphics/Digital Media programs vs. Robotics and the Industrial classes.

A couple of things stood out as a recurring theme based on data and research that was presented to us.
1. One way to attract women to your program is to provide opportunities (tasks) that allow them to help others/the world/mankind/etc. i.e. More into concerns of others vs. competition.
2. Women tend to be more perfectionists, which is why many give up on STEM programs of study early on. Men will delve into hands-on projects more, without concerning themselves about getting every single step correct the first time.
3. Men see technology as toys. Women see them as tools.

One thing I thought was interesting in encouraging more women to pursue AND graduate from post-secondary STEM education programs: Provide entry level students with appropriate type courses and support based on their current skill set vs. a one size fit all (you either meet it or fail).
There was an example of an engineering program where the entrance requirement was a specific math course students took the 1st semester. Half the women failed it, and then subsequently quit or changed majors as a result. The recommendation was to provide additional open lab time for supporting women that needed help, and that eventually, more would succeed in completing undergraduate programs.
I know this part is trivial, but I think the point was trying to convince universities that having different entrance requirements and levels of support based on current student skill set is the most critical point in allowing many more women to succeed in STEM eventually.
It was brought to our attention that Carnegie Mellon is one example of a University that does this.
Also, MIT has the highest % of women graduating from an engineering school.

[HelloRobot]

Everyone on this thread has had great advice. When I started in FRC as a freshmen, I was the only girl on the team, besides three female mentors. Not only that; my team wasn't associated with my school, so I didn't really know anyone. I might have gotten discouraged if not for their support. I felt out of place and excluded; I will be the first to say that upperclassmen guys are not the best teachers. But I made it past that. Last year I co-founded a team at my school, and we went to Worlds.

It's very important to have mentors who can make everyone feel included. A lot of times - especially in "cliquey" teams - they're the only ones who see students' true potentials if they're on "the outside." I think it's also important to show teammates that there is no reason for them not to be appreciated. If you're promoting yourself as a supportive group and everyone looks like they enjoy it, then people will want to join.

[Katie_UPS]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

I am concerned that all-girls teams may in the long run be a disservice to both the girls and the boys. The vast majority of female students inspired to STEM careers will end up working (at least for the first decade or so) in a predominately male career field. The vast majority of males will end up working with women; I project that a majority will end up working for a woman at some point in their career. While I've never been one to actively pursue diversity (more power to those of you who do!), when the opportunity arises I'd much rather embrace diversity than to create a segregated culture. Our latest organizational changes require all team members (and strongly encourage mentors) to contribute on both the technical and business side; among the goals is to better integrate the team across gender lines.

When I was much younger I would have agreed with you completely, but after talking to some educators about the topic, I've changed my tune.

To explain why all-girls teams are not bad, we have to understand that -whether we like it or not- girls are conditioned as they grow up to be submissive and quiet while boys are taught to be loud. The first example that comes to my mind is some study that showed that teachers were more tolerant of boys speaking out of turn than they were of girls (they would tell the girls “raise your hand next time” but not say that to the boys). There is a large collection of ideas (and maybe studies) that conclude that men are taught to dominate and own spaces (not literal space/property) and women are taught to observe and take up as little space as possible (again, not literally). Consequently, in many situations boys will take on leadership roles/talk more/dominate the space - especially domains like STEM where men are perceived to succeed at higher rates than women.

All-girl teams work well for girls who have successfully been trained to be submissive and quiet because without boys automatically claiming the space, they now are able to. This builds confidence, which allows them to be successful when they are in co-ed environments. This is one of the underlying principles behind single-sex education for women. Girls aren’t dumb, they know that they will someday be in a co-ed environment. Having a single-sex environment for developing skills, especially in FIRST where they will interact with boys at competition, is not a detriment or making them “soft”, it’s just giving them a safe space to grow their confidence and skill set.

Many girls who say they would hate to be on an all-girls team (myself included when I was younger) are probably not the girls who would need an all-girls team. If one had the right combination of personal traits and external factors (mentors, parents, etc), they will do well, a point I’ve made before.

Conglomeration of studies with summaries about single-sex vs co-ed

Getting girls (and probably boys) on a team: Hands on experience that has little commitment or risk (ie driving a robot, wiring up a simple but cool circuit, attending an off-season) and inclusionary language (there is something for everyone, you don’t need to know anything).


*Side note: These are quick google searches over my lunch, and I’m acknowledging that they are not the best resources.

[Vale]

Originally Posted by HelloRobot

When I started in FRC as a freshmen, I was the only girl on the team, besides three female mentors. Not only that; my team wasn't associated with my school, so I didn't really know anyone. I might have gotten discouraged if not for their support.

This is a very important point.

To me, it seems like a big part of getting girls to join teams and stay in them is having female role-models. Mentors and upperclassmen are great for this. If you have any female leaders, I really do suggest making sure they take a dominant role in the recruitment of girls.

For this past year, my rookie year, most of the executive board on my team consisted of girls, and our lead mentor is female. Having that sort of support early on made my transition into being a part of the team a LOT easier than it would have been otherwise. Female role models are great for support and inspiration. Because of them, I can say with a clear head that I am planning on pursuing STEM in the future.

As a result, I recommend that the team builds up a good support system for girls entering, and promotes girls in being active within the team, to recruit and retain female members.

[221Sarahborg]

Interacting with girls is a big point of it all I noticed. For a few years I've brought our robots to the Girl Scout Day Camp I work at where my name is actually Robot along with another girl from marketing who goes by Pluto. The older girls (4-6th grade) get to spend the night and we go in the morning. We only bring girls including the mentor to strengthen that as well and we set up, talk about what we do, our time restraints, where we're from, etc. etc. Even though they're way too young to join the team there's still FTC and FLL. Parents are there and teen staff that I work with also see it. I was surprised how many people approached me about the presentation afterwards (kids, teens, and adults!). Just getting out there and talking to girls (if not boys and girls equally) then it gets them interested even if it's in the long run.

Supporting girls is an important thing. By showing up with just girls from a robotics team and telling them that they can build something like what we bring in just 6 weeks is really empowering. I also run the only STEM based program on camp, and I could not believe the support I got from everyone and how much they want to push it.

[Tom Ore]

I suspect that having girls on the teams makes it easier for other girls to join and get involved. We seem to get a bigger percentage of girls on the team each year - I think we're just under 50% this year.

For our trip to China this August, 7 of the 8 students that signed up are girls. Most of them were involved in working on the robot or making parts. The 1 boy that's going is more of the artistic type. Just thought that was curious...

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Vale

This is a very important point.

To me, it seems like a big part of getting girls to join teams and stay in them is having female role-models. Mentors and upperclassmen are great for this. If you have any female leaders, I really do suggest making sure they take a dominant role in the recruitment of girls.

I failed to mention this earlier. Absolutely!!
I reflected on our own program and realized we never considered finding guest speakers based on gender also.
Females seeing female role-models is absolutely critical.

[BlueLipstick]

Agreeing with the gist of everyone else's ideas. It's really important to have personal examples. You can say you boy to girl ratio all day, but if you can't say "this is ____, she's our head of programming" or "this is ____, she's the best graphic designer ever", then it doesn't give any reference to prospective students. Being able to point to a role model that shows girls can be successful on the team is a powerful tool. Also, having girls on outreach is good too, because only having boys representing your team gives off the vibe that there aren't any girls. No one wants to be the only one.

[Toa Circuit]

Granted most of our girls are homeschooled and thus really aren't exposed to a lot of stereotypes/don't care at all about peer pressure...
You get them the same way you get other students: word of mouth. Don't treat them different. Affirmative action style programming makes people feel like they're getting on the team because they're a minority, not because they have actual value they can give to the team.

You get more girls the same way you get more boys. Have a solid outreach program that isn't exclusionary, and have a solid team that isn't exclusionary. Don't divide people up into groups. That's all.

Granted, yes, you're going to have to treat all individuals differently, and yes, that means you may end up being more emotionally sensitive to the girls and more factual to the guys. (Of course there's cases where the reverse is very much true)

TL;DR: People are individuals, not collectives; treat them as such!

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Toa Circuit

Granted, yes, you're going to have to treat all individuals differently, and yes, that means you may end up being more emotionally sensitive to the girls and more factual to the guys. (Of course there's cases where the reverse is very much true)

TL;DR: People are individuals, not collectives; treat them as such!

If people are individuals, why is your blanket supposition also that you should be more emotionally sensitive when dealing with women?

:/

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Toa Circuit

Affirmative action style programming makes people feel like they're getting on the team because they're a minority, not because they have actual value they can give to the team.

Did anyone mention lower standards for girls or other minorities to make the team? The question was asked (and is being answered) about targeted recruitment, and a bit about retention. The bottom line is that the culture is skewed to under-inspire girls and minorities to careers in STEM. The mission of FIRST is to inspire everyone who may be called to a career in STEM. Until we've changed the culture enough that there's no bias against women and minorities pursuing in STEM, we have to work a bit harder at inspiring some people than others.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

Also, while I'm certainly a follower of "You inspire your way; I'll inspire mine," I am concerned that all-girls teams may in the long run be a disservice to both the girls and the boys. The vast majority of female students inspired to STEM careers will end up working (at least for the first decade or so) in a predominately male career field. The vast majority of males will end up working with women; I project that a majority will end up working for a woman at some point in their career (indeed, it's quite likely that a woman will be my immediate supervisor within a few months). While I've never been one to actively pursue diversity (more power to those of you who do!), when the opportunity arises I'd much rather embrace diversity than to create a segregated culture. Our latest organizational changes require all team members (and strongly encourage mentors) to contribute on both the technical and business side; among the goals is to better integrate the team across gender lines.

Originally Posted by BSV

So far we are really happy with the model of gender-separated teams for FTC and then merging them together for FRC. It's really let people step into leadership rolls in FTC who would likely not had the opportunity if they did FRC alone -- and then it carries over to FRC. We're only one year in, though. I'll let you know how it turns out a decade from now.

If teams and meta-teams find it useful to separate genders as team members are learning what gender means, that's OK. My point earlier was that by High School, most students understand their gender identity, and we should be moving beyond that towards a team structure that is gender-agnostic. And here's the hard part that I've only learned/accepted in quite recent years: this is true even when the team member's plumbing doesn't agree with the member's identity.

[Gdeaver]

If you want want easy, then have a monolithic team. Same sex, race, culture, religion. Unfortunately, while easy, this will not prepare students for life. In today's society it is a great personal skill set to be able to deal with diversity.

Early on when I first became a First mentor our team tried the girl sub team and boy sub team. Total failure.

Since then my mantra has been, "The girls have to learn how to play with the boys". And just as important. "The boys have to learn how to play with the girls". It is not easy. It is something that requires constant effort ever meeting and intervention to help them work together. On our team the older students really help by their interactions. So it is hard, requires constant effort. The pay off is the power of a diverse well integrated team.

"The girls have to learn how to play with the boys" "The boys have to learn how to play with the girls"

[Ari423]

The biggest problem with recruiting girls on my team is that girls don't want to join because there aren't many girls on the team. We have one (maybe two) girls on my team. We would love to have more, but when we ask girls to join their first question is always "How many girls are on the team?". When we tell them one or two, they immediately don't want to join. Telling them that we have a female mentor doesn't help either.

The problem is it's a self-fulfilling prophecy: girls don't want to join because there aren't any girls on the team, but there aren't any girls on the team because they don't want to join (because there aren't any girls on the team). We have even tried recruiting a whole group of engineering-focused girls at once (to quote our mentor "girls travel in packs"), but we had the same problem, despite our trying to explain that there will be plenty of girls on the team if they all join.

This season we might have a few more girls join, as we are publicizing that the team is more than just engineering, but it's likely we will still have the same problem. It's okay for now (the team isn't 100.0% boys), but if this pattern continues, soon there won't be any girls left on the team, and that is a problem. Besides just not being a diverse environment which isn't as fun, we get less funding and more funny looks when people see that the team is entirely boys.