Recruiting Girls

[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.