Sign this petition to allow girls in robotics! (at Timmins Public library)!

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

You might have been intending to ask that question, but what you actually asked was whether Siri M had a citation for the statement of literacy not being a gendered topic. The point being made was one of law rather than of opinion. (Of course, since Timmins is not a US library, this specific piece of US legal code is not completely relevant.)

The "original documents" on the Timmins Public Library web site have been removed, but while they were there you could have seen them by clicking on the link on the first page of this thread. I don't remember whether or not they made clear the status of the program as a reading program. The TPL June 2015 newsletter is still online, with the "For Boys ONLY!" prominent on page 3. The mention of the session on the first page is admittedly somewhat ambiguous as to whether it's being included as a literacy program along with the others listed in the same paragraph.

I'll be more than a little surprised if the Title IX legislation or regulations say anything about whether or not keeping boys literacy on a par with girls literacy during ages 9-12 can be accomplished by investing equal effort into the boys and the girls.

When someone says that literacy among 9-12 year olds is not a gendered topic, I think that is what they are asserting, and I doubt Title IX contains any facts that would support the claim.

That is why I asked my question.

I believe I followed all the links that are in this thread, back when they were live. Nothing I read described the actual planned content of the program. The word "robots", or some variation of it was prominently mentioned in an announcement, but there was nothing I read that gave any more detail.

The robots might be inert action figures for all I know, or they might be pre-made motorized devices students would drive, but learn nothing about, or they might be roles that would be assigned to participants in a role-playing game, or ....

I don't recall anything that said or implied that learning about STEM was either directly, or tangentially the purpose of the program. I think many CD folks saw the word "robot" and assuming participants would be learning STEM material. That's an understandable assumption for CD readers, but as far as I can tell, we don't know if that assumption Is correct, or wildly incorrect, or somewhere in-between.

That is why I asked my question.