Girls are still undermined?

[nehalita]

It was brought to my attention that, although many teams have let us "chicks" do the same things the males do, not all teams have changed.

Of course, I cannot point fingers. I have heard more than one story and invite anyone who has a story to share. My purpose in bringing up this thread is NOT to point fingers, it is to bring up the fact that it still happens.

Some girls are still told to go do something "spirit-like" or perhaps loaded with "clerical work" or maybe just pushed away from the mechanical aspects of robotics.

I think it's important to promote the integrated environment where there are no comments suggesting a hierarchy. It's our duty to promote this and make sure we don't know anyone that let's people get away with comments such as "why don't you think of what colors to paint our robot?" or "why don't you advertise for our robot?" -- Many comments are said in jest but there is a line between joking around and limiting girls to what they can do.

I would like to point out that I have seen MANY teams where this isn't a problem at all. Girls are encouraged just as much as boys are and there is a respect between each of them.

But unfortunately, as I mentioned, all the teams aren't like this yet. We all have some speaking up to do, whether it is for ourselves or for our peers. If you know someone who's had to deal with this, please, try to address the problem so it doesn't happen.

What do you think?

[sanddrag]

We haven't really had many girls (1) in recent years but we have 5 now. Recently, I handed a girl a drill and a guy a vacuum. So, I'd say we keep things pretty fair. For example right now we have a couple guys working on a new logo and a couple girls being introduced to electronics and programming.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and last year our only girl did a good amount of machining.

I don't think there's anything girls can't or shouldn't do. I think some of the heavy lifting may be a little more challenging though due to males usually being more muscular than females. (nothing I can do about that really).

[Andrew Blair]

Mmm, I don't know. Alot of the girls we have had on our team recently are the stereotypical girl, where getting her hands dirty is an unforgivable sin. Now don't get me wrong, we have had some girls do wonders in the machine shop, and they are strongly encouraged, perhaps bcause they are so rare. But alot of initial "stereotyping" is done because so many girls are afraid to get their hands dirty. I guess thats where FIRST comes in too. It gives them a chance to learn otherwise remote mechanical skills, and if they choose not to learn then they have other opportunities: Chairmans, animation, and general graphic design.

[Beth Sweet]

Originally Posted by Andrew Blair

Mmm, I don't know. Alot of the girls we have had on our team recently are the stereotypical girl, where getting her hands dirty is an unforgivable sin. Now don't get me wrong, we have had some girls do wonders in the machine shop, and they are strongly encouraged, perhaps bcause they are so rare. But alot of initial "stereotyping" is done because so many girls are afraid to get their hands dirty. I guess thats where FIRST comes in too. It gives them a chance to learn otherwise remote mechanical skills, and if they choose not to learn then they have other opportunities: Chairmans, animation, and our teams personal favorite, flirting with boys at competitions. (ahh! don't lynch me! Some girls) .

Andrew,

I don't think that Neha is saying that there is a problem with the girls who want to be on Chairmans, Animation (I'm ignoring the other comment) being there, but rather the ones with interest in engineering being forced to participate in the aforestated groups and not allowed to participate in engineering because of their lack of the ever coveted Y chromosome.

Neha, yes, it's a problem. That is a big reason that, especially the MI chapter of, the RCU is around. Girls who are not being allowed to do such things can go there to talk and try to learn the skills that some aren't being taught on their teams so that they can be just as competant as their male counterparts. It is support and it is education. It's a safe place, basically. The best way that I know of to deal with a situation where you are being judged as inferior is to prove your competency. CD, RCU and mentors, even from other teams, can all prove valuable resources in this sort of unacceptable situation.

And for the record, if any girls are in this position on their teams and just want to vent, my screen name on AIM is spartychica08. While I can provide little to no technical insight, I can probably at least get you in contact with someone that can help out.

[Koko Ed]

When we recruits kids one requirement to being an X-Cat is you have to do one year working on the robot. Boy or girl. NO EXCEPTIONS. We prefer the kids get the full FIRST experience by trying all aspects of the team. It may not win us a buttload of awards on the field but it accomplishes our ultimate goal of building up that child for the future.

[sciguy125]

Before someone bites my head off: I will be speaking in generalizations. If I say that a certain group does something, it in no way means that everyone in that group will do it. The following statements are also observations, not opinions.

While I'm not willing to say that girls tend toward the "creative" tasks, I will say that they tend away from engineering tasks. Without encouragement and reassurance, I've noticed that many girls that have passed through the team won't do engineering. It seems that they won't do it on their own. I'm not just talking about the dirty work, they don't seem to like design work either. While most of them will do the work, they usually need active encouragement and someone to make sure they keep going. Once they get into it, though, they'll stay with it. There haven't been many that want to take on higher level engineering positions though.

I will also note that with the creation of our administrative branch (marketing, PR...) there was a massive influx of girls. However, they seem to have evenly distributed themselves between engineering and administration.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by sciguy125

Before someone bites my head off: I will be speaking in generalizations. If I say that a certain group does something, it in no way means that everyone in that group will do it. The following statements are also observations, not opinions.

While I'm not willing to say that girls tend toward the "creative" tasks, I will say that they tend away from engineering tasks. Without encouragement and reassurance, I've noticed that many girls that have passed through the team won't do engineering. It seems that they won't do it on their own. I'm not just talking about the dirty work, they don't seem to like design work either. While most of them will do the work, they usually need active encouragement and someone to make sure they keep going. Once they get into it, though, they'll stay with it. There haven't been many that want to take on higher level engineering positions though.

I will also note that with the creation of our administrative branch (marketing, PR...) there was a massive influx of girls. However, they seem to have evenly distributed themselves between engineering and administration.

I tend towards the creative stuff and avoid even thinking of touching the robot. I'm just plain not handy and would do more harm than good but my degree is in graphic design and it's what I do best.

[Jaine Perotti]

I think that the most widespread gender-based problem lies in sparking the interest of more young women in science and technology, not so much in gender-based discrimination. I believe that the reason there is a disproportionately low number of females involved in the areas of science and engineering is the fact that girls are often underexposed to the possibility of a career in those fields. The problem is not so much that girls are being discriminated against, but rather that girls are not receiving enough encouragement from the onset.

I don't believe that sexism on FIRST teams is a huge problem. There are many, many teams where girls are welcome and encouraged to participate. Why then, are there so few females in FIRST?

The real issue is that girls are usually encouraged by society to go into the arts and humanities, rather than into science or technology. They aren't encouraged to go into science or engineering in the same way that boys are - not because society is discriminatory, but because our culture has only relatively recently accepted the idea of women pursuing scientific careers. Society isn't "used to" the idea of women in science and technology, and therefore it isn't "expected". Many girls never really consider careers in engineering because their cultural experience never planted the thought in their minds.

I once asked one of my female students at my summer RoboCamp for Girls session why she had never considered joining the school's FLL team. She told me, "I was afraid it would be ruled by the boys." I have observed that oftentimes, girls in that age group (9-14) are often more reserved and reticent than boys in the same age group. Their ideas are less likely to be heard in a noisy group of boisterous boys, and they are less comfortable sharing them. All too often, the girls have had some sort of a bad experience in school trying to work with a group of boys, and they were shut out. Boys at that age are often bossier than the girls, and can be rougher and pushier.

These social characteristics of this particular age group - when left unchecked - are often what prevents young girls from feeling comfortable embarking upon a new experience that is mostly male dominated. No one discriminates against them or discourages them purposely. Rather, the girls are uncomfortable from the onset, due to social environmental factors. This mindset is learned in their preteen years, and consequently makes many girls rule out robotics in their teen years.

However, it is possible to foster a group dynamic that allows girls to feel more comfortable working in a male dominated activity. Maintaining a team that is well structured and organized prevents members from feeling overwhelmed by chaos (why is it that chaos is often present where there are boys? ). Making clear rules about allowing everyone to share their ideas is very important. Define your behavioral expectations to the kids clearly - make sure that an atmosphere of respect is highly palpable. This allows everyone to feel comfortable working with each other, and sharing their opinions. By keeping a well-run team, you are ensuring that all of the students (including the girls) have a positive experience.

But how does society in general help more girls become interested in science and technology?

I firmly believe that all-girls programs and camps are a great way to introduce pre-teen and teen girls to robotics. I ran two RoboCamp for Girls sessions this summer, and they were a great success. For the first time ever, my school district has female members on it's two FLL teams. Previously, there were none. Because the girls didn't have to worry about being pushed around by boys, they felt comfortable embarking upon a new learning experience. They were able to acquire the knowledge and skills that made them feel less intimidated to join the FLL team. They felt (and were) of equal competence to the boys who were on the team, and they felt comfortable sharing their opinions.

The other reason why girls felt comfortable in the all-girls program is that they could stick with their friends. Girls at that age seem to be more confident about trying new things when they have a friend at their side. This is true for my robotics team also - almost all of the girls on my team have joined because a friend was already on the team.

The bottom line is this:

More girls need to be directly encouraged to become interested in science and technology. More programs targeted specifically at girls need to be put in place. Sexism is not the root of this problem, as it was in the past. Even though most sexism is gone, society still has not recovered from it's effects - namely, that girls are not expected to go into science and technology the way that boys are. By directly encouraging girls, we can hopefully initiate a gradual change in society's perceptions surrounding careers and gender.

-- Jaine

[Allison K]

I had this disucussion with a few of my team members just last week.

At least to me, it has never been an issue on our team. Everyone (both boys and girls) will stand their ground whether the debate is about the robot or about spirit. Maybe we just have a really confident group of girls.

We've almost had the opposite occurance at times. The girls taking the robot from the boys. But other times it will be the veterans overshadowing the rookies, or the outgoing kid not noticing that the quiet kid has something to say. To me it seems to be a matter of attitude and personality more than gender.

[sciguy125]

Originally Posted by BurningQuestion

I think that the most widespread gender-based problem lies in sparking the interest of more young women in science and technology, not so much in gender-based discrimination.

I brought this up before but nobody took up the discussion. (You can ignore my closing comments there.)

This gender bias seems to be more prominant in engineering than science, but I haven't been able to figure out why.

[nehalita]

Just a thought:
After reading these comments, many of which I agree with, I'm making a hypothesis.

There is confidence in numbers.
Boys see other boys doing mechanical work so they feel more invited to do the same.
If there are girls also doing mechanical work, the next girl might feel encouraged, but if there are only boys working on the robot, then the girl would have to break the "invisible barrier". It may be, in fact, that there is no barrier, but to a girl who sees only boys working or designing the robot, they might have a preconditioned barrier of their own to cross.

This could be with anything. What if only girls did the electrical work and always do? I'm sure some boys might hesitate and do something else instead.

Just throwing this out there....

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Originally Posted by nehalita

Just a thought:
After reading these comments, many of which I agree with, I'm making a hypothesis.

There is confidence in numbers.
Boys see other boys doing mechanical work so they feel more invited to do the same.
If there are girls also doing mechanical work, the next girl might feel encouraged, but if there are only boys working on the robot, then the girl would have to break the "invisible barrier". It may be, in fact, that there is no barrier, but to a girl who sees only boys working or designing the robot, they might have a preconditioned barrier of their own to cross.

This could be with anything. What if only girls did the electrical work and always do? I'm sure some boys might hesitate and do something else instead.

Just throwing this out there....

You should try gathering some statistical data on this problem.

Come up with some type of questionnaire, or a poll asking about girl's interest and participation in science and technology. You can distribute it to your school to come up with some small scale results. If you like the idea, I do recommend making a Chief Delphi white paper out of this, and trying to get as many people as possible involved in the distribution of this poll.

I think it would be pretty neat to get something big like that going, because you would have some solid numbers to work off of. You would also be able to see how girl's perspective on engineering varies throughout different regions of the country, and try to draw some conclusions off of that.

What will this do to help the problem? No idea.. the balls in your court for that one. I just think doing something like this would be a worthwhile undertaking.

[KenWittlief]

It would be interesting to check the statistics: what percent of freshman enrolled at engineering universities this year, female & male? It would be a good indication of where we are, and by looking at past years, what is the trend?

One of the great dis-services that happened in the 70s and the 80s was confusing "equal" with "same".

Women and men should absolutely have equal rights, equal opportunities, equal encouragement and at the same time we need to understand and acknowledge the genuine differences in the way that men and women think, feel and interact with the world.

Some of those differences are a result of our culture, and some are due to the way our brains are wired. If you ignore the differences you are setting yourself up for frustration, grief, and in some cases failure.

Please dont take my comments the wrong way. Women can be excellent engineers, and men can be excellent nurses, but men and women are clearly drawn towards some occupations and shy away from others.

If we think that half of all engineers should be women by a certain date in the future, it would be best to first stop and understand why you think that is true?

[Cory]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

It would be interesting to check the statistics: what percent of freshman enrolled at engineering universities this year, female & male?

It's pretty much entirely disproportional. I know engineering schools like RIT/WPI/etc that are well known in FIRST all have extremely small female populations.

I think the gap is very slowly closing, but it's going to be a long long time until it reaches 50/50 or 60/40, or whatever it is that most colleges are at.

[KenWittlief]

my point is: is it reasonable to expect the ratio to be 50:50?

If you look at the present situation, and from your perspective you think it should be 50:50, and that makes you upset or angry, or it pushes you work towards making it 50:50, are you looking at things realistically?

Im only raising the question. What should the ratio be?