Are all girl FIRST team counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST?

[prettycolors91]

I suppose that I will add my bit about females and FIRST as well.

I began my experience with FLL in middle school, working on a co-ed team with both female and male mentors. We were all encouraged to work on all parts of the team, and for a time I worked in "programming" (well, it felt like programming to a seventh grader). Personally, I took to the research portion of the team. Working on Mission: Mars provided a unique opportunity to hone scientific research skills as well as presentation/communication abilities.

I moved onto the HOT team, and was there for my entire high school career. I moved on to become the Scouting Captain, and worked heavily in the Chairman's subgroup. As a female, I have caught some flack from other female students to "defaulting" to these positions, and falling into female "stereotypes". I find it unfortunate that these aspects of the team are regarded as easier, or below the harder engineering roles. FIRST has taught me that there are many aspects to a successful team of people. You can have a fantastic robot, but without proper scouting and communication skills, it's very difficult succeed (especially in Michigan).

I'm currently and Environmental Science major at Michigan Technological University. If any of you know of MTU, you'll know that to begin with, the ratio of males to females is currently about 3:1. This gap widens once you move into the harder STEM fields of the university. Being in FIRST gave me the ability to look at people's abilities, rather than their gender. I have also found that being confident in your abilities can go a long way in terms of respect. If you approach a group situation comfortable with what you can do, then you'll have a much different experience than if you go in doubting yourself. FIRST teaches girls that they ARE smart and that they CAN do these things.

I'm taking over the Robotic Systems Enterprise next academic year, as one of the few girls in the group. We run three FRC teams in the area (857, 2586, 3771), a few FLL teams, support a SailBOT collegiate level team, and hope to be involved in the FIRST collegiate pilot program next year. FIRST gave me the leadership experience needed to take over a position like this, and I am SO grateful to the program for that.

As a result of my experience in FIRST and the Robotic Systems Enterprise, I've been offered an internship from General Motors this summer. I'll be working on reducing the environmental impact of my assigned plant. STEM careers emerge in all sorts of places...

In closing, I guess it doesn't matter if there are exclusive teams or not. As long as students are all given an opportunity in an area to participate, then an all girls or all boys team can sometimes be the best solution for an individual.

[Ankit S.]

All girl teams are great, unless they are made by a co-ed high school with no alternative for the boys.

If an all girls(boys) team was created by my school, and I(or a girl) was given no where to go to, then that would be sexist. However, all girl teams that are created with all brother teams, or created by an all girls school, are fine. In fact, they are better for the girls because they are given more chances to work on the robot. Many of the girls I know are shy and would give up their spot for a boy or someone else so having a single sex team is good.

[Becca334]

I have read through all of these posts and was unsure on my stance on this topic until after I read many of your ideas.

I have been involved with FIRST for around the past 5 years. I was on FLL for all of my time in middle school where the environment was very encouraging. I would say our team was even 50-50 in terms of gender. I went on to learn the "programming" on that team and truly enjoyed it because of all the support and how much I learned. I can truly say being involved in FIRST during middle school is what makes me so interested in the STEM field today.

I am now a sophomore in high school and have been part of Team 334 since the first week of my freshman year. After learning about programming from FLL, I went on to learn Java from a fellow teammate and become one of the team's 2 programmers. My team consists of around 50 students, and I'd say we have around 4-6 female members, with only 2 actually working with the robot. I've had many of the boys on my team talk to me and try to convince me that because I am a girl I can not do as well as they are. That actually made me want to do more and I am now the only one on my team who does electrical. Not only that but I also run the team's website and also edited the chairman's video. This year I went on to be one of the first female drivers our team has ever had, and yes there were a lot of sexist comments about me driving the robot.

The two different FIRST teams I've been on have had two completely different environments. I can say that in the end we should not be worrying about the gender make-up of a team, we should be more focused on making sure that students are encouraged to continue being involved in STEM. I've talked with other girls in my school and some have straight out told me that they do not want to join robotics because they feel like they would be pushed aside because of our 40+ male members.

I do agree though that female engineers are not as common as male engineers, but I'm not sure if FIRST is the right place to be debating wether or not it's 'right' or 'wrong' for these teams to exist. There are organizations such as SWE(Society of Women Engineers) and AWIS (Association for Women in Science) that solely support the advancements of more women entering into the STEM field. I personally started a SWE club in my school to hopefully get more girls to realize that STEM fields are not just for guys.

In short summary: Girls are often discouraged on co-ed teams, and I've been the victim of that first hand; too many times to count. Never being a part of an all-girls team, I can not comment on what it's like for them. But no matter what your team make-up is, FIRST should be more focused on an environment that is encouraging you to learn more in the STEM field. Some may say that an all-girl team is a better environment, some may disagree. In the end, it's your own personal opinion on the pros and cons on these types of teams.

[erobo2520]

The mission of FIRST is so inspire in students a desire to pursue science and technology. Are girls on co-ed teams inspired? yes, if they can stick around. It is really hard to get both the mentors and the other students to over look the steriotypes our society instills in people. For some reason people are hardwired to protect girls and women, and handing one a jig saw does not come naturally to male mentors especially if they have daughters. So do all girl teams inspire female students better? Probably, but it also does not prepare them for the starck reality that is sexism in science and technology. All girl teams are not counterproductive to the mission of FIRST but it does not allow girls to develop the thicker skin they will need if they want to pursue a career in science and technology.

[N7UJJ]

"it does not allow girls to develop the thicker skin they will need if they want to pursue a career in science and technology."

My daughters went to an all girls school and were on all girl teams. My daughters handle themselves very well in coed society. It would be interesting if there is a study that has examined all girl teams and if there is any difference with girls who are on coed teams. Anecdotal stories are interesting, but not necessarily descriptive of a group.

"girls to develop the thicker skin" I know what you mean, but isn't it sad that the girls must adapt to feel accepted instead of the culture welcoming talented, productive women into the science and technology fields? Perhaps we need to change the culture so that thick skins are not required.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by N7UJJ

"girls to develop the thicker skin" I know what you mean, but isn't it sad that the girls must adapt to feel accepted instead of the culture welcoming talented, productive women into the science and technology fields? Perhaps we need to change the culture so that thick skins are not required.

This is the part that I've been confused about for the last 5 years. It's like the FRC program creates a bubble of Gracious Professionalism that is touted, used, put into effect, and mentored while students are a part of the program. Then, as the students leave the program and move on to further their educational goals and establish careers, that bubble is burst. The part that has been confusing, disheartening, frustrating, and very uninspiring, is the role that mentors of teams may play in contributing to the bubble burst. It may be that in their careers, they are accustomed to and celebrate, the tough skinned mentality, projecting the 'deal with it, this is reality' attitude.

So what that does is limit the possibilities that FRC creates among students, mentors, and teams - by helping to maintain the status quo of the work environmental culture and mentality outside of it.

If men are accustomed to behaving a certain way and the women have to adapt to that behavior, that is sending a very clear signal that it's a man's world. If men are told that there are female employees present and to keep it clean - that is still sending a very clear signal. The expectation should be that employees maintain a professional behavior and attitude all the time. Period. That allows for opportunities like Gracious Professionalism, mutual respect, and courtesy to be a part of that expectation, fundamentally.

I'd love to see a button that says: Gracious Professionalism, it starts here. Even better: Gracious Professionalism begins with me - worn by bosses, engineers, VIPs, politicians, and celebrities. That would really rock the culture.

Jane

[Siri]

Originally Posted by erobo2520

All girl teams are not counterproductive to the mission of FIRST but it does not allow girls to develop the thicker skin they will need if they want to pursue a career in science and technology.

So I was on a co-ed team, but I'm not sure it influenced much of a gendered "thick skin" for me. Maybe I already had it, but most of what I learned was how to deal with people--lead them, work with them, inspire them--females and males alike. Did the guys bring something specifically guy-like to the team? Yeah, I think so, but I don't think it had an overwhelming effect on my ability to stand up as an honors ME major, lead in AFROTC, or work on rural engineering in developing countries. Pretty sure that was good mentors.


I'd be interested in hearing from the all-girls teams what benefits it's had and whether they feel they've been better inspired. It's an interesting consideration. Has anyone done both?

Originally Posted by erobo2520

...and handing one a jig saw does not come naturally to male mentors especially if they have daughters.

This I find a little odd. I've had a lot of men had me jig saws over the years and quite a few of them have a daughter. (One has 3, all of whom he's done the same to.) They seemed quite ok with it, to the point where it sometimes precedes "how do you use this?"
Is this issue more common than I think it is?


Jane: Unfortunately, I think one needs a thick skin to change a thick culture. ...But do I sense an IRI 2012 button project?

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Siri

Jane: Unfortunately, I think one needs a thick skin to change a thick culture. ...But do I sense an IRI 2012 button project?

I like the idea of building thicker skills rather than thicker skin. I think there is a difference. Determination is not for the weak or the weak-minded. Neither is being equipped to mentor in what Gracious Professionalism is and what its potential/impact can be to people outside of FIRST. Being capable of doing that in order to implement a change in attitude and mentality is a skill.

An IRI button project = awesome.

Jane

[GaryVoshol]

"Growing a thicker skin" gets tossed about all over the place when somebody really means, "I've been acting like a jerk, what'cha gonna do about it?"

My other refereeing passion is soccer. (Thank goodness FLL and FRC seasons usually don't overlap with soccer season.) There has been much speculation about this video on the soccer bb's lately: http://vgportal.thesun.co.uk/sol/hom...clattered.html

Sian Massey is the only female referee in the English Premier League. Earlier in the season a promenent TV commentator was fired over his sexist remarks about her. Now this incident - did the player mean it? Was she run over intentionally? Why didn't he at least check if she was OK?

As far as we have come, we have not gotten rid of sexism and racism in society. Hopefully graciously professional behavior can serve to further the process toward everyone eventually being equal, so no one has to be told to "grow a thicker skin."

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by erobo2520

The mission of FIRST is so inspire in students a desire to pursue science and technology. Are girls on co-ed teams inspired? yes, if they can stick around. It is really hard to get both the mentors and the other students to over look the steriotypes our society instills in people. For some reason people are hardwired to protect girls and women, and handing one a jig saw does not come naturally to male mentors especially if they have daughters. So do all girl teams inspire female students better? Probably, but it also does not prepare them for the starck reality that is sexism in science and technology. All girl teams are not counterproductive to the mission of FIRST but it does not allow girls to develop the thicker skin they will need if they want to pursue a career in science and technology.

I think the portion I bolded here says more than anything else.

FIRST isn't about preparing students for the "real world" (even though much of what we do does have direct parallels in the "real world") - Even school isn't about preparing students for the "real world". 99.9% of FIRST graduates aren't going to end up with jobs where they have only 6 weeks to develop a solution to a new problem. Heck, most of them won't even end up with jobs where they get large, unique problems even once a year. For the most part, they'll be taking work that's already been done and expand on it, fix the bugs, and push it to market.

FIRST is about inspiring. If coed teams have trouble inspiring girls, to the point where you feel its necessary to include an "if they can stick around" qualifier to your answer above, then it's not the best medium for inspiring girls in STEM fields. I've seen first hand with the Robettes - girls leave inspired and energized, and that carries them into engineering majors in college. Sure, they meet some of that sexism from their classmates in college, but their experiences on an all girls team provides them with confidence and determination, and they can build that thick skin if they really need to... or they can work to change the culture at their schools and work places by refusing to accept the "norm". Being the best at what you do will overcome sexism faster than anything else.

Finally, if you think all girls teams don't deal with sexism, you clearly haven't interacted with one before. My team's gone out there and proven themselves again and again at competitions, but still they have to deal with poor attitudes from other teams just because they're girls. Not all other teams, true, but enough that girls comment on it. When we talk about possible alliance members at competition, invariably the drive team tells us about teams that treated them badly, who they don't want to work with in the eliminations.

[Cynette]

I keep reading this thread and each time I ponder giving a response, but I'm never sure where to begin. Today, I'll give it a go, spurred on by the "thick skin / thin skin" discussion.

Why does it matter what the demographic make-up of a team is in FIRST? All girl, all boy, coed... why is that even a discussion? Do we have the same discussion about teams formed with all honor students, or all gifted students, as opposed to all levels of ability students? Should we wonder about the efforts to start teams in inner cities where they will be more likely to be poor and minority instead of affluent and white? And there are schools that have the audacity to force students who want to be on FIRST teams to take a specific course curriculum to be eligible! The characterizations could go on.

Let's ask the same question about those groups. Is it counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST have a team of all gifted kids? Surely they don't need to be be given the opportunity to participate with other gifted students in a program like FIRST? They need to be able to get along with the normal kids to survive in the future, don't they? Aren't there average kids who are being denied participation on a FIRST team if it is exclusive like that?

Is it counterproductive to the philosophy of FIRST have a team from an inner city or totally rural area? If they wanted to be on a FIRST team, surely they can move to a school which already has one? The amount of effort expended to have a successful team in those areas is much higher than a suburban school; won't we cause more inspiration if we get FIRST teams in all of those first?

I hope everyone realizes that these are indeed rhetorical questions and that the answer in each of these cases is NO! It is not counterproductive to the FIRST philosophy.

As a engineer who happens to be a female... and who has been an engineer for almost 30 years, I find it rather sad that we still need to have this discussion. I still cannot understand why in the 34 years since I started on my path to become an engineer, it has not become more transparent for young women to pursue engineering as their career choice, or why we have girls in our schools today who are still told that girls shouldn't like math, or why girls on FIRST teams are directed to non-engineering tasks.

Based on my experience with Team 1511 - which is coed, 1 in every 4 of the girls who start on our team has the personal fortitude to push through the circle of boys to become the mechanical, electrical, or programming star. If you get one, she will take at least one or two others with them. If you don't have one of "those" girls, you need something special on tap to push them through that barrier. All-girl teams prevent that barrier from forming in the first place. Should it be that way? No. But it is. I've watched brilliant girls circle around the outside of that barrier and not be able to break through. They don't stay on the team. Is that counter-productive to the philosophy of FIRST? I think it is.

FIRST needs us to use every tool in our arsenal to provide inspiration to as many students as possible. Forming All-girl teams are part of that tool-kit. They work.

A note on the "Thick Skin" discussion: We all need coping tools for learning to deal with jerks. But it doesn't require a thick skin, because jerkiness should not need to be tolerated. I've never mastered the thick skin, but I have mastered handling myself as a professional in those situations. I give credit to my husband as a true gentleman for teaching me those skills rather than lowering myself to take on traditional hardened reactionary response mechanisms.

[Molten]

From my experience everyone should have thick skin and nobody should need it. We all say stupid things sometimes. We are all jerks sometimes. That means we all need to learn to with each other's stupidity. We need to tolerate each other when people are jerks. This is no excuse for people being that way. As I said, nobody should need thick skin. At the same time, until everyone around you is perfect...you should have thick skin to make up for their faults. Yes, fixing those around you is better. Since that can't be done fully, thicker skin is to help make those moments of imperfection more tolerable.

Jason

[Phcullen]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Finally, a closing thought from working with an all-girls team for 5 years. Our drive team is most often ignored by other drive teams. Not because we don't have something valuable to say, or because our students are timid or shy, or because we've done poorly in the past (highest seeded rookie team, finalist the next 3 years, and winning at North Star this year). Can you explain why that is if it's not gender based?

for the past 2 (possible 3) years my former team had an all girl drive team despite not being a all girl team and i would be very interested to hear from them on weather they experienced this as well. i no longer believe that all girl teams should be discouraged by FIRST but I do believe that they shouldn't be encouraged. In my years in first the announcement of every all girl team has been preceded by "the all girl team from _______ it's ______" however the only other case i have heard an announcer do that is with a team from a deaf school comprised of all deaf students. if i remember correctly, in all ,my years with FIRST, i used my ears more than my penis and would only consider one of those things a handicap.

my point is; if FIRST treats being a woman as a handicap then its no wonder that products of that organization. will look at girls from all girl teams as being sheltered and less component.

this can also be seen in sports you cant probably build a list of objectively the best mens and womans basketball teams in order. but it would be quite hard to make a single objective list if the two leags never interact

[Seth Mallory]

Originally Posted by Seth Mallory

The point of FIRST is to inspire students to learn. Different people work best in indifferent ways. That is the reason teams have different ways that they function. Our team is coed and some of our captains have been girls. Since all the students have to take the same training they all use the machine tools. Our school also has many girls on the local Girl Scouts team. I would like them on our team but if they want to be on the Girl Scouts team that is where they belong. At the regonals some of the teams the girls have minor rolls and do not work with the robot. When asked they respond that they do not work on the robot during build. Many of those girls would be better off on a all girls team just to get the chance to learn. Diffrent teams for diffrent folks.

It has been two and half years since I posted on this topic. Last year our drive team was half female including the lead driver. This year we have a female team captain, 25% female members. and one third of our mentor staff is female and she is the lead mentor. We have female students in all of our groups and they are some of our best lathe and mill operators. The Girl Scouts still take many from our school since they take fresmen and GRT does not. The new girls each year have to compete to get on the team the same way the boys do. I still feel that if a girl would feel better on a all girls team then she shoud be on one. What ever inspires the students to learn is where they belong.

[Phcullen]

thank you for coming back. For myself it was interesting reading though everything again i think we had a pretty good discussion. i cant say that it has compleatly changed my view but it has been molded by a few of the posters. I would now say that all girl teams (again not attached to all girl schools/all girl organizations) are undesirable but necessary in completing the end goal of giving students the fill experience and opportunity that First has to offer. but i do dissagree with how FIRST or at least many people within FIRST talk about all girl teams as if they were over coming a handicap. hopefully in the past two years that i have not been involved this has changed. i think it would be intresting to hear from people again and from new people on what they have observed recently in FIRST and in higher education