<p>lookingforward, if I understand you correctly, I think you’re saying that in some fields that are still male-dominated, such as physics, the culture is one that is more comfortable for men than for women. </p>
<p>But then how do we account for the fact that some formerly male-dominated fields (e.g., medicine) now include large numbers of women while others (e.g., engineering) do not? The original cultures of both types of fields would have been male-oriented. If it’s a matter of culture, what has changed in medicine but not engineering?</p>
<p>Simon Baron-Cohen has a theory which categorizes people on a scale from empathy to systemizer. "He and his colleagues have administered tests to a representative sample of the population and found that the chance of being a systemizer is 44 percent in men and 14 percent in women. " So, there are women who are well-suited to engineering, but they’re rarer than men.</p>
<p>My dd is in her 4th her at MIT, mech eng major. We haven’t encountered this, but the president of a well-known math organization once shared his opinion on why there seemed to be not as many young women in math fields with an audience of parents of daughters… His opinion was that frequently girls who excel in math and science also excel in other fields and more often have many options. He felt that boys who excel in math and science frequently are not stellar in other areas. Therefore they choose to pursue math/science with more single-mindedness than their female counterparts. Perhaps this is another controversial statement, and not applicable 100% of the time - as none of these theories is - but it may have some merit.</p>
<p>Periwinkle – Interesting article. Also, factor in that many men and women on the autism spectrum are now completing high school and even college, thus putting them in a better position to meet other people, marry, and have children.</p>
<p>*** Women With Both High Math and Verbal Ability Appear Less Likely to Choose Science Careers Because Their Dual Skills Confer More Career Options (University of Pittsburgh)**</p>
<p>Study also finds that women with high math skills and only moderate verbal ability are the ones who appear more likely to choose STEM careers*</p>
<p>One issue for females in STEM is that technology fields change very rapidly and therefore it may not work well for them to take time off from their careers to care for children. I know a talented engineer who had worked in her field for 8 years after college but then took a short hiatus to raise her kids. Upon return to the workforce, she could only find an entry level position which paid poorly. Another friend was in IT, and has had to change careers because her knowledge is considered outdated. And this woman had done part time things along the way.</p>
<p>On a more personal note, I just had a talk with my D about how SHE has to care about her own future and if she is being ignored, she has to persist and make the best of it. She cannot sit back and wait for others to help and encourage her, and she cannot give up. We are dealing with that issue in sports right now. The high school cross country coach is supposed to coach both genders, but only concerns himself with the boys. He seldom talks to the girls and does as little as possible with them. After all, girls aren’t as athletic as boys, right? Anyway, D and I decided on what training she needed to do for the last 3 days since coach decided to only take the boys to the biggest meet in our state on Saturday (because he didn’t want to “kill” the girls), and gave no training instructions for Saturday, Sunday, or today since practice is cancelled.</p>
<p>There is the stereotype that gifted math/science people are socially awkward. For my daughter I would say - yes and yes. She covers with a tremendous amount of effort but her interpretation of social cues is often unique and not standard. This may have something to do with girls and their choice of educational direction. Girls (stereotyping here) are not drawn to solitary pursuits and have (perhaps) more of a need to belong.</p>
<p>Chicken and egg discussion here: I would say math/science giftedness is born, not made, but that a lot of marginally-high-gifted candidates, especially girls, do not develop their talent to their fullest based on societal pressures. If they are conscientious students, they have other options that feel more comfortable.</p>
<p>Engineering programs at universities are a good example. They are very punitive and rigid. It’s usually not the subject matter that makes students want to pull-their-hair-out (so to speak), it’s the pace. The unrelenting pace does not allow for much of a social life. Many girls aren’t willing to make the trade-off. And the math/science girls, who know themselves well, know that a social life - for them - takes work too.</p>
<p>Why fail so many students out-of-engineering? I know I’m veering a bit off-course here ~ Our state school accepts students into engineering -primarily- only those in the top 3% in math, but then fails 50%. Really? Is this really the way our country “develops” its’ science community?</p>
<p>When I thought our daughter might apply to college as an engineering student (she didn’t -she’s getting a doctorate in another stem field) We asked universities if there was an accepted “5 year plan”. If we were willing to pay for 5 years -from the start- could she arrange a “lighter” schedule? That was not going to be ok with them.</p>
<p>Thanks! I was inspired by that WSJ article about women at Harvard Business School and the CC thread on the topic. Frankly, I was annoyed that women were holding themselves back, not raising their hands, etc. due to perceived negative social pressure. Every high-achieving woman has had to fight this nonsense. I love Condoleezza Rice. She good-humoredly keeps fighting the stereotypes and racial and gender barriers she encounters, without getting bitter. The latest one was the implication that because she was a woman she didn’t care enough about football and shouldn’t be on that player selection committee.</p>
<p>It’s the sort of encouragement our girls need, that they may not automatically see on their own. I don’t know if we’ll ever truly have some perfect unisex blend, but maybe we can get to better par. Just as dads traditionally “had the talks” with their sons, we need to coach our girls. Just because we want to send our girls off into a competitive world, just because our girls are smart, capable, and educated for a particular career, doesn’t mean they will move ahead based on that alone. They need to understand “the ways.” </p>
<p>Snug, girls are as weeded as boys, from premed. But those women who can find the ways to make it through, who don’t let setbacks discourage them, do move into med school, where the particular attributes women can bring are being recognized and fostered. There’s a heightened focus on interactive skills, now. Anecdotally, an advantage for women. It would be interesting to find how many female docs move into the more traditionally male specialties.</p>
<p>Engineering has a relatively high baseline of rigor and workload, due to the standards set by ABET accreditation. There are also a lot of sequenced prerequisites, so the lower level courses need to be sufficiently rigorous to prepare students for the upper level courses, so the lower level courses are inherently “weeder” courses.</p>
<p>However, note that typical workloads in engineering do not appear to be higher than the nominal 3 hours per week per credit unit (45 hours per week for a normal 15 credit unit course load). But most other subjects are significantly lighter in workload these days. See <a href=“Why College Students Leave the Engineering Track - The New York Times”>Why College Students Leave the Engineering Track - The New York Times. Add an assumed 15 hours of class time to the study time in the graph to get total hours per week, though engineering and science majors may have a few more hours of class time due to labs. This results in total time of about 28 hours per week for business majors, versus 33 hours per week for engineering majors (or 36 to 42 hours per week for engineering majors with lab courses in their schedules – still lower than 45 hours per week).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In only a few schools like Dartmouth does the ABET accredited engineering curriculum normally take more than four academic years worth of school (not including co-op jobs). However, actual graduation times at all but the most selective schools are typically longer than four academic years worth of school. This is true outside of engineering as well.</p>
<p>However, most schools really do want students to start off on the four year plan, because they don’t want a lot of students hanging around for extra semesters or quarters, causing capacity issues. This is especially true of public schools which are running a maximum capacity, and where every in-state student is subsidized (so late graduation means more subsidy spent on the student).</p>
<p>When my older D had him, he got e-mails from me, and then so did the principal, AD, and superintendent. He’s still here so I have started to appeal to a Higher Power for his removal. One reason there is not more outcry is that the parents themselves don’t care as much about their girls’ athletic success, or perhaps the kids of the parents that do care are playing soccer and basketball. And the BOYS team is doing fine, so he MUST be a good coach.</p>
<p>Parents tell their boys “Go get 'em tiger,” but tell the girls “Go have fun!” I made a comment to several parents at the last meet and they sanctimoniously said, “I just want my D to feel good about herself and enjoy being on the team.” (Ok then. I want my D to run faster and maybe win a race.) Can you imagine a dad saying something like that about his son: “I just want Johnny to develop a positive body image”? Grrr.</p>
<p>So I guess what I’m saying is that we need to give our girls the same mindset the society has always given boys–that they need to strive, and compete, and make a way for themselves in the world. Our girls need to know that the path may not be welcoming to them, eg. in STEM fields, so they are mentally prepared for the struggle and don’t assume that difficulty means they are lacking some other competency.</p>
<p>In our school district, NHS is about 2/3 female but BC Calc in the regular HS and the student population at the new STEM HS are both about 1/3 female.</p>
<p>Gender bias starts early, and they’ve done the studies to expose it. When someone is told an infant is female, they will talk more, touch more, and play differently. A crying baby will be picked up sooner if the adult is told it is a female. Exposing and acknowledging our biases will go a long way toward fixing them.</p>