Girls in STEM is failing both girls and STEM? 99

[moltenmetal]

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/com...m-culture-is-failing-both-girls-and-stem.html

Read the article, THEN discuss...

Growing up, I increasingly saw my good grades as a trap locking me into a single career: STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics). It felt like a dystopian YA novel, and my high school report card was The Choosing. A’s in math and science? Here are your jeans and sweatshirt.

Well-meaning people lied to me. They said computer science was a great work-from-home career if I wanted children (when in fact a majority of women quit STEM because the culture of poor work-life balance makes it too difficult to raise a family), that STEM careers are secure (actually the industry has frequent layoffs and is very competitive), and more....

 

[IRstuff]

I personally wouldn't use it, or other, similar, appellations, simply because I have no desire to propagate, nor wallow in, racist stereotypes, regardless of the reason.

My observation is that words have no intrinsic meaning, thereby allowing the speaker to attach whatever meaning they desire to them, which may be in direct conflict with whatever meaning someone else have have hoped for. I think using N* is a serious mistake on the part of blacks, because the word itself can never be cleansed of its historical meanings and connotations, and gives racists freedom to continue to use the word for their own purposes.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[ImminentCollapse]

IRStuff,
“but practically every week is yet another blurb about some female student being sent home because their clothing is "distracting" or "provocative." So, somehow, "boys will be boys," remains the theme and that remains the way we treat our daughters in school. With that sort of attitude in the school system, how can anyone claim that discrimination is a thing of the past with a straight face? We enforce rules that perpetuate the notion that our boys won't be able to help themselves from conking a girl on the head, etc., just because they were wearing leggings to school, or wearing skirts that were one inch above their knees.”

You’re blaming the schools and I would like to know more.

My first-hand experience is this: I have three daughters in school, 1st, 3rd and 5th grade and most of our friends have school-age kids at varying levels. Nowhere, nowhere, do I see or hear what you are describing outside of the high profile media driven incidents you reference. Our school, and those of my friends, strongly support girls almost at the expense of boys one could argue. Again, my first-hand, direct experience.

If you claim what you reference are the norm in schools, and that these stereotypes and favoring of boys persist, then we have a much worse problem than even you realize. 90% of teachers are women. Either they are doing this, or allowing the male teachers to do it unchecked, both are inexcusable. I suspect it is neither and you are headline grabbing to perpetuate a narrative.

But, if you insist that this is the norm, based on you first-hand experience and not the headlines, and it is going on in all schools everywhere, who do you hold accountable? Is this going on at your kid’s school? My daughter’s teachers would scream from the mountain tops in the face of this and I imagine that is representative of most woman teachers and administrators. I would expect nothing less.

So who exactly is to blame for holding girls back? Don't give me some lame, abstract societal or cultural norms excuse because at some point a human being is telling a girl "she can't....". Is it a teacher, a coach, an administrator, a parent, who is it?

Punch them in the face for me.

IC

 

[IRstuff]

I made no claims to know more beyond that, nor how widespread that is. There is something like 24,000 secondary schools in the US, so even one story per week is a very small percentage. But, certainly, based on the quoted responses of school officials involved, these are a non-zero number of schools where girls are considered to be "distractions" to boys, and it's likely, like my sales rep, they're professional until they're not. The fact that a school is not in the news might simply mean that everyone is already "assimilated" into a culture of propping up boys and blaming the girls, and no one is brave or foolish enough to rock their boat. As with many injustices in the world, it takes a certain level of bravery and foolhardiness to throw down a gauntlet and challenge authority.

The gross statistics don't describe the entire picture. However, the relevant statistic is that in high schools, the gender mix is much more balanced:

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/tables/dt15_209.50.asp

and, the highest percentage of male teachers in academic classes include, mathematics, nature sciences, social sciences, and vocational/technical.

What that means is that the high overall percentage of women teachers is driven by extremely high percentages in primary schools, and coincidentally, girls seem to do very well in math and science in primary school. In high school, male teachers are nearly 50% of the teaching staff for STEM, and coincidentally, girls seem to lose interest in STEM in high school. Sounds like a conspiracy to me ;-)

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[ImminentCollapse]

“The fact that a school is not in the news might simply mean that everyone is already "assimilated" into a culture of propping up boys and blaming the girls, and no one is brave or foolish enough to rock their boat.”

What a damning, hopeless, bleak, and impossible to prove (or counter) generalization of the school system and characterization of the teachers and staff.

IC

 

[IRstuff]

How is that bleak, compared to the alternative that we are imprinted and programmed at birth by genetics and chemicals for only specific gender roles?

At least, with attitudes, they can be adjusted, but obviously, it's just taking, and will take, much longer than anyone desires or hopes for.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[CWB1]

Yes, let's blame the boys that are behaving themselves while making excuses for the girls desperate enough to act foolish for their attention and judge others on their professionalism in a parking lot. While we're at it let's keep wasting money and time chasing unrealistic "equality" metrics because we spend far too much on fundamental life/job skills and promoting healthy relationships.

Meanwhile back in reality divorce and lack of fundamental life/job skills creates a helluva lot of real struggles.

 

[IRstuff]

Yes, and we need school officials to concentrate on elevating and improving their work product, which is student education, and stop obsessing over clothing and "distractions" for the boys. I don't blame the boys; I blame school officials and parents that think that girls are suspendable "distractions" in school. I blame judges that let off admitted sex offenders because that would "ruin" their futures, while ignoring the harm done to the victims.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[solid7]

Before we even begin to address that, maybe it wouldn't be so bad to do away with standardized testing, that rewards or punishes a school for its academic performance. You know, since education really begins in the home. (the teachers don't craft behavior, intelligence or potential, they only work with what's available) As a society, we fail to understand the most basic concept, which is that a system is only as strong as its weakest member. Put all of the disadvantaged people together, you get a weak system. Separating them out, rather than forcing everyone to learn from, and with one another - and thereby, creating a true microcosm of society - perpetuates disadvantage. It also forges attitudes about other members of society, and creates class rifts, which further denigrate societal values.

Forgive me if I can't be bothered to care about a hyper-fixation on the stifling of provocative clothing, or to presume that it is somehow even a significant factor in the larger problem. If we're dealing we one problem at a time, we don't start there.

 

[CWB1]

Teachers as well as parents need to instill a sense of propriety in students simply for the fact that society has certain expectations of the workforce, maintaining a professional appearance being an important one. Personally I find it rather ironic anyone would argue against teachers upholding basic dress standards in schools as one of my pet peeves is that many of our "professional" teachers today have no outside work experience and therefore no clue what is acceptable dress or necessary knowledge for the workplace, only what the state mandates be taught. They know their job, not how to educate and do their damnedest through the unions to prevent anyone with experience from usurping their position.

 

[solid7]

3 things:

1) agree, but only to a point
2) "professional" dress codes have changed, and are changing
3) it's still not the top priority

My children were never taught to love school. If they do, great. IF not, all the same. The only catch being, that the school is the domain of the teachers and administrators. When you're on their turf, you're on their time, and they are the owners of that domain. What they say, goes. You don't have to like it, you only have to do it. If something is said or done that you don't agree with, you tuck it in, and find a clever way to deflect any further attention from yourself. (and it can be discussed in a proper/neutral forum later) When teachers give you the rub, you learn to control your emotions, and thereby, reduce a lot of unnecessary conflict or friction. Because just like that judge or policeman in society, I don't want to have to deal with them (kids or teachers) when they go wrong. If I have to deal with kids or teachers, because they (kids) didn't take note of whose jurisdiction they violated, then we have a problem.

This is my way of teaching my kids how the world works. Just like when we get into the world, we don't have to like our job, but we do it to make our lives easier, and hopefully, we can find a way to enjoy it. (we'd all rather be not work, if we didn't have to) And of course, when you sign up to accept a paycheck, you implicitly acknowledge that your employer's goals are your goals, and to that end, that you agree to all of your employer's terms. Of course, children don't get that luxury, but it's a preparation for making a good choice, when they are able to make one.

So I still maintain that this is the primary responsibility of the parent. If parents don't teach their kids well, I can't help that. I can only do my part. I refuse to have "peeves", or sit around obsessing over things I can't control. When things bother us, it's our responsibility to do our part - whatever we can do.

The environment created by artificial academic standards - whose only real purpose is to create a facade, or maintain the status of the facade - is the real problem. Dress codes are insignificant in light of the bigger problem. But if people want to solve all of the problems at once, instead of finding the biggest problems, solving them first, and hopefully having a cascade effect, then I suppose that chaos will always reign...

 

[IRstuff]

They are insignificant only if you ignore the fact that they are a symptom of the underlying attitudes and practices. It''s not a question of solving dress codes and everything's hunky-dory. It's merely an indicator that the problem is extremely pervasive and deeply entrenched and hidden in plain sight. Even the love-to-hate purple dinosaur used stereotyped gender roles when my oldest was watching his show 20 years ago., despite talking up how anyone can grow up to do anything.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[solid7]

That is exactly how I perceive it - insignificant on account of being a symptom of a bigger problem.

Never was a problem solved by treating the symptoms, but rather, the cause.

 

[lacajun]

Furthermore, the smarter misogynists know better than to reveal themselves in public. It's the same mechanism at work with pedophiles; how many pedophiles and child abusers do we run across at work? But, they're obviously there in the population; I don't think anyone would argue that they don't exist.

That is a fine point. The masters of manipulation do it in secrecy. Further, the masters of manipulation have 26 core behaviors they use to manipulate. Twenty-six core behaviors implies there are others and there are. They are complex and they are not used singly or just on one person. These are the behaviors con men use. That's why I recommend reading Character Disturbance by George Simon to so many people.

Another point some people miss is the duration each offense takes. It takes about 2 seconds to utter "token" or some variation of it. It takes about 25 seconds to say "The Good Ol' Boys Club is alive and well and you'll never be a member because, well, look at you, you're a woman." Thus the meaning behind the phrase, "death by a thousand cuts." If you read Mindset by Carol Dweck, you'll have a much better understanding of that phrase.

I think it would be wise to keep in mind who the majority is, at least in the US.

I, and many other women, chose to not speak up and cause trouble for a variety of reasons. It gives you a reputation that you do not want, for starters.

That some of you don't experience it or see it, and never have, does not mean it does not exist and in enough significance to warrant thought and genuine solutions. As I read in another thread, paraphrasing, "If you're an owl talking to a grizzly, you need to see it and understand it." I see a lot of owls talking at a lot of grizzlies and vice versa, with absoluteness of right being on their side. All of us want to see the world through our own lenses but we cannot afford that luxury any more. Technology will not allow it. Technology has changed our culture and it will continue to do so. I'm not trying to force anyone to be an owl or a grizzly. I am encouraging you to be yourself and to see what others experience. IRstuff doesn't need to be exposed to racial slurs such as "no tickee, no washee." That's highly unprofessional and unethical of a supposed highly educated, high functioning manager.

I realize some of my posts are going to be offensive to some of you. My goal is to raise awareness so that younger women will have an easier road than women have had in the past. This is not about you. It is not about me. It is about the broader culture and younger women and improving their abilities to pursue their dreams.

I realize this is on an international community. I also realize that the NY Times, the LA Times, the Chicago Tribune, etc. are all available to the international community. I also realize that cultural research organizations are online and available to the international community. So, in essence, the points that I have raised being on an international site, well, that dog don't hunt, as they say back home. For those upset by my posts and what they reveal, this is nothing compared to the broader picture. Absolutely nothing. A drop in the bucket!

I've also spent time reading declassified documents on US government websites just as many others do, internationally. My experiences are insignificant in comparison. A drop in the bucket!

An acquaintance hammered me about some aspects of American culture of late, I repeatedly told him to watch Congressional hearings to learn. He knew beyond any doubt he was right and I was wrong. He finally asked for links, which I provided. He's been quiet ever since! If you are willing to listen without your biases, you will learn. Being Southern, I've had to walk away from a lot of things I was "absolutely certain" of. There is nothing special about me so I know if I can, others can, too.

Mindset by Carol Dweck and Character Disturbance by George Simon are excellent books to begin learning what some people do. If you are unwilling to read them, it's your choice. I perceive those as two books that are part of the broader cultural problems' solution. Your perception may differ. But, when I think of the POTUS, I cannot help but think of those two books and the knowledge they contain. According to Dr. Simon, character disturbance is a growing problem. It may benefit you to read them for your own safety, if not for another's.

One other thing I've learned over the last few years is that healthy people and healthy families talk about their problems. They don't run from them, hide them, deny them, shift responsibility, etc. They may not reach resolutions but they work on them. Extrapolations are left to the reader.

Pamela K. Quillin, P.E.
Quillin Engineering, LLC
NSPE-CO, Central Chapter
Dinner program:

http://nspe-co.org/events.php

 

[IRstuff]

Pam,

Thanks for the links. That nails exactly a problem I have with one of my kids.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[CWB1]

I mostly agree with both of you fellas' various premises including that its symptomatic of a larger problem, which I believe to be a lack of personal discipline anymore. Having served in the military, IMHO this is best learned through driving high standards of seemingly small details like personal appearance, behavior in groups, focused attention, etc. I do not hold parents solely responsible for this as I believe it needs to be a combination of parents and other adult influences driving kids to be more disciplined. Personally, growing up I was pretty equally influenced by the ultra-conservative parents of my best friend as I was by my own parents, his demanded manners, posture, "please/thanks/etc," and all other things etiquette whereas mine simply demanded we behave.

 

[ScottyUK]

Pamela,

While I don't share every last one of your opinions, I certainly don't feel offended by any of them or by the way you're expressing them.

 

[solid7]

I don't feel offended by them either. But I do have my own opinions. (and they're just that)

I think that a person can be too well read. At some point, when certain thoughts or themes are so pervasive, I think a person can begin to look for those themes in everything they do - and even bias their thoughts towards them.

If I have to spend my days looking for the 26 core behaviors in every person that I encounter in a day, I will never view humans in a normalized way. Since I am not a researcher in academia, I just have no desire to put every facet of human behavior under that kind of a microscope.

I'm just smart enough to call a spade a spade - but beyond that, I wouldn't dare try to point fingers at people that I don't know, and try to show them that they're closet misogynists.

 

[lacajun]

IRstuff, I wish you all the best with your child.

CWB1, I grew up with a single mother, who was never in the military but ran the household very efficiently. She taught my sister and me a lot and a lot about diligence and perseverance.

ScottyUK, thank you.

solid7, I am not hyper-vigilant nor do I care to be. I take people as they are and let them reveal themselves over time. We all reveal and observe. I am smart enough to obtain knowledge and go about my normal, daily life, with application of knowledge seamlessly. I do not look for boogie men, ever, nor do I purposefully look for or expect anyone, male or female, to be a jerk to me.

I am not trying to be the smartest person anywhere just trying to raise awareness because I have experienced way more in life than anyone should. Most people who have my experiences never achieve what I have, which isn't much and is certainly nothing to brag about. There are many here much more accomplished and much more gifted intellectually. My IQ is nowhere near 180 or low end Mensa material either.

Most people with my history become alcoholics, drug addicts, bums, convicts, etc. That I have not become any of those is a miracle according to counselors. Most people have one or two major things, from childhood, to overcome, which is easily done. When kids experience four to five big things in childhood, they are overwhelmed and never grow beyond those childhood problems to become fully functioning adults. They become alcoholics, drug addicts, bums, convicts, etc. Some experience much more than 4 - 5 things and I am one of those.

So, that I have grown into an adult, albeit one that needed to do a lot of reading, thinking, and working to correct problems, capable of helping others and that is not in prison, on skid row, drug addicted, etc. says a little something about my ability to think, solve, and persevere through extremely trying hardships in life. Thanks to that, I've also lived through some extremely trying hardships in the workforce. That was normal to me, sadly. A childhood friend of mine died, in prison, at a young age because she couldn't overcome her childhood. She was beautiful, smart, fun, kind, and had a lot of promise. While some may think I am full of it, I am not. I am experienced.

I'm just smart enough to call a spade a spade - but beyond that, I wouldn't dare try to point fingers at people that I don't know, and try to show them that they're closet misogynists.

You are smart; however, I am not calling you or anyone on this forum/thread a misogynist. Once again, do not wrongly attribute things to me, a stranger to you. And, I do not view that calling a spade a apade. I will not spend more time on your posts.

Pamela K. Quillin, P.E.
Quillin Engineering, LLC
NSPE-CO, Central Chapter
Dinner program:

http://nspe-co.org/events.php

 

[solid7]

You are smart; however, I am not calling you or anyone on this forum/thread a misogynist. Once again, do not wrongly attribute things to me, a stranger to you. And, I do not view that calling a spade a apade. I will not spend more time on your posts.

All I was trying to say was that I feel that my behavior towards people - women in particular - is well enough adjusted that I won't do any extensive research, towards the goal of identifying misogyny, in any form other than the obvious. I am definitely not the type who wishes to tout intelligence. (because to be fair, I don't really think about whether I am, or not - I just try to be the best "me" that I can) Especially over others. I'm often the dumbest guy in the room, and that's my comfort zone. (since the dumb guy has the most left to learn)

You and I are two people who don't see eye to eye on certain things. But just to be sure that you understand that I respect your views while not agreeing with them - we are two PEOPLE having a disagreement. Some person out there may think that we're both extreme, and find a better answer in-between our view points. With that in mind, it would be sad to think that you don't want to carry on in discourse. It costs us nothing but the time that we'd be spending in similar pursuits, anyway.

 

[CWB1]

I am not hyper-vigilant nor do I care to be. I take people as they are and let them reveal themselves over time.

Therein lies an interesting conundrum of a double standard common in humans. As we all do, you view yourself differently than others view you while suggesting others must be as you view them. Which is more important, intent or action, how someone intends to come across to others or how they actually do? Is someone who makes a seemingly sexist or racist joke revealing themself to be a terrible person, or simply someone making a bad joke to someone they view as a friend as well as colleague? Given the somewhat stereotypical but common "nerdy-ness" of engineers, often lacking in social skills, etc I'd suggest that intent is far more important than action and taking someone's words at apparent face value as simply nonsense. Another important consideration in this matter is that while the ideological strive to be the utmost professional at all times in their business transactions, reality is that behavior leads to mediocrity and failure. To be truly effective in a team environment we need a level of trust and honesty well beyond professionalism, we need to be able to make bad jokes, say stupid things, and have our colleagues recognize intent rather than simply the action itself as "family" would. That's the secret to success in the military, sensitivity to such petty things is chaptered out as the weakness it is. Sadly, many times in the civilian world taking the social justice warrior's stand and declaring others evil, racist, etc bc of such trivial matters as a singular occurrence of "no tickee no washee" is applauded as heroic.