It is often said that women are absent from the sciences. But this is
not true. Not anymore.
Although a gender gap remains in the sciences overall, the gap is
closing. Women are now more likely than men to earn undergraduate degrees in
biology, and they are almost as likely as men to earn undergraduate degrees in
chemistry and math.
There are, however, several scientific disciplines that women are still
much less likely than men to choose to study: computer science, engineering and
physics.
Our new research suggests that there is at least one important reason
for this – and it is not because differences between men and women in computer
science are set in stone, as a certain former Google engineer's controversial
memo would have us believe.
Rather, we found that, from a young age, American children form the
belief that boys are better than girls in these technological subjects. This
specific stereotype shows up even earlier than gendered ideas about math and
science more broadly.
We asked a group of 96 first-grade children whether boys or girls were
better at robotics, programming, math and science. Across both genders, a
majority of the children, all of whom were six years old, reported that they
believed boys were better than girls at robotics and programming. The children
did not report this same bias when asked which gender was better at math and
science.
We also found that the stronger the girls' gender stereotypes about
robotics and programming, the less they believed that they themselves were
skilled at these activities.
To find out whether we could get girls to express interest in computer
science and engineering despite this stereotype, we conducted a more direct
experiment.
We gave 32 of the six-year-old girls and boys a robot pet to program
for 20 minutes using a mobile phone app. The remaining 64 girls and boys either
played a storytelling game or did no activity at all.
Afterward, we asked all the children how interested they were in
robotics and programming, and also how good they were at these activities.
Among the 64 children who did not get to program a robot, there was an
observable gender gap: Boys reported greater interest in the activity, and
confidence in their abilities, than the girls did.
But the girls who had played with the robot expressed more interest in
robotics and programming and more confidence in their abilities. In fact, the
gender gap in both interest and confidence completely disappeared among the
children who had played with the robot.
The implications are clear: Gender gaps are malleable, not intrinsic.
Experience and socialisation matter.
The gender bias we found in first-graders is reflected in the enrolment
statistics for classes in these subjects at American public high schools. Most
students at public high schools in the US will graduate without having taken a
single computer science or engineering class. When such classes are offered,
boys are more likely than girls to enrol.
When students haven't had early experience with specific disciplines,
they are likely to rely on stereotypes to decide whether to take classes in
that subject. In previous research, we found that most high school students –
girls and boys – associate computer science and engineering with geeky men.
(Think TV's The Big Bang Theory.)
Because of this association, girls in American public high schools are
less likely than boys to enrol in necessary "pipeline courses," and
are therefore also less likely to consider these professional fields. Quite
simply, young girls and female students receive the message that they don't
belong.
Women's representation in computer science hasn't always been as low as
it is now. In 1984, women earned almost 40% of undergraduate degrees in
computer science. What happened? The personal computer revolution was marketed
explicitly to boys, and computer science was linked in the popular imagination
with males.
This trend can be reversed. Positive early experiences in scientific
disciplines can counteract the negative effects of these gender stereotypes. In
particular, parents can play an instrumental role in inspiring girls to consider
a future in computer science and engineering.
Although they are hard to find in toy-store aisles, gender-neutral
mechanical toys are a good place to start. One of us recently gave an
electronics kit to a friend's seven-year-old daughter as a birthday gift. The
kit, which allows kids to make doorbells, radios and alarms using colourful
circuits that snap together, became one of the girl's favourite toys. She liked
it so much, in fact, that she asked her parents if she could enrol in a
robotics camp. — Los Angeles Times/Tribune News Service
Comments
Post a Comment