I was a volunteer at yet another STEM for girls event recently - a thing I feel very ambivalent about these days but have not figured out how to say no to well-meaning friends who request for help. A good decade ago, I related very strongly to the idea of getting and keeping girls interested in math. No so much STEM (and now STEAM) but just making math fun, interesting and accessible. Since that time, this whole business of bringing gender parity to STEM has been subjected to a crazy "shrink it and pink it" strategy with appalling results from what I can tell.
Most of the events where I have volunteered have two kinds of participants. The first set is hyper hot-housed by the parents to the point you can no longer see the real kid outside their pitch and app. Everyone makes an app these days no matter the relevance to the problem at hand. They stick to what they have been coached to say and do and cannot engage in an exploratory conversation on the very subject of their project.
The other type is there because someone signed them up and they have no idea what they are here to do. Its much easier to see the real kid and learn about their actual interests because saving the world by way of another useless app is not an interest they profess to have. They are openly and aggressively bored by this whole girls in STEM hoopla but could be fun to interact with.
The girls are not benefiting from such programs. Instead the natural progression from curiosity about the world aided by tools of scientific discovery, computation and analysis is impeded by these faux projects that have zero real world value or application. No hard skills like logic, reasoning or induction are used in the production of these fake "things".
The over-involved parents through their misguided efforts are short-circuiting the natural learning paths that lead to a thriving future in STEM. Sadly, the under-represented gender that we all propose to serve are being disproportionately hurt by much ill-advised ventures.
Most of the events where I have volunteered have two kinds of participants. The first set is hyper hot-housed by the parents to the point you can no longer see the real kid outside their pitch and app. Everyone makes an app these days no matter the relevance to the problem at hand. They stick to what they have been coached to say and do and cannot engage in an exploratory conversation on the very subject of their project.
The other type is there because someone signed them up and they have no idea what they are here to do. Its much easier to see the real kid and learn about their actual interests because saving the world by way of another useless app is not an interest they profess to have. They are openly and aggressively bored by this whole girls in STEM hoopla but could be fun to interact with.
The girls are not benefiting from such programs. Instead the natural progression from curiosity about the world aided by tools of scientific discovery, computation and analysis is impeded by these faux projects that have zero real world value or application. No hard skills like logic, reasoning or induction are used in the production of these fake "things".
The over-involved parents through their misguided efforts are short-circuiting the natural learning paths that lead to a thriving future in STEM. Sadly, the under-represented gender that we all propose to serve are being disproportionately hurt by much ill-advised ventures.
Comments