Original: English

DATE:

NUMBER:

TITLE: The Participation of Girls and Young Women in Science and Mathematics Education

INTRODUCTION: Barriers still discourage many young women from enrolling in physics, chemistry, and advanced mathematics at the secondary school level, thus pre-empting their choice of post-secondary programs in science and engineering. The enrolment of women in Canadian undergraduate engineering programs increased from 12 percent to just under 20 percent between 1989 and 1993. The number of women graduate students and faculty also remains dismally low and have not followed gains at the undergraduate levels (3,8). Other professions such as medicine, law, dentistry, and veterinary medicine have reached and maintained gender-balanced enrolments for some time. This points clearly to the existence of subtle barriers in engineering and physical science programs. The climate, culture, teaching styles and curricula must all be modified in ways that integrate women's needs if these barriers are to be removed.

DESCRIPTION: Systemic barriers at the secondary school level include (3,5,8,11):

Cultural influences and gender-role stereotyping at home and at school;

The lack of women role models as teachers and in textbooks;

Teaching styles: studies have shown that only 5 percent of the population has a "mentally-centred" learning style, yet most science, mathematics and engineering teaching is done in that style, while 85 percent of both women and men prefer a relationally-centred style (1);

Misperceptions that many non-traditional occupations are for men only: many parents, teachers and career counsellors place more importance on and greater expectations for the career plans of boys than for those of girls and show more concern for the overall performance of boys;

Physical appearance rather than a good education are emphasized for girls in popular and teen culture;

Erosion of self-esteem in girls between the age of thirteen and seventeen affects their performance and choices (7);

The message that "brains and femininity are incompatible" may come from boys, parents, other girls, and some educators (11);

School board policies, expectations of universities and attitudes of employers may also be a problem.

At the university level also, sexist bias exists and appears in various forms:

Women are consistently under-represented in textbooks: examples and references relate to masculine interests, women and men are depicted in stereotypical roles;

There are few women faculty available as role models (2,3,8);

Most courses are taught with a narrow focus on particular topics, without links to broader societal realities;

Myths based on a masculine view of excellence -- concerning merit, awards and appointments and also the value of intellectual work and success in seeking funding and recognition -- are prejudicial to women's success and to their integration into these fields (2);

With regard to course content, "a prevalent attitude is that the presence of emotional, personal issues and feelings...indicates the absence of academic and intellectual content."

Granting agencies provide funding to researchers who perform their work in what are narrowly defined by grant selection committees -- still (in Canada) completely male-dominated -- as "good research areas and methods". These factors work against the women whose research interests and methods lie outside the currently narrowly defined world of scholarship. "Unwritten rules of conduct and behaviour, defined by men over a long period of time are often an unknown quantity for women, and when broken, can cause their career great harm and or irreparable damage" (2; supported by personal communications from women faculty).

Differences between masculine and feminine perspectives have more to do with culture than with competence or contribution. Showing a better understanding and esteem for the differences that persist will make women feel more welcome. In developing effective policies, it is also important to study and understand differences that may exist at the various educational levels. Recent reports of the Canadian Committee on Women in Engineering (CCWE)(3) and the National Advisory Board of Science and Technology (NABST)(8) have encouraged organizations to set goals and draw-up achievable plans to create an educational system without systemic barriers, challenging and comfortable for both genders and for people of all races.

Current endeavours to combat sexism in science and mathematics classrooms include:

Education faculties sensitizing future teachers about systemic sexism in the classroom;

Workshops with parents and career counsellors to encourage them to be a positive influence, to avoid stereotyping and to challenge girls as much as boys to develop their full potential;

Some schools (teachers) select textbooks which do not portray women and men in traditional stereotyped roles, books that include profiles of women scientists, engineers, mathematicians; (here, the province of Quebec is a good example);

Some provinces have achieved an equal representation of women in mathematics and sciences classes at the secondary level: (Quebec and Saskatchewan are good examples);

Some schools are using a cooperative learning environment in classes, others have adopted a single-sex approach (6), or a content and teaching style that incorporates the experiences and interests of girls (1,6,12);

Videos have been produced on careers in engineering (4) and science (13), showing how engineers and scientists apply their knowledge to the benefit of humankind, to solve problems, and to design the world we live and work in; such videos make these careers more visible and appealing to young women;

Mentor programs, where young women students meet women in non traditional occupations, create a long-term support needed to eliminate the barriers.

A new idea involves introducing the concepts and methods involved in problem-solving (engineering) into the existing science and mathematics courses at the secondary level and introducing early and basic notions that pertain to the various engineering fields would bring these fields closer to the students at a critical time when they are considering their options and their careers. It is vital to ensure that the content and delivery creates a positive image for young women, to equalize some of the unbalance that currently exists in the system, and to provide them with self-confidence in an area from which they have been discouraged (directly or indirectly) to participate.

At the post secondary level much is also needed to change the climate and culture for women:

Universities should encourage the use of gender-inclusive language and the creation of a non-threatening environment in the classroom -- teaching assessment questionnaires should ask students about this aspect in each class;

Universities could distribute a booklet on gender-inclusive language to each instructor (10) and provide gender-sensitivity training to faculty, staff and graduate assistants;

Faculties should track students on academic probation and develop a mentor program, especially for students in minority groups;

Special efforts should be made to attract and fund women students in graduate programs: they form the pool for future women faculty;

Studies are needed to identify gender differences in graduate student funding, and the quality of relationships with supervisors;

Women faculty need to be proactively sought and hired. Objective hiring criteria would be based on the availability of women in the pool of graduates -- it is frequent to observe that even where affirmative action policies exist, the policy is often ignored or given lip service;

Caplan's meritocracy myth (2) must be exposed and attitudes changed on how excellence is defined.

The use of a cooperative learning and teaching style creates a positive environment and team work with which women are comfortable (1); -- it has also been shown to be far more effective than the traditional method for both women and men students alike (12,14). In addition, relating topics to societal realities would be most effective (1,9). The curriculum should develop multidisciplinary topics that are related to the quality of the environment and the quality of life; examples are: biophysics, environmental engineering, biomedical engineering, water resources engineering, biological engineering, etc. Such programs in Canada have achieved gender-balanced enrolments. In contrast, topics which are narrowly-focused and classical in their approach find the lowest enrolment of women. When these courses are 'humanized' with some societal context, they will certainly be attended by greater numbers of women.

CONCLUSION: The current 'culture of science' originates from the middle-ages and from the industrial revolution (9). One of the negative aspects of this culture passed down from these early times is 'man's domination and control of nature, of the planet and of its natural resources'. This image has deterred many talented women and men from considering the study of science (14). The perception (or reality) of a masculine culture in science creates a systemic barrier for many women. But their absence deprives these fields of an enriching perspective. Strategies must be sought to successfully eradicate sexism and harassment in our universities. Aspects of the current culture that make some women feel uncomfortable must be identified and ways sought to integrate and value feminine perspectives, especially in the creation of new scholarly work.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1. Brooks C. (1986) "Instructor's Handbook: Working with Female Relational Learners in Technology and Trades Training." Fanshawe College and Ontario Ministry of Skills Development, Toronto, Canada.

2. Caplan, P. (1992) "Lifting a Ton of Feathers. A Woman's Guide to Surviving in the Academic World". (A project of the Council of Ontario Universities Committee on the Status of Women), University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Canada.

3. CCWE (1992) "More Than Just Numbers". Report of the Canadian Committee on Women in Engineering. Copies can be obtained from M. Frize, UNB, Fredericton, NB, E3B 5A3.

4. Frize M., McGinn-Giberson, J., Shelton, C. (1992) "Engineering: Design Tomorrow's World". VHS Video, 22 min., Northern Telecom-NSERC Women in Engineering Chair, UNB, Fredericton, NB, Canada E3B 5A3.

5. Hall, R.M. and Sandler B.R. (1982) "The Classroom Climate". Project on the Status and Education of Women. Association of American Colleges, Washington, D.C.

6. Gillbert C. (1991) "An experiment in Female Friendly Chemistry". CCWE Conference, Fredericton, May; Montreal Forum, January.

7. Greenberg-Lake, The Analysis Group Inc. (1990) "Shortchanging Girls, Shortchanging America". American Association of University Women, Sept./Nov.

8. NABST (National Advisory Board of Science and Technology) report, March 1993, 240 Sparks St., 8th Floor West, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0H5

9. Noble D.F. (1992) "A World Without Women". Technology Review, May-June: 52-60

10. Ontario Women's Directorate (1993) "Words that Count Women In" 2 Carlton St., 12th floor, Toronto, Ontario M5B 2M9.

11. Peltz W.H. (1990) "Can Girls + Science - Stereotypes = Success? Subtle Sexism in Science Studies". The Science Teacher, December: 44-49.

12. Rogers P. (1988) "Gender Differences in Mathematical Ability-Perceptions vs Performance." ICME-6, Budapest, July.

13. S.C.W.I.S.T. "What Do Scientists DO?"

14. Tobias S. (1990) "They're not dumb, they're different". Research Corporation, 6840 East Broadway Boulevard, Tucson, Arizona 85710-2815.

__________________

The Working Group thanks Monique Frize (University of New Brunswick) and Jane McGinn-Giberson for their collaboration in preparing this "Brief".

This "Brief" is one of a series of six. The others are: Science and Mathematics Education in a New Social and Economic Context; The Education of Science and Mathematics Teachers; Measuring Success in Science and Mathematics Education; Information and Communication Technologies in Science and Mathematics Education; Partnerships to Strengthen Science and Mathematics Education. The views expressed in this "Brief" do not necessarily represent those of the Canadian Commission for UNESCO, but rather reflect those of the Commission's Sub-Commission on Natural Sciences and its Working Group.