Women, Minorities and STEM

Why are women and Hispanic minorities underrepresented in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields? This was the topic of our class a few weeks ago and it is a great question.

In 2003, 18% of physics PhDs were awarded to women. While those numbers are growing, the number of women obtaining PhDs in engineering and physics lags behind other sciences. I mention physics and engineering specifically, because I was a physics major as an undergraduate student. I did not continue on to the graduate level in math or science despite my ability and encouragement from professors. I never felt discriminated against because I was a women. I was given every opportunity that my fellow students were given. Why didn't I continue? I have my reasons I guess: I didn't want to work in a cubicle, I wanted to travel, I wanted to work more closely with people, I wanted to make a direct difference in people's lives. But, looking back, I could have done all of those things as a physics PhD. Was there something more unconscious that prevented me from going to graduate school in physics or math? I didn't give up on science and math completely. I became a physics teacher and taught physics and math until recently. I'm proud that I was a science-loving, female role model for both male and female high school students. But I still wonder why I didn't continue on in physics - a subject I love to learn.

As we discussed in class, we all seemed to come back to one issue: lack of good role models. I think people do what they are comfortable doing. What they are comfortable doing sometimes depends on what they see people around them doing. Maybe Hispanic minorities and women don't pursue STEM careers because they don't see others like them there? Maybe I didn't try to obtain a PhD in physics because no one in my family is an academic? Maybe the math and science homework problems we solve in school typically appeal to certain students, so that women and Hispanic minorities are turned away? I'd like to share the following section from "The Secrets to Increasing Females in Technology":

The Value of Technology
The Extraordinary Women Engineers Project, a coalition
of engineering organizations, academic institutions,
corporations, and individuals, asked why high school girls
with the academic preparation to major in engineering
found tbe profession so unappealing. Among the several
interesting results uncovered by a study of this segment
by WGBH Research, was the preference for working in an
area that "makes a difference.." Any technology teacher can
discuss how everything from our planet's ability to sustain
its population to the ubiquity of mobile phones is thanks to
technology. However, the value of technology is not common
knowledge, nor is it frequently reflected in the exercises in the
classroom or in after-school programs. Have your students
solved the problem of a "bomb dropping from a plane" or
a "CARE package dropping from a plane"? Am I building
a robot that will fight with the other team's robot, or is my
team collaborating with another team to build a single robot
that will help the elderly continue to live in their own homes?
The technology and science is the same, but the girls will
find the benefits of the end product something compelling
to address the collaboration with other teams rather than
attempting to make competition more enjoyable. One ITEA
member described how he transformed a project to design
a BMX park into a project where the students could choose
to design a BMX park, a skateboarding park, a zoo, or a city
park. Although all students had comparable experiences in
design, innovation, and applying their knowledge, the boys
almost exclusively chose the BMX park and skateboarding
park while the girls almost exclusively selected the zoo
and city park. His experience not only showed the gender
differences, but also showed how a creative solution can be
effective without being more costly or involving significantly
more effort.

When does this change. When will we have enough role models that value this kind of differentiation in the science and math classroom? Will we finally reach a point where we have enough role models to ensure more equal representation in STEM fields? What is your view?

Readings:

• A System in Need of More Than Tweaking: Inequities Persist for Minorities in Math, Science, and Engineering
  Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
• The Secrets to Increasing Females in Technology
  Betty Shanahan
• Why women choose information technology careers: Educational, social and familial influences
  Sandra V. Turner, Phyllis W. Bernt, and Norma Pecora

The Nomadic Learner

We attended class last week at the local Panera to simulate being nomadic learners. We ate, enjoyed wi-fi, and learned. Although, I will say that we didn't really have to simulate nomadic learning. Most of us do it all the time. We learn anywhere, anytime.

With the proliferation of mobile devices, learning anywhere, anytime is becoming easier. But, Bryan Alexander (see article link below) says there is another reason that fuels anywhere, anytime learning.

But mobile machines become personally intimate; they are held close to the body—in a purse, on the lap, in a pocket, on the floor next to the user. Their screens are easily hidden from prying eyes. Emotional investments increase, even with shared devices. Michele Forman, the 2001 National Teacher of the Year in the United States, notes that her high school students became very attached to their wireless laptops. They significantly increased their personal writing and composition. Such machines become prosthetics for information, memory, and creativity.

Perhaps the growth of mobile devices, public wi-fi spots, and technology use in schools is blurring the line between what people have traditionally thought of as learning and what learning really is. My response to that is - it's about time! If I see (or hear) one more movie clip, commercial, or song lyric that depicts learning as students in rows with teacher pointing finger, I think I will scream! While I know that still exists, I think learning gets a bad rap from modern media. As we discovered in our class last week, learning is so much more. Students have these devices, so let's teach them to learn with them. One of my goals as a teacher is to inspire life-long learning. I think that job is now easier with the help of mobile devices and widespread wi-fi access.

Here are some of my recent examples of learning anywhere, anytime:

• I learned a lot about the economy by listening to podcasts in my car this week.
• I read blog posts and newspaper articles on my iPod touch while in a waiting room with wi-fi access.
• I looked at resources posted by friends in Facebook while sitting in my grad class at a break.

How have you taken advantage of learning anywhere, anytime this week?

Recommended reading:
Going Nomadic: Mobile Learning in Higher Education, by Bryan Alexander
Breaking the Barriers of Time and Space: More Effective Teaching Using e-Pedagogy, by Peshe Kuriloff
Lectures on the Go, by Brock Read

Impact of Instructional Technology on Developing Countries

In the first of six articles included in the International Review's "The Impact of Instructional Technology Culture on Developing Countries," authors Moghaddam and Lebedeva share their preference for the term low-income societies instead of developing countries, since "all societies are developing in some form, " even the United States. The term low-income societies still acknowledges income differences in the world. The authors share that four billion of seven billion people live on less than two dollars a day.

The main educational challenge still faced by most of the world is to provide their young the rudimentary resources, such as a pencil and a paper pad, for elementary verbal and mathematical literacy.

As someone working with technology, I feel I sometimes lose sight of the fact that many people cannot even fathom my concerns over trying to get faculty to use a tablet PC or the e-clickers. They are saving their money to buy a piece of paper and then ironing the ink out of that paper to get more use from it.

Unfortunately, technology begins by serving the elite of any society regardless of income status. This is where the article gets interesting. Rather than focusing on the differences between high and low income societies, the authors focus on the differences between the elite and non-elite in all societies. The authors argue that there is a fundamental difference between how the elite and non-elite look at the world. Even in the poorest countries, there is a small number of people with Internet access and access to technology. These elite are more likely to be influenced by western thought by traveling, attending university in the west, and by exposure the western thoughts via the Internet. The non-elite are more likely to be uneducated, illiterate, and live in rural areas without access to technology.

This makes me think about how technology is impacting other countries and it seems like it is impacting different people in different ways. Unfortunately, the article does not give any solutions for how to empower the non-elites to gain access to technology and use it for their purposes and not just to spread western thought.

This brings me to another thought I had while reading these articles. Perhaps my view that everyone should have access to technology to learn and work is short-sighted. Authors Leh and Kennedy, in their article "Instructional and Information Technology in Papua New Guinea," made me realize that it is not just about access to the Internet. It is also about literacy and relevance. Let's face it, bringing Internet access to a small rural village won't help anyone if they don't know how to read and interpret the information. And even if they could, is it relevant to their lives? Instead of trying to spread what we think is useful technology, we need to ask others, "what do you need help doing?" Then, technology can be used to help with the problems that are relevant to them. So, maybe the solution is not Internet access, but instead, a piece of hardware that helps fishermen do their jobs more efficiently. This is something I'd like to keep in mind while helping faculty use technology in their classes. Instead of presenting technology as something they should use, I need to encourage them to see a problem they have that could be solved by using technology.

But, I still wonder. What is the most appropriate way to share technological advance with non-elites? Is it appropriate to assume that what is useful for me is useful for others? Should we pressure non-elites to gain exposure to technology because we know the good it can do? Or should we accept when others are not interested. I have not fully formed my thoughts on this topic.