If you're a male and you're voting for Obama

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Is there any harm in trying to attract the interest of more females in these areas of study?

meh - I suspect the situation in the job market is already pretty apparent for those that really care to do their homework.

by the 8-10 year olds? They all want to be astronomers and firemen and reporters. Maybe super heroes these days. By the time kids even begin to think about these things (and it's difficult to do too far ahead in technology due to changing trends) it's too late. If you want to do engineering or physics at a serious school, you better be on track to finish 1st year calculus (both semesters, not just the 1st) in high school, or you're going to suffer a bit in year 1 at college. (or more likely, not be admitted) Short of compressing years together, that means algebra in junior high.

wow - I had no idea that grade schools and high schools had different curriculums for their students by gender....shows you learn something every day here

clearly we need to force the girls to pretend to be astronauts and firemen at least 3 days per week until they think right

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Is there any harm in trying to attract the interest of more females in these areas of study?

meh - I suspect the situation in the job market is already pretty apparent for those that really care to do their homework.

by the 8-10 year olds? They all want to be astronomers and firemen and reporters. Maybe super heroes these days. By the time kids even begin to think about these things (and it's difficult to do too far ahead in technology due to changing trends) it's too late. If you want to do engineering or physics at a serious school, you better be on track to finish 1st year calculus (both semesters, not just the 1st) in high school, or you're going to suffer a bit in year 1 at college. (or more likely, not be admitted) Short of compressing years together, that means algebra in junior high.

wow - I had no idea that grade schools and high schools had different curriculums for their students by gender....shows you learn something every day here

clearly we need to force the girls to pretend to be astronauts and firemen at least 3 days per week until they think right

so you have no actual response, is what you're saying here.

Again, by the time kids, their parents, and any guidance counselors that might still exist, get to thinking about the job market in relation to college decisions, it's too late for some of the choices. Fortunately, math is the only one that's really hard to make up on time for.

Though honestly I'd generally discourage kids from making the current job market the key to their decisions - the job market changes and 4-5 years is a long time to invest in a BS in a subject you find you don't like very much.

[billvon 2,379]

>wow - I had no idea that grade schools and high schools had different curriculums
>for their students by gender....shows you learn something every day here

Fun fact - when I went to middle school they still had boys taking shop and girls taking home ec. That sort of "sets the stage" for a lot of what happens later.

On the other side of the equation I think voluntary means are a pretty good way to combat this. When I went to school it was something like 25% women/75% men. As a school we spent a fair bit of money on attracting women students. Our band played at the "women's week" we had during the summers, where they brought in high school juniors to try to get them interested in engineering.

It worked pretty well (although likely not due to our musical prowess or lack thereof.) Nowadays MIT is close to 50/50.

[wmw999 2,114]

Quote

Fun fact - when I went to middle school they still had boys taking shop and girls taking home ec. That sort of "sets the stage" for a lot of what happens later.

Me too. Except that my parents supported me in saying I wouldn't take home ec because it was wrong to make only girls take it (I don't think I'd ever heard the word sexist yet then ). I took French at the high school instead.

In retrospect, home ec is valuable, and I missed something. OTOH, I gained from standing up for myself, and having my parents support me in this.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

>Fun fact - when I went to middle school they still had boys taking shop and girls taking home ec. That sort of "sets the stage" for a lot of what happens later.

fun fact - that's a sample size of one located a long long time ago

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

so you have no actual response, is what you're saying here.

I love that tactic.

Sure, if that's what you want to think, go for it. You take yourself so serious, Kelpy.

BV's response was a decent one, though better if he'd have just noted the anecdote for a school today - he and Wendy are as old as me. You're really just advocating for a cause. It was a great cause, but the question on the table is whether it's still one in today's world.

I'd contend it's not and people trying to keep it alive are likely causing more harm than good. Watch the kids today, they don't think like they used to. They have their act together much better on these matters. I'd like to trust them. Treat them well and let them lead the way. You know, show them all the beauty they possess inside. Maybe give them a sense of something....something they can be proud of.

etc
etc

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

so you have no actual response, is what you're saying here.

I love that tactic.

Sure, if that's what you want to think, go for it. You take yourself so serious, Kelpy.

you gave a stupid answer, I pointed out why, and you responded with a wild irrelevance. If you wanted to tag it with a "retarded" tag, fine. I don't care for it when Bill plays dumb either. We can play that way in the next Shac rant.

Skip from Wendy's generation to NerdGirl's and it's a bit better, but hardly great. Current graduation numbers have also been provided, confirming that it is still present.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Quote

>Fun fact - when I went to middle school they still had boys taking shop and girls taking home ec. That sort of "sets the stage" for a lot of what happens later.

fun fact - that's a sample size of one located a long long time ago

Yeah, I'm just a little bit younger than Bill. And at my school, shop and home ec. were both electives open to either sex.

[nanook 1]

Quote

I think it's wrong to give girls dolls

Well, it depends how they play with them. For instance: I think it's a 2-6-4 Baldwin.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,379]

>fun fact - that's a sample size of one located a long long time ago

Well, two now. And it was pretty common through the early '70s - that's one of the reasons Title IX was passed.

Fortunately nowadays that's not true any more. But that's part of many people's history, and for years that tradition was continued in higher education. Thus the value (IMO) of programs that encourage women in STEM areas.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

you gave a stupid answer,.

Bullshit, if you don't understand it, ask for a clarification.

You advocate forcing the kids to think to your subjective standards. I'm advocating that they can think for themselves once they are adults and that we've matured over the last few decades that the same old crap doesn't apply like it used to. I try to be lighthearted about it because I assume you're being devil's advocate about the viewpoint. But you just want to play SC crap here. I'm not playing that.

If you want to call

Quote

"I'd contend it's not and people trying to keep it alive are likely causing more harm than good. Watch the kids today, they don't think like they used to. They have their act together much better on these matters. I'd like to trust them"

as "wild irreverance" then we have nothing to talk about.

Having the next generation better than the last shouldn't be a threat, it should be a fantastic thing if you're strong enough to handle it. You people want to fix yourselves, and you can't do that, so you're trying to fix the next generation which isn't broken in that way.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I'm advocating that they can think for themselves once they are adults

Not sure how many times I'll need to repeat this - by the time they're adults, it's too late to decide they'd like to study physics at Cal or MIT. It's not too late to decide to go to law school, but for the STEM side of things, yeah.

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Is there any harm in trying to attract the interest of more females in these areas of study?

meh - I suspect the situation in the job market is already pretty apparent for those that really care to do their homework.

by the 8-10 year olds? They all want to be astronomers and firemen and reporters. Maybe super heroes these days. By the time kids even begin to think about these things (and it's difficult to do too far ahead in technology due to changing trends) it's too late. If you want to do engineering or physics at a serious school, you better be on track to finish 1st year calculus (both semesters, not just the 1st) in high school, or you're going to suffer a bit in year 1 at college. (or more likely, not be admitted) Short of compressing years together, that means algebra in junior high.

wow - I had no idea that grade schools and high schools had different curriculums for their students by gender....shows you learn something every day here

clearly we need to force the girls to pretend to be astronauts and firemen at least 3 days per week until they think right

This comment is beneath your usual standards. It's pretty easy to see how a teacher could bias a math class to make it interesting to one gender and boring to the other. How about if the teacher uses sports "statistics", such as batting averages, to teach fractions? Or cooking to teach about addition?

More likely, and probably more insidious, is the scenario where teachers end up teaching classes they are not comfortable with themselves. A female teacher "at sea" in a science or math class can easily send a subliminal but powerful message that women and science/math don't mix. Somehow a male teacher in the same situation doesn't seem to have the same effect, I'm not sure why but maybe it's because the female teacher reinforces existing stereotypes and the male teacher doesn't. Of course, a knowledgeable, enthusiastic, and engaging teacher (regardless of gender) can do wonders to inspire students. For this reason I think it's critical to have courses taught by teachers who have themselves been appropriately trained in rigorous classes. I remember undergraduate classmates who were struggling in biology, switched to education and graduated, and then ended up teaching biology because they had some biology courses (which they did poorly in) on their transcript. That was a long time ago, I can only hope that doesn't still happen but I fear it does.

Teachers also should have a role in challenging stereotypes in the classroom, but that often doesn't happen. For example, I used to do outreaches where I'd bring insects to local classes and talk about "bugs". In the lower elementary grades, both boys and girls would be enthusiastic about holding the hissing cockroaches, or letting a tarantula walk across their hand. By the 5th or 6th grade, boys were still enthusiastic but most girls squealed and moved away; a few wanted to hold the insects but when they did they were criticized by the other girls ("How can you touch that thing?? That's icky!"). By late middle school it was very unusual for any girls to participate, but boys were happy to prove their "bravery". Saddest of all were the few girls who were obviously intrigued, got in line to hold a hissing roach, then pulled out when they were "teased" by the other girls. This would have been the perfect opportunity for a teacher to step in and show that it isn't true that "real" girls don't like bugs, or frogs, or whatever, but that never happened. Almost always, if the teacher was female they were just as terrified of the bugs as their students were (or even more so). Perhaps it's not the fault of those teachers, they were raised with certain ideas and it would be very hard for them to overcome their own ingrained fear, but it does show how cultural stereotypes are easily perpetuated from generation to generation.

So, boys and girls together in the same class, but cultural stereotypes can lead boys and girls to pick up different lessons from the same set of facts.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

This comment is beneath your usual standards

OK, apparently, I have to be grim and upset to get my point across (which will be ignored by some regardless of tone) rather than enjoy the usual banter and friendly discourse which I do get from you and few others.



Yours is a discussion defending that gender stereotypes still exist but not the extent or the relative improvement we've experienced. And not whether today's level of bias is acceptable or not, not a discussion about whether they have as much power as they used to, or if they are significant enough to require a dramatic reaction or interference by government - and social interference is exactly what's being pushed.

I contend that people in their 50's and older are acting as if the kids are still living in the culture the 50 year olds remember, not today's. Contrast Shotgun's (or mine) experience 15-30 years ago where all the classes were elective vs Billvon's experience where the boys had one set of classes and the girls had another (I took a ton of shop and actually a couple home Ec classes). But, still, those are historical anecdotes, not today's reality. Bill made the point that this is corrected in today's school - the implication that those programs did serve their purpose. So what are they NOW trying to fix today with programs designed for 3 decades ago? Is it helping, or is it now stifling the kids? Does it celebrate the natural inclinations, or is it trying to force a homogeneity that's legislated for PC guilt's sake?

I think it still comes down to the same thing. Do you think it's a huge enough of a problem, for TODAY's kids, to force the kids or the teachers or the parents to behave in a proscribed manner, even against their inclinations? Or do we trust the parents and kids to do their job - even when we don't always agree?

Because that's exactly the end game here, do we force behavior we choose on others? - for the children.

Quote

So, boys and girls together in the same class, but cultural stereotypes can lead boys and girls to pick up different lessons from the same set of facts.

this is also a bit silly - sit a few classes. I have. The disparity between INDIVIDUAL children gets from a lesson is a lot more varied (diverse, if you will), than the generalized gender stereotype. (i.e., the total population sigma is more significant than the subgroup mean difference.) I see a lot more difference between the groups (smart kids vs lazy kids) than I do between (males vs females).

Seems we should focus on teaching all the kids. Not obsessing over subgroup issues from the 1900's

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

For this reason I think it's critical to have courses taught by teachers who have themselves been appropriately trained in rigorous classes. I remember undergraduate classmates who were struggling in biology, switched to education and graduated, and then ended up teaching biology because they had some biology courses (which they did poorly in) on their transcript. That was a long time ago, I can only hope that doesn't still happen but I fear it does.

I suspect it does. In an Advanced Calculus class some math ed. majors were talking about how, after they received their high school teaching certification, they could take a fairly easy test that would allow them to teach middle school, also. It was also mentioned that the reverse was also true. They could initially get their certification in middle school, and take a relatively easy test to also be certified to teach high school. The difference is that the major for the middle school teaching certification didn't require the rigorous math class classes, such as Advanced Calculus, required for the secondary math education major. So, at least in principle, it is possible for those who haven't proven themselves to be competent in mathematics to be certified to teach mathematics.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Bill made the point that this is corrected in today's school - the implication that those programs did serve their purpose.

I didn't see where he made that point. I saw where he said MIT had about a 50:50 male:female ratio, but that doesn't mean much, since a university as prestigious as MIT is going to have more qualified applicants of each gender than they can admit. When the enrollment at typical state universities is about 50:50 throughout the STEM programs, then we can claim the disparity is corrected.

Alternately, if we could conclude with a high level of confidence that the disparity is due to nature, and not nurture, then we could dismiss it as not really being a problem.

It's pretty common to see young girls encouraged to play with dolls while young boys are discouraged from doing so, so I'm not inclined to believe the problem has already been corrected or that boys and girls are not nurtured differently.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[DanG 1]

I think it varies state to state. My best friend is a public school high school math teacher in Virginia. Besides requiring a Masters in Education, he had to take enought extra math classes (his undergrad was in economics) to basically get a math degree. He has taking stuff that I don't understand, and I'm an aerospace engineer.

I'm sure there are ways to game the system, but he really doesn't need to understand non-Euclidean spaces to teach high school geometry.

- Dan G

[rehmwa 2]

His point is above in a post about school electives (as a way to insert that programs like Title 19 were successful, but he still noted it).

Your personal assumption that 50/50 = parity aside, and whether we agree that we've reached it or at least or on the way there without MORE intervention (my point)

Right now, do you contend that we need government to intervene with parents in how they nurture, then?

What is the proposed fix? It's still a statement of a perceived problem only, with no fix proposed that doesn't require a really intrusive society.

How intrusive do you want society to get?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

He has taking stuff that I don't understand, and I'm an aerospace engineer.

Out of curiosity, what math beyond multivariate calculus and differential equations is necessary for an aerospace engineer?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Right now, do you contend that we need government to intervene with parents in how they nurture, then?

What is the proposed fix? It's still a statement of a perceived problem only, with no fix proposed that doesn't require a really intrusive society.

Do you really think reevaluating how math and science are presented to young students and presenting the material in a manner that appeals to the girls as much as the boys constitutes a "really intrusive society"?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Do you really think reevaluating how math and science are presented to young students and presenting the material in a manner that appeals to the girls as much as the boys constitutes a "really intrusive society"?

What's being done wrong right now? Do you have examples from today? or just recollections?

Or do you mean things like - "A lumberjack cuts down 10% of a rainforest every year, the rainforest can rejuvenate 8% from the remaining each year. How do you think the birds in the forest FEEL about this? Please show your work, and bring in a monetary contribution from your parents for the NEA"

I'm all for revamping how to present math from that baseline.

(this is just mockery - but seriously, can you tell me how it's being done wrong? or are you just distressed that the results aren't making you feel good? I've sat today's math classes and don't see the gender bias, but perhaps I'm just a blind neanderthal). I don't see how calculating a force vectors in physics is gender biased. I don't see how solving a limit in math is gender biased. seriously


I mean - in the early 80's, we made bookends in metal shop. That was in the early 80's? Are you telling me that bookends aren't gender neutral? In home ec, we cooked a dinner and sewed a shirt? are you telling me that eating and wearing shirts is gender biased? In both those classes, we were assigned to pick a personal project to execute - are you telling me that choosing your own project isn't gender neutral? What exactly would you change after your 'reevaluation'? And that was in the 80's



another thing - how do you redo the curriculum to 'encourage' girls to do this without applying your own perspective to what you THINK a GIRL likes? Isn't that application of a personal gender bias right there?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[DanG 1]

The highest class I had to take was partial differential equations.

- Dan G

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The highest class I had to take was partial differential equations.

was it partial differential equations and how they are applied to shaving, crotch scratching and weight lifting?

or was it partial differential equations and the related aspects of menstruation and hair styling with emphasis on child birth and makeup application?

I just want to get a feel for your high school's inherent biases......

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

What's being done wrong right now? Do you have examples from today?

That's the crux. We don't know exactly what is being done wrong. That doesn't mean we should stick our heads in the sand and ignore the fact that there is a disparity in the participation rates in math and science in universities and the professional world.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

stick our heads in the sand and ignore the fact

sigh

however, I get your concern, though

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants