Boys left behind at school while girls get trip

[Quickchat1]

Recently my sons class went on an educational trip to a local university. But only the girls. The boys were left behind with a cover teacher listening to music and generally doing very little. My son is GCSE year and would have benefited from a computing and science event. No it was only for the girls with no mention of anything for the boys. I understand this was a STEM event for girls only but if there was a STEM event for boys only there would be uproar! AIBU?

You make a good point pan socioeconomic disadvantage is rife too ( this is my specialist area) and it's important to understand that people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds often lack the social and cultural capital required to access certain universities, subjects and ultimately careers.

Male privilege does exist but do does class and economic privilege. Unfortunately as there are finite resources available you have to look at the data and let that inform your initiatives. In the case of STEM, women are hugely underrepresented and this is supported by data. However, if you start to look at specific careers not just very broad sector areas you see other trends which need to be addressed.

noblegiraffe no robots that look cute and fluffy and look like animals, babies or random creatures need the tech skills to get it to do what it needs (burp, giggle, repeat words) are the same as the ones that look like dinosaurs or trucks or a 'traditional' looking robot. I don't think having a Furby will turn a girl into wanting to work in a childcare job. That's the type of robots 'aimed' at girls I meant. But that is all down to the parents to what toys they give to their children. Yes media and advertising and society still says "this is for boys" "this is for girls" but if parents essentially ignore that concept children will gradually learn to ignore that concept. I was a child in the 80s. I had 'girl' stuff, I had 'boy' stuff, I had 'unisex' stuff. But what I didn't have was anything that actually made links between what I played with and the enjoyment from that particular toy and what it could lead too. I was a massive Lego fan. Something these days marketed as a 'stem' toy. But I was never given the concept of what my building skills could lead to. At the age when it's time to choose school subjects or a path to go down the days of toys are long left behind. The link between toys and jobs isn't really there for a 13/14 year old. As I said upthread I would like to see good quality job advice for both boys and girls. One part of that should be asking the teen what they used to play with as a younger child, enjoy as a younger child etc. Because that could lead to a job that had never been thought of or heard of or on 'their radar's. I am not quite sure why I seem to have seem to have angered so many on this thread. I just want to see all teens get good opportunies for their future lives. That's all. No one ever said I couldn't be a 'scientist' or whatever because I am female. No one ever really told me what I could 'be' at all and sadly (in my experience) this lack of school subject/jobs/careers advice for teens is still as poor as it was almost 30 years ago when I was a teen.

blueskiesovertheforest

Perhaps they should take just the boys to a careers in health and social care event - some universities run them on school day afternoons.

And what do you do if most boys are simply not interested in such careers in the same manner that many women are not interested in pursuing Stem jobs?

Or a careers in childcare event, or a primary or early years pgce open day...

Yes, because any young man who states that he wants to work with young children does not arouse any suspicion or safe guarding issues at all.

Something female dominated generally looked down upon and poorly paid

Poorly paid and looked down upon like those female dominated medicine and law careers?

As they are both at university it doesn't seem to have harmed them.
I would say that is debatable.

Might there have been better paths than going to university? Different degrees chosen if they had been aware of other possibilities? Different option choices would have given different possibilities - my son didn't study an MFL for example. When he came to applying for uni lack of MFL GCSE limited his chouces despite not wanting to study anything related to MFL at university.

Everything was left to us to find out. There was no guidance from anyone that knew how the system operated. He was very much the guinea pig as first in extended family to go to university. His sister and cousins benefitted greatly from the experience we gained from him going through the system.

pan are you really saying that any boy/man expressing an interest in childcare or caring careers raises safe-guarding concerns????

No they don't - only by a very small risk minded minority. Unfortunately attitudes like that contribute to low numbers of men in these types of jobs.

CostanzaG

That was the point that I was trying to make - socioeconomic deprivation will still influence career paths even if you continue to encourage girls to consider careers in STEM.

You say schools have to provide career guidance but in my experience it was minimal. Even with guidance who helps students navigate university open days, travel costs, student finance, guarantees accommodation etc etc etc? A couple of day trips to see what engineering course is on offer doesn't negate all of the other barriers to higher education.

Weetabix career guidance in schools has been lacking and patchy but it was there.

If your son didn't want to studying anything to do with MFL then not having a MFL would not have limited his options in any way.

Do your children feel they made the wrong choice?

Weetabix yes I know. But they do help as part of a wider careers education programme. Should we be stopping these events completely despite their known benefits?

Even with guidance who helps students navigate university open days, travel costs, student finance, guarantees accommodation etc etc etc?

There is support for this from both schools and universities - I know cos that used to be my job. Sometimes you need to ask for it though!

If your son didn't want to studying anything to do with MFL then not having a MFL would not have limited his options in any way.
Maybe you should look at entrance requirements for some universities? Most definitely some insisted on MFL at GCSE and he was looking at studying history.

Do they regret their choices? Not sure. They have both studied something they were interested in. My son loved his degree but now thinks maybe he should have studied something with more vocational prospects.

My daughter loved her subject throughout school but isn't enjoying it so much at university. Has absolutely no idea what to do for a career and so opted to study a subject that she enjoyed. I think she is starting to regret that now, particularly as she has learnt more about degree apprenticeships.

There is support for this from both schools and universities - I know cos that used to be my job. Sometimes you need to ask for it though!

Bit of a catch 22 I guess - you won't necessarily think to ask for something that you don't know exists.

Op

I agree with you 100%
To give someone an opportunity because of a particular characteristic OVER ability does no one any favours
And if girls have got to GSCE year and havent realised they can do anything they want to do if they have the skills or ability is really the fault of parents

Weetabix I worked in student recruitment for ten years at a number of universities.....while MFL are incredibly useful and valued unless there is a MFL element to the course it wouldn't have formed part of any offer.

So you're saying your children are intelligent enough to go to university but not to seek out the careers adviser that absolutely did exist in their schools??

pelirocco do you understand social inequality or the impact of unconscious bias?

I am a female lecturer in a STEM subject.

The number of women in university computer science programs in both the US and France (haven't seen information on the UK) peaked in the early 80s at slightly less than 40%. It is currently around 15%.

In the early years of computing as a career (just after the second world war) computing was generally regarded as a relatively "girly" occupation. It required meticulousness and careful attention to detail and people thought of those as relatively female characteristics.

So either X chromosomes have changed radically in the last 40 years or so, or there is no innate reason why women would not be both interested in and good at programming. And in the second case, it must be assumed that the reason why we currently have so few women in computer science is mostly sociological.

It has been noted by some sociologists that the fall off in women in computers coincides with the emergence of computer games in the house. Because computer games at that point mostly appealed to boys, people started assuming that other activities with computers were mostly for boys.

Actually, playing computer games and programming are very different activities.

"Why aren't these events held in yrs 7 or 8 long before the students select GCSE options that might then narrow their choices later on?"

This is actually a really good question. I know that some large organisations where it's all about people - think accounting, consulting, law firms etc - have long had mentoring programmes, formal and informal. Then when they realised women weren't on these programmes, they created women only programmes. But it didn't have the impact they hoped.

The next step that these firms are now focusing on is the realisation that often by the time these mentoring programmes kick in, the relevant individuals have already decided whether or not this is a long term path for them - ie to make partner or similar according to industry. And for the women, with all the mentoring in the world, they'd already decided it wasn't for them because of all kinds of reasons. So now, HR teams are looking at introducing mentoring for women at a much earlier stage in their careers. ie, rather than waiting for the best to start rising to the top and them help to accelerate that, they're trying to get in early so that the women who are talented and have potentially excellent careers within these organisations do thrive within them, and, importantly, stay.

I'm not sure if there's much data on the success of this type of programme as yet. I'm more aware of research that shows where the problem starts and this is just the currently proposed solution. But it would be interesting.

And certainly, from my own perspective, I was extraordinarily ambitious as a teenager and in my early 20s. But as I worked in large global organisations, I increasingly questioned whether being at the top within my field in one of these was something I wanted. I wasn't sure about the culture and the sense that you practically had to give up your soul to do it. I also started to get frustrated by the number of times I would do brilliant work but get just a fraction of the credit a man doing similar, or sometimes worse, work would get. Promotion opportunities always seemed to be less for me.

And sure, you could say that was just me. But I have enough happy clients and ex colleagues to know that my competence wasn't in question.

With these mentoring programmes of course, the big problem is whether they help to shift th culture. Because from my experience (and I don't think I'm alone in this - I've got female friends with similar experience) the thing that pulls you down is a combination of being looked over (which mentoring might solve) and the fact that the appeal of the "big job" lessens as you see what sacrifices you have to make elsewhere.

CostanzaG

I'm really sorry but you are wrong. One university that I specifically remember - Kings College London. Entry requirements for History was a GCSE in a MFL. It wasn't the only one but one that I remember because he really wanted to apply there.

As for the careers adviser - there was not one. I was a governor at the school. I know this to be true. There was a teacher that arranged for the local 6th form to visit for an open evening and they also handed out a pack with dates of other 6th form open days. On PSHE days they had talks by armed forces personnel. There was no specific guidance or tailored advice given. That was down to the individual students to seek out.

And why such a sneery tone? If you think individual students should be able to garner relevant advice why do we need to target girls and STEM careers? According to you, if girls are clever enough to study these subjects they are surely clever enough to find out their own information??????

According to you, if girls are clever enough to study these subjects they are surely clever enough to find out their own information??????
Nice bit of victim blaming there - "it's the girls' own fault for not making more effort"

PanGalaticGargleBlaster medicine isn't female dominated if you look beyond medical school. 45% of doctors are femal in the UK (so actually still male dominated overall) but women are over represented in general practice and under represented in highly paid hospital consultant roles. 32% of consultants are females.

Law is broadly similar. In fact only 30% of judges in England and Wales are females.

BlingLoving

I was responding to CostanzaG who posted this

So you're saying your children are intelligent enough to go to university but not to seek out the careers adviser that absolutely did exist in their schools??

I don't think that. I was questioning their assertion that if a student is clever enough to go to university then they are clever enough to source their own information

Weetabix as a school governor you will know know that it's a statutory requirement that all state schools provide impartial careers advice and guidance. You will also know that schools are expected to provide a careers education programme which should be embedded in the curriculum. This forms part of the Ofsted inspection ( although until recently didn't actually make an impact on the final grading but was taken into consideration)
Your school will have had a careers adviser - they may have been independent and not there full time but there will have been someone offering careers advice.

You seem to be ignoring the deep rooted social inequalities which impact career decision making and blaming your children's descions in the lack of careers support and availability of events like the one mentioned in the op.
Yes careers advice has been lacking but it's not the only influence on career and education decisions. Targeted WP days help dispel myths, raise awareness and raise aspirations but they have to be targeted to be effective. They also have to form part of an ongoing programme of support.

There is no comparison to someone being able to seek out support and girls choosing or not choosing STEM subjects. One is down to inequality, gender norms and stereotypes.

CostanzaG

You can keep saying this until the cows come home - there was no careers guidance. No independent person, no teacher. They had a presentation in year 11 by the local 6th form college but that was it. They used to have work experience for 3 weeks but they abandoned that when my son was in year 10 but the students had to arrange it themselves.

There is no comparison to someone being able to seek out support and girls choosing or not choosing STEM subjects. One is down to inequality, gender norms and stereotypes.

And yes there is a comparison. Students from certain backgrounds aren't necessarily going to be aware of the opportunities available to them. Of the myriad of jobs that there are. They know what is around them. As I said, we learnt a lot from the mistakes we made with our son. My daughter, my nieces and nephews and my friends children benefitted from his experience, not from schools guiding them.

I don't know what organisation you worked for, nor what help you offered students but my children were never offered help or assistance. The only help they got was what I was able to offer and then it's down to asking the right questions.

Back to the OP - how can girls be expected to make the right choices if the first advice they get is a couple of months before they sit GCSEs? By now they've selected certain options and decided on their post 16 course. How do they know what careers exist in STEM if they have no exposure to it? But then how do other under privileged groups know? Even if they do know, who helps them to achieve it if their families can't?

Interestingly I have just spent the afternoon at a major London hospital. Most of the staff we have seen are female. The few males we have seen seem to be porters or cleaners. Our doctor was male but to be honest of most the doctors and other medical staff are female. Out of the 20 or so medical professionals in the department we have been to only 2 were make.

Well that school is a first and I've worked with 100s...as a careers adviser, on wp projects, in student recruitment and I now train careers advisers and careers leaders to work in schools. I've also done significant research into careers provision in schools I've never come across a school that didn't offer some careers advice or employ a careers adviser. Even those that were on their arse financially managed it. I hope you raised it as governor? I'm assuming this was picked up by Ofsted?

Thankfully, this should have changed now. The new careers strategy means every school has to have at least a careers leader and careers adviser to offer personal guidance. The also need to work towards achieving the Gatsby Benchmarks by march 2020. This means things should improve significantly. You can now fail your Ofsted if you aren't providing adequate careers provision.

'male' not make!