How can I encourage my daughters to consider traditionally male dominated careers?

[meinus]

I've been trying to expose my daughters to career areas that are traditionally male dominant. I wanted to share this video because I like how it simply shows a young woman 'as' an engineer and they liked the fun machine setting: www.youtube.com/watch?v=XppH0LJ7c4E
Has anyone seen any other good videos like this that I could show them?

katie Indeed , or even any nationality, as my children, having grown up in other cultures and having such a mix in their own background, do not regard themselves as belonging to any particular tribe. Mathsanxiety you are so deep in the pit of your own subjectivity that you are assuming attitudes and perspectives in the other posters here that they have not manifested, especially since nobody has been celebrating English society or education, or even their own choices as perfect unlike you. There really is no point in engaging in debate with you or even trading anecdotes. Wonder if there was wine involved with that last rant post

I agree with summerends that arts degrees do not stop good careers in commercial and financial sectors - my daughters now lawyers in London etc are an example. My sons' classmates are being very very pushed by their parents into doing maths and science A levels only even if that child is not good at those subjects which I think is silly. If the boy can get high grades in history which he loves much better to get the better A level result and fail in a subject you may not like. I am slightly biased because I have seen scientists for 20 years wanting to move into law because pay in science in the UK can be poor comparatively although I have also worked with some scientists and computer programmers who have business skills or bought them in and made huge huge sums from owning their own businesses so it can sometimes work.

Also as someone said above money is not everyone's objective.

I feel grateful my parents encouraged my interest in science even though I did not in the end do science A levels. I always liked maths and the amazing patterns and principles of it and I do maths every day but only the running your own business kind of maths and understand clients' accounts type of maths.

I spent all day yesterday at a STEM event at a UK University.

I was saddened to see how many of the FB posts and tweets said "my husband took our son"
BUT
in the actual rooms that were packed with undergrads, postgrads and faculty including research team leaders demonstrating their projects

the numbers of undergrads and postgrads were pretty much equal male and female
at faculty it was about 3/4 men
BUT
there were distinct splits between the different departments / teams

Maths was all men, Biomed was about 80% women, Chemistry was pretty even, as were Astronomy and Physics, Civil Eng, half and half, acoustics all men, mech eng half and half, geology half and half, marine engineering more women

And I know that those present on the day are a good representation of the departments because of the way its organised.

Insulting the number of mums playing on their phones during the talks, rather than listening with their kids.

But lots and lots of girls realising that they can do anything they like.

Those present are not actually fair representations of the departments - they are representations of those who have daycare for their children.

Maths at your local university is approximately 20-25% female at staff level (around national average) while physics is about 10% female at staff level (below/around national average). There were for sure females present in maths. Engineering at this university is around 15% female, so women were over-represented, as they always are at outreach events.

Cauchy
Were you there yesterday? You did not come and say hello.

PS how many undergrads have children?

Katie, I didn't say you were British or any other nationality, or imply it, just that you may be looking at the question of open mindedness from a British class system pov.

Poisonwood, nobody has been celebrating English education, or denigrating it for that matter. However, I think many attitudes expressed here arise from a mindset that occurs in the English education context. What I have asked is how much attitudes to STEM subjects on the part of girls are influenced by the peculiarities of an education system that makes students choose STEM or humanities at quite an early age unless they are hoping to get into an elite university. I have also asked how much the attitudes of some posters to allegedly different types of brains and the focus on 'interest' have been formed by English expectations that a choice must be made, and how much the notion that one has either a maths brain or another sort of brain is a chicken and egg thing, with the idea of different brains informing the way the system is set up. I have pointed out that in places where students must keep up both STEM and humanities if they want to go to decent universities, they tend to find themselves motivated, interested, and even able to tackle STEM subjects.

Summerends, it is not an 'either/or' issue here -- the choice of STEM or humanities isn't an issue in US universities until it is time to pick your major, and it is not a matter of only one motivation for my DCs either. Nor is it a matter of forcing anyone to do STEM against their will. My DCs are all interested in the subjects they have chosen for their degrees. I have fostered their interest in school in general, gave them my tuppenceworth when choosing subjects in high school, and encouraged them when the going got tough as it did in all their subjects across the board.

DD2 was the only one who came close to choosing a humanities subject political science but was drawn back to economics as she herself feels her options would be better upon graduation and would take her in the direction she wants to go (GO/NGO/UN/World Bank/IMF with a particular interest in women's welfare) plus she argues econ offers a perspective that goes beyond pol sci.

Insulting the number of mums playing on their phones during the talks, rather than listening with their kids.
I agree with this comment as it applies to mothers' interest in general. I think parental focus on third level education is key and when it comes to girls and STEM subjects, parents need to model interest. Mothers especially, even if they haven't a clue what is going on and are composing mental shopping lists during a talk on meteorology, should not visibly opt out.

mathanxiety you very reasonably are backtracking from that original position of yours quoted in my last post. I am delighted that you are not as intransigent as you wanted us to believe.

Math, I never said that you said I was British.

Nor did I say anything about my nationality. I did state I had Scottish qualifications and went to a RG university. It is false and terribly unscientific to infer anything from that regarding my nationality.

And please stop using "English" when referring to UK education. That is incorrect. Scotland has a separate and distinct system and has done for donkey's years. To refer to UK education as English makes as little sense as saying the education systems in Ireland and Northern Ireland are one and the same.

I am not referring to 'UK education'.

The Scottish system differs from the English system in significant ways. I could say Welsh or NI as well as, or instead of English, but I choose to use the term English to denote all non-Scottish approaches in the UK partly because there are more students involved in England.

What I said about the class system clouding perceptions arose from your use of the term open minded wrt my grandfather. The only open mindedness I could imagine you would have perceived was his decision to send his children to university, because the fact that he left school at 14 and was a small farmer were the only things I had said about him along with the fact that he sent his children to university. I never mentioned what my mother, aunts or uncles studied there. He could only be seen as open minded in a cultural context where people tend to be closed minded about third level education, something that contributes to the lack of social mobility in Britain as a whole. In NI social mobility is constricted by other factors.

Summerends, I never wanted you to believe I was intransigent. You chose to read what I posted that way.

Most of what MathAnx is saying is so much to do with the system she has. If you as a parent must pay for bulk of costs of your kids' degree, then you start having strong opinions about your investment. It's just not like that in Europe, parents don't immediately pay so much.

Rather reluctantly because it's MathAnx I tend to agree that the narrow specialism of Uk uni degrees is undesirable. But funny thing is, the more elite the US Uni the fewer and less diverse the general ed requirements are (kids at better Unis don't have to take so many classes outside their specialism). I always felt that it was a sign that kids at more vocational Unis weren't trusted to make good elective choices, rather than an effort to give them more diverse skills.

Funny thing is, for admission to law school you're best off with a analytical-essay degree like history of English Lit & the fluffy things that MathAnx dissed. And law is a great career going forward.

One thing MathAnx said didn't ring true:

"Sheffield is not the only university where students can get a degree in economics without much maths"

I dunno what qualifies as 'much maths'. At Sheffield according to the foxy physics 1st year I met on the train they do differentiation which is simple calculus . Even advanced economists don't do much more complicated math unless it's statistical analysis.

What one does at Undergrad degree is never the be all and end all for life.
I did not do a degree in accountancy - and actively discourage people from doing accountancy degrees
while never regretting choosing it as a career

Please don't trouble yourself to imagine anything about me, Math, as you will undoubtedly get it wrong.
Again.

The elite liberal arts schools in the US call their gen ed requirements a 'core curriculum'. State schools call it gen ed and tend not to be so high faluting in their brochures.

This is what you encounter in Columbia University, NY:
'Begun in the early part of the 20th century, the Core Curriculum is one of the founding experiments in liberal higher education in the United States and it remains vibrant as it enters its tenth decade. Not only academically rigorous but also personally transformative for students, the Core seminar thrives on oral debate of the most difficult questions about human experience. What does it mean, and what has it meant to be an individual? What does it mean, and what has it meant to be part of a community? How is human experience relayed and how is meaning made in music and art? What do we think is, and what have we thought to be worth knowing? By what rules should we be governed? The habits of mind developed in the Core cultivate a critical and creative intellectual capacity that students employ long after college, in the pursuit and the fulfillment of meaningful lives.'
Core classes in Columbia.

The University of Chicago:
'Not only does the curriculum provide the background for any major and for continuing study after graduation, it also provides a common experience for all students in the College. All students have taken the same sorts of classes and read the same kinds of texts, struggling and triumphing over the same sorts of ideas. This gives every student a common vocabulary of ideas and skills, no matter his or her background before coming to the College.'
Core breakdown
Humanities, Civilization Studies, and the Arts (6 quarters)
Natural and Mathematical Sciences (6 quarters)
Social Sciences (3 quarters)
Language Requirement (can be fulfilled with placement credit)

Students spend about one third of their time in the U of C doing their core coursework.
The Core at U of C (aka 'where fun goes to die').

I would anticipate that value for money will become more of a factor in university course choices now that cost has become a factor in third level education in the UK but perhaps not in Scotland. As a motivating factor in getting girls interested in STEM subjects, the idea that they should look at degrees that will enable them to earn a decent living afterwards while paying off loans might yet prove to be significant.

As suggested by the University of Chicago blurb, students who graduate with a degree in a STEM subject from any really good university in the US would be very well equipped to study law thanks to gen ed or core course requirements.

Do have a creme egg.

Katie that is one of the disadvantages of the US, no creme eggs, just Hershey bird vomit kisses. Though of course they are trying to deprive us of our rightful cultural heritage and eroding the excellent and depth of our chocolate......

I have a (very old) maths degree and work in investment banking - I actually think the gender issues are different in both these fields and to a degree require different solutions; investment banking can be testosterone fueled - it can be an incredibly demanding environment in terms of hours and responsiveness; it has a culture that plays on traditional male skills/mindsets- very alpha male etc
I don't think that type of thing is what puts women/girls off doing STEM degrees. From my experience there is a downgrading of STEM subjects at an earlier stage - they aren't considered cool - to be good at them isn't seen as a good thing; people get denigrated early- both boys and girls- I think girls suffer more comments/slights- I think more comments come from girls and there is more desire to succumb to peer pressure for girls.

I do believe (and can only talk about maths) that at some stage natural talent comes in- I saw many people (talented mathematicians at 18/19) reach a plateau and not be able to get topics at later stages in a degree.
But this is in apure/theoretical subject- I don't think its necessarily the same in more applied degrees

I amn somewhat cynical about the direct link some posters have made between STEM degrees and future careers. I know as many women on my course who have a secondary career compared to their partners as on other courses. My career (via accounting) isn't really linked to my degree (when i was doing my training the most desired degree by accounting firms was latin/classics). I think the approach Mathanxiety is following is really where the degree is vocational rather than theoretical (not sure where the exh's law career fits in). I still would like my DC to study something for study's sake and not with soley an eye on the future income it can generate

There are certainly differences between countries. In the UK we tend to get on with things. I graduated at 20 a year young in law and was delighted to finish all exams at 21. So I had about 8 years before I was 30 to work very hard, buy a property etc. If instead you are an Italian or German type system with university until you're 32 whilst probably still living home with mother you are a kind of kidult for years. Same with those graduates who are too lazy to think about jobs and do endless pointless MAs. It tends not to get them as far as if they started a real job.#

However if you don't see life like that with achievements by particular ages and indeed quite like a lot of years of studying and changing from one possible career to another then an IB instead of A levels and a more US or German system of longer studying times is fine - more expensive - but fine.

Actually, there has never been a time in my experience when there haven't been creme eggs in the US. They are sold in little boxes of four and you can also buy them loose. They are prominently displayed coming up to Easter.

I am not thinking of vocational as opposed to theoretical degrees but I would like to understand better where you see the distinction. Do you mean academic as opposed to vocational?

I don't think that type of thing is what puts women/girls off doing STEM degrees. From my experience there is a downgrading of STEM subjects at an earlier stage - they aren't considered cool - to be good at them isn't seen as a good thing; people get denigrated early- both boys and girls- I think girls suffer more comments/slights- I think more comments come from girls and there is more desire to succumb to peer pressure for girls.
I agree with this.

I think not only do girls back away more as a result of what they perceive to be the uncool factor, they are generally rewarded at an impressionable age for the sort of behaviour that will in the end work against them in traditionally 'male' fields -- compliant, co-operative, quiet, patient, even passive.

This desire and willingness to fit in with others also contributes to women aiming for 'second income' careers, imo.

Moreover, if they happen to be early readers or good readers at an early age the rewards in school for that (in the form of teacher praise or placement in a certain set) tend to plant the seeds of the idea that they are humanities/literature people. They tend to become demoralised when it comes to maths because in that subject you can get answers right or wrong. In reading and writing by contrast, decent handwriting or a good turn of phrase will garner a positive response from a teacher -- there are more avenues to success than in the 'right or wrong' field of maths. It is a huge pity that maths is generally not taught as a creative subject in the early school years and that setting is used in schools when children are forming important aspects of their identities.

I suspect a lot of the plateauing out in maths stems from the focus on computational skills as opposed to conceptual elements for most of primary and secondary education.

I also suspect the preference for Latin/classics among accounting firms may dovetail with the importance of the old school tie in some of the traditional business related professions. Your average Latin/classics graduate may have gone to a school where Latin was taught; it is not taught everywhere. ExH's bachelors degree was in Latin with a minor in Greek. One of his brothers did law too, after a bachelors in biomedical engineering. The brother graduated in the top 5% of his law school class.

Male dominated careers

• bricklayer
• electrician
• road work ground crew
• roofer
• scaffolder

oh no, silly me, those are jobs for non University types

A lot of Americans (maybe even a large majority) leave home at 18 for university and do not return even if they go on to grad school. Most graduate level studying in the US is done in order to get professional qualifications - a teaching licence after an initial BA, midwifery after a BSN, medicine, law, veterinary medicine, qualifications in counseling psychology. A masters in a subject like English Lit wouldn't really get you a job unless you were to accompany it by a masters in education or educational admin. If you were hoping to have a career as an academic then there would be a point to it but it would be a stepping stone towards a doctorate. There are some who could afford to spend the time doing a masters degree just for the heck of it of course.

mathanxiety - i think the points you make about behaviour traits being praised (compliance/collaboration etc) is really interesting - I don't think it necessarily always tallies with traditional female/male divide subjects/fields - more certain environments (banking for example!); In my subject maths there is nothing inherently matching those traits. I do think there is a distinction to be made between encouraging girls to do traditional male academic subjects and encouraging girls to enter traditional male work environments/roles and I think they need to be approached differently. there can be overlap where a vocational degree is needed for a job but not necessarily the case.

I don't agree with your comment re plateau-ing- people didn't struggle with conceptual thinking becasue they hadn't been taught it at school - the concepts were just harder than they had come accross

A lot of Americans (maybe even a large majority) leave home at 18 for university and do not return even if they go on to grad school.

Utter bollocks.

The vast bulk of the country does not go onto grad school

they go to the local community college, live at home and get a job on the checkout at Duane Reade if they are lucky.

TalkinPeace, I didn't say the vast majority of Americans go to grad school.

Many Americans alternate between university and community college while at undergrad level. If you go to a not so selective state or private school you may find you can get credits under your belt at a local community college for far less than paying for a semester away at a four year university. This is what the daughter of a friend of mine is doing after spending the first semester away. She will return to her university in the autumn after the spring and summer semesters at community college.

If you transfer from one university to another you might find you needed to complete some courses at a community college in order to progress to 200 or 300 or higher level courses at your new university, avoid having to spend a year redoing coursework and graduate in four years. Students can complete credits over the summer too. Community colleges have revolving doors to a large extent, and they also equip students with certificates in paralegal training, ultrasound tech, lab tech, medical billing, graphic design, prep students to take professional real estate exams and other vocational training including vocational training for people who are university graduates.

Many students get an associates degree (two years) at a community college and then transfer to a four year university for their bachelors degree, though in general they are not transferring their community college credits to a very selective university if they go that route. If high school students do AP subjects they qualify for community college credit which in turn eliminates the necessity of some required gen ed or core coursework in a four year university. I have two friends now in their 40s who qualified as nurses through community college programmes, one for nursing after a bachelors degree and one via an associates degree followed by two years in a BSN programme at a university. Community colleges do not pretend to be universities but are not hopeless pits of despair by a long shot.

Continuing to live at home past 18 and certainly into your early 20s is considered something both parents and students should really worry about in the US.

From my experience there is a downgrading of STEM subjects at an earlier stage - they aren't considered cool - to be good at them isn't seen as a good thing; people get denigrated early- both boys and girls

This couldn't be further from the truth IME (I have 3 DC currently at secondary school). STEM subjects are not given parity of esteem with arts/humanities, it is true. They are held in FAR higher esteem. You only have to look at the EBACC or progress 8 and any number of comments from politicians (up to and including the secretary of state for education) to see that. Kids are encouraged to do science above all else, they are discouraged from doing humanities and arts ed is dying on its arse in schools now.