Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Encouraging girls to do Physics, Technology, Engineering and Maths. Is it worth it

195 replies

rationaloptimist123 · 30/01/2015 19:48

Only 2% of British girls are taking A'level Physics. This means that a significant number of high paying career options are going to be closed to them in 5, 10, 15 years time. Does this concern anyone else?

OP posts:
SardineQueen · 30/01/2015 21:47

morethan I wouldn't be surprised.

Would be interesting to see STEM takeup in different types of state school / different areas and independent schools. I bet there would be a difference, too.

CrazyTights · 30/01/2015 21:49

No, not especially. There are plenty of well paid opportunities which don't involve physics and it's not popular with everybody.
Girls not doing any science at all would concern me, I think everybody should do triple science if they are capable of it and then see what happens.

SurlyCue · 30/01/2015 21:49

I'm doing an access to engineering course right now.

My tutor told us last week that out of over 100 maths/computing/engineering access students in our college only 12 are female. In the engineering course which contains the physics modules- only two of us.

It was quite shocking to hear.

OublietteBravo · 30/01/2015 21:57

My brother and I did almost identical A-levels (he did chemistry, physics, maths and further maths). It seems that merely by taking biology instead of physics, my choices are perceived as being 'more female'

NeedAScarfForMyGiraffe · 30/01/2015 21:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

stealthsquiggle · 30/01/2015 22:01

Surlycue - get used to it. Engineering science was ~10% women, engineering and computing science was 35 guys and me. That was back in the dark ages, but it hasn't changed much.

stealthsquiggle · 30/01/2015 22:03

Oubliette -less about perception than about statistics. Out of pure nosiness curiosity, why do you think you chose biology and your DB chose physics?

SurlyCue · 30/01/2015 22:08

Yep stealth, i know this is how it is, it was just shocking to hear the numbers.

noblegiraffe · 30/01/2015 22:08

Caro, I don't know about the formulae that you are talking about, but aren't Fisher grades based on average student performance in that subject? Is that the same sort of formula that would say that Further Maths is the easiest subject because most students who take it get an A*/A? Ignoring the fact that only students who are really good at maths end up taking it in the first place and then not dropping out in the first year?

OublietteBravo · 30/01/2015 22:15

He wanted to be a physicist (his degree is in theoretical physics), so physics was essential for him. I wanted to do chemistry, and was just more interested in biology (especially genetics - which I did as my 'option' topic) than physics.

I subsequently moved all the way across from chemistry to physiology (via molecular biology, biotechnology, biochemistry, genomics and cell biology) during my research career. I'm now a patent attorney. Meanwhile, my brother is still a theoretical physicist.

OublietteBravo · 30/01/2015 22:22

So I guess you could conclude that our interests at A-level played out over our subsequent careers.

morethanpotatoprints · 30/01/2015 22:24

I look at the schooling my dc have had compared to the schooling i received and we have gone backward.
I wasn't interested in physics, other sciences or Maths firstly because I wasn't any good at them, but I was certainly encouraged, even at the crappy comprehensive I went to. They were so forward thinking in the 70s/80's and teachers encouraged girls as much as boys. It was exactly the same with technology, I built a wall in year 7 and did woodwork and metalwork. The problem was the other girls didn't take those subjects because they knew all that was available was a council house 2 kids, no industry, no prospects. They opted for hairdressing, home economics, sewing, because this is what they saw as useful.
I'm convinced I didn't take the other subjects with the girls was because of my upbringing, watching dad designing things, trying to explain something he was working on, showing me wax models that were really fragile. Helping him with all his maths/rulers, squares etc.

I look around me now and I see girls taking subjects they find useful and it isn't physics.

Are they being discouraged or just not encouraged?

BuggersMuddle · 30/01/2015 22:25

I am conflicted on this one.

On the one had, I did Maths, Physics and Chemistry at Higher alongside English and History, so I was a 'STEM' candidate.

I then studied Economics at university. Reason being? I had not calling as such and that seems liked an academic degree that would merge some of my interest and tbf result in a decent income.

I'm now a project / programme manager.

I didn't see any impediment to me doing STEM at the time, but in the absence of a vocation I wanted to make good money and I do. DP is a STEM professional at the top of his field and I am a project / programme manager. I make bloody good money and far more than I would probably have made in engineering.

anothernumberone · 30/01/2015 22:27

I am an engineer. I studied Physics, Maths and Biology for A level equivalent. I got the top grade in all 3 but personally for me Physics was much harder. Biology is a lot of learning but conceptually it is much more straight forward.

I think women not taking up STEM subjects is a loss to humanity.

dottygamekeeper · 30/01/2015 22:33

Interested in this - my year 12 DD is doing Chemistry, Maths, Further Maths & Physics so am place marking. She is at a mixed comprehensive but in her particular groups, in fact , there seem to be an almost 50:50 split between boys and girls in her subjects.

What particularly concerns me is the apparent shortage of Physics graduates to teach Physics - at GCSE she was taught by a bio-chemist, now at A level Physics one of her teachers is a chemist.

BuggersMuddle · 30/01/2015 22:34

See I sometimes feel like a sell-out another, but given I had no great love I followed the money.

Ironically I've recently done some technical stuff as a hobby and came across far more (unplanned and non-deliberate, but still grim) sexism, than I encountered 16 years ago.

OublietteBravo · 30/01/2015 22:40

BuggersMuddle - my DH has a degree in biochemistry and a PhD in neuroscience. He also worked in R&D in an industrial lab for a while. Nowadays he's a management consultant specialising in project/change management. In the end he 'followed the money' too. I dong think there is anything wrong with that. You made a perfectly valid career choice (as did he).

Lilymaid · 30/01/2015 22:42

DH is an engineer and mentors recent recruits and those seeking chartered status. He generally finds the female mentees (?) to be more intellectually able, literate and mature than their male equivalent. He is dismayed by the attitude of some of his colleagues when female engineers have the temerity to have babies - all the old nasty prejudices come out and there doesn't seem to be much encouragement for them to continue working despite the availability of an onsite nursery.

EBearhug · 30/01/2015 22:44

Pico2 One of the problems with girls is that they are often good at everything smile. That means that many promising STEM students have to leave behind other subjects at A Level and many choose the other subjects instead. I found choosing A Levels very hard as there was only one GCSE subject that I was happy to see the back of. I wonder if more baccalaureate style post 16 options would help delay this decision making to a more mature age when careers seem more real.

Oh yes, definitely. Still feel a bit bitter that I was only allowed to take 3 subjects at A-level. (None of which were STEM subjects, though I now work in IT.)

Stealthsquiggle To add to the argument that it is something in our education system that causes this drop off - talking to technical women from across Europe, Middle East and Africa, it is only the Western European countries and those like Australia and the US that show this pattern. My colleagues from some middle east countries tell me that engineering degrees are >50% female there.

Yes, it's definitely a cultural issue, at least for IT, but probably all STEM - Northern Europe, USA, Canada, Australia, NZ. The figures are better for other countries. IT (I focus on that, because I work in it) is often seen as a clean job, better than alternatives like agriculture or cleaning.

Anyway, in case anyone's missed me going on about it endlessly, I'm a unix systems admin, and have been for several years. Also do quite a lot of STEM promotion stuff at work, because I don't understand why more women don't want to work in a career that's comparatively well-paid, can have flexible hours and is interesting and varied and always with something new to learn. (Well, I do understand it; it's the male-dominated culture.)

Last week, I went to a BBC Women in Technology event, which was excellent, and raised some useful points. One of the speakers was Kate Russell, who presents Click. She pointed out that a lot of us women who do work in technology are a particular personality type - partly because we've had to be to survive. But what about the women who aren't so sure of ourselves or happy to stand alone?

The time we really need to capture girls' imagination and wish to go into STEM careers is before they take their options - the degrees you can do will be governed by the A-levels you do, and that will have been governed in part by which GCSEs you did - one reason that maths will have higher participation at A-level is partly because it's compulsory to 16, so there's a bigger field of people who can continue it to A-level.

One of the issues is that when you decide at 14 which GCSE options to take, it's at just the age where many people don't want to stand out in the crowd - nearly everything can make you feel self-conscious at that age, and you do have to be particularly determined to want to be the only one or the only one of a minority in the room. Emphasising that we want more girls to take certain subjects can be counter-productive, because it can highlight that girls don't tend to take it, so they are going to stand out if they take that decision. Balance begets balance.

Another issue is image. I think many people are simply unaware of the massive variety of careers available. Science is just in a white coat in a lab. Engineering is in overalls and a hardhat and mud. IT is like the IT crowd. And those people do exist, but there's way, way more. The BBC at the moment has so many roles opening at the moment, in all sorts of areas, because their Future Media division is massively expanding, and they've got jobs with web design, front-end development of iPlayer, red-button, various web pages, programme voting, interactive sports viewing (like they had for the Olympics). They get to see all the latest devices, because iPlayer has to work with them all. Their R&D department was playing with a 3D printer (they get to use it for more serious stuff, too!) They've also got all sorts of internal programs for BBC staff, and there's all the infrastructure behind it, operating systems and hardware. A lot of these jobs are very creative, too, and you have to be able to talk to other people to do them well. (I don't work for the BBC, I should add!) There is just such a massive range, and people often don't realise.

I like the Science Council's list where they categorise 10 types of scientist, to try and give an idea of how many different jobs STEM actually encompasses.

Part of the issue with STEM careers is the image - not just for those considering what career to go into, but for those who advise them. If your daughter were to ask her teacher what sort of careers she could do, would her teacher have a good enough idea of the range of possible careers? Some will - but many won't. Yet how else are children going to find out? I've attended some careers fairs for my employer, and some people go to every stand; some have found out about the companies beforehand and are very focussed, and others are directed by their parents. If their parents aren't aware of your company or what your industry really does, then they may not encourage their child to visit your stall. (Mind you, that might be easier than the ones who are pushed their by their parents = "Go on, Lee! Don't be shy, ask her a question!")

Parents also have a big influence on what careers children go into. When you were thinking about what to do when you grew up, I'm willing to bet that the majority of us will have at least considered the jobs and industries that we'd heard about because it was what our parents did, what our extended family did, what our parents' friends did. I never considered IT because I didn't know anyone working in IT, and we didn't even have a TV. I'd never heard of actuaries until I shared a house with a trainee actuary in my mid-20s. My parents never told me what to do, but the upbringing I had meant I was inclined more towards academic-type careers (my first jobs out of uni were in libraries.) Like it or not, they had instilled their values in me - and my friends show similar patterns. One friend went into retail - her father runs a department store. Another is an engineer, like her father, she did physics A-level - one of my other friends who did physics A-level is a nurse, like her mother. So we need to attract the parents as well as the children. Of course not everyone follows this pattern in the same way, but many do, so we need to educate the parents about what a wide range of STEM careers are available, so that it's part of the things that get talked about at home.

Finally, one of the things that struck me about many of the women I met at the BBC day was the number who hadn't taken a straight path into IT - my first degree is history, and many others had done non-ITish things first. We need to be more open to less traditional paths in; this is difficult with science careers, because you need to build on the knowledge you already have. But it can be possible (the OU would not exist if it were not.) Is it a bad thing to have someone start a career at 40? They're likely to be working for at least another 25 years, which seems a fair investment on any training to me.

The other thing we need to look at here is career breaks - in IT in particular, job roles quite often have requirements for very specific skills, and because things move on quite quickly, if you've been out of the workforce for a couple of years, this can be a major barrier to women returning to work - they weren't there to be on the training courses, and if they can't get back into work, then they aren't going to gain the skills and experience easily. It probably doesn't need to be as difficult as we make it, and if we're going to stop the leaky pipeline, we do need to look at ways round this problem.

I don't know how other STEM careers compare for that aspect, but the more specific the requirements for particular technical skills are, the more of a barrier that is going to be unless we offer more support for returners to work; perhaps if men take up their rights to parental leave, we will be forced to resolve it better than we currently do.

If I were advising someone whose mind is not made up, and they have no clear academic bias, I would advise them to take STEM subjects, simply because it's easier to pick up subjects like languages, history and literature at evening classes and on university outreach programmes and MOOCs and so on. Although MOOCs mean it's also easier to pick up some STEM subjects outside of normal formal education, too. Subject decisions made at school do not set everything in stone forever for those who are determined, which is good, because we do specialise way to early in the UK.

So:
Talking to girls -

  • Focus on the benefits (pay, flexibility, variety, learning)
  • Focus on the massive variety of STEM careers
  • Get the parents on board as well as the children

Talking to employers -

  • More flexible ideas about career paths and entry points
  • More support for returners to work

Essay over. Grin

anothernumberone · 30/01/2015 22:44

Nah Buggers I get that but given the importance of STEM and applied sciences to the improvement of humanity and the fact that at least 50% of the STEM talent is likely to land with women it is worth at least trying to get women interested.

i can't fault following the money either though, it sets a good precedence for girls and younger women.

morethanpotatoprints · 30/01/2015 22:48

Just talking from the pov of the lower income areas and their schools for outreach.
There always seem to be a couple from these schools who go into careers in science, engineering, etc.
I'm sure there would be more to reach.
However, I remain convinced its a preserve for those who are strongly encouraged by parents, not necessarily employed in these fields themselves, but at least educated in their worth.

anothernumberone

I really hope you enjoy your work and get a lot of satisfaction from what you do. Do you have dc? I'm not sure what the equivalent of set squares, drawing board, and all strengths of pencils is, but I bet you'd be so encouraging. Thanks

YonicScrewdriver · 30/01/2015 22:48

Marking place

PuffinsAreFictitious · 30/01/2015 22:52

And now, just as I thought I'd made up my mind, I am wavering again.

STEM subjects are brilliant and easy (for me) it's a real shame that more girls don't take them up and that more women aren't taking them forward.

EBearhug · 30/01/2015 22:53

Oh, I meant to add - we shouldn't just focus on the girls. Boys need to see women in STEM careers as normal, too, and the solutions shouldn't be just down to women.

I do enjoy the events I've done with STEMNet and so on, and some of the things I've been involved in at work through STEM promotion has given me opportunities to do stuff I never would in my day job. But sometimes I feel tired that as a woman in IT I feel some obligation to encourage girls, when it's something that never even crosses my male colleagues' minds.

Mushypeasandchipstogo · 30/01/2015 22:53

I think one of the problems is that there are so few really inspiring Physics teachers teaching A level. Schools find it difficult to recruit talented teachers, especially in the South, when a top Physics graduate could be earning far more elsewhere.

Swipe left for the next trending thread