CONCURRENT PANELS: Transforming Research to Action

Transforming the Equation in Science and Technology: The Case for Women and Girls

By drawing on research and practical hands-on projects for women and girls, this session outlined the kinds of policies and projects that have proven successful in attracting women and girls to science and technology, and ensuring that they have a fair chance of thriving once there. Panelists identified areas in which progress has been made, as well as continuing barriers to full inclusion.

Chair: Carol Hollenshead (Director, Center for the Education of Women, University of Michigan)

Participants: Angela Ginorio (Director, Northwest Center for Research on Women, University of Washington), Sue Rosser (Director, Center for Women's Studies and Gender Research, University of Florida), Cecily Cannan Selby (Scientist, Director, Educator), Carol Burger (Coordinator, Science and Gender Equity Program, Virginia Polytechnic Institute)

Angela Ginorio, who directs the NSF-funded Rural Girls and Sciences Program in Washington, sent a paper outlining some of the challenges faced by underrepresented groups -- students and faculty of color, women, students from rural backgrounds -- in the sciences and engineering. The Rural Girls and Sciences Program is designed to encourage girls' participation in the sciences, and to identify issues affecting access to the sciences and engineering among rural girls, with particular attention to the impact of socially defined identities, parental involvement, and mentoring. In rural communities, the issue of access to science education is still central, she argued, often due to tracking, which is highly correlated to socio-economic status. Additionally, for many non-white, working class girls, the choice of science as a career can create not only physical but also psychological distance since it necessitates their leaving family and community. Nevertheless, she found that the only students among whom commitment to science had diminished during the Program years were girls not participating in the project. Despite this success, she is concerned by the politically motivated changes in funding arenas, which may have a negative affect on their ability to continue to offer programs informed by feminist scholarship.

Carol Burger spoke about national policy issues regarding science education, and post-1980s efforts to increase the numbers and percentages of women and people of color in the science disciplines through various NSF grants designed to recruit and retain women and girls. She argued that while there has been some steady success in this regard, in order to see broader-based change, we must encourage the development of a feminist pedagogy for science education, and promote the idea that those in policy positions should have a feminist theoretical foundation upon which to base their funding and programming decisions. Drawing from her own work as an invited reviewer of projects funded by the NSF between 1988 and 1997 that were designed to encourage women's participation in math, science, and engineering, Sue Rosser echoed some of Carol's comments. She has found that of the various projects funded, few have been geared toward post-secondary scientific education, and fewer have centered on pedagogy, curriculum, or classroom climate. Rosser argued that the lack of attention in funding initiatives to changing the environment in the classroom, the laboratory, or the academy continues to pose challenges to women's involvement in the sciences.

Cecily Selby followed this point by explaining that the impetus for the New York Academy of Sciences conference she chaired earlier in the year was an interest in why young women and girls were not pursuing careers in science given that they no longer expressed the feeling that they are barred access. She argued that slow-to-change work climates in the sciences and engineering are not only unhealthy for the participation of women and minorities, but also for the future of science and technological research. Dr. Selby advocated shifting the debate from helping women, girls, and minorities in the sciences and engineering, to helping the sciences through the increased participation of women, girls, and minorities.

During the comments that followed, Nomcebo Simelane, a geographer from the University of Swaziland and a Global Initiative participant, noted similarities between the panelists' discussions and her own experiences in working toward maximizing participation of girls and women in the sciences in southern Africa. She echoed panelists' views that while access has become less of a barrier to the participation of women and girls in the sciences, working environments remain a challenge once access has been gained.

Previous Page

Next Page

Back to the program