Stereotypes and cultural conventions hamper girls’ enthusiasm in STEM, but educators can address the gaps by making simple modifications to their practices. This blog will look at hurdles and solutions for increasing girls’ interest and willingness to participate in STEM programs. Continue reading to learn more!
1st Barrier: Building a Math identity
The issue: One explanation for gender inequalities in STEM engagement could be opinions about what it means to be a mathematician or scientist. When girls become aware of male supremacy in arithmetic through both subtle and overt cultural messaging, each encounter with math and technology becomes more difficult.
Solution:
According to studies, teachers can help children develop a growth mindset by emphasizing the importance of effort above natural talent in improving performance. Including images of female mathematicians or scientists in instructional materials can also help to change attitudes about who belongs.
2nd Barrier: The race and class conflict
Our perceptions about who is good in arithmetic and the academic and financial assistance that follows may have a more significant impact on achievement than essential ability. According to research, black girls see themselves as outsiders in mathematics, and teachers see them as outsiders.
Solution:
Schools can think about “structural disturbances” in how math is taught. Furthermore, community influences and resilience tactics from extracurricular or co-curricular programs, single-gender programs, and teacher training in culturally responsive teaching strategies can benefit. More importantly, having black and female role models in STEM fields can be beneficial.
3rd Barrier: Context matters as much as content
According to research, the format matters when it comes to teaching and learning STEM subjects. For example, according to a poll, girls performed higher in higher-level arithmetic but scored somewhat worse on the admissions test, resulting in lower admittance rates. This isn’t because girls aren’t good at arithmetic; it’s more likely that they make fewer guesses, which is a disadvantage on a multiple-choice test, and performs better with open-ended responses.
Solution:
Instead of using multiple-choice examinations, common in math and science, teachers should focus on open-ended assessments that allow students, particularly girls. This may help demonstrate their competency through word problems or writing, which they are more comfortable with.
Conclusion
There is a dire need for structural consideration in STEM programs based on how girls and boys think and analyze problems. Girls need to be encouraged more to break the stereotypical barriers that restrict them from pursuing society’s definition of non-conventional careers and interests.
