In the
last few weeks I have been thinking a lot about STEM and its impact. This has
come around from a few things such as a meeting with the Royal Society of
Edinburgh and GTCS’s Martin Osler (@MartinOsler) presenting the Partnership of
the Year Award Sponsored by GTCS, which won this year by Dalziel High School
and Amec Foster Wheeler for a five year project encouraging pupils into STEM
subject. There has also been some coverage in press and I think I am missing
teaching science (I am the only one who gets excited when I open the Chemistry
of Christmas, today it was acetic acid (C2H4O), cool
stuff). So I had a look at the Education
Source - EBSCO and pulled off three articles which all discuss different
aspects of STEM subjects.
Let’s
start with the bad press. In the last while there have been some disturbing
notions about STEM subjects and some opinions are most unhelpful. For example,
the twitter frenzy #distractinglysexy that was created after Jeremy Hunts
comments about female scientists, see below;
Tim
Hunt, an English biochemist who admitted that he has a reputation for being a
“chauvinist”, said to the World Conference of Science Journalists in Seoul,
South Korea: “Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen
when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with
you and when you criticise them, they cry.”
Source: The Guardian (June 10th 2015)
Unfortunately
you don’t have to look far to find similar misguided campaign’s, for example,
IBM’s ‘Hack a Hairdryer’ campaign, which has recently come in for criticism
both in the media and on twitter and due to the negative media attention, IBM
have pulled this campaign. The aim of
the campaign was sound, in that it was to "reengineer
misperceptions about women in tech, and to focus on what really matters in
science”, however the way this was then marketed was not as ‘sound’.
I would love to have been in that meeting,
“OK chaps, we have to engage more females in engineering, any
ideas?”
“Well, what can we use that all women relate to?”
“I’ve got it! They all love playing with their hair so what
about hairdryers?”
What a great opportunity missed.
Criticism in the press;
“IBM's
"hack a hairdryer" campaign suddenly attracted a barrage of criticism
by Twitter users who called it patronising and sexist”
(BBC
website 7th December 2015)
And on twitter;
There are also concerns that the implementation of CfE has
narrowed the curriculum and had led to a fall in the uptake of STEM subject by
4% in 2015, reported in Holyrood, here.
There are good news stories as well, this week we see an
astronaut from Britain launching to the International Space Station where he
will spend six months carrying out experiments and research. This weekend sees
the end of the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (#COP21) with a ‘historic’ climate
change agreement being agreed to by around 200 countries. Aberdeen Council lead
the way to support primary teachers move from feeling ‘trepidation’ to ‘science
champions’ by investing in staff capabilities, reported in Holyrood, here. There is also lots of good resources and support through
STEMNET and the learned Societies such as the Institute of Physics, Royal
Society of Chemistry and the Royal Society of Biology.
Even
with all of these supports and resources we are still not meeting the demand
from industry for students with a focus on STEM subjects. STEM subjects are
still seen as the way forward to keep the global workforce sustainable and economically
viable in an ever changing and digitising world. In a recent Telegraph article
(8-12-15), here, they discussed how
mothers who were not fond of STEM subjects, for whatever reason, are also
passing on this “preconceptions about science to
their own daughters”. From my experience of parents evening, I can say I have
witnessed this so many times. Parents coming into the science lab and starting
the conversation with “I was never any good at science so I don’t think she/he
will be either”, I always love that conversation! In the article by Wenger et
all (2014, p37), they cite Toglia (2013) who discuss the “socio-economic status, their parents expectations,
jobs and educational level and the influence of respective advice centres” as
all factors which influence girls in continuing with STEM subjects. So the
perception of themselves as learners and social influences could have a more
direct effect on girls choosing or not choosing STEM subjects.
The
way children learn through play also impacts on their learning through out
there lives. Girls tend to keep their play within the confines of ‘game’
whereas boys tend to go outwith. I saw this with my own children when they
played with Lego, my boy would build something then break it apart and make
random things, which all had a purpose - usually destruction! Whereas my
daughter always built what was on the box and was satisfied when it was
finished. This leads me to wonder then if there is something in the way
learning is constructed into already existing schema (Piaget, 1975) that
supports different thinkers, whether boys or girls, as Wenger et al (2014, p39)
states “STEM subjects demand high levels of abstract thinking from students
because of the models and formulas the respective information is condensed in”.
Wenger et al (2014) goes on to discuss the need for more ‘independent learning
opportunities’ so girls can build mental models, self-esteem and view of
themselves as being ‘good’ at STEM subjects.
Another
aspect that influences whether students’ progress into STEM subjects is the
‘edutainment’. In science subjects in early years, through primary and into the
first stages of secondary there has been a focus on making science ‘fun’ to
engage students. While I do like this aspect, it can only best serve the STEM
subjects if this is underpinned by scientific rigour and followed up with a
discussion around ‘what do our results tell us?’ rather than ‘just for fun’. As
Pittinsky & Diamante (2015, p 47) state “At first glance, it looks like the
problem begins when the fun stops”.
Teachers
also have a huge role to play. In a cluttered education system with various
pathway options and subjects jostling for attention, it can be hard for
students to make decisions about the best subjects to take. Teachers need to be
‘gender free’ with advice and it is worrying to read in a Telegraph article,
cited above, “Too often, I hear stories of
teachers and career advisers telling girls that science is not for them”. So
maybe we have to re-culture teacher’s knowledge and expectations for all students.
Within the STEM subjects we need to start working more collaboratively, instead
of the subject silo’s, and in co-operation with each other to promote a STEM
mindset as Morrison and Bartlett (2009) cited by Pittinsky & Diamante
(2015) state we will have moved to a time when “the STEM subjects are to be
seen as a collective curriculum, where their content can become integrated or
fused as one subject”.
Studying
STEM subjects for all students can stir curiosity and enhance creativity, innovation
and support positive learning experiences. Coupled with non-gender specific
advice and continuing to increase the awareness of the pathways and careers
offered by studying STEM subject – not that I am biased!
References
Pittinsky,
T.L.& Diamante, N (2015) Going
beyond fun in STEM: Kappan magazine.org p47- 51
Retrieved
15-12-07 p
Roberts,
A. (2013) STEM is here, Now what? Technology and engineering teacher p22- 27
Wegner,
C. Strehlke, F. Weber, F. (2014) Investigating the differences between girls
and boys regarding the factors of frustration, boredom an insecurity they
experience during science lessons:
Themes
in Science and Technology Education, 7(1), pp 35-45
Useful
websites
No comments:
Post a Comment