On influences on women choosing technology careers

Report: Women Who Choose Computer Science – What Really Matters (Google, 2014)

Today I had a read of this Google backed report into women in technology. In the face of so many reports commenting about negative perceptions of women and tech, this one stood apart due to its positivity. The report identified the two main drivers that can have the most impact on increased female participation as ENCOURAGEMENT (social/family/peers and self belief) and EXPOSURE (availability of academic subjects and perceptions of the tech sector). The report also highlighted that some commonly held beliefs about what influences students may not be as important as we credit them.

Top four influencing factors are:

• Social encouragement: positive reinforcement of computer science from family and peers. Family support influenced 17% of people surveyed, peers 11%. It also noted that girls are half as likely to receive encouragement as girls.
• Self perception: having an interest in puzzles and problem solving – and a belief that those skills can translate to a successful career. Self perception of maths ability and problem solving influenced 17% but the ultimate influencer was a passion for solving problems and tinkering.
• Academic exposure: availability of both structured (formal/graded studies) and informal (after school programs). This accounted for 22.4% of explainable factors – the study went on to say that regardless of how they were exposed – young women that had been exposed were more likely than those that weren’t (eg. Anything is better than nothing).
• Career perception: familiarity and perception that tech careers can be diverse and be positive. Accounts for 27.5% of explainable factors on why a young woman would pursue an career in technology. The main problem here is that a flawed perception of tech (ie nerdy, boring, hard, technical) actively dissuades young woman from pursuing an interest, and ultimately correcting the perception.

Things that have less influence include: ethnicity, family income, parental occupation and perceptions of natural ability. Other factors that had limited influence include: having a family member in the tech sector, early exposure to tech, age of first computer exposure, access to mobile devices, natural aptitude, pre-college computer science education.

The conclusion is overwhelmingly positive. Mainly because the report believes that the four core influencers can be addressed. It believes that outreach programs should:

• contain a parent education component,
• provide young woman an opportunity to practice problem solving skills,
• support organisations adding informal or formal computer science education to more schools,
• focus on the visibility of female role models and story telling of positive impact careers.

My thoughts:

I liked the simplicity of this arrangement – exposure and encouragement. It makes sense. I liked the positivity that these are actionable areas and the suggestions for how to act. I like that the report makes an effort to identify things that are not critical influencers (but could be seen as distractions to outreach programs?). I would argue that those elements are things that need to be considered – e.g. parents and peers will still influence but, depending on background/situation, may influence in different ways.

One thing the report didn’t touch on was the age at which young women are most receptive to external influences. The report is categorised into ‘high school’ and ‘post college’ – but doesn’t mention primary education or the role of high school peers in subject selection. There is the common perception that early high school (age 13-14) is the subject choice cliff, the point at which female perceptions of technology is first revealed (and where schools a lot of their student cohort).

On the growth of ICT Jobs in Australia

An interesting stat emerged in a news a few weeks ago: according to SEEK.com, the online job platform, tech job advertisements made up the largest category of new jobs posted in 2014. At 10.7% this category beat out Trades and Services (7.7%) and Healthcare and Medical (7.4%). From Jan 2014 to Jan 2015 – the number of tech job advertisements grew by 14%.

The drivers of this change appear to be digital transformation and analytics/intelligence. This means companies moving their infrastructure to the cloud and accommodating a mobile-first world. It also means restructuring existing processes so that you can pull data from them and then do something with that data (probably the integration of analytics software).

This is interesting news – largely because it uses SEEK data. For years, critics have commented that the Australian Bureau of Statistics mis-represents tech jobs (e.g. how do you categorise an HR person working at a tech company or a techie working in an infrastructure firm?). But this data is user generated and the ads are written to be found by the largest number of techies possible.

[Source: ICT leads growth in Aussie jobs market, ARN, Feb 2015]

On Attitudes to ICT Careers and Study Among 13-19 Year Olds

As a state, Victoria has been hit pretty hard by the Australia wide decline in ICT enrolments. Between 2002 (peak) and 2012 (trough) Victoria experienced a drop of over 10,000 students in tertiary computer science related degrees. This compares to a decline of 5,600 in NSW and 8,700 in Qld. Percentage wise we are talking declines of 38% (Victoria), 49% (Queensland) and 28% (NSW). Its no wonder that the Victorian Government (Department of State Development, Business and Innovation) has commissioned four reports (2004, 2007, 2009, 2012) investigating career choice and study options among young people. Here are some of the findings, paying attention to noticeable changes from 2009-2012:

Some things don’t change:

• The percentage of students that studied ICT in year 9 or above (remained at 42%)
• Awareness of the term ICT (sits at 40%) – although students had trouble defining what it meant
• Understanding that ICT had career opportunities (67%)
• Interest in studying ICT at a tertiary level (when asked) remains at 41%
• Interest in pursuing a career in ICT (when asked) remains at 46%

Some things do:

• Decline: student interest in working in the ICT sector compared to other sectors (from 35% to 24%)
• Decline: interest in studying ICT (when compared with other courses) from 37% down to 28%
• Increase: students believe they have a better understanding of ICT as a career choice (51% in 2009, 56% in 2012)
• Increase: students believe ICT is recession proof (10% in 2009, 30% in 2012)
• Increase: students thought that delivery of ICT in schools has improved (64% in 2009, to 79% in 2012)

What students are looking for:

• a job they can excel in (83%)
• a job that is in line with their areas of interest (82%)
• a job they’re proud of (78%)
• a secure job (77%)
• a chance to earn good money (75%)
• Summary: students are looking for a job that they will enjoy for many years, one that provides the lifestyle they want to have, is not stressful, one where they are not stuck indoors and behind a desk all day and one that offers a good work/life balance

Influencers:

• Parents (85%) remain the key influencer for career choices and guidance
• People that work in the industry (83%)
• Teachers (71%)
• Work experience in the area (71%)
• Other family members (72%)
• Institution open days/careers fairs (72%)
• Friends and peers (56%) play less of a role, but still a greater role than generic internet sources, media and social media

Perceptions of ICT:

• Students still see ICT as monotonous and desk bound (58% agree)
• Low human interaction (44% agree)
• Geeky and nerdy (30% agree) – these perceptions are formed from teachers that teach the subject, people they know in the industry and impressions they receive from TV. While students are not anti-geek, they don’t necessarily identify with that image.

Positioning: the report then looks at what messages resonate with the ambitions of students in different age category:

• Years 7-8: ICT should be a positive school experience, not tied to career choices but role modelled by adults and fun to engage in
• Years 9-10: at this age, messaging should directly address and alleviate misconceptions about ICT and promote ICT as a gateway to future career choices
• Years 11-12: students need to know the broader skills sets required of tertiary level ICT, outside of the technical expertise – students need reassurance that they are capable of being able to study at a higher level.

Communications and Information:

• Ensure that outward facing communications resonate with students – this includes both rationally (i.e. salary, career options, in demand industry etc) and emotionally (fun career, stay abreast of tech trends, fulfilling career)
• Clarify misconceptions: ICT does not need to be desk bound, it has group work, it is social, it is global etc
• Convey the diversity of available careers: ideally in ‘day in the life’ style promotions
• Disseminate information via school networks (careers advisors, teachers and parents)
• Work on gaining mainstream multimedia attention for campaigns

The role of industry:

• The challenge with this issue is representing diversity of career choice in a targeted fashion that meets the diverse interests of students at different age levels. Industry can play a greater role in schools and participating in careers expos.

Industry’s own actions will have a significant impact on addressing educational and broader workforce issues over time, and as such, they along with schools, education providers, and the Government, must continue to take joint responsibility and ownership for attracting people to the industry to achieve positive outcomes for the sector as a whole

On whether you can prepare for future jobs

There was no such thing as a social media expert five to ten years ago and some the fastest growing jobs are in user experience design, iOS and Android development, and business intelligence – some of which didn’t exist before 2007.

This statement came from a piece on the changing nature of jobs. The above jobs were created largely by the mass uptake of the smart phone since 2007. Social would be a very different place without neat apps, geotagging and great cameras in phone. UX wouldn’t exist as we know it without the mad rush of companies needing to adapt to smart phone specs and finally business intelligence – well, that could exist, however the huge amount of data generated from phones has changed that landscape as well.

Jobs change over time. The point of the article is that it is possible to come from a diverse range of backgrounds and still arrive in the same role. This article emphasises soft skills such as enthusiasm, team work, interpersonal skills but personally I felt it underplayed some of the more tangible skills you need to be effective. While UX might be intuitive – it certainly comes into its own when working with people that have the technical skills to modify apps/websites and understand, at an almost academic level, what is happening from a design point of view.

There is a tension between employers seeking diverse experience and those that want niche skills sets. Employers hope that employees bring something fresh to the mix through their previous backgrounds but also hope that a person is a ninja in their field of expertise. From the employee point of view – if you stay too focused you lose your adaptability, too diverse and you may find that when looking for a job you are piped at the post by someone with a closer aligned skills set.

So what to do? Do the best you can, stay diverse, keep up to speed with new interests and take advantage of free online courses to hone your skills.

On Reasons Why Women Should Work in Software Engineering

 

Alaina Percival, CEO of the nonprofit Women Who Code, recently posted her thoughts on reasons more women should work in software engineering. Her post comes in response to the recent diversity reports from Google, Facebook and LinkedIn that show women hold just 15%-17% of technical roles in those organisations.

Here are 10 reasons why more women should work in software engineering:

1. Employers want to hire you.
2. Job security.
3. The potential for flexible schedules, working from home or anywhere in the world.
4. IT jobs constantly claim the top spots on “Top Job Lists”.
5. Tech can require a lot of collaboration — a skill often valued in women.
6. The career can be fulfilling for those who like to constantly learn new things.
7. You often need to think creatively and solve problems.
8. It is considered prestigious and this will likely increase over time.
9. There are many different career paths as you move up in your career.
10. In the future, all companies will be involved in technology, so no matter what sector you are interested in you could find an engineering role.

This list could really apply to anyone but its a great the diversity is being championed.

On university and industry perceptions of Australia’s ICT industry

Report: “Addressing ICT curriculum recommendations from surveys of academics, workplace graduates and employers” (University of Wollongong et al, 2012) [LINK]

Today I’m going to look the first (of five) issues raised in this report: perception (pages 26-43). These insights come from a survey conducted with 18 notable universities and up to 182 industry professionals (with large representation from Australian Computing Society membership). The survey looks at ICT industry perceptions from two target groups: a) universities looking to increase student enrolments, and b) industry looking to increase quantity and quality of employees.

[Extract] …poor perceptions of the ICT industry and profession are having a severe impact on the quality and quantity of people being attracted to ICT careers

The key issues resulting from the surveys are:

• a lack of knowledge/understanding of how different factors actually affect ICT enrolments
• collaborative activities between natural competitors (such as universities competing for students and graduates) are effective
• the concept of the “ICT profession” (really comprising a number of ICT professions) is complex, deriving at least in part from its multifaceted nature, and is neither well specified, communicated to, nor understood by key stakeholders
• improved understanding and perception of ICT is needed in terms of social (what it achieves) and industrial benefit rather than in academic or technical terms (what ICT is and does technically).

Universities:

All universities agreed that to increase ICT enrolments, student perceptions of the ICT professional would need to be more positive. Makes sense. 68% of universities said they had an effective student outreach program including activities such as visits to schools, offering university courses to high school students and teacher professional development. Further areas of outreach could include: publicising high levels of employment for ICT graduates, more aggressive publicity of job opportunities, ICT across diverse industry sectors and a focus on the social aspects of technology. The report suggests that current university efforts are more about winning individual market share and that a focus on broadly increasing ICT industry perceptions would improve all enrolments.

University Conclusion: University outreach activities need to be less-focused on institutional promotion and more focused on raising ICT industry perceptions, and that collaborative efforts with industry and other institutions need to be undertaken as appropriate in pursuit of this goal

Industry:

Industry was undecided as to whether there is a perception issue (43% agree, 33% disagree). However only 12% agreed that industry attempts to raise public perception if ICT were successful while 30% disagreed. Current activities include (unsuccessful) attempts to engage with schools directly, IBM’s Excite program and the I Choose Technology (Group X) program in Queensland. In general, industry respondents believed that their own attempts to raise public perception of ICT have been unsuccessful.

Industry Conclusion: the collective promotional activities by industry to improve perceptions of ICT should be improved by including a focus on social benefits resulting from the application of ICT in different industry sectors.

A question of marketing:

72% of industry responses said that a marketing campaign for ICT as a profession would improve perceptions (8% said no). The campaign needs to differentiate between the different types of ICT jobs that people can do (i.e. technical vs non-technical) and in a diverse range of industry sectors (health, mining, finance etc). Respondents liked CPA’s (Certified Practising Accountants) campaign to drive perceptions and quality for accredited accountants – but then again the survey responses mainly came from people involved in the tech industry’s equivalent – the Australian Computing Society.

My Conclusion:

I liked this article. It was a really interesting insight into the collective thoughts of universities and industry (mainly ACS reps). The main points I pulled were that a collaborative effort between all universities would increase total student numbers. Also, that individually industry was struggling to get cut through with their efforts to increase perceptions of ICT. A key issue seems to be the definition of the tech industry – does ‘tech’ relate to awesome startups smashing it on a global stage or does it relate to that trapped, lonely IT guy that resets your password on the first day back from holidays. Is a career in tech a globe trotting world of investments, pitching and trips to San Francisco – or is it living in fear that your job will be outsourced and you’ll have no competitive skills?

One issue with this survey is that it mainly includes the perceptions of ACS members – it doesn’t capture the boundless energy and creativity coming from the startup scene – a collective that may not see the need for professional accreditation by the ACS.

Promoting computer science careers to high school students

Article: New Image for Computing, Report on Market Research (April 2009) (Association for Computing Machinery)

This 2009 report outlines market research and initial message testing conducted by two New York marketing and communications firms (BBMG and Global Strategy Group). In 2008 the project surveyed some 1,400 college bound high school students (age 13-17) to:

• assess the current attitudes toward computer science as a college major and future career choice
• assess the same attitudes along different lines (gender, Hispanic, African American)
• develop messages that portray computer science in a variety of ways and then test the messages among teens

A couple of scene setting points to start:

• the number of students choosing computer science as a major had dropped 70% since 2000 (UCLA, 2007)
• more than 80% of first year university students did not know what a computer science major actually did
• a different survey (Taulbee, 2007) says computer science enrolments had risen 6.2% from 2006 to 2007 – however diversity is still an issue with only 10% of those awarded to women

The report begins with high school student attitudes towards computer science as a career. For the most part they are positive.

• CS ranked third (behind music and business) as ‘a good major to choose’ – however this is split on gender lines. 74% positive for boys vs 38% for girls.
• As a career choice CS ranks fourth (behind musician (?!), doctor and entrepreneur (?!)) – but notably above lawyer, financial analyst and accountant. Once again – split on gender lines leads to 67% positive for boys vs 26% positive for girls.

The report is most useful when it moves to messaging. When choosing careers high school students focused on:

• Doing work that they find interesting (78%)
• Being passionate about their jobs (71%)
• Being able to spend time with their families (54%)
• Having the power to do good and doing work that makes a difference (52%)

The research provides a gender split for the above responses – it finds that girls are more responsive when it comes to ‘being more passionate about your work’ and ‘having the power to do good and doing work that makes a difference‘. These gender gaps were quite wide (14% and 9% respectively) suggesting that people speaking with young girls about career choices should focus on these elements in their primary messaging.

The next section of the report I found interesting was when they looked at university and career choices based on familiarity with technology. The report creates three segments i) communicators (think teenagers with mobiles/social media), ii) techies (kids fixing modems and assembling computers), and iii) creators (digital media content). Not surprisingly, all teens ranked high on the first, boys on the second and girls on the third.

From here the report identified that a reasonably high number of students in the creators space (which is 44% female) were thinking of taking up computer science majors (74%) and careers (68%). This insight suggests that it is possible to translate a young girl’s enthusiasm for digital media (photography mainly) – into future digital careers. [nb a point of note – while about 70-80% of students thought computer science was a good idea – only 6%-14% considered it as a future career path. The review team proposed a separate report to address this issue]

My take away:

When talking to girls about tech careers I suggest focusing on the outcome/result of the technology. They know that apps, websites and systems are built with ‘code’ but it helps to explain that they are built by people that work with humans, that understand design, that have the ability to make things beautiful and work seamlessly. User experience, app development, business analyst roles are strong points for discussions on careers. Talking through how different organisations use technology to improve lives (ie local councils using apps to fix infrastructure or banks helping retailers conduct transactions quickly) is a good approach. Another point of conversation is that having the skills to design software (or work in tech) empowers the girls to effect this change – to ‘be in the drivers seat’.

Conclusion:

The strongest positive driver towards computer science or an openness to a career in computing, regardless of gender, is “having the power to create and discover new things”.

The STEM Crisis is a Myth – part 2

Article: The STEM Crisis: Myth or Reality? (Michael Anf, Chronicle of Higher Education, November 2013)

I thought I’d continue my review of the STEM crisis counter argument. Today I’m looking at Michael Anf’s 2013 article published in the Chronicle of Higher Education.

The strongest point of Anf’s anti-‘STEM crisis’ claim is the idea that if skills were in short supply then wages would increase as employers fought for the best and the brightest. The main source of this line of thinking is Michael S Teitelbaum, a reseacher and frequent writer on this subject. [nb. Teitelbaum was also referenced in the IEEE Spectrum article I reviewed earlier this week.] Anf’s own counter to this argument is that the globalised nature of tech work and its ability to place work in the area that offers the best skills/wages is what’s keeping USA STEM wages stable/low. This creates a circular logic that suggests that this model of globalised skills sourcing is a good thing while at the same time companies are struggling to reach new markets because of the lack of domestically skilled (and client facing) engineers and analysts.

That’s roughly the extent of Anf’s arguments suggesting there is no STEM crisis. There are other interesting points raised in the article but they mainly question whether the attention being paid to this issue is the result of successful lobbying of government by universities and tech companies in order to secure funding for STEM education support programs. I don’t necessarily believe that an issue is not valid just because someone is effective at raising attention to their cause. Sometimes those people are the most informed – other times they are acting in their own self interest.

Anf’s other points:

• Tech as entrepreneurship: Anf suggests the STEM crisis narrative is being supported, and acted upon, because technology and engineering are the means by which people ‘make and do’ things in the 21st century. These are essential foundation skills for entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs are the great white hope of countries responding to stagnant jobs growth (caused by globalised economies and the decline of domestic manufacturing and primary resources markets). I’ll support that argument. However Anf draws a distinction between the future earning potential of an Information Technology worker and other STEM disciplines such as those that are biologists, chemists, electrical engineers, manufacturing workers, mechanical engineers, or physicists. Maybe tech workers have more flexibility than chemists?
• False motives: the article also suggests that major tech companies benefit from an increase in STEM workers (and I’m defaulting to my particular interest in IT programmers). Anti-‘STEM Crisis’ proponents argue that the increased numbers of workers keep wages low. Tech companies can continue to pick the best and the brightest without the ongoing responsibility of training older workers as they move out of flavour. This is important as tech moves fast. “Norman S. Matloff, a professor of computer science at the University of California, has investigated how IT employers benefit by raising the numbers of lower-paid foreign STEM laborers and by sending offshore the engineering and STEM manufacturing jobs of mostly older American workers.” (Anf, 2013). That could be interesting to follow-up on however I don’t believe it negates the overall narrative that says our world needs more people in the STEM space.
• STEM workers change careers: About half the USA’s STEM university graduates have left STEM related jobs within ten years of graduating. Anf takes this to mean that people don’t like their jobs. I take it to mean that STEM skills are relevant in other areas of the economy. This could be a case of statistics getting in the way of a good story. We have previously seen challenges in measuring STEM workers (ie is an accountant at a tech firm a STEM employee? – government says yes). I’m not sure how these statistics would measure data scientists working at a financial institution or security experts working for an infrastructure firm. I don’t believe this career movement is related to an oversupply of educated STEM workers – I see it as someone using their skills in new fields.
• International Workers: Up until now the USA has been able to rely on the brightest minds emigrating to the USA for a better quality of life and more interesting jobs. Irma Becerra-Fernandez, vice president for engagement at Florida International University, believes that idea will change as other countries have rapidly improved their own standards of living and have caught up to the US in other areas of technical expertise. I’d argue that the US is still a very attractive place to work however perhaps that is fading.
• Recruiting mismatches: the article says that the skills shortages are real. Quote: “The problem is that employers and would-be workers don’t always match up well, whether because of geography or a worker’s level of specific skills, or because companies—merged, downsized, or otherwise hunkered down during the recession—aren’t reaching out to college grads and others effectively enough.” (Anf 2013).

My Conclusion:

The main point I pull from Anf’s article is that we should not panic over the shortage of workers. He, among others, reminds us that STEM crisis statistics are being generated by tech companies and universities with a vested interest in directing funding towards the number of skilled workers in that area. While people generally agree that students with a solid grounding in STEM have more life options – no-one has given me a satisfactory response to the question of what is happening to the previous generation of skilled IT workers – the ones who are losing their jobs to overseas competition (with lower wages).

Throughout this discussion we’re still falling back on the idea that we are future proofing a generation – we don’t know what jobs will be created in the coming 20 years, however we have a strong belief that they will involve technology – whether its making the tech yourself or needing to work with the people that the tech.

This closing quote comes from David Hart, director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy, at George Mason University

“…Combining STEM knowledge with humanities knowledge would be ideal. If you can train an engineer to solve problems and operate in a complicated environment, you’ve done something important.”

The STEM Crisis is a Myth

Article: The Stem Crisis is a Myth: An Ongoing Discussion by Robert N. Charette (IEEE Spectrum, August 2013)

I read a lot of articles on the magic of technology. Reading them creates a euphoric sense that ‘now’ is the time to be alive. The internet is coming into its own and smart phones are knocking down doors left, right and centre. Any day now a wave of entrepreneurs will rise up, create jobs for the nation and solve most all of our problems. I’m sold, I am pro-tech.

However there has always been a lingering doubt. Its not uncommon that I’ll meet a mid 40s ex-software engineer that is now long term unemployed. Where did all the jobs go? Comments sections on STEM articles are a great place to look. The same themes emerge:

1. there are no jobs in tech,
2. skilled migrants and easy visas are keeping wages low and preventing locals getting jobs,
3. there are no entry level jobs because it is too expensive to hire local graduates,
4. graduates can’t get jobs because they don’t have enough industry experience,
5. industry doesn’t believe universities are training the right kind of graduates (and therefore they must import skilled labour),
6. a person might have been in tech for 20 years but was looked over for a position because their qualifications did not exactly match the job description
7. companies were unwilling to invest in maintaining the skills of its employees – preferring to hire new people in contract roles at a cheaper price

The flip side of this is the narrative I painted above – that tech is our future and that a basic understanding of computer science will put you in good stead when it comes to stable employment.

This article, The STEM Crisis is a Myth, takes direct aim at the idea of a ‘STEM crisis’. The article first points out the challenges of defining STEM careers. Is it all people working for STEM companies (including management and cleaners) or is it people with STEM tertiary degrees (which might not include entrepreneurs or self taught). Charette’s argument is that if STEM jobs were in such high demand then:

• wages would rise for software developers (which he says they haven’t),
• there would be no need for increased skilled tech immigration visas (which has happened), and
• tertiary educated STEM students would remain in STEM careers (which 20% are not after two years, rising to 58% after ten years).

The article’s conclusion is that countries in ‘crisis’ are not short on (loosely defined) STEM workers – they are short on students literate in a solid grounding of science, maths and engineering (which I presume includes computer science). It says that the constant obsession with STEM shortages is causing a boom-bust educational cycle/focus that is disrupting what should be an essential part of every child’s education. The point of the argument is clarify the ‘crisis’ element. This panic is distorting the ‘reality’ of the tech jobs market – during boom cycles it creates false promises of endless jobs once you graduate  followed by periods where employers have no access to skilled labour once the tide of enthusiasm recedes in a bust period.

I actually find the article’s conclusion a little weak. After spending over 3700 words debunking the STEM crisis it sounds as though the author ends up arguing in favour of an increased focus on STEM subjects for children. Charette then concludes by tamely asking that “instead of continuing our current global obsession with STEM shortages, industry and government should focus on creating more STEM jobs that are enduring and satisfying as well”. That can also read as: make better jobs that are more engaging – not quite the punchy ending I was hoping for.

So I still don’t have an answer – I think I’ll settle for my existing: instilling children with competencies in STEM subjects (and logic) improves their resilience for future career prospects as the economy transitions into an unknown networked/globalised 21st century.

How to present STEM career choices to girls

The New Digital Learning Playbook: Understanding the Spectrum of Students’ Activities and Aspirations (2014, link)

This article discusses digital learning trends, use of technology in the classroom and confidence levels for boys/girls from K-12. Interesting information if that’s what you are after however the part that interested me the most was a review of students’ interests, differentiated by gender, in making STEM career choices.

The review begins with a table demonstrating that by Y9-12 the number of girls that assessed themselves as advanced tech users had dropped to almost half that of boys (17% v 32%). The conclusion from this is that if female students are not confident in their own tech abilities then they will be less likely to pursue tech careers.

It’s not all over though. A further chart says that 67% of female students are either somewhat interested or very interested in STEM related careers (79% in boys). The article then highlights that girls in particular are interested in socially based and digital career exploration opportunities that can be highly individualised to their interest levels.

A new approach to engaging girls in STEM fields may therefore include:

• Providing an online self-assessment of skills and interests (34%)
• Working with mentors who can guide college choices (32%)
• Access to websites and day-in-the-life videos for self-directed career exploration (28%)

Students were also interested in these general STEM career engagement ideas:

• Visiting companies to learn about careers (58%)
• Participating in school based career exploration programs (47%)
• Having teachers with a background in a STEM profession (43%)

It’s an interesting idea – reviewing how girls go about learning and then making sure that information is delivered in a similar fashion. Page 6 has a chart that shows that girls are more advanced tech users than boys in all aspects of digital writing (except texting conversations on gaming and HTML coding). The main broad categories that girls are strong in are digital media and writing (photography, creative writing, and journalism) and social media and online interactivity (blogging, tweets, instant messaging).

My general perception is that when talking tech with girls it is best to focus on results and outcomes. The idea that tech is a way of doing something, achieving a social outcome or helping overcome challenges.