Female Researcher: We Must Make STEM Courses ‘Less Competitive’ to Be More ‘Inclusive’ of Women

National Review ^ | March 22, 2016 | Katherine Timpf

[C19fan]

A doctoral candidate at the University of North Dakota published a paper suggesting that we should make Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) courses more “inclusive” of women by making then “less competitive,” which is about the most sexist thing I’ve ever heard. “There is an opportunity for STEM courses to reduce the perception of courses as difficult and unfriendly through language use in the syllabi, and also as a guide for how to use less competitive teaching methods and grading profiles that could improve the experience of female students,” Laura Parson wrote in the paper.

[GoldwaterChick]

At least they get a fancy title—”barista”. No, they are fountain workers serving coffee. That title is to make everyone feel better—especially those paying $5 for a cup of coffee that tastes like burned rope.

[Myrddin]

My company is 90% staffed with STEM employees. Lots of master's and PhD (30%). There is a filtering that occurs after you get hired and work a project or two. Your reputation for being a performing asset to the team results in getting recruited to new contracts. If you're not a performer, you lose "coverage" i.e. you are an employee without a revenue producing contract. If you don't fix that fairly quickly, the HR department sends you notice that your arrangements are coming to an end very soon.

The idea that making STEM classes less competitive so that you can graduate more people with less capability is a wrong headed approach. It is better to fail in school and find a more suitable path, then to exit with a degree and a reputation for not performing. That millstone will be hard to shed. My current development team is about equally divided male/female. All are great performers. Senior staff with great track records that have survived the filtering process.

[jonascord]

Bookmark

[Pearls Before Swine]

A PhD in education or an EdD is less difficult than an AA in electronics.

But it takes longer, so they get credit for patience?

[theBuckwheat]

Calculus, upon which much of what is “STEM” is based is not competitive at all. Either you can use it competently or you cannot.

STEM is anti-feminist because you can not yammer, spin, nag or bully your way to success.

“There is no try, only do.” —Yoda

[Grampa Dave]

This bs can be another blow against the 4-5 year college programs as they become PC safe places for future failures.

Companies and the CIA/NSA/FBI/? are going to Math Olympiads and Odyssey of the Mind events to identify the young people they want to work for them.

Those chosen become paid interns and often have professors visiting them for their so called upper education.

[Pecos]

Note the full title of what she wrote: “Are STEM Syllabi Gendered? A Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis,”

Gotta be written as part of a Womyn's Studies course, which defines it as worthless from the get-go.

[Gumdrop]

I was always a good student and very good at math and most sciences. But, I did not like physics. All the theories and facts about electricity confused me, mostly the resistance part.

So, I decided to continue in the medical sciences - not nursing though - medical laboratory sciences.

The fact is, people differ in abilities and interests. It takes a combination of abilities and interests to become truly good at something.

Anyone who thinks dumbing down education standards is an idiot.

[DoughtyOne]

[IronJack]

Yeah, magnetism and electricity were my weak areas in physics too. I managed to bulldoze my way through them though.

[Grampa Dave]

More on new math being pushed even in STEM courses!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks C19fan.

[Eaker]

Most of the women I knew in college who were engineering, science, or math majors regularly ran rings around their male counterparts.

My experience was exactly the opposite.

[Chode]

[GOPJ]

“Victim-ocracy”

Good one!

[fedupjohn]

Electrical Engineering here, I agree!