Retention Policies and Practices for Women in Science: a Single Sex Camp and Its Effects

RETENTION POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE: A SINGLE SEX CAMP AND ITS EFFECTS ON ADOLESCENT WOMEN

Roxanne Hughes

Florida State University

Graduate Student

Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Contact information:

1571 Stone Road Unit 6B

Tallahassee, FL 32303

Email Address:

INTRODUCTION

Currently, in the United States there is a discrepancy in the numbers of women pursuing degrees in specific science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. The most recent NSF (2007) report found that women comprise only 27% of the total science and engineering workforce and most of those women are relegated to lower positions in these careers. Research suggests that the crucial time for identifying and combating this gender discrepancy phenomenon is middle school (Barton, Tan, & Rivet, 2008). At this point, test scores and confidence of young males have been found to increase while those of females decrease (AAUW, 2008; Shakeshaft, 1995). The gender difference exists not only in test scores but also interest in science and math (Spielhagen, 2008). If adolescent women lose interest in science, then they will be less likely to take certain science courses that are typically required for admission or success in college science majors. As a result, it is important to determine programs and policies that encourage women to take courses typically required for college admission and that predict success in college science majors.

This paper utilizes a feminist standpoint theorist perspective to identify sources of gender differences in female students’ science interest. Feminist theorists contend that the historical marginalization of women of all ages in the sciences combined with cultural and social gender stereotypes prevent them from entering into the sciences (Bianchini, Cavozos, & Helms, 2000; Harding, 1997; Lemke, 2001). The feminist standpoint theory focuses on the unique viewpoint each individual can have regarding an event, person, and/or picture based on their own unique experience (Harding, 1997). Specifically, women have unique experiences different from men that create “distinctively gendered standpoints on nature” or a unique feminist standpoint (Harding, 1997, p. 187).

This concept of marginalization of women in science has also gained prominence in education policy initiatives including No Child Left Behind (Ferrara & Ferrara, 2008). Some researchers believe that young women may learn better in a learning environment where the distraction of young men is missing and interest in science and math is supported by female peers and female role models (Brickhouse & Potter, 2001; Rayman & Brett, 1995). However, other research claims that there is no definitive proof that single sex programs and classes actually improve women’s interest in science majors and careers (Mael et al., 2005). Therefore, single-sex programs that aim to increase the number of women in science are new phenomena that need to be studied to determine if they are improving women’s representation in science fields/careers and if so, what strategies and program features contribute to this success.

METHODS & DATA

For this research, a two-week all-girls middle school science camp in Northern Florida was chosen. The unit of analysis for this study was the participants, the teachers, and the administrators of the camp. This particular camp is in its third year. Each year the number of applicants has increased and the administrators accept 30-32 girls from over 100 applicants. Participants are chosen based on their interest in science, teacher recommendations, and diversity including type of school (i.e. urban, rural, charter). This study determined how effective this camp is at providing a rich array of science experiences that stimulate a strong interest in science at a critical time in girls’ educational development.

The research questions for the study include:

1.  What are the goals of the camp as voiced by the administrators and teachers? Are these goals achieved?

2.  How do the specific events, interactions, and/or conversations highlighted by teachers and participants have an impact on the girls’ interest in science and science careers?

3.  What misconceptions regarding science emerge and how does participation in the camp affect the participants’ misconceptions?

To answer these questions, the author chose a mixed method approach including surveys (pre and post camp), participant observation, and interviews.

RESULTS

For my first research question, the teachers and administrators maintained their overall goal of exposing the participants to multiple science fields and increasing their interest in these fields. Some of the other themes that became evident through the interview and survey responses were: experience with science and real world connections, increasing empowerment and confidence, engagement in learning, and developing inspiration and motivation for continued learning.

The participants’ survey and interview responses revealed that these objectives were met. The Lickert scale portions of the girls’ surveys were analyzed by finding the mean score of the responses.

Table 1: Mean Scores for Lickert Scale Portions of Survey

Overall Experience / Changed Attitudes towards science / Improved Confidence / Improved Problem Solving / Overall Knowledge
Mean score / 4.85 / 3.6 / 4.0 / 3.95 / 4.6

Table 2: Participants’ “Yes/No” Responses

Percentage of Yes Responses / Percentage of No Responses
Camp Influenced Career Decision / 62% / 38%
Enjoyed All Girls Environment / 94% / 6%

Table 1 shows the results of this analysis. The participants rated all categories highly. Respondents indicated that they already possessed positive attitudes towards science and problem solving which explains why these two categories were below 4.0. Table 2 shows the positive influence the camp had on the participants’ interest in science careers. Table 2 also shows the positive reaction participants had to the all-girls’ environment. These reactions are supported by the qualitative responses the participants gave in their surveys and interviews:

“There is no competition and there are girls there that I have a lot in common with, science wise. And we are all kinda at the same thinking level.” (Participant Survey Response)

“I think girls don’t always get as many opportunities as guys so this is a good opportunity for me and other girls.” (Participant Survey Response)

“When it is just girls I feel much more comfortable than when there are boys too.” (Participant Survey Response)

For my second research question, I wanted to find out which interactions or activities had the most impact on the participants. Based on the surveys, observations and interviews, I found that the most beneficial activities were where the presenters provided an explanation of the importance of the particular activity and the real world application. All three of the highest ranked activities had the common theme of explanation, demonstration of real world application, and a presentation that kept the girls interested.

And finally, for my third research question through participant observation and survey and interview responses, I found that the participants held the misconception that science is sterile and provides answers with absolute certainty. Through the camp the girls learned that science can be messy and unpredictable. The participants also had practice in the analytical nature of science.

IMPLICATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE

Single sex camps and after school activities have been initiated throughout the United States. These single sex schools and programs were stimulated by the federal policies mentioned earlier in this paper. However, the effectiveness of single sex schools and programs is yet to be determined. Therefore, studies like this one that look at the immediate and longitudinal effects of a single sex program on middle school female students’ interest and persistence in science are crucial to an overall understanding of the influences that are most effective in retaining women in science beginning in middle school. The results of this study can help policy makers and school administrators to have a better understanding of educational initiatives that can improve the gender gap in science test scores, interest, and persistence.

References

AAUW Educational Foundation. (2008). Where the girls are: The facts about gender equity in education.

Washington, DC: Author.

Barton, A.C., Tan, E., & Rivet, A. (2008). Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science among urban middle

school girls. American Educational Research Journal, 45 (1), p 68-103)

Bianchini, J.A., Cavazos, L.M., & Helms, J.V. (2000). From professional lives to inclusive practice: Science teachers and scientist views of gender and ethnicity in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 511-547.

Brickhouse, N.W. & Potter, J.T. (2001). Young women’s scientific identity formation in an urban context. Journal

of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 965-980.

Ferrara, M. & Ferrara, P. (2008) Chapter 7: Good news and bad news: Student behavior in single-sex classes. In

F.R. Spielhagen (Ed). Debating single-sex education: Separate and equal? (pp.70-82). Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Lemke, J.L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296-316.

Mael, F., Alonso, A., Gibson, D., Rogers, K., & Smith, M. (2005). Single-Sex Versus Coeducational Schooling: A

Systematic Review. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and

Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/reports.html on March 5, 2007.

NSF, (2007) National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics, Arlington, VA: Women,

Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: NSF07-315.

Rayman, P. & Brett, B. (1995) Women science majors: What makes a difference in persistence after graduation?

The Journal of Higher Education, 66(4), 388-414.

Shakeshaft, C. (1995). Reforming Science Education to Include Girls. Theory into Practice, 34(1), 74-79.

Spielhagen, F.R. (2008) Chapter 4: Having it our way: Students speak out on single-sex classes. In F.R.

Spielhagen (Ed). Debating single-sex education: Separate and equal? (pp.32-46). Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.