CAST off characteristics: Not the Science Type?

Who is the “science type”? If the Draw-a-Scientist social experiment first conducted in the sixties with elementary-school children in US and Canada is any indication, back then, it was certainly a man. Out of the almost 5,000 scientists drawn by the children who participated in the experiment, only 28 drew a female scientist. All of those were drawn by girls and not a single boy drew a woman. Progress has since been made – it is very promising to see that as gender roles in society evolve so do children’s imagination of what is possible. But we are not close to parity yet. In recent decades on average, 28 percent of the children drew female scientists. Interestingly at age 6, girls draw 70 percent of scientists as women, but by the time they are 16, they draw around 75% of scientists as men, with the number starting to flip at around 10 years of age. 

Much research has been done on the topic of why many girls and young women do not see themselves or even their gender in science careers. A multitude of factors can contribute to this, at an individual, group, cultural and societal level. Studies have found that a less pronounced masculine image of science has the potential to increase the likelihood of STEM career aspirations. Among strong factors that dissuade girls are the characteristics that have become associated with the people who pursue science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education and the construct around the realities and perceptions of education and careers in these male-centric fields. This resonates. I wouldn’t have opted for STEM -- thinking that I too was not the “science type.” I am fortunate that my unique circumstances prompted that I pursue nonetheless and here I am today – a corporate scientist - the highest level at 3M and first-ever Chief Science Advocate.

Cast a light

This week I am looking forward to the launch of “Not the Science Type,” a docuseries featuring four female scientists who are challenging stereotypes having confronted gender, racial, and age discrimination as they pursue their chosen STEM fields. The series was created in order to spark a deeper conversation about stereotypes and their negative impact on STEM diversity, equity and inclusion. I am humbled to be among one of the female scientists highlighted. And while each one of us has taken a different path to pursuing scientific excellence, we are bound by the common experience of feeling ‘not the type’ for a multitude of reasons. While we may not have always thought of ourselves as the "science type," now we feel the need to share our insights and advocate for equity in the science field. 

This topic is especially important as we need all the diversity we can muster to creatively solve the challenges that face us as a society such as global healthcare issues and climate change – just to name two that are top of everyone’s minds. Scientific fields need adequate representation, not just in order to innovatively solve problems, but also to ensure that we arrive at solutions that work for all. If STEM fields are viewed in a negative light it will certainly dissuade girls AND boys from pursuing, and as a result the public awareness and appreciation of science can suffer which in turn can lead to loss of funding at all levels. Science is critical to our future. Diversity is critical to science. Gender and racial equity are critical to diversity. In fact, 2021 results of 3M State of Science Index (SOSI) show that the world recognizes diversity can help science achieve more, including greater global collaboration between scientist, more innovative ideas, new and improved approaches to existing research techniques and more research and innovation to help under-served populations.

Cast aside

Given that most of the STEM fields were largely laid out by men for men, there are many systemic barriers that women who do enter the field still confront as they often have to navigate ‘the onlyness’ along these established and entrenched pathways. They encounter systems that often have little reason or motivation to change given the majority. The recent documentary Picture a Scientist spotlights issues such as the overt discrimination and subtle microaggressions. Also, there are behavioral norms and expectations, skills and styles, tokenism and typecasting that can all seemingly promote gendered barriers, further stacking the system against women and impacting them disproportionately throughout their careers. Adding to the mix, certain evolutionary psychological gender traits and powerful social conditioning, the systemic experiences with discrimination can lead to lower satisfaction levels and it can chip away at confidence. Intersectionality further compounds these issues. Many female scientists take themselves out of the picture.

It’s not just the school or college or work environment, it’s even ingrained into the way we teach, typify, train and talk about STEM. I often speak about the importance of context for girls whereas content may suffice for boys. I have previously mentioned how I myself didn’t see the connection of STEM careers to my pro-social goals. When you are young you may often need someone to make these connections for you. I know I did. In fact, a 2008 study from the National Academy of Engineering asked students if they wanted to be engineers. No surprise -- girls were twice as likely to say no. But, when the context of what engineers do became the backdrop of the question – Who would like to design a safe water system? Who would like to save the rain-forest? It was a resounding yes from girls. A change in the construct, with addition of rich context is an intervention that will serve to inspire young girls and underrepresented minorities to pursue STEM – before the die is cast in middle school.

Cast a wider net

In addition to the construct of the field and the stereotypical portrayal of science there is also the deep-rooted gender stereotypes that can impact a child’s social identity and the perception of who is a scientist and who can be a scientist. Not only do girls not see themselves in these roles, stereotypes also have prejudicial effects on how boys view women in STEM roles when they encounter them in real life. Furthermore, popular culture archetypes of scientists as dispassionate villains, or maverick heroes, and the nerdy geeks, socially awkward, loner stereotypes are all often incompatible with the way girls see themselves, and these portrayals serve to lessen the appeal of science itself. There may be positive stereotypes as it relates to genius scientists with exceptional skills, but it essentially serves to replace one stereotype with another.

There has been a lot of effort to portray women in STEM so more girls can envision themselves pursuing STEM education and succeeding in STEM careers. Role models in science careers and adequate representation of women in science curriculum can be effective strategies to combat stereotypes. This can also counteract the impact of stereotypes that serve to limit a student's self-confidence, discourage STEM engagement, and widen the achievement gap. In order to encourage more girls to pursue STEM education and more women to persist in STEM careers we need to CAST off these characteristics associated with science, and scientists, that hinder the engagement, participation and success of women in these fields:

Constructs

Archetypes

Stereotypes

Typecasting

There has never been a better time to change the constructs and shatter these images! The pandemic has ignited a renewed interest in STEM careers and education. More than half of the respondents of 3M SOSI say, that the pandemic is inspiring a new generation to pursue science-based careers and the public agrees girls and women in STEM still face obstacles relating to their gender. Moreover, seven in 10 people around the world agree -- there are negative consequences to society if the science community fails to attract more women and girls.

With this docuseries – we hope to inform, influence and inspire. It was an honor for me to be cast alongside nuclear engineer Dr. Ciara Sivels, microbiologist Dr. Jessica Taaffe and STEM innovator Gitanjali Rao. Our paths can be diverse, just as diverse as we all are, and science will be better off for that diversity. It is my hope that those who see the docuseries realize that there are many paths, myriad prospects and multiple perspectives -- you don’t have to be a specific race or gender or ethnicity or nationality, you don’t have to be a child who tinkered, and you don’t have to have a degree -- to be the “science type.” You can bring in your interests, shape your roles and pursue your passions…and you can blaze trails with potential that is exponential.

What do you think are the best strategies for engaging more girls and retaining more women in STEM? Hope our series provokes more conversation on this topic.

Look forward to your comments and feedback after viewing.