Supporting young women to enter engineering: Long-term effects of a middle school engineering outreach program for girls

Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 119-142

  Demetry, Chrysanthe ^a   Hubelbank, Jeanne ^b   Blaisdell, Stephanie L ^a,c   Sontgerath, Suzanne ^a   Nicholson, Michelle Errington ^a,b   Rosenthal, Elissa ^b   Quinn, Paula ^b  

^a Worcester Polytechnic Institute   (United States)

^b Independent Consultants ^*

^c UNIVERSITY OF MEMPHIS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70450209999     PISSN: 10728325     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v15.i2.20     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation (1991). Short changing girls, shortchanging America: A call to action. Washington, DC: American Association of University Women.
2. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation (2004). Under the microscope: A decade of gender equity projects in the sciences. Washington, DC: AAUW Educational Foundation.
3. Baker, D., & Leary, R. (1995). Letting girls speak out about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 3-27.
4. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
5. Besecke, L. M., & Reilly, A. H. (2006). Factors influencing career choice for women in science, mathematics, and technology: The importance of a transforming experience. Advancing Women in Leadership Journal, 21. Retrieved November 4, 2008, from http://www.advancingwomen. com/awl/summer2006/Besecke- Reilly.html.
6. Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (2006). Career self-efficacy theory: Back to the future. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 3-11.
7. Blaisdell, S., & Cosgrove, C. R. (1996). A theoretical basis for recruitment and retention interventions for women in engineering. Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exhibition. Retrieved December 4, 2008, from http://papers.asee.org/ conferences/paper-view. cfm?id=12958.
8. Campbell, N. K., & Hackett, G. (1986). The effects of mathematics task performance on math selfefficacy. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 28(2), 149-162.
9. Catsambis, S. (1995). Gender, race, ethnicity, and science education in the middle grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 243-257.
10. Clewell, B. C. (1987). What works and why: Research and theoretical bases of intervention programs in math and science for minority and female middle school students. In A. B. Champagne & L. E. Hornig (Eds.), Students and science learning (pp. 95-135). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
11. Clewell, B. C. (2002). Breaking the barriers: the critical middle school years. In The Jossey-Bass reader on gender in education (pp. 301-313). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
12. Crowe, M. (2003). Jump for the sun II: Can a monthly program change girls' and women's attitudes about STEM? Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9, 325-332.
13. Darke, K., Clewell, B., & Sevo, R. (2002). Meeting the challenge: The impact of the National Science Foundation's Program for Women and Girls. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8(3-4), 285-303.
14. Davis, C., & Rosser, S. V. (1996). Program and curricular interventions. In C. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, & P. M. Rayman (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering (pp. 232-264). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
15. Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women's educational and occupational choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(4), 585-609.
16. Evans, M. A., & Whigham, M. (1995). The effect of a role model project upon the attitudes of ninthgrade science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 195-204.
17. Gibbons, M. T. (n.d.). Engineering by the numbers. American Society for Engineering Education. Retrieved November 24, 2008, from http://www.asee.org/ publications/profiles/upload/ 2007ProfileEng.pdf.
18. Higher Education Research Institute (2005). 2005 CIRP institutional profile: Worcester Polytechnic Institute: First-time full-time (1215-00). Los Angeles: University of California, HERI.
19. Hill, O. W., Pettus, W. C., & Hedin, B. A. (1990). Three studies of factors affecting the attitudes of blacks and females toward the pursuit of science and science-related careers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(4), 289-314.
20. Hubelbank, J., Demetry, C., Nicholson, S. E., Blaisdell, S., Quinn, P., Rosenthal, E., et al. (2007). Long term effects of a middle school engineering outreach program for girls: A controlled study. Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exhibition. Retrieved December 2, 2008, from http://papers.asee.org/conferences/paper-view.cfm?id=4368.
21. Hyde, J. S., Lindberg, S. M., Linn, M. C., Ellis, M. B., & Williams, C. C. (2008). Gender similarities characterize math performance. Science, 321, 494-495.
22. Jayaratne, T. E., Thomas, N. G., & Trautmann, M. (2003). Intervention program to keep girls in the science pipeline: outcomes differences by ethnic status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 393-414.
23. Jones, L. R., Mullis, I. V. S., Raizen, S. A., Weiss, I. R., & Weston, E. A. (1992). The 1990 science report card: NAEP's assessment of fourth, eighth, and twelfth graders. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
24. Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84, 180-192.
25. Kahle, J. B. (1996). Opportunities and obstacles: Science education in the schools. In C.-S. Davis, A. B. Ginorio, C. S. Hollenshead, B. B. Lazarus, P. M. Rayman, & Associates (Eds.), The equity equation: Fostering the advancement of women in the sciences, mathe matics, and engineering (pp. 57-95). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
26. Lawrenz, F., & Huffman, D. (2006). Methodological pluralism: The gold standard of STEM evaluation. In D. Huffman & F. Lawrenz (Eds.), New Directions for Evaluation, 109. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
27. Leslie, L. L., McClure, G. T., & Oaxaca, R. L. (1998). Women and minorities in science and engineering: A life sequence analysis. Journal of Higher Education, 69(3), 239-276.
28. Massachusetts Department of Education. (2001). Local graduation requirements in Massachusetts public high schools. Retrieved September 29, 2008, from http://www.doe.mass.edu/news/ archive01/gradreq.pdf.
29. National Research Council, Committee on Women in Science and Engineering. (2006). To recruit and advance: Women students and faculty in science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
30. National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008. Retrieved September 8, 2008, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/.
31. National Science Foundation. (2007). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/.
32. Oakes, J. (1990). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority students in science and mathematics. Review of Research in Education, 16, 153-222.
33. O'Brien, V., Kopala, M., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1999). Mathematics self-efficacy, ethnic identity, gender, and career interests related to mathematics and science. Journal of Educational Research, 92(4), 231-235.
34. Orenstein, P. (1994). SchoolGirls: Young women, self-esteem, and the confidence gap. New York: Doubleday.
35. Pryor, J. H., Hurtado, S., Saenz, V. B., Santos, J. L., & Korn, W. S. (2007). The American freshman: Forty year trends, 1966-2006. Los Angeles: University of California, Higher Education Research Institute.
36. Richardson, G., Hammrich, P. L., & Livingston, B. (2003). Improving elementary school girls' attitudes, perceptions, and achievement in science and mathematics: Hindsights and new visions of the Sisters in Science program as an equity reform model. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 9, 333-348.
37. Rosser, S. V. (1993). Female friendly science: Including women in curricular content and pedagogy in science. Journal of General Education, 42(3), 191-220.
38. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
39. Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1990). A summary of major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education, 74(1), 1-18.
40. Smith, W. S., & Erb, T. O. (1986). Effect of women science career role models on early adolescents' attitudes toward scientists and women in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 667-676.
41. Stage, E. (1992). Interventions defined, implemented, and evaluated. In M. L. Matyas & L. S. Dix (Eds.), Science and engineering programs: On target for women? (pp. 15-26). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
42. Stohr-Hunt, P. M. (1996). An analysis of frequency of hands-on experience and science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(1), 101-109.
43. Talton, E. L., & Simpson, R. D. (1985). Relationships between peer and individual attitudes toward science among adolescent students. Science Education, 69(1), 19-24.
44. Teshome, Y., Maushak, N., & Athreya, K. (2001). Attitude toward informal science and math: A survey of boys and girls participating in hands-on science and math (Funtivities). Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7, 59-74.
45. Tomhave, J. A. (1990). The effects of a short-term intervention program on future participation in math and science. Fargo: North Dakota State University.
46. VanLeuvan, P. (2004). Young women's science/mathematics career goals from seventh grade to high school graduation. Journal of Educational Research, 97(5), 248-267.
47. VanLeuvan, P. (2006). Tracing young women's career aspirations. Advancing Women in Leadership Journal, 21. Retrieved January 24, 2008, from http://www.advancingwomen.com/awl/ summer2006/VanLeuvan.html.
48. Virnoche, M., & Eschenbach, E. (2007). Expanding girls' horizons in math and science: A longitudinal evaluation of EYH conference outcomes. Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exhibition, Honolulu, HI, June 24-27. Retrieved December 2, 2008, from http://papers.asee.org/conferences/paper-view. cfm?id=6261.
49. Virnoche, M. E. (2008). Expanding girls' horizons: Strengthening persistence in the early math and science education pipeline. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 14, 29-48.
50. Wiest, L. R. (2004). Impact of a summer mathematics and technology program for middle school girls. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10, 317-339.
51. WPI Camp Reach. (2008a). Annual Reports, 2001-2008. Retrieved September 25, 2008, from http:// www.wpi.edu/+reach/planners.html.
52. WPI Camp Reach. (2008b). Evaluation Addenda, 2004-2008. Retrieved September 25, 2008, from http://www.wpi.edu/+reach/planners.html.
53. Yanowitz, K. L., & Vanderpool, S. S. (2004). Assessing girls' reactions to science workshops. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(3), 353-359.