It’s said, among other things, in order to address the gender gap in STEM careers, we need to increase the resilience of students. Build their self confidence, and they will face challenging work head on. A newer perspective considers starting with the right foundation by instilling a growth mindset. This has been borne out in many research studies and has gone fully mainstream as popularized by Carol Dweck. But instead of instilling a growth mindset with psychological tools gathered from behaviorists, Chris Moore - founder of FIRST which advances STEM education - proposes STEM education as the mechanism for instilling that confidence. This is an interesting turn of concepts when you consider one meta-analysis of STEM education revealed five explanations for the gap in over the 40 years of research reviewed: “individual background characteristics; structural barriers in K−12 education; psychological factors, values, and preferences; family influences and expectations; and perceptions of STEM fields.” All of which are from the student’s perspective in choosing areas of study. How STEM education can work on the mind of a student is a compelling concept and validating for us. Using STEM to engage students is exactly what we do at Pink Space Theory.

Keeping that idea in mind, let’s review some of the solutions to these five areas that have been proposed in recent years. Spatial thinking, faculty representation, adjusting science subjects to match gender typical interests, and culturally sensitive organization change. 

• With spatial thinking, the argument is made that the male and female brain differ in the ability to use spatial thinking in learning. That these differences can be exploited to encourage a more equitable representation in STEM. 

• Faculty representation is a specific study done with STEM doctoral students but the argument for representation in general has been made in other work. It’s a key item in the agenda of many organizations, including ours, working to close the gender gap in STEM. If we can’t see it, we don’t believe we can be it. 

• Adjusting subject matter in science education follows much of the same argument as does the encouragement of spatial thinking. 

• And finally, looking at organizational psychology, change models essentially follow the same arguments as representation but includes the idea of “managers as change agents”. 

Can you find the common thread? These are interventions or solutions to an already established problem. They are essentially trying to fix the environment so that female students and workers might feel more comfortable choosing a STEM career. FIRST’s proposal that we use STEM education to improve students’ resilience and solidify the growth mindset, is an approach we share at Pink Space Theory. Spatial thinking that uses manipulatives like Sphero to drive learning is featured in our Make Tech Pink program. We promote representation by featuring women of color in speaking and teaching roles. And in all our programs, we match the theme to our girls’ interests. The more interventions we have the better…for now. However, hinging on all of these is the assumption that the student’s choice, after the fact, is the final result. What if we consider the deeper cultural fabric each child is born to? If we do that, one day, we are working toward the same outcome, before the fact.