By Alok Ganguly
Managing Editor
In the 2015-2016 school year, a new science course will be offered at Westford Academy titled Women in Engineering. This class is available only to female students in grades 10-12.
This class proves to be an awful representation of Westford Academy as a whole. Westford Public Schools states that they will not discriminate on the basis of a variety of factors including race, religion, and sex, and this class is the antithesis of that statement. Boys and girls are taught in the same classroom for every other class, so there is no reason that they should not be for Engineering.
The class treats girls as though they are incapable of competing with male students, and removing them from a classroom will leave girls ill-prepared to work with a variety of people. The “real world” that students are being prepared for is comprised by people from different areas of the world, different cultures, and of the opposite gender, and this class is depriving students of experience working with this melting pot of individuals.
It is understandable where the idea for the class came from. It can be uncomfortable for someone to enter a class that is completely filled with members of the opposite gender, but making an entirely new class is not the solution.
Instead, steps should be taken in the scheduling process so that at least two students of each gender are in each class. If there is enough demand to have a girls only engineering class, then there are certainly enough students to have at least two girls in each class period. This small change would eliminate the argument for this class entirely, and if a simple change can solve the issue, then why has it not been implemented?
There is also a double standard to this argument. There are no classes at WA (apart from Women in Engineering) that are closed off to students based on gender, but this would not occur if a male student was in the same situation. There are several classes at WA that stereotypically contain more of one gender than another, but to create a class that manufactures an artificial gender division completely unlikely to occur in the workplace is counterproductive.
All students at WA, regardless of their gender, do not deserve this kind of treatment. Students are well past the age where boys and girls are segregated in order to keep things “fair” for everyone, and students do not need to be treated as though they need additional help to gain the education they want.
Regardless, the Women in Engineering class is happening next year, but there needs to be some clarity over how it is run. If students are being given a curriculum that is in any way different from the “regular” engineering program, there is a huge issue. Students deserve the same treatment and same education no matter what gender they are, and that needs to be kept in mind if trends are set by this division.
Overall, the Women in Engineering class is an insult to students. While there are valid reasons as to why the class originiated, there are certainly easy ways to eliminate the need for a class such as this. If this class is setting a new standard for how WA treats education, then it is only a matter of time before the student body is entirely separated by gender.
Alisha Sodhi • Feb 13, 2015 at 4:04 pm
I think the intention behind the women-specific engineering class is great. Having more women encouraged to have careers in male-dominated careers is a good cause. However, I don’t think the class is the best solution. In the world, there are male-dominated fields, and there are women dominated fields. What’s next? An acting class for just men? Programming for women? I think the most important thing is to be able to learn that some people will always be skeptical of your abilities. There are some people who are sexist, racist, and having an end to these awful things isn’t going to happen in the near future. Having co-ed classes mixes everyone up by race, gender, etc.. I think that’s what makes school in general worthwhile. You learn from many different types of people. Who says women engineering students cannot learn from men engineering students? Why are we depriving students to learn from other students? Women should not be intimidated by a male-dominated field. Giving people a way to almost escape their fears is not helping anyone. People are brought together by common interests and classes like “Women in Engineering” just provides an extra division that society already can intepret in a negative way anyway. In general, we should focus on ways to increase a women’s self-confidence to enter these co-ed classes instead of just making a single gender class.
Stephanie • Feb 13, 2015 at 3:35 pm
Initially, I had a negative reaction to this class like some others, but thinking about WHY this class is being instituted changed my perspective.
I think the intent of this class is to give girls an opportunity to study engineering in an environment where they feel comfortable. There may be girls at WA who would be interested in engineering that wouldn’t consider taking the classes due to the male domination in the field and in the classes. The intent is NOT however to suggest that girls are incapable of successfully completing the engineering courses previously offered. I think this class will act as a gateway class. Once girls see that they ARE capable of competing with the guys and feel comfortable with their skills as engineers, they will be more comfortable entering a class with more guys. Its hard being surrounded by boys in STEM based classes and seeing the professional world as catering towards them, rather than girls. Also, everyone knows that the post-high school world will not make distinctions like this. But if a girl can take one semester class in high school and that class can show her what she is capable of, she will feel less intimidated by upper level/college classes and even the professional world, and I’m all for that.
AnotherGhostwriter • Feb 13, 2015 at 12:32 pm
I agree with a lot of points made in the article. I’m a male and I’ve been in a couple of electives- English ones- where the classes were heavily female (at one point I was one of four males in a 29 student class) and though it was a little uncomfortable during some discussions, I thought that as a whole it prepared me for something I now plan on majoring in. The reality of the situation is that engineering is a professional field dominated by males and by catering to the hesitation that some females may have about joining a predominantly male class does not help to prepare them for a college and/or professional career in an engineering environment. It instead creates a false reality that could lead to future anxieties. In short, it’s better to he accustomed to the male-heavy nature of the field now before investing thousands of dollars and multiple years of your life into a college or career that will not be what this new class prepared you for.
KC • Feb 13, 2015 at 10:53 am
This is a win-lose situation for WA.
As a women who wants to study engineering in college, my immediate reaction was anger. Westford Public Schools states that it does not discriminate against race, religion or sex. But this class has an air to it that makes it seem like this is the “safety scissors” version of engineering…but for women. To me, it supports the idea that women can not compete with men in this field. Although women make up half the workforce only a quarter work in science, technology, engineering or math related fields (aka STEM). In 2011, women were 47% of mathematical workers, 41% of life and physical scientists, 27% of computer professionals, and 13% of engineers. Engineering, especially, is a MALE-DOMINATED field. The way WA is going about this is messy and re-asserting a gender inequality. Women in STEM fields, continually (sometimes daily) have to fight misogyny in their workplace. Women with a science or engineering degree working full-time make $58,000 a year compared to $85,000 for men. EVEN YEARS AFTER THEY GRADUATE COLLEGE. Women still struggle to enter many fields that have historically been dominated by men. But just women in the past fought to gain equal rights, we (apparently) need to fight to retain them…While it is always harder to enter a gender dominated class, it does not mean there needs to be a separate class for women only.
HOWEVER, I would be a hypocrite if I did not share that I never took an engineering class at WA. While being interested in the subject, I was primarily taking music courses to fill my electives. Many times while visiting the engineering room, I did see girls in Advanced Tech and so forth. I understand to be a gender specific dominated class is uncomfortable. However if these women want to BE scientists, BE technological innovators, BE engineers, or BE mathematicians, they will have to accept being surrounded by mainly men and social injustice.
I believe that WA’s administration and science department created this class because they wanted to encourage women to feel comfortable taking an engineering class without being one of the only girls. While on paper it seems like a good idea, in reality it’s a bad one. Yes- this class is only for women, but what is to come the next year? Say these women LOVED the class (great! maybe more future engineers!) and they wanted to take another engineering course….Would they have to take advanced tech, where they would be “thrown in with the wolves(men)” or will WA once again make a separated class for women and make a Women in Advanced Tech? While WA wants to be a safe zone for all students, this is a sheltered idea that needs to get a blast into the 21st century. The desire to encourage women to take engineering and feel comfortable is a step in the right direction; but the way they plan to go about it, is a step to reassert gender inequality.
I take pride in my high school. I do. I love being able to say I go to Westford Academy. But this…this to me proves that even at WA, injustices such as misogyny still exist.
(Data/numbers source: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/…/09/10/2599491/women-stem/)
Jayne Smith • Feb 13, 2015 at 9:51 am
This class is an insult to the entire female student body at Westford Academy. Any intelligent, hard-working student, male or female, knows they can succeed in a classroom with both genders. Women have fought for years for equality and now the WA administration sends the message that girls need an artificially constructed environment in order to feel comfortable taking engineering-related courses. Hey girls…newsflash…you will be competing with guys in the workforce your entire lives. Get used to it.
Shannon hfkdngkdkfjjf • Feb 13, 2015 at 8:33 am
This article is approaching the issue from the wrong angle. The problem isn’t a double standard; the fact that this class is being offered isn’t discrimination against men. Women, as part of the minority, do not have many opportunities to enter male-dominated work forces such a engineering. The idea of having the class is to encourage more women to be interested in engineering. However, while having the class may be a good mindset, it is a little contradictory and fails to address another issue. If the societal standpoint is that women are viewed as so inferior to the point that they feel threatened to take a class where the majority is men, shouldn’t that be acknowledged? Maybe, instead of offering a class geared specifically towards girls and further perpetuating an idea that women and men must be separated and possibly instigating in people the idea that women are still inadequate and must be catered to separately, Westford Academy should teach its students to be able to work in a field regardless of which gender dominates it and respect each other so that no one is made to feel uncomfortable or discriminated against.
Male WA Alum • Feb 12, 2015 at 11:49 pm
I feel that the article’s points are borderline sensationalist, but my main issue comes from the idea of separating purely based on gender. We get it, engineering, along with many other fields, finds itself disproportionately populated with men. In order to draw knowledge and wisdom from all possible angles, companies are striving to encourage diversity in their workforce, and gender is no exception. My issue stems from the idea that women need a separate class to learn in an academic environment. So a class has more men than women; that’s indicative of the proportions you will find in the workplace… a workplace where you won’t be separated because gender. Women, if they wish to be engineers, should pursue that career path. But they shouldn’t not be exposed to men during their studies. This is counterintuitive to what professional women are striving for: to be accepted as equals in their fields, so that integration into their workplace is natural. Engineering firms will never segregate men and women into different parts of the building; their employees are all functioning humans, and allowing diverse individuals to work together often brings about more ideas and results in projects.
Engineering, by definition, is not a male profession. It simply has a lot of men in it. If women want to feel comfortable in an environment where there are a large amount of men, they should be exposed to them in classrooms, collaborate with them on projects, and bounce ideas off one another.
I understand the intent of the class, but in the end, an engineer is an engineer. This action is a step backwards for all groups.
Anonymous • Feb 12, 2015 at 10:37 pm
Great article! There is no such thing as “separate but equal”. If the class is too easy, then you are really doing an injustice to the girls. They will never be able to compete in the real world. Also, there is no co-ed or boys version of this engineering class.
Anonymous • Feb 12, 2015 at 10:10 pm
I am a female at WA and honestly, when I first heard of this class I flat out hated it. However, with reflection, I now see that this is not necessarily a bad step towards increasing female representation in STEM fields. From a female perspective, a predominantly male class is definitely a deterrent in my course selections (sorry, guys!). An all-girls class does create a more encouraging environment for girls interested in engineering but put off by gender ratios. Think about it this way: once more and more females take engineering classes, the need for a specialized female class will not be needed. Thus the gender inequality is solved and the gap is NOT widened. This should not be perceived as a new standard for WA classes but as a stepping stone for prospective female engineers, akin to programs like affirmative action which help those that are underrepresented or historically excluded.
WA Engineering Alumnus • Feb 12, 2015 at 10:04 pm
I think the idea of encouraging women to take interest in engineering is great. My college engineering class is predominantly male. That being said, encourage these young women to take regular engineering classes. I get that being one of the only girls in a class is intimidating, but guess what? That’s how it is in engineering school and no one is going to be there to make all girl classes for them so they feel comfortable.
Robin Miller • Feb 12, 2015 at 8:43 pm
I think this article misses the point that having this class will open the door to many girls who are interested in engineering but feel excluded from the primarily-male classes. This class will provide a launching pad to open the doors and to get more girls in engineering classes. The existence of this course doesn’t imply that girls are incapable of competing with boys, but instead gives them a more supportive environment to explore this field. The course material, although different, does not seem to be that much easier or harder than other engineering classes. Also, it does not state that girls are now not allowed to participate in the other engineering classes. So this course provides a starting course for those who may not feel comfortable in an all-boy class, and perhaps the course will give them the confidence to show off their girl-power in the other engineering classes with other girls from this class as a guaranteed support group. If this class allows one girl to enter this subject who would not have taken an engineering class without this course available, it will have been a positive change.
Former wa student • Feb 12, 2015 at 8:08 pm
I think it’s bordering on irresponsible how this class is framed in this article. I highly doubt WA is offering a class that is only for women and restricting females from registering for normal engineering classes, as this article seems to suggest. More likely, WA is simply offering a class titled Women in Engineering, open to anyone, the same way colleges have African-American studies departments and Black Engineer academic clubs and cultural classes. It’s not that women are “incapable of competing with male students” – that is completely missing the point and distorting the nature of the class. Women face special challenges when entering a male-dominated the field, the same way a male would face challenges going into a female-dominated field. The class can discuss what these challenges are, how prevalent they are and ways to deal with them…something that may interest socially-aware males as well.
The proposed solution that WA should “fix” the problem by essentially establishing a 2-women quota is just flat out ludicrous. I’ll just leave my opinion at that…quotas never make things better in these types of situations.
I think the facts need to be stated more quickly…if this class really is barred for men to enroll in – that is outrageous and a clear violation of public school law. But, much more likely, it is just a class akin to a women’s studies class you would find at any decent college.
Helen Copp • Feb 12, 2015 at 7:52 pm
Hm. Interesting points. I am all for women’s inclusion in science and engineering, and providing girls more opportunities to feel comfortable in this field is honestly fantastic. When I first heard about this class – today – I was actually thrilled. An environment where girls could be taught the same engineering skills without being surrounded by boys, constantly competing with them and trying to prove their worth? Awesome! But it is interesting to note that in an effort to make engineering courses more accessible to girls, they have separated them from boys. (Separate altogether is the argument of where trans or gender fluid students would go). I can see how it doesn’t make sense to separate, since in the real world there is no such separation. I think what was trying to happen was making the class more accessible and fair to girls. In my opinion, the best way to do this would be to encourage more girls to participate in these classes, and crack down on sexism and gender preference in the classroom. Perhaps creating an entirely new class wasn’t the best way, but I wouldn’t go do dar as to call it a step back. As long as both classes are learning the same material, I don’t see it as an unfairness rather as just making girls more comfortable. As a girl, I would be excited and far less apprehensive to take this class. Women deserve to feel comfortable and accepted in a field that is just as much theirs as it’s is men’s.
Kayleigh McHugh • Feb 12, 2015 at 7:43 pm
Honestly I had a similar reaction to this class at first as well. And I do agree with most of what was stated. But the more I thought about it the more this course made sense. I do not think that the aim is to deem female students less capable. (Though some may take it that way.) This class was created based on an idea opposite of what was stated in this article. It’s not that there are so many female students to make it their own class; its that there is not enough. I think this class will encourage more girls to pursue engineering, and then feel confident to enroll in more engineering classes. Also, to have guidance counsellors gender pick classes would not be feesible.
In contrast, I think it would be interesting to propose an all male AP English class. Food for thought.
Anonymous • Feb 12, 2015 at 7:33 pm
I agree completely. This class is a step backwards, and while the intentions behind it are well-meaning, this is not the solution. Separating classes by gender will only serve to widen the gap between them.