A few years back, I did a History of STEM unit. It was partly an excuse to have students designing and "making" stuff in a social studies class and partly a legitimate history unit with great debate and discussions about science, technology, engineering and social context. However, I also tied this back into the themes of social justice, women's rights and civil rights. In one class, I had students research examples of female scientists, engineers and mathematicians. In another class, I did the same with racial/cultural minorities. In the other class, we mentioned the civil rights and feminist perspectives only as a lens for talking about bigger ideas. I gave the students a pre-unit and post-unit survey about cultural perceptions of STEM and people groups. An interesting phenomenon happened. In the classes where I had focussed on minorities and women, students ended up saying things like, "Science is mostly for whites, but there have been some black and latino exceptions" or "Technology is mostly for guys, but I guess some women can do it if they really want to." The other groups that had talked about the changing social context throughout STEM, ended up saying things like, "As women fought for their rights as equal citizens, they began to break into STEM. I'm hopeful for my own career as a scientist." They were also more likely to see themselves as being able to enter a field where they are the minority. It has me thinking that tokenism often happens with the best of intentions. People want to avoid conflict and uncomfortable conversations in mainstream history. So, they relegate it to Black History Month or a mural that celebrates famous women. Or they have a special Women in Science night. The intentions are often great. However, if students view themselves as "the exceptions," chances are it's tokenism. photo credit:
Đ…olo via
photopin cc 
