Girl Talk

Statistics show that communication in all its aspects is the domain of girls, from in-person communication to cellphone use to instant messaging. Girls also outpace boys in journal writing, 49 percent to 20 percent [ 4]. Driven by a desire to communicate, girls think of social media as simply new tools for broadcasting and publishing.

In the social media space, “girls dominate the teen blogo-sphere and social networks— 66 percent of girls have an SNS [social networking service] profile compared with 50 percent of boys, and 34 percent of girls (versus 20 percent of boys) keep an online journal or blog” [ 4]. The domination of girls in social media is represented across all ages in the youth segments.

The Pew study found that:
“Older teen girls are still
far more likely to blog when
compared with older boys ( 38
percent versus 18 percent),
but younger girl bloggers have
grown at such a fast clip that
they are now outpacing even the
older boys ( 32 percent of girls
ages 12-14 blog versus 18 percent
of boys ages 15-17)” [ 4].
Highly skilled in the art of
weaving stories and fostering
social connections, teenage girls
have embraced the Internet and
transferred these skills to social
media at a time when the tech-
nology itself is going through
radical changes, allowing
content to be treated program-
matically, shared as objects, and
providing endless opportunity
for self-expression. In this peer-
based learning model, the excit-
ing convergence of the social
Web with open-source devel-
opment has enabled an entire
generation—GenY—of girls help-
ing girls to make the leap from
content creation to coding.

purposeful, socially conscious
potential to draw in more men
and women to STEM fields.

Jane Margolis’s later study (from 2001) of the gender gap in the computer sciences, “Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing,” echoes Rosser’s findings. The conclusions from Margolis’s interviews with 100 male and female computer science students at Carnegie Mellon University, while now almost eight years old, a lifetime in technology years, are still noteworthy:

“For males, the attraction to
computers comes early in life and
appears to be magnetic. Males are
more likely to be fascinated with the
computer itself, find satisfaction in
controlling and mastering a machine,
and enjoy hacking for hacking’s
sake. Females’ interest in comput-
ing is more likely to be one interest
among several others. They are
more likely to place a high value on
the context of computing, the links
between computers and other fields,
and the contribution to society that
computers can make. We refer to
this orientation as ‘computing for a
purpose’.... Many women who decide
against studying computer science,
either before or after starting, do so
after concluding that their interests
in application, helping people, and
being a ‘people person’ do not have a
place in computer science.” [ 7].

“Computing for a purpose” defines the Web today. There is no shortage of examples of social media promoting civic engagement, volunteerism, and sustainable practices [ 8]. As technology becomes a pervasive tool for getting things done, and both women and men engage with it equally, one can begin to imagine that women and young girls will be less alienated by technology.

[ 4] Arafeh, S., Lenhart, A., Macgill, A., and Smith, A. “Writing, Technology and Teens.” Pew Internet; http:// www.pe winternet.org/ Reports/2008/Writing- Technology-and-Teens. aspx/ [ 5] Storytelling Alice; http://www.alice.org/ kelleher/storytelling/ index.html/

Programming Purpose The momentum to program will only win more ground for girls and young women as they get older and transcend storytelling. While their initial exposure to technology might have been driven by the desire to play online games on mobile phones or computers, or to connect in a social way—be it Club Penguin, Webkinz, or Facebook—they increasingly see the potential for technology as a tool for change. The pervasiveness of technology in all aspects of our lives and society today is markedly different from 1973. An important shift has occurred, one in which technology goes beyond “ socializing” to a focus on what Sue Rosser, in Female Friendly Science, calls “social context.” According to Rosser, “insuring science and technology are considered in their social context …may be the most important change that can be made in science teaching for all people, both male and female” [ 6]. Rosser argues for a contextualization of technology that emphasizes its more

[ 6] Rosser, S. Female-Friendly Science: Applying Women’s Studies Methods and Theories to Attract Students. Ne w York: Teachers College Press, 1990.

[ 7] Fisher, A., Margolis,
J., and Miller, F.
“Computing for a
Purpose: Gender
and Attachment to
Computer Science”
( Work in progress).
Carnegie Mellon
Project on Gender and
Computer Science;
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/
afs/cs/project/gender-
gap/www/ purpose.html/
[ 8] See for examples:
CarrotMobs; http://
carrotmob.org/;
1BlockOff TheGrid
(1BOG); http://1bog.
org/; The Whuffie
Bank; http://www.
thewhuffiebank.org/;
or CitySourced; http://
www.citysourced.com/
January + February 2010