Designing Girl-Friendly Learning Environments: What the Research Says Lynn D. Dierking, Oregon State University

Personal Context Factors  Self-efficacy (multilayered—me as girl, me in relationship to STEM; possible selves)  Value authenticity, relevance/purpose (connection to daily life; see where / how fit in; how science helps people  Interests: aesthetics, creativity, some topics (body, mind & health)

Personal Context Factors (cont.)  Not “school” science  Ownership for experience  Support for taking risks, being curious being wrong, being smart, questioning authority

Socio-Cultural Context Factors Micro:  Importance of talking/collaboration  Feel safe taking “lead”/being smart  See self in non-traditional STEM role  Be able to connect experience back to friends and/or family later

Socio-Cultural Context Factors (cont.) Macro:  Community of Practice/Science as Enterprise  Understand science’s social/collaborative nature  See that science is for all--images of under-represented groups  Learn scientists are real people

Physical Context Factors  Designs for collaboration & interaction (seating for more than one person; easy to see what there is to do)  Gender inclusive language and images  Space for quiet/private experimenting  Aesthetics are important  Create appealing, colorful environment

Physical Context Factors (cont.)  Bright and engaging images on signage  Soft edges, wood or stone, not metal  Sounds, smells (& other contextual aspects)  Opportunities (& encouragement) to connect to others not on visit through social media