In exploring why females remain more likely to view technology as a male domain or field, we can apply the theory of domain identification introduced by C. Steele  (as cited in Steele, 2006). This theory stresses that a girl or woman must not only have an interest and skill but also must feel accepted and valued. Barriers obviously exist to prevent women from perceiving these criteria. Perceived ability and pedagogical practices influences this belief, but it all begins with inculturation.

The inculturation process originates in play. We all generally know that girls and boys tend to receive gender specific toys which in turn become domain identifiers. Dolls and domestic play usually dominate a young girl's leisure time, while building, construction, or "gadget" (think of Transformers) toys occupy a boy's play time. Thus early on, boys begin to disassemble and reconstruct at an early age; these activities complement the skill sets needed for delving into technology for its own sake but also may explain why men end up with gadget envy. They see tech gadgets and computers more as toys; something with which to play (Kelan, 2007). Whereas as women tend to grow up without making that association. Advertising, according to Jensen and Rose, reinforces these domain differences by marketing computers as "toys" for men and relegating women to more passive roles as data entry workers or mere eye-candy models (as cited in Kelan, 2007). Conversely, boys also suffer from negative stereotypes. If they enjoy programming or gaming, girls then label them as lone nerds or geeks who hack the night away at the keyboard; a drawing by teenage girls, when asked to depict a computer scientist, speaks volumes. These stereotypes feed off the mental images or prototypes that all people develop toward professions (Rommes, et al. 2008).

Girls tend to use computers more for socializing (Lenhart, Madden, MacGill & Smith, 2007) and perceive technology careers as too "thing" or not people oriented enough (Rommes, et al. 2008). Most importantly, girls and boys, developing as adolescents, clearly feel pressure to conform as they grow into sex roles. A teen girl may enjoy computers, but if it's perceived as a masculine trait will dissasociate from technology because they wish to identify with more feminine traits (Rommes, et al. 2008).  Thus, a potent combination of inculturation;  market reinforced stereotypes; and inherent developmental processes see to it that many girls feel they don't fit into a computer science domain.

Gaming; however, seems an area where girls have made a little progress. According to Professor Yasmin Kafai, a presenter at the "Girls 'n Games Conference", girls account for 70% of the casual computer game market (Dillon, 2006). Apparently girls at some level do associate technology with fun but do not wish to parlay their interest into a career, again due to domain stereotypes. Dillon reports that women are increasingly "...gaming in an industry that actively tries to keep them out...We're oddballs if we play.” This seems to say that a strong cultural current exists to maintain clearly defined domain identifications by men when it comes to associating technology with toys and play.

Interestingly, being marginilized in the IT profession leads to a passively intentional reinforcement of stereotypes. Women who work in IT, Gill and Grint find, end up "doing gender" (as cited in Kelan,  2007). Women and men view technology as masculinized, so women in that field tend to distance themselves from it by describing technology as "a necessary evil" or as "a work tool for me"; interviewed women tended to distance themselves from technology for its own sake as a means, perhaps, to reinforce their feminine identity.

Clearly some girls try to break the mold. Unfortunately, teachers allow inculturation to creep into the classroom. Pedagogical norms exist that still support digital exclusion for girls. We'll next explore those pedagogical contexts to learn how to avoid unwittingly contributing to the gender divide and to instead become a part of the solution.

Pedagogical Context