Search

Background: Research on gender differences and practical initiatives to attract girls to engineering are often carried out at the macro level where science, technology, engineering, and mathematics are aggregated into an entity called STEM. Purpose/Hypothesis: This article challenges the aggregated approach, analyzes gender differences among science and engineering applicants in Finland, and discusses the implications of the findings for engineering education and intervention initiatives. Design/Method: The data consist of the application choices of all applicants to Bachelor studies in Finland in 2016 (151,369 individuals), from which two groups were selected: persons whose first application choice was engineering/technology and persons whose first choice was natural sciences or mathematics. The application choices of these individuals (in total 9,104) are statistically described and analyzed. Results: Engineering/technology (TECH) and natural sciences and mathematics (SCIMA) subjects are not perceived as alternative options by female applicants. Almost 60% of all female TECH applicants and more than 50% of the female SCIMA applicants apply only to their respective programs. Moreover, TECH applicants considering other options prefer other subjects to SCIMA and vice versa. Conclusions: Encouraging more girls to study STEM is not a sufficient solution for attracting more women to engineering. Instead of or in addition to encouraging girls to study science and mathematics in K‐12 education, it is necessary to open the black box of technology and help young people better understand what engineering is about. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The paper aims to examine the current status and development of sustainable development in Finnish engineering education.Design/methodology/approach The study consists of interviews with key stakeholders supplemented with the analysis of documented material. Development is discussed in relation to the findings of collaborative strategy process in the year 2009.Findings The paper observes that the Finnish universities providing engineering education are committed to sustainable development in their strategies. However, a lot of work remains to be done before the strategies are implemented and sustainable development is integrated to all degree programs. Explicit knowledge and individual learning in clearly defined disciplinary boundaries have been the main focus of engineering education.Practical implications The paper suggests that engineers need to be provided with mental tools to cope with uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. Key competencies include holistic understanding, communication and collaboration skills, ability and willingness for critical and reflective thinking, creativity, innovativeness and entrepreneurship. Thus, collaborative learning, open dialogue and innovation are at the heart of education for sustainable development.Originality/value This paper has a relatively wide approach as it analyses sustainable development in the context of Finnish engineering education both on institutional and societal levels and is based on a national project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]