In Tinkering with Technological Skill, Ann Brady Aschauer made me wonder more about the “add women and stir” solution (15) to address the (dis)belief that women lack certain technological skill as it presented itself in my ENGL106e class this semester.

My students are unlike any other students I have had. While there are larger systemic problems with the class structure and its partnership with TECH120 (don’t get me started), The treatment of the three young women in my class has increased in the last few weeks. While I am always attentive to the needs of my students, historically (As proven by this article) and currently the marginalization of women in technical fields was something I knew I needed to look out for. The three young women (PSL, POC, and SHY), are, for the most part, ignored by their male peers. POC and PSL have bonded well and use each other as support, but SHY is oftentimes ignored by her male peers and by the two female peers. Despite the fact that SHY is smart and has a larger technological skill than many other first years in the class, she has (so far) been passed up for each tech-based small group class activity.

The gender techno divide is a real one that we can observe in our every day. The micro-community of the classroom versus “the field” of technology are equally important for allowing female students like SHY to be a part of their discipline. The closing comments for Brady Aschauer echo this overlap, “both communities can benefit from an increased understanding of how social expectations and constraints influence the construction of technological skill and use” (21). The way that PSL, POC, and SHY are brought into the community of practice for the College of Technology will be important for determining their future success and development.

Redefining technology, as the article suggests, only matters when industry responds to new definitions. So, sorry, Brady Aschauer, you’re wrong. Idealistic, but wrong.