Special programs (single gender programming, subsidized fees for girls, etc…) are simply mechanisms to increase female interest in STEM in hopes of achieving equity. I find it misleading when people equate “pro-girl” programs with “anti-boy” programs. Girls and boys have different educational needs and there are arguments that single-gender programs (in complement with co-ed experiences) can help both genders succeed academically.

In the case of STEM, the need for all-girls programming may simply be more urgent.  In Canada, women are tragically underrepresented in technology, engineering, and natural sciences in post-secondary education and in the workforce (I can provide links, if needed, but just look up on StatCan). I think one of the big areas we see parity in science-related fields is in health professions, but if I recall it was in lower-paying positions (lots of female technologists and nurses, not so many doctors). 

Food for thought!

I can see making a special attempt to recruit girls.  I can’t see excluding boys.