Oh, I'm definitely reading. Wrapping robotics in theater to attract girls who like theater is going to do nothing to show girls what working in the robotics field is like.
What it IS going to do is expose them to the possibility of doing such a thing, in an environment that is familiar to them. Only a small number of those girls will go anywhere with it, but a few, once exposed, will become fascinated with what is possible.
This is exactly the same with the boys. Most boys I know who join robotics groups do it because of video games they've played or cool toys they've played with. Then they get into the nitty gritty of servo mechanics and AI programming, and discover it's actually a LOT of work, and the first things you produce are nothing like Gundam Wing.
So in reality, you're not wrapping robotics (or anything else) in theater to attract people who like theater, you're changing the student body perception of the program itself so that more people might be willing to try it out and stick with it long enough for it to be rewarding -- even when there are other "quick social win" programs out there that it's competing with.
Robotics and programming can be fun and fascinating -- they can also be very dry and boring. Maths are the same way; introduce mathematical concepts in the right way, and they're tools to do something great -- introduce them the wrong way and they become this bit of useless knowledge that accomplishes nothing useful.
If all that makes you interested in chemistry is making kitchen goo and colored smoke and liquids, that's enough to get you interested and start learning about chemistry fundamentals. We're talking kids who are 10-14 here -- they don't know what they're allowed to want to do at this point, and are nowhere near a track for a job in ANY profession.
Once the smoke clears, a few kids who joined a chemistry club because they wanted to learn how to make mustard gas and smoke/stink bombs will discover they can do much more, and much more rewarding things, and it's worth the effort. The majority will graduate from highschool and go into a profession or education track that has nothing to do with being a chemist.
And yeah; I'm a case in point for all of these. In highschool I used to "sign out" chemicals from the chem supply room at the school and create all sorts of compounds on my own time, just because I thought it was neat. As a result, I understand the basics of chemistry and can make many basic compounds from scratch, including substituting when needed. And I know how to do it safely. But I'm no chemist, and have no interest in a job in chemistry.
Programming I got into because my elementary school needed some software to perform a specific task, and I had some spare time and thought I'd see how you make something like that happen. Completely self-driven, and I doubt anyone today or then recalls/cares that it was actually me who developed that software for my school.
So from those two examples, I prove your point: attracted by fancy chemistry experiments, I never went into chemistry. Attracted by solving a problem and playing around with some expensive machinery, I got hooked on computer programming.
But I'm sure glad I had that exposure to chemistry, and I'd probably be better at my job today if there'd been a fun club working on computer projects instead of just me and the school secretary who even touched a computer.
In fact, at one point I actually taught a math/computer "club"/class to elementary school kids -- all boys. Even with them, what really got them learning the hard stuff was giving them rewarding problems to solve that resulted in something they could share with others who might not understand exactly what they were learning.
Along these lines, I remember back in the 90's encountering people who mentioned that they'd built their own computers. At first I was in awe -- having years of knowledge of how computers are made, I couldn't imagine someone making an ENTIRE computer. Then I realized that when they said "made" they actually meant "assembled commodity parts based on spec sheets". I was much less impressed. For the most part, they understood nothing about the components they assembled to create that computer, and didn't really comprehend how it worked. But they still accomplished stuff that they could show off to non-computer users, and a number went on to become hardware designers and software programmers, because building a system "from scratch" drew them in.
Similarly, I remember when being part of a mobile robotics club meant creating your own sensors and logic gates, and writing your own OS to handle the I/O. These days, many robotics clubs start with something like a Lego MindStorm or even an off-the-shelf programmable quadcopter. The basic stuff comes later, after they've already had a taste for the results.