Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Articles

No. 1 (2024)

Process of building a research project on the gender gap in physics classroom

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/erp1-2024oa18292
Submitted
agosto 5, 2024
Published
2024-10-14

Abstract

This paper proposes a reflection on the process of constructing a gender research problem by a doctoral student in education who comes from an undergraduate background in physics. Although with some experience in physics education, this is the first time the author approaches a research problem focused on education and especially on gender studies: the problem of the gender gap in physics education. The specific perspectives that the author possess are considered as the guide to the criterion by which the sources considered in defining the research problem were chosen. The guiding thread of the problematization process is the analysis of the Programme for International Student Asessment reports published by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development regarding the mathematical proficiency of students in schools in countries participating in the data collections. Characterizing the framework provided by the Programme for International Student Asessment data, we introduce a theoretical tool, the identity lens, that can drop into specific cultural contexts and frame the gender biases involved in physics learning/teaching processes, reshaping the complexity of the gap. It is intended to support the idea that research in this area must necessarily take on a multi-perspective and intersectional character that does not risk falling into essentialism and male-female binarism.

References

  1. Ajello, A. (2012). Le competenze chiave di cittadinanza e il ruolo della scuola: riflessioni per l’anno europeo della cittadinanza.
  2. Ashcraft, M. H., & Kirk, E. P. (2001). The relationships among working memory, math anxiety, and performance. Journal of experimental psychology: General, 130(2), 224. Doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.224.
  3. Boaler, J., & Greeno, J. G. (2000). Identity, agency, and knowing in mathematics worlds. Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning, 1, pp. 171-200.
  4. Carlana, M. (2019). Implicit stereotypes: Evidence from teachers’ gender bias. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3), pp. 1163-1224. Doi: 10.1093/qje/qjz008.
  5. Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), pp. 1187-1218. Doi: 10.1002/tea.20237.
  6. Cobb, P. (2004). Mathematics, literacies, and identity. Reading Research Quarter-ly, 39(3), pp. 333-337.
  7. Contini, D., Di Tommaso, M. L., & Mendolia, S. (2017). The gender gap in mathematics achievement: Evidence from Italian data. Economics of Education Review, 58, pp. 32-42. Doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.03.001.
  8. Jaremus, F., Gore, J., Prieto-Rodriguez, E., & Fray, L. (2020). Girls are still being ‘counted out’: Teacher expectations of high-level mathematics students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105, pp. 219-236.
  9. Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M. C. (2010). Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: A gender study. Journal of research in science teaching, 47(8), pp. 978-1003. Doi: 10.1002/tea.20363.
  10. Herbert, J., & Stipek, D. (2005). The emergence of gender differences in children's perceptions of their academic competence. Journal of applied developmental Psychology, 26(3), pp. 276-295. Doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2005.02.007.
  11. Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC.: American Association of University Women.
  12. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
  13. Hooks, B. (2000). Feminism is for everybody: Passionate politics. Pluto Press.
  14. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
  15. Mendick, H. (2005). A beautiful myth? The gendering of being/doing ‘good at maths’. Gender and education, 17(2), 203-219. Doi: 10.1080/0954025042000301465.
  16. Marsh, H. W., & O'Mara, A. (2008). Reciprocal effects between academic self-concept, self-esteem, achievement, and attainment over seven adolescent years: Unidimensional and multidimensional perspectives of self-concept. Per-sonality and social psychology bulletin, 34(4), pp. 542-552. Doi: 10.1177/0146167207312313.
  17. Marsh, H. W., Xu, M., & Martin, A. J. (2012). Self-concept: A synergy of theory, method, and application. Doi: 10.1037/13273-015.
  18. Matteucci, M., & Mignani, S. (2021). Investigating gender differences in mathematics by performance levels in the Italian school system. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101022. Doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101022.
  19. Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning. New directions for adult and continuing education, 74(74), pp. 5-12.
  20. OECD (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, Doi: 10.1787/53f23881-en.
  21. OECD (2015). The ABC of Gender Equality in Education: Aptitude, Behaviour, Confidence, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, Doi: 10.1787/9789264229945-en.
  22. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems thinker, 9(5), pp. 2-3.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...