|
|
|
Printer-friendly version of this
essay
Gender Equity in Science Classrooms
Jane Butler Kahle
Miami University
For about twenty years teachers and researchers have been concerned about
differences in the enrollments and achievements of girls and boys in science.
Early work focused on differences in interest, attitudes, and motivation-it
was thought that if girls liked science, they would do well in it. Early
intervention projects helped teachers teach science in a "girl friendly"
way and focused on the science that girls indicated they preferred-biology.
Assessments of those projects indicated that neither the attitudes nor
achievements of girls systematically improved. Today, research tells us
that the issues affecting girls in science must be addressed at an early
age and may differ across groups. Further, teachers as well as researchers
recommend new ways to look at equity and new teaching strategies to meet
the needs of all students.
Research suggests that simply teaching, or treating, all students the
same does not necessarily lead to equitable outcomes. Rather, differences
in home and out-of-school experiences need to be addressed in equitable
classrooms in order to equalize science knowledge and skills among groups
of students. Further, girls are not a monolithic group and cultural differences
may interact with educational opportunities to affect specific groups
of girls differently. Although gender equity seems to be an elusive target,
simple instructional strategies will move science classes toward equity.
To assist in reaching the goal of gender equity in science classrooms,
all professional development experiences should include discussions of
equity, and teachers should have opportunities to try new, more equitable,
teaching strategies as part of those experiences.
Early Experiences in Science
Research at the University of Minnesota suggests that boys and girls learn
socially appropriate behavior by 24-26 months of age. At that time, male
and female stereotypes are set, and boys, more than girls, define what
they will and will not do. Similar sex-stereotypic behaviors are revealed
in very young science students. In one study, kindergarten children were
interviewed three weeks after they entered school. At that age, neither
boys nor girls were able to define science, but-even without that knowledge-more
boys than girls replied that they wanted to be scientists, that they were
good in science, and that they had done science. The importance of these
attitudes is reflected in the hypothesis that sex differences in course
taking patterns are established as early as kindergarten.
Another study revealed that by fourth grade girls showed a preference
for biological science, while boys, many of whom had had out-of-school
experiences with mechanical and electrical activities, chose topics in
the physical science. Furthermore, girls based their selections on what
they should know, while boys selected science topics on the basis
of what they wanted to know.
By the time they reach adolescence, children have a well-defined identity.
Studies show that girls' regard for science begins to decline in middle/junior
high school. For example, equal percentages of third-grade girls (67 percent)
and boys (66 percent) respond that what they learn in science classes
is useful in everyday life. In seventh grade, both boys' and girls' responses
continue to be fairly high (54 and 57 percent, respectively). However,
boys retain that attitude through high school, while girls' perceptions
of the utility of science falls 11 percent. The same decline is found
in girls' interest in a science career. Boys and girls respond the same
in the seventh grade, but many girls lose interest by the eleventh grade.
Girls' enrollment in elective science courses in high school mirrors
the decline in their valuing of science. Although the last few years have
seen a substantial increase in the number of young women enrolling in
high school chemistry, they continue to be under-represented in physics.
There is also some indication that girls' increased chemistry enrollments
may be due to increased science requirements for high school graduation
and that much of the increase is in non-academic chemistry courses. It
has been hypothesized that girls' lower enrollments in advanced science
courses affect their achievement levels on national and international
tests.
Gender Equity Varies by Student Group
Because all girls-or boys-are not the same, the ability to create equitable
science classrooms has been limited by research that clumped all girls
together. Changes that may improve science learning and attitudes of African
American girls may not help Latinos, for example. Only a few studies have
disaggregated data by gender and by race/ethnicity. However, both teachers
and researchers can learn much from this recent work.
One study analyzed self-confidence and perceived difficulty in doing
physical science activities among urban, fourth and fifth grade students
by gender and race/ethnicity. The gender gap in self-confidence and in
perceived difficulty (higher in both cases for boys) was greater for White
than for African American students. In addition, White girls expressed
significantly lower levels of self-confidence and ranked the electricity
activities as significantly more difficult than did White boys or African
American boys or girls. Overall, results suggested that upper elementary,
White girls may hold more negative views of their ability to do physical
science than African American girls do.
In another study, data from the National Education Longitudinal Study
(NELS: 88) were used to investigate factors associated with gender differences
in middle grade science performance. Gender differences on science achievement
test scores were small, but they varied by race/ethnicity. Gender differences
were moderate among Latinos, weak among Whites, and nonexistent among
African Americans. However, the same study found that middle school girls
of all racial/ethnic groups held fewer positive attitudes toward science,
participated in fewer science-related extra-curricular activities, and
less often aspired to science careers than did their male classmates.
The effect of student gender on science attitudes was strongest among
Latino/Latina students, while the gender difference for participation
in extra-curricular science activities as well as aspirations for science-based
careers was greatest for White students and least for African American
students.
Findings for Asian Americans contrast with those for other racial groups.
Studies have investigated the attitudes of traditional Asian Americans
(those who immigrated before the Vietnamese War) and White boys and girls
who were Westinghouse Science Talent Search semi-finalists. Significant
differences in attitudes and achievement separated White girls from the
other groups. For example, White girls ranked lowest on the scales assessing
self-concept, attribution for success, and persistence in science. They
also had the lowest mean score on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT).
The research concluded that White girls were more influenced by gender
socialization than were Asian American girls, or boys in either group.
Teachers need to be aware of varying patterns of gender differences across
racial/ethnic groups and modify their practices and provide experiences
accordingly. A few teaching practices that research indicates have led
to both achievement and attitude changes among girls are discussed next.
Improving Gender Equity in Science Classes
Teachers can do much to promote equity in their science classes. Some
steps are easy. For example, Mary Budd Rowe, a devoted science educator,
suggested that girls (and other students) be allowed to become familiar
with science equipment before they were assigned a task or experiment.
She observed pairs of elementary students working to solve experimentally
a problem in physical science. Because the tools needed to solve the problem
were less familiar to girls than to boys, the pairs of girls initially
seemed less successful in their efforts. But when she allowed time for
"tinkering" with the tools prior to posing the problem, pairs
of girls as well as pairs of boys found solutions in a timely way. Likewise,
teachers in Norway have found a simple way of promoting gender equity
in their science classes. Instead of starting science classes by posing
a problem or asking a question that requires past experience for an answer,
they begin by allowing the students to become familiar with the materials,
equipment, and tools that they will need to solve the problem or to answer
the question. That is, they equalize experiences by providing "tinkering"
time.
Generally, the research on gender equity in science indicates that actively
involving all students in science activities that are done in cooperative
learning groups positively influences the attitudes and achievement of
girls regardless of race/ethnicity. As noted, "Girls dislike instruction
that isolates them, such as reading the textbook or taking notes while
listening to lectures. They prefer instruction that permits them to interact
with others, such as working in groups or discussing the issues with their
teachers and classmates" (Baker and Leary, 1995, p.24). Further,
the use of varied assessment strategies allows all students (including
girls) to better demonstrate understanding.
Although overt inequity, such as calling on more boys than girls, allowing
boys to call out answers and dominate discussions, or permitting boys
to hog equipment and materials, is fading from science classrooms, subtle
differences remain. For example, one research group noted that gender-related
incidents, subtle comments or actions, are more common in coeducational
science classes than in other subjects. Another recent study reported
on the damaging effect of gender lore, vaguely remembered information
from media reports and studies that is widely accepted and believed by
adolescents. According to that study, gender lore affects girls' confidence
and performance in physical science.
Although equity in science classes is a subtle and elusive target, it
is one that all teachers strive for. In an equitable science classroom,
differences in attitudes, performance, and achievement cannot be attributed
to a student's gender, race/ethnicity, or socio-economic status. Although
there will be individual differences, there will not be group differences.
Further, the science learning needs of each student are the basis for
instruction. That simple definition of an equitable classroom, plus the
basic guideline of meeting each student where he or she is, will promote
not only gender, but general, equity in science classrooms.
References
American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (1998).
Gender Gaps: Where Schools Still Fail our Children. Washington,
DC: Author.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (1995). Educating
Everybody's Children: Diverse Teaching Strategies for Diverse Learners.
Alexandria, Virginia: Author.
Baker, D. & Leary, R. (1995). Letting girls speak out about science.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32 (1), 3-27.
National Science Foundation. (1998, January). Infusing Equity in Systemic
Reform: An Implementation Scheme. Washington, DC: Author.
Northwest Regional Educational Library. (1997, April). Science and
Mathematics for All Students: It's Just Good Teaching. Portland, Oregon:
Author.
For Further Information
American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (1998).
Gender Gaps: Where Schools Still Fail Our Children. 148 pages.
Washington, DC: Author. This publication documents the progress and failure
of schools to provide fair and equitable education since 1992, the year
that How Schools Shortchange Girls was published. The new report
focuses on emerging gaps in areas such as technology that threaten to
disadvantage girls as they confront 21st-century demands.
Synthesizing approximately 1,000 research studies, Gender Gaps: Where
Schools Still Fail Our Children reviews issues of historic concern
for girls such as math and science enrollments, high-stakes standardized
testing, extracurricular activities, and health and development risks,
as well as new areas such as technology and School-to-Work programs. Based
on their findings, the publication of concern offers more than 35 recommendations
for action by states, local school districts, educators, and researchers.
For more information:www.aauw.org;
foundation@aauw.org; (202) 728-7602.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (1995). Educating
Everybody's Children: Diverse Teaching Strategies for Diverse Learners.
182 pages. Alexandria, Virginia: Author. This publication is a comprehensive
book that includes nearly 90 proven instructional strategies to involve
diverse students, especially those who are at risk of academic failure,
in education. It features specific, teacher-tested methods for increasing
achievement in reading, writing, mathematics, and oral communication.
For more information: www.ascd.org;
member@ascd.org; (800) 933-2723.
National Science Foundation. (1998, January). Infusing Equity in Systemic
Reform: An Implementation Scheme. 71 pages. Washington, DC: Author.
This document is designed to assist leaders of the National Science Foundation's
(NSF) Systemic Initiatives (SIs) and other educational reforms to pursue
the goal of high quality mathematics and science education for all students.
Particularly, it is aimed at assisting them in infusing equity throughout
reform projects. The document attempts to provide answers to the following
three fundamental questions:
- What is high-quality science and mathematics education and how does
it differ from current practice?
- How does the infusing of equity make it high-quality?
- How can schools create and sustain a high-quality mathematics and
science education for all students?
For more information: www.nsf.gov;
(703) 306-1234.
Northwest Regional Educational Library. (1997, April). Science
and Mathematics for All Students: It's Just Good Teaching. 34
pages. Portland, Oregon: Author. This publication focuses on fostering
equity in the classroom by using techniques that benefit all students.
The publication includes a summary of research on the under-representation
of women and of people of color in science and mathematics, and it suggests
strategies to increase the participation of all students. A listing of
current equity-related books, organizations, and on-line sources points
teachers toward additional resources. It is published by the Northwest
Regional Educational Laboratory, Science and Mathematics Education Unit
in cooperation with the Center for National Origin, Race, and Sex Equity.
For more information: http://www.nwrel.org/msec/resources/index.html;
Amy Coyle; (503) 275-0457.
|