|
|
|
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.
|