Introduction: Why Do We Need Identity in Physics Education Research?

Part of the Cultural Studies of Science Education book series (CSSE, volume 19)


Over several decades, studies have documented differences between men and women’s achievement and participation in physics, or have sought social or psychological explanations for differences in physics engagement. This dualistic understanding of gender and its consequences for physics learning has long been challenged theoretically, but only recently have new perspectives on gender and physics been taken up in the field of physics education research (PER). A recent epistemological shift in research on gender and physics education is turning our gaze away from documenting differences and rather towards understanding how gendered identities are constructed in physics learning and practice. As this book will detail, identity frameworks have much to offer our understanding of gender in physics education research. Frameworks that highlight identity work in physics can be used to explore how gender interacts with constructs like power, privilege, agency, discourse, positionality and inequity and how these are tied up in identity construction and trajectories into and out of physics. In this chapter, we introduce a growing scholarship using sociocultural frameworks to understand learning and participation in physics, that seeks to challenge dominant understandings of who does physics and what counts as physics competence. We discuss the various perspectives taken in the subsequent chapters of this book, and the potential these have to help us construct a broad picture of the complexity inherent in doing physics and doing gender.


  1. Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: How families shape children’s engagement and identification with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Åsberg, C., & Lykke, N. (2010). Feminist technoscience studies. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 17(4), 299–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (1999). Agential realism: Feminist interventions in understanding scientific practices (pp. 1–11). The science studies reader.Google Scholar
  4. Beichner, R. J. (2009). An introduction to physics education research. Getting Started in PER, 2(1), 1–25.Google Scholar
  5. Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Embodying science: A feminist perspective on learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 282–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Calabrese Barton, A. (1998). Teaching science with homeless children: Pedagogy, representation, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 35(4), 379–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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, 44(8), 1187–1218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. In University of Chicago Legal Forum (Vol. 140, p. 139).Google Scholar
  10. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Identity politics, intersectionality, and violence against women. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gonsalves, A. J., Danielsson, A., & Pettersson, H. (2016). Masculinities and experimental practices in physics: The view from three case studies. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 020120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harding, S. G. (1998). Is science multicultural?: Postcolonialisms, feminisms, and epistemologies. Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Heron, P. R., & Meltzer, D. E. (2005). The future of physics education research: Intellectual challenges and practical concerns. American Journal of Physics, 73, 390–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on science and gender. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Keller, E. F. (1987). On the need to count past two in our thinking about gender and science. New Ideas in Psychology, 5(2), 275–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Scherr, R. (2016). Never mind the gap: Gender-related research in physical review physics education research, 2005–2016. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 020003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Traxler, A. L., Cid, X. C., Blue, J., & Barthelemy, R. (2016). Enriching gender in physics education research: A binary past and a complex future. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 020114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Integrated Studies in EducationMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Department of EducationUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations