Abstract
Researchers have been exploring the issue of women’s attrition from science doctoral programs for over two decades, but understanding the problem of the under-representation of women in science has remained limited. Thus, the study on which this chapter is based was conceived to examine possible reasons for the under-representation of women in physics, and to understand reasons why women stay in physics. What emerged from this study, however, was the realization that specific questions around why women leave or stay in physics are not sufficient to understand the problem of how to develop gender-inclusive educational practices in doctoral physics. A redefinition of the so-called problem of women in science is necessary: one that de-centres the category woman, and rather focuses on the ways that gender is produced in doctoral physics programs to reify and sustain the current gender order.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Discourse with a “big-D” (Gee 2005) is used here to denote the combination of language, action, interaction, values, beliefs, symbols, objects, tools and places that are associated with being a certain kind of person. Lemke (1995) interprets Gee’s discourse “as what we are actually saying (and doing), and Discourses (capitalized) as our social habits of different people saying (and doing) the same sorts of things in the same ways time and again” (p. 16).
References
Brickhouse, N. W. (2001). Embodying science: A feminist perspective on learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 282–295.
Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 971–1002. doi: 10.1002/tea.20241.
Bucholtz, M., Barnwell, B., Jung-Eun, J. L., & Skapoulli, E. (2009). Techies and fuzzies: The ideological opposition of science and non-science among high-achieving undergraduates. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA. (http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/bucholtz/cv.html).
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.
Davies, B., & Harrè, R. (1990). Positioning: The social construction of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43–63.
Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C., & Uzzi, B. (2000). Athena unbound: The advancement of women in science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fox, M. F. (2000). Women, science, and academia: Graduate education and careers. Gender and Society, 15(5), 654–666.
Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis. London: Routledge.
Gilbert, J. (2001). Science and its ‘other’: Looking underneath ‘woman’ and ‘science’ for new directions in research on gender and science education. Gender and Education, 13(3), 291–305.
Gilbert, J., & Calvert, S. (2003). Challenging accepted wisdom: Looking at the gender and science education question through a different lens. International Journal of Science Education, 25(7), 861–878.
Gonsalves, A. J. (2010). Discourses and gender in doctoral physics: A hard look at a hard science. Unpublished dissertation. McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who needs ‘identity’? In S. Hall & P. Du Gay (Eds.), Questions of cultural identity (pp. 1–17). London: Sage.
Henwood F. (1998). Engineering difference: Discourses on gender, sexuality and work in a college of technology. Gender and Education, 10, 35–49.
Ivie, R., & Ray, K. N. (2005). Women in physics and astronomy, 2005. AIP Report, Number R-430.02. Statistical Research Center of the American Institute of Physics. E-mail: stats@aip.org; http://www.aip.org/statistics. Accessed November 17, 2009.
Keller, E. F. (1982). Feminism and science. Signs, 7(3), 589–602.
Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lemke, J. (1995). Textual politics. London: Taylor and Francis.
Oudshoorn, N., Saetnan, A. R., & Lie, M. (2002). On gender and things reflections on an exhibition on gendered artifacts. Women’s Studies International Forum, 25, 471–483.
Phipps, A. (2007). Re-inscribing gender binaries: Deconstructing the dominant discourse around women’s equality in science, engineering, and technology. Sociological Review, 55(4), 768–787.
Schiebinger, L. (1999). Has feminism changed science? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Summers, L. (2005). Remarks at NBER conference on diversifying the science and engineering workforce. www.President.Harvard.Edu/speeches/2005/nber.html. Accessed January 20, 2006.
Thomas, K. (1990). Gender and subject in higher education. Bristol: Taylor and Francis.
Tonso, K. (2006). Student engineers and engineer identity: Campus engineer identities as figured world. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(2), 307, 273.
Traweek, S. (1992). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Boston: Harvard University Press.
Tsai, L. (2003). Identity reconstruction of women in physics: Interventionist discourse matters. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED474533. Accessed February 20, 2008.
Walker, M. (2001). Engineering identities. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(1), 75–89.
Walkerdine, V. (1989). Counting girls out. London: Virago.
Further Reading
Brickhouse, N. W., Lowery, P., & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of a girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441–458.
Cetina, K. K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge (1st ed.). Boston: Harvard University Press.
Danielsson, A. T., & Linder, C. (2008). Learning in physics by doing laboratory work: Towards a new conceptual framework. Gender and Education, 21(2), 129–144.
Eisenhart, M. (2001). Educational ethnography past, present, and future: Ideas to think with. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 16.
Eisenhart, M. A., & Finkel, E. (2001). Women (still) need not apply. The gender and science reader. New York: Routledge.
Erwin, L., & Maurutto, P. (1998). Beyond access: Considering gender deficits in science education. Gender and Education, 10, 51–69.
Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder: Westview.
Sfard, A., & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher, 34(4), 14.
Sonnert, G. (1999). Women in science and engineering: Advances, challenges, and solutions. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 869, 34–57.
Wood, S. (2005, May 6–8). Doctoral women’s learning and identity in the culture of engineering: Stories as situated retellings. mit4: The work of stories. Conference at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gonsalves, A.J. (2011). Gender and Doctoral Physics Education: Are We Asking the Right Questions?. In: McAlpine, L., Amundsen, C. (eds) Doctoral Education: Research-Based Strategies for Doctoral Students, Supervisors and Administrators. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0507-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0507-4_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0506-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0507-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)