Informing Teaching and Research in Science Education Through Gender Equity Initiatives

Part of the Science & Technology Education Library book series (volume 2)


The purpose of this chapter is twofold. First, we present a cross-national comparison of the implementation of a gender equity initiative in Australia and the USA. Second, we provide an example of the ways in which both teaching and research in science education can be informed through the development and implementation of gender equity initiatives. The chapter documents the stages in a collaborative and evolving process involving two almost identical studies, one in Australia and one in the USA, and uses the combined results of the two studies in developing an explanatory model of the relationship between gender and science in schools and classrooms. Both studies used inservice workshops not only to address primary school teachers’ lack of background knowledge and skill in teaching physical science, but also to give them training in gender-equitable teaching strategies. Both interventions were monitored and evaluated in terms of student and teacher attitudes, beliefs and behaviours in relation to science.


Preservice Teacher Physical Science Teacher Inservice Primary School Teacher Classroom Behaviour 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bailey, B. (1992). ‘The effect of teacher inservice on students’ attitude and participation’, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Oxford, Ohio, Miami University.Google Scholar
  2. Kahle, J.B., Anderson, A. & Damnjanovic, A. (1991). ‘A comparison of elementary teacher attitudes and skills in teaching science in Australia and the United States’, Research in Science Education (21), 208–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Kahle, J.B. & Damnjanovic, A. (1994). ‘The effect of inquiry activities on elementary students’ enjoyment, ease and confidence in doing science: An analysis by sex and race’, Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering (1), 17–28.Google Scholar
  4. Kahle, J.B., Parker, L.H., Rennie, L.J. & Riley, D. (1993). ‘Gender differences in science education: Building a model’, Educational Psychologist (28), 379–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kahle, J.B. & Rennie, L.J. (1993). ‘Ameliorating gender differences in attitudes about science: A cross-national study’, Journal of Science Education and Technology (2), 321–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kelly, A. (1978). Girls and science, IEA Monograph Studies No. 6, Stockholm, Almqvist & Wicksell.Google Scholar
  7. Kelly, A (1981). The missing half: Girls and science education, Manchester, Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Linn, M.C. & Hyde, J.S. (1989). ‘Gender, mathematics and science’, Educational Researcher 18(8), 17–19, 22-27.Google Scholar
  9. McMillan, J.H. & May, M. (1979). ‘A study of the factors influencing attitudes towards science of junior high school students’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching (16), 217–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ormerod, M.B. & Duckworth, D. (1975). Pupils’ attitudes to science: A review of research, Slough, National Foundation for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  11. Parker, L.H. & Rennie, L.J. (1985). ‘Teacher inservice as an avenue to equality in science and technology education’, Contributions to the Third GASAT Conference, London, Chelsea College, University of London, 226–234.Google Scholar
  12. Parker, L.H. & Rennie, L.J. (1986). ‘Sex-stereotyped attitudes about science: Can they be changed?’, European Journal of Science Education (8), 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rennie, L.J. & Parker, L.H. (1987). ‘Detecting and accounting for gender differences in mixed-sex and single-sex groupings in science lessons’, Educational Review (39), 65–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rennie, L.J., Parker, L.H. & Hutchinson, P. (1985). The effect of inservice training on teacher attitudes and primary school science classroom climate (Report to the Commonwealth Schools Commission), Perth, The University of Western Australia.Google Scholar
  15. Shrigley, R.L. (1983). ‘Persuade, mandate and reward: A paradigm for changing the science attitudes and behaviours of teachers’, School Science and Mathematics (83), 204–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Simpson, R.D. (1978). ‘Relating student feelings to achievement in science’, in M.B. Rowe (ed.), What research says to the science teacher (Vol. 1), Washington, DC, National Science Teachers’ Association.Google Scholar
  17. Stevenson, H.W. & Stigler, J.W. (1992). The learning gap, New York, Summit Books.Google Scholar
  18. Vockell, E.L. & Lobonc, S. (1981). ‘Sex role stereotyping by high school females in science’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching (18), 209–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Curtin University of TechnologyWestern Australia
  2. 2.Miami UniversityOhioUSA

Personalised recommendations