Advertisement

Revealing Assumptions: Problematising Research on Gender and Mathematics and Science Education

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

Abstract

Over the past three decades, teachers, researchers and policy makers have become increasingly aware of differences in the participation and achievement of girls and boys in school mathematics and science. Significant amounts of research have focussed on this issue, and associated initiatives have been developed, usually with the explicit aim of increasing the participation of girls in these subjects. This work has contributed to our understanding of the area and has affected the educational and career opportunities of some girls. However, we believe that the scope and extent of these changes have been circumscribed by a limited conceptualisation of gender.

Keywords

Science Education Educational Research Practical Interest Mathematics Achievement Gender Category 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barnes, M. (1991). Investigating change: An introduction to calculus for Australian schools, Melbourne, Curriculum Corporation.Google Scholar
  2. Barnes, M., Plaister, R. & Thomas, A. (1984). Girls count in mathematics and science: A handbook for teachers, Sydney, Mathematical Association of New South Wales.Google Scholar
  3. Burton, L. (ed.) (1986). Girls into maths can go, Holt, London, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  4. Burton, L. (ed.) (1990). Gender and mathematics. An international perspective, London, Cassell.Google Scholar
  5. Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research, London, Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dekkers, J., de Laeter, J.R. & Malone, J.A. (1986). Upper secondary school science and mathematics enrolment patterns in Australia, 1970-1985, Perth, Curtin University of Technology.Google Scholar
  7. Doron, R. (1991). ‘Gender similarities and dissimilarities in prediction of academic achievements by psychometric tests among Israeli practical engineers’, in L.J. Rennie, L.H. Parker and G.M. Hildebrand (eds.). Action for equity: The second decade. Contributions to the Sixth International GASAT Conference, Perth, National Key Centre for Teaching and Research in School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University of Technology, 544–552.Google Scholar
  8. Ethington, C.A. (1992). ‘Gender differences in a psychological model of mathematics achievement’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 23(2), 166–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fennema, E. (1993). ‘Teachers’ beliefs and gender differences in mathematics’, in E. Fennema and G. Leder (eds.). Mathematics and gender, Brisbane, University of Queensland Press, 169–187.Google Scholar
  10. Gianello, L. (ed.) (1988). Getting into gear, gender inclusive teaching strategies in science, Canberra, Curriculum Development Centre.Google Scholar
  11. Gray, J.A. (1981). ‘A biological basis for the sex differences in achievement in science’, in A. Kelly (ed.), The missing half: Girls and science education, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 43–58.Google Scholar
  12. Grosz, E. (1990). ‘Conclusion: A note on essentialism and difference’, in S. Gunew (ed.), Feminist knowledge, critique and construct, London, Routledge, 332–344.Google Scholar
  13. Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum: Product or praxis, London, Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  14. Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests, second edition, London, Heinemann.Google Scholar
  15. Harding, S. (1986). The science question in feminism, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Johnston, J. & Dunne, M. (1991, April). Gender, mathematics and science: Evading the issues or confronting new questions, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  17. Jones, M.G. (1991). ‘Competitive science: Gender differences in the physical and biological sciences’, in L.J. Rennie, L.H. Parker and G.M. Hildebrand (eds.), Action for equity: The second decade. Contributions to the Sixth International GASAT Conference, Perth, National Key Centre for Teaching and Research in School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University of Technology, 261–269.Google Scholar
  18. Keeves, J. (ed.) (1992). The IEA study of science III: Changes in science education and achievement: 1970 to 1984, Oxford, Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kelly, A. (1987). ‘Why girls don’t do science’, in A. Kelly (ed.), Science for girls?, Milton Keynes, Open University Press, 12–17.Google Scholar
  20. Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The Structure of scientific revolutions, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leder, G.C. (1974). ‘Sex differences in mathematics: Problem appeal as a function of problem context’, Journal for Educational Research (67), 351–353.Google Scholar
  23. Leder, G.C. (1976). ‘Contextual setting and mathematical performance’, Australian Mathematics Teacher 32(4), 119–127; 32(5), 165-173.Google Scholar
  24. Leder, G.C. (1982). ‘Mathematics achievement and fear of success’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 1(2), 124–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lewis, S. & Davies, A. (1988). Girls and maths and science teaching: Professional development manual, Canberra, Curriculum Development Centre.Google Scholar
  26. Lock, R. (1992). ‘Gender and practical skill performance in science’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching (29), 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Megaw, W.J. (1991). ‘Gender distribution in the world’s physics departments’, in L.J. Rennie, L.H. Parker and G.M. Hildebrand (eds.), Action for equity: The second decade. Contributions to the Sixth International GASAT Conference, Perth, National Key Centre for Teaching and Research in School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University of Technology, 604–612.Google Scholar
  28. Murphy, P. (1991). ‘Gender differences in pupils’ reactions to practical work’, in B. Woolnough (ed.). Practical science, Milton Keynes, Open University Press, 112–122.Google Scholar
  29. Phillips, D.C. (1987). Philosophy, science and social inquiry: Contemporary methodological controversies in social science and related applied fields of research, Oxford, Pergamon.Google Scholar
  30. Popper, K.R. (1968). The logic of scientific discovery, London, Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  31. Reilly, B. & Morton, M. (1991). ‘Performance in a nationwide mathematics examination at tertiary entrance level’, in L.J. Rennie, L.H. Parker and G.M. Hildebrand (eds.), Action for equity: The second decade. Contributions to the Sixth International GASAT Conference, Perth, National Key Centre for Teaching and Research in School Science and Mathematics, Curtin University of Technology, 301–309.Google Scholar
  32. Sherman, J. (1983). ‘Girls talk about mathematics and their future: A partial replication’, Psychology of Women Quarterly (7), 338–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sjøberg, S. & Imsen, G. (1988). ‘Gender and science education I’, in P. Fensham (ed.), Development and dilemmas in science education, London, Falmer Press, 218–248.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, I. (1964). Spatial ability: Its education and social significance, San Diego, CA, Robert P. Knapp.Google Scholar
  35. Stanley, L. (1990). Feminist praxis, London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1983). Breaking out: Feminist consciousness and feminist research, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  37. Walkerdine, V. (1984). ‘Developmental psychology and the child centred pedagogy: The insertion of Piaget into early education’, in J. Henriques, W. Hollway, C. Urwin, C. Venn and V. Walkerdine, Changing the subject: Psychology, social regulation and subjectivity, London, Methuen, 153–202.Google Scholar
  38. Walkerdine, V. & The Girls and Mathematics Unit (1989). Counting girls out, London, Virago Press.Google Scholar
  39. Willis, S. (1989). ‘Real girls don’t do maths’: Gender and the construction of privilege, Geelong, Australia, Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Willis, S. (1995). ‘Gender reform through school mathematics’, in P. Rogers and G. Kaiser (eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture, London, Falmer Press, 186–200.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Education Department of Western AustraliaPerthAustralia
  2. 2.The University of BirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations