Suscripción a Biblioteca: Guest
Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering

Publicado 6 números por año

ISSN Imprimir: 1072-8325

ISSN En Línea: 1940-431X

SJR: 0.514 SNIP: 0.875 CiteScore™:: 2.4 H-Index: 27

Indexed in

BEYOND EINSTEIN AND EXPLOSIONS: UNDERSTANDING 6TH GRADE GIRLS' AND BOYS' PERCEPTIONS OF PHYSICS, SCHOOL SCIENCE, AND STEM CAREERS

Volumen 26, Edición 6, 2020, pp. 541-577
DOI: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.2020033678
Get accessGet access

SINOPSIS

This study examines the perceptions of 6th grade middle school girls and boys regarding physics and science, physics and science in school, and STEM careers to better understand how reforms in science education may increase girls' interest and future participation in STEM careers. This interpretive multi-case study was situated within classrooms where girl-friendly and integrated STEM strategies were utilized, and leveraged social cognitive career theory as a lens in analysis. Focus group interviews with twenty-eight students indicate few differences in girls' and boys' perceptions related to physics, school science, and career interests. Unsurprisingly, students find hands-on experiences to be a central component to science learning and struggle with perceptions of scientists beyond stereotypes. However, this study reveals that girls may have a more accurate understanding of what scientists do, understanding that their work impacts others and is not limited to a traditional laboratory space. Findings additionally indicate that contextualizing science learning and meaningful group work were vital to girls' interests in science class, which are tied to their career interests. Implications for practice include the importance of contextualizing science learning, the necessity of modeling cooperative teamwork, and the need to make explicit connections to STEM careers.

REFERENCIAS
  1. Archer, L., Dewitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2010). "Doing" science versus "being" a scientist: Examining 10/11-year-old schoolchildren's construction of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617-39. DOI: 10.1002/sce.20399. .

  2. 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. DOI: 10.3102/0002831211433290. .

  3. Baker, D., & Leary, R. (1995). Letting girls speak out about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 3-27. DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660320104. .

  4. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1. .

  5. Barth, J. M., & Masters, S. (2020). Effects of classroom quality, gender stereotypes, and efficacy on math and science interest over school transitions. International Journal of Gender, Science and Technology, 12(1), 4-31. .

  6. Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x. .

  7. Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369-87. DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00985.x. .

  8. Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: A review of four themes in science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 971-1002. DOI: 10.1002/tea.20241. .

  9. Brown, R., Brown, J., Reardon, K., & Merrill, C. (2011). Understanding STEM: Current perceptions. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 20(6), 5-9. .

  10. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). Current population survey. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/cps/. .

  11. Bybee, R. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press. Calabrese Barton, A., Tan, E., & Rivet, A. (2008). Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science among urban middle school girls. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 68-103. DOI: 10.3102/0002831207308641. .

  12. Catsambis, S. (1995). Gender, race, ethnicity, and science education in the middle grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 243-57. DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660320305. .

  13. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. .

  14. Crosling, G., Heagney, M., & Thomas, L. (2009). Improving student retention in higher education: Improving teaching and learning. Australian Universities 'Review, 51(2), 9-18. .

  15. Czerniak, C. M., Weber, W. B., Sandmann, A., & Ahern, J. (1999). A literature review of science and mathematics integration. School Science and Mathematics, 99(8), 421-30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1999. tb17504.x. .

  16. Dabney, K., Chakraverty, D., & Tai, R. H. (2013). The association of family influence and initial interest in science. Science Education, 97(3), 395-409. DOI: 10.1002/sce.21060. .

  17. Dare, E. A. (2015). Understanding middle school students' perceptions of physics using girl-friendly and integrated STEM strategies: A gender study. (Publication No. 3727776) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. .

  18. Dare, E. A., Ellis, J. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2018). Understanding science teachers' implementations of integrated STEM curricular units through a phenomenological multiple case study. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(4), 1-19. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-018-0101-z. .

  19. Dare, E. A., Rafferty, D., Scheidel, E., & Roehrig, G. H. (2017). Flood rescue: A gender-inclusive integrated STEM curricular unit. K-12 STEM Education, 3(2), 193-203. .

  20. Dawson, C. (2000). Upper primary boys' and girls' interests in science: Have they changed since 1980? International Journal of Science Education, 22(6), 557-70. DOI: 10.1080/095006900289660. .

  21. English, L. D. (2016). STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1-8. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-016-0036-1. .

  22. Froyd, J. E., & Ohland, M. W. (2005). Integrated engineering curricula. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 147-64. DOI: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00835.x. .

  23. Haussler, P., Hoffmann, L., Langeheine, R., Rost, J., & Sievers, K. (1998). A typology of students' interest in physics and the distribution of gender and age within each type. International Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 223-38. DOI: 10.1080/0950069980200207. .

  24. Haussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2000). A curricular frame for physics education: Development, comparison with students' interests, and impact on students' achievement and self-concept. Science Education, 84(6), 689-705. DOI: 10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<689::AID-SCE1>3.0.C0; 2-L. .

  25. Haussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2002). An intervention study to enhance girls' interest, self-concept, and achievement in physics classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 870-88. DOI: 10.1002/tea.10048. .

  26. Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M. C. (2010). Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectation, physics identity, and physics career choice: A gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978-1003. DOI: 10.1002/tea.20363. .

  27. Herschbach, D. R. (2011). The STEM initiative: Constraints and challenges. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 48(1), 96-112. DOI: 10.30707/JSTE48.1Herschbach. .

  28. Hirsch, L. S., Carpinelli, J. D., Kimmel, H., Rockland, R., & Bloom, J. (2007). The differential effects of pre-engineering curricula on middle school students' attitudes to and knowledge of engineering careers. Published in the proceeding of 2007 Frontiers in Education Conference, Milwaukee, WI. .

  29. Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (Eds.). (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press. .

  30. Huebner, T. A. (2009). Encouraging girls to pursue math and science. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 90-1. .

  31. Jenkins, E., & Nelson, N. W. (2005). Important but not for me: Students' attitudes toward secondary school science in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23(1), 41-57. DOI: 10.1080/02635140500068435. .

  32. Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 82(2), 180-92. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200003)84:2<180::AID-SCE3>3.0.C0;2-X. .

  33. Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11), 2-11. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z. .

  34. Kotte, D. (1992). Gender differences in science achievement in 10 countries. New York: Peter Lang. .

  35. Kowalski, S. M. (2007). Students, language, and physics: Discourse in the science classroom (Publication No. 3284257) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN. .

  36. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. .

  37. Labudde, P., Herzog, W., Neuenschander, M. P., Violi, E., & Gerber, C. (2000). Girls and physics: Teaching and learning strategies tested by classroom interventions in grade 11. International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 143-157. DOI: 10.1080/095006900289921. .

  38. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (2002). Social cognitive career theory. In D. Brown (Ed.), Career choice and development (4th ed.) (pp. 255-311). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. .

  39. Lent., R. W., Brown, S. D., Sheu, H.-B., Schmidt, J., Brenner, B. R., Gloster, C. S., Wilkins, G., Schmidt, L. C., Lyons, H., & Treistman, D. (2005). Social cognitive predictors of academic interests and goal in engineering: Utility for women and students at historically Black universities. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(1), 84-92. DOI: 10.1037/0022-0167.52.1.84. .

  40. Maltese, A. V., & Cooper, C. S. (2017). STEM pathways: Do men and women differ in why they enter and exit? AERA Open, 3(3), 1-16. DOI: 10.1177/2332858417727276. .

  41. Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among U.S. students. Science Educational Policy, 95(5), 877-907. DOI: 10.1002/sce.20441. .

  42. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. .

  43. Moore, T. J., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W., Kersten, J. A., & Ntow, F. D. (2013). The status of engineering in the current K-12 state science standards (research-to-practice). Paper presented at the 2013 ASEE (American Society for Engineering Education) Annual Conference, Atlanta, GA. .

  44. Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H.-H., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In S. Purzer, J. Strobel, and M. Cardella (Eds.), Engineering in precollege settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 35-60). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press. .

  45. Moote, J., Archer, L., DeWitt, J., & MacLeod, E. (2020). Science capital or STEM capital? Exploring relationships between science capital and technology, engineering, and math aspirations and attitudes among young people aged 17/18. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. DOI: 10.1002/ tea.21628. .

  46. Mosatche, H. S., Matloff-Nieves, S., Kekelis, L., & Lawner, E. K. (2013). Effective STEM programs for adolescent girls: Three approaches and many lessons learned. Afterschool Matters, 17, 17-25. .

  47. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. .

  48. National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. (2019). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering (NSF 19-304). Retrieved from https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf19304/. .

  49. Newbill, P. L., & Cennamo, K. S. (2008). Improving women's and girls' attitudes toward science with instructional strategies. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science Education, 14(1), 49-65. DOI: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEngv14.i1.30. .

  50. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press. .

  51. Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy during childhood and adolescence: Implications for teachers and parents. In F. Pajares and T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 339-67). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. .

  52. Ring, E. A., Dare, E. A., Crotty, E. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2017). The evolution of teacher conceptions of STEM education throughout an intensive professional development experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 28(5), 444-467. DOI: 10.1080/1046560X.2017.1356671. .

  53. Rosser, S. V. (1998). Group work in science, engineering, and mathematics: Consequences of ignoring gender and race. College Teaching, 46(3), 82-9. DOI: 10.1080/87567559809596243. .

  54. Rosser, S. V. (2000). Women, science, and society: The crucial union. New York: Teachers College Press. .

  55. Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z., & Tai, R. (2012). Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education, 96(3), 411-27. DOI: 10.1002/sce.21007. .

  56. Scantlebury, K. (2014). Gender matters: Building on the past, recognizing the present, and looking toward the future. In N. G. Lederman and S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education: Volume II (pp. 187-203). Routledge. .

  57. Scherz, Z., & Oren, M. (2006). How to change students' images of science and technology. Science Education, 90(6), 965-85. DOI: 10.1002/sce.20159. .

  58. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. .

  59. Sikora, J., & Pokropek, A. (2012). Gender segregation of adolescent science career plans in 50 countries. Science Education, 96(2), 234-64. DOI: 10.1002/sce.20479. .

  60. Smith, J., & Karr-Kidwell, P. (2000). The interdisciplinary curriculum: A literary review and a manual for administrators and teachers. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED443172). .

  61. Stadler, H., Duit, R., & Benke, G. (2000). Do boys and girls understand physics differently? Physics Education, 35(6), 417-22. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9120/35/6/307. .

  62. Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312, 1143-4. DOI: 10.1126/science.1128690. .

  63. U.S. Department of Education. (2007). Encouraging girls in math and science: IES practice guide. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/PracticeGuide/20072003.pdf. .

  64. Wieselmann, J. R., Dare, E. A., Ring-Whalen, E. A., & Roehrig, G. H. (2019). "I just do what the boys tell me": Exploring small group student interactions in an integrated STEM unit. Journal for Research in Science Teaching, 57(1), 112-44. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21587. .

  65. Wong, B. (2015). Careers "From" but not "in" science: Why are aspirations to be a scientist challenging for minority ethnic students? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 972-1002. DOI: 10.1002/ tea.21231. .

  66. Yanowitz, K. L. (2004). Do scientists help people? Beliefs about scientists and the influence of prosocial context on girls' attitudes towards physics. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10(4), 393-399. DOI: 10.1615/JWomenMinorScienEng.v10.i4.70. .

  67. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. .

CITADO POR
  1. Wieselmann Jeanna R., Dare Emily A., Roehrig Gillian H., Ring‐Whalen Elizabeth A., “There are other ways to help besides using the stuff”: Using activity theory to understand dynamic student participation in small group science, technology, engineering, and mathematics activities, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58, 9, 2021. Crossref

  2. Roehrig Gillian H., Dare Emily A., Wieselmann Jeanna R., Ring-Whalen Elizabeth A., STEM curriculum development and implementation, in International Encyclopedia of Education(Fourth Edition), 2023. Crossref

  3. Wieselmann Jeanna R., Dare Emily A., Roehrig Gillian H., Ring-Whalen Elizabeth A., Measurement instruments of STEM affective learning: a systematic review, in International Encyclopedia of Education(Fourth Edition), 2023. Crossref

Próximos Artículos

Mitigating Barriers, Scaffolding Success: Institutional Supports for Black Undergraduate Women in Engineering Programs Meseret Hailu, Neelakshi Rajeev Tewari, Brooke Coley Underrepresented Students Pursuing Mathematics-Intensive Degrees: Changes after Transitioning to College Alison Marzocchi What do STEM Clubs do? The Effect of College Club Participation on Career Confidence and Gender Inclusion Guillermo Dominguez Garcia, Jennifer Glass Validating Practices and Messages that Promote Women’s Engineering Classroom Belongingness: An Intersectional Approach Dina Verdin, A Lili Castillo Examining the Role of Institutional Support on International Doctoral Women’s STEM Persistence and Mental Health Aisha Farra, Aashika Anantharaman, Sarah Swanson, Kerrie Wilkins-Yel, Jennifer Bekki, Nedim Yel, Ashley Randall, Bianca Bernstein Searching for safe space: Student veterans’ uneven pathways to STEM careers by race Brittany Hunt, Jae Hoon Lim Does Race, Ethnicity or Gender of the Mentor Affect Whether They Will be a “Good Mentor”? A Qualitative Analysis of Students’ Perceptions Reuben May, Christine Stanley, America Soto-Arzat, Jennifer Ackerman PSYCHOLOGICAL SAFETY AND TEAM MEMBER EFFECTIVENESS OF MINORITIZED STUDENTS IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION Behzad Beigpourian, Matthew Ohland Perceptions of Department Chair Roles and Responsibilities in Career Progression and Success of Women STEM Faculty Stephanie Jones, Patricia Ryan Pal “Barbed-Wire Boundaries”: Hidden Curriculum, First-Generation and Low-Income Engineering Students, and Internship Acquisition Jerry Yang, Joseph Towles, Sheri Sheppard, Sara Atwood “I Want to Make an Impact”: The Science Identity and Career Goals of Black and Latinx Science and Engineering Postdoctoral Scholars Sylvia Mendez, Kathryn Watson, Kathryn Starkey, Valerie Conley Care Work, Science Brokering, and Career Motivations: How Hispanic/Latinx Young Adults in STEM Express Social Agency during the COVID-19 Pandemic Angela Frederick, Angelica Monarrez, Danielle Morales Bridging the gap: A sequential mixed methods study of trust networks in graduate application, admissions, and enrollment Cynthia Villarreal, Julie Posselt, Theresa Hernandez, Alexander Rudolph
Portal Digitalde Biblioteca Digital eLibros Revistas Referencias y Libros de Ponencias Colecciones Precios y Políticas de Suscripcione Begell House Contáctenos Language English 中文 Русский Português German French Spain