1 / 18

Gender Gap and Gendered Education: Myth or Reality?

Gender Gap and Gendered Education: Myth or Reality?. Tatyana Sumner Fall 2012 ED.7202.T Action Research Final Presentation. Table of Contents. Statement of Problem – Slide 3 Research Design – Slide 4 Threats to Internal Validity – Slide 5 Threats to External Validity – Slide 6

makaio
Download Presentation

Gender Gap and Gendered Education: Myth or Reality?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Gender Gap and Gendered Education: Myth or Reality? Tatyana Sumner Fall 2012 ED.7202.T Action Research Final Presentation

  2. Table of Contents Statement of Problem – Slide 3 Research Design – Slide 4 Threats to Internal Validity – Slide 5 Threats to External Validity – Slide 6 Proposed Data – Slide 7 Proposed Correlations (Graphs) – Slide 8 – 9 Sample Survey Questions – Slide 10 References – Slide 11

  3. Statement of the Problem This research focuses on possible differences in math attitudes between female and male students. • Living in a gendered society (Ridgeway & Correll, 2004; Risman,2004). • Socially constructed stereotypes “girls are not good at math,” (Guderson et al., 2012; Nosek, Banaji, & Greenwald, 2002; Tomasetto, Alparone, & Cadinu, 2011; Tracy & Lane, 2006). • Gross underrepresentation of women in math-related fields (Brandell & Staberg 2008; Leaper et al., 2012; Steffens, Jelenec, & Noack, 2010).

  4. Literature Review • Educating teachers about gender bias (Tracy & Lane, 1999). • Students should be taught to work together in peer-assisted and cooperative learning environments (Kroeger & Kouche, 2006; Kuntz et al., 2001; Sparks, 2012; Tournaki & Crischitello, 2003) • Provide girls with female role-models, support against stereotype threat and encouragement in their abilities (Gool et al., 2007; Shapiro & Williams, 2012). Proposed Solutions Math Attitudes • Girls are less likely to pursue math-related careers (Brandell & Staberg, 2008; Steffens et al., 2010; James 2007). • Math = Male, Me = Female, Therefore Math ≠ Me (Leaper et al., 2012; Norsek et al., 2002; Steffens et al., 2010). • Girls attribute success to luck or hard work rather than talent (Steffens et al., 2010; Stetsenko, et al., 2000).

  5. Hypothesis Statement HR1 By implementing a dual-gender peer-assisted learning environment during math instruction for 18 students (9 girls and 9 boys) in an urban setting in East New York and Northern New Jersey, for the period of 4 weeks, 3 times a week, will improve student’s attitudes toward mathematics.

  6. Participants and Instruments Participants • Sample of convenience = 18 students from various schools throughout New York and northern New Jersey area. • 9 girls – age range 9-15 • 9 boys – age range 9-15 Instruments • Pre / Post Test • Math attitude survey (devised by the researcher) • Team Randomization • An excel file to randomize pairs without bias.

  7. Research Design and Threats to Validity Threats to External Validity • Ecological Validity • Selection-Treatment Interaction • Specificity of Variables Threats to Internal Validity • History • Maturations • Instrumentation • Mortality • Statistical Regression • Differential Selection of Subject Quasi-Experimental Design • Nonequivalent Control Group Design • Symbolic Design Representation: O X1O O X2 O

  8. Procedures Pre-test – Students of both groups were given a survey measuring gauging their initial attitude toward mathematics. Treatment – Hypothetical treatment were given introduced to all participants. Post-test – A survey, identical to pre-test survey were given to the group gauging any change in attitude toward mathematics

  9. Data Analysis: Math Attitudes Composite Predictive Variables

  10. Data Analysis: Math Skill Confidence Composite Predictive Variables

  11. Correlations: Math Attitudes Post-Survey Correlation Brief Analysis: A fair, positive correlation (.326rxy) suggests that the more students prefer to work in parirs or groups when doing math problems, the more positive their attitudes toward math are. Correlation Coefficient = 0.326rxy

  12. Correlations: Parent Assistance and Math confidence Post-Survey Correlation Brief Analysis: A fair, negative correlation (-.35rxy) suggests that the less parents spend time helping students with math, the more confident the students in working on math independently. Correlation Coefficient = -0.35rxy

  13. Bell Curve Distribution Math Attitude (Mean of Questions 2, 3, and 9) Mean = 2.44 Mode = 2.67 Median = 2.83 SD = 0.7 83% within +/- 1SD Negative Skew – More higher scores and few to none lower scores beyond 1SD

  14. Discussion/Implications Discussion Even the hypothetical implementation of treatment produced a change of perception in students attitudes toward math. By attempting to eliminate gender-based competition in the classroom, and by creating peer-assisted learning environment, raises students’ confidence in and enjoyment of mathematics. Implications Further research using a randomly selected and larger sample. Further research with actual implementation of treatment.

  15. References Brandell, G., & Staberg, E. (2008). Mathematics: A female, male or gender-neutral domain? A study of attitudes among students at secondary level. Gender and Education, 20(5), 495-509. doi:10.1080/09540250701805771 Gool, J., Carpenter, J., Davies, S., Ligos, T., MacKenzie, L., Schilp, R., & Schips, J. (2006). Teacher bias of gender in the elementary classroom. Education Today, (5), 27-30. Retrieved from Education Research Complete Database Gunderson, E., Ramirez, G., Levine, S., & Beilock, S. (2012). The role of parents and teachers in the development of gender-related math attitudes. Sex Roles, 66(3/4), 153-166. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-9996-2 Kroeger, S. D., & Kouche, B. (2006). Using peer- assisted learning strategies to increase response to intervention in inclusive middle math settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(5), 6-13. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete Database Kuntz, K. J., McLaughlin, T. F., & Howard, V. F. (2001). A comparison of cooperative learning and small group individualized instruction for math in a self contained classroom for elementary students with disabilities. Educational Research Quarterly, 24(3), 41-56. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete Database Leaper, C., Farkas, T., & Brown, C. (2012). Adolescent girls’ experiences and gender-related beliefs in relation to their motivation in math/science and English. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(3), 268-282. doi:10.1007/s10964-011-9693-z

  16. References Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 83(1), 44-59. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.83.1.44 Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 83(1), 44-59. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.83.1.44 Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18(4), 510-531. doi:10:1177/0891243204265269 Risman, B. J. (2004). Gender as a social structure: Theory wrestling with activism. Gender & Society, 18(4), 429-450. doi:10.1177/0891243204265349 Shapiro, J., & Willaims, A. (2012). The role of stereotype threats in undermining girls’ and women’s performance and interest in STEM fields. Sex Roles, 66(3/4), 175-183. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0 Sparks, S. D. (2012). Researchers cite social benefits in coed classes. Education Week, 31(30), 1-15. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete Database

  17. References Steffens, M. C., Jelenec, P., &Noack, P. (2010). On the leaky math pipeline: Comparing implicit math-gender stereotypes and math withdrawal in female and male children and adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 947-963. doi:10.1037/a0019920 Stetsenko, A., Little, T. D., Gordeeva, T., Grasshof, M., & Oettingen, G. (2000). Gender effects in children’s beliefs about school performance: A cross-cultural study. Child Development, 71(2), 517-527. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00161 Tomasetto, C., Alparone, F., & Cadinu, M. (2011). Girls’ math performance under stereotype threat: The moderating role of mothers’ gender stereotypes. Developmental Psychology, 47(4), 943-949. doi:10.1037/a0024047 Tournaki, N., & Criscitiello, E. (2003). Using peer tutoring as a successful part of behavior management. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(2), 22-29. Retrieved from http://www.cec.sped.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Publications2/TEACHINGExceptionalChildren/default.htm Tracy, D. M., & Lane, M. B. (1999). Gender-equitable teaching behaviors: Preservice teachers’ awareness and implementation. Equity & Excellence in Education, 32(3), 93-104. doi:10.1080/1066568990320311

  18. The End

More Related