Equity or Stereotypes in Science Education? Perspectives from Pre-University Students
Abstract
:1. Introduction
Gender Stereotypes in Science Education
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Procedure
2.3. Instrument
2.4. Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions and Limitations
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Flores-Lázaro, J.; Castillo-Preciado, R.; Jiménez-Miramonte, N. Desarrollo de funciones ejecutivas, de la niñez a la juventud. [Development of executive functions, from childhood to youth]. An. Psicol. 2014, 30, 463–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez de Madariaga, I.; De la Rica, S.; Dolado, J. (Eds.) Libro Blanco Sobre la Situación de Las Mujeres en la Ciencia Española. [White Book on the Women Situation in Science in Spain]; Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Unidad de Mujeres y Ciencia: Madrid, Spain, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Manzano, A.; de Pro Bueno, A. Algunos datos sobre la visión de los niños y de las niñas sobre las ciencias y del trabajo científico. [Some data on the children perception of Science and the scientific job]. Rev. Género Igual 2018, 18–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vázquez-Alonso, Â.; Mas, M. El descenso de las actitudes hacia la ciencia de chicos y chicas en la educación obligatoria. [The decrease of science attitudes in boys and girls in compulsory education]. Ciência Educ. 2011, 17, 249–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Patall, E.; Steingut, R.; Freeman, J.; Pituch, K.; Vasquez, A. Gender disparities in students’ motivational experiences in high school science classrooms. Sci. Educ. 2018, 102, 951–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lytle, A.; Shin, J.E. Incremental Beliefs, STEM Efficacy and STEM Interest among First-Year Undergraduate Students. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2020, 29, 281–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lin, T.; Tsai, C. Differentiating the Sources of Taiwanese High School Students’ Multidimensional Science Learning Self-Efficacy: An Examination of Gender Differences. Res. Sci. Educ. 2018, 48, 575–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michell, D.; Szabo, C.; Falkner, K.; Szorenyi, A. Towards a socio-ecological framework to address gender inequity in computer science. Comput. Educ. 2018, 126, 324–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Percepción Social de la Ciencia y la Tecnología en España 2018. [Social Perception of Science and Technology in Spain]; Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades de España Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología, FECYT: Madrid, Spain, 2019; Available online: https://www.fecyt.es/es/publicacion/percepcion-social-de-la-ciencia-y-la-tecnologia-en-espana-2018 (accessed on 20 September 2020).
- Sikora, J.; Pokropek, A. Gender segregation of adolescent science career plans in 50 countries. Sci. Educ. 2012, 96, 234–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Witherspoon, E.B.; Schunn, C.D. Locating and understanding the largest gender differences in pathways to science degrees. Sci. Educ. 2020, 104, 144–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso, Á.; Mas, M. La relevancia de la educación científica: Actitudes y valores de los estudiantes relacionados con la ciencia y la tecnología. [The relevance of science Education: Attitudes and values of students]. Enseñanza Cienc. 2009, 27, 33–34. [Google Scholar]
- Barth, J.; Kim, H.; Eno, C.; Guadagno, R. Matching abilities to careers for others and self: Do gender stereotypes matter to students in advanced math and science classes? Sex Roles 2018, 79, 83–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manzano, A.; Baeza, J. Gamificación transmedia para la divulgación científica y el fomento de vocaciones procientíficas en adolescentes. [Transmedia gammification for the science outreach and the fostering of science vocations in adolescents]. Comunicar 2018, 55, 93–103. [Google Scholar]
- Makarova, E.; Herzog, W. Trapped in the gender stereotype? The image of science among secondary school students and teachers. Equ. Div. Incl. Intl. J. 2015, 34, 106–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smeding, A. Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): An investigation of their implicit gender stereotypes and stereotypes’ connectedness to math performance. Sex Roles 2012, 67, 617–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marbà-Tallada, A.; Solsona-Pairó, N. Identificación e interpretación de las posibles desigualdades formativas en ciencias de chicos y chicas en la educación obligatoria y el bachillerato. [Identification and interpretation of the possible educational drawbacks among boys and girls in compulsory secondary education and baccalaureate]. Cult. Educ. 2012, 24, 289–303. [Google Scholar]
- Pardal, V.; Alger, M.; Latu, I. Implicit and Explicit Gender Stereotypes at the Bargaining Table: Male Counterparts’ Stereotypes Predict Women’s Lower Performance in Dyadic Face-to-Face Negotiations. Sex Roles 2020, 83, 289–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sánchez, M.; Suárez, M.; Manzano, N.; Oliveros, L. Estereotipos de género y valores sobre el trabajo entre los estudiantes españoles. [Gender stereotypes and values on the Jobs among Spanish students]. Rev. Educ. 2011, 355, 331–354. [Google Scholar]
- García, T.; Fernández, E.; Vázquez, A.; García, P.; Rodríguez, C. El Género y la Percepción de las Inteligencias Múltiples. Análisis en Función del Informante. [The gender and perception of multiple inteligences. Analysis since the subject]. Psicol. Educ. 2017, 24, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heredia, E.; López, A.; Agulló, C. Percepción escolar de las profesiones y estereotipos de género. [Pupils’ perception of job positions and gender stereotypes]. Psicol. Educ. 2006, 12, 133–147. [Google Scholar]
- Márquez, Y.; Gutiérrez- Barroso, J.; Gómez-Galdona, N. Equidad, género y diversidad en educación. [Equity, gender and diversity in Education]. Eur. Sci. J. 2017, 13, 300–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ruiz Medina, D.; Parga Lozano, D.; Martinez Perez, L. Creencias de los profesores de preescolar y primaria sobre ciencia, tecnología y sociedad, en el contexto de una institución rural. [Beliefs of preschool and primary education on science, technology and society in the context of a rural school]. Rev. Fac. Cienc. Tecnol. TED 2009, 25, 41–61. [Google Scholar]
- Chaves, A. Implicaciones educativas de la teoría sociocultural de Vigotsky. [Educational implications of the sociocultural theory of Vigotsky]. Rev. Educ. 2001, 25, 59–65. [Google Scholar]
- Gifre, M.; Esteban, M. Consideraciones educativas de la perspectiva ecológica de Urie Bronfenbrenner. [Educational considerations of the ecological perspective of Urie Bronfenbrenner]. Contextos Educ. 2012, 15, 79–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bian, L.; Leslie, S.J.; Cimpian, A. Gender stereotypes about intelectual ability emerge early and influence children’s interest. Science 2017, 355, 389–391. Available online: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6323/389.abstract (accessed on 5 October 2020). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Riegle-Crumb, C.; Moore, C.; Ramos-Wada, A. Who wants to have a career in science or math? Exploring adolescents’ future aspirations by gender and race/ethnicity. Sci. Educ. 2011, 95, 458–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Makarova, E.; Aeschlimann, B.; Herzog, W. The gender gap in STEM fields: The impact of the gender stereotype of math and science on secondary students’ career aspirations. Front. Educ. 2019, 4, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deemer, E.D.; Lin, C.; Soto, C. Stereotype threat and women’s science motivation: Examining the disidentification effect. J. Career Assess 2016, 24, 637–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramspott, S.; Fedele, M.; Tarragó, A. Funciones sociales de los youtubers y su influencia en la preadolescencia. Comunicar 2018, 57, 71–80. [Google Scholar]
- Carli, L.; Alawa, L.; Lee, Y.; Zhao, B.; Kim, E. Stereotypes about gender and science: Women≠ scientists. Psychol. Women Q. 2016, 40, 244–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McPherson, E.; ParK, B.; Ito, T. The role of prototype matching in science pursuits: Perceptions of scientists that are inaccurate and diverge from self-perceptions predict reduced interest in a science career. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2018, 44, 881–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sandhu, P.; Gupta, R. Awareness among rural girls for role of home science education in economic empowerment. Stud. Home Com. Sci. 2014, 8, 27–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chetcuti, D.; Kioko, B. Girls’ attitudes towards science in Kenya. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2012, 34, 1571–1589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ginorio, A.; Fournier, J.; Frevert, K. The rural girls in science program. Educ. Leadersh. 2004, 61, 79–84. [Google Scholar]
- Feniger, Y. The gender gap in advanced math and science course taking: Does same-sex education make a difference? Sex Roles 2011, 65, 670–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cézar, R.F.; Pinto, N.S. Attitude towards school science in primary education in Spain. REDIE 2017, 19, 112–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fernéndez-Cézar, R.; Pinto-Solano, N.; Muñoz-Hernández, M. Do experimentation outreach programs improve the attitudes towards school science? Rev. Educ. 2018, 381, 285–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Cézar, R.; Garrido, D.; Solano-Pinto, N. Do Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) experimentation outreach programs affect attitudes towards mathematics and science? A quasi-experiment in primary education. Mathematics 2020, 8, 1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manassero, M.; Vázquez, A.; Acevedo, J. Cuestionario de Opiniones Sobre Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad (COCTS). [Questionnaire on Science, Technology and Society Opinions]; Educational Testing Service: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, C.; Sonnert, G.; Sadler, P.M. The effect of first high school science teacher’s gender and gender matching on students′ science identity in college. Sci. Educ. 2020, 104, 75–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sanchez, C.A.; Weber, K. Using relevant animations to counter stereotype threat when learning science. J. Appl. Res. Mem. Cogn. 2019, 8, 463–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Cézar, R.; Gértrudix-Barrio, F.; Gértrudix-Barrio, M.; Solano Pinto, N. Ciencia CreActiva. ¿Cómo sensibilizar a docentes y estudiantes de ámbitos educativos no universitarios en la economía circular? [CreActive science. How to sensitize teachers and students in educational environments on circular economy]. PEL 2020, 57, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Woodcock, A.; Hernandez, P.R.; Schultz, P.W. Diversifying science: Intervention programs moderate the effect of stereotype threat on motivation and career choice. Soc. Psych. Person. Sci. 2016, 7, 184–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- López-Iñesta, E.; Botella, C.; Rueda, S.; Forte, A.; Marzal, P. Towards breaking the gender gap in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. IEEE Rev. Iberoam. Tecnol. Aprendiz. 2020, 15, 233–241. [Google Scholar]
- 11 de Febrero. Día Internacional de la Mujer y la Niña en la Ciencia. [International Day of Women and Girl in Science] From 1 to 15 February, 2020. Available online: https://11defebrero.org (accessed on 20 September 2020).
Gender Perspective (G) |
G1. Women and men are equal depending on what it takes to be a good scientist. |
G2. Men and women work differently because, by nature or education, they have different values, opinions, perspectives, and characteristics. |
G3. In a world traditionally considering men, women would work better because they have to show that they are competitive. |
G4. Men would work better because they have no difficulty in combining their professional and family role. |
G5. Scientific women endow their scientific work with greater value and feelings than men. |
G6. Scientific men give greater human value and feeling to their scientific work than women. |
G7. Scientists women endow more creativity and intuition to their scientific work than men. |
G8. Scientific men have a greater capacity to solve problems and make decisions in their scientific work than women. |
G9. The greater presence of scientific men is due to men are more rational than women and women are more emotional than men. |
G10. Men find work before women because they focus on their studies, while women focus more on family life. |
G11. Society has different expectations for men and women in relation to their professions. |
Science and Scientists (S) |
S1. The more students learn about science and technology, the more informed the citizens of the future will be (people can have better opinions about how science and technology are used). |
S2. The policy of the country affects its scientists because, in addition to financing projects, they establish scientific policy taking into account new applications and directly affecting the type of scientific projects it would carry out. |
S3. Science classes help students learn problem-solving skills and knowledge to solve practical problems. |
S4. If private companies were controlled scientific research (high tech, communications, pharmaceutical companies, and so on), there would be more competitiveness, economic endowment, and greater discoveries. |
S5. Most scientists are motivated to do their job. The main motivation is to solve problems to increase personal knowledge and benefit society (e.g., new treatments). |
S6. Scientists need to be deeply involved in their work to succeed and such involvement prevents them from having social and family life. |
S7. Scientists publish their findings for personal and social benefit, advancing science by sharing their ideas and results. |
S8. The scientific vocation depends on education. Thus, families, educational centers, and institutions must convey to children the orientation, encouragement, and opportunity to be scientists. |
S9. Scientific advances should be transmitted to society, such that citizens could learn about discoveries with the objective of becoming aware and being informed of all the responsible options that may affect their future. |
S10. Science and technology offer possible alternatives to solve social problems such as poverty, crime, and unemployment. |
Agreement | Disagreement | Missing | |
---|---|---|---|
Gender Perspective | |||
G1 | 386 (95.5%) | 7 (1.7%) | 1 (0.2%) |
G2 | 104 (25.7%) | 203 (50.2%) | 8 (2.0%) |
G3 | 93 (23.0%) | 206 (51.0%) | 7 (1.7%) |
G4 | 42 (10.4%) | 268 (66.3%) | 8 (2.0%) |
G5 | 51 (12.6%) | 217 (53.7%) | 11 (2.7%) |
G6 | 33 (8.2%) | 256 (63.4%) | 11 (2.7%) |
G7 | 70 (17.3%) | 213 (52.7%) | 6 (1.5%) |
G8 | 37 (9.2%) | 280 (69.3%) | 8 (2.0%) |
G9 | 46 (11.4%) | 277 (68.6%) | 8 (2.0%) |
G10 | 32 (7.9%) | 304 (75.2%) | 11 (2.7%) |
G11 | 268 (66.3%) | 56 (13.9%) | 3 (0.7%) |
Stereotyped ideas | 10 (2.2%) | 296 (77.5%) | 22 (5.4%) |
Equity ideas | 386 (95.5%) | 7 (1.7%) | 1 (0.2%) |
Science and Scientists | |||
S1 | 353 (87.4%) | 5 (1.2%) | 4 (1.0%) |
S2 | 248 (61.4%) | 25 (6.2%) | 5 (1.2%) |
S3 | 328 (81.2%) | 13 (3.2%) | 6 (1.5%) |
S4 | 170 (42.1%) | 57 (14.1%) | 10 (2.5%) |
S5 | 295 (73.0%) | 24 (5.9%) | 6 (1.5%) |
S6 | 97 (24.0%) | 195 (48.3%) | 7 (1.7%) |
S7 | 283 (70.0%) | 28 (6.9%) | 8 (2.0%) |
S8 | 246 (60.9%) | 48 (11.9%) | 7 (1.7%) |
S9 | 317 (78.5%) | 15 (3.7%) | 6 (1.5%) |
S10 | 235 (58.2%) | 53 (13.1%) | 11 (2.7%) |
Perception of science | 44 (11.3%) | 9 (2.3%) | 16 (4.0%) |
Perception of scientists | 64 (16.2%) | 41 (10.4%) | 9 (2.2%) |
Girls | Boys | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agreement | Disagreement | Missing | Agreement | Disagreement | Missing | |
Gender Perspective | ||||||
G1 | 178 (96.2%) | 4 (2.2%) | 0 (0%) | 204 (95.8%) | 3 (1.4%) | 0 (0%) |
G2 | 39 (21.7%) | 93 (50.3%) | 5 (2.7%) | 61 (28.6%) | 109 (51.2%) | 2 (0.9%) |
G3 | 51 (27.6%) | 83 (44.9%) | 3 (1.6%) | 41 (19.2%) | 121 (56.8%) | 3 (1.4%) |
G4 | 19 (10.3%) | 123 (66.5%) | 3 (1.6%) | 22 (10.3%) | 143 (67.1%) | 4 (1.9%) |
G5 | 26 (14.1%) | 90 (48.6%) | 5 (2.7%) | 25 (11.7%) | 126 (59.2%) | 5 (2.3%) |
G6 | 10 (5.4%) | 119 (64.3%) | 5 (2.7%) | 22 (10.3%) | 134 (62.9%) | 5 (2.3%) |
G7 | 35 (18.9%) | 90 (48.6%) | 1 (0.5%) | 35 (16.4%) | 120 (56.3%) | 4 (1.9%) |
G8 | 12 (6.5%) | 138 (74.6%) | 3 (1.6%) | 24 (11.3%) | 139 (65.3%) | 4 (1.9%) |
G9 | 10 (5.4%) | 137 (74.1%) | 3 (1.6%) | 35 (16.4%) | 36 (63.8%) | 4 (1.9%) |
G10 | 10 (5.4%) | 151 (81.6%) | 1 (0.5%) | 22 (10.3%) | 149 (70.0%) | 9 (4.2%) |
G11 | 140 (75.7%) | 15 (8.1%) | 0 (0%) | 127 (59.6%) | 39 (18.3%) | 2 (0.9%) |
Stereotyped ideas | 4 (2.2%) | 141 (80.1%) | 9 (4.9%) | 6 (3.0%) | 162 (75.6%) | 12 (5.6%) |
Equity ideas | 39 (21.7%) | 93 (50.3%) | 5 (2.7%) | 61 (28.6%) | 109 (51.2%) | 2 (0.9%) |
Science and Scientists | ||||||
S1 | 168 (90.8%) | 1 (0.5%) | 2 (1.1%) | 180 (84.5%) | 4 (1.9%) | 2 (0.9%) |
S2 | 183 (89.9%) | 14 (7.6%) | 2 (1.1%) | 137 (64.3%) | 11 (5.2%) | 3 (1.4%) |
S3 | 149 (80.5%) | 6 (3.2%) | 2 (1.1%) | 174 (81.7%) | 7 (3.3%) | 4 (1.9%) |
S4 | 69 (37.7%) | 26 (14.1%) | 4 (2.2%) | 98 (46.0%) | 31 (14.6%) | 6 (2.8%) |
S5 | 147 (79.5%) | 5 (2.7%) | 2 (1.1%) | 143 (67.1%) | 18 (8.5%) | 4 (1.9%) |
S6 | 33 (17.8%) | 108 (58.4%) | 3 (1.6%) | 59 (27.7%) | 87 (49.8%) | 4 (1.9%) |
S7 | 131 (70.8%) | 11(5.9%) | 3 (1.6%) | 146 (68.5%) | 17 (8.0%) | 5 (2.3%) |
S8 | 114 (61.6%) | 23 (12.4%) | 2 (1.1%) | 128 (60.1%) | 35 (22.7%) | 5 (2.3%) |
S9 | 155 (83.8%) | 2 (1.1%) | 2 (1.1%) | 157 (73.7%) | 12 (5.6%) | 4 (1.9%) |
S10 | 108 (58.4%) | 26 (24.2%) | 4 (2.2%) | 123 (57.7%) | 26 (12.2%) | 7 (3.3%) |
Perception of science | 86 (46.5%) | 5 (2.8%) | 6 (3.2%) | 105 (51.9%) | 15 (7.4%) | 10 (4.7%) |
Perception of scientists | 51 (27.5%) | 37 (15.5%) | 4 (2.2%) | 61 (29.3%) | 35 (16.8%) | 5 (2.3%) |
CSE | HS | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agreement | Disagreement | Missing | Agreement | Disagreement | Missing | |
Gender Perspective | ||||||
G1 | 257 (94.8%) | 5 (1.8%) | 1 (0.4%) | 129 (97.0%) | 2 (1.5%) | 0 (0%) |
G2 | 81 (29.9%) | 118 (43.5%) | 3 (1.1%) | 23 (17.3%) | 85 (63.9%) | 5 (3.8%) |
G3 | 70 (25.8%) | 134 (94.4%) | 3 (1.1%) | 23 (17.3%) | 72 (54.1%) | 4 (3.0%) |
G4 | 29 (10.7%) | 179 (66.1%) | 2 (0.7%) | 13 (9.8%) | 89 (66.9%) | 6 (4.5%) |
G5 | 46 (17.0%) | 125 (46.1%) | 5 (1.8%) | 5 (3.8%) | 92 (69.2%) | 6 (4.5%) |
G6 | 29 (10.7%) | 155 (57.2%) | 4 (1.5%) | 4 (3.0%) | 101 (75.9%) | 7 (5.3%) |
G7 | 59 (21.8%) | 123 (45.4%) | 2 (0.7%) | 11 (8.3%) | 90 (67.7%) | 4 (3.0%) |
G8 | 32 (11.8%) | 172 (63.5%) | 2 (0.7%) | 5 (3.8%) | 108 (81.2%) | 6 (4.5%) |
G9 | 39 (14.4%) | 170 (62.7%) | 2 (0.7%) | 7 (5.3%) | 107 (80.5%) | 6 (4.5%) |
G10 | 28 (10.3%) | 194 (71.6%) | 3 (1.1%) | 4 (3.0%) | 110 (82.7%) | 8 (6.0%) |
G11 | 36 (13.3%) | 179 (66.1%) | 3 (1.1%) | 89 (66.9%) | 20 (15.0%) | 0 (0%) |
Stereotyped ideas | 9 (3.6%) | 185 (71.4%) | 12 (4.4%) | 1 (0.8%) | 111 (90.2%) | 10 (7.5%) |
Equity ideas | 257 (94.8%) | 5 (1.8%) | 1 (0.4%) | 129 (97.0%) | 2 (1.5%) | 0 (0%) |
Science and Scientists | ||||||
S1 | 231 (85.2%) | 5 (1.8%) | 3 (1.1%) | 122 (91.7%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S2 | 137 (50.6%) | 23 (8.5%) | 4 (1.5%) | 111 (83.5%) | 2 (1.5%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S3 | 217 (80.1%) | 11 (4.1%) | 5 (1.8%) | 111 (83.5%) | 2 (1.5%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S4 | 112 (41.3%) | 40 (14.8%) | 8 (3.0%) | 58 (43.6%) | 17 (12.8%) | 2 (1.5%) |
S5 | 193 (71.2%) | 17 (6.3%) | 5 (1.8%) | 102 (76.7%) | 7 (5.3%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S6 | 77 (28.4%) | 114 (42.1%) | 6 (2.2%) | 20 (15.0%) | 81 (60.9%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S7 | 194 (71.6%) | 21 (7.7%) | 7 (2.6%) | 89 (66.9%) | 7 (5.3%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S8 | 175 (64.6%) | 19 (7.0%) | 6 (2.2%) | 71 (53.4%) | 29 (21.8%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S9 | 207 (76.4%) | 10 (3.7%) | 5 (1.8%) | 110 (82.7%) | 5 (3.8%) | 1 (0.8%) |
S10 | 146 (53.9%) | 41 (15.4%) | 7 (2.6%) | 89 (66.9%) | 12 (9.0%) | 4 (3.0%) |
Perception of science | 118 (45.4%) | 11 (4.2%) | 11 (4.1%) | 54 (42.2%) | 4 (3.1%) | 5 (3.8%) |
Perception of scientists | 49 (18.1%) | 42 (16.0%) | 8 (3.0%) | 25 (18.9%) | 22 (16.7%) | 1 (0.8%) |
Rural | Urban | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agreement | Disagreement | Missing | Agreement | Disagreement | Missing | |
Gender Perspective | ||||||
G1 | 104 (97.2%) | 1 (0.9%) | 1 (0.9%) | 282 (94.9%) | 6 (2.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
G2 | 29 (27.1%) | 50 (46.7%) | 3 (2.8%) | 75 (25.3%) | 153 (51.5%) | 5 (1.7%) |
G3 | 32 (29.9%) | 46 (43.0%) | 1 (0.9%) | 61 (20.5%) | 160 (53.9%) | 6 (2.0%) |
G4 | 8 (7.5%) | 69 (64.5%) | 1 (0.9%) | 34 (11.4%) | 199 (67.0%) | 7 (2.4%) |
G5 | 18 (16.8%) | 49 (45.8%) | 1 (0.9%) | 33 (11.1%) | 168 (56.6%) | 10 (3.4%) |
G6 | 12 (11.2%) | 56 (52.3%) | 1 (0.9%) | 21 (7.1%) | 200 (67.3%) | 10 (3.4%) |
G7 | 28 (26.2%) | 43 (40.2%) | 1 (0.9%) | 42 (14.1%) | 170 (57.2%) | 5 (1.7%) |
G8 | 16 (15.0%) | 65 (60.7%) | 1 (0.9%) | 21 (7.1%) | 215 (72.4%) | 7 (2.4%) |
G9 | 13 (12.1%) | 69 (64.5%) | 1 (0.9%) | 33 (11.1%) | 208 (70.0%) | 7 (2.4%) |
G10 | 7 (6.5%) | 81 (75.7%) | 1 (0.9%) | 25 (8.4%) | 223 (75.1%) | 10 (3.4%) |
G11 | 71 (66.4%) | 13 (12.1%) | 1 (0.9%) | 197 (66.3%) | 43 (14.5%) | 2 (0.7%) |
Stereotyped ideas | 3 (2.8%) | 72 (69.2%) | 3 (2.8%) | 7 (2.4%) | 224 (80.6%) | 19(6.4%) |
Equity ideas | 104 (97.2%) | 1 (0.9%) | 1 (0.9%) | 282 (94.9%) | 6 (2.0%) | 0 (0.0%) |
Science and Scientists | ||||||
S1 | 92 (86.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 261 (87.9%) | 5 (2.7%) | 4 (1.3%) |
S2 | 49 (45.8%) | 7 (6.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 199 (67.0%) | 18 (6.1%) | 5 (1.7%) |
S3 | 91 (85.0%) | 3 (2.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 237 (79.8%) | 10 (3.4%) | 6 (2.0%) |
S4 | 42 (39.9%) | 12 (11.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | 128 (43.2%) | 45 (15.2%) | 10 (3.4%) |
S5 | 74 (69.2%) | 13 (12.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 221 (74.4%) | 11 (3.7%) | 6 (2.0%) |
S6 | 30 (28.0%) | 43 (40.2%) | 1 (0.9%) | 67 (22.6%) | 152 (51.2%) | 6 (2.0%) |
S7 | 77 (72.0%) | 6 (5.6%) | 1 (0.9%) | 206 (69.4%) | 22 (7.4%) | 7 (2.4%) |
S8 | 73 (68.2%) | 3 (2.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 173 (58.2%) | 45 (15.2%) | 7 (2.4%) |
S9 | 83 (77.6%) | 4 (3.7%) | 0 (0.0%) | 234 (78.8%) | 11 (3.7%) | 6 (2.0%) |
S10 | 60 (56.1%) | 14 (13.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 175 (58.9%) | 39 (13.1%) | 11 (3.7%) |
Perception of science | 42 (39.4%) | 8 (7.5%) | 0 (0.0%) | 78 (26.3%) | 8 (2.8%) | 7 (2.4%) |
Perception of scientists | 21 (19.6%) | 2 (1.9%) | 2 (1.9%) | 84 (28.3%) | 11 (3.9%) | 16 (5.4%) |
Group | N | Mean Rank | U | Z | p | η2 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender Perspective | |||||||
Stereotyped ideas | Girls | 176 | 192.62 | 17,051.50 | −0.604 | 0.546 | 0.00 |
Boys | 201 | 185.83 | |||||
CSE | 259 | 213.85 | 10,141.00 | −5.746 | <0.001 | 0.09 | |
HS | 123 | 144.45 | |||||
Rural | 104 | 217.53 | 11,748.50 | −2.822 | 0.005 | 0.02 | |
Urban | 278 | 181.76 | |||||
Equity ideas | Girls | 185 | 203.54 | 18,954.50 | −1.052 | 0.293 | 0.00 |
Boys | 213 | 195.99 | |||||
CSE | 270 | 197.20 | 16,659.50 | −1.880 | 0.060 | 0.01 | |
HS | 133 | 211.74 | |||||
Rural | 106 | 206.90 | 15,221.50 | −0.805 | 0.421 | 0.00 | |
Urban | 297 | 200.25 | |||||
Science and Scientists | |||||||
Perception of science | Girls | 181 | 195.91 | 17,984.00 | −0.172 | 0.863 | 0.00 |
Boys | 208 | 194.21 | |||||
CSE | 260 | 185.26 | 14,238.50 | −2.321 | 0.020 | 0.02 | |
HS | 128 | 213.27 | |||||
Rural | 107 | 190.22 | 14,576.00 | −0.465 | 0.642 | 0.00 | |
Urban | 281 | 196.13 | |||||
Perception of scientists | Girls | 179 | 190.47 | 18,659.50 | −0.150 | 0.880 | 0.00 |
Boys | 203 | 192.41 | |||||
CSE | 263 | 207.79 | 14,782.50 | −2.435 | 0.015 | 0.02 | |
HS | 132 | 178.49 | |||||
Rural | 105 | 207.55 | 14,222.00 | −1.012 | 0.311 | 0.00 | |
Urban | 290 | 194.54 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Fernández-Cézar, R.; Garrido, D.; García-Moya, M.; Gómezescobar, A.; Solano-Pinto, N. Equity or Stereotypes in Science Education? Perspectives from Pre-University Students. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9354. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229354
Fernández-Cézar R, Garrido D, García-Moya M, Gómezescobar A, Solano-Pinto N. Equity or Stereotypes in Science Education? Perspectives from Pre-University Students. Sustainability. 2020; 12(22):9354. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229354
Chicago/Turabian StyleFernández-Cézar, Raquel, Dunia Garrido, Melody García-Moya, Ariadna Gómezescobar, and Natalia Solano-Pinto. 2020. "Equity or Stereotypes in Science Education? Perspectives from Pre-University Students" Sustainability 12, no. 22: 9354. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229354
APA StyleFernández-Cézar, R., Garrido, D., García-Moya, M., Gómezescobar, A., & Solano-Pinto, N. (2020). Equity or Stereotypes in Science Education? Perspectives from Pre-University Students. Sustainability, 12(22), 9354. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229354