Advocating for equitable science-learning opportunities for girls in an Urban City Youth Club and the roadblocks faced by women science educators

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 151-163

  Davis, Kathleen S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036471957     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.10014     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans: A project 2061 report on literacy goals in science, mathematics, and technology. Washington, DC: AAAS.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. American Association of University Women. (1992). How schools shortchange girls. Washington, DC: AAUW.
4. Atkinson, P. (1992). Understanding ethnographic texts. London: Sage Publications.
5. Atwater, M.M. (2000). Females in science education: White is the norm and class, language, lifestyle, and religion are nonissues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 386-387.
6. Baker, D. & Leary, R. (1995). Letting girls speak out about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 3-27.
7. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
8. Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L.J.D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9. Bowles, S. & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America. New York: Basic Books.
10. Brickhouse, N., Lowery, P., & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441-458.
11. Brown, L.M. (1991). A problem of vision: The development of voice and relational knowledge in girls ages seven to sixteen. Women's Studies Quarterly, 1-2, 52-71.
12. Davis, K.S. (1999). Why science? Women scientists and their pathways along the road less traveled. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 5(2), 129-153.
13. Davis, K.S. (2001). "Peripheral and subversive": Women making connections, challenging the boundaries, and defining the limits of the science community. Science Education, 85(4), 368-409.
14. Delamont, S. (1989). Knowledgeable women: Structuralism and the reproduction of elites. New York: Routledge.
15. Dorney, J. (1991). "Courage to act in a small way": Clues toward community and change among women teaching girls. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
16. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In Wittrock, M. (Ed.), The handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan.
17. Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women's lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
18. Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural? Postcolonials, feminisms, and epistemologies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
19. Kreinberg, N. & Lewis, S. (1996). The politics and practice of equity: Experiences from both sides of the Pacific. In Parker, L.H., Rennie, L.J., & Fraser, B.J. (Eds.), Gender, science and mathematics: Shortening the shadow. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
20. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
21. Leadbeater, B.J.R. & Way, N. (Eds.). (1996). Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities. New York: New York University Press.
22. McCarthy, C. (1990). Race and curriculum: Social inequality and the theories and politics of difference in contemporary research on schooling. New York: The Falmer Press.
23. Meier, D. (2000). Educating a democracy. In Meier, D. (Ed.), Will standards save public education? Boston: Beacon Press.
24. Mohanty, C.T. (1991). Introduction cartographies of struggle: Third world women and the politics of feminism. In Mohanty, C.T., Russo, A., & Torres, L. (Eds.), Third world women and the politics of feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
25. National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26. National Science Foundation. (1999). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 1998. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
27. Nicholson, H. & Fredericks, J. (1991). The explorer's pass: A report on case studies of girls and math, science, and technology. New York: Girls Inc.
28. Oakes, J. (1990a). Opportunities, achievement, and choice: Women and minority students in science and mathematics. In Cazden, C.B. (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 16, 153-222.
29. Oakes, J. (1990b). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
30. Pastor, J., McCormick, J., & Fine, M. (1996). Makin' homes: An urban girl thing. In Leadbeater, B.J.R. & Way, N. (Eds.), Urban girls: Resisting stereotypes, creating identities. New York: New York University Press.
31. Richardson, G., Livingston, B., & Hammrich, P.L. (1998). Confronting the gender gap in science and mathematics: The Sisters in Science Program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego. CA.
32. Schiebinger, L. (1989). The mind has no sex? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Schiebinger, L. (1993). Nature's body: Gender in the making of modern science. Boston: Beacon Press.
34. Seymour, E. (1995). The loss of women from science, mathematics, and engineering undergraduate majors: An explanatory account. Science Education, 79(4), 437-473.
35. Spradley, J.P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
36. Stanton-Salazar, R.D., Vasquez, O.A., & Mehan, H. (1995). Engineering success through institutional support. In Murtado, A. (Ed.). The educational achievement of Latinos. Vol. II. Santa Cruz, CA: Regents of the University of California.
37. Varanka-Martin, M. (1997). The fate of an all girls' physics class: A reflection of society. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Research in Teaching Association. Oakbrook, IL.
38. Weiler, K. (1988). Women teaching for change: Gender, class, & power. New York: Bergin & Garvey Publishers.
39. Young, I.M. (1990). Polity and group difference: A critique of the ideal of universal citizenship. In Sunstein. C. (Ed.), Feminism and political theory (pp. 245-247). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.