From marginality to legitimate peripherality: Understanding the essential functions of a women's program

Science Education

Volumn 92, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 33-64

  Kahveci, Ajda ^a   Southerland, Sherry A ^b   Gilmer, Penny J ^b  

^a MARMARA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 38049148037     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20234     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (49)

1. ACCESS Program for Women in Science and Mathematics. (2006). Retrieved June 7, 2007, from http://www.science.utah.edu/access.html
2. Alcoff, L. (1988). Cultural feminism versus post-structuralism: The identity crisis in feminist theory. Signs, 13(3), 405-436.
3. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
4. Brainard, S. G., & Carlin, L. (2001). A six-year longitudinal study of undergraduate women in engineering and science. In M. Lederman & I. Bartsch (Eds.), The gender and science reader (pp. 24-37). New York: Routledge.
5. Brickhouse, N. W., & Kittleson, J. M. (2006). Visions of curriculum, community, and science. Educational Theory, 56(2), 191-204.
6. Bystidziensky, J. M., & Bird, S. R. (2006). Introduction. In J. M. Bystidziensky & S. R. Bird (Eds.), Removing barriers: Women in academic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pp. 1-22). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
7. Cronin, C., & Roger, A. (1999). Theorizing progress: Women in science, engineering, and technology in higher education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(6), 637-661.
8. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2007a). Beyond bias and barriers: Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
9. Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2007b). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
10. Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Davies, B. (2005). Communities of practice: Legitimacy not choice. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 9(4), 557-581.
12. Davis, K. (2001). "Peripheral and subversive": Women making connections and challenging the boundaries of the science community. Science Education, 85, 368-409.
13. Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
14. Eisenhart, M. A., & Finkel, E. (1998). Women's science: Learning and succeeding from the margins. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
15. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
16. Fausto-Sterling, A. (2001). Life in the XY coral. In M. Lederman & I. Bartsch (Eds.), The gender and science reader (pp. 234-251). New York: Routledge.
17. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education (5th ed.). New York McGraw-Hill.
18. Freeman, C. E. (2004). Trends in educational equity of girls & women: 2004. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
19. Gee, J. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York: Routledge.
20. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575-599.
21. Harding, S. (2001). Feminist standpoint epistemology. In M. Lederman & I. Bartsch (Eds.), The gender and science reader (pp. 145-168). New York: Routledge.
22. Hubbard, R. (2001). Science and science criticism. In M. Lederman & I. Bartsch (Eds.), The gender and science reader (pp. 49-51). New York: Routledge.
23. Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students' experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists, Science Education, 84, 180-192.
24. Kahveci, A. (2004, April). Encouraging retention of women in undergraduate science, mathematics, and engineering majors. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, Canada.
25. Kahveci, A., Southerland, S. A., & Gilmer, P. J. (2006). Retaining undergraduate women in science, mathematics and engineering. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(3), 34-38.
26. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
27. Lederman, M. (2003). Gender/inequity in science education: A response. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(6), 604-606.
28. Lofland. J., & Lofland, L. H. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
29. Maton, K. I., Hrabowski, III, F. A., & Schmitt, C. L. (2000). African American college students excelling in the sciences: College and postcollege outcomes in the Meyerhoff Scholars Program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 629-654.
30. Matyas, M. L. (1992). Promoting undergraduate studies in science and engineering. In M. L. Matyas & L. S. Dix (Eds.), Science and engineering programs: On target for women? Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. National Academy of Sciences. (1995). On being a scientist: Responsible conduct in research (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Science Board. (2006). Science & engineering indicators - 2006 (No. NSB 02-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation (Vol. 1, NSB 06-01; Vol. 2, NSB 06-01A).
33. National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resource Statistics. (2003). Gender differences in the careers of academic scientists and engineers: A literature review (No. NSF 03-322). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
34. National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. (2007). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 2007 (No. NSF 07-315). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
35. Nichols, S. E., Gilmer, P. J., Thompson, A. D., & Davis, N. (1998). Women in science: Expanding the vision. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 967-978), Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
36. Normile, D. (2006). Getting women scientists back on the career track in Japan. Science, 311, 1235-1236.
37. Öǧrenci Seçme ve Yerleştirme Merkezi. (2007). 2006-2007 öǧretim yili istatistikleri. Retrieved June 29, 2007, from http://www.osym.gov.tr
38. Packard, W. (2003). Student training promotes mentoring awareness and action. Career Development Quarterly, 51(4), 335-345.
39. Peltz, W. H. (1990). Can girls + science- stereotypes = success? The Science Teacher, 57(9), 44-49.
40. Rosser, S. V. (1994). Educating women for success in science & mathematics: A University of South Carolina model project. West Columbia: University of South Carolina.
41. Rosser, S. V. (1997). Re-engineering female friendly science. New York: Teachers College Press.
42. Schiebinger, L. (1989). The mind has no sex? - Women in the origins of modern science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43. Seymour, E. (1995). The loss of women from science, mathematics, and engineering undergraduate majors: An explanatory account. Science Education, 79(4), 437-473.
44. Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
45. Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 435-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. Summers, M. F., & Hrabowski, III, F. A. (2006). Preparing minority scientists and engineers. Science, 311, 1870-1871.
47. Weedon, C. (2000). Feminism, theory and the politics of difference. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
48. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
49. Wygoda, L. J. (1993). Women in science: Meet Madam Curie's colleagues. The Science Teacher, 60(8), 24-27.