Girls (and boys) and technology (and toys)

Canadian Journal of Education

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 164-182

  Upitis, Rena ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 52549130498     PISSN: 03802361     EISSN: 03802361     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/1602199     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Caleb, L. (2000). Design technology: Learning how girls learn best. Equity and Excellence in Education, 33(1), 22-25.
2. Ching, C., Marshall, S., & Kafai, Y. (1998). Give girls some space: Gender equity in collaborative technology activities. Proceedings of the 19th National Educational Computing Conference, IR 018 902, San Diego, CA.
3. Cole, M., & Scribner, S. (1974). Culture and thought: A psychological introduction. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
4. Cutler-Landsman, D. (1993). Bridging the gender gap with LEGO TC Logo. In D. Watt & M. Watt (Eds.), New paradigms in classroom research on Logo learning (pp. 91-99). Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
5. DeJean, J., Upitis, R., Koch, C., & Young, J. (1999). The story of Phoenix Quest: How girls respond to a prototype language and mathematics computer game. Gender and Education, 11, 207-223.
6. Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier.
8. Fiore, C. (1999). Awakening the tech bug in girls. Learning and Leading with Technology, 26(5), 10-17.
9. Flowers, J. (1998). Improving female enrollment in Tech Ed. The Technology Teacher, 58(2), 21-25.
10. Francis, B. (1997). Power plays: Children's constructions of gender, Gender and Education, 9, 79-91.
11. Francis, B. (1998a). Power plays: Primary school children's constructions of gender, power, and adult work. Stoke on Trent, U.K.: Trentham Books, Ltd.
12. Francis, B. (1998b). Oppositional positions: Children's construction of gender in talk and role plays based on adult occupation. Educational Research, 40, 31-43.
13. Hall, I., & Hooper, P. (1993). Creating a successful learning environment with second and third graders, their parents, and LEGO/Logo. In D. Watt & M. Watt (Eds.), New paradigms in classroom research on Logo learning (pp. 53-63). Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
14. Henshaw, A., Kelly, J., & Gratton, C. (1992). Skipping's for girls: Children's preferences of gender roles and gender preferences. Educational Research, 34, 229-235.
15. Hutchinson, E., & Whalen, M. (1995). Mathematics and science: Female students and LEGO TC Logo. Computing Teacher, 22(4), 22-25.
16. Inkpen, K., Upitis, R. Klawe, M., Hsu, D., Leroux, S., Lawry, J., Anderson, A., Ndunda, M., Sedighian, K. (1994). We have never forgetful flowers in our garden: Girls' responses to electronic games. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 13, 383-403.
17. Kilpatrick, W.H. (1918). The project method. Teachers College Record, 19, 319-335.
18. Kinnaman, D. (1994). The leadership role: Best of all ... it isn't teacher-proof! The practical application of technology in public schools: Professional issues in public education. Hartford, CT: Connecticut Education Association.
19. Klawe, M., Inkpen, K., Phillips, E., Upitis, R., & Rubin, A. (2002). Phoenix Quest in the classroom. In N. Yelland & A. Rubin (Eds.), Ghosts in the machine (pp. 209-227). New York: Peter Lang.
20. Klawe, M., & Phillips, E. (1995, October). A classroom study: Electronic games engage children as researchers. Paper presented at the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning '95 (CSCL 95), Bloomington, Indiana.
21. Klawe, M., Upitis, R., Inkpen, K., & Koch, C. (1997). The story of Phoenix Quest: Developing an appealing mathematical computer game for girls (and boys). Proceedings of the Grace Hopper Memorial Conference on Women and Computing, San José, California.
22. Koch, C., & Upitis, R. (1996). Is equal computer time fair for girls? Potential Internet inequities. Proceedings of the 6th annual International Conference of the Internet Society, Montréal, Québec.
23. Knupfer, N. (1997). Out of the picture, out of the club: Technology, mass media, society, and gender. Selected readings from the 1996 Annual Conference of the International Visual Literacy Association, IR 018 353, Cheyenne, Wyoming.
24. Lebow, D., & Wager, W. (1994). Authentic activity as a model for appropriate learning activity: Implications for design of computer-based simulations. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the 1994 National Convention of the Association on Educational Communications and Technology, Research and Theory Division, IR 016 784, Florida.
25. Margolis, J., Fisher, A., & Miller, F. (2000). Caring about connections: Gender and computing. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 18(4), 13-20.
26. Martin, C., Eisenbud, L., & Rose, H. (1995). Children's gender-based reasoning about toys. Child Development, 66, 1453-1471.
27. Martin, C., Wood, C., & Little, J. (1990). The development of gender stereotype components. Child Development, 61, 1891-1904.
28. McDonnell, K. (1994). Kid culture: Children and adults and popular culture. Toronto: Second Story Press.
29. Mullen, J. (1994). Count me in: Gender equity in the primary classroom. Toronto: Green Dragon Press.
30. Nicolopoulou, A., Scales, B., & Weintraub, J. (1994). Gender differences and symbolic imagination in the stories of four-year-olds. In A.H. Dyson & C. Genishi (Eds.), The need for story: Cultural diversity in classroom and community (pp. 102-123). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
31. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
32. Papert, S. (1993). The children's machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York: Basic Books.
33. Papert, S. & Solomon, C. (1971). Twenty things to do with a computer. Artificial Intelligence Memo. no. 248. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
34. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
35. Perry, L. & Sung, H-Y. (1993, June). Developmental differences in young children's sex-typing: Automatic versus reflective processing. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, New Orleans, LA.
36. Provenzo, E. (1991). Video kids: Making sense of Nintendo. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. Ross, C. (1993). Girls as constructors in the early years: Promoting equal opportunities in maths, science, and technology. Stoke-on-Trent, U.K.: Trentham.
38. Thorne, B. (1993). Play: Girls and boys in school. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
39. Turkle, S. (1984). The second self: Computers and the human spirit. New York: Schuster.
40. Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.
41. Upitis, R. (1998). From hackers to luddites, game players to game creators: Profiles of adolescent students using technology in a classroom setting. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30, 293-318.
42. Upitis, R., Phillips, E., & Higginson, W. (1997). Creative mathematics: Exploring children's understanding. London, U.K.: Routledge.
43. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
44. Welch, M. (1999). Analyzing the tacit strategies of novice designers. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17(1), 19-34.
45. White, R. & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London, U.K.: The Falmer Press.
46. Whitehead, B. (1993). Classroom computers: A new approach. Principal, 73(1), 34-36.
47. Wolk, S. (1994). Project-based learning: Pursuits with a purpose. Educational Leadership, 52(3), 42-45.
48. Wood, J. (2000). The girls have it! Instructor, 109(6), 31-35.
49. Young, J., & Upitis, R. (1999).The microworld of Phoenix Quest: Social and cognitive considerations. Education and Information Technologies, 4(4), 1-18.