Gender Differences Regarding Mathematics Achievement: The Case of Turkish Middle School Students

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 108, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 113-120

  Isiksal, Mine ^a   Cakiroghi, Erdinc ^a  

^a MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 65449161231     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2008.tb17814.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Battista, M. T. (1990). Spatial visualization and gender difference in high school geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 47–60.
2. Beaton, A. E., Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzales, E. J., Kelly, D. L., & Smith, T. A. (1999). Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study-Repeat (TIMMS-R). Boston College, Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation and Policy.
3. Birenbaum, M., & Nasser (2006). Ethnic and gender differences in mathematics achievement and in dispositions towards the study of mathematics. Learning and Instruction, 16, 26–40.
4. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Brandon, P. R., Newton, B. J., & Hammond, O. (1987). Children's mathematics achievement in Hawaii: Sex differences favoring girls. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 437–461.
6. Byrnes, J. P., & Takahira, S. (1993). Explaining gender differences on SAT-math items. Developmental Psychology, 29, 805–810.
7. Byrnes, J. P., & Takahira, S. (1994). Why some students perform well and others perform poorly on SAT math items. Contemporary Education Psychology, 19, 63–78.
8. Capraro, R. M. (2004). Statistical significance, effect size reporting, and confidence intervals: Best reporting strategies. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 57–62.
9. Cheng, S. K., & Seng, Q. K. (2001). Gender differences in TIMSS mathematics achievement of four Asian nations: A secondary analysis. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, 331–340.
10. Dinçer, B., Özaslan, M., & Satilmiş, E. (1996). Illerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişlik siralamasi araşttrmast, [Research on order of socio-economic development of cities]. Ankara: Devlet Planlama Teskilati. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/bolgesel/dincerb/il/.
11. Ercikan, K., McCreith T., & Lapointe, V. (2005). Factors associated with mathematics achievement and participation in advanced mathematics courses: An examination of gender differences from an international perspective. School Science and Mathematics, 105, 5–14.
12. Fennema, E. (1974). Mathematics learning and the sexes: A review. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 5, 126–139.
13. Fennema, E., & Carpenter, T. (1981). The second national assessment and sex-related differences in mathematics. Mathematics Teacher, 74, 554–559.
14. Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. (1978). Sex-related differences in mathematics achievement and related factors: A further study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 9, 189–203.
15. Geary, D. C. (1996). Sexual selection and sex differences in mathematical abilities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 229–284.
16. Green, K. E. (1996). Applications of the Rasch model to evaluation of survey data quality. In M. T. Bravermann & J. K. Slater (Eds.), Advances in survey research, No. 70 (pp. 81–92). San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. Hacket, G. (1993, October). Case against co-eds still not proven. The Times Educational Supplement, 4.
18. Halpern, D. F. (1992). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematical performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139–155.
20. Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2006). Gender similarities in mathematics and science. Science, 314, 599–600.
21. Isiksal, M., & Askar, P. (2005). The effect of spreadsheet and dynamic geometry software on the achievement and self-efficacy of 7th-grade students. Educational Research, 47, 333–350.
22. Leder, G. C. (1992). Mathematics and gender: Changing perspectives. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. New York: Macmillian.
23. Linacre, J. M., & Wright, B. D. (1998). A user's guide to Winsteps, Bigsteps, and Ministeps: Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago: MESA Press.
24. Ma, X. (1995). Gender differences in mathematics achievement between Canadian and Asian education systems. The Journal of Educational Research, 89, 118–126.
25. Ma, X. (2004, July). Current trend in gender differences in mathematics performance: An international update. Paper presented at the 10th International Congress on Mathematics Education, Copenhagen, Denmark.
26. Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. CA: Stanford University Press.
27. Ministry of National Education. (2003). Haydi kizlar okula [Girls to school]. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://www.haydikizlarokula.org/amac.php.
28. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzales, E. J., Gregory, K. D., Garden, R. A., O'Connor, K. M., et al. (2000a). TIMSS 1999: International Mathematics Report. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
29. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Fierros, E. G., Goldberg, A. L., & Stemler, S. E. (2000b). Gender differences in achievement: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
30. Mullis, I. V. S., & Stemler, S. E. (2002). Analyzing gender differences for high achieving students on TIMSS. In D. F. Robitaille & A. E. Beaton (Eds.), Secondary analysis of the TIMSS data (pp. 277–290). Boston: Kluwer.
31. Ogretmen, T., & Dogan, N. (2004). OKOSYS Matematik alt testine ait maddelerin yanlilik analizi [Item bias analysis of mathematics items in the High School Entrance Examination]. Inonu Universitesi Egitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5 (8). Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://web.inonu.edu.tr/~efdergi/arsiv/Ogretmen_Dogan.htm.
32. Olejnik, S., & Algina, J. (2000). Measures of effect size for comparative studies: Applications, interpretations, and limitations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 241–286.
33. Pallas, A. M., & Alexander, K. L. (1983). Sex differences in quantitative SAT performance: New evidence on the differential coursework hypothesis. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 165–182.
34. Shadish, W., Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
35. Siegel, R. G., Galassi, J. P., & Ware, W. B. (1985). A comparison of two models for predicting mathematics performance. Social learning versus math aptitude-anxiety. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 531–538.
36. Thompson, B. (2002). “Statistical,”“practical,” and “clinical”: How many kinds of significance do counselors need to consider? Journal of Counseling and Development, 80, 64–71.
37. Thompson, B. (2006). Foundations of behavioral statistics: An insight-based approach. New York: Guilford.
38. Turkish Statistical Institute [TSI]. (2001). Population statistics. Ankara, Turkey: TSI. Retrieved January 10, 2008, from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/VeriBilgi.do.
39. Walden, R., & Walkerdine, V. (1982). Girls and mathematics: The early years (Bedford Way Papers 8). London: Institute of Education, University of London.
40. Wood, R. (1976). Sex differences in mathematics attainment at GCE ordinary level. Educational Studies, 2, 141–160.