How student characteristics affect girls' and boys' verbal engagement in physics instruction

Learning and Instruction

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 33-42

  Jurik, Verena ^a   Gröschner, Alexander ^a   Seidel, Tina ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Gender; Science education; Student characteristics; Teacher student interactions; Video study

Indexed keywords

EID: 84868648980     PISSN: 09594752     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.09.002     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Bargh J.A., Schul Y. On the cognitive benefit of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology 1980, 72(5):593-604. 10.1037/0022-0663.72.5.593.
2. den Brok P., van Tartwijk J., Wubbels T., Veldman I. The differential effect of the teacher-student interpersonal relationship on student outcomes for students with different ethnic backgrounds. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2010, 80(2):199-221. 10.1348/000709909X465632.
3. Brophy J.E., Good T.L. Teacher-student relationships 1974, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Austin.
4. Carlone H.B. The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: girls' access, participation, and resistance. Journal of Research Science Teaching 2004, 41(4):392-414. 10.1002/tea.20006.
5. Cohen J., Cohen P., West S.G., Aiken L.S. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences 2003, Erlbaum, London.
6. Davier v.M. WINMIRA - A program system for analyses with the Rasch-model, with the latent class analysis and with the mixed-Rasch model 1999, IPN, Kiel.
7. Einsiedler W., Treinies G. Effects of teaching methods, class effects, and patterns of cognitive teacher-pupil interactions in an experimental study in primary school classes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 1997, 8(3):327-353. 10.1080/0924345970080303.
8. Hannover B., Kessels U. Self-to-prototype matching as a strategy for making academic choices. Why high school students do not like math and science. Learning and Instruction 2004, 14(1):51-67. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.002.
9. Haworth C.M., Dale P.S., Plomin R. Sex differences in school science performance from middle childhood to early adolescence. International Journal of Educational Research 2010, 49(2-3):92-101. 10.1016/j.ijer.2010.09.003.
10. Heller K.A., Perleth C. Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4-12. Klassen, Revision 2000, Beltz Test GmbH, Göttingen, Germany.
11. Hoffmann L. Promoting girls' interest and achievement in physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction 2002, 12(4):447-465. 10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00010-X.
12. Hoffmann L., Häußler P., Lehrke M. Die IPN-Interessenstudie Physik 1998, IPN, Kiel, Germany.
13. Kessels U. Fitting into the stereotype: how gender-stereotyped perceptions of prototypic peers relate to liking for school subjects. European Journal of Psychology of Education 2005, 20(3):309-323. 10.1007/BF03173559.
14. Kessels U., Hannover B. How the image of math and science affects the development of academic interests. Studies on the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG priority programme 2007, 283-297. Waxmann, Münster. M. Prenzel (Ed.).
15. King A. Autonomy and question asking: the role of personal control in guided student-generated questioning. Learning and Individual Differences 1994, 6(2):163-185. 10.1016/1041-6080(94)90008-6.
16. Kobarg M., Prenzel M., Seidel T., Walker M., McCrae B., Cresswell J., et al. An international comparison of science teaching and learning - Further results from PISA 2006 2011, Waxmann, Münster.
17. Kobarg M., Seidel T. Coding manual - process-oriented teaching. How to run a video study. Technical report of the IPN Video Study 2005, 70-78. Waxmann, Münster. T. Seidel, M. Prenzel, M. Kobarg (Eds.).
18. Landis J.R., Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33(1):159-174.
19. Linn M.C., Hsi S. Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners 2000, Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
20. Lipowsky F., Rakoczy K., Pauli C., Klieme E. Gleicher Unterricht - gleiche Chancen für alle? Die Verteilung von Schülerbeiträgen im Klassenunterricht. Unterrichtswissenschaft 2007, 35(2):125-147.
21. Mercer N., Wegerif R., Dawes L. Children's talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal 1999, 25(1):95-111.
22. Muthén L.K., Muthén B.O. Mplus user's guide 2011, Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA. 6th ed.
23. Oakes J. Chapter 3: opportunities, achievement, and choice: women and minority. Students in science and mathematics. Review of Research in Education 1990, 16:153-222. 10.3102/0091732X016001153.
24. OECD Pisa 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow's world 2007, OECD, Paris.
25. OECD Equally prepared for life? How 15 year-old boys and girls perform in school 2009, Retrieved from, 10.10.11. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/59/50/42843625.pdf.
26. O'Donnell A. The role of peers and group learning. Handbook of educational psychology 2006, 781-802. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. P. Alexander, P.H. Winne (Eds.).
27. Osborne J., Simon S., Collins S. Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education 2003, 25(9):1049-1079. 10.1080/0950069032000032199.
28. Pauli C., Drollinger-Vetter B., Hugener I., Lipowsky F. Kognitive Aktivierung im Mathematikunterricht. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie 2008, 22(2):127-133. 10.1024/1010-0652.22.2.127.
29. Pauli C., Lipowsky F. Mitmachen oder Zuhören? Mündliche Schülerinnen- und Schülerbeteiligung im Mathematikunterricht. Unterrichtswissenschaft 2007, 35(2):101-124.
30. Perry N.E., Turner J.C., Meyer D.K. Classrooms as contexts for motivating learning. Handbook of educational psychology 2006, 327-348. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. P.A. Alexander, P.H. Winne (Eds.).
31. Rimmele R. Videograph. Multimedia-Player zur Kodierung von Videos 2009, IPN, Kiel.
32. Rimmele R., Seidel T., Knierim B., Kobarg M., Dalehefte I.M., Schwindt K., et al. Scale documentation-student questionnaire. How to run a video study: Technical report of the IPN video study 2005, 224-281. Waxmann, Münster, Germany. T. Seidel, M. Prenzel, M. Kobarg (Eds.).
33. Roth K.J., Druker S.L., Garnier H.E., Lemmens M., Chen C., Kawanaka T., et al. Teaching science in five countries. Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Statistical analysis report 2006, National Center for Education Statistics, US. Department of Education, Washington DC.
34. Seidel T. The role of student characteristics in studying micro teaching-learning environments. Learning Environments Research 2006, 9(3):253-271. 10.1007/s10984-006-9012-x.
35. How to run a video study. Technical report of the IPN Video Study 2005, Waxmann, Münster. T. Seidel, M. Prenzel, M. Kobarg (Eds.).
36. Seidel T., Prenzel M. Stability of teaching patterns in physics instruction: findings from a video study. Learning and Instruction 2006, 16(3):228-240. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.002.
37. Seidel T., Prenzel M., Rimmele R., Herweg C., Kobarg M., Schwindt K., et al. Science teaching and learning in German physics classrooms: findings from the IPN Video Study. Studies on the educational quality of schools. The final report on the DFG priority programme 2007, 79-99. Waxmann, Münster. M. Prenzel (Ed.).
38. Seidel T., Rimmele R., Prenzel M. Gelegenheitsstrukturen im Klassengespräch und ihre Bedeutung für die Lernmotivation. Videoanalysen in Kombination mit Schülerselbsteinschätzungen. Unterrichtswissenschaft 2003, 31(2):142-165.
39. Sjøberg S. Gender and the image of science. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 1988, 32(2):49-60. 10.1080/0031383880320201.
40. Sjøberg S. Pupils' experiences and interests relating to science and technology. Some results from a comparative study in 21 countries 2002, Contribution to Stockholm library of curriculum studies, Retrieved from, 19.10.11. http://folk.uio.no/sveinsj/SLOC%2520Sjoberg%2520paper.pdf.
41. Snow R.E., Corno L., Jackson D. Individual differences in affective and conative functions. Handbook of educational psychology 1996, 243-310. MacMillan, New York. D.C. Berliner, R.C. Calfee (Eds.).
42. Thissen D., Steinberg L., Mooney J. Trace lines for testlets: a use of multiple-categorical response models. Journal of Educational Measurement 1989, 26:247-260.
43. Turner J.C., Meyer D.K., Midgley C., Patrick H. Teacher discourse and sixth graders' reported affect and achievement behaviors in two high-mastery/high-performance mathematics classrooms. The Elementary School Journal 2003, 103(4):359-382.
44. Turner J.C., Patrick H. Motivational influences on student participation in classroom learning activities. Teachers College Record 2004, 106(9):1759-1785.
45. Van de Gaer E., Pustjens H., Van Damme J., De Munter A. Mathematics participation and mathematics achievement across secondary school: the role of gender. Sex Roles 2008, 59(7-8):568-585. 10.1007/s11199-008-9455-x.
46. Webb N.M. The teacher's role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology 2009, 79(1):1-28. 10.1348/000709908X380772.
47. Webb N.M., Farivar S. Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups in middle school mathematics. American Educational Research Journal 1994, 31(2):369-395. 10.3102/00028312031002369.
48. Wells G., Arauz R.M. Dialogue in the classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 2006, 15(3):379-428.
49. White S., Tesfaye C.L. High school physics courses & enrollments. Results from the 2008-09 nationwide survey of high school physics teachers 2010, Retrieved from, 10.10.11. http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/reports/highschool3.pdf.