The Single Sex Debate for Girls in Science: A Comparison Between Two Informal Science Programs on Middle School Students' STEM Identity Formation

Research in Science Education

Volumn 43, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 1979-2007

  Hughes, Roxanne M ^a   Nzekwe, Brandon ^a   Molyneaux, Kristen J ^b  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Firelight Foundation   (United States)

Author keywords

Informal education; Perception of scientists; Single sex programs; STEM education

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884530267     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-012-9345-7     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. American Association of University Women (2009). Separated by sex: Title IX and single-sex education (Position paper). Washington, DC: AAUW Public Policy and Government Relations Department. http://www. aauw. org/advocacy/issue_advocacy/actionpages/upload/single-sex_ed111. pdf. Accessed 25 Jul 2010.
2. American Association of University Women (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (Report). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Anderson, T. H. (1995). The movement and the sixties. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students' identities, participation and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 564-582.
5. AWE, 2008. Assessing Women and Men in Engineering website. (http://www. engr. psu. edu/awe/secured/director/precollege/pre_college. aspx. Accessed 3 Mar 2008.
6. Barab, S. A., & Hay, K. E. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of experts: issues related to the science apprenticeship camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 70-102.
7. Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students' understanding of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 487-509.
8. Bianchini, J. A., Cavazos, L. M., & Helms, J. V. (2000). From professional lives to inclusive practice: science teachers and scientist views of gender and ethnicity in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 511-547.
9. Bracey, G. W. (2006). Separate but superior? A review of issues and data bearing on single-sex education. Tempe: Educational Policy Research Unity (EPRU). EPSL-0611-221-EPRU.
10. Brickhouse, N. W., & Potter, J. T. (2001). Young women's scientific identity formation in an urban context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 965-980.
11. Brickhouse, N. W., 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.
12. Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: a review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 971-1002.
13. Buck, G. A., Plano Clark, V. L., Leslie-Pelecky, D., Lu, Y., & Cerda-Lizarrage, P. (2007). Examining the cognitive processes used by adolescent girls and women scientists in identifying science role models: a feminist approach. Science Education, 92, 688-707.
14. Burkam, D. T., Lee, V. E., & Smerdon, B. A. (1997). Gender and science learning early in high school: subject matter and laboratory experiences. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 297-331.
15. Calabrese Barton, A. (1997). Liberatory science education: weaving connections between Feminist theory and science education. Curriculum Inquiry, 27(2), 141-163.
16. Carlone, H. B. (2004). The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: girls' access, participation and resistance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 392-414.
17. Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1187-1218.
18. Creswell, J. W. (2006). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
19. Darke, K., Clewell, B., & Sevo, R. (2002). Meeting the challenge: the impact of the National Science Foundation's program for women and girls. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8, 285-303.
20. Demetry, C., Hubelbank, J., Blaisdell, S., Sontgerath, S., Nicholson, M. E., Rosenthal, E., et al. (2009). Supporting young women to enter engineering: long-term effects of a middle school engineering outreach program for girls. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 15, 119-142.
21. Eccles, J. S. (2007). Where are all the women? Gender differences in participation in physical science and engineering. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 199-210). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
22. Fadigan, K. A., & Hammrich, P. L. (2004). A longitudinal study of the educational and career trajectories of female participants of an urban informal science education program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 835-860.
23. Gandy, K. (2006). Separation threatens girls. USA Today. http://www. now. org/issues/education/060328op-ed. html. Accessed 10 Mar 2009.
24. Gilmartin, S., Denson, N., Li, E., Bryant, A., & Aschbacher, P. (2007). Gender ratios in high school science departments: the effect of percent female faculty on multiple dimensions of students' science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 980-1009.
25. Halpern, D. F., Eliot, L., Bigler, R. S., Fabes, R. A., Hanish, L. D., Hyde, J., et al. (2011). The pseudoscience of single-sex schooling. Science, 333(6050), 1706-1707.
26. Harding, S. (1997). Women's standpoints on nature: what makes them possible? Osiris, 12, 186-200.
27. Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M. C. (2010). Connecting high school Physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: a gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978-1003.
28. Jayaratne, T. E., Thomas, N. G., & Trautmann, M. (2003). Intervention program to keep girls in the science pipeline: outcome differences by ethnic status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 393-414.
29. Jones, M. G., Brader-Araje, L., Carboni, L. W., Carter, G., Rua, M. J., Banilower, E., et al. (2000). Tool time: gender and students' use of tools, control and authority. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 760-783.
30. Kozoll, R. H., & Osborne, M. D. (2004). Finding meaning in science: lifeworld, identity, and self. Science Education, 88(2), 157-181.
31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
32. Lee, V. E., & Burkam, D. T. (1996). Gender differences in middle grade science achievement: subject domain, ability level, and course emphasis. Science Education, 80(6), 613-650.
33. Mael, F., Alonso, A., Gibson, D., Rogers, K., & Smith, M. (2005). Single-sex versus coeducational schooling: A systematic review. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Policy and Program Studies Service. http://www. ed. gov/about/offices/list/opepd/reports. html. Accessed 5 Mar 2007.
34. McGrayne, S. B. (2005). Nobel Prize women in science: their lives, struggles, and momentous discoveries (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press.
35. National Science Foundation (2011). Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering. NSF 11-309. Table 9-37: Demographic characteristics of employed scientists and engineers by race/ethnicity and sex. Arlington, VA.
36. Ong, M., Wright, C., Espinosa, L. L., & Orfield, G. (2011). Inside the double bind: a synthesis of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of color in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 172-208.
37. Painter, J., Jones, M. G., Tretter, T. R., & Kubasko, D. (2006). Pulling back the curtain: uncovering and changing students' perceptions of scientists. School Science and Mathematics, 106(4), 181-190.
38. Polman, J. L., & Miller, D. (2010). Changing stories: trajectories of identification among African American youth in a science outreach apprenticeship. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 878-918.
39. Rittmayer, M. A. & Beier, M. E. (2009). Self-Efficacy in STEM. In B. Bogue & E. Cady (Eds.). Applying Research to Practice (ARP) Resources. http://www. engr. psu. edu/AWE/ARPresources. aspx. Accessed 1 Sept 2010.
40. Sadler, T. D., Burgin, S., McKinney, L., & Ponjuan, L. (2010). Learning science through research apprenticeships: a critical review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(3), 235-256.
41. Salomone, R. C. (2003). Same, different, equal: rethinking single-sex schooling. New Haven: Yale University Press.
42. Spielhagen, F. R. (2008). Having it our way: students speak out on single-sex classes. In F. R. Spielhagen (Ed.), Debating single-sex education: separate and equal (pp. 32-46). Baltimore: Rowan & Littlefield.
43. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
44. Williams, W. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2007). Introduction: Striving for perspective in the debate on women in science. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
45. Zinn, M. B., & Dill, B. T. (1996). Theorizing difference from multiracial feminism. Feminist Studies, 22(2), 321-332.
46. Zohar, A., & Bronshtein, B. (2005). Physics teachers' knowledge and beliefs regarding girls' low participation rates in advanced physics classes. International Journal of Science, 27, 61-77.