Gender differences in teacher‐student interactions in science classrooms

Abstract

Thirty physical science and 30 chemistry.classes, which contained a total of 1332 students, were observed using the Brophy-Good Teacher-Child Dyadic Interaction System. Classroom interactions were examined for gender differences that may contribute to the undempresentation of women in physics and engineering courses and subsequent careers. The Brophy-Good coding process allows for examination of patterns of interactions for individuals and groups of pupils. An analysis of variance of the data yielded a significant main effect for teacher praise, call outs, procedural questions, and behavioral wamings based on the sex of the student and a significant teacher-sex main effect for direu questions. Significant two-way interactions were found for the behavioral warning variable for teacher sex and subject by student sex, Female teachers warned male students significantly more than female students. Male teachers warned both genders with similar frequency. Male students also received significantly more behavioral warnings in physical science classes than female students. In chemistry classes, both male and female students received approximately the same number of behavioral wamings.(1986) reports that women cmstitute half of the work force in the U.S. but make up only 3% of the engineers.Women often lack the necessary high school prerequisites to enter college science and technical programs. Scholastic Aptitude Scores (SAT) and achievement tests often

USAF Summer Research Program - 1995 Summer Faculty Research Program, Final Reports, Volume 2A, Armstrong Laboratory.

“…The sixth grade boys' "non-text" and their third marker, aural comprehension, fit with the research: 1) boys receive more interaction from the teacher (Jones & Wheatley, 1990;Parsons,Kaezala, & Meece,1982;Simpson & Erikson, 1983;) rather than the text; 2) boys feel more independent (Grieb & Easley, 1984;Kimball, 1989), and hence may not be as concerned with the text and the teachers' structuring instruction around the text; 3) boys are not as good readers (Feingold, 1993;Leinhardt, Seewald, & Engel, 1979) and thus may prefer to listen; 4) boys tend to be better listeners (Brimer, 1969).…”

Status Characteristics and the Provision of Public Goods: Experimental Evidence

“…To cite an illuminating facet, studies have shown that teachers judge as well as respond differently to performance outputs by boys and girls during class (cf. Jones and Wheatley 1990;Tiedemann 2002). In this sense, the award ceremony and differential treatment of our subjects just mimics fundamental aspects of social reality.…”

Reasons for using or not using interactive whiteboards: Perspectives of Taiwanese elementary mathematics and science teachers

“…Male teachers also had significantly higher ratings for using IWBs to increase interactions between teachers and students. Gender differences have been found in teacher-student dyadic interactions (Jones & Wheatley, 1990;She, 2000). Jones and Wheatley (1990) found that male science teachers asked more direct questions than did female teachers.…”

“…Gender differences have been found in teacher-student dyadic interactions (Jones & Wheatley, 1990;She, 2000). Jones and Wheatley (1990) found that male science teachers asked more direct questions than did female teachers. She (2000) in her study concluded that teachers' beliefs can influence how they interact with their students.…”