Gender motivational gap and contribution of different teaching approaches to female students’ motivation to learn physics

Abstract

This research focuses on potential gender differences in motivation to learn Physics with the aim to determine the weakest female motivational components to learn Physics and the contribution of different teaching approaches (using real and virtual experiments) on those components and motivation for learning Physics in general. These two approaches were chosen as the most commonly used approaches in physics but without clear compared indication on females’ motivation. The standardized questionnaire SMTSL (Student’s Motivation towards Science Learning) is used for the measurements. The results show that for female students the weakest motivational components to learn Physics are the importance of Physics as a science and self-efficacy. Virtual experiments contribute more to females’ motivation to learn Physics than applying real experiments. The female students who used real experiments show fear of being laughed at by their male peers and express doubt in their self-knowledge. Although the applied approaches cause some improvements in female students’ self-efficacy, they are not statistically significant. Research results suggest that teachers need to apply such teaching approaches that engage girls and encourage their learning and development in order to improve their self-efficacy and other motivational components.

Active methods in electricity and magnetism courses: Influence of degree, academic level and gender on student performance

“…In addition, from a gender perspective, it would be necessary to include more active and cooperative methodologies that make women feel more integrated than in the current competitive environment. So, instructors should apply teaching approaches that engage girls and encourage their learning to improve their self-efficacy and other motivational components [ 44 ]. In short, as indicated by other studies [ 44 , 55 ], it is about creating a learning environment that allows positive interactions with peers and that encourages students' interest in physics.…”

“…So, instructors should apply teaching approaches that engage girls and encourage their learning to improve their self-efficacy and other motivational components [ 44 ]. In short, as indicated by other studies [ 44 , 55 ], it is about creating a learning environment that allows positive interactions with peers and that encourages students' interest in physics.…”

“…Madsen et al [ 40 ] analysed 26 published articles comparing the impact of 30 factors that could potentially influence the gender gap and concluded that factors such as gender differences in background preparation and scores on different assessments could contribute to a difference between male and female responses. Radulovic et al [ 44 ] used a standardised questionnaire to measure the gender differences in motivation towards Physics learning. They found that the weakest motivational components were the importance of Physics as a science and self-efficacy.…”

Evaluating the Impacts of NTC Learning System on the Motivation of Students in Learning Physics Concepts Using Card–based Learning Approaches

“…Tuan et al (2005) included these motivational factors because they believed that it emphasizes the importance of learning science and that it allows students to acquire competencies for solving problems, engage in research activities thus stimulating thinking, and find the relevance of science and everyday life. It is worth highlighting that a similar questionnaire has been already adopted and validated for Serbian students to measure their motivation in learning chemistry (Olic et al, 2016), and later it was adapted for use in in studies analyzing motivation in learning physics (Blajvaz et al, 2022;Radulovic et al, 2022;Radulovic et al, 2023). Nonetheless, their questionnaire was based on 5 out of 6 motivational factors, and the depth of the questions did not cover thoroughly the basic factors needed to evaluate motivation as the last factor, 'learning environmental stimulation' , has been excluded.…”