Transdisciplinarity in Mathematics Education

Abstract

the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

“Deep questions for a Saturday morning”: An investigation of the Australian and Canadian general public's definitions of gender

“…The use of the terms male and female could be linked to ideas about sex, as these terms are typically used to refer to this construct (Ho and Mussap, 2019). However, given the evidence from our analysis of the remainder of the questionnaire data (Hall andJao, 2018a, 2018b), it is possible that these participants were simply using the terms male and female to refer to gender rather than to intimate any ideas about biology.…”

“…With respect to the demographic section of the questionnaire, as noted earlier, in many questionnairesincluding the binary version of this questionnaire by Forgasz and Leder-where the data are collected face-to-face, participants' genders are assumed based on appearance, which is problematic, as discussed earlier, in general, as well as in relation to this particular study (Hall, 2018). Furthermore, we felt that it was important to not only ask the participants their genders, but to frame the question as open-ended, rather than forcing participants to select from pre-determined closed categories, in order to provide the most freedom possible in participants' responses.…”

“…Hence, the inter-rater reliability for the coding was well above the suggested level of 80 percent agreement on 95 percent of the codes (Miles and Huberman, 1994). All instances of differing codes were reviewed by Hall, 2018 and2018a, who, upon discussion, agreed on a final code for each response.…”