The Views of Turkish Science Teachers About Gender Equity within Science Education
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate Turkish Science teachers' views about gender equity in the scope of Science education. This study was conducted with quantitative methodology. Within this scope, a 35-item 5-point Likert scale survey was developed to determine Science teachers' views concerning gender equity issues. 160 Turkish Science teachers completed the survey. Their reponses were analysed using SPSS. It was revealed that many Turkish Science teachers did not think there was any gender equity in Science teaching programmes or their science textbooks. These science teachers' views also indicated that there were no gender policies in Turkish science education. They believed gender equity issues were important for students' science achievement. It is recommended that Science teachers have some in-service training on gender equity.References
Bazler, J. (1991). Are high school chemistry textbooks gender fair? Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 28(4), 353-362.
Beede, D., Julian, T., Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Khan, B., & Doms, M. (2011). Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to Innovation. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration.
Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V., & Sklaveniti, S. (2005). Towards a framework of socio-linguistic analysis of Science textbooks: The Greek case. Research in Science Education, 35, 173–195.
EACEA P9 Eurydice. (2010). Gender Differences in Educational Outcomes: Study on the Measures Taken and the Current Situation in Europe. Retrieved from: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/documents/thematic_reports/120en.pdf
Euproean Commission (EC). (2011). Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Elgar, A. G. (2004). Science textbooks for lower secondary schools in Brunei: issues of gender equity. International Journal of Science Education, 26(7), 875-894.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed). New York: The McGraw-Hill.
Hill, C., Corbett, C., & Rose, A. (2010). Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington: AAUW.
Hines, M. (2007). Do sex differences in cognition cause the shortage of women in Science? In S. J. Ceci, & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren’t more women in Science? (101 - 112). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Good, J. J., Woodzicka, J. A., & Wingfield, L. C. (2010). The effects of gender stereotypic and counter-stereotypic textbook images on Science performance. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(2), 132-147.
Guzzetti, B. J., & Williams, W. O. (1996). Gender, text, and discussion: Examining intellectual safety in the Science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(1), 5-20.
Lee, J. F. K., & Collins, P. (2009). Australian English-language textbooks: the gender issues. Gender and Education, 21(4), 353–370.
Magno, C., & Silova, I. (2007). Teaching in transition; Examining school-based inequities in central/south-eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 647-660.
MEB. (2000). İlköğretim okulu fen bilgisi dersi öğretim programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
MEB. (2005). İlköğretim Fen ve Teknoloji Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
MEB. (2015a). İlköğretim Kurumları Fen Bilimleri Dersi (3,4,5,6,7 ve 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
MEB. (2015b). TEOG, Derslerin Ortalama Puanları. Retrieved from: http://mebk12.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/35/04/714936/dosyalar/2014_07/1110 1945_2014teoglleortalamalar%C4%B1.pdf
MEB. (2016). TIMSS 2015 ulusal matematik ve fen bilimleri ön raporu 4. ve 8. Sınıflar. Ankara: MEB Yayınları.
MEB. (2017). İlköğretim ve Ortaöğretim Öğretim Programlarının Güncellenmesi. Erişim adresi: https://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/www/ilkogretim-ve-ortaogretim-ogretim-programlarinin guncellenmesi/icerik/289#
OECD. (2015a). The ABC of Gender Equality in Education: Aptitude, Behaviour, Confidence, PISA. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264229945-en
OECD. (2015b). PISA 2015 results in focus. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf
OECD. (2016). Equations and Inequalities: Making Mathematics Accessible to All, PISA. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264258495-en
Potter, E. F., & Rosser, S. V. (1992). Factors in Life Science Textbooks that May Deter Girls’ Interest in Science. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 29(7), 669-686.
UNESCO. (2000). Gender equality and equity: A summary review of UNESCO's accomplishments since the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing 1995). Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001211/121145e.pdf
UNESCO. (2008). Education for All by 2015: will we make it. Retrieved from: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001547/154743e.pdf
USAID. (2008). Educatıon from a gender equalıty perspectıve. Retrieved from http://www.ungei.org/resources/files/Education_from_a_Gender_Equality_Perspective.pdf
Whiteley, P. (1996a). The ‘gender fairness’ of integrated Science textbooks used in Jamaican high schools. International Journal of Science Education, 18(8), 969-976.
Whiteley, P. (1996b). The gender balance of physics textbooks: Caribbean and British books, 1985-91. Physics Education, 31(3), 169-174.
Whiteley, P. (2007). The ‘gender fairness’ of integrated Science textbooks used in Jamaican high schools. International Journal of Science Education, 18(8), 969-976.
Zittleman, K., & Sadker, D. (2002). Gender bias in teacher education texts new (and old) lessons. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 168-180.
