Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of the Perception of Science on Engineering & Technologies Study Choices in Lithuania

  • Chapter
GIEE 2011: Gender and Interdisciplinary Education for Engineers

Abstract

The paper summarises the Lithuanian specific case studies, providing gender specific data on traditional and innovative pilot degree courses in E&T and identifying innovative study programs in engineering then comparison of traditional and interdisciplinary study courses. For that purpose an in-depth qualitative and quantitative analysis of some engineering study programmes grounded on transnational iterative methodology has been done. From this first analysis, a set of Lithuanian case studies have been selected for further analysis of students’ perception of E&T studies. The paper summarises the results found after an in depth examination of these selected case studies for a posterior evaluation of the success of pilot projects aiming attract more female students in E&T. The research draw up women are less likely than men to study engineering because of its perceived societal and cultural impact, and women are more attracted to engineering programs in universities that include an interdisciplinary approach, student-centered learning and the teaching and empowering studies environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Adamuti-Trache M, Andres L. Embarking on and persisting in scientific fields of study: Cultural capital, gender, and curriculum along the science pipeline. International Journal of Science Education. 2008;30(12):1557–1584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angell, C., Guttersrud, Ø., Henriksen, E. K., &; Isnes, A. (2004). Physics: Frightful, But Fun. Pupils’ and Teachers’ Views of Physics and Physics Teaching. Science Education, 5(88), 683–706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ary D, Jacobs LC, Razavieh,A. Introduction to Research in Education. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publisher; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., &; Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-Efficacy Beliefs as Shapers of Children’s Aspirations and Career Trajectories. Child Development, 72(1), 157–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U., &; Beck-Gernsheim, E.(2002) Individualization. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Bennett, J. (2001). The development and use of an instrument to assess students’ attitude to the study of chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 533–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlone, H. B. (2003). Innovative science within and against a culture of “achievement”. Science Education, 87, 307–3P8. Cerini, B., Murray, I., &; Reiss, M. J. (2003). Student review of the science curriculum. Major findings. London: Planet Science; Institute of Education, University of London; Science Museum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Challenging Futures of Science in Society.Emerging Trends and cutting-edge issues. (2009). Report of the MASIS Expert Group set up by the European Commission. Directorate-General for Research. Science in Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleaves A. The formation of science choices in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education.2005;27(4):471–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L., Manion, L., &; Morrison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge and Falmer. EC. (1999). ACT: Communication from the Commission of 17 February 1999, “Women and Science”: mobilising women to enrich European research. EC. (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. Directorate-General for Research. She Figures 2009. Women and Science Statistics and Indicators.http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/preliminaryresults-of-she-figures-2009_en.pdf).

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • EU. (2004). Europe needs more scientists! Brussels: European Commission, Directorate-General for Research, High Level Group on Human Resources for Science and Technology in Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flash Eurobarometer No 260 -Students and Higher Education Reform. Special Target Survey. Ana-litical Report. (2009). Survey conducted by The Gallup Organization Hungary upon the request of Directorate-General Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gable RK, Wolf MB. Instrument Development in the Affective Domain. Measuring Attitudes and Values in Corporate and School Settings.Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, P. L. (1975). Attitudes to science: A review. Studies in Science Education(2), 1-41. Gardner, P. L. (1985). Interests in science and technology education: an international overview. Io M. Lehrke &; L. Hoffmann &; P. L. Gardner (Eds.), Interests in science and technology education: 12th IPN sumposium (2–6 June 1984). Kiel: IPN, Institute of Science Eduation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner PL. The dimensionality of attitude scales: a widely misunderstood idea. International Journal of Science Education. 1996;18(5):913–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfroy, Anne-Sophie; Pinault, Cloé; Thaler, Anita; Wächter, Christine (2010). Deliverable D 3.2. Methodological Guidelines. Published in the members area of HELENA website. In: http://www.fp7-helena.org/ [17.09.2010].

  • HGWS. (2002). National policies on Women and Science in Europe. Executive summary. The Helsinki Group on Women and Science. Available: ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/improving/docs/women_national_policies_full_report.pdf

  • Jacobs, J., &; Simpkins, S. (Eds.). (2006). Leaks in the Pipeline to Math, Science, and Technology Careers (Vol. 110): Jossey-Bass. Kiffirosli, M., &; Lie, S. (2000). Kjønnsforskjeller i realfag: Hva kan TIMSS fortslls? [Gender difSsrsacss in Science and Mathematics Education: What can TIMSS tell us?]. In G. Imssn (Ed.), Kjønn og likestilling i grunnskolen [Sex and equity in primary and lower secondary school]. Oslo: Gyldendal Akadsmisk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kjaernsli, M., Lie, S., Olsen, R. V., &; Roe, A. (P007). TId for tunge løft. Norske elevers kompetanse i naturfag, lesing og matematikk i PISA 2006. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantonidou, M. M. (2010), Engineering Education and Engineering Practice: A Student Teacher Perspective // Electronics and Electrical Engineering. - Kaunas: Technologija. No.6(102). - P. 167–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornov L, Johannsen HHW, Moesby E. Experiences with integrating individuality in project-orientated and problem-based learning POPBL. International Journal of Engineering Education. 2007;23(5):947–953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labudde P, Herzog W, Neuenschwander MP, Violi E, Gerber C. Girls and physics: teaching and learning strategies tested by classroom interventions in grade 11. International Journal of Science Education. 2000;22:143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl, B. (2003). Lust att lara naturvetenskap ock teknik? En longitudinell studie om vägen till gym- nasiet [A desire to learn science and technology? A longitudinal study of pathways to upper secondary school]. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, Göteborg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., Clark, D., &; Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517–538. Lyng, S. T. (2004). V&;re eller l&;re? Om elevroller, identitet og luring i ungdomsskolen [To be or to learn? On student roles, identity and learning in lower secondary school]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mokslėives ir studentes tiksliuosiuose ir technologijos moksluose. Lietuvos švietimo sistemos bū- kles tyrimo ataskaita/School and college students (girls) in sciences and technology. The investigation of Lithuanian education system report. Vilnius: Švietimo ir mokslo ministerija, 2008. http://www.smm.lt/svietimo_bukle/tyrimai_sb.htm

  • Mork S, Jorde D. We Know they Love Computers, but do they Learn Science? Themes in Education. 2004;5(1):69–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer E, Scott P. Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead and Philadelphia: Open University Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller DJ. Measuring Social Attitudes. A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners. New York: Teachers College Press; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Beyond Bias and Barriers: Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic Science and Engineering, Washington. D.C: The National Academies Press; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, G., Gavrin, A., Christian, W., &; Patterson, E. (1999). Just-in-time teaching: blending active learning with web technology.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall NSB. (2006). Science and Engineering Indicators 2006. Two volumes (volume 1, NSB 06–01; volume 2, NSB 06–0IA). Arlington, VA: National Science Board. Oppenheim, A. N. (1992). Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. London: Printer Publisher Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novelskaitė, A. (2008) Veiksniai, turintys įtakos studenčių (-tų) nusiteikimui tęsti studijas magistrantūroje/Factors affecting students to continue studies in Master Degree. Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia,Nr.21, 178–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne J, Collins S. Pupils’ and Parents’ Views of the School Science Curriculum. London: Wellcome Trust, King’s College London; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne J, Collins S. Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: a focus-group study. International Journal of Science Education. 2001;23(5):441–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne J, Dillon J. Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections. London: The Nuffield Foundation; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qualifications &; Curriculum Authority. (2005). New Key Stage 4 Programme of Study from 2006. Qualifications &; Curriculum Authority. Available: http://www.qca.org.uk/default.aspx [2008, February].

  • Ramberg, I. (2006). Realfag eller ikke? Elevers motivasjon for valg og bortvalg av realfag i viderega- ende oppl&;ring. Oslo: NIFU STEP. Ramsden, J. M. (1998). Mission impossible? Can anything be done about attitudes to science? International Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 125–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robson C. Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-researchers. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scantlebury, K., & Baker, D. (2007). Gender Issues in Science Education Research: Remembering Where the Difference Lies. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education. Abingdon: Routledge. Schiebinger, L. (Ed.). (2008). Gendered Innovations in Science and Engineering: Stanford University Press Schreiner, C. (2006). Exploring a ROSE-garden: Norwegian youth’s orientations towards science - seen as signs of late modern identities. Based on ROSE (The Relevance of Science Education), a comparative study of 15 year old students’ perceptions of science and science education. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, University of Oslo, Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2003, 19–23 August). Optimists or pessimists? How do young people relate to environmental challenges? Paper presented at the ESERA (European Science Research Association) conference: Research and the quality of science education, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2007). Science education and youth’s identity construction - two incompatible projects? In D. Corrigan & J. Dillon &; R. Gunstone (Eds.), The Re-emergence of Values in the Science Curriculum (pp. 231–248): Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadler H, Duit R, Benke G. Do boys and girls understand physics differently? Physics Education. 2000;35:417–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stokking K. Predicting the choice of physics in secondary education. International Journal of Science Education.2000;22:1261–1283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Støren LA, Arnesen CA. Et kjønnsdelt utdanningssystem [A sex segregated education system]. In: Raabe M, Aasen P, Aamodt PO, Stølen NM, Høiskar AH, editors. Utdanning 2003 - ressurser, rekruttering og resultater [Education 2003 - resources, recruitment and results]. Oslo: Statistisk Sentralbyrå, Statistics Norway; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suter C. “’Trends in Gender Segregation by Field of Work in Higher Education’, in OECD Women in Scientific Careers: Unleashing the potential. Paris: OECD; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urbonienė, A. Factors motivating young women for the professional career in the field of technological and physical sciences. Researching Education Markets in CEEC. Transformations in business &; economics. 2002–2009. P. 164–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warrington, M., &; Younger, M. (2000). The other side of the gender gap. Gender and education 12(4), 493–508. Wistedt, I. (2001). Five Gender-inclusive Projects Revisited. A Follow-up Study of the Swedish Government’s Initiative to Recruit more Women to Higher Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology. Stockholm: Høgskoleverket.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziehe T, Stubenrauch H. Ny ungdom og usædvanlige læreprocesser: kulturel frisættelseog subjektivitet (Original: Plädoyer für ungewöhnliches Lernen, Ideen zur Jugendsituation, 1982). Copenhagen: Politisk Revy; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Women in science and technology. Creating Sustainable Careers. DG for Research Science, Economy & Society

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Šiauliai, Lithuania

    Virginija Šidlauskienė

Authors
  1. Virginija Šidlauskienė
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Association ECEPIE, Paris, France

    André Béraud

  2. Université Paris-Est-Créteil and Institute d’Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences et des Techniques, Paris, France

    Anne-Sophie Godfroy

  3. Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées, Paris, France

    Jean Michel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Šidlauskienė, V. (2012). Influence of the Perception of Science on Engineering & Technologies Study Choices in Lithuania. In: Béraud, A., Godfroy, AS., Michel, J. (eds) GIEE 2011: Gender and Interdisciplinary Education for Engineers. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-982-4_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation