Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 55–69 | Cite as

Teachers' attributions and beliefs about girls, boys, and mathematics

  • Elizabeth Fennema
  • Penelope L. Peterson
  • Thomas P. Carpenter
  • Cheryl A. Lubinski

Abstract

Thirty-eight first grade teachers were asked to identify their two most and least successful girls and boys in mathematics, to attribute causation of these students' successes and failures, and to describe their characteristics. Teachers' choices of most and least successful students were compared to mathematics test scores of their students. Teachers were most inaccurate when selecting most successful boys. Teachers tended to attribute causation of boys' successes and failures to ability and girls' successes and failures to effort. Teachers thought their best boy students when compared to their best girl students, were more competitive, more logical, more adventurous, volunteered answers more often to mathematics problems, enjoyed math more, and were more independent in mathematics.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bar-TalD. and FriezeJ. H.: 1977, ‘Achievement motivation for males and females as a determinant of attributions for success and failure’, Sex Roles 3, 301–313.Google Scholar
  2. Bar-TalD. and GuttmannJ.: 1981, ‘A comparison of teachers', pupils', and parents' attributions regarding pupils' academic achievements’, British Journal of Educational Psychology 51, 301–311.Google Scholar
  3. BrovermanI. K., BrovermanD., ClarksonF. E., RosenkrantzP. S., and VogelS.: 1970, ‘Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgements of mental health’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 34, 1–7.Google Scholar
  4. BussisA. M., ChittendenF., and AmarelM.: 1976, Beyond Surface Curriculum, Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.Google Scholar
  5. CarpenterT. P., FennemaE., PetersonP. L., and CareyD. A.: 1988, ‘Teachers' pedagogical content knowledge of students' problem solving in elementary arithmetic’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 19(5), 385–401.Google Scholar
  6. ClarkC. M. and PetersonP. L.: 1986, ‘Teachers' thought processes’, in M. C.Wittrock (ed.), Third Handbook of Research on Teaching, pp. 255–296, Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Connors, R. D.: 1987, An Analysis of Teacher Thought Processes, Beliefs, and Principles during Instruction, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar
  8. CooperH. M. and BurgerJ. M.: 1980, ‘How teachers explain students' academic performance: A categorization of free response academic attributions’, American Educational Research Journal 17(1), 95–109.Google Scholar
  9. CooperH. M.: 1979, ‘Pygmalion grows up: A model for teacher expectation communication and performance influence’, Review of Educational Research 49, 389–410.Google Scholar
  10. DeauxK.: 1976, ‘Sex: A perspective on the attribution process’, in J.Harvey, W.Ickes, and R.Kidd (eds.), New Directions in Attributional Research, Vol. 1, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  11. DosseyJ. A., MullisI. V. S., LindquistM. M., and ChambersD. L.: 1988, The Mathematics Report Card: Are We Measuring Up?, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  12. Fennema, E.: 1987, ‘Sex-related differences in education: Myths, realities, and interventions’, in V. Koehler (ed), Educator's Handbook: Research into Practice, Longman.Google Scholar
  13. FennemaE.: 1990, ‘Teachers' beliefs and gender differences in mathematics’, in E.Fennema and G.Leder (eds.), Mathematics and Gender: Teacher and Student Influences, Teachers College Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. FennemaE. and PetersonP. L.: 1985, ‘Autonomous learning behavior: A possible explanation of gender-related differences in mathematics’, in L. C.Wilkinson, and C. B.Marrett (eds.), Gender-Related Differences in Classroom Interactions, pp. 17–35, Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
  15. FennemaE. and PetersonP. L: 1987, ‘Effective teaching for girls and boys: The same or different?’, in D. C.Berliner and B. V.Rosenshine (eds.), Talks to Teachers, pp. 111–125, Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  16. FriezeI. H., WhitleyB. E., HanusaB. H., and McHughM. C.: 1982, ‘Assessing the theoretical models for sex differences in causal attributions for success and failure’, Sex Roles 8, 333–343.Google Scholar
  17. GrahamS.: 1984, ‘Teacher feeling and student thoughts: An attributional approach to affect in the classroom’, The Elementary School Journal 85, 91–104.Google Scholar
  18. GuskeyT. R.: 1982, ‘Differences in teachers' perceptions of personal control of positive versus negative student learning outcomes’, Contemporary Educational Psychology 7, 70–80.Google Scholar
  19. HallinanM. T. and SorensenA. B.: 1987, ‘Ability grouping and sex differences in mathematics achievements’, Sociology of Education 60, 63–72.Google Scholar
  20. Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., and Lamon, S. J.: in press, ‘Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis’, Psychological Bulletin.Google Scholar
  21. Janesicki, V.: 1977, An Ethnographic Study of a Teacher's Classroom Perspective, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.Google Scholar
  22. KaeleyG. S.: 1988, ‘Sex differences in the learning of post-secondary mathematics in a neo-literate society’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 19, 435–457.Google Scholar
  23. Koehler, M. S.: 1985, Effective Mathematics Teaching and Sex-Related Differences in Algebra One Classes, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
  24. LederG. C.: 1987, ‘Teacher-student interaction: A case study’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 18, 255–271.Google Scholar
  25. LeinhardtG., SeewaldA. M., and EngelM.: 1979, ‘Learning what's taught: Sex differences in instruction’, Journal of Educational Psychology 79(4), 432–439.Google Scholar
  26. LorenzJ. H.: 1982, ‘On some psychological aspects of mathematics achievement assessment and classroom interaction’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 13, 1–20.Google Scholar
  27. Marland, P. W.: 1977, A Study of Teachers' Interactive Thoughts, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.Google Scholar
  28. Munby, H.: 1983, April, A Qualitative Study of Teachers' Beliefs and Principles, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
  29. NorthamJ.: 1988, ‘Girls and boys in primary maths books’, in L.Burton (ed.), Girls into Maths Can Go, pp. 110–116, Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, London.Google Scholar
  30. PetersonP. L. and BargerS. A.: 1985, ‘Attribution theory and teacher expectancy’, in J. B.Dusek, V. C.Hall and W. J.Meyer (eds.), Teacher Expectancies, pp. 159–184, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  31. PetersonP. L., FennemaE., CarpenterT. P., and LoefM.: 1989, ‘Teachers' pedagogical content beliefs in mathematics’, Cognition and Instruction 6(1), 1–40.Google Scholar
  32. PrawatR. S., ByersJ. L., and AndersonA. H.: 1983, ‘An attributional analysis of teachers' affective reactions to student success and failure’, American Educational Research Journal 20(1), 137–152.Google Scholar
  33. ShuardH.: 1986, ‘The relative attainment of girls and boys in mathematics in the primary years’, in L.Burton (ed.), Girls into Maths Can Go, pp. 23–37, Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, London.Google Scholar
  34. SkempR. R.: 1978, ‘Relational understanding and instrumental understanding’, Arithmetic Teacher 26, 9–15.Google Scholar
  35. StageE. K., KreinbergN., Eccles (Parsons)J., and BeckerJ. R.: 1985, ‘Women in mathematics, science, and engineering’, in S. S.Klein (ed.), Handbook for Achieving Sex Equity Through Education, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  36. Thompson, A. G.: 1982, Teachers' Conceptions of Mathematics and Mathematics Teaching: Three Case Studies, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.Google Scholar
  37. WeinerB.: 1979, ‘A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences’, Journal of Educational Psychology 71, 3–25.Google Scholar
  38. WeinerB.: 1974, Achievement Motivation and Attribution Theory, General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ.Google Scholar
  39. WolleatP. L., PedroJ. D., BeckerA. D., and FennemaE.: 1980, ‘Sex differences in high school students' causal attributions of performance in mathematics’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 11(5), 356–366.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth Fennema
    • 1
  • Penelope L. Peterson
    • 2
  • Thomas P. Carpenter
    • 3
  • Cheryl A. Lubinski
    • 4
  1. 1.Wisconsin Center for Education ResearchUSA
  2. 2.Michigan State UniversityUSA
  3. 3.Wisconsin Center for Education ResearchUSA
  4. 4.Illinois State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations