Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 69, Issue 11–12, pp 605–617 | Cite as

Is School Feminine? Implicit Gender Stereotyping of School as a Predictor of Academic Achievement

  • Anke Heyder
  • Ursula Kessels
Original Article

Abstract

One cause proposed for boys’ relatively lower academic achievement is a “feminisation” of schools that might result in a lack of fit between boys’ self-concept and academic engagement. Research so far has investigated math-male and language-female stereotypes, but no school-female stereotypes. Our study tested for implicit gender stereotyping of school and its impact on boys’ achievement in N = 122 ninth-graders from a large city in Western Germany using the Go/No-go Association Task (GNAT). Gender role self-concept and grades in math (representing an academic domain stereotyped as male) and German (domain stereotyped as female) were assessed using written questionnaires. It was found that, overall, students associated school more strongly with female than with male, and that this association of school with female was related to boys’ academic achievement. The more strongly boys associated school with female and the more they ascribed negative masculine traits to themselves, the lower their grades in German were. Boys’ academic achievement in math was unrelated to the extent to which they perceived school as feminine and themselves as masculine. Girls’ grades in both German and math were unrelated to their gender stereotyping of school. These findings emphasize the importance of fit between a student’s gender, gender role self-concept and gender stereotyping of school for academic achievement. Strategies to improve this fit are discussed.

Keywords

Gender gap in academic achievement Gender role self-concept Implicit measures Stereotypes School 

References

  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Ambady, N., Shih, M., Kim, A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2001). Stereotype susceptibility in children: Effects of identity activation on quantitative performance. Psychological Science, 12, 385–390. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Athenstaedt, U., Mikula, G., & Bredt, C. (2009). Gender role self-concept and leisure activities of adolescents. Sex Roles, 60, 399–409. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9543-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (1995). Implicit gender stereotyping in judgments of fame. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 181–198. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.181.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanton, H., Jaccard, J., Gonzales, P. M., & Christie, C. (2006). Decoding the implicit association test: Implications for criterion prediction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 192–212. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.07.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Buchmann, C., DiPrete, T. A., & McDaniel, A. (2008). Gender inequalities in education. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 319–337. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carrington, B., Tymms, P., & Merrell, C. (2008). Role models, school improvement and the ‘gender gap’ - Do men bring out the best in boys and women the best in girls? British Educational Research Journal, 34, 315–327. doi: 10.1080/01411920701532202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chatard, A., Guimond, S., & Selimbegovic, L. (2007). “How good are you in math?” The effect of gender stereotypes on students’ recollection of their school marks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 1017–1024. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2006.10.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark, M. A., Lee, S. M., Goodman, W., & Yacco, S. (2008). Examining male underachievement in public education: Action research at a district level. NASSP Bulletin, 92, 111–132. doi: 10.1177/0192636508321155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Connell, R. W. (1989). Cool guys, swots and wimps: the interplay of masculinity and education. Oxford Review of Education, 15, 291–303. doi: 10.1080/0305498890150309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cvencek, D., Meltzoff, A. N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2011). Math-gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Child Development, 82, 766–779. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dasgupta, N., & Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to counterstereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 642–658. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2004.02.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dresel, M., Stöger, H., & Ziegler, A. (2006). Klassen- und Schulunterschiede im Ausmaß von Geschlechterdiskrepanzen bei Leistungsbewertungen und Leistungsaspirationen: Ergebnisse einer Mehrebenenanalyse [Class and school differences in gender discrepancies in performance evaluations and achievement aspirations: Results of a multilevel analysis]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 53, 44–61.Google Scholar
  14. Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). Self-discipline gives girls the edge: Gender in self-discipline, grades, and achievement test scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 198–208. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elmore, K. C., & Oyserman, D. (2012). If ‘we’ can succeed, ‘I’ can too: Identity-based motivation and gender in the classroom. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 176–185. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Epstein, D. (1998). Real boys don’t work: ‘underachievement’, masculinity and the harassment of ‘sissies’. In D. Epstein, J. Elwood, V. Hey, & J. Maw (Eds.), Failing boys? Issues in gender and achievement (pp. 96–108). Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fiedler, K., Messner, C., & Bluemke, M. (2006). Unresolved problems with the “I”, the “A”, and the “T”: A logical and psychometric critique of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 74–147. doi: 10.1080/10463280600681248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Francis, B. (1999). Lads, lasses and (new) labour: 14-16-year-old students’ responses to the ‘laddish behaviour and boys’ underachievement’ debate. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20, 355–371. doi: 10.1080/01425699995317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Freund, A. M., Weiss, D., & Wiese, B. S. (2013). Graduating from high school: The role of gender-related attitudes, self-concept and goal clarity in a major transition in late adolescence. Advance online publication. European Journal of Developmental Psychology.. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2013.772508.Google Scholar
  20. Garner, R. (2012, February 16). Female teachers accused of giving boys lower marks. The Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/female-teachers-accused-of-giving-boys-lower-marks-6943937.html.
  21. Gold, D., & Reis, M. (1982). Male teacher effects on young children: A theoretical and empirical consideration. Sex Roles, 8, 493–513. doi: 10.1007/BF00287715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gray, J., Peng, W.-J., Steward, S., & Thomas, S. (2004). Towards a typology of gender-related school effects: Some new perspectives on a familiar problem. Oxford Review of Education, 30, 529–550. doi: 10.1080/0305498042000303991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hadjar, A., & Lupatsch, J. (2011). Geschlechterunterschiede im Schulerfolg: Spielt die Lehrperson eine Rolle? [Gender differences in educational success: Does the teacher matter?]. Zeitschrift für Soziologie der Erziehung und Sozialisation, 31, 79–94.Google Scholar
  26. Hannover, B., & Kessels, U. (2011). Sind Jungen die neuen Bildungsverlierer? Empirische Evidenz für Geschlechterdisparitäten zuungunsten von Jungen und Erklärungsansätze [Are boys left behind? Reviewing and explaining education-related gender disparities]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 25, 89–103. doi: 10.1024/1010-0652/a000039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Helbig, M. (2010). Sind Lehrerinnen für den geringeren Schulerfolg von Jungen verantwortlich? [Are female teachers responsible for the school performance gap between boys and girls?]. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 62, 93–111. doi: 10.1007/s11577-010-0095-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heppner, P. P., Walther, D., & Good, G. E. (1995). The differential role of instrumentality, expressivity, and social support in predicting problem-solving appraisal in men and women. Sex Roles, 32, 91–108. doi: 10.1007/BF01544759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jackson, C. (2002). ‘Laddishness’ as a self-worth protection strategy. Gender and Education, 14, 37–50. doi: 10.1080/09540250120098870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jackson, C. (2003). Motives for ‘laddishness’ at school: Fear of failure and fear of the ‘feminine’. British Educational Research Journal, 29, 583–598. doi: 10.1080/01411920301847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jackson, C., & Dempster, S. (2009). ‘I sat back on my computer … with a bottle of whisky next to me’: Constructing ‘cool’ masculinity through ‘effortless’ achievement in secondary and higher education. Journal of Gender Studies, 18, 341–356. doi: 10.1080/09589230903260019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jarvis, B. G. (2010). DirectRT. New York: Empirisoft Corporation.Google Scholar
  33. Kagan, J. (1964). The child’s sex role classification of school objects. Child Development, 35, 1051–1056.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Kellogg, R. L. (1969). A direct approach to sex-role identification of school-related objects. Psychological Reports, 24, 839–841. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1969.24.3.839.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kessels, U., & Hannover, B. (2007). How the image of math and science affects the development of academic interest. In M. Prenzel (Ed.), Studies on the educational quality of schools. The final report of the DFG priority programme (pp. 283–297). Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  36. Kessels, U., & Hannover, B. (2008). When being a girl matters less: Accessibility of gender-related self-knowledge in single-sex and coeducational classes and its impact on students’ physics-related self-concept of ability. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 273–289. doi: 10.1348/000709907X215938.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kessels, U., & Steinmayr, R. (2013a). Macho-man in school: Toward the role of gender role self-concepts and help seeking in school performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 23, 234–240. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2012.09.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kessels, U., & Steinmayr, R. (2013b). Der subjektive Wert von Schule in Abhängigkeit vom verbalen und mathematischen Selbstkonzept [Valuing school as a function of verbal and mathematical ability self-concepts]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 27, 105–113. doi: 10.1024/1010-0652/a000093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kessels, U., Rau, M., & Hannover, B. (2006). What goes well with physics? Measuring and altering the image of science. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 761–780. doi: 10.1348/000709905X59961.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kiefer, A. K., & Sekaquaptewa, D. (2007). Implicit stereotypes, gender identification, and math-related outcomes: A prospective study of female college students. Psychological Science, 18, 13–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01841.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kohlberg, L. (1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of children’s sex-role concepts and attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences (pp. 82–172). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Köller, O., Daniels, Z., Schnabel, K. U., & Baumert, J. (2000). Kurswahlen von Mädchen und Jungen im Fach Mathematik: Zur Rolle von fachspezifischem Selbstkonzept und Interesse [Course selections of girls and boys in mathematics: The role of academic self-concept and interest]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 14, 26–37. doi: 10.1024//1010-0652.14.1.26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Krahé, B., Berger, A., & Möller, I. (2007). Entwicklung und Validierung eines Inventars zur Erfassung des Geschlechtsrollen-Selbstkonzepts im Jugendalter [Development and validation of an inventory for measuring gender role self-concept in adolescence]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 38, 195–208. doi: 10.1024/0044-3514.38.3.195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lane, K. A., Goh, J. X., & Driver-Linn, E. (2012). Implicit science stereotypes mediate the relationship between gender and academic participation. Sex Roles, 66, 220–234. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0036-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Legewie, J., & DiPrete, T. A. (2012). School context and the gender gap in educational achievement. American Sociological Review, 77, 463–485. doi: 10.1177/0003122412440802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lindsay, G., & Muijs, D. (2006). Challenging underachievement in boys. Educational Research, 48, 313–332. doi: 10.1080/00131880600992389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Macan Ghaill, M. (1994). The making of men. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. (2005). Motivating boys and motivating girls: Does teacher gender really make a difference? Australian Journal of Education, 49, 320–334. doi: 10.1177/000494410504900308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Martinot, D., Bagès, C., & Désert, M. (2012). French children’s awareness of gender stereotypes about mathematics and reading: When girls improve their reputation in math. Sex Roles, 66, 210–219. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0032-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mickelson, R. A. (1989). Why does Jane read and write so well? The anomaly of women’s achievement. Sociology of Education, 62, 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Morris, E. W. (2008). “Rednecks,” “rutters,” and rithmetic: Social class, masculinity, and schooling in a rural context. Gender and Society, 22, 728–751. doi: 10.1177/0891243208325163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. National Center for Education Statistics. (2004). Trends in educational equity of girls & women: 2004. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005016.pdf.
  53. Neugebauer, M., Helbig, M., & Landmann, A. (2011). Unmasking the myth of the same-sex teacher advantage. European Sociological Review, 27, 669–689. doi: 10.1093/esr/jcq038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). The Go/No-Go Association Task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–666. doi: 10.1521/soco.19.6.625.20886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nosek, B. A., & Smyth, F. L. (2011). Implicit social cognitions predict sex differences in math engagement and achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 1125–1156. doi: 10.3102/0002831211410683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44–59. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality and Quantity, 41, 673–690. doi: 10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. OECD. (2009). Equally prepared for life? How 15-year-old boys and girls perform in school. Paris: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Orr, A. J. (2011). Gendered capital: Childhood socialization and the “boy crisis” in education. Sex Roles, 65, 271–284. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0016-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Osborne, J. W., & Jones, B. D. (2011). Identification with academics and motivation to achieve in school: How the structure of the self influences academic outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 23, 131–158. doi: 10.1007/s10648-011-9151-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Oyserman, D., & Destin, M. (2010). Identity-Based Motivation: Implications for intervention. The Counseling Psychologist, 38, 1001–1043. doi: 10.1177/0011000010374775.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Piché, C., & Plante, C. (1991). Perceived masculinity, feminity and androgyny among primary school boys: Relationships with the adaptation level of these students and the attitudes of the teachers towards them. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 6, 423–435. doi: 10.1007/BF03172775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Plante, I., Théorêt, M., & Favreau, O. E. (2009). Student gender stereotypes: Contrasting the perceived maleness and femaleness of mathematics and language. Educational Psychology, 29, 385–405. doi: 10.1080/01443410902971500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Río, M. F., & Strasser, K. (2013). Preschool children’s beliefs about gender differences in academic skills. Sex Roles, 68, 231–238. doi: 10.1007/s11199-012-0195-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Runge, T. E., Frey, D., Gollwitzer, P. M., Helmreich, R. L., & Spence, J. T. (1981). Masculine (instrumental) and feminine (expressive) traits: A comparison between students in the United States and West Germany. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 12, 142–162. doi: 10.1177/0022022181122002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Smeding, A. (2012). Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): An investigation of their implicit gender stereotypes and stereotypes’ connectedness to math performance. Sex Roles, 67, 617–629. doi: 10.1007/s11199-012-0209-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sokal, L. (2010). Prevalence of gendered views of reading in Thailand and Canada. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 56, 44–56.Google Scholar
  68. Sokal, L., Katz, H., Chaszewski, L., & Wojcik, C. (2007). Good-bye, Mr. Chips: Male teacher shortages and boys’ reading achievement. Sex Roles, 56, 651–659. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9206-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Holahan, C. K. (1979). Negative and positive components of psychological masculinity and femininity and their relationships to self-reports of neurotic and acting out behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1673–1682. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1673.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Steffens, M. C., & Jelenec, P. (2011). Separating implicit gender stereotypes regarding math and language: Implicit ability stereotypes are self-serving for boys and men, but not for girls and women. Sex Roles, 64, 324–335. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9924-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Steffens, M. C., Jelenec, P., & Noack, P. (2010). On the leaky math pipeline: Comparing implicit math-gender stereotypes and math withdrawal in female and male children and adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102, 947–963. doi: 10.1037/a0019920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tiedemann, J., & Faber, G. (1994). Mädchen und Grundschulmathematik: Ergebnisse einer vierjährigen Längsschnittuntersuchung zu ausgewählten geschlechtsbezogenen Unterschieden in der Leistungsentwicklung [Girls and primary school mathematics: Results from a four-year longitudinal study on selected gender differences of the performance development]. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 26, 101–111.Google Scholar
  73. Twenge, J. M. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36, 305–325. doi: 10.1007/BF02766650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Vollmer, F. (1984). Sex differences in personality and expectancy. Sex Roles, 11, 1121–1139. doi: 10.1007/BF00288138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wilde, A., & Diekman, A. B. (2005). Cross-cultural similarities and differences in dynamic stereotypes: A comparison between Germany and the United States. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 188–196. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00181.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Willis, P. E. (1977). Learning to labour: How working class kids get working class jobs. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Education and PsychologyFreie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations