Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Building gender inclusivity: disentangling the influence of classroom demography on classroom participation

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite increased attention on women in business, concerns abound regarding the extent to which business schools are creating inclusive learning environments that support the leadership development of both male and female students. Using an organizational demography lens, we investigate the interactive effects of student gender, faculty gender, and classroom demography on class participation. We focus on class participation as it is essential to students’ overall learning and development especially concerning leadership. Our findings demonstrate that student and faculty demography interacts with context in unexpected ways to affect participation. Specifically, when women students are in the minority and have a female professor, they receive higher participation grades, particularly as class size decreases. The findings from this study have important implications for business school faculty and administrators as they work to build more inclusive learning environments which support all students’ development as leaders.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 751–763.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abuid, B. A. (2014). A student participation assessment scheme for effective teaching and learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 11(1), 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allan, E. J., & Madden, M. (2006). Chilly classrooms for female undergraduate students: a question of method? The Journal of Higher Education, 77(4), 684–711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altermatt, E. R., Jovanovic, J., & Perry, M. (1998). Bias or responsivity? Sex and achievement-level effects on teachers’ classroom questioning practices. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 516–527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, D. J. (2012). Black achievers’ experiences with racial spotlighting and ignoring in a predominantly white high school. Teachers College Record, 114, 1–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom versus physical classroom: an exploratory study of class discussion patterns and student learning in an asynchronous internet-based MBA course. Journal of Management Education, 24(2), 213–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbaugh, J. B., Bento, R., & Hwang, A. (2010). Does the MBA experience support diversity? Demographic effects on program satisfaction. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 8(2), 391–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, M., & Boud, D. (1983). Assessing participation in discussion: an exploration of the issues. Studies in Higher Education, 8, 33–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashcraft, K. L., & Mumby, D. K. (2004). Reworking gender: a feminist communicology of organization. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, B. (2015). The toxic lining of men’s fashion consumption: the omnipresent force of hegemonic masculinity. Critical Studies in Men’s Fashion., 2(2&3), 143–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartunek, J. M., & Louis, M. R. (1996). Insider/outsider team research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basow, S. A. (2000). Best and worst professors: gender patterns in students’ choices. Gender Roles, 43, 407–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bean, J. C., & Peterson, D. (1998). Grading classroom participation. New Direction for Teaching and Learning, 74, 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berdine, R. (1986). Why some students fail to participate in class. Marketing News, 20, 23–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. New York: David McKay Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowles, H. R., Babcock, L., & Lai, L. (2007). Social incentives for gender differences in the propensity to initiate negotiations: sometimes it does hurt to ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103(1), 84–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, K. L., & Eisler, R. M. (1999). Gender and gender in the college classroom: a quantitative analysis of faculty student interactions and perceptions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 127–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brescoll, V. L. (2011). Who takes the floor and why: gender, power, and volubility in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56(1), 622–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Kramer, R. M. (1986). Choice behavior in social dilemmas: effects of social identity, group size, and decision framing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 543–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canada, K., & Pringle, R. (1995). The role of gender in college classroom interactions: a social context approach. Sociology of Education, 68, 161–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, A., Chajut, E., & Saporta, K. (2008). Participation in class and in online discussions: gender differences. Computers & Education, 50(3), 718–724.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catalyst. (2017). Pyramid: women in S&P 500 companies. New York: Catalyst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. R. (1976). Beyond simulation: treating the classroom as an organization. The Teaching of Organization Behavior, 2(1), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, R. R., Gray, J. M., & Constantinople, A. P. (1990). Student-faculty interaction in the college classroom. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 23, 189–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crombie, G., Pyke, S. W., Silverthorn, N., Jones, A., & Piccinin, S. (2003). Students’ perceptions of their classroom participation and instructor as a function of gender and context. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(1), 51–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crossgrove, K., & Curran, K. L. (2008). Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material. CBE Life Sciences Education, 7(1), 146–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: the stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 61–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czekanski, K. E., & Wolf, Z. R. (2013). Encouraging and evaluating class participation. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 10(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., & Platt, M. B. (2006). Non-voluntary class participation in graduate discussion courses: effects of grading and cold calling. Journal of Management Education, 30, 354–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., & Platt, M. B. (2008). Using discussion pedagogy to enhance oral and written communication skills. College Teaching, 56(3), 163–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., & Platt, M. B. (2010). Class participation in accounting courses: factors that affect student comfort and learning. Issues in Accounting Education, 25(4), 613–629.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., & Platt, M. B. (2013). Impact of cold-calling on student voluntary participation. Journal of Management Education, 37, 305–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, N., & Rivera, L. (2008). When social context matters: the influence of long-term and short-term exposure to admired outgroup members on implicit attitudes and behavioral intentions. Social Cognition, 26, 112–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, B. G. (2009). Tools for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, J. F., & Richter, A. W. (2006). Probing three-way interactions in moderated multiple regression: development and application of a slope difference test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 917–926.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delaney, E. (1991). Applying geography in the classroom through structured discussions. Journal of Geography, 90(3), 129–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dezsö, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33(9), 1072–1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiTomaso, N., Post, C., & Parks-Yancy, R. (2007). Workforce diversity and inequality: power, status, and numbers. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 473–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downey, D. B., & Pribesh, S. (2004). When race matters: teachers’ evaluations of students’ classroom behavior. Sociology of Education, 77, 267–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: resolving the contradictions. Psychological of Women Quarterly, 31(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eddy, S. L., Brownell, S. E., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Gender gaps in achievement and participation in multiple introductory biology classrooms. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13, 478–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenberg, R. G., Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (1995). Do teachers’ race, gender, and ethnicity matter? Evidence from the national educational longitudinal study of 1988. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 48(3), 547–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. J. (1995). The power in demography: women’s social constructions of gender identity at work. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 589–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. M. (2011). Taking gender into account: theory and design for women’s leadership development programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 474–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ethier, K. A., & Deaux, K. (1994). Negotiating social identity when contexts change: maintaining identification and responding to threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 243–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewens, W. (2000). Teaching using discussion. In R. Neff & M. Weimer (Eds.), Classroom communication: collected readings for effective discussion and questioning (pp. 21–26). Madison: Atwood Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, P. M., Cavanagh, K. V., & Bilimoria, D. (2016). Gender equality in business schools: the elephant in the room. In P. M. Flynn, K. Haynes, & M. A. Kilgour (Eds.), Integrating gender equality into business and management education (pp. 26–54). Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, P. M., Haynes, K., & Kilgour, M. A. (2016). Integrating gender equality into business and management education. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisby, B. N., & Martin, M. M. (2010). Instructor-student and student-student rapport in the classroom. Communication Education, 59(2), 146–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fritschner, L. M. (2000). Inside the undergraduate college classroom: faculty and students differ on the meaning of participation. The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 342–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galyon, C. E., Blondin, C. A., Yaw, J. S., Nalls, M. L., & Williams, R. L. (2012). The relationship of academic self-efficacy to class participation and exam performance. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal, 15, 233–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilmore, T. N., & Schnall, E. (1996). Staying alive to learning: integrating enactment with case teaching to develop leaders. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15(3), 444–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Girgrin, K. Z., & Stevens, D. D. (2005). Bridging in-class participation with innovative instruction: use and implications in a Turkish university classroom. Innovation in Education and Teaching International, 42, 93–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruenfeld, D., Mannix, E., Williams, K., & Neale, M. (1996). Group composition and decision-making: how member familiarity and information distribution affect process and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 67, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S., Fadil, P., & Kale, R. (2009). The influence of culture and demography on classroom participation: integrating technology into the pedagogical paradigm. International Business: Research Teaching and Practice, 3(1), 71–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, N. (2008). Engaging identities in a regional university classroom. Higher Education, 56, 241–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1199–1228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. (1998). Beyond relational demography: time and the effects of surface and deep level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 96–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2009). A practical guide to authentic e-learning. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertenstein, J. H. (1991). Patterns of participation. In C. R. Christensen, D. A. Garvin, & A. Sweet (Eds.), Education for judgment: the artistry of discussion leadership (pp. 175–191). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander, J. (2002). Learning to discuss: strategies for improving the quality of class discussion. Teaching Sociology, 30(3), 317–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, A., Fujishiro, K., & Heaney, C. A. (2014). Workplace racial/ethnicity similarity, job satisfaction, and lumbar back health among warehouse workers: asymmetric reactions across racial/ethnic groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(2), 172–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: a systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 325–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell, R. J. (2011). Exploring the impact of grading rubrics on academic performance: findings from a quasi-experimental, pre-post evaluation. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 22(2), 31–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, K.C., Misra, J., & McCurley, K. (n.d.). Intersectionality in sociology. Retrieved from https://www.socwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/swsfactsheet_intersectionality.pdf.

  • Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: a meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 599–627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, A., Liao, H., & Jackson, S. E. (2006). Cross-level effects of workplace diversity on sales performance and pay. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 459–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, A., Dencker, J. C., Franz, G., & Martocchio, J. J. (2010). Unpacking generational identities in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(3), 392–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, D. A., & Yoels, W. C. (1976). The college classroom: some observations on the meanings of student participation. Sociology and Social Research, 61(4), 421–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelan, E., & Jones, R. D. (2010). Gender and the MBA. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(1), 26–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, W. (2011). Review of the book Gender and the changing face of higher education: A feminized future?, by C. Leathwood & B. Read. Higher Education (61, pp. 613–616).

  • Marshall, L. L. (2010). An elective course in women’s health. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 17(1), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayorga-Gallo, S., & Hordge-Freeman, E. (2017). Between marginality and privilege: gaining access and navigating the field in multiethnic settings. Qualitative Research, 17(4), 377–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, J. (2009). Racial and gender microaggressions on a predominantly-white campus: experiences of black, latina/o and white undergraduates. Race, Gender & Class, 16(1/2), 133–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCorkel, J., & Myers, K. (2003). What difference does difference make? Position and privilege in the field. Qualitative Sociology, 26(2), 199–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, W. J., & McGuire, C. V. (1981). The spontaneous self-concept as affected by personal distinctiveness. In M. D. Lynch, A. A. Norem-Heberson, & K. J. Gergen (Eds.), Self-concept: advances in theory and research. Cambridge: Balinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLoughlin, L. A. (2005). Spotlighting: emergent gender bias in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(4), 373–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, J. M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M. C., Steele, C. M., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Signaling threat: how situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18, 879–885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niederle, M., & Vesterlund, L. (2007). Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 1067–1101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong, M., Wright, C., Espinosa, L. L., & Orfield, G. (2011). Inside the double bind: a synthesis of empirical research on undergraduate and graduate women of color in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Harvard Educational Review, 81, 172–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepper, M. B., & Pathak, S. (2010). Classroom contribution: what do students perceive as fair assessment? Journal of Education for Business, 83(6), 360–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1983). Organizational demography. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 299–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pichevin, M., & Hurtig, M. (1996). Describing me, describing women: sex membership salience and numerical distinctiveness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 513–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be and don’t have to be: the contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • PRME Working Group on Gender Equality (2011). Discussion paper. Retrieved from: http://prmegenderequalityworkinggroup.unprme.wikispaces.net/file/detail/PRME%20WG%20Gender%20Equality%20Discussion%20Paper.docx.

  • Randel, A. E. (2002). Identity salience: a moderator of the relationship between group gender composition and work group conflict. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 749–766.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rankin, S., & Reason, R. (2008). Transformational Tapestry Model: a comprehensive approach to transforming campus climate. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1(4), 262–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, C. (2009). Imaging the other? Ethical challenges of researching and writing women’s embodied lives. Feminism & Psychology, 19(2), 245–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rico, R., Sánchez-Manzanares, M., Gil, F., & Gibson, C. (2008). Team implicit coordination processes: a team knowledge-based approach. The Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 163–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riddle, E.J., Smith, M., & Frankforter, S.A. (2016). A rubric for evaluating student analyses of business cases. Journal of Management Education, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916644283.

  • Rocca, K. A. (2010). Student participation in the college classroom: an extended multidisciplinary literature review. Communication Education, 59(2), 185–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M. (1996). Teacher questioning in an open-inquiry learning environment: interactions of context, content, and student responses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 709–736.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., & Phelan, J. E. (2008). Backlash effects for disconfirming gender stereotypes in organizations. In A. P. Brief & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 61–79). New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salter, D. W., & Persaud, A. (2003). Women’s views of the factors that encourage and discourage classroom participation. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 831–844.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scantlebury, K., & Kahle, J. B. (1993). The implementation of equitable teaching strategies by biology student teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(6), 537–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, R. (2006). Masculinity and management education: feminizing the MBA. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5(2), 182–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, A. (1995). Sex and the MBA. Organization, 2(2), 295–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewman, S. (1988). Organizational demography. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 173–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout, J. G., Dasgupta, N., Hunsinger, M., & McManus, M. A. (2011). STEMing the tide: using ingroup experts to inoculate women’s self-concept in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 255–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatum, H. E., Schwartz, B. M., Schimmoeller, P. A., & Perry, N. (2013). Classroom participation and student-faculty interaction: does gender matter? The Journal of Higher Education, 84(6), 745–768.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. C. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: a self-categorization theory. New York: Basil Blackwell, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, R. C. (1994). Teacher education students’ views on class discussion: implications for fostering critical reflection. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10, 231–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, D. J., & Dodds, P. S. (2007). Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 441–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, J. W. (2011). Resistance to classroom participation: minority students, academic discourse, cultural conflicts, and issues of representation in whole class discussions. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 10, 250–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, H., & Mean, L. (2004). Measuring gender composition in work groups: a comparison of existing methods. Organizational Research Methods, 7, 456–474.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Management Division, Babson College, Babson Park, MA, 02457, USA

    Tina R. Opie, Danna N. Greenberg & Wendy M. Murphy

  2. University of Iowa , Management and Organizations, Iowa City, Iowa, 52242, USA

    Beth Livingston

Authors
  1. Tina R. Opie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Beth Livingston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Danna N. Greenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wendy M. Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tina R. Opie.

Appendix

Appendix

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Opie, T.R., Livingston, B., Greenberg, D.N. et al. Building gender inclusivity: disentangling the influence of classroom demography on classroom participation. High Educ 77, 37–58 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0245-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0245-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation