GENDER DIFFERENCES IN LEARNING OF THE CONCEPT OF FORCE, REPRESENTATIONAL CONSISTENCY, AND SCIENTIFIC REASONING
- 677 Downloads
This quantitative case study used a pre- and posttest design for exploring the gender differences in secondary school students’ (n = 131, 45 males and 86 females) learning of the force concept when an interactive engagement type of teaching was used. In addition, students’ ability to interpret multiple representations (i.e., representational consistency) was documented by a pre- and posttest and scientific reasoning ability by a pretest only. Males significantly outperformed females in learning of the force concept, pre- and posttest representational consistency, and pretest scientific reasoning. However, the gender difference in learning of the force concept was not significant when ANCOVA was conducted using pretest results of representational consistency and scientific reasoning as covariates. This appeared to indicate that the gender difference in learning gain was related to students’ abilities before the instruction. Thus, the teaching method used was equally effective for both genders. Further, our quantitative finding about the relation between representational consistency and learning of the force concept supports the assumption that multiple representations are important in science learning.
Key wordsconceptual understanding gender force concept multiple representations scientific reasoning
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Coletta, V. P., Phillips, J. A. & Steinert, J. (2012). FCI normalized gain, scientific reasoning ability, thinking in physics, and gender effects. In N. Rebello, P. Engelhardt & C. Singh (Eds.), 2011 Physics Education Research Conference (pp. 23–26). New York: American Institute of Physics.Google Scholar
- Directorate-General for Education and Culture (2009). Key data on education in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice.Google Scholar
- Giancoli, D. (2005). Physics—Principles with applications (6th ed.). Englewood, Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Halloun, I., Hake, R. R., Mosca, E. P., & Hestenes, D. (1995). Force concept inventory. Retrieved September 10, 2012, from http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html.
- Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S. & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8(1), 1–51.Google Scholar
- Hatakka, J., Saari, H., Sirviö, J., Viiri, J. & Yrjänäinen, S. (2004). Physica 1. Porvoo, Finland: Werner Söderström Oy.Google Scholar
- Lawson, A. E. (2000). Classroom test of scientific reasoning (revised). Retrieved September 10, 2012, from http://www.ncsu.edu/per/TestInfo.html.
- Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S. & Foy, P. (2008). TIMSS 2007 International Science Report. Chesnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.Google Scholar
- McCullough, L. (2004). Gender, context, and physics assessment. Journal of International Women's Studies, 5(4), 20–30.Google Scholar
- Nieminen, P., Savinainen, A., & Viiri, J. (2009). The gender gap in students' ability to apply various representations of the force concept. In K. Merenluoto & T.–R. Hurme (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Symposium of the Finnish Mathematics and Science Education Research Association: Matematiikan ja luonnotieteiden oppimista ja ajattelun taitoa tutkimassa (pp. 67–80). Finland: University of Turku.Google Scholar
- Nieminen, P., Savinainen, A. & Viiri, J. (2010). Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students' representational consistency. Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 6(2), 020109. The R-FCI is available in (retrieved on September 10, 2012) http://www.compadre.org/portal/items/detail.cfm?ID=11958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2009). Equally prepared for life? How 15-year-old boys and girls perform in school. Paris: Author.Google Scholar
- Osborn Popp, S. E., Meltzer, D. E., & Megowan-Romanowicz, C. (2011, April). Is the Force Concept Inventory biased? Investigating differential item functioning on a test of conceptual learning in Physics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. Retrieved September 10, 2012 from http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html.
- Schnotz, W., Baadte, C., Müller, A. & Rasch, R. (2010). Creative thinking and problem solving with depictive and descriptive representations. In L. Verschaffel, E. De Corte, T. de Jong & J. Elen (Eds.), Use or representations in reasoning and problem solving: Analysis and improvement (pp. 11–35). Milton Park, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Snyder, T. D. & Dillow, S. A. (2010). Digest of education statistics, 2009. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar