Parental and Secondary School Teachers’ Perceptions of ICT Professionals, Gender Differences and their Role in the Choice of Studies

Abstract

The influence of parents and teachers in the decisions made by adolescents regarding study options has not been widely documented in Spain. The main aim of this qualitative study consisted of analyzing the opinions of parents and secondary school teachers about their role in the different academic and professional choices boys and girls make. Seven focus groups (4 with 27 parents and 3 with 22 secondary school teachers) from 5 schools located in urban and rural areas of Catalonia (Spain) were carried out in order to explore how both groups perceive Information and Communication Technology (ICT) professionals, gender differences in study options and their own role in adolescents’ choice of study options. Our findings show that parents and teachers hold stereotypes about ICTs and consider that gender does not condition adolescents’ study choices. Both groups saw themselves as playing a secondary role in adolescents’ academic and professional choices. Some gender differences among parents and teachers emerged regarding their perception of the ICT professionals and their own role and of others in shaping adolescents’ study choices. The findings and their practical implications are discussed.

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

References

  1. American Association of Women [AAUW]. (1995). How schools short-change girls. Washington DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Auyeung, P., & Sands, J. (1997). Factors influencing accounting students’ career choice; A cross-cultural validation study. Accounting Education: An international journal, 6(1), 13–23. doi:10.1080/096392897331596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bandura, A. (1999). Self-efficacy in changing societies. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, C. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child development, 72(1), 187–206. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00273.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Barker, L. J., & Aspray, W. (2006). The state of research on girls and IT. In J. M. Cohoon & W. Aspray (Eds.), Women and information technology (pp. 3–54). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing source. Psychological Review, 88, 354. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.88.4.354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bleeker, M. M. (2002). Parents’ influence on the math and science career plans of adolescents. Poster session presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, New Orleans, LA.

  8. Bleeker, M. M., & Jacobs, J. E. (2004). Achievement in math and science: Do mothers’ beliefs matter 12 years later? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 97–109. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bryman, A. (2001). Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Charmaz, K. (1983). The grounded theory method: An explication and interpretation. In R. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research (pp. 109–126). Boston: Little Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Chhin, C. S., Bleeker, M. M., & Jacobs, J. E. (2008). Gender-typed occupational choices. The long-term impact of parents’ beliefs and expectations. In H. M. G. Watt & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Gender and occupational outcomes. Longitudinal assessments of individual, social and cultural influences (pp. 194–214). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Crowley, K., Callanan, M. A., Tenenbaum, H. R., & Allen, E. (2001). Parents explain more often to boys than to girls during shared scientific thinking. Psychological Science, 12, 258–261. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00347.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Culley, L. (1988). Girls, boys and computers. Educational Studies, 14, 3–8. doi:10.1080/0305569880140101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cussó, R. (2007). Tecnologia: Gènere i professió. [Technology: Gender and profession]. Unpublished report, Departament d’Educació de la Generalitat de Cataluña.

  16. Cussó, R., & Sáinz, M. (2009). What factors lead female students not to choose technology-related domains and subjects in secondary education? Poster presented in the XI European Congress of Psychology, 7–10 July, Oslo (Norway).

  17. Dickhäuser, O., & Stiensmeier-Pelster, J. (2003a). Gender differences in the choice of computer courses: Applying an expectancy-value model. Social Psychology of Education, 6, 173–189. doi:10.1023/A:1024735227657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dickhäuser, O., & Stiensmeier-Pelster, J. (2003b). Wahrgenommene Lehreeinschatzungen und das Fahigkeitselfbskonzept von Jüngen und Mädchen in der Grundschule. [Perceived evaluation of lessons and girls’ and boys’ self-concept of ability in primary school]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht, 50, 182–190. doi:10.1026//0049-8637.35.1.1.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior. Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.54.6.408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women.s educational and occupational choices. Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(00), 585–609. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01049.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Eccles, J. S. (2007). Families, schools and developing achievement-related motivations and engagement. In J. E. Grusec & J. P. Hastings (Eds.), Handbook of socialization. Theory and research (pp. 665–691). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Eccles, J. S., Jacobs, J. E., & Harold, R. D. (1990). Gender role stereotypes, expectancy effects, and parents’ socialization of gender differences. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 186–201. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1990.tb01929.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Eccles, J. S., Barber, B., & Jozefowicz, D. (1999). Linking gender to educational, occupational and recreational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. In W. B. Swann, J. H. Langlois, & L. A. Gilbert (Eds.), Sexism and stereotypes in modern society (pp. 153–191). Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Eccles, J. S., Frome, P., Suk Yoon, K., Freedman-Doan, C., & Jacobs, J. (2000). Gender-role socialization in the family: A longitudinal approach. In T. Y. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 333–360). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Eccles-Parsons, J., Adler, T. F., & Kaczala, C. M. (1982). Socialization of achievement attitudes and beliefs: Parental influences. Child Development, 53, 310–321.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fagot, B. I., Rodgers, C. S., & Leinbach, M. D. (2000). Theories of gender socialization. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental psychology of gender (pp. 65–89). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Frome, P. M., & Eccles, J. S. (1998). Parents’ influence on children’s achievement-related perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 435–452. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.74.2.435.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. García-Cuesta, S. (2009). Carrera profesional y Género. La inserción laboral con la titulación en Derecho. [Career and Gender: Work insertion with a degree in law]. Santa Cruz de Tenerife: Universidad de La Laguna Colección Tesis Doctorales.

  30. Hackett, G. (1999). Self-efficacy in career choice and development. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp. 232–258). London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Instituto de la Mujer. (2010). Datos. [Data]. Retrieved from http://www.inmujer.migualdad.es/MUJER/mujeres/cifras/tablas/.

  32. Jacobs, J. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Parents, task values and real life achievement-related choices. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 405–439). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Jenson, J., & Brushwood Rose, C. (2003). Women@Work: Listening to gendered relations of power in teachers’ talk about new technologies. Gender and Education, 15, 169–181. doi:10.1080/13803610600765851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Joiner, R., Littleton, K., Chou, C., & Morahan-Martin, J. (2006). Gender and information communication technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 317–319. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00195.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Jones, M. G., & Wheatley, J. (1990). Gender differences in teacher-student interactions in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science and Teaching, 27, 861–874. doi:10.1002/tea.3660270906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Jussim, L., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). Teacher expectations 2: Construction and reflection of student achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 947–961. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.63.6.947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Jussim, L., Eccles, J. S., & Madon, S. (1996). Social perception, social stereotypes and teacher expectations: Accuracy and the quest for the powerful self-fulfilling prophecy. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 28, pp. 281–388). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  38. López-Sáez, M., & Sáinz, M. (2008). Estereotipos de los profesores y de los alumnos en torno a las modalidades de Bachillerato, desde una perspectiva de género. [Stereotypes of teachers and students about the different tracks of Bachillerato from a gender perspective]. Actas del primer congreso Iberoamericano de Investigación cualitativa, 414–445.

  39. López-Sáez, M., Morales, F. J., & Lisbona, A. M. (2008). Evolution of gender stereotypes in Spain: Traits and roles. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11, 609–617.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lott, B., & Maluso, D. (2001). Gender development: Social learning. In J. Worell (Ed.), Encyclopedia of women and gender: Sex similarities and differences and the impact of society on gender (pp. 537–549). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Margolis, J., & Fisher, A. (2002). Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Martin, C. L., & Dinella, L. M. (2001). Gender development. Gender schema theory. In J. Worell (Ed.), Encyclopedia of women and gender: Sex similarities and differences and the impact of society on gender (pp. 507–521). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Meersmith, E. E., Garrett, J. L., Davis-Kean, P., Malanchuk, O., & Eccles, J. S. (2008). Career development from adolescence through emerging adulthood: Insights from Information Technology Occupations. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23, 206–227. doi:10.1177/0743558407310723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Morgan, D. L. (1991). Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, Cal: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Nelson, L. J., & Cooper, J. (1997). Gender differences in children’s reactions to success and failure with computers. Computers in Human Behavior, 13, 247–267. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(97)00008-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. OECD. (2006). ICT and learning. Supporting out-of-school youth and adults. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Parsons, J. E., Adler, T. F., & Kaczala, C. M. (1982). Socialization of achievement attitudes and beliefs: Parental influences. Child Development, 53, 310–321. doi:10.2307/1128973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation and student intellectual development. New York: MSS Modular.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Sáinz, M. (2007). Aspectos psicosociales de las diferencias de género en actitudes hacia las nuevas tecnologías en adolescentes. [Psychosocial aspects of gender differences in attitudes towards computers in adolescents] Retrieved from: http://www.injuve.mtas.es/injuve/contenidos.item.action?id=1423691052&menuId=400352110.

  50. Sáinz, M., & López-Sáez, M. (2010). Gender differences in computer attitudes and the choice of technology-related occupations in a sample of secondary students in Spain. Computers and Education, 54, 578–587. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(97)00008-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Sáinz, M., López-Sáez, M., & Lisbona, A. (2004). Expectativas de rol profesional de mujeres estudiantes de carreras típicamente femeninas o masculinas [Occupational role expectations of female students enrolled in studies considered as typically feminine or masculine]. Acción Psicológica, 3, 111–123.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Shashaani, L. (1994). Socioeconomic status, parents’ sex-role stereotypes, and the gender gap in computing. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 26, 433–452.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Sigalés, C., Mominó, J.M. & Meneses, J. (2007). L’escola a la societat xarxa: Internet a l’educació primària i secundària. [The school in the information society: Internet in primary and secondary education]. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. Informe de recerca. Retrieved from http://www.uoc.edu/in3/pic/cat/escola_xarxa/informe.html.

  54. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Subirats, M., & Brullet, C. (1992). Rosa y azul. La transmisión de los géneros en la escuela mixta. [Blue and Pink. The transmission of gender in the mixed school]. Madrid: Instituto de la Mujer.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Tenenbaum, H. R., & Leaper, C. (2003). Parent-child conversations about science: The socialization of gender inequities? Developmental Psychology, 39, 34–47. doi:10.1037//0012-1649.39.1.34.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Tenenbaum, H. R., Snow, C. E., Roach, K. A., & Kurland, B. (2005). Talking and reading science: Longitudinal data on sex differences in mother-child conversations in low-income families. Applied Developmental Psychology, 26, 1–19. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2004.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Trouilloud, D. O., Sarrazin, P. G., Martinek, T. J., & Guillet, E. (2002). The influence of teacher expectations on student achievement in physical education classes: Pygmalion revisited. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 591–607. doi:10.1002/ejsp. 109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Updegraff, K. A., McHale, S. M., & Crouter, A. C. (1996). Gender roles in marriage: What do they mean for girls’ and boys’ school achievement? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25, 73–88. doi:10.1007/BF01537381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Vekiri, I. (2008). ICTs and socialization: The role of school and teachers. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/43/28/40832756.pdf.

  62. Vekiri, I. (2010). Boys and girls ICT beliefs. Do teachers matter? Computers and education, 55, 16–23. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Vekiri, I., & Chronaki, A. (2008). Gender issues in technology use: Perceived social support, computer self-efficacy and value beliefs, and computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, 51, 1392–1404. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.01.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Whiston, S. C., & Keller, B. K. (2004). The influences of the family of origin on career development: A review and analysis. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 493–568. doi:10.1177/0011000004265660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wilkinson, S. (1998). Focus groups in feminist research: Power, interaction and the co-production of meaning. Women’s Studies International Forum, 21, 111–25. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Zarrett, N. R., & Malanchuk, O. (2005). Who’s computing? Gender and race differences in young adults’ decisions to pursue an Information Technology career. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 110, 65–84. doi:10.1002/cd.150.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zarrett, N. R., Malanchuk, O., Davis-Kean, P. E., & Eccles, J. S. (2006). Examining the gender gap in IT by race: Young adults’ decisions to pursue an IT career. In B. Aspray & J. MacGrath Cohoon (Eds.), Women and Information Technology: Research on the reasons for under representation (pp. 55–88). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper is part of a broader research project financed by the Catalonian Women’s Institute ASC/46/2008. The corresponding author thanks the financial support given by the Programa José Castillejo Programme on Mobility of the Spanish Ministry of Education. The authors would like to thank the participants and Esther Fatsini, Ana González-Ramos, Pilar Prat, Jordi Solé and Nuria Vergés for their collaboration in the process of contacting participants and the analysis of some focus groups. Special thanks to the blind reviewer and editors for their insightful comments and suggestions.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Milagros Sáinz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sáinz, M., Pálmen, R. & García-Cuesta, S. Parental and Secondary School Teachers’ Perceptions of ICT Professionals, Gender Differences and their Role in the Choice of Studies. Sex Roles 66, 235–249 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0055-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Parental and school influence
  • Gender
  • Academic choices
  • ICTs