Abstract
Equitable computer collaborations in mixed-gender teams have been a pressing issue for many years. While some have argued for creating single-gender teams or girls-only computer activities, our approach was different. The current study examines a three-month software design activity in which mixed teams of girls and boys (10–12 year olds) designed and implemented multimedia astronomy resources for younger students. In this context we assessed gender differences in students' levels of access to technology and how these participation patterns changed throughout the project duration. We found through our qualitative analyses that the configuration of social, physical and cognitive “spaces” in the project environment contributed to a positive change in girls' levels of access. We discuss the implications of these results in regard to issues surrounding the development and maintenance of gender equity in computer use and further research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.REFERENCES
Barnes, D., and Todd, F. (1977). Communication and Learning in small Groups, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Guzdial, M. and Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist 26: 369–398.
Camp, T. (1997). The incredible shrinking pipeline. Communications of the ACM 40(10): 103–110.
Canada, K., and Brusca, F. (1991). The technological gender gap: Evidence and recommendations for educators and computerbased instruction designers. Educational Technology Research & Development 39(2): 43–51.
Chen, M. (1985). Gender differences in adolescents' uses of and attitudes toward computers. In McLaughlin, M. L. (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 10, Sage, Beverly Hills, California, pp. 200–216.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research 64: 1–35.
Cohen, E. G. (1982). Expectation states and interracial interaction in school settings. Annual Review of Sociology 8: 109–235.
Fredricks, J., and Alfeld-Lo, C. (1997). The right kind of socialization goes a long way with girls: Path analyses of gender differences in tenth grade science learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois, 1997.
Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., and Bass, K. (1997). The relationship between motivation, thoughtfulness, and group processes: An exploration of gender in project based science classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois, 1997.
Getzels, J. W. (1974). Images of the classroom and visions of the learner. School Review 82(4): 527–540.
Gump, P. V. (1974). Operating environments in schools of open and traditional design. School Review 82(4): 575–594.
Hall, R., and Stevens, R. (1995). Making space: A comparison of mathematical work in school and professional design practices. In Starr, S. L. (Ed.), The Cultures of Computing, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, pp. 118–145.
Harel, I. (1991). Children Designers, Ablex, Norwood, New Jersey.
Harel, I., and Papert, S. (1991). Software design as a learning environment. In Harel, I., and Papert, S. (Eds.), Constructionism, Ablex. Norwood, New Jersey. pp. 42–84.
Heller, R. S., Brade, K., and Branz, C. (1994). The representation of women and minorities in print media. GATES 1(2): 1–8.
Inkpen, K., Booth, K., and Klawe, M. (1991). Cooperative learning in the classroom: The importance of a collaborative environment for computer-based education. EGEMS Technical Report. University of British Columbia.
Johnson, D., and Johnson, R. (1974). Instructional goal structure: cooperative, competitive, or individualistic. Review of Educational Research 44: 337–343.
Kafai, Y. (1995). Minds in Play: Computer Game Design as a Context for Children's Learning, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
Kahle, J. B., and Meece, J. (1994). Research on gender issues in the classroom. In Gabel, D. (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning, Macmillian, New York.
Kinnear, A. (1995). Introduction of microcomputers: A case study of patterns of use and children's perceptions. Journal of Educational Computing Research 13: 27–40.
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Linn, M. C. (1985). Fostering equitable consequences from computer learning environments. Sex Roles 13(3/4): 229–240.
Martin, D., and Heller, R. (1994). Bringing young minority women to computers and science: Developing intervention programmes that work. GATES 1: 4–13.
Provenzo, L. (1991). Videokids, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Roth, W. M., (1995). Inventors, copycats, and everyone else: The emergence of shared resources and practices as defining aspects of classroom communities. Science Education 79: 475–502.
Roth, W. M. and Bowen, G. M. (1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a grade 8 openinquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction 13: 73–128.
Roth, W. M. (1998). Designing Community, Kluwer Academic Press, New York.
Sadker, M., and Sadker, D. (1984). Year 3: Final report, Promoting effectiveness in classroom instruction. National Institute of Education. Washington, DC.
Sadker, M., and Sadker, D. (1994). Failing at Fairness: How Our Schools Cheat Girls, Touchstone Press, New York.
Schon, D. (1988). Towards a marriage of artistry & applied science in the architectural design studio. Journal of Architecture and Education 41(4): pp. 4–10.
Shashaani, L. (1994). Gender differences in computer experience and its influence on computer attitudes. Journal of Educational Computing Research 11(4): 347–367.
Slavin, R. (1983). When does cooperative learning increase student achievement? Psychological Bulletin 94: 429–445.
Spertus, E. (1991). Why are there so few female computer scientists? MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Technical Report #1315, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Webb, N. (1984). Sex differences in interaction and achievement in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology 76: 33–44.
Webb, N. (1984). Microcomputer learning in small groups: Cognitive requirements and group processes. Journal of Educational Psychology 76: 1076–1088.
Wellesley College Center for Research on Women. (1994). How Schools Shortchange Girls: The AAUW report, Marlow and Company, New York.
Wilkinson, L. C., Lindow, J., and Chiang, C. (1985). Sex differences and sex segregation in students' small-group communication. In Wilkinson, L. C., and Marret, C. B. (Eds.) Gender Influences in Classroom Interaction, Academic Press, New York.
Wood, J. (1996). Adolescent girls, creative expression, and technology: Lessons from Boston's Computer Clubhouse. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, 1994.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ching, C.C., Kafai, Y.B. & Marshall, S.K. Spaces for Change: Gender and Technology Access in Collaborative Software Design. Journal of Science Education and Technology 9, 67–78 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009425024600
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009425024600