Letting Girls Speak Out About Science

  • Dale Rose Baker
Part of the Cultural and Historical Perspectives on Science Education book series (CHPS)


I conducted this study because I was interested in the question of why attitude research indicated that girls did not like science and were less likely to pursue a career in science. I was also puzzled about the drop in interest in science that occurred around the time students made the transition from elementary to high school.


Science Education Science Career American Educational Research Association American Educational Research Journal Woman Scientist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Almquist, E., Angrist, S., & Mickelsen, R. (1980). Women’s career aspirations and achievements: College and seven years after. Sociology of Work and Occupations, 7, 376–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Association of University Women. (1991). Summary: Shortchanging girls, shortchanging America. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  3. Angrist, S., & Almquist, E. (1975). Careers and contingencies. New York: Dunelllen.Google Scholar
  4. Arnold, K. (1992, April). The Illinois valedictorian project: Academically talented women ten years after high school graduation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  5. Baker, D. (1990, March). Gender differences in science: Where they start and where they go. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  6. Baker, D., Leary, R., & Trammell, R. (1992, March). Where are the gender differences in science and what do they mean. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  7. Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, L.M., & Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the crossroads: Women’s psychology and girls’ development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell, J. (1991). The roots of gender inequity in technical areas. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, J., & Connolly, C. (1987). Deciphering the effects of socialization. Journal of Educational Equity and Leadership, 7, 208–222.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell, P. (1988). Rethinking research: Challenges for new and not so new researchers. Washington, DC: Department of Education, Women’s Educational Equity Act.Google Scholar
  12. Center for Children and Technology. (1991, October). Women and technology: A new basis for understanding. News from the Center for Children and Technology, 1–4.Google Scholar
  13. DeBoer, G. (1984a). Factors relating to the decisions of men and women to continue taking science courses in college. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 325–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. DeBoer, G. (1984b). A study of gender effects in science and mathematics coursetaking behavior among students who graduated from college in the late 1970s. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 95–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eccles, J. (1986). Gender-roles and women’s achievement. Educational Researcher, 15, 15–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ethington, C., & Wolfe, L. (1989). Women’s selection of quantitative undergraduate fields of study: Direct and indirect influences. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Grant, M., & Harding, J. (1987). Changing the polarity. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 335–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holden, G., & Edwards, L. (1987). Parental attitudes toward child rearing: Instruments, issues and implications. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 29–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hueftle, S., Rakow, S., & Welch, W. (1983). Images of science: A summary of results from the 1981–82 national assessment in science. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Research and Evaluation Center.Google Scholar
  21. Kahle, J.B., & Lakes, M.K. (1983). The myth of equality in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Maple, S., & Stage, F. (1991). Influences on the choice of math/science major by gender and ethnicity. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 37–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Markus, H., & Oyserman, D. (1989). Gender and thought: The role of the self-concept. In M. Crawford & M. Gentry (Eds.), Gender and thought (pp. 100–127). New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. Martinez, M. (1992). Interest enhancements to science experiments: Interactions with student gender. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 167–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mullis, I., & Jenkins, L. (1988). The science report card: Trends and achievement based on the 1986 national assessment. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  26. Nardi, B. (1983). Goals in reproductive decision making, American Ethnologist, 10, 697–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. National Science Foundation, (1990). Women and minorities in science and engineering. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  28. Noddings, N. (1990). Feminist critiques in the professions. In C. Cazden (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 16 (pp. 393–424). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  29. Oakes, J. (1990). Opportunities, achievement and choice: Women and minority students in science and mathematics. In C. Cazden (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 16 (pp. 153–222). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  30. Peng, S., & Jaffe, J. (1979). Women who enter male-dominated fields of study in higher education. American Educational Research Journal, 16, 285–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sadker, M., Sadker, D., & Klein, S. (1991). The issue of gender in elementary and secondary schools. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of Research in Education 17 (pp. 269–334). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  32. Sheperd, L. (1993). Lifting the veil: The feminine side of science. Boston: Shambhala Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Sjoberg, S., & Imsen, G. (1983). Gender and science education. (Monograph No. 3). Oslo, Norway: Center for Science Education, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  34. Solomon, J., & Harrison, K. (1991). Talking about science based issues: Do boys and girls differ? British Educational Research Journal, 17, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sutton, R.E. (Winter, 1991). Equity and computers in the schools: A decade of research. Review of Educational Research, 61, 475–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Steinkamp, M.W., & Maehr, M.L. (1983). Affect, ability and science achievement: A quantitative synthesis of correlational research. Review of Educational Research, 53, 269–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tesch, R., Sommerlund, B., & Kristensen, O. (1989). Textbase alpha users manual. Desert Hot Springs, CA: Qualitative Research Management.Google Scholar
  38. Ward, B. (1979). Attitudes toward science: A summary of results from the 1976–77 national assessment of science. (Report No. 08-S-01) Denver, CO: Education Commission of the StatesGoogle Scholar
  39. Ware, N., Steckler, N., & Lesserman, J. (1985). Undergraduate women: Who chooses a science major? Journal of Higher Education, 56, 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wilder, G., & Powell, K. (1989). Sex Differences in performance: A survey of the literature (College Board Report No. 89-3, ETS RR No. 89-4). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dale Rose Baker
    • 1
  1. 1.Arizona State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations