Abstract
This chapter applies science identity to the notion of talent in higher education science: What it is and who it is for. The study draws on interview data produced to explore what teachers and students value and recognize as ideal and celebrated student characteristics and practices. One dataset is informed by students enrolled at a highly selective master’s science programme where women are majority. The other brings a teacher-perspective using interviews with undergraduate science faculty at the same institution. A thematic analysis that operationalises talent as an ideal, exposes a gendered mechanism for in- and ex- clusion that determine what and who are recognized and privileged in science. The results are treated as two distinct themes: (1) what talent is and is not, locates talent as hegemonically masculine and; (2) the price of talent, investigates how personal sacrifice associates science identity with talent. Together the two themes suggest that feminine performativity, within or outside of science, will not be read as talent. Instead, interviews show that when ‘talent’ is used to describe ideals that associate with science identities, it describes masculinized ideals that work to position students and teachers relative to each other in ways that renders science inherently inequitable.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F089124390004002002
Adriansen, H. K., & Madsen, L. M. (2009). Studying the making of geographical knowledge: The implications of insider interviews. Norsk geografisk tidsskrift - Norwegian journal of geography, 63(3), 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/00291950903238966
Allegrini, A. (2015). Italian students’ ideas about gender and science in late-modern societies: Interpretations from a feminist perspective. In E. Henriksen, J. Dillon, & J. Ryder (Eds.), Understanding student participation and choice in science and technology education (pp. 331–347). Springer.
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012a). “Balancing acts”: Elementary school girls’ negotiations of femininity, achievement, and science. Science Education, 96(6), 967–989. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21031
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012b). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: How families shape children’s engagement and identification with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908. https://doi.org/10.3102/2F0002831211433290
Archer, L., & Francis, B. (2006). Understanding minority ethnic achievement: Race, gender, class and ‘success’. Routledge.
Archer, L., Halsall, A., & Hollingworth, S. (2007). Inner-city femininities and education: ‘Race’, class, gender and schooling in young women’s lives. Gender and Education, 19(5), 549–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250701535568
Archer, L., Moote, J., & MacLeod, E. (2020). Learning that physics is ‘not for me’: Pedagogic work and the cultivation of habitus among advanced level physics students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 29(3), 347–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2019.1707679
Avraamidou, L. (2020). Science identity as a landscape of becoming: Rethinking recognition and emotions through an intersectionality lens. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(2), 323–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09954-7
Barton, A. C. (1998). Reframing “science for all” through the politics of poverty. Educational Policy, 12(5), 525–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0895904898012005004
Becker, H. S. (Ed.). (2002). Boys in white: Student culture in medical school. Transaction Publishers.
Bourdieu, P. (1974). The school as a conservative force: Scholastic and cultural inequalities. In J. Eggleston (Ed.), Contemporary research in the sociology of education (pp. 32–46). Methuen. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203128374
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Bryan, E., & Simmons, L. A. (2009). Family involvement: Impacts on post-secondary educational success for first-generation Appalachian college students. Journal of College Student Development, 50(4), 391–406.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
Carlone, H. B. (2004). The cultural production of science in reform-based physics: Girls’ access, participation, and resistance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 392–414. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20006
Carlone, H. B., Johnson, A., & Scott, C. M. (2015). Agency amidst formidable structures: How girls perform gender in science class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 474–488. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21224
Carlone, H. B., Scott, C. M., & Lowder, C. (2014). Becoming (less) scientific: A longitudinal study of students’ identity work from elementary to middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(7), 836–869. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21150
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Rathunde, K., & Whalen, S. (1997). Talented teenagers. Cambridge University Press.
Danielsson, A. T., Berge, M., & Lidar, M. (2018). Knowledge and power in the technology classroom: A framework for studying teachers and students in action. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 13(1), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-016-9782-0
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0959353505051728
Doerr, K. (2021). Is college science teaching women’s work? Gender inequity in the physical sciences [Doctoral dissertation]. The University of Texas at Austin.
Faulkner, W. (2007). ‘Nuts and bolts and people’: Gender-troubled engineering identities. Social Studies of Science, 37(3), 331–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0306312706072175
Faulkner, W. (2011). Gender (in)authenticity, belonging and identity work in engineering. Brussels Economic Review, 54(2/3), 277–293.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 301–316). Sage.
Foucault, M. (1997). Ethics: Subjectivity and truth (essential works 1954–1984) (P. Rabinow, Ed.). Penguin.
Gagné, F. (2011). Academic talent development and the equity issue in gifted education. Talent Development & Excellence, 3(1), 3–22.
Gale, T., & Tranter, D. (2011). Social justice in Australian higher education policy: An historical and conceptual account of student participation. Critical Studies in Education, 52(1), 29–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2011.536511
Gonsalves, A. J. (2014). “Physics and the girly girl - there is a contradiction somewhere”: Doctoral students’ positioning around discourses of gender and competence in physics. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(2), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-012-9447-6
Hartsmar, N., Leathwood, C., Ross, A., & Spinthourakis, J. (2021). Can educational programmes address social inequity? Some examples from Europe. In A. Ross (Ed.), Educational research for social justice (pp. 271–297). Springer.
Hasse, C. (2016). An anthropology of learning. Springer.
Holmegaard, H. T. (2020a). Complexity, negotiations, and processes: A longitudinal qualitative, narrative approach to young people’s transition to and from university. In N. E. Fenton & W. Ross (Eds.), Critical reflection on research in teaching and learning (pp. 107–130). Brill Sense.
Holmegaard, H. T. (2020b). Master students’ imagined futures. The interaction of students’ resources, narrative repertoires and their thoughts about postgraduate futures within selected STEM master programmes. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(7), 1217–1237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2020.1789213
Hughes, G. (2001). Exploring the availability of student scientist identities within curriculum discourse: An anti-essentialist approach to gender-inclusive science. Gender and Education, 13(3), 275–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250120063562
Jackson, C., & Nyström, A. S. (2015). ‘Smart students get perfect scores in tests without studying much’: Why is an effortless achiever identity attractive, and for whom is it possible? Research Papers in Education, 30(4), 393–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2014.970226
Keller, E. F. (1985). Reflections on gender and science. Yale University Press.
Kogan, M. (1997). Diversification in higher education: Differences and commonalities. Minerva, 35(1), 47–62.
Kvale, S. (2006). Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(3), 480–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F1077800406286235
Leathwood, C., & O’Connell, P. (2003). ‘It’s a struggle’: The construction of the ‘new student’ in higher education. Journal of Education Policy, 18(6), 597–615. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093032000145863
Liu, Y., Green, A., & Pensiero, N. (2016). Expansion of higher education and inequality of opportunities: A cross-national analysis. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 38(3), 242–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2016.1174407
Lucas, S. R. (2001). Effectively maintained inequality: Education transitions, track mobility, and social background effects. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1642–1690. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12074
Mansour, N. (2020). The dissonance between scientific evidence, diversity and dialogic pedagogy in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 42(2), 190–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1706114
Marginson, S. (2016). Global stratification in higher education. In S. Slaughter & B. Taylor (Eds.), Higher education, stratification, and workforce development (pp. 13–34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21512-9_2
Mensah, F. M., & Jackson, I. (2018). Whiteness as property in science teacher education. Teachers College Record, 120(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F016146811812000108
Ministry of Higher Education and Science. (2018, 9 March). Nye målsætninger for de videregående uddannelser [Press release] [New goals for higher education]. https://ufm.dk/aktuelt/pressemeddelelser/2018/nye-malsaetninger-for-de-videregaende-uddannelser-skal-geare-os-til-fremtiden/nye-malsaetninger-for-de-videregaende-uddannelser
Radnor, H., Koshy, V., & Taylor, A. (2007). Gifts, talents and meritocracy. Journal of Education Policy, 22(3), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930701269186
Rasmussen, A., & Rasmussen, P. (2015). Conceptions of student talent in the context of talent development. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 28(4), 476–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2014.916013
Read, B., Francis, B., & Robson, J. (2001). Playing safe’: Undergraduate essay writing and the presentation of the student ‘voice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(3), 387–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425690124289
Reay, D., Crozier, G., & Clayton, J. (2010). ‘Fitting in’ or ‘standing out’: Working-class students in UK higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902878925
Reimer, D., & Thomsen, J. P. (2019). Vertical and horizontal stratification in higher education. In R. Becker (Ed.), Research handbook on the sociology of education (pp. 308–328). Edward Elgar Publishing.
Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18(4), 510–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0891243204265269
Rienecker, L., Jørgensen, P. S., Dolin, J., & Ingerslev, G. H. (2015). University teaching and learning. Samfundslitteratur.
Rodgers, K. A., & Summers, J. J. (2008). African American students at predominantly white institutions: A motivational and self-systems approach to understanding retention. Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9072-9
Rose, N. (1998). Inventing our selves: Psychology, power, and personhood. Cambridge University Press.
Rottenberg, C. (2014). The rise of neoliberal feminism. Cultural Studies, 28(3), 418–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502386.2013.857361
Scager, K., Akkerman, S. F., Keesen, F., Mainhard, M. T., Pilot, A., & Wubbels, T. (2012). Do honors students have more potential for excellence in their professional lives? Higher Education, 64(1), 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9478-z
Scott, P. (1995). The meanings of mass higher education. Open University Press.
Scott, P. (2019). Trow’s elite-mass-universal triptych: Conceptualising higher education development. Higher Education Quarterly, 73(4), 496–506. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12224
Søndergaard, D. M. (2005). Making sense of gender, age, power and disciplinary position: Intersecting discourses in the academy. Feminism & Psychology, 15(2), 189–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/2F0959353505051728
Søndergaard, D. M. (2006). Tegnet på kroppen. Køn: koder og konstruktioner blandt unge voksne i akademia. Museum Tusculanum.
Staunæs, D. (2003). Where have all the subjects gone? Bringing together the concepts of intersectionality and subjectification. NORA: Nordic Journal of Women’s Studies, 11(2), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/08038740310002950
Taber, K. S. (Ed.). (2007). Science education for gifted learners. Routledge.
Thomas, K. (1990). Gender and subject in higher education. Society for Research into Higher Education.
Tonso, K. L. (1998, April 13–17). Engineering gender – gendering engineering: What about women in nerd-dom? [Conference presentation]. American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, US.
Trow, M. (2010). Twentieth-century higher education: Elite to mass to universal. John Hopkins University Press.
Wolfensberger, M. V. (2012). Teaching for excellence. Honors pedagogies revealed. Waxmann.
Wong, B., & Chiu, Y. L. T. (2020). University lecturers’ construction of the ‘ideal’undergraduate student. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2018.1504010
Wong, B., DeWitt, J., & Chiu, Y. L. T. (2021). Mapping the eight dimensions of the ideal student in higher education. Educational Review, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1909538
Wright, T. (2016). Women’s experience of workplace interactions in male-dominated work: The intersections of gender, sexuality and occupational group. Gender, Work and Organization, 23(3), 348–362. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12074
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Holmegaard, H.T., Johannsen, B.F. (2022). Science Talent and Unlimited Devotion: An Investigation of the Dynamics of University Students’ Science Identities Through the Lens of Gendered Conceptualisations of Talent. In: Holmegaard, H.T., Archer, L. (eds) Science Identities. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 12. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17642-5_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-17642-5_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-17641-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-17642-5
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)