Skip to main content

Surveying the Public: Revisiting Mathematics and English Stereotypes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Diversity in Mathematics Education

Part of the book series: Mathematics Education Library ((MELI))

Abstract

Historically, mathematics has been viewed as a male domain and English as a female domain. In the longer term, female exclusion from mathematics and male exclusion from English because of societal expectations can only be detrimental to the diversity and creativity of the nation’s future citizenry. In Australia, national achievement data indicate that males outperform females in mathematics, and females do better than males in English. Grade 12 high stakes testing data from Victoria, Australia, show that more males than females achieve the highest grades in the most challenging mathematics subject offered and also for English literature. The social milieu and societal beliefs are included as contributing factors in explanatory models of gender differences in mathematics learning. The views of stakeholders in children’s learning (students, parents, teachers, educational leaders, etc.) are frequently sought: rarely, however, are the views of the general public gauged. Thus, we were interested to know if Australians held stereotyped views about mathematics and English. We report the findings from two online surveys—one focussing on mathematics, the other on English. Members of the general public aged 18 and over were recruited using the social media site, Facebook. Our findings indicate that many in this group do not gender stereotype mathematics or English. Among those who do, however, the traditional stereotypes persist. Thus challenges remain to counter such stereotyping and enhance the perception, and reality, of mathematics as an inclusive field appropriate for all.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this chapter, we use “sex differences” when it is clear that categorisation is only based on biological factors. “Gender differences” are used when psycho-social or socio-cultural factors may contribute to any difference found.

  2. 2.

    Middle age is defined by both the Oxford and Collins dictionary as starting around the age of 40. We have therefore chosen 40, somewhat arbitrarily, as the age to discriminate between older and younger participants.

References

  • Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (n.d.). Australian curriculum—English. http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/English/Rationale. Accessed 19 June 2014.

  • Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2009). Shape of the Australian curriculum: Mathematics. http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Australian_Curriculum_-_Maths.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2014.

  • Bhanot, R., & Jovanovic, J. (2005). Do parents’ academic gender stereotypes influence whether they intrude on their children’s homework? Sex Roles, 52(9/10), 597–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Labour and Mattingly Advertising. (1989). Summary of two stage campaign evaluation study. Girls’ career and subject choice. Melbourne: Department of Labour and Mattingly Advertising.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forgasz, H. J., & Leder, G. C. (1996). Mathematics and English: Stereotyped domains? Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 18, 129–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forgasz, H. J., & Leder, G. C. (2011). Equity and quality of mathematics education: Research and media portrayals. In B. Atweh, M. Graven, W. Secada, & P. Valero (Eds.), Mapping equity and quality in mathematics education (pp. 205–222). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forgasz, H. J., Leder, G. C., & Taylor, C. (2007). Research versus the media: Mixed or single-gender settings? Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education. http://www.aare.edu.au/07pap/for07148.pdf.

  • Forgasz, H., Leder, G., & Tan, H. (2011). Facebook and gendered views of ICT. In S. Barton, J. Hedberg, & K. Suzuki (Eds.), Proceedings of global learn Asia Pacific 2011 (pp. 1718–1727). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education [AACE]. http://www.editlib.org/p/37393.

  • Geist, E. A., & King, M. (2008). Different, not better: Gender differences in mathematics learning and achievement. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(1), 43–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, S. H., & 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 

  • Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: AAUW. http://www.aauw.org/learn/research/upload/whysofew.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leder, G. C. (1992). Mathematics and gender: Changing perspectives. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 597–622). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leder, G. C. (2011). Commentary 1 on feminist pedagogy and mathematics. In B. Sriraman & L. English (Eds.), Theories of mathematics education: Seeking new frontiers (pp. 447–454). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leder, G. C., & Forgasz, H. J. (2010). I liked it till Pythagoras: The public’s views of mathematics. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education. Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 328–335). Fremantle: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leder, G. C., & Forgasz, H. J. (2011). The public’s views on gender and the learning of mathematics: Does age matter? In J. Clark, B. Kissane, J. Mousley, T. Spencer, & S. Thornton (Eds.), Mathematics: Traditions and [new] practices (pp. 446–454). Adelaide: AAMT and MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Logan, S., & Johnston, R. (2009). Gender differences in reading ability and attitudes: Examining where these differences lie. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(2), 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, D. M., & Fugitt, J. (May 2007). The perception of math and math education in the rural Mid West. Appalachian collaborative center for learning, assessment, and instruction in Mathematics. Working Paper No. 37. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/33/5b/c3.pdf.

  • McAnalley, K. (1991). Encouraging parents to stop pigeon-holing their daughters: The “Maths multiplies your choices” campaign. Victorian Institute of Educational Research Bulletin, 66, 29–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powlishta, K. K. (2002). Measures and models of gender differentiation. In L. S. Liben & R. Bigler (Eds.), The developmental course of gender differentiation: Conceptuality, measuring and evaluating constructs and pathways. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 67(2), 167–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sam, U. C., & Ernest, P. (28 Feb 1998) A survey of public images of mathematics. Paper presented at British society for research into learning Mathematics. http://www.bsrlm.org.uk/IPs/ip18-12/index.html.

  • Steinke, J. (1998). Theory into practice: Connecting theory and practice: Women scientist role models in television programming. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42(1), 142–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiedemann, J. (2000). Parents’ gender stereotypes and teachers’ beliefs as predictors of children’s concept of their mathematical ability in elementary school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 144–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, S., De Bortoli, L., Nicholas, M., Hillman, K., & Buckley, S. (2011). Challenges for Australian education: Results from PISA 2009. Melbourne: ACER. http://www.acer.edu.au/ documents/PISA-2009-Report.pdf.

  • van Egmond, M., Baxter, J., Buchler, S., & Western, M. (2010). A stalled revolution. Gender role attitudes in Australia, 1986–2005. Journal of Population Research. http://www.springerlink.com/ content/83t4k56g58866h43/fulltext.pdf.

  • Watson, A., Kehler, M., & Martino, W. (2010). The problem of boys’ literacy underachievement: Raising some questions. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 53(5), 356–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helen Forgasz .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Forgasz, H., Leder, G. (2015). Surveying the Public: Revisiting Mathematics and English Stereotypes. In: Bishop, A., Tan, H., Barkatsas, T. (eds) Diversity in Mathematics Education. Mathematics Education Library. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05978-5_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics