Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Achieving Gender Equity: A Case for Science Education in India

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Gender Equity: Challenges and Opportunities

  • 491 Accesses

Abstract

Gender equity in science education entails that all students of any sex, regardless of their culture, caste, disability, linguistic and ethnic background, be given the required support to become successful in learning science and eventually aspiring to do science in future. In this paper, an analytical framework is used based on the feminist critique of science. It has been seen that girls despite showing high levels of interest in studying science take fewer science courses in colleges. This paper discusses three approaches to accomplish gender equity in science. These three different approaches are based on understanding the role of gender in shaping students’ approaches to science education. These approaches are gender neutral science education on the premise of equality feminism, female-friendly science education based on difference feminism and gender-sensitive science education on the premise of postmodern feminism. It also discusses a few strategies to accomplish gender equity in Indian science classrooms. Also, examples are elucidated from the NCERT science textbooks of 6th and 8th classes for the science teachers to inculcate these ideas while teaching in the classroom to cater to the issue of gender inequity in an Indian science classroom.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nedha. 2011. Difference Between Equity and Equality: Key Difference—Equity vs Equality. Retrieved from file:///D:/DESK3/CONCORDIA/ASSIGNMENTS/COURSE3-EDGR595 Community%20of%20Learners/week1/Equity%20Matters%20(1).pdf . Accessed on 13 October 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Elizabeth, Wood, Martin Levinson, Keith Postlethwaite, and Alison Black. 2011. Equity Matters. Education International: University of Exeter. Retrieved from file:///D:/DESK3/CONCORDIA/ASSIGNMENTS/COURSE3-EDGR595-Community%20of%20Learners/week1/Equity%20Matters%20(1).pdf. Accessed on 20 September 2020. Accessed on 20 September 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gorard, Stephen, and Emma Smith. 2004. An international comparison of equity in education systems. School Comparative Education 40(1):15–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305006042000184863

  4. Patricia, Murphy, and Elizabeth Whitelegg. 2006. Girls and physics: Continuing barriers to ‘belonging’. The Curriculum Journal 17. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170600909753

  5. Nancy. W. Brickhouse, Patricia Lowery, and Katherine Schultz. 2000. What kind of a girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5):441–458. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200005)37:5<441: AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-3

  6. Sadler, P.M., Gerhard Sonnert, Zahra Hazari, and Robert Tai. 2012. Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: A gender study. Science Education 96 (3): 411–427. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang, M.T., and Jessica Degol. 2013. Motivational pathways to STEM career choices: Using expectancy–value perspective to understand individual and gender differences in STEM fields. Developmental Review 33: 304–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2013.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Aschbacher, P.R., Erika Li, and Ellen J. Roth. 2010. Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 47 (5): 564–582. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Astrid, Sinnes. 2006. Three Approaches to Gender Equity in Science Education. Nordina: Nordic Studies in Science Education. 3. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.451.10.5617/nordina.451

  10. Harding, Sandra. 1993. Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity”? In Feminist Epistemologies, ed. Linda Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter, 49–82. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1987. Feminism and science. In Sex and Scientific Inquiry, ed. Sandra Harding and Jean F. O’Barr, 233–246. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Calabrese Barton, A. 1998. Feminist Science Education. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  13. V. Howes, Elaine. 2002. Connecting Girls and Science. Constructivism, Feminism, and Education Reform. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Harding, Sandra. 1986. The Science Question in Feminism. Buckingham: Open University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/027046768600600481.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Census. 2011. Primary Census Abstracts, Registrar General of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, Available at: http://www.censusindia.gov

  16. Nash, K. 2000. Equality and difference. In Encylopedia of Feminist Theories, ed. Lorraine Code, 174–176. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203195598

  17. S. Franklin. 2000. Science. In Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories, ed. Lorraine Code, London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203195598

  18. Rosemarie, Tong. 2000. Cultural feminism. In Encylopedia of Feminist Theories, ed. Lorraine Code, 113–115. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203195598

  19. Harding, Sandra. 1998. Is Science Multicultural? Postcolonialisms, Feminisms, and Epistemologies. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0887536700010175.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Rosser, S.V. 1990. Female friendly science. Applying women’s studies methods and theories to attract students. New York: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Harding, Sandra. 1992. How the women’s movement benefits science: Two views. In Inventing women. Science, technology and gender, eds. G. Kirkup, & L. S. Keller, 57–72. Cambridge: Polity Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-5395(89)80005-6

  22. Shiva, Vandana. 2001. Democratizing biology. Reinventing biology from a feminist, ecological and Third World perspective. In The gender and science reader, eds. Ingrid Bartsch and Muriel Lederman, 447–465. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  23. McPherson, Kathryn. 2000. First-wave/second-wave feminism. In Encylopedia of feminist theories, ed. Lorraine Code, 208–210. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203195598

  24. Haraway, Donna. 2003. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Feminist theory reader. Local and global perspectives, eds. Carole R. McCann, Seung-kyung Kim, Emek Ergun, 391–403. (Original work published in 1988). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003001201

  25. Haraway, Donna. 1989. Primate visions. Gender, race and nature in the world of modern science. London and New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kenway, Jane, and Annette Gough. 1998. Gender and science education in schools: A review “with attitude.” Studies in Science Education 31: 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269808560110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Eisenhart, Margaret A., and Elizabeth Finkel. 2001. Women need (still) not apply. In The gender and science reader, ed. Ingrid Bartsch and Muriel Lederman, 13–23. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education, University of Delhi, Delhi, India

    Neha Yadav

Authors
  1. Neha Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT), Surat, India

    Vasundhara Mahajan

  2. Department of Electrical Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT), Surat, India

    Anandita Chowdhury

  3. Department of Applied Mathematics and Humanities, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT), Surat, India

    Urvashi Kaushal

  4. Department of Civil Engineering, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT), Surat, Gujarat, India

    Namrta Jariwala

  5. School of Arts & Social Sciences, Monash University, Selangor, Malaysia

    Sharon A. Bong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Yadav, N. (2022). Achieving Gender Equity: A Case for Science Education in India. In: Mahajan, V., Chowdhury, A., Kaushal, U., Jariwala, N., Bong, S.A. (eds) Gender Equity: Challenges and Opportunities. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0460-8_34

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation