Abstract
Although substantial gender differences in motivation, engagement and enrolment behaviour are frequently reported in the international physics education literature, the majority of studies focus on students who intend to choose physics for their future study. The present multi-occasional study examines the gender difference in motivation, engagement and enrolment behaviour among senior secondary students from New South Wales schools who have already chosen to study physics. It examines whether the differences reflect differences of degree in these dimensions, or differences of kind for these students. Fine-grained analyses at module-specific level of the senior secondary physics curriculum indicated that the differences do not represent differences of kind. That is, girls’ and boys’ perceptions of the key facets of motivation, sustained engagement and choice intentions in relation to physics seemed to be qualitatively the same. However, there were differences in the degree to which boys and girls are motivated, although the pattern was inconsistent across the four modules of the senior secondary physics curriculum. Girls’ motivation, engagement and sustained enrolment plans in relation to physics were found equal to or higher than boys’ at various time points through the course. These findings highlight the need to change the existing gender-biased stereotype that students perceive physics as a male domain and that subjective motivation, engagement and enrolment plans will always report higher measures for males. The results have implications for intervention strategies aimed at sustaining student motivation in physics. The potential implications of the findings for practitioners and researchers are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Angell, C., Guttersrud, Ø., Henriksen, E. K., & Isnes, A. (2004). Physics: frightful, but fun. Pupils’ and teachers’ views of physics and physics teaching. Science Education, 88(5), 683–706. doi:10.1002/sce.10141.
Baker, D., & Leary, R. (1995). Letting girls speak out about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 3–27. doi:10.1002/tea.3660320104.
Barmby, P., & Defty, N. (2006). Secondary school pupils’ perceptions of physics. Research in Science & Technological Education, 24(2), 199–215.
Barnes, G. R. (1999). A motivational model of enrolment intentions in senior secondary science courses in New South Wales Schools. Doctoral dissertation, University of Western Sydney, Macarthur.
Barnes, G., McInerney, D. M., & Marsh, H. W. (2005). Exploring sex differences in science enrolment intentions: an application of the general model of academic choice. Australian Educational Researcher, 32(2), 1–24.
Blickenstaff. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17(4), 369–386.
Bodkin-Andrews, G., O‘Rourke, V., Grant, R., Denson, N., & Craven, R. G. (2010). Validating racism and cultural respect: testing the psychometric properties and educational impact of perceived discrimination and multiculturation for indigenous and non-indigenous students. Educational Research and Evaluation, 16(6), 471–493.
Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modelling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
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. doi:10.1002/tea.20006.
Cavas, P., Cavas, B., Yılmaz, H., & Kesercioglu, T. (2010). What I want to learn about physics topics: a general picture of Turkish Rose Survey. Paper presented at the XIV IOSTE Symposium, Socio-cultural and Human Values in Science and Technology Education, Bled, Slovenia. http://files.ecetera.si/IOSTE/805.pdf.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255.
Cousins, A. (2007). Gender inclusivity in secondary chemistry: a study of male and female participation in secondary school chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 29(6), 711–730.
DeBacker, T. K., & Nelson, R. M. (1999). Variations on an expectancy-value model of motivation in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(2), 71–94. doi:10.1006/ceps.1998.0984.
DeBacker, T. K., & Nelson, R. M. (2000). Motivation to learn science: differences related to gender, class type, and ability. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(4), 245–254.
Eccles, J. S. (1994). Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices: applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18(4), 585–609. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01049.x.
Eccles, J. S. (2008). Can middle school reform increase high school graduation rates? California Dropout Research Project Report #12.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: the structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 215–225. doi:10.1177/0146167295213003.
Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., et al. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75–146). San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
Eccles, J., Barber, B., Updegraff, K., & O‘Brien, K. (1998). An expectancy-value model of achievement choices: the role of ability self-concepts, perceived task utility, and interest in predicting activity choice and course enrolment. In A. Krapp, A. Renninger & J. Baumert (Eds.), Interest and learning: proceedings of the Seeon conference on interest and learning (pp. 267–279): Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel (IPN).
Eccles, J., O’Neill, S., & Wigfield, A. (2005). Ability self-perceptions and subjective task values in adolescents and children. In K. A. Moore & L. H. Lippman (Eds.), What do children need to flourish? (Vol. 3, pp. 237–249). US: Springer.
Elwood, J., & Comber, C. (1996). Gender differences in examinations at 18+: final report. London: Institute of Education.
Enman, M., & Lupart, J. (2000). Talented female students’ resistance to science: an exploratory study of post-secondary achievement motivation, persistence, and epistemological characteristics. High Ability Studies, 11, 161–178.
Feder, T. (2002). Women, and some men, ask why women don't flock to physics. Physics Today, 55(5), 24–26.
Frost, S., Reiss, M., & Frost, J. (2005). Count me in! Gender and minority ethnic attainment in school science. School Science Review, 86(316), 105–112.
Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. London: Edward Arnold.
Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2001). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
Greene, B. A., De Backer, T. K., Ravindran, B., & Krows, A. J. (1999). Goals, values, and beliefs as predictors of achievement and effort in high school mathematics classes. Sex Roles, 40(5), 421–458. doi:10.1023/a:1018871610174.
Häussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2000). A curricular frame for physics education: development, comparison with students’ interests, and impact on students’ achievement and self-concept. Science Education, 84(6), 689–705. doi:10.1002/1098-237x(200011)84:6<689::aid-sce1>3.0.co;2-l.
Hoffmann, L. (2002). Promoting girls’ interest and achievement in physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12(4), 447–465. doi:10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00010-x.
Hollins, M., Murphy, P., Ponchaud, B., & Whitelegg, E. L. (2006). Girls in the physics classroom: a guide for teachers. London: Institute of Physics.
Ivie, R., & Stowe, K. (2000). Women in Physics, 2000. College Park, MD: AIP.
Ivie, R., Czujko, R., & Stowe, K. (2002). Women physicists speak: the 2001 International study of Women in physics. Melville: American Institute of Physics, Statistical Research Center.
Jones, M. G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students’ experiences, interests, and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84(2), 180–192. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-237x(200003)84:2<180::aid-sce3>3.0.co;2-x.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1996). LISREL 8: structural equation modelling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
Jozefowicz, D. M., Barber, B. L., & Eccles, J. S. (1993). Adolescent work-related values and beliefs: gender differences and relation to occupational aspirations. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research on Child Development, New Orleans.
Lyons, T. (2006). The puzzle of falling enrolments in physics and chemistry courses: putting some pieces together. Research in Science Education, 36(3), 285–311. doi:10.1007/s11165-005-9008-z.
Lyons, T., & Quinn, F. (2010). Choosing science: understanding the declines in senior high school science enrolments. Research report to the Australian Science Teachers Association. Armidale, New South Wales: UNE: Association.
Marsh, H. W. (1994). Confirmatory factor analysis models of factorial invariance: a multifaceted approach. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1(1), 5–34.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & Hau, K. T. (1996). An evaluation of incremental fit indices: a clarification of mathematical and empirical processes. In G. A. Marcoulides & R. E. Schumacker (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: issues and techniques (pp. 315–353). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marsh, H. W., Tracey, D. K., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Multidimensional self-concept structure for preadolescents with mild intellectual disabilities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(5), 795–818. doi:10.1177/0013164405285910.
Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Muthén, B., Asparouhov, T., Morin, A. J. S., & Trautwein, U. (2009). A new look at the Big Five factor structure through exploratory structural equation modeling. UK: Oxford University.
Martin, A. J. (2004). School motivation of boys and girls: differences of degree, differences of kind, or both? Australian Journal of Psychology, 56(3), 133–146. doi:10.1080/00049530412331283363.
Mullis, I. V. S., & Jenkins, L., B. (1988). The science report card: elements of risk and recovery. Trends and achievement based on the 1986 National Assessment. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Murphy, P., & Whitelegg, E. (2006). Girls and physics: continuing barriers to ‘belonging’. Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 281–305.
Osborne, J. F., & Collins, S. (2000). Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum. London: King’s College London.
Rennie, L., & Parker, L. (1996). Placing physics problems in real-life context: students’ reactions and performance. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 42(1), 55–59.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmailion in the classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Seymour, E. (1995). The loss of women from science, mathematics, and engineering undergraduate majors: an explanatory account. Science Education, 79(4), 437–473. doi:10.1002/sce.3730790406.
Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N. M. (1997). Talking about leaving: why undergraduates leave the sciences? Boulder: Westview Press.
Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 323–332.
Speering, W., & Rennie, L. (1996). Students’ perceptions about science: the impact of transition from primary to secondary school. Research in Science Education, 26(3), 283–298. doi:10.1007/bf02356940.
Stokking, K. M. (2000). Predicting the choice of physics in secondary education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(12), 1261–1283.
Stumpf, H., & Stanley, J. C. (1996). Gender-related differences on the college board’s advanced placement and achievement tests, 1982–1992. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 353–364.
Whitelegg, E., Murphy, P., & Hart, C. (2007). Girls and physics: dilemmas and tensions. In R. Pintó & D. Couso (Eds.), Contributions from science education research (pp. 27–36). The Netherlands: Springer.
Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation: a developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6(1), 49–78. doi:10.1007/bf02209024.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: a theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12(3), 265–310. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(92)90011-p.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1015.
Willms, J. D., (2003). Student engagement at school: a sense of belonging and participation. Results from PISA 2000: OECD.
Woods, C. (2008). Factors predicting high ability girls’ enrolment in year 11 and 12 physics and intermediate mathematics in regional and rural North Queensland. Paper presented at the AARE Conference, Brisbane.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Abraham, J., Barker, K. Exploring Gender Difference in Motivation, Engagement and Enrolment Behaviour of Senior Secondary Physics Students in New South Wales. Res Sci Educ 45, 59–73 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9413-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9413-2