Abstract
This article explores howstudents’aspirations to study mathematics or physics in post-16 education are associated with their perceptions of their education, their motivations, and the support they feel they received. The analysis is based on the responses of around 10,000 students in England in Year 8 (age 12–13) and then in Year 10 (age 14–15). The students were first surveyed during 2008–2009 and then followed up in 2010–2011. t-tests revealed a decline in their perceptions of their mathematics and physics education. Factor analyses indicated subject-specific constructs that were associated with gender aspiration groups (i.e., high-aspiring girls, high-aspiring boys, low-aspiring girls, lowaspiring boys). High-aspiring girls were more likely than low-aspiring boys to be positive about mathematics/physics education, motivation in these subjects, and support received. However, high-aspiring girls were less likely than high-aspiring boys to be encouraged by their teachers and families to continue with these subjects post-16 and had lower self-concepts, intrinsic valuations, and perceptions of lessons. Low-aspiring girls reported the least favorable views of their mathematics/physics education of all four gender aspiration groups. Findingswere generally similar for mathematics and physics, although students overall responded more favorably to mathematics than to physics. The quantitative findings are illustrated with extracts from longitudinal interviews (ages 15, 16, and 17) of two high-aspiring girls
Résumé
Cet article se penche sur les liens qui existent entre d’une part la volonté d’étudier les mathématiques ou la physique chez les étudiants de 16 ans et plus, et d’autre part la perception qu’ont ces étudiants de leur formation, leurs motivations et le soutien qu’ils estiment avoir reçu. L’analyse se base sur les réponses d’environ 10 000 étudiants de 8e année (12–13 ans), puis de nouveau lorsqu’ils étaient en 10e année (14–15 ans), en Angleterre. Le premier sondage a été effectué en 2008–2009, et le second en 2010–2011. Les tests t montrent qu’il y a eu un déclin dans leur perception de leur formation en mathématiques et en physique. Les analyses factorielles indiquent la présence de construits spécifiques liés à des groupes classés en fonction de leur sexe et de leur niveau d’aspirations (filles hautement motivées, garçons hautement motivés, filles peu motivées, garçons peu motivés). Les filles hautement motivées avaient plus souvent une meilleure opinion de leur formation en mathématiques et en physique, de leur motivation dans ces sujets et du soutien qu’elles avaient reçu, comparativement au groupe des garçons peu motivés. Cependant, les filles plus motivées avaient moins de probabilités d’être encouragées par leurs enseignants et leur famille à poursuivre une formation dans ces sujets que les garçons hautement motivés, et elles avaient également une moins bonne image d’elles-mêmes, une évaluation intrinsèque plus basse et une moins bonne perception des leçons. Des quatre groupes, c’est dans le celui des filles peu motivées qu’on trouve la perception la moins favorable de leur formation en mathématiques et en physique. Les résultats se sont généralement avérés comparables pour les mathématiques et la physique, même si, dans l’ensemble, les réponses des étudiants étaient plus positives à l’égard des mathématiques que de la physique. Les résultats quantitatifs sont illustrés au moyen d’extraits provenant d’entrevues longitudinales avec deux répondantes provenant du groupe des filles hautement motivées (soit à 15, 16 et 17 ans).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). Science aspirations, capital, and family habitus: How families shape children’s engagement and identifcation with science. American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 881–908.
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2012). “Balancing acts”: Elementary school girls’ negotiations of femininity, achievement, and science. Science Education, 96(6), 967–989.
Archer, L., DeWitt, J., Osborne, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2013). “Not girly, not sexy, not glamorous”: Primary school girls’ and parents’ constructions of science aspirations. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 21(1), 171–194.
Asante, K. O. (2012). Secondary students’ attitudes towards mathematics. Ife Psychologia, 20, 121–123.
Bennett, J., Lubben, F., & Hogarth, S. (2006). Bringing science to life: A synthesis of the research evidence on the efects of context-based and STS approaches to science teaching. Science Education, 91, 347–370.
Boaler, J. (2009). The elephant in the classroom: Teaching students to learn and love maths. London, England: Souvenir Press.
Brandell, G., & Staberg, E.-M. (2008). Mathematics: A female, male or gender-neutral domain? A study of attitudes among students at secondary level. Gender and Education, 20(5), 495–509.
Cann, R. (2009). Girls’ participation in post-16 mathematics: A view from pupils in Wales. Gender and Education, 21(6), 651–669.
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. (2009). Higher ambitions: The future of universities in a knowledge economy. London, England: Author. Retrieved from https://doi.org/webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/www.bis.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/publications/Higher-Ambitions.pdf
Goldberg, G. L., & Roswell, B. S. (2002). Reading, writing and gender: Instructional strategies and classroom activities that work for girls and boys. London, England: Eye on Education.
Guzzeti, B. J., & Williams, W. O. (1996). Gender, text and discussion: Examining intellectual safety in the science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(1), 5–20.
Homer, M., Ryder, J., & Donnelly, J. (2013). Sources of diferential participation rates in school science: The impact of curriculum reform. British Educational Research Journal, 39, 248–265.
Institute of Physics. (2015). Opening doors: A guide to good practice in countering gender stereotyping in schools. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.iop.org/publications/iop/2015/fle_66429.pdf
Joint Council for Qualifcations. (2014a). A, AS and AEA results summer 2014. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.jcq.org.uk/examination-results/a-levels/2014/a-as-and-aea-results-summer-2014.
Joint Council for Qualifcations. (2014b). Results: 2011. Retrieved from https://doi.org/www.jcq.org.uk/examination-results/gcses/2014/gcse-and-entry-level-certifcate-results-summer-2014.
Leedy, M. G., LaLonde, D., & Runk, K. (2003). Gender equity in mathematics: Beliefs of students, parents, and teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 103(6), 285–292.
Lovelace, M., & Brickman, P. (2013). Best practices for measuring students’ attitudes toward learning science. CBE — Life Sciences Education, 12, 606–617.
Mendick, H. (2006). Masculinities in mathematics. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2013a). A survey of psychological, motivational, family and perceptions of physics education factors that explain 15-source-old students’ aspirations to study post-compulsory physics in English schools. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 371–393.
Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2013b).What sort of girl wants to study physics after the age of 16? Findings from a large-scale UK survey. International Journal of Science Education, 35(17), 2979–2998. doi:10.1080/09500693.2012.681076
Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2016). Girls in the UK have similar reasons to boys for intending to study mathematics post-16 thanks to the support and encouragement they receive. London Review of Education, 14, 66–81. doi:10.18546/LRE.14.2.05
Mujtaba, T., Reiss, M. J., Rodd, M., & Simon, S. (2015). Methodological issues in mathematics education research when exploring issues around participation and engagement. In J. A. Middleton, J. Cai, & S. Hwang (Eds.), Design, results, and implications of large-scale studies in mathematics education (pp. 335–362). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2005). Primary science in the UK: A scoping study. Final report to the Wellcome Trust. London, England: Wellcome Trust.
Noyes, A. (2003). Mathematics learning trajectories: Class, capital and conflict. Research in Mathematics Education, 5(1), 139–153.
Osborne, J. F., & Collins, S. (2000). Pupils’ and parents’ views of the school science curriculum. London, England: King’s College London.
Paechter, C. (2001). Gender, reason and emotion in secondary mathematics classrooms. In P. Gates (Ed.), Issues in mathematics teaching (pp. 51–63). London, England: Routledge-Falmer.
Randall, G. J. (1987). Gender differences in pupil-teacher interaction in workshops and laboratories. In G. Weiner & M. Arnot (Eds.), Gender under scrutiny: New inquiries in education (pp. 163–172). London, England: Hutchinson.
Reiss, M. J. (2004). Students’ attitudes towards science: A long term perspective. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(1), 97–109.
Reiss, M. J., Hoyles, C., Mujtaba, T., Riazi-Farzad, B., Rodd, M., Simon, S., & Stylianidou, F. (2011). Understanding participation rates in post-16 mathematics and physics: Conceptualising and operationalising the UPMAP Project. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(2), 273–302.
The Royal Society. (2011). A “state of the nation” report on preparing the transfer from school and college science and mathematics education to UK STEM higher education. London, England: Author.
Sjoberg, S., & Schreiner, C. (2005). How do learners in different cultures relate to science and technology? Results and perspectives from the project ROSE (the Relevance of Science Education). Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 1–17.
Smail, B. (2000). Has the mountain moved? The girls into science and technology project 19792-83. In K. Myers (Ed.), Whatever happened to equal opportunities in schools? (pp. 143–155). Buckingham, England, and Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Smith, E. (2011).Women into science and engineering? Gendered participation in higher education STEM subjects. British Educational Research Journal, 37(6), 993–1014.
Zohar, A., & Bronshtein, B. (2005). Physics teachers’ knowledge and beliefs regarding girls’ low participation rates in advanced physics classes. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 61–77.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mujtaba, T., Reiss, M.J. “I Fall Asleep in Class …But Physics Is Fascinating”: The Use of Large-Scale Longitudinal Data to Explore the Educational Experiences of Aspiring Girls in Mathematics and Physics. Can J Sci Math Techn 16, 313–330 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1235743
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2016.1235743