- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Editors' Suggestion
  • Open Access

Group roles in unstructured labs show inequitable gender divide

Katherine N. Quinn1,2, Michelle M. Kelley3, Kathryn L. McGill4, Emily M. Smith5, Zachary Whipps6, and N. G. Holmes3

  • 1Center for the Physics of Biological Function, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, USA
  • 2Initiative for the Theoretical Sciences, CUNY Graduate Center, New York, New York 10016, USA
  • 3Laboratory of Atomic and Solid State Physics, Department of Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA
  • 4Department of Physics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA
  • 5Department of Physics, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado 80401, USA
  • 6Department of Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010129 – Published 26 May, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010129

Abstract

Instructional labs are being transformed to better reflect authentic scientific practice, often by removing aspects of pedagogical structure to support student agency and decision making. We explored how these changes impact men’s and women’s participation in group work associated with labs through clustering methods on the quantified behavior of students. We compared the group roles students take on in two different types of instructional settings: (i) highly structured traditional labs, and (ii) less structured inquiry-based labs. Students working in groups in the inquiry-based (less structured) labs assumed different roles within their groups, however men and women systematically took on different roles and men behaved differently when in single- versus mixed-gender groups. We found no such systematic differences in role division among male and female students in the traditional (highly structured) labs. Students in the inquiry-based labs were not overtly assigned these roles, indicating that the inequitable division of roles was not a result of explicit assignment. Our results highlight the importance of structuring equitable group dynamics in educational settings, as a gendered division of roles can emerge without active intervention. As the culture in physics evolves to remove systematic gender biases in the field, instructors in educational settings must not only remove explicitly biased aspects of curricula but also take active steps to ensure that potentially discriminatory aspects are not inadvertently reinforced.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (60)

  1. H. Pettersson, Making masculinity in plasma physics: Machines, labour and experiments, Science & Technology Studies 24, 1 (2011).
  2. R. Scherr, Never mind the gap: Gender-related research in Physical Review Physics Education Research, 2005–2016, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020003(E) (2016).
  3. A. Madsen, S. B. McKagan, and E. C. Sayre, Gender gap on concept inventories in physics: What is consistent, what is inconsistent, and what factors influence the gap?, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 9, 020121 (2013).
  4. S. Andersson and A. Johansson, Gender gap or program gap? Students’ negotiations of study practice in a course in electromagnetism, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020112 (2016).
  5. L. J. Sax, G. Holton, V. Van Horne, I. Nair, C. Davis, A. Ginorio, C. Hollenshead, B. Lazarus, and P. Rayman, Undergraduate science majors: Gender differences in who goes to graduate school, Rev. High. Educ. 24, 153 (2001).
  6. S. L. Eddy and S. E. Brownell, Beneath the numbers: A review of gender disparities in undergraduate education across science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020106 (2016).
  7. K. Rosa and F. M. Mensah, Educational pathways of Black women physicists: Stories of experiencing and overcoming obstacles in life, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020113 (2016).
  8. J. M. Nissen and J. T. Shemwell, Gender, experience, and self-efficacy in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020105 (2016).
  9. Z. Y. Kalender, E. Marshman, C. D. Schunn, T. J. Nokes-Malach, and C. Singh, Gendered patterns in the construction of physics identity from motivational factors, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020119 (2019).
  10. K. L. Lewis, J. G. Stout, S. J. Pollock, N. D. Finkelstein, and T. A. Ito, Fitting in or opting out: A review of key social-psychological factors influencing a sense of belonging for women in physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020110 (2016).
  11. P. W. Irving and E. C. Sayre, Identity statuses in upper-division physics students, Cult. Stud. Sci. Educ. 11, 1155 (2016).
  12. Z. Y. Kalender, E. Marshman, C. D. Schunn, T. J. Nokes-Malach, and C. Singh, Why female science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors do not identify with physics: They do not think others see them that way, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020148 (2019).
  13. P. W. Irving and E. C. Sayre, Becoming a physicist: The roles of research, mindsets, and milestones in upper-division student perceptions, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 11, 020120 (2015).
  14. E. Wenger, R. A. McDermott, and W. Snyder, Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge (Harvard Business Press, 2002) p. 284.
  15. A. J. Gonsalves, A. Danielsson, and H. Pettersson, Masculinities and experimental practices in physics: The view from three case studies, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020120 (2016).
  16. B. Francis, L. Archer, J. Moote, J. DeWitt, E. MacLeod, and L. Yeomans, The construction of physics as a quintessentially masculine subject: Young people’s perceptions of gender issues in access to physics, Sex Roles 76, 156 (2017).
  17. S. L. Li and D. Demaree, Assessing physics learning identity: Survey development and validation, AIP Conf. Proc. 1413, 247 (2012).
  18. J. Stake and S. Nickens, Adolescent girls’ and boys’ science peer relationships and perceptions of the possible self as scientist, Sex Roles 52, 1 (2005).
  19. E. W. Close, J. Conn, and H. G. Close, Becoming physics people: Development of integrated physics identity through the Learning Assistant experience, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010109 (2016).
  20. R. Lock, J. Castillo, Z. Hazari, and G. Potvin, Proceedings of the 2015 Physics Education Research Conference, College Park, MD (AIP, New York, 2015), pp. 199–202.
  21. Z. Hazari, E. Brewe, R. M. Goertzen, and T. Hodapp, The importance of high school physics teachers for female students’ physics identity and persistence, Phys. Teach. 55, 96 (2017).
  22. A. T. Danielsson and C. Linder, Learning in physics by doing laboratory work: towards a new conceptual framework, Gender Educ. 21, 129 (2009).
  23. American Association of Physics Teachers, AAPT Recommendations for the Undergraduate Physics Laboratory Curriculum, Tech. Rep. (American Association of Physics Teachers, College Park, PA, 2014), https://www.aapt.org/Resources/upload/LabGuidlinesDocument_EBendorsed_nov10.pdf.
  24. N. W. Brickhouse, Embodying science: A feminist perspective on learning, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 38, 282 (2001).
  25. L. Archer, J. Moote, B. Francis, J. DeWitt, and L. Yeomans, The “Exceptional” physics girl: A sociological analysis of multimethod data from young women aged 10–16 to explore gendered patterns of post-16 participation, Am. Educ. Res. J. 54, 88 (2017).
  26. H. B. Carlone and A. Johnson, Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 44, 1187 (2007).
  27. J. Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Routledge, New York, 1999).
  28. D. Doucette, R. Clark, and C. Singh, Hermione and the Secretary: how gendered task division in introductory physics labs can disrupt equitable learning, Eur. J. Phys. 41, 035702 (2020).
  29. P. Heller, R. Keith, and S. Anderson, Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving, Am. J. Phys. 60, 627 (1992).
  30. J. P. Adams, G. Brissenden, R. S. Lindell, T. F. Slater, and J. Wallace, Observations of student behavior in collaborative learning groups, Astron. Educ. Rev. 1, 25 (2002).
  31. S. L. Eddy, S. E. Brownell, and M. P. Wenderoth, Gender gaps in achievement and participation in multiple introductory biology classrooms, CBE Life Sci. Educ. 13, 478 (2014).
  32. J. Jovanovic and S. S. King, Boys and girls in the performance-based science classroom: Who’s doing the performing?, Am. Educ. Res. J. 35, 477 (1998).
  33. N. G. Holmes, I. Roll, and D. A. Bonn, Participating in the physics lab: Does gender matter?, Phys. Canada 70, 84 (2014).
  34. J. Day, J. B. Stang, N. G. Holmes, D. Kumar, and D. A. Bonn, Gender gaps and gendered action in a first-year physics laboratory, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020104 (2016).
  35. M. Laeser, B. M. Moskal, R. Knecht, and D. Lasich, Engineering design: Examining the impact of gender and the team’s gender composition, J. Engin. Educ. 92, 49 (2003).
  36. A. L. Traxler, X. C. Cid, J. Blue, and R. Barthelemy, Enriching gender in physics education research: A binary past and a complex future, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020114 (2016).
  37. C. Gosling, Identity as a research lens in science and physics education, J. Belonging Identity Language Diversity 1, 62 (2017).
  38. J. Jovanovic and S. S. King, Boys and girls in the performance-based science classroom: Who’s doing the performing?, Am. Educ. Res. J. 35, 477 (1998).
  39. N. G. Holmes, C. E. Wieman, and D. A. Bonn, Teaching critical thinking, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112, 11199 (2015).
  40. E. M. Smith, M. M. Stein, C. Walsh, and N. G. Holmes, Direct measurement of the impact of teaching experimentation in physics labs, Phys. Rev. X 10, 011029 (2020).
  41. N. G. Holmes and E. M. Smith, Operationalizing the AAPT learning goals for the lab, Phys. Teach. 57, 296 (2019).
  42. N. G. Holmes, B. Keep, and C. E. Wieman, Developing scientific decision making by structuring and supporting student agency, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010109 (2020).
  43. J. H. Corpus and S. V. Wormington, Profiles of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations in elementary school: A longitudinal analysis, J. Exp. Educ. 82, 480 (2014).
  44. J. A. Schmidt, J. M. Rosenberg, and P. N. Beymer, A person‐in‐context approach to student engagement in science: Examining learning activities and choice, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 55, 19 (2017).
  45. J. A. Hartigan and M. A. Wong, Algorithm AS 136: A K-means clustering algorithm, J. R. Stat. Soc. Series C (Applied Statistics) 28, 100 (1979).
  46. R. L. Thorndike, Who belongs in the family?, Psychometrika 18, 267 (1953).
  47. L. v. d. Maaten and G. Hinton, Visualizing data using t-SNE, J. Machine Learn. Res. 9, 2579 (2008).
  48. O. Friard and M. Gamba, BORIS: a free, versatile open‐source event‐logging software for video/audio coding and live observations, Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1325 (2016).
  49. C. Hasse, Learning and transition in a culture of playful physicists, Eur. J. Psychol. Educ. 23, 149 (2008).
  50. B. Davies and R. Harré, Positioning: The discursive production of selves, J. Theory Soc. Behav. 20, 43 (1990).
  51. M. Berge and A. T. Danielsson, Characterising learning interactions: A study of university students solving physics problems in groups, Res. Sci. Educ. 43, 1177 (2013).
  52. B. R. Wilcox and H. J. Lewandowski, Open-ended versus guided laboratory activities:Impact on students’ beliefs about experimental physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020132 (2016).
  53. E. Etkina, A. Karelina, M. Ruibal-Villasenor, D. Rosengrant, R. Jordan, and C. E. Hmelo-Silver, Design and reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories, J. Learn. Sci. 19, 54 (2010).
  54. S. E. Brownell, M. J. Kloser, T. Fukami, and R. Shavelson, Undergraduate biology lab courses: Comparing the impact of traditionally based “Cookbook” and authentic research-based courses on student lab experiences, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 41, 36 (2012).
  55. D. J. Adams, Current trends in laboratory class teaching in university bioscience programmes, Biosci. Educ. 13, 1 (2009).
  56. D. C. Haak, J. HilleRisLambers, E. Pitre, and S. Freeman, Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology, Science 332, 1213 (2011).
  57. P. Heller and M. Hollabaugh, Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups, Am. J. Phys. 60, 637 (1992).
  58. K. D. Tanner, Structure matters: Twenty-one teaching strategies to promote student engagement and cultivate classroom equity, Cell Biol. Educ. 12, 322 (2013).
  59. K. Rainey, M. Dancy, R. Mickelson, E. Stearns, and S. Moller, Race and gender differences in how sense of belonging influences decisions to major in STEM, Int. J. STEM Educ. 5, 10 (2018).
  60. A. J. Fisher, R. Mendoza-Denton, C. Patt, I. Young, A. Eppig, R. L. Garrell, D. C. Rees, T. W. Nelson, and M. A. Richards, Structure and belonging: Pathways to success for underrepresented minority and women PhD students in STEM fields, PLoS One 14, e0209279 (2019).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010129– Published 26 May, 2020
  • Received 20 December 2019
  • Accepted 28 April 2020
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation