Gender and Science &
Technology Education
Gender is implicated in science and technology
education (STE) in a number of different ways. One set of issues relates
to the relative participation rates of boys and girls in programmes of science,
technology and vocational education. Why, when these subjects are not compulsory,
do boys and girls often exercise markedly different choices? How, and on
what basis, are those choices made? Is there something about the nature
of physics or technology that necessarily makes them unattractive to girls
as subjects to study? A second set of issues clusters
around science
and technology curricula and the associated procedures for assessing students'
progress and understanding. Any curriculum necessarily selects, and thereby
privileges certain kinds of activities and forms of knowledge and sends
explicit and implicit messages about them to students and teachers alike.
Teachers' responses to these messages, as they seek to deliver science and
technology education in the classroom and laboratory, present a third set
of issues. In transforming the prescribed into the delivered curriculum
and engaging in the dynamics of classroom interaction, teachers necessarily
draw upon their understandings of their subject and their beliefs about
how best to teach and promote learning. They also draw upon a set of wider
cultural assumptions not least about the role expected of boys and girls
in society. These assumptions differ widely between, and often within, societies
and they may differ significantly between the teachers in an individual
institution. They also change markedly over time and it is this potential
for change that makes it possible to be optimistic about addressing many
of the gender issues surrounding science, technology and vocational education.
These and other aspects of the gender dimensions of science and
technology have, for many years, attracted the attention of scholars drawn
from many different disciplines who have approached the issues from a variety
of perspectives. Science educators have done much, not least through the
Gender and Science and Technology (GASAT) conferences, to establish the
necessary data about the relative participation of and achievement by girls
in science and technology, to explore their attitudes towards these components
of their education and to promote ways of addressing the various imbalances
that have been identified.
These educational activities of GASAT need to be placed in the
context of the current global concern to bring attention to bear on a wide
range of issues that are of particular concern to women, evident in a range
of UNESCO and country-specific initiatives and a series of international
conferences for women, the fourth of which was held in Beijing in 1995.
Some philosophers and sociologists of science writing from a feminist
perspective have argued that science and technology are essentially masculine
- and Western - in their ontology, an argument that seems to point conveniently
towards an explanation of why an education in these subjects is so often
an alienating experience for many girls and women. It is important to acknowledge,
however, that a variety of feminist positions exist with respect to science
and technology and that since some are much more radical than others, there
are major differences in the implications they may have for science and
technology education.
National and international comparisons of attitudes towards, and
the performance of boys and girls in science and technology are now available,
although for far too few countries from the developing world, where the
need for reliable data over time remains a priority. The data which are
available suggest caution in making over simple generalisations about gender
and STE. There are different sciences and many different technologies and
a valid explanation of, or successful strategy for dealing with gender issues
in one culture may be quite inappropriate in another. We should also be
very wary of referring in a simplistic way to science and technology (thereby
ignoring important differences between different sciences and technologies)
and of attributing a cultural homogeneity to individual countries or even
continents. There are perhaps even greater dangers in assuming that the
gender issues surrounding science education are the same, or necessarily
have the same origins, as those involved in technology education. Important
distinctions can be made between science and technology and they have very
different curriculum histories and status. Technology, understood in terms
of designing, making and doing rather than as computing or information technology,
is the curriculum newcomer and far too little research has been done on
gender issues to parallel the extensive body of work now available in the
field of science education.
A further point to note is that gender-related data can quickly
become out-of-date. For example, in many developed countries there have
been significant shifts over time in the size and extent of the gender gap
between the levels of performance of boys and girls on a variety of tests
in the physical sciences. The trend is for the gap between males and females
to narrow or even disappear, so much so that in a few developed countries
it is the relative performance of boys that is now beginning to give rise
to concern. Such changes can, of course, be seen as prima facie evidence
for the importance of social, cultural and educational expectations of girls
and boys and the ways in which these are accommodated in the organization
and values that underpin schooling.
Nonetheless, subject to these important qualifications, a number
of tentative generalisations can be made. Girls seem to be more interested
than boys in the social, cultural and ethical dimensions of science and
technology. They are often less persuaded by the 'technical fix', and their
interest in science and technology education increases when these can be
related to their own concerns and priorities. There may be 'women's ways
of knowing' that are more inclusive and less reductionist than the approach
traditionally associated with science and technology and girls generally
attach a higher importance than boys to working collaboratively through
discussion rather than competitively and on an individual basis. There may
also be important differences in the responses of boys and girls to some
of the language of science and technology and the image which it conveys.
For example, the use of terms such as 'execute', 'kill' and 'abort' in computing
is not easily reconciled with the values to which many girls and women attach
importance.
The caution needed in generalising about gender differences in
science and technology education is equally necessary when examining possible
policy options for change. There are, of course, a number of general strategies
which can be identified. These include employing more women science teachers
to serve as role models for pupils, increasing teachers' awareness of gender
issues and helping them become more sensitive to the dynamics of classroom
interaction, removing gender bias from textbooks and other curriculum materials,
raising the profile of successful women scientists and technologists, and
collaborating with other agencies, such as the broadcast and print media,
in alerting parents and students to the opportunities which exist for work
in science and technology-related careers. It is also important not to overlook
the obvious. For example, girls will not stay at school to study if the
cost to their families is too great or if the demands of schooling conflict
too markedly with other priorities that cannot be changed.
Although much research is still needed, especially in the developing
world, more than enough has been done to expose the issues and prompt an
enduring political response. Some elements of that response will necessarily
differ from one country to another, a point well-recognised in the UNESCO
Special Project on Scientific, Technical and Vocational Education of Girls
in Africa. The collaborative dimensions of this Project with a variety of
National Commissions and NGOs will be central to its success in promoting
and implementing gender-inclusive curriculum policies. So too will be local
initiatives and the support of national governments. However, gender-inclusive
policies commonly reveal and challenge assumptions that are so embedded
in the community that changing those assumptions is not only difficult but
sometimes actively resisted. Ultimately, however there can be no alternative
if the Jomtien commitment to education for all and the UNESCO Project 2000+
are to have any meaning. Assumptions, structures, systems or practices which
discourage or prevent girls from studying science and technology are not
only unjust, they frustrate the immense and arguably distinctive, contribution
that women can make to many fields that are fundamental to sustainable development
at local, national and international level. The problems associated with
gender, science and technology, therefore, are an integral part of a much
larger agenda: one which seeks to promote new, more ecologically sustainable
and socially just approaches to development. Such approaches are now a pressing
requirement of all countries and UNESCO is uniquely placed to promote them.
Edgar W. Jenkins Centre
for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education, University of Leeds, U.K.