父母、教师STEM性别刻板印象的表现和影响
The Manifestation and Impact of STEM Gender Stereotypes among Parents and Teachers
DOI: 10.12677/ass.2024.13121081, PDF, HTML, XML,   
作者: 刘雯欣:福建师范大学心理学院,福建 福州
关键词: 性别刻板印象父母教师Gender Stereotypes Parents Teachers
摘要: 在科学、技术、工程、数学领域,女性的代表性不足。孩子社会化的过程中,父母和教师对于孩子职业选择发挥着重要作用。首先,父母和教师都持有传统STEM性别刻板印象,他们对STEM性别刻板印象存在不同的表现。其次他们的性别刻板印象对于孩子选择STEM产生了影响,使得女生在自我概念、自我效能感、对STEM的兴趣和动机方面等下降。最后,提出将在家庭、学校两方面给予有效干预,比如提供榜样、加强父母和教师的支持等。从而使得STEM领域的发展更加平衡。
Abstract: Women are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Parents and teachers play an important role in children’s career choices in the process of children’s socialization. First, both parents and teachers hold traditional STEM gender stereotypes, and they have different representations of STEM gender stereotypes. Second, their gender stereotypes had an impact on children’s choice of STEM, resulting in a decline in girls’ self-concept, self-efficacy, interest in STEM, and motivation. Finally, it is proposed that effective interventions will be provided at both home and school levels, such as providing role models and strengthening the support of parents and teachers. This makes the development of STEM fields more balanced.
文章引用:刘雯欣. 父母、教师STEM性别刻板印象的表现和影响[J]. 社会科学前沿, 2024, 13(12): 95-102. https://doi.org/10.12677/ass.2024.13121081

1. 引言

近年来,在STEM (科学、技术、工程、数学)领域中,世界各地男性与女性的数量依然存在较大差距,女性的代表性仍然不足[1]。女性在物理学(21%)、工程学(22%)和计算机科学(20%)的新学士学位中占比不到四分之一。在美国工程和计算机领域中,女性获得学位的数量不足20% [1]。中国面临此类困境,从事STEM领域的女性较少。比如,从事科研研发的女性仅占26.56%。对于获得中国科学院、中国工程院院士的女性仅占5.52% [2]。这样对于社会的发展和人才的培养都产生不利影响,所以需要进一步去解决STEM领域存在的问题。

同时,出现了一个比较有趣的现象。根据研究发现,中国男生与女生在数学成绩差距很小,甚至不存在[3] [4]。2015年中国学生数学成绩评估,北京、上海、武汉等城市数学高考成绩性别差异基本不存在[1]。但是,选择数学领域专业的女生比例却还是比较低[5]。个体在社会化的过程,社会文化所形成的性别刻板印象会对女性产生重大的影响[6]。虽然,女性在STEM领域也可以表现得很出色,但是女性受到性别刻板印象的污名化。在传统性别刻板印象中,一般认为STEM是男性的领域,而女性不属于这个领域[7]。认为男性在这些领域表现比女性好,具有较高的能力,所以导致女性选择这些领域的人数较少[7] [8]。由于传统的性别规范,父母和老师对男孩和女孩的能力抱有不同的期望[9] [10]。年轻人的表现也容易受到性别期望的影响[11]。学生在与社会的不断接触中,父母和教师的性别刻板印象对学生的性别刻板印象的形成产生重要的影响。他们的STEM性别刻板印象是影响学生STEM的态度和看法的重要外部因素[12]

2. 理论框架

2.1. 期望–价值理论

根据期望–价值理论,可以有效地预测个体的动机[13]。也可以预测学生选择STEM领域的动机和职业愿望的影响[13]。期望–价值理论可以分为期望、价值两部分来解释。期望指个体对于未来承担这方面的任务和在某领域学习工作的看法和愿景。价值指选择STEM领域的意义和重要性[14]。期望和价值会受到社会化因素的影响,性别刻板印象是重要因素之一。而父母和教师又是学生社会化过程中重要模仿者、接触者、影响者。所以父母、教师的关于STEM的性别刻板印象会通过期望和价值来对学生进行塑造,从而对学生的STEM动机产生影响[13]

2.2. 刻板印象威胁理论

刻板印象威胁是指一个人处于一个群体之中,刻板印象对这个群体产生了不利的看法和态度,从而也对个体产生影响[15]。性别刻板印象会认为女生在STEM领域比男生表现差,女生不属于这些领域[15]。文化中所存在的性别刻板印象会对女生产生威胁和不利因素。如果父母或者教师持有性别刻板印象,会对女生产生威胁和不利。

根据性别图式理论的核心原则,儿童通过观察他们所处的环境来学习将男性和女性与某些属性联系起来。这种性别知识形成了认知图式,从而产生了刻板的信念并影响行为[16]。家庭教育和学校教育也往往会产生一些性别刻板印象,从而阻碍了学生进入STEM领域。综上所述,本文将分别从父母、教师STEM的性别刻板印象对学生的影响进行阐述。总结父母、教师的性别刻板印象是如何影响学生对STEM的认同感和归属感、以及他们的自我概念和信心、动机和兴趣。

3. 父母的STEM性别刻板印象

3.1. 父母STEM性别刻板印象的表现

父母在孩子社会化的过程中扮演重要角色。他们对于STEM的看法会产生重要的作用。根据研究表明,父母认同传统的性别刻板印象,这将造成STEM领域的性别差异[17]。过去的一系列研究表明,父母对男孩和女孩在STEM的领域产生了不同的看法。他们认为男孩比女孩更具有天赋,也更容易将男孩在STEM的成功归因于能力,而女孩是需要努力才能够在STEM领域有所成就[18]。所以父母会认为男生在STEM领域会有更好的表现,从能力方面更加适合STEM。而且父母认为男孩对STEM领域也会更加感兴趣,从兴趣方面也更加适合STEM [19]。近年来以美国为样本进行研究调查,数据显示有接近三倍的父母认为男孩比女孩在数学和科学领域有更好的表现[20]。也有实证研究表明,父母认为男孩有更好的空间表现能力和心理操作能力,这是学习STEM所需要的基本能力要求,男孩更加适合STEM [21]。父母的这些STEM刻板印象的看法会通过他们的行为表现出来。他们会有意或者无意与男孩谈论更多STEM的知识,向男孩进行有关解释,从而给了男孩更多在这方面的支持与鼓励[22]。而对于女孩,父母减少与她们进行STEM方面的交流。所以父母的性别刻板印象将对她们选择STEM和从事这些方面的工作产生更多不利影响。

3.2. 父母STEM性别刻板印象的影响

父母存在STEM性别刻板印象,而孩子认同这种性别刻板印象,这将会对孩子产生重要的影响。而且随着年龄的增长而逐渐加深[23]。研究表明,对于青少年而言,父母科学和数学的性别刻板印象与孩子的科学和数学性别刻板印象具有十分紧密的联系。无论男生还是女生,父母数学和科学刻板印象可以积极显著预测9~11岁孩子的性别刻板印象[20]。而且,有学者进一步分析父母隐性STEM性别刻板是否会对孩子产生影响,结果发现父母隐性的性别刻板印象影响比较有限。但是进一步细化结果父亲隐性的STEM性别刻板印象会对女孩的隐性性别刻板印象产生影响,但是不会影响男孩。对于男孩和女孩,母亲的内隐影响比较有限[24]。孩子认同父母STEM性别刻板印象会影响他们对这些领域的归属感。当女生觉得自己并不属于其中的领域,那么她们就不会选择其中领域。社会归属感和能力归属感的不足也会让女性在STEM职业道路上难以坚持[25]

对女孩的调查研究发现,性别刻板印象会负向预测她们的自我概念。而家庭因素会成为降低她们自我概念的重要因素。父母不恰当的做法,不正确的教育方式,进一步地加深性别刻板印象,从而影响了女生的自我概念[26]。而自我概念是未来职业选择和预测的重要因素,较低的自我概念减少了女生进入STEM领域[27]。父母所传递的性别刻板印象威胁还体现在对孩子兴趣的影响。负面的刻板印象影响了孩子,特别是女生对于这些领域的态度,也进一步影响她们从事相关职业的动机[28]。从布朗芬布伦纳的生态系统理论中,得出家庭作为孩子成长的微观系统[29]。父母所形成的性别刻板印象还会影响孩子的成就动机,这也将阻碍女生进入STEM领域[30]

父母的STEM性别刻板印象影响还表现为支持的性别差异和专业差异。父母的支持均可以正确预测男生和女生对于STEM职业的期待[31]。母亲对女生在数学和科学的支持与关注,这将可以有效地提高女生加入STEM领域的动机[32]。但是男生比女生受到父母更多的支持,从而对于女生的STEM职业动机和期望产生不利的影响[33]。而且在STEM这些领域中,父母更加支持女生选择女生比例比较高的专业(比如生物学等) [12]。这样也会对女生选择一些其他的STEM专业产生阻碍,造成专业发展不均衡。不仅家庭教育是重要的因素,教师同样也发挥着重要影响[34]

4. 教师的STEM性别刻板印象

4.1. 教师STEM性别刻板印象的表现

教师同样也是孩子社会化的重要引领者。而他们也会表现出对STEM领域传统性别刻板印象的观点。教师会认为STEM学科更多与男性特征相联系,符合男性性别角色[31]。同时,教师会认为学习STEM需要天赋和智慧,努力无法达到相同水平。男生比女生在STEM学科中表现更好[23]。所以,在一项研究中,当教师和父母参与调查访谈,研究者向他们呈现学生在STEM的表现,他们对女生在STEM学科的表现感到惊讶。因为女生跟男生在STEM学科的表现一样好,甚至还超过男生,这样的发现超乎教师以往的认知和偏见[35]。而且还发现,与年级较高的教师相比,5~10岁儿童的数学教师更相信学习是需要才华和天赋[36]。研究者还对教师性别刻板印象背后的原因进行探讨。一项关于数学误解的问卷调查,得出教师的数学性别刻板印象与移情系统化和女孩补偿误解相关程度高,而且大多数的教师都至少持有其中一种性别误解[37]。此外,教师的教学经验可以有效帮助教师减轻对STEM的性别刻板印象和偏见。对不同国家的物理教师进行研究发现,比如德国、奥地利等地女教师随着经验的积累,对学生学习STEM的性别偏见会逐步消失[38]

教师的STEM性别刻板印象也会影响教师自身的行为表现。根据皮格马利翁效应,教师的期望会对学生未来的发展产生重要的影响。教师对男生和女生在STEM的领域给予了不同的关注和支持。这样的性别偏见和差别化对待都会对女生选择STEM领域和职业坚持产生不利的影响。

4.2. 教师STEM性别刻板印象的影响

教师的性别刻板印象会对学生学习STEM兴趣和自我效能感产生影响,增加学生的心理负担。教授所持有固定的能力思维模式,认为能力是天生的,无法通过努力进行增长。无论是男生还是女生,都会减少学习STEM的兴趣和产生对STEM的负面情绪。教授固定思维模式会给女生带来更加负面的影响。当女生感知到了教授的思维模式,她们就更不愿意去选择此类教授的STEM课程[39]。而且当教师拥有STEM性别刻板印象后会通过课堂的方式有意无意地影响学生的性别刻板印象。对性别刻板印象的认同进而影响了学生从事和选择STEM领域的自我效能感和动机[10]。具体表现为,在课堂上,更多地与男生讨论比较困难的问题,让男生来回答相关问题。更多地提到在STEM领域男性成功人士,没有对女性成功人士进行介绍,从而无法给女生带来榜样。在大学中,教授对学生申请科研助理的职位存在性别刻板印象,男生更容易获得机会[40]。教师中还存在一些隐性STEM性别刻板印象的因素。这些行为会对女学生产生刻板印象威胁。当女教师因为性别刻板印象而对自身能力有所怀疑,也会降低女学生对于STEM的自我效能[41]。研究表明女生感知到性别刻板印象威胁时,有教学经验女教师可以有效减轻女生在STEM的担忧[23]。所以,女教师自身对于STEM的看法和表现对学生具有重要作用。男生是STEM性别刻板印象受益的一方,具有刻板印象优势。但是也有教师指出男生可能会高估自己STEM能力,从而作出错误的职业选择[33]

5. 干预

我们需要采取有效的措施干预父母和教师的STEM性别刻板印象,从而促进STEM的平衡发展。研究表明父母和教师的支持,对于孩子和学生选择STEM具有重要意义。父母的支持可以提高一年之后孩子的动机和信念[42]。父母和教师对女生的支持可以让女生对科学有更加强烈的归属感。从而可以增加女生将科学家作为职业目标的信心和认同感[43]。父母与孩子的交流中正确传递关于STEM的实用信息,促进选择STEM学生人数增加[43]。所以,可以给父母和教师提供更多的信息,从而改变和破除他们心中的性别刻板印象。比如,女生也可以胜任STEM的工作、女生也会对STEM感兴趣、努力比天赋更重要等[44]。父母和教师也可以增强和提高他们对于女生的信心,给予女生同样的鼓励和支持,消除更多的职业选择的性别不平等。具体操作包括了可以增加培训机会、家校座谈会、研讨会等。让教师、孩子、父母都参与其中,传播性别平等的知识,促进父母和教师给予孩子和学生更加平等的鼓励和支持[45]。但是,也有研究指出支持需要掌握方法和技巧。过于直接的支持可能会产生适得其反的效果。所以正确的方法和家校交流很重要[26]

一些干预研究表明,与女性STEM教师进行互动之后,女生对于数学的兴趣增加[46]。同时,女性教师也可以有效改变拥有较强性别刻板印象的男生[47]。在学龄前到四年级的女孩中,接触反刻板印象的女性典范减少了她们职业上的性别刻板印象和对女性的传统态度[48]。三年级学生在听了从事反刻板印象职业的男女谈论他们的职业后,报告的性别刻板印象有所减少。此外,青春期前的女孩在与女性科学家在为期10天的科学营中互动后,降低将科学家想象成男性的可能性[49]。所以,在学校教育中树立可以学习的榜样,可以增强女生的信心和动机[49]。但是,相关研究表明,需要将学生与榜样之间建立联系。从而才能更加有助于学生内化相关的态度。而不是让学生把这些反性别刻板印象的榜样看成是例外的人群,成为阻碍她们选择STEM的人[49]。在STEM相关课程中,学校可以考虑更多安排女教师来进行传授这些领域的知识,为女生提供学习榜样。教师可以帮助学生克服特定性别的归因模式,例如,鼓励女孩将成功归因于自己的能力,而不是外部原因,从而实现动机[50]。同时,我们需要推动课堂的改革,改变部分教师不正确的思维信念,对教师进行科学的培训。教师以更加成长型的教学策略和更加包容性的态度来看待学生。减少不平等的皮格马利翁效应,促进STEM领域更加繁荣发展[51]

6. 总结

孩子和学生对于职业的选择,是一次纵向发展的过程,家长和教师是重要的参与者。通过对文献的总结与回顾,父母和教师的STEM性别刻板印象都得到了实证研究。父母和教师的STEM性别刻板印象都不同程度对学生选择这些领域产生影响。父母对孩子的支持和鼓励存在性别差异,教师同样也对男生和女生产生不同的期望。研究也表明,男生在选择STEM领域更多受到教师的影响。而女生更多受到了父母的影响[52]。此外,相关研究表明,父母的STEM性别刻板印象会对孩子产生更加显著的影响[20]。父亲对女孩的职业选择发挥了更加重要的作用[53]

未来的研究还可以定量去比较影响孩子职业选择动机的外部因素,其中哪一个因素的影响力最大。在一些文献中提到,教师认为父母对孩子的职业选择、动机和自我认识是最具有重要作用[54]。此外,在STEM领域中,男性和女性的比例差异也不同。比如,在工程和技术领域女性比例一直很低[1]。可以对比父母和教师STEM性别刻板印象是如何对学生在不同学科专业选择和职业决策产生影响,如何解决这些领域的性别不平衡。打破性别刻板印象,性别平等将更有益于STEM的教育和职业发展,从而更好地为社会和谐发展作出重要贡献。

参考文献

[1] OECD (2015) The ABC of Gender Equality in Education: Aptitude, Behaviour, Confidence. OECD Publishing.
[2] National Bureau of Statistics of China (2016) China Statistical Yearbook on Science and Technology (2016 Version). China Statistics Press.
[3] Tsui, M. (2007) Gender and Mathematics Achievement in China and the United States. Gender Issues, 24, 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-007-9044-2
[4] Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O. and Loveless, T. (2015) 20 Years of TIMSS: International Trends in Mathematics and Science Achievement, Curriculum, and Instruction. Presented at the TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center.
[5] Liu, R. (2018) Gender-Math Stereotype, Biased Self-Assessment, and Aspiration in STEM Careers: The Gender Gap among Early Adolescents in China. Comparative Education Review, 62, 522-541.
https://doi.org/10.1086/699565
[6] Shapiro, J.R. and Williams, A.M. (2011) The Role of Stereotype Threats in Undermining Girls’ and Women’s Performance and Interest in STEM Fields. Sex Roles, 66, 175-183.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0051-0
[7] Wang, M., Eccles, J.S. and Kenny, S. (2013) Not Lack of Ability but More Choice: Individual and Gender Differences in Choice of Careers in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Psychological Science, 24, 770-775.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612458937
[8] Stoet, G. and Geary, D.C. (2018) The Gender-Equality Paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education. Psychological Science, 29, 581-593.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617741719
[9] Hyde, J.S. and Kling, K.C. (2001) Women, Motivation, and Achievement. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 25, 364-378.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.00035
[10] Hand, S., Rice, L. and Greenlee, E. (2017) Exploring Teachers’ and Students’ Gender Role Bias and Students’ Confidence in STEM Fields. Social Psychology of Education, 20, 929-945.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-017-9408-8
[11] Jacobs, J.E. and Bleeker, M.M. (2004) Girls’ and Boys’ Developing Interests in Math and Science: Do Parents Matter? New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2004, 5-21.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.113
[12] Luttenberger, S., Paechter, M. and Ertl, B. (2019) Self-Concept and Support Experienced in School as Key Variables for the Motivation of Women Enrolled in STEM Subjects with a Low and Moderate Proportion of Females. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 1242.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01242
[13] Eccles, J.S. and Wigfield, A. (2020) From Expectancy-Value Theory to Situated Expectancy-Value Theory: A Developmental, Social Cognitive, and Sociocultural Perspective on Motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, Article 101859.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101859
[14] 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, 585-609.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1994.tb01049.x
[15] Steele, C.M. and Aronson, J. (1995) Stereotype Threat and the Intellectual Test Performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797-811.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.69.5.797
[16] Martin, C.L., Ruble, D.N. and Szkrybalo, J. (2002) Cognitive Theories of Early Gender Development. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 903-933.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.128.6.903
[17] Eccles, J.S. (2005) Influences of Parents’ Education on Their Children’s Educational Attainments: The Role of Parent and Child Perceptions. London Review of Education, 3, 191-204.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14748460500372309
[18] Eccles, J.S. and Wigfield, A. (2002) Motivational Beliefs, Values, and Goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153
[19] Bhanot, R.T. and Jovanovic, J. (2009) The Links Between Parent Behaviors and Boys’ and Girls’ Science Achievement Beliefs. Applied Developmental Science, 13, 42-59.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10888690802606784
[20] Starr, C.R. and Simpkins, S.D. (2021) High School Students’ Math and Science Gender Stereotypes: Relations with Their STEM Outcomes and Socializers’ Stereotypes. Social Psychology of Education, 24, 273-298.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-021-09611-4
[21] Muenks, K., Peterson, E.G., Green, A.E., Kolvoord, R.A. and Uttal, D.H. (2019) Parents’ Beliefs about High School Students’ Spatial Abilities: Gender Differences and Associations with Parent Encouragement to Pursue a STEM Career and Students’ STEM Career Intentions. Sex Roles, 82, 570-583.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01072-6
[22] Šimunović, M. and Babarović, T. (2020) The Role of Parents’ Beliefs in Students’ Motivation, Achievement, and Choices in the STEM Domain: A Review and Directions for Future Research. Social Psychology of Education, 23, 701-719.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-020-09555-1
[23] Master, A., Cheryan, S. and Meltzoff, A.N. (2014) Reducing Adolescent Girls’ Concerns About STEM Stereotypes: When Do Female Teachers Matter? Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale-International. Review of Social Psychology, 27, 79-102.
[24] Lapytskaia Aidy, C., Steele, J.R., Williams, A., Lipman, C., Wong, O. and Mastragostino, E. (2021) Examining Adolescent Daughters’ and Their Parents’ Academic‐Gender Stereotypes: Predicting Academic Attitudes, Ability, and STEM Intentions. Journal of Adolescence, 93, 90-104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2021.09.010
[25] Banchefsky, S., Lewis, K.L. and Ito, T.A. (2019) The Role of Social and Ability Belonging in Men’s and Women’s pSTEM Persistence. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 2386.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02386
[26] Ertl, B., Luttenberger, S. and Paechter, M. (2017) The Impact of Gender Stereotypes on the Self-Concept of Female Students in STEM Subjects with an Under-Representation of Females. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 703.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00703
[27] Rossi Cordero, A.E. and Barajas Frutos, M. (2015) Elección de estudios CTIM y desequilibrios de género. Enseñanza de las Ciencias. Revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas, 33, 59-76.
https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.1481
[28] Gunderson, E.A., Ramirez, G., Levine, S.C. and Beilock, S.L. (2011) The Role of Parents and Teachers in the Development of Gender-Related Math Attitudes. Sex Roles, 66, 153-166.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-9996-2
[29] Newall, C., Gonsalkorale, K., Walker, E., Forbes, G.A., Highfield, K. and Sweller, N. (2018) Science Education: Adult Biases Because of the Child’s Gender and Gender Stereotypicality. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 55, 30-41.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.08.003
[30] Yang, X. and Gao, C. (2019) Missing Women in STEM in China: An Empirical Study from the Viewpoint of Achievement Motivation and Gender Socialization. Research in Science Education, 51, 1705-1723.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9833-0
[31] Lv, B., Wang, J., Zheng, Y., Peng, X. and Ping, X. (2022) Gender Differences in High School Students’ STEM Career Expectations: An Analysis Based on Multi‐Group Structural Equation Model. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 59, 1739-1764.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21772
[32] Leaper, C., Farkas, T. and Brown, C.S. (2011) Adolescent Girls’ Experiences and Gender-Related Beliefs in Relation to Their Motivation in Math/Science and English. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 268-282.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9693-z
[33] Mujtaba, T. and Reiss, M.J. (2013) 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, 2979-2998.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.681076
[34] Luo, L., Stoeger, H. and Subotnik, R.F. (2022) The Influences of Social Agents in Completing a STEM Degree: An Examination of Female Graduates of Selective Science High Schools. International Journal of STEM Education, 9, Article No. 7.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00324-w
[35] Sáinz, M., Fàbregues, S. and Solé, J. (2020) Parent and Teacher Depictions of Gender Gaps in Secondary Student Appraisals of Their Academic Competences. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 573752.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.573752
[36] Copur-Gencturk, Y., Thacker, I. and Quinn, D. (2020) K-8 Teachers’ Overall and Gender-Specific Beliefs about Mathematical Aptitude. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 1251-1269.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10104-7
[37] Dersch, A., Heyder, A. and Eitel, A. (2022) Exploring the Nature of Teachers’ Math-Gender Stereotypes: The Math-Gender Misconception Questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 820254.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.820254
[38] Hofer, S.I. (2015) Studying Gender Bias in Physics Grading: The Role of Teaching Experience and Country. International Journal of Science Education, 37, 2879-2905.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1114190
[39] LaCosse, J., Murphy, M.C., Garcia, J.A. and Zirkel, S. (2021) The Role of STEM Professors’ Mindset Beliefs on Students’ Anticipated Psychological Experiences and Course Interest. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113, 949-971.
https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000620
[40] Moss-Racusin, C.A., Dovidio, J.F., Brescoll, V.L., Graham, M.J. and Handelsman, J. (2012) Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 16474-16479.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109
[41] Beilock, S.L., Gunderson, E.A., Ramirez, G. and Levine, S.C. (2010) Female Teachers’ Math Anxiety Affects Girls’ Math Achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 1860-1863.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910967107
[42] Simpkins, S., Estrella, G., Gaskin, E. and Kloberdanz, E. (2018) Latino Parents’ Science Beliefs and Support of High School Students’ Motivational Beliefs: Do the Relations Vary across Gender and Familism Values? Social Psychology of Education, 21, 1203-1224.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-018-9459-5
[43] Harackiewicz, J.M., Rozek, C.S., Hulleman, C.S. and Hyde, J.S. (2012) Helping Parents to Motivate Adolescents in Mathematics and Science: An Experimental Test of a Utility-Value Intervention. Psychological Science, 23, 899-906.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611435530
[44] Cian, H., Dou, R., Castro, S., Palma‐D'souza, E. and Martinez, A. (2021) Facilitating Marginalized Youths’ Identification with STEM through Everyday Science Talk: The Critical Role of Parental Caregivers. Science Education, 106, 57-87.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21688
[45] Benavent, X., de Ves, E., Forte, A., Botella-Mascarell, C., López-Iñesta, E., Rueda, S., et al. (2020) Girls4STEM: Gender Diversity in STEM for a Sustainable Future. Sustainability, 12, Article 6051.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12156051
[46] McGuire, L., Monzavi, T., Hoffman, A.J., Law, F., Irvin, M.J., Winterbottom, M., et al. (2021) Science and Math Interest and Gender Stereotypes: The Role of Educator Gender in Informal Science Learning Sites. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 503237.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.503237
[47] Riegle‐Crumb, C., Moore, C. and Buontempo, J. (2016) Shifting STEM Stereotypes? Considering the Role of Peer and Teacher Gender. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 27, 492-505.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12289
[48] Pike, J.J. and Jennings, N.A. (2005) The Effects of Commercials on Children? Perceptions of Gender Appropriate Toy Use. Sex Roles, 52, 83-91.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-1195-6
[49] Buck, G.A., Clark, V.L.P., Leslie‐Pelecky, D., Lu, Y. and Cerda‐Lizarraga, P. (2007) Examining the Cognitive Processes Used by Adolescent Girls and Women Scientists in Identifying Science Role Models: A Feminist Approach. Science Education, 92, 688-707.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20257
[50] Dresel, M., Schober, B. and Ziegler, A. (2007) Golem and Pygmalion. Scheitert die Chancengleichheit von Mädchen im math-ematisch-naturwissenschaftlichtechnischen Bereich am geschlechtsstereotypen Denken der Eltern? In: Ludwig, P.H. and Ludwig, H., Eds., Erwartungen in himmelblau und rosarot. Effekte, Determinanten und Konsequenzen von Geschlechterdifferenzen in der Schule. Juventa, 61-81.
[51] Kuchynka, S.L., Eaton, A. and Rivera, L.M. (2022) Understanding and Addressing Gender‐Based Inequities in STEM: Research Synthesis and Recommendations for U.S. K‐12 Education. Social Issues and Policy Review, 16, 252-288.
https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12087
[52] Lee, S.W., Min, S. and Mamerow, G.P. (2015) Pygmalion in the Classroom and the Home: Expectation’s Role in the Pipeline to STEM. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 117, 1-40.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811511700907
[53] Sonnert, G. (2009) Parents Who Influence Their Children to Become Scientists: Effects of Gender and Parental Education. Social Studies of Science, 39, 927-941.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312709335843
[54] Sáinz, M. and Upadyaya, K. (2016) Accuracy and Bias in Spanish Secondary School Students’ Self-Concept of Math Ability: The Influence of Gender and Parental Educational Level. International Journal of Educational Research, 77, 26-36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.02.009