The NOS in gtraining pedagogues

Mayra García Ruiz ([email protected]) ,Raúl Calixto Flores and Ángel Vázquez Alonso

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCE

Symposium: Evidence-based learning of the nature of science in Latin countries

The NOS in training pedagogues: toward a

better understanding from the gender perspective.


Background and framework

Nowadays science education programs include NOS issues as part of curriculum contents, the development of an informed understanding of how science works and scientists operate has been seen as an important aspect of scientific literacy (Tala & Vesterinen, 2015).Thus it is expected that:

The abilities of students improve to make reasoned decisions in a world impacted by science.

By knowing the characteristic of scientific knowledge and the way it is constructed, citizens will be better able to apply scientific knowledge to their everyday lives (Bell & Lederman, 2003; McComas, 2004).


Background and frameworkThere are several problems underlying NOS teaching: Students and teachers -

regardless of grade level- have naïve ideas about NOS such as, they believe that scientific knowledge is absolute.

In addition teachers and students do not understand the role that theories, hypotheses, laws, the scientific method, models, creativity, and tentativeness play in scientific knowledge, and do not distinguish science and technology.

(Walls et al., 2013; Bell et al., 2011; Seung et al., 2009; Khishfe & Lederman, 2006; Akerson et al., 2007; Bennássar et al., 2010; García-Ruiz y Sánchez, 2006).



Problems underlying NOS teaching (continuation):

Most of students and teachers have uninformed and inappropriate views about science, scientists, scientific method, and scientific work.

Some of them believe that a scientist is a very intelligent (although a little bit crazy) and lonely man immersed in a lab.



It is a problem of great importance when the teachers present these NOS ideas because to help students improve their understanding about NOS, first it is necessary prepare teachers accordingly (Lederman, 2007).


Background and frameworkThere are other factors linked to NOS teaching such as: Race Culture Gender Regarding to gender it is well known that within science and technology areas, women are under-represented (Blinkenstaff, 2005; Smith &

Gorard, 2011).

That is not surprising when we analyse the history of female education.


Background and frameworkHistory of Female Education in MexicoDuring nineteenth century girls’ primary education included reading, writing, and addition and subtraction with special emphasizes in women activities (religious education, sewing and embroidery). Later the National Preparatory School it was created, but it was only for young boys.For girls the Secondary school was created (Staples 2003, González, 2004).


Table 1. Curricula of the National Preparatory School and the Secondary school* National Preparatory School (for boys) Secondary (for girls) Algebra Basics algebra, geometry and cosmography Trigonometry Reading exercises Analytic geometry Writing exercises

Infinitesimal calculus Spanish grammar Elemental physics History of México Arithmetic Medicine (first aid) Natural history of elements Hygiene and domestic economy General Chemistry Women duties in society Spanish grammar Women duties relating family and, state Greek, Latin, English, Italian, French and German

French, English and, Italian

General history Music National history Women’s arts and jobs Logic Gardening and horticulture, notions Paleography Comparative teaching method Cosmography Elemental chronology and general history

*In this table are show only some of the subjects, the complete curricula for preparatory included 33 subjects (natural and exacts sciences 39%) and for secondary school included 20 (natural and exacts science 5%) [Modified from González, 2006:777].



BACKGROUND AND FRAMEWORK

History of Education in Mexico

Regarding higher education only men were allowed to enter.In the late nineteenth century two normal schools were created: for men in 1887 and for women in 1889.


Background and frameworkHistory of Female Education in MexicoThe curricula was different for both schools: the normal school for men had 19% of science and math subjects meanwhile the female normal school had 14%, the reason was that women would became mothers and they weren’t expected to need science education “Excess of science education is unhealthy for females and could cause neurosis” (El Magisterio Nacional 1905:142-

143, in González, 2006). Paradoxically Primary female teachers who had suffered this discrimination repeated these negatives patterns.

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCEBackground and framework History of Female Education in MexicoAt present time, this educational division does not exist anymore, however, there still persist certain believes in some teachers that girls are better in Spanish and boys are better in science and math. Women represent more than 50% of Mexican population. Though both women and men are enrolled in the Mexican educational system, their opportunities to access to scientific and technological formation are different. Even now gender stereotypes make a differentiation between female and male studies, scientific and technological careers like mathematics, engineering, physics and geology are male studies whereas teaching, psychology, pedagogy are considered female careers (Vázquez y Manassero, 2009; García-Ruiz & Calixto, 2011).


Purpose and Research questions

In this context the purpose of this research was to improve NOS understanding from gender perspective in future female pedagogues, through teaching-learning sequences (TLS) based on creative and recreational activities and daily experiences. Specifically, it seeks to address the following two research questions:1. What initial attitudes and believes do

future pedagogues possess about scientist characteristics and women under-representation in Science?

2. To what extent is possible to impact on pre-service pedagogues’ attitudes and understanding about NOS through TLS since gender perspective?


Rationale

In a previous research in which we surveyed in training teachers of basic education we found some inappropriate believes about scientific work and the role of females and males in science, to this respect we noted that some gender issues persisted in those future teachers and in some aspects, women showed more negative attitudes than men (García-Ruiz and Calixto, 2011) .

In this research we decided to include only female pedagogues. We had two reasons for that:1. Cultural pressure on girls and women still persists

to agree with traditional gender roles. 2. Pedagogy is a career mostly for women, these

young girls will have in their hands a lot of pupils, and the ideas about scientists and scientific work that these future pedagogues possess will be transmitted to their future learners.

MethodParticipants: Seventeen junior undergraduate pedagogy females who were enrolled in General Didactic subject.

Age(Years)

Mean Standard

Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

21-48 27 7.025 21 48Variables analysed:Attitudes and believes before and after didactic intervention


Method

Instrument: Questionnaire of Opinions on science, technology and society (COCTS, for Spanish acronym, Manassero et al., 2003).

Example:60611 Today in our country, there are many more male scientists than female scientists. The MAIN reason for this is: A. males are stronger, faster, brighter, and better at concentrating on their studies. B. males seem to have more scientific abilities than females, who may excel in other fields. C. males are just more interested in science than females.

A couple of Questions were considered from the COCTS specifically those related to: Scientists’ characteristics Women under-

representation in Science


METHODTeaching-Learning-Sequences (TLS) were designed to carried out didactic intervention. The TLS applied was "Evoking other times: Science, technology and environment"The topics of the TLS included the role of ecologists as scientists, the scientific work, the science, technology, and environment relationship (i.e., impacts of science and technology in the ecosystems), and the role of females and males in science.


TÍTLE: Evoking other times: Science, technology, and environment. SESSIONS 2

Session

General Description: Systematize personal experiences about science, technology, and environment. Recognize the ecology as science, identify scientist characteristics and scientific work. Recognize Ecologist as a scientist. School curriculum: General Didactics II

Level Undergraduate Pedagogy

BASIC SKILLS Recognize the science as a dynamic and interdisciplinary process of social construction of knowledge. States the relationship between science, technology, and the environment in historical and everyday contexts. Identify problems, make questions and develop hypothesis. Describes levels of biological organization and the ecosystems. Discuss the role of females and males in scientific work.

OBJECTIVES Describes the biomes. Explains the different ecosystems and environments. Identifies the role of ecologists and their scientific work. Characterizes the impacts of science and technology in the ecosystems.

Time ACTIVITIES (Students / Teacher) Methodology/

organization Materials/ Resources

2.5 hours

ENGAGE: Introduction-motivation • Orally expose personal experience about the environmental problems/solves doubts and guides students to take into account their own experiences. • Discuss the relations among science, technology and environment/ Who are the people who carry out the study of those subjects? /guides the discussion (key questions).

Individual presentations and then organizes the students in small groups to analyses and debates the issues.

Flipchart sheets, paper, markers

ELICITATES previous knowledge Present ideas regarding environment, nature of science and scientific activities/Asks to the students their perceptions and coordinate the discussion.

Small groups.

Development Team work analysis and reflection

Analyses of literature

Contents Analyse literature

EXPLAIN Procedures

Review materials about environment and basic characteristics of scientist, specifically ecologist/ Join student’s research procedures.

Small group Case analysis (choice a scientist).

Different reference sources. Different materials.

EXPLAIN Attitudes

Share acquired information, collaborative attitude / Actions that help objective achievement. The whole group

EXPLORE Consolidation

Recognize the role of males and females in the scientific work. Discuss the different meanings of environment. Debate about environmental problems. Team prepare conceptual framework synthesizing work and showing the relationship among science, technology, and environment/ Moderates discussion and presentations.

Small groups Mural or graphic organizer and laptop

Evaluate

Instruments (questionnaire items) Compare preconceptions and new concepts/Guides process.

Items 10211 30111 40161

60611 60521 10111

EXTEND Reinforcement activities

Debate about activities carried out/Guides and regulates discussion.

EVALUATION/REFLECTION ON TEACHING PRACTICE Assess how new knowledge helps to understand nature of science.

MethodProcedureThe participants were evaluated before and after the didactic intervention through a quasi-experimental research approach: pre-test /Teaching-Learning-Sequence/ post-test.Data Analysis In the data analysis process, mean and standard deviation values were calculated. The effectiveness of the treatment was assessed by comparing the students’ initial and final scores through a t-test for correlated samples.


SCIENCE


RESULTS

The outstanding overall result is that the post-test mean scores across all evaluation phrases are better than baseline scores, though only a few differences are statistically significant.But these changes on scores mean indicate that the pedagogue participants improved their understanding of gender issues in science through the educational intervention with the TLS.

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCERESULTSThe pedagogues in training manifested uninformed beliefs as they showed negative indices in plausible phrases of the question: 60521 There is no difference between female and male scientists in the way they do science:

60521A. Because all good scientists carry out the job the same way.

60521B. Because female and male scientists go through the same training.

60521C. Because overall women and men are equally intelligent.

60521E. Because everyone is equal, no matter what the job.

60521I. Women would likely do science somewhat better than men because women must work harder in order to compete in a male dominated field such as science.

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCERESULTSIn the case of naïve phrases, positives indices were observed but just one of the sentences reached a significant difference. 60521 There is no difference between female and male scientists in the way they do science:

60521G. Women would do science somewhat differently because, by nature or by upbringing, females have different viewpoints, perspectives, imagination, or characteristics (such as patience) .

60521H. Men would do science somewhat differently because men do science better.

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCERESULTSThere were no significant differences between appropriate phrases before and after the intervention of the same question:

60521 There is no difference between female and male scientists in the way they do science:

60521D. Because women and men are the same in terms of what is needed to be a good scientist

60521F. Because any differences in the way scientists do science are due to differences between individuals. Such differences have nothing to do with being male or female.

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCERESULTSConcerning to gender inequality, characterized by women’s under-representations in science, we found in the most of cases, positive indices -although with low scores- and some significant differences on naïve and appropriate sentences after the application of the TLS.

Figure 2. Mean indices of pedagogues’ views across the sentences of the assessment question 60611 about women under-representation in science before and after the intervention. * Phrases with significant differences.

60611 Today in our country, there are many more male scientists than female scientists. The MAIN reason for this is: Naïve sentences: 60611A. Males are stronger,

faster, brighter, and better at concentrating on their studies.

60611B. Males seem to have more scientific abilities than females, who may excel in other fields.

60611C. Males are just more interested in science than females.

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCEResults


60611 Today in our country, there are many more male scientists than female scientists. The MAIN reason for this is:

Appropriate sentences: 60611D. The traditional

stereotype held by society has been that men are smarter and dominant, while women are weaker and less logical. This prejudice has caused more men to become scientists, even though females are just as capable in science as males.

60611E. the schools have not done enough to encourage females to take science courses. Females are just as capable in science as males

ESERA 2015 CONFERENCERESULTS


60611 Today in our country, there are many more male scientists than female scientists. The MAIN reason for this is: Appropriate sentence: 60611F. Until recently,

science was thought to be a man’s vocation. (Women didn’t fit television’s stereotypical image of a scientist.) In addition, most women were expected to work at home or take on traditional jobs. (Thus, men have had more encouragement to become scientists.) But today this is changing. Science is becoming a vocation for women, and women are expected to work in science more and more.



60611 Today in our country, there are many more male scientists than female scientists. The MAIN reason for this is: Appropriate sentence: 60611G. Women have been

discouraged, or not allowed, to enter the scientific field. Women are just as interested and capable as men; but the established scientists (who are male) tend to discourage or intimidate potential female scientists.



60611 Today in our country, there are many more male scientists than female scientists. The MAIN reason for this is:

Plausible sentence: 60611H. There is NO reason for having more

male scientists than female scientists. Both sexes are equally capable of being good scientists, and today the opportunities are equal.


CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This study confirms that the female students did not possess initial appropriate perceptions about NOS related to gender issues. It is not surprising if we remember that Mexican males and females have had different opportunities to access scientific and technological training along the history of education . The application of the TLS improved significantly some aspects of the gender issues in the future pedagogues. In addition, the TLS allowed them to improve themselves through critical reflection about science, technology and gender.Most of the participants showed a more appropriate attitudes regarding gender inequality in science and technology after the intervention.


CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Our positive results and the impotent role that school plays in children's education lead us to presume that appropriate attitudes towards gender in science issues will be encouraged and positive changes in the new generations will be forged.

Finally, it is important to say that most participants took consciousness about gender issues, which is a truly relevant fact because they will be able to evoke positive and informed attitudes, not only in their future learners, but also in everyone else, partners, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, etc.

Finally, we consider that every citizen should be able to make informed decisions about S&T and then build a better relationship with the environment.

Thank you very muchCancún, México

Conclusions and Implications

Documents

The NOS in gtraining pedagogues