{"title":"Egalitarian gender role attitudes give girls the edge: Exploring the role of students’ gender role attitudes in reading and math","authors":"Tatjana Taraszow, Sarah Gentrup, Birgit Heppt","doi":"10.1007/s11218-024-09913-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Gender differences in reading and math have been reported for many years. Girls outperform boys in reading (representing a school domain stereotyped as female); boys often perform slightly better in math (a stereotypical male domain). Research has so far investigated the contribution of domain-specific academic self-concepts and interests as well as gender stereotypes to these gender differences. Students’ gender role attitudes (GRAs) and their relation with gender disparities in school performance, however, have been studied little. This study examines if students’ GRAs contribute to explaining boys’ higher math achievement and girls’ higher reading achievement. Using PISA-2009 data from Germany, the sample included 9,460 grade nine students (49.70% girls; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 15.61 years). Regression analyses revealed that egalitarian GRAs are beneficial for all students. Still more so for girls, egalitarian GRAs help girls perform particularly well in reading and compensate for possible disadvantages in math. In reading, girls with egalitarian GRAs reached higher performance scores than boys with egalitarian GRAs. In math, girls with egalitarian GRAs scored nearly as high as boys with egalitarian GRAs. Boys also benefited from egalitarian GRAs, although not as much as girls. Although gender disparities in reading and math achievement were explained only partly by students’ GRAs, supporting boys and girls in endorsing egalitarian GRAs is worthwhile as they may help to increase societal gender equality more broadly.</p>","PeriodicalId":51467,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology of Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychology of Education","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-024-09913-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Gender differences in reading and math have been reported for many years. Girls outperform boys in reading (representing a school domain stereotyped as female); boys often perform slightly better in math (a stereotypical male domain). Research has so far investigated the contribution of domain-specific academic self-concepts and interests as well as gender stereotypes to these gender differences. Students’ gender role attitudes (GRAs) and their relation with gender disparities in school performance, however, have been studied little. This study examines if students’ GRAs contribute to explaining boys’ higher math achievement and girls’ higher reading achievement. Using PISA-2009 data from Germany, the sample included 9,460 grade nine students (49.70% girls; Mage = 15.61 years). Regression analyses revealed that egalitarian GRAs are beneficial for all students. Still more so for girls, egalitarian GRAs help girls perform particularly well in reading and compensate for possible disadvantages in math. In reading, girls with egalitarian GRAs reached higher performance scores than boys with egalitarian GRAs. In math, girls with egalitarian GRAs scored nearly as high as boys with egalitarian GRAs. Boys also benefited from egalitarian GRAs, although not as much as girls. Although gender disparities in reading and math achievement were explained only partly by students’ GRAs, supporting boys and girls in endorsing egalitarian GRAs is worthwhile as they may help to increase societal gender equality more broadly.
阅读和数学方面的性别差异已被报道多年。女生在阅读方面的表现优于男生(这代表了学校中被定型为女性的领域);男生在数学方面的表现往往略胜一筹(这是被定型为男性的领域)。迄今为止,已有研究调查了特定领域的学术自我概念和兴趣以及性别刻板印象对这些性别差异的影响。然而,对学生的性别角色态度(GRAs)及其与学习成绩性别差异的关系却研究甚少。本研究探讨了学生的性别角色态度是否有助于解释男生数学成绩较高和女生阅读成绩较高的原因。样本包括 9,460 名九年级学生(49.70% 为女生;年龄 = 15.61 岁)。回归分析表明,平等主义 GRA 对所有学生都有益。对女生而言,平等主义 GRA 尤其有助于女生在阅读方面取得好成绩,并弥补了她们在数学方面可能存在的劣势。在阅读方面,采用平等主义 GRA 的女生比采用平等主义 GRA 的男生得分更高。在数学方面,采用平等主义 GRA 的女生的成绩几乎与采用平等主义 GRA 的男生一样高。男生也从平等主义 GRA 中获益,尽管没有女生那么多。尽管学生的 GRAs 只能部分解释阅读和数学成绩中的性别差异,但支持男孩和女孩认可平等主义 GRAs 是值得的,因为它们可能有助于更广泛地提高社会性别平等。
期刊介绍:
The field of social psychology spans the boundary between the disciplines of psychology and sociology and has traditionally been associated with empirical research. Many studies of human behaviour in education are conducted by persons who identify with social psychology or whose work falls into the social psychological ambit. Several textbooks have been published and a variety of courses are being offered on the `social psychology of education'', but no journal has hitherto appeared to cover the field. Social Psychology of Education fills this gap, covering a wide variety of content concerns, theoretical interests and research methods, among which are: Content concerns: classroom instruction decision making in education educational innovation concerns for gender, race, ethnicity and social class knowledge creation, transmission and effects leadership in schools and school systems long-term effects of instructional processes micropolitics of schools student cultures and interactions teacher recruitment and careers teacher- student relations Theoretical interests: achievement motivation attitude theory attribution theory conflict management and the learning of pro-social behaviour cultural and social capital discourse analysis group dynamics role theory social exchange theory social transition social learning theory status attainment symbolic interaction the study of organisations Research methods: comparative research experiments formal observations historical studies literature reviews panel studies qualitative methods sample surveys For social psychologists with a special interest in educational matters, educational researchers with a social psychological approach.