Gender Equality Training for Students in Higher Education: Scoping Review.

IF 3.2 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Claire Condron, Mide Power, Midhun Mathew, Siobhan Lucey, Patrick Henn, Tanya Dean, Michelle Kirrane Scott, Walter Eppich, Siobhan M Lucey
{"title":"Gender Equality Training for Students in Higher Education: Scoping Review.","authors":"Claire Condron, Mide Power, Midhun Mathew, Siobhan Lucey, Patrick Henn, Tanya Dean, Michelle Kirrane Scott, Walter Eppich, Siobhan M Lucey","doi":"10.2196/60061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite recent improvements, gender inequality persists within the higher education sector, as evidenced by the proportionally greater number of student and academic leadership positions occupied by male students and staff. Gender equality education and training for students may help to develop awareness, knowledge, and skills among individual students, building capacity to address biases and accelerate culture change in higher education institutions.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to identify and explore the existing literature on gender equality training interventions for students in tertiary education, with a particular emphasis on training content, methodology, and outcome evaluation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 6-stage framework developed by Arskey and O'Malley was used to map the literature related to current best practice in gender equality training for students in higher education. Systematic database searches of peer-reviewed literature were carried out and 3142 titles, 333 abstracts, and 52 full-text articles were screened for eligibility with 14 (27%) articles selected for inclusion in this review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The selected studies detailed a range of pedagogical approaches, including didactic lectures, participatory and co-design workshops, reflective writing, and service-learning, with durations ranging from a single interaction to 1 year. Most articles reviewed did not explicitly state their study aims or research question, and the theoretical underpinnings were generally vaguely described. The longer-term impact of most interventions was unclear, as evaluation metrics seldom go beyond the level of adoption.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This scoping review shows that the literature base for gender equality training for tertiary students lacks coherence, highlighting the need for further work to evaluate its impact. This work provides a foundation for developing training design recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":36236,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Medical Education","volume":" ","pages":"e60061"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/60061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite recent improvements, gender inequality persists within the higher education sector, as evidenced by the proportionally greater number of student and academic leadership positions occupied by male students and staff. Gender equality education and training for students may help to develop awareness, knowledge, and skills among individual students, building capacity to address biases and accelerate culture change in higher education institutions.

Objective: We aimed to identify and explore the existing literature on gender equality training interventions for students in tertiary education, with a particular emphasis on training content, methodology, and outcome evaluation.

Methods: The 6-stage framework developed by Arskey and O'Malley was used to map the literature related to current best practice in gender equality training for students in higher education. Systematic database searches of peer-reviewed literature were carried out and 3142 titles, 333 abstracts, and 52 full-text articles were screened for eligibility with 14 (27%) articles selected for inclusion in this review.

Results: The selected studies detailed a range of pedagogical approaches, including didactic lectures, participatory and co-design workshops, reflective writing, and service-learning, with durations ranging from a single interaction to 1 year. Most articles reviewed did not explicitly state their study aims or research question, and the theoretical underpinnings were generally vaguely described. The longer-term impact of most interventions was unclear, as evaluation metrics seldom go beyond the level of adoption.

Conclusions: This scoping review shows that the literature base for gender equality training for tertiary students lacks coherence, highlighting the need for further work to evaluate its impact. This work provides a foundation for developing training design recommendations.

高等教育学生性别平等训练:范围检讨。
背景:尽管最近有所改善,但高等教育部门内的性别不平等仍然存在,男性学生和教职员工占据学生和学术领导职位的比例较高就是证明。针对学生的性别平等教育和培训可能有助于提高学生个人的意识、知识和技能,培养解决偏见的能力,并加速高等教育机构的文化变革。目的:本综述旨在识别和探索现有的关于三年级学生性别平等培训干预措施的文献,特别强调培训内容、方法和结果评估。方法:采用Arskey & O'Malley的六阶段框架来绘制与当前高等教育学生性别平等培训最佳实践相关的文献。对同行评议文献进行了系统的数据库检索,筛选了3140篇标题、33篇摘要和52篇全文文章,其中14篇文章入选本综述。采用了变革理论视角,提供了一种结构化的方法,以便在高等教育中的性别平等培训范围内审查其重点和相关性。结果:选定的研究详细介绍了一系列教学方法,包括说教式讲座、参与式和共同设计研讨会、反思性写作和服务学习,持续时间从一次互动到一年不等。大多数被审查的文章没有明确地说明他们的研究目的或研究问题,理论基础通常是模糊的描述。大多数干预措施的长期影响尚不清楚,因为评估指标很少超出采用水平。结论:这一范围审查表明,针对三年级学生的性别平等培训的文献基础缺乏连贯性,强调需要进一步的工作来评估其影响。这项工作为制定培训设计建议提供了基础。临床试验:JMIR Res Protoc 2023;12:e44584 doi: 10.2196/44584。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JMIR Medical Education
JMIR Medical Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
54
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信