Implicit Theories of German Mathematics and Physics Teachers on Gender Specific Giftedness and Motivation

Abstract

9.1 Introduction Although the percentage of girls attending German Gymnasiums has notably increased in the last decade to the point where it even outweighs the percentage of boys, a marked under-representation of girls in the areas of mathematics and natural sciences continues to exist (for an overview, see Heller & Ziegler, 1997). For example, at the Gymnasium level (German college preparatory high schools) girls accounted for only 37.4% of those students who passed their graduation exams in the math, and for physics the figure is only 12.5%.(1) While the longtime dominant explanation of gender differences through cognitive abilities is highly disputed (see Beerman, Heller, & Menacher, 1992; Heller & Ziegler, 1996; for the opposing position see Benbow & Lubinski, 1993, 1995), various evidence has turned up in the last few years which shows that socialization-caused differences in motivation are an important cause of the gender discrepancies observed. One area in which children encounter gender-specific socialization processes is the school. Here gender-role stereotypes are reinforced through the content of teaching material (Ulich, 1983), gender polarization in society is also visible in schoolbooks (e.g., Metz-Gockel & Nyssen, 1990). Furthermore, there is a severe lack of female role models in the areas of mathematics and natural sciences (Beerman et al., 1992; Kotte, 1992). At the behavior level there is evidence of an abundance of gender-specific interaction patterns between teachers and students, which foster the learning of gender roles. For example, boys in school are called upon more often than girls are (Reis & Callahan, 1989). It was also shown that male teachers in the areas of math and natural sciences give girls less attention than they do boys, and that teacher-student interaction is also less intense with girls (Enders-Dragasser & Fuchs, 1989; Fennema & Peterson, 1985; Hannover & Bettge, 1993). Dweck, Davidson, Nelson and Enna (1978) report that boys receive more praise for successful work than girls do and the scolding they receive has less to do with the intellectual quality of their work. Dweck et al. (1978) came to the conclusion that this feedback pattern can lead to learned-helplessness in girls and to mastery behavior among boys. However, gender-specific interaction patterns among teachers and the resulting school behaviors are not ultimately influenced by teacher expectations (Brophy & Good, 1976; Cooper, 1979), but rather by their theories referring to intelligence, goal orientation, causal attribution, etc. 9.2 Teachers' Implicit Theories Teachers' theories form the basis for teachers' ideas about their pupils' personality traits, qualities, attitudes and abilities, which can easily contain prejudgments and stereotypes. The inclusion of the term implicit should indicate that one usually does not consciously disagree/argue with the contents of his/her own personality (Mietzl, 1986, p. 304). In the following sections, various forms of teachers` theories will be introduced which, according to Dweck's (1989) Motivation Process Model, are suspected of exerting a strong influence on the development of gender role stereotypes among both girls and boys. Among these are the personality theory (IPT) of intelligence, theories about the motivational orientation and student attributions of success and failure. In our approach, we assume that these components of the motivational processes of male and female students are largely subject to influence by teachers and their theories. Dweck (Dweck, 1989; Dweck & Bempechat, 1983; Dweck, Chiu & Hong, 1995) distinguishes between two IPTs of intelligence: an incremental, or modifiable intelligence and an entity, or non-modifiable intelligence. Dweck suspects that these intelligence theories influence teachers` methods of teaching, the types of problems they assign, as well as the educational goals they set. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 64 citations exist upstream.