Gender Differences Towards Self-efficacy and Academic Performance

Introduction

Review of related literature is an objective, critical summary of published research literature relevant to a topic under consideration for research. The review of literature creates familiarity with current thinking and research on the gender differences towards self-efficacy and academic performance in Pre-Calculus and may justify future research into a previously overlooked or understudied area.

Gender Differences Towards Self-efficacy and Academic Performance

According to Oakes (1990) and Parson et al. (1982), the overall research delving into gender differences in Mathematics self-efficacy based on gender role type has been limited. Some studies suggest that parents' generalizations about students' performance in Mathematics vary based on gender. Andre et al. (1999) and Choi (2004) indicated that gender role type is connected with scholastic self-efficacy. Nevertheless, research examining concrete diversity in Mathematics self-efficacy remains sparse concerning gender role type and gender type socialization. Analyzing differences in terms of gender type socialization and gender role type is another focus of this topic.

Nosek, Banaji, & Greenwald (2002) argue that when women perceive math as a male domain, it negatively impacts their attitudes towards mathematics and performance. This perception often results in reduced motivation to engage with mathematics, leading to lower academic performance. Conversely, women who resist this stereotype tend to exhibit higher self-efficacy and improved academic performance (Schmader, Johns, & Barquissau, 2004). This finding highlights the importance of addressing gender stereotypes in educational settings to foster a more inclusive learning environment.

Socialization and STEM Disciplines

Recent studies show that learning experiences among females in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines are impacted by a pattern of socialization that often differs from males despite comparable ability (American Association of University Women, 1992; National Association of Educational Progress [NAEP], 2007; National Educational Longitudinal Survey [NELS], 2004). An analysis of national data and independent research studies from the 1960s through the 1980s concluded that gender differences in Mathematics achievement depend on several demographic characteristics (Linn & Peterson, 1986).

These findings may be combined with advantages in problem-solving found among males (Hyde et al., 1990). The performance of students in Mathematics is linked to opportunities to enroll in different types of Mathematics courses in college (United States Department of Education, 2007). A substantial body of research confirms higher verbal ability in mathematical abilities is typically achieved by males (Vogel, 1990). Over time, results reveal that senior high school students, both male and female, are taking mathematics courses by the time of graduation, including more upper-level courses such as Pre-Calculus (Ingels et al., 2008).

Attitude and Performance

Fennema et al. (1998), Maccoby & Jacklin (1974), and Shibley-Hyde, Fennema & Lamon (1990) show that many cases report differences in mathematics performance connected to gender. These differences are presumed to be directly related to attitude differences towards mathematics. Viewing mathematics as a male field and attitudes towards success in mathematics, males tend to hold higher scores, as found by Fennema & Sherman (1977). Since this report, similar cases about gender differences in attitude towards mathematics have been reported.

Although researchers are aware of the extensive coverage that gender variations in Pre-Calculus achievement and attitudes and beliefs regarding mathematics have received within the academic literature, there is a tendency to overlook the initiation of studies expecting to find gender variations. However, when researchers educate the categories using an MMM, it became apparent that more males exhibited resistance to strategy and lack of participation, whereas more females came prepared with assignments and volunteered regularly. Participation is a key element of success in a student-focused learning environment, suggesting that gender should always be considered a variable in the investigation.

Conclusion

At the time of the study, researchers were aware of no literature reporting on gender differences in inquiry-based undergraduate mathematics. However, after completing the study, a report was released concerning a large-scale investigation of inquiry-based learning (IBL) conducted by researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder in collaboration with three other universities. This underscores the need for further exploration of gender dynamics in educational settings to ensure equitable learning opportunities for all students.

References

• American Association of University Women. (1992). How schools shortchange girls. New York: Marlowe & Company.
• Andre, T., Whigham, M., Hendrickson, A., & Chambers, S. (1999). Gender differences in the relationships between mathematics and science achievement and self-efficacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(3), 347-363.
• Choi, N. (2004). Sex role group differences in specific, academic, and general self-efficacy. The Journal of Psychology, 138(2), 149-159.
• Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. A. (1977). Sex-related differences in mathematics achievement, spatial visualization and affective factors. American Educational Research Journal, 14(1), 51-71.
• Fennema, E., Peterson, P., Carpenter, T., & Lubinski, C. (1998). Teachers' attributions and beliefs about girls, boys, and mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21(1), 55-69.
• Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 139-155.
• Ingels, S. J., Dalton, B. W., & LoGerfo, L. (2008). Trends among high school seniors, 1972-2004 (NCES 2008-320). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
• Linn, M. C., & Peterson, A. C. (1986). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 57(6), 1475-1498.
• Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford University Press.
• National Association of Educational Progress [NAEP]. (2007). The nation's report card: Mathematics 2007. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.
• National Educational Longitudinal Survey [NELS]. (2004). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
• Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 44-59.
• Oakes, J. (1990). Lost talent: The underparticipation of women, minorities, and disabled persons in science. RAND Corporation.
• Parsons, J. E., Adler, T. F., & Kaczala, C. M. (1982). Socialization of achievement attitudes and beliefs: Parental influences. Child Development, 53(2), 310-321.
• Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Barquissau, M. (2004). The costs of accepting gender differences: The role of stereotype endorsement in women's experience in the math domain. Sex Roles, 50(11-12), 835-850.
• United States Department of Education. (2007). The condition of education 2007. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.
• Vogel, S. (1990). Gender differences in achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 2(2), 123-145.