Skip to main content
Login
  1. Home
  2. Breaking Images
  3. 19. Gender, mathematics, and mathematics education
Open Book Publishers

19. Gender, mathematics, and mathematics education

  • David Kollosche(author)
  • Daniela Steflitsch(author)
  • Kora Deweis-Weidlinger(author)
Chapter of: Breaking Images: Iconoclastic Analyses of Mathematics and its Education(pp. 485–538)
  • Export Metadata
  • Metadata
  • Locations
  • Contributors
  • References

Export Metadata

Metadata
Title19. Gender, mathematics, and mathematics education
ContributorDavid Kollosche(author)
Daniela Steflitsch(author)
Kora Deweis-Weidlinger(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0407.19
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0407/chapters/10.11647/obp.0407.19
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
CopyrightDavid Kollosche; Daniela Steflitsch; Kora Maria Deweis-Weidlinger;
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2024-12-11
Long abstract

This chapter approaches the discipline of mathematics from the perspective of gender studies. It provides an overview of the gendering of mathematics and mathematics education based on aspects such as images of mathematics, achievement, representation, biology, cognition, learning preferences, classroom interaction, and belonging. These aspects are then critically addressed from a post-structural perspective on gender and mathematics. Special attention is paid on moral dilemmas in dealing with gender inequality in mathematics and on the question how the perspective of gender studies can enrich our understanding of mathematics.

Page rangepp. 485–538
Print length54 pages
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Locations
Landing PageFull text URLPlatform
PDFhttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0407/chapters/10.11647/obp.0407.19Landing pagehttps://books.openbookpublishers.com/10.11647/obp.0407.19.pdfFull text URL
HTMLhttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0407/chapters/10.11647/obp.0407.19Landing pagehttps://books.openbookpublishers.com/10.11647/obp.0407/ch19.xhtmlFull text URLPublisher Website
Contributors

David Kollosche

(author)
Full Professor for Mathematics Education Research at University of Klagenfurt
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1055-2418

David Kollosche is a full professor for mathematics education research at the University of Klagenfurt in Austria. He teaches mathematics, history of mathematics, philosophy of mathematics, and mathematics education to prospective secondary school teachers. His research focusses on theoretical foundations of mathematics education, the epistemology of mathematics, the sociology of mathematics education, and students’ perspectives on mathematics education.

Daniela Steflitsch

(author)
Post-doctoral Researcher at University of Klagenfurt
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3365-4732

Daniela Steflitsch is a post-doctoral researcher at the University of Klagenfurt in Austria. She teaches mathematics education and mathematics for vocational schools to prospective secondary school teachers. Her research focuses on critical mathematics education, cross-curricular themes in mathematics education, and students’ perspectives on mathematics education.

Kora Deweis-Weidlinger

(author)
University of Klagenfurt
https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5604-4316

Kora Deweis-Weidlinger holds a Master’s degree in secondary mathematics education and supported various research projects, including a study on primary school students’ strategies for addition and subtraction in the number range 100, a study on the development of basic ideas and solution strategies for multiplication tables, and a survey study on the role of gender in mathematics education. She has returned to school and is currently teaching at a lower secondary school in Austria.

References
  1. Baldino, R. R. (2000). Neurone-Z, philosophy of the mind and symptom. In J. F. Matos & M. Santos (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd international mathematics education and society conference (pp. 143–157). Universidade de Lisboa.
  2. Becker, J. R. (1981). Differential treatment of females and males in mathematics classes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 12(1), 40–53. https://doi.org/10.2307/748657
  3. Becker, J. R. (1995). Women’s ways of knowing to mathematics. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: influences of feminism and culture (pp. 164–175). Falmer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203990087-29
  4. Becker, J. R. (2001). Single-gender schooling in the public sector in California: Promise and practice. In B. Atweh, H. Forgasz, & B. Nebres (Eds.), Sociocultural research on mathematics education: an international perspective (pp. 367–378). Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410600042-31
  5. Beilock, S. L., Gunderson, E. A., Ramirez, G., & Levine, S. C. (2010). Female teachers’ math anxiety affects girls’ math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(5), 1860–1863. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910967107
  6. Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, M. J. (1997). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. Basic Books. (Original work published 1986)
  7. Benbow, C. P [Camilla Persson] (1988). Sex differences in mathematical reasoning ability in intellectually talented preadolescents: Their nature, effects, and possible causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00049244
  8. Bischof-Köhler, D. (2011). Von Natur aus anders: Die Psychologie der Geschlechtsunterschiede [Different by nature: The psychology of gender differences]. Kohlhammer. (Original work published 2002)
  9. Boaler, J. (1997). Experiencing school mathematics: Teaching styles, sex, and setting. Open University.
  10. Boles, D. B. (1980). X-linkage of spatial ability: A critical review. Child development, 51(3), 625–635. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129448
  11. Brown, J. R. (2008). Philosophy of mathematics: A contemporary introduction to the world of proofs and pictures. Routledge.
  12. Brown, T., & McNamara, O. (2005). New teacher identity and regulative government: The discursive formation of primary mathematics teacher education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/b104107
  13. Burton, L. (Ed.). (1990). Gender and mathematics: An international perspective. Cassell.
  14. Burton, L. (1995). Moving towards a feminist epistemology of mathematics. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture (pp. 211–227). Falmer.
  15. Butler, J. (1999). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
  16. Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. Routledge.
  17. Chafetz, J. S. (2006). The varieties of gender theory in sociology. In J. S. Chafetz (Ed.), Handbook of the sociology of gender (pp. 3–23). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-36218-5_1
  18. Chapman, O. (1993). Women’s voice and the learning of mathematics. Journal of Gender Studies, 2(2), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.1993.9960539
  19. Cheryan, S. (2012). Understanding the paradox in math-related fields: Why do some gender gaps remain while others do not? Sex Roles, 66(3-4), 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0060-z
  20. Colom, R., Juan-Espinosa, M., Abad, F., & García, L. F. (2000). Negligible sex differences in general intelligence. Intelligence, 28(1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(99)00035-5
  21. Davis, P. J., & Hersh, R. (1980). The mathematical experience. Birkhäuser.
  22. Delon, F. (1995). The French experience: The effects of de-segration. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: influences of feminism and culture (pp. 142–153). Falmer.
  23. Dowling, P. (1991). Gender, class, and subjecivity in mathematics: A critique of Humtpy Dumpty. For the Learning of Mathematics, 11(1), 2–8.
  24. Driver, G. (1980). Beyond underachievement: Case studies of English, West Indian, and Asian school-leavers at sixteen plus. Commission for Racial Equality.
  25. Dweck, C. S. (2007). Is math a gift? Beliefs that put females at risk. In S. J. Ceci & W. M. Williams (Eds.), Why aren't more women in science? Top researchers debate the evidence (pp. 47–55). American Psychological Association.
  26. Dweck, C. S., Davidson, W., Nelson, S., & Enna, B. (1978). Sex differences in learned helplessness: II. The contingencies of evaluative feedback in the classroom and III. An experimental analysis. Developmental Psychology, 14(3), 268–276. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.14.3.268
  27. Dweck, C. S., & Reppucci, N. D. (1973). Learned helplessness and reinforcement responsibility in children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25(1), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034248
  28. Eccles, J. S. (1989). Bringing young women to math and science. In M. Crawford & M. Gentry (Eds.), Gender and thought: Psychological perspectives (pp. 36–58). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3588-0_3
  29. Eckert, P., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2003). Language and gender. Cambridge University Press.
  30. Ernest, J. B., Reinholz, D. L., & Shah, N. (2019). Hidden competence: Women’s mathematical participation in public and private classroom spaces. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 102(2), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09910-w
  31. Ernest, P. (1995). Values, gender and images of mathematics: A philosophical perspective. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 26(3), 449–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739950260313
  32. Ernest, P. (2007). Questioning the gender problem in mathematics. Philosophy of Mathematics Education, 20. https://www.exeter.ac.uk/research/groups/education/pmej/pome20/index.htm
  33. European Commission. (2019). She figures 2018. Publications Office of the European Union.
  34. Eurostat. (2019a). Graduates by education level, programme orientation, sex and field of education. Eurostat. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/educ_uoe_grad02/default/table?lang=en
  35. Eurostat. (2019b). Students enrolled in tertiary education by education level, programme orientation, sex and field of education. Eurostat. https://data.europa.eu/data/datasets/tvoyfp236pvctmgfqyudca?locale=en
  36. Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Carpenter, T. P., & Lubinski, C. A. (1990). Teachers’ attributions and beliefs about girls, boys, and mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21(1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311015
  37. Foucault, M. (1961). Histoire de la folie à l'âge classique: Folie et déraison [Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the Age of Reason]. Plon.
  38. Foucault, M. (1966). Les mots et les choses: Une archéologie des sciences humaines [The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences]. Gallimard.
  39. Foucault, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison [Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison]. Gallimard.
  40. Foucault, M. (1976). Histoire de la sexualité: La volonté de savoir [The history of sexuality: The will to knowledge]. Gallimard.
  41. Foucault, M. (1982). How is power exercised? In H. L. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel foucault: beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (pp. 216–226). Harvester.
  42. Foucault, M. (2007). What is Critique? In S. Lotringer (Ed.), The politics of truth (pp. 41–81). Semiotext(e). (Original work published 1990)
  43. Foyn, T., Solomon, Y., & Braathe, H. J. (2018). Clever girls’ stories: The girl they call a nerd. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 5(1), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9801-4
  44. Freitas, E. de (2008). Mathematics and its other: (Dis)locating the feminine. Gender and Education, 20(3), 281–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250801964189
  45. Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique. Norton.
  46. Fullerton, O. (1995). Who wants to feel stupid all of the time? In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture (pp. 38–49). Falmer.
  47. Geary, D. C. (1998). Male, female: The evolution of human sex differences. American Psychological Association.
  48. Gerdes, P. (2006). African women with a doctorate in mathematics. Newsletter of the African Mathematical Union Commission on the History of Mathematics in Africa, 33. http://africanwomeninmath.org/women-in-math/report/african-women-doctorate-in-mathematics
  49. Good, C., Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Why do women opt out? Sense of belonging and women’s representation in mathematics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 700–717. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026659
  50. Green, J. (2001). How many women mathematicians can you name? Math Horizons, 9(2), 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10724117.2001.12021856
  51. Hacking, I. (2014). Why is there philosophy of mathematics at all? Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107279346
  52. Hall, J. (2010). The influence of high school and university experiences on women’s pursuit of undergraduate mathematics degrees in Canada. In H. J. Forgasz, J. R. Becker, K.-H. Lee, & O. B. Steinthorsdottir (Eds.), International perspectives on gender and mathematics education (pp. 365–390). Information Age.
  53. Halpern, D. F. (2012). Sex differences in cognitive abilities. Psychology Press.
  54. Halpern, D. F., Benbow, C. P., Geary, D. C., Gur, R. C., Hyde, J. S., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (2007). The science of sex differences in science and mathematics. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 8(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2007.00032.x
  55. Hampson, E. (1990). Variations in sex-related cognitive abilities across the menstrual cycle. Brain and Cognition, 14(1), 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2626(90)90058-v
  56. Hampson, E., & Rovet, J. F. (2015). Spatial function in adolescents and young adults with congenital adrenal hyperplasia: clinical phenotype and implications for the androgen hypothesis. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 54, 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2015.01.022
  57. Hannover, B. (1991). Zur Unterrepräsentanz von Mädchen in Naturwissenschaften und Technik: Psychologische Prädiktoren der Fach- und Berufswahl [On the underrepresentation of girls in science and technology: Psychological predictors of subject and career choice]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 5, 169–186.
  58. Hersh, R., & John-Steiner, V. (2011). Loving and hating mathematics: Challenging the myths of mathematical life. Princeton University Press.
  59. Herzig, A. H. (2004). ‘Slaughtering this beautiful math’: Graduate women choosing and leaving mathematics. Gender and Education, 16(3), 379–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250042000251506
  60. Hiddleston, P. (1995). The contribution of girls-only schools to mathematics and science education in Malawi. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: influences of feminism and culture (pp. 148–153). Falmer.
  61. Hines, M. (2010). Sex-related variation in human behavior and the brain. Trends in Cognitive Science, 14(10), 448–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.07.005
  62. Horner, M. (1968). Sex differences in achievement motivation and performance in competitive and non-competitive situations [Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan].
  63. Hyde, J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. The American psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581
  64. Isaacson, Z. (1990). ‘They look at you in absolute horror’: Women writing and talking about mathematics. In L. Burton (Ed.), Gender and mathematics: an international perspective (pp. 20–28). Cassell.
  65. Jahnke-Klein, S. (2001). Sinnstiftender Mathematikunterricht für Mädchen und Jungen [Meaningful mathematics education for girls and boys]. Schneider.
  66. Johnston, B. (1995). Mathematics: An abstracted discourse. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture (pp. 228–236). Falmer.
  67. Jungwirth, H. (1991). Interaction and gender: Findings of a microethnographical approach to classroom discourse. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(3), 263–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00368341
  68. Kenschaft, P. C. (1982). Women in mathematics around 1900. Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 7(4), 906–909.
  69. Kinski, I. (1994). Mädchenmathematik kontra Knabenmathematik [Girls’ mathematics versus boys’ mathematics]. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung, 2(3), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1515/dmvm-1994-0308
  70. Knowles, J. M. (2010). Recognizing gender in mathematics relationships: A relational counseling approach helps teachers and students overcome damaging perceptions. In H. J. Forgasz, J. R. Becker, K.-H. Lee, & O. B. Steinthorsdottir (Eds.), International perspectives on gender and mathematics education (pp. 421–450). Information Age.
  71. Koehler, M. S. (1990). Classrooms, teacher and gender differences in mathematics. In E. Fennema & G. C. Leder (Eds.), Mathematics and gender (pp. 128–148). Teachers College, Columbia University.
  72. Kollosche, D. (2018). Social functions of mathematics education: A framework for socio-political studies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 98(3), 287–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9818-3
  73. Leder, G. (1980). Bright girls, mathematics and fear of success. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11(4), 411–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00231214
  74. Leder, G. (1995). Equal or different? Cultural influences on learning mathematics. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture (pp. 118–126). Falmer.
  75. Lee, K., & Anderson, J. (2015). Gender differences in mathematics attitudes in coeducational and single sex secondary education. In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Mathematics education in the margins: proceedings of the 38th annual conference of the mathematics education research group of australasia (pp. 357–364). MERGA.
  76. Llewellyn, A. (2012). Unpacking understanding: The (re)search for the Holy Grail of mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81(3), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9409-7
  77. Ludwig, P. H. (2010). Schulische Erfolgserwartungen und Begabungsselbstbilder bei Mädchen: Strategien ihrer Veränderung [Expectations of success at school and self-image of talent in girls: Strategies for change]. In M. Matzner & I. Wyrobnik (Eds.), Handbuch Mädchen-Pädagogik (pp. 145–158). Beltz.
  78. Magolda, M. B. B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender-related patterns in students’ intellectual development. Jossey-Bass.
  79. Marchbank, J., & Letherby, G. (2014). Introduction to gender: Social science perspectives. Pearson.
  80. Marulis, L. M., Lui, L. L., Warren, C. M., Uttal, D. H., & Newcombe, N. S. (2007). Effects of training or experience on spatial cognition in children and adults: A meta-analysis. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
  81. Masanja, V. G. (2010). Increasing women’s participation in science, mathematics and technology education and employment in Africa. https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/gst_2010/Masanja-EP.8-EGM-ST.pdf
  82. Mead, M. (1949). Male and female: A study of the sexes in a changing world. Morrow.
  83. Mendick, H. (2005). A beautiful myth? The gendering of being/doing ‘good at maths’. Gender and Education, 17(2), 203–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954025042000301465
  84. Mendick, H. (2006). Masculinities in mathematics. Open University.
  85. Mendick, H. (2017). Mathematical futures: Discourses of mathematics in fictions of the post-2008 financial crisis. In A. Chronaki (Ed.), Mathematics education and life at times of crisis (Vol. 1, pp. 74–89). University of Thessaly Press.
  86. Money, J. (1955). Hermaphroditism, gender and precocity in hyperadrenocorticism: Psychologic findings. Bulletin of the Johns Hopkins Hospital, 96(6), 253–264.
  87. Morrow, C., & Morrow, J. (1995). Connecting women with mathematics. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture (pp. 13–27). Falmer.
  88. Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A., Bar-Anan, Y., Bergh, R., Cai, H., Gonsalkorale, K., Kesebir, S., Maliszewski, N., Neto, F., Olli, E., Park, J., Schnabel, K., Shiomura, K., Tulbure, B. T., Wiers, R. W., … Greenwald, A. G. (2009). National differences in gender-science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(26), 10593–10597. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809921106
  89. OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in mathematics, reading and science. OECD Publishing.
  90. Olson, M., Olson, J., Okazaki, C., & La, T. (2010). Conversations of parents and children working on mathematics. In H. J. Forgasz, J. R. Becker, K.-H. Lee, & O. B. Steinthorsdottir (Eds.), International perspectives on gender and mathematics education (pp. 33–54). Information Age.
  91. Peak, P. L. (2010). Factors contributing to gender differences in mathematics performance of United States high school students. In H. J. Forgasz, J. R. Becker, K.-H. Lee, & O. B. Steinthorsdottir (Eds.), International perspectives on gender and mathematics education (pp. 203–224). Information Age.
  92. Perl, T. (2010). The Ladies’ Diary or Woman’s Almanack, 1704–1841. In H. J. Forgasz, J. R. Becker, K.-H. Lee, & O. B. Steinthorsdottir (Eds.), International perspectives on gender and mathematics education (pp. 15–32). Information Age.
  93. Pfost, K. S., & Fiore, M. (1990). Pursuit of nontraditional occupations: Fear of success or fear of not being chosen? Sex Roles, 23(1–2), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289875
  94. Pieper-Seier, I. (2009). Studentinnen und Professorinnen in der Mathematik [Female students and female professors of mathematics]. Gender, 1(1), 59–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.25595/76
  95. Popejoy, A. B., & Leboy, P. S. (2012). Is math still just a man’s world? Journal of Mathematics and System Science, 2, 292–298.
  96. Prendergast, M., & O’Donoghue, J. (2014). Influence of gender, single-sex and co-educational schooling on students’ enjoyment and achievement in mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(8), 1115–1130. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2014.904530
  97. Riegle-Crumb, C., & Humphries, M. (2012). Exploring bias in math teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability by gender and race/ethnicity. Gender & Society, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243211434614
  98. Rodd, M., & Bartholomew, H. (2006). Invisible and special: Young women’s experiences as undergraduate mathematics students. Gender and Education, 18(1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500195093
  99. Rogers, P., & Kaiser, G. (Eds.). (1995). Equity in mathematics education: Influences of feminism and culture. Falmer.
  100. Schwank, I. (1994). Zur Analyse kognitiver Mechanismen mathematischer Begriffsbildung unter geschlechtsspezifischem Aspekt [On the analysis of cognitive mechanisms of mathematical concept formation from a gender-specific perspective]. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 26(2), 31–40.
  101. Schwank, I. (1999). On predicative versus functional cognitive structures. In I. Schwank (Ed.), European research in mathematics education: proceedings of the first conference of the European society in mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 84–96). Forschungsinstitut für Mathematikdidaktik.
  102. Schwank, I. (2002). Analysis of eye-movements during functional versus predicative problem solving. In J. Novotná (Ed.), European Research in Mathematics Education II: Proceedings (pp. 489–498). Charles University.
  103. Skovsmose, O. (2011). An invitation to critical mathematics education. Sense. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-442-3
  104. Solomon, Y., Radovic, D., & Black, L. (2016). ‘I can actually be very feminine here’: Contradiction and hybridity in becoming a female mathematician. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 91(1), 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9649-4
  105. Sorby, S. A., & Baartmans, B. J. (2000). The development and assessment of a course for enhancing the 3-D spatial visualization skills of first year engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 89(3), 301–307. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2000.tb00529.x
  106. Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1373
  107. Thompson, D. R. (1995). The METRO achievement program: Helping inner-city girls excel. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in mathematics education: influences of feminism and culture (pp. 28–37). Falmer.
  108. Tiedemann, J. (2002). Teachers’ gender stereotypes as determinants of teacher perceptions in elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 50(1), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020518104346
  109. Trakulphadetkrai, N. V. (2017). Where are the girls and women in mathematical picture books? Mathematics Teaching, 258, 23–25.
  110. Walkerdine, V., & The Girls and Mathematics Unit. (1989). Counting girls out. Virago.
  111. Walls, F. (2010). Freedom to choose? Girls, mathemaitcs and the gendered construction of mathematical identity. In H. J. Forgasz, J. R. Becker, K.-H. Lee, & O. B. Steinthorsdottir (Eds.), International perspectives on gender and mathematics education (pp. 87–110). Information Age.
  112. Wiest, L. R. (2010). Out-of-school-time (OST) programs as mathematics support for females. In H. J. Forgasz, J. R. Becker, K.-H. Lee, & O. B. Steinthorsdottir (Eds.), International perspectives on gender and mathematics education (pp. 55–86). Information Age.
  113. Willis, S. (1996). Gender justice and the mathematics curriculum: Four perspectives. In L. H. Parker, L. J. Rennie, & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), Gender, science and mathematics: shortening the shadow (pp. 41–51). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0143-1_4

Export Metadata

UK registered social enterprise and Community Interest Company (CIC).

Company registration 14549556

Metadata

  • By book
  • By publisher
  • GraphQL API
  • Export API

Resources

  • Downloads
  • Videos
  • Merch
  • Presentations
  • Service status

Contact

  • Email
  • Bluesky
  • Mastodon
  • Github

Copyright © 2026 Thoth Open Metadata. Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.